|
Mike DiChristina
Appeal
In the civil justice system, an individual may seek relief from unwanted or threatening contact with another individual by filing a Motion of Restraining Order with the Superior Court.
Either party may appeal the ruling of the Superior Court to the Appellate Court if they believe the rule of law has been erroneously applied during their hearing, or if they have the time and money and are just plain pissed off.
These are their stories.
Appellate Court of the State of Connecticut
Dr. Robert A. Bancroft, MD v. Ms. Penelope Q. Beanstalk
Upton, Wells, and Candy, Appellate Judges
Argued: 17-July-2009
(Appeal from Superior Court, Judicial District of Stamford, Wood, W. )
Opinion
Author: A. J. Candy, Justice of the Appellate Court
This matter pertains to a Motion for Restraining Order on the part of plaintiff, Dr. Robert A. Bancroft, MD, in the matter of defendant, former supermodel Ms. Penelope Q. Beanstalk.
As an aside, the Appellate Court of the State of Connecticut has always been perplexed by Ms. Beanstalk's decision to retire from her career in front of the camera at the very moment she had reached the pinnacle of her profession, having emerged as the paragon of feminine beauty at the end of twentieth century. We hold today, a decade after her last Vogue cover (April 2000), that Ms. Beanstalk remains the definitive physical manifestation of the archetypal feminine, having supplanted in the eyes of this court such exemplars of the feminine from this jurist's formative years as the breathtaking protuberance on the Farrah Fawcett poster; and his cousin Tamara, whom this court fruitlessly pursued during nude nighttime games of "Marco Polo" in the cold dark waters of Lake Winnipesaukee during the summer of his thirteenth (13th) year.
Mais, je divague.
As to the appellate case before this court: Plaintiff, Robert A. Bancroft, appeals previous judgment of the Superior Court of Connecticut denying said Motion for Restraining Order against defendant, Ms. Penelope Beanstalk, on 15-June-2009. Plaintiff argues that Superior Court Justice Willard (Woody) Wood's amatory behavior toward the defendant precluded said Justice from evaluating the facts of this case in the pure unadulterated light of The Law.
I. Motion for Restraining Order
|
The following factual and procedural background is relevant to our consideration of plaintiff's appeal:
A. Plaintiff
Plaintiff is a noted dermatologist practicing in Greenwich, CT, and member in good standing of the American Academy of Dermatology, currently holding the office of Assistant Treasurer.
Plaintiff adheres to a strict exercise regimen (cycling, polo, Bikram yoga); faithfully subjects himself to facial scrubs with European men's skincare products used in conjunction with lukewarm de-ionized imported water; and avoids solar radiation and animal fats. Plaintiff's consumption of alcohol is limited to fine red wines and dirty mojitos (weekends between Memorial Day and Labor Day, or when in St. Bart's). Said lifestyle choices have had a salubrious effect upon plaintiff, allowing him to appear younger than his fifty-eight (58) years.
Plaintiff enjoys classical music, most notably Brahms and Shostakovich. He listens to and sings along with Justin Bieber ("Baby") when driving alone on beautiful Indian summer days in his silver Mercedes E-class convertible on the gently curving, tree-lined roads of lower Fairfield County, leaving a trail of multi-hued leaves dancing in his wake. He stands in excess of six feet (6'), has excellent posture, and a full head of wavy jet black hair, for which there is evidence of artificial pigmentation every six weeks. He is a scratch golfer and plays Wednesday afternoons and Saturday mornings at the White Tail Club, Greenwich, CT.
Plaintiff was negatively impacted from a psychological perspective (according to the other three members of his Saturday golf foursome) by recent revelations concerning the behavior of a professional golfer of some renown. Indeed, several fellow members of the White Tail Club, while sipping aperitifs on the clubhouse's stone terrace overlooking the eighteenth (18th) hole (which presents the golfer with a two-tiered green protected by bunkers and a meandering trout stream), postulated that alleged betrayal of husbandly and paternal duties by said professional golfer had been the inciting incident behind plaintiff's decision to terminate his purported relationship with defendant. Blepharoplastic procedures in January, 2009 have largely eliminated the senescent effect of "bags" under his eyes.
Plaintiff filed the Motion for Restraining Order on 1-June-2009 to obtain relief from excessive, highly disruptive, and ultimately threatening behavior on the part of defendant, with whom he had maintained an extra-marital relationship beginning in 2006. Termination of said relationship on 1-April-2009 is believed by plaintiff to have been the event that precipitated the unwelcome behavior on the part of defendant.
B. Defendant
Defendant is a well-known fashion industry entrepreneur and owner of the eponymous fashion house, headquartered in New York, NY. Defendant is a former fashion model who graced the covers of leading magazines, including "Elle", "Vogue", and "Cigar Aficiando" during an illustrious and tempestuous career.
She stands approximately five feet ten inches (5' 10") and claims to weigh one hundred nineteen (119) pounds. Tabloid magazines are of the opinion that she currently weighs one hundred forty-three (143) pounds. To support this assertion, one such magazine has published photographs of the defendant in a foreign sedan (Scarlet 2009 Aston Martin Rapide®). In said photographs, defendant is attired in a white silk vintage Dior bustier with tassels on each breast. Apparently seeking anonymity (despite the BNSTLK license plate), defendant is shown wearing tortoise pearl sunglasses (available for $599 at Beanstalk. com) over a black lycra ski mask similar to that worn by the villain in "Dirty Harry" (Warner Bros Pictures, 1971). In one photograph, a brown cigarillo dangles from defendant's mouth, though analysts have hypothesized that said cylindrical object is, in fact, a Tootsie Roll®. Defendant's legs were selected as Best in World by Esquire magazine in 1992.
Defendant is highly dependent upon her dermatologist (plaintiff) to postpone the onset of middle age as long as possible. She is thirty-seven (37, dammit) years old. There have been rumors (unsubstantiated) of cosmetic surgery. Her breasts are exquisite (they are of type cornucopiesque: i.e., full-bodied with a distinctive swoop down the torso and then, defying gravity, swooping back up to a breathtaking and mouthwatering pinnacle topped with mammary papillae reminiscent to this jurist of the Double Bubble® Gum that cheap neighbors used to hand out at Halloween in his suburban Connecticut town, only harder). Said breasts have been highlighted by fashion industry insiders as (a) key success driver(s) in defendant's modeling career. This Appellate Court conducted internet research to verify said assertion (Search string: "Beanstalk tits"; click on "Images" hyper-textual link at top of search results page and the researcher will be rewarded with a stunning gallery of mammarial beauty; click on any image to enlarge, if so inclined).
Defendant was an active participant in, and (according to her ghost-written 1999 autobiography "Runway Stalker"), the heroic initiator of a work stoppage by runway models to protest conditions for seamstresses in the clothing industry during the 1997 Paris Spring Fashion Show. The world watched in shock as the show opened to a parade of supermodels demonstrating the solidarity with said seamstresses. The models — lithe, stoic and unclothed, except for white thongs with the classic portrait of Che Guevara silkscreened on the anterior triangular portion of said garment (precluding the audience from direct observation of their pudenda) and five inch (5") stiletto heels — enlightened the minds of adolescent males (and future justices of the Connecticut court system) as to the consummate dignity of the worker in capitalistic enterprises. Ultimately, fashion industry leaders did deliver across the board wage and benefit concessions to their well-deserving employees, but only after enough filming had been done to create a feature length documentary ("Mon Dieu!" Elysée Films, winner of the "Best Documentary" prize at the Cannes Film Festival, 1998) of this singular event that demonstrated the power of the worker to control the means of production. U. S. Presidential scholars have intimated that this film had a revelatory effect on Barack Obama, converting him into an ardent socialist and leg man.
In 2000, defendant founded Beanstalk & Co., allowing her to segue from supermodel to super-owner of her own fashion house. Led by the defendant's distinctive artistic vision, said enterprise has emerged as one of the world's most esteemed bastions of haute couture in recent years. Her Fall 2002 line stunned the world with a daring yet playful array of provocative evening wear, lingerie, and accessories using fruit and/or vegetable motifs, most notably her delectable chapeau au salade des fruits, including tomatoes (which are categorized as fruits, though often misleadingly sold in the vegetable sections of food emporiums).
Defendant is currently rumored, according to well-placed industry sources (Pat O'Brien of "Entertainment Tonight"), to be the top choice to replace Heidi Klum as the host of next season's "Project Runway" on the Lifetime Television Network.
C. Superior Court Justice Willard Wood
It is necessary at this point in our document to provide background information on Justice Willard Wood, as his actions during these proceedings are relevant to our consideration of plaintiff's appeal.
Justice Willard Wood, hereinafter referred to as "Woody", was born in 1967 in Westport, CT. He was salutatorian of his high school graduating class at Choate Rosemary Hall (1986). His commencement address "Offshore Oil Drilling: Green & Clean Energy for America in the 21st Century" should best be interpreted as ironic at this point. He graduated from Yale University (1990) and Yale Law School (1993), where he placed second (2nd) in the school's prestigious Moot Court competition (1992).
Currently separated from his wife, Woody resides in the Holiday Inn in downtown Stamford, Room 11C, which has recently acquired the distinct smell of takeout fried chicken.
D. Summary of plaintiff's argument for Motion of Restraint
According to the Superior Court transcript of this case, the plaintiff, who presented the case pro se (without the aid of legal counsel), asserted he and defendant reached a verbal agreement on 1-April-2009 during an informal meeting at the Greenwich Avenue location of a global purveyor of coffee beverages. The oral agreement consummated at that time stated and/or implied that the two parties mutually consented to terminate communication from that date forward. Soon thereafter, and in flagrant violation of said agreement, defendant initiated a series of unwelcome, harassing, and ultimately threatening communications and/or interactions with plaintiff.
At the Superior Court proceeding, plaintiff presented a timeline of incidents during the period of April-May 2009 to facilitate the court's understanding of the extent of the defendant's egregious behavior:
|
17-April-2009 & 29-April-2009
- Defendant scheduled unwarranted dermatological examinations with plaintiff on the above dates. Defendant's ostensible rationale for said examinations was to obtain diagnoses regarding potential malignancies on the derma of various parts of defendant's corpus.
- The examinations took place at plaintiff's medical practice at 53 Gooseberry Lane, Suite 2100, Greenwich, CT.
- A registered nurse, Katherine L. Diehl, RN, under the employ of plaintiff, was present during each examination.
- Plaintiff determined defendant to be free of any dermatological conditions that might warrant further contact between plaintiff and defendant for twelve months.
- Despite said assessment, defendant requested and was granted a subsequent appointment on 29-April-2009. After a second examination, plaintiff again concluded defendant's derma continued to have adequate levels of moisture, enviable suppleness, and a uniform tint that would cause most observers to compare said derma favorably to a variety of fruit and dairy products.
- Plaintiff did note an apparent decrease in the muscular tone of defendant's abdominal area at that time. When questioned regarding this development, defendant became surly, according to plaintiff.
— 1-May-2009 to 15-May-2009, inclusive
- Defendant effected 283 (two hundred eighty-three) phone calls to the professional offices of plaintiff's medical practice during the above time period, many of which resulted in electronic recordings that continued to the maximum fifteen (15) minutes allowed by plaintiff's voice mail system. The court asked to evaluate one of the recordings to better understand the emotional state of defendant during this time period. The court listened to a recording and ascertained that contents of said recording of defendant's voice contained nothing but incoherent verbalizations symptomatic of a high degree of emotional distress and associated lachrymal secretion.
— 15-May-2009
- Defendant dined alone at a table "coincidentally" adjacent to that of plaintiff and his spouse at the Restaurant Louis XIX in Greenwich. Said dinner was in celebration of plaintiff and his spouse's twenty-eighth (28th) wedding anniversary.
- Defendant was attired in a sleeveless black silk dress with defendant's signature plunging "V" neckline from her Spring 2009 collection. Defendant ordered meals and drinks (scotch and sodas) for herself and for a (non-existent) friend "Yvette" whom, as she explained to the maitre d', would shortly arrive on the premises. Ultimately, defendant consumed her own as well as her "Yvette's" entrée, including generous helpings of pommes de terres au gratin. Conversation at defendant's table was continuous, muted, and one-sided as shown in the following (reconstructed) dialog:
MS. BEANSTALK: I'm elated you were in town.
"YVETTE" (with Parisian accent): Oh, we just got back on Monday. Now, tell me your news. Is he really going to leave his wife?
MS. BEANSTALK: Voila! (She extends hand toward an empty chair, revealing her new "Pre-Engagement" ring).
"YVETTE": Well, take it off, let me see!
MS. BEANSTALK: (Removes ring, and holds it in front of empty chair for "Yvette" to see and then drops it. Ring rolls over toward table where Dr Bancroft and his wife sit). Oh dear, look what I've done.
DR. BANCROFT: (Bends over and retrieves the ring and walks over to Ms Beanstalk's table). I believe this is yours?
MS. BEANSTALK: Why yes, thank you very much.
DR. BANCROFT: (nods his head, formally, his eyes bugging out, and returns to his table)
"YVETTE": My, he is absolutely delicieuse!
MS. BEANSTALK: Let's order dessert!
- The "two" friends shared clafoutis aux abricots (apricot cake) for dessert.
- Defendant refrained from directly communicating with plaintiff and his spouse during the meal. Nonetheless, plaintiff did experience the ill effects of high levels of endocrinal secretions associated with a variety of emotional states, including arousal, annoyance, angst, and ultimately anger, thus, from plaintiff's perspective, dramatically decreasing the gustatory pleasure of his celebratory meal (a fine gougeonnette of Atlantic Swordfish with pearl onions tossed with melted bacon in a red wine lobster sauce). Plaintiff noticed that defendant's breasts appeared even more voluminous than previously observed.
— 16-May-2009 to 31-May-2009, inclusive
- According to plaintiff's email archives, in excess of one thousand (1,000) emails from a Google account controlled by defendant were delivered to plaintiff's email accounts during this time period. The emails contain more than five hundred (500) digital photographs of defendant, including photographs from her previous modeling career in Milan, Italy. Many of the photographs depict defendant modeling the now classic 1993 swimsuit collection of Agua Azul while on location in Mallorca, including a high cut "liquid metal" gold bikini bottom that inspired an entire generation of sun worshippers at luxury beach resorts throughout the world, and anyone who watched the March 11th, 1993 edition of "Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous."
— 20-May-2009 to 22-May-2009
- Defendant unexpectedly attended the annual American Academy of Dermatology Conference in Las Vegas, NV, where plaintiff was keynote speaker (Presentation Topic: "Nanotechnology: Not Your Mother's Anti-Wrinkle Cream"). Defendant attended numerous functions associated with the event, including the keynote address and the annual Botox Ball, an important networking event for the country's leading dermatologists, at which defendant made numerous unwelcome advances upon plaintiff while plaintiff was otherwise occupied with examining the melanocytic nevus (mole) of a professional entertainer in the Star-Lite Lounge. Defendant was ultimately escorted from the casino premises by Bellagio security.
— 25-May-2009
- Plaintiff's wife discovered defendant in the wine cellar of plaintiff's residence during plaintiff's Memorial Day celebration with extended family members present, including plaintiff's paternal grandmother. Defendant was allegedly in an inebriated condition, having consumed an entire bottle of French Bordeaux 1949 Mouton-Rothschild, Claret – Premier Cru, approximate value: three thousand six hundred dollars ($3600) and partially consumed a bottle of Pinot Noir, vintage unspecified. Greenwich police officers were notified of the situation and removed defendant from the premises. Plaintiff declined to file charges against defendant. This event, however, compelled plaintiff to contact legal counsel to initiate the Motion for Restraining Order.
|
E. Summary of defendant's argument against Motion of Restraint
Defendant was defended pro se (self-defended). For the occasion, she wore a pinstripe jacket and skirt (ebony with silver pinstripes) from her Spring 2009 collection over an elegant grey silk sleeveless jersey with mock turtleneck. Her black patent leather pumps were by Manolo Blahnik. The skirt was cut above the knee, thus allowing the Court an opportunity to savor the striations of the gastrocnemius muscles of her lower legs as she presented her argument. She stated that plaintiff had abruptly terminated their long-term relationship on 1-April-2009, thus breaching an implicit contract between the two parties. This action on the part of plaintiff occurred approximately seven (7) days after plaintiff had committed to a more permanent relationship with the defendant during a private dinner celebrating the thirty-seventh (37th) birthday of the defendant.
Defendant presented extensive evidence for such claim, including:
|
— Defendant stated that her two dermatological appointments during May, 2009 with plaintiff were necessary for continued monitoring of a genetic propensity for melanoma. Defendant stated she had noticed apparent abnormalities on the derma of her upper torso and inguinal area, respectively. She stated that during the second of the two examinations, plaintiff had opportunistically dismissed Ms. Katherine Diehl, RN, from the examination room for several moments, during which time plaintiff allegedly professed a continued emotional attachment to the defendant and did willfully make physical contact with defendant in such a manner as to confirm said attachment. Defendant claimed to have evidence of a "Lewinskyian" nature should it be necessary to prove the given assertion. The Court deemed it unnecessary to view such evidence in the given context.
— Defendant presented a "Pre-Engagement Ring" (having removed said ring from the ring finger of her left hand in order to facilitate closer examination on the part of the Superior Court judge). Said ring (Emerald set in white gold with scripted engraving on inner ring surface stating "To Penelope from Robbie, Beauty is not skin deep, but your skin is beautiful, March 24th 2009", with receipt from Tiffany's of Greenwich (twenty-seven thousand nine hundred dollars ($27,900) + tax), was claimed by defendant to have been a gift from plaintiff on the anniversary of their first "encounter" (2005 Dermatological conference in Rome, Italy, sponsored by Clearasil).
— Defendant claimed her actions in the weeks prior to the aforementioned Motion for Restraining Order, though perhaps excessive, were wholly rational given the long-term nature of their relationship, and were well within the bounds of societal norms. Defendant claimed that plaintiff had led her to believe the two individuals (plaintiff and defendant) would ultimately cohabitate and become life partners, and possibly even procreate. Upon apprehending that plaintiff no longer envisioned or aspired to such a scenario, indeed, that the implicit contract between the two parties had been unilaterally voided by plaintiff, defendant reasonably conceded that she had "lost her composure, somewhat."
— The court also notes that, according to the transcript of the hearing, plaintiff repeatedly interrupted the defendant during her oral argument. The primary rationale for plaintiff's behavior appears to have been to refute the veracity of the defendant's testimony. According to the transcript of the hearing, plaintiff also verbalized highly subjective opinions with respect to the defendant's unique and proven ability to use her physical attributes; her method and style of clothing; and the tenor of her voice to persuade males to concur with her specious and fallacious arguments.
— The following is an excerpt from said transcript which the court believes is quite illuminating:
(SUPERIOR COURT) JUSTICE W. WOOD (WOODY): From the court's perspective, the home invasion described by plaintiff is the most serious, and frankly, alarming episode described thus far in these proceedings.
MS. BEANSTALK: Oh, I can explain. It was quite innocuous, kind of funny, actually (quiet laughter).
WOODY: I'm sure you can. The court is all ears.
DR. BANCROFT: Yeah, I'd love to hear this, too.
MS. BEANSTALK: Well, your honor, I had tried to communicate my news to Robbie, I mean Dr. Bancroft using every means possible, but he wanted nothing to do with me right when I needed him most.
WOODY: What news was that?
MS. BEANSTALK: That I am…that I am with…that I am pregnant.
Loud murmurs of surprise echo throughout the courtroom.
DR. BANCROFT: Liar.
WOODY: So, you decided to visit his residence?
MS. BEANSTALK: Yes. But, then I saw his family, so I hid in the wine cellar.
DR. BANCROFT: And stole a five thousand dollar bottle of wine!
WOODY: Dr. Bancroft, I must remind you of court protocol. Please do not interrupt. Continue, Ms. Beanstalk.
MS. BEANSTALK: Then Mrs. Bancroft, Julia came into the cellar and we, we talked. We talked and drank. She's wonderful. Knows her wine, too.
DR. BANCROFT: Liar.
MS. BEANSTALK: Julia finished off the Bordeaux and then she opened the pinot noir. The wine had a silky, inviting texture with a light rosemary scent and subtle black cherry and cola notes.
WOODY: Probably Californian. Goes great with lamb kabobs, though I prefer a lower gravity Zinfandel.
MS. BEANSTALK: Justice, may I approach the bench.
WOODY: By all means. Is this private? Shall we retire to my chambers?
MS. BEANSTALK: Yes. I'm feeling rather hot.
WOODY: (Breathy laughter).
DR. BANCROFT: (Whistles like a cuckoo bird).
Woody and Ms. Beanstalk retire to the judge's chambers.
|
F. Decision by the Superior Court of Connecticut
On 15-June-2009, The Honorable Willard Wood of the Connecticut Superior Court ruled in favor of the defendant, Ms. Penelope Q. Beanstalk, thus denying the Motion for Restraining Order in the matter of the two parties aforementioned.
|
II. The Appeal
An Appeal of the decision to deny the Motion for Restraining Order on the part of plaintiff, Dr. Robert A. Bancroft, MD, against the defendant, Ms. Penelope Q. Beanstalk, was put forth to the Connecticut Appellate Court on 17-July-2009, Justices Upton, Wells, and Candy presiding, and pretty excited to do so.
Plaintiff cited judicial bias as the basis for his appeal of the Superior Court of Connecticut's decision to deny the Motion for Restraining Order against the defendant, Ms. Penelope Q. Beanstalk.
Defendant, who was self-represented, acknowledged that her relationship with plaintiff had been turbulent; however she could see no reason for overruling the Superior Court of Connecticut's reasonable decision to deny the Motion for Restraining Order. Defendant wore an understated grey cashmere dress by Marc Jacobs. A Harry Winston pearl necklace drew appreciative nods from the Court.
During her testimony, the defendant would without doubt have remarked the darkly handsome features and deep soulful eyes of one of the three jurists (the one on the left). For this particular jurist, what followed was a moment pregnant first with curiosity, then hope, and finally the revelation of the sweet promise of love soon to be requited. Defendant had peered into the very soul of said jurist, a dutiful son who had resigned himself to a life of service before the blind scales of justice.
The jurist, a polymath, had graduated as valedictorian from his elite New England preparatory school (Choate Rosemary Hall, class of 1986) where his valedictory address, "Someday We'll Be Able To Buy Dog Food Using Our Personal Computers" is held, to this day, as a model of eloquence and prescience. Against his personal inclinations (he had wanted to follow Nabokov into literature and lepidoptery), he had acquiesced to parental pressure and had dutifully studied political science (Yale '90, summa cum laude) and the law (Yale '93, summa cum laude, where he also won the 1992 Moot Court competition.
He lived alone.
Now on the cusp of middle age, this jurist still had dreams of love — ill-defined, but involving sunsets and a silhouetted couple holding hands as they cavort barefoot in the surf; he, shirtless with his chinos rolled up; she, in a long diaphanous white dress, her flowing honey-colored tresses undulating in the sea breeze, while Simon and Garfunkel's "Bridge Over Troubled Waters" plays in the background (said fantasy may in fact be a vestigial memory the jurist had subconsciously retained of a 1975 K-TEL commercial for "The World's Best Love Songs" album, a compilation of banal love blather by such artists as Helen Reddy ("Delta Dawn"), Maureen McGovern ("The Morning After"), and Gladys Knight and the Pips ("The Night that the Lights Went Out in Georgia").
Said jurist was, in actuality, a forty-three (43) year old bachelor who speed dates on the first Tuesday night of each month at the Holiday Inn in downtown Stamford under an assumed name and using a fake Texas accent, which does, in fact, work, sometimes.
Let the record state that plaintiff was physically restrained by court peace officers at this time, and did willfully destroy court property, as well as attempt (unsuccessfully) to verbally intimidate the judges of the Appellate Court while being so restrained.
III. Decision of the Appellate Court of Connecticut
Subsequent to the aforementioned appellate proceedings, this Appellate Court has been made cognizant of additional details with respect to this case. This new information has been taken into consideration and has impacted the outcome of the appeal process.
Superior Court Justice W. Wood did willfully interact with the defendant during the aforementioned Connecticut Superior Court proceedings in such a manner as to ultimately bias the Superior Court's judgment in this matter, including a passionate discussion of the film "Sideways" in the judge's chambers followed by dinner at Bennett's, a Stamford steakhouse. No bodily fluids were exchanged between the two parties.
Despite these improprieties, after proper and extensive consideration of the facts of this case, the Connecticut Appellate Court finds no basis to overrule the Superior Court of Connecticut in this matter. Defendant may continue to communicate and interact with plaintiff as often as she wishes, which is not going to be very often, in the opinion of this Court.
Addendum
|
By way of postscript, the Appellate Court of Connecticut notes the following:
— Heidi Klum will continue as host of "Project Runway" during the upcoming season.
— Dr. Bancroft has agreed to reimburse the Appellate Court of the State of Connecticut for the cost of a new Diamante Stenograph (nine thousand nine hundred ninety-five dollars ($9,995) + tax).
— Ms. Beanstalk gave birth to twin boys (Christian and Yves) on August 22nd, 2009. Despite having been in a state of gestation for only thirty-three (33) of an initially projected forty (40) weeks (the act of fertilization having been consummated by plaintiff and defendant during the early morning hours of 1-January-2009 in a rustic ski chalet in the South Tyrol region of the Italian Alps after an evening of mild debauchery involving off-duty Papal Swiss Guards; flaxen-braided buxom maidens of Austro-Bavarian stock with blouses that have crisscrossed lacing up the front instead of buttons; large steins of German lager; and copious amounts of Grappa), said junior Beanstalks are happy and healthy.
— As for Ms. Beanstalk herself, dear reader, I, Justice A. J. Candy, am in love with her! I have made extraordinary efforts to communicate said emotional state to Ms. Beanstalk via electronic mail and telephonic queries. Failing that, one evening, I climbed a leafy oak tree that offered a private view into Ms. Beanstalk's boudoir. Straddling a branch, I watched her slip beneath a comforter on her antique four-poster to watch "Law & Order" (the episode where a rich adolescent, with an inbred sneer and long silky bangs that fall over his eyes, and who attends an elite private school on the Upper East Side, bludgeons his grandparents to death with his lacrosse stick; then wins the city lacrosse championship with an incredible backhand as time expires; goes unpunished due to legal skullduggery involving an unethical judge and a corrupted evidentiary chain; and smirks at the prosecutors as he slips into his chauffeured limousine that will whisk him to the airport to board a Learjet to Geneva). Imagine my surprise when, from the limb above me, Superior Court Justice Wood, a ghostly silhouette, informed me that: "Last night, she read William T. Vollmann's 'Imperial' for five hours, and I loved every minute." Justice Wood then proffered me a half-consumed KFC Mashed Potato Bowl®, and a plastic spork that he had licked clean. Dr. Bancroft then revealed his presence by passing down a half-consumed bottle of cabernet from an even higher branch of said tree, holding on to the trunk thereof with one arm while swinging himself like a drunken orangutan and singing the latest hit from Lady Gaga ("Paparazzi"). When the three of us finally turned our attention back to Ms. Beanstalk's bedroom window, we were surprised to see an empty bed. Just then, we heard a most disconcerting cackle. Looking down, we beheld Ms. Beanstalk standing at the foot of the tree, a ghostly woman in white: her head thrown back, her lovely neck as white as a dove's; her nightgown glowing in the moonlight, barely restraining her womanhood(s). It was then that Ms. Beanstalk tasered us! One by one, we each tumbled to the earth and lay prone in the grass at her feet. The last thing I remember before passing into sweet oblivion was a delectable view up Ms. Beanstalk's nightgown: her statuesque legs; her lacey undergarments; and finally, her untethered creamy breasts glistening in the moonlight. I smiled the smile of one sated with the sweet honey of love and placed my arms around Dr. Bancroft and a still-twitching Woody, and we laughed and laughed.
Tomorrow, she will be mine!
|
In this opinion, the other judges of the Appellate Court of State of Connecticut have concurred, mostly. — A. J. Candy
Mike DiChristina spent twenty-five years as an executive in the software industry before retiring to focus on his passion for writing. He currently lives in Riverside, Connecticut with his wife and three teenage daughters.
|