The Dim-Post

December 14, 2012

Quote of the day, most obvious quote imaginable edition

Filed under: books — danylmc @ 8:15 am

Jarndyce v Jarndyce drones on. This scarecrow of a suit has, in course of time, become so complicated that no man alive knows what it means. The parties to it understand it least, but it has been observed that no two Chancery lawyers can talk about it for five minutes without coming to a total disagreement as to all the premises. Innumerable children have been born into the cause; innumerable old people have died out of it. Scores of persons have deliriously found themselves made parties in Jarndyce v Jarndyce without knowing how or why; whole families have inherited legendary hatreds with the suit. The little plaintiff or defendant who was promised a new rocking-horse when Jarndyce v Jarndyce should be settled has grown up, possessed himself of a real horse, and trotted away into the other world. Fair wards of court have faded into mothers and grandmothers; a long procession of Chancellors has come in and gone out; the legion of bills in the suit have been transformed into mere bills of mortality; there are not three Jarndyces left upon the earth perhaps since old Tom Jarndyce in despair blew his brains out at a coffee-house in Chancery Lane; but Jarndyce v Jarndyce still drags its dreary length before the court, perennially hopeless.

- Charles Dickens, Bleak House

About these ads

3 Comments »

  1. Based on a real case (Jennens vs Jennens) that stretched from 1798 to 1915 after the death of one William Jennens apparently. Or at least, according to QI it is. [\random factoid]

    Comment by Ben — December 14, 2012 @ 8:32 am

  2. However, J v J came to an end … because there was no money left in the inheritance to fight over, as it had been consumed by legal bills.

    In the Bain case, we have unlimited resources on one side, and folks prepared to do work for free on the other, so not even the prospect of exorbitant lawyers fees can kill this saga.

    Comment by Andrew Geddis — December 14, 2012 @ 8:51 am

  3. Add a binding refererendum question at the next election – should improve voter turnout

    Comment by cctrfred — December 14, 2012 @ 8:55 am


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

The Rubric Theme. Blog at WordPress.com.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 408 other followers

%d bloggers like this: