The law in song: These lyrics have footnotes!

I am very happy to present this guest post by Kristin Grossman. She's a law student who has created a unique way to make the law fun and memorable. Thanks, Kristin, for telling us your story and letting us read your five outstanding songs. I know many readers will be hearing the songs in their heads as they read. Now here's Kristin . . .

Like Elle in the film “Legally Blonde,” I pretty much did wake up one morning and decide to pursue a J.D.  The similarities don't stop there.  My background is hardly what one would expect for a law student.  I have a B.A. in art, a yoga teacher certification, and a body of professional and personal experience that diplomatically can be termed “eclectic.”  I'm also blonde and fond of the color pink. 

One can imagine then, that much of the time at school, I feel like a Hare Krishna at a Presbyterian church picnic.  There is no getting around the fact that it's tough being a right-brained person in a left-brained environment.

My need to remember legal concepts in a creative manner spawned the following lyrics.  And to give these lyrics a stage, "Restitution: The Attractive Nuisance Band” was formed with the help and guidance of Professor Susan Daicoff and my fellow artistically-inclined law students (one of whom is now my husband - what an amazing benefit to being yourself).  We performed these ditties for our Contracts II class and the student body at Florida Coastal School of Law.  It's the most I'd seen everyone smile in nine months.  And my hope and suspicion is, that in the midst of the fun, important concepts were solidified.

It is important to note that these lyrics do not merely represent the musings of my restless creative self, but truly serve to “flesh out” the concepts and the key elements of important rules of law.  I think the creators of “Schoolhouse Rock” would back me on this: certain brains learn more effectively when they have a jingle and some fun to help remember the dry stuff.  

Little Bit Me, Little Bit You
(to the tune of A Little Bit Me A Little Bit You by Neil Diamond and performed by the Monkees)

Compare!
Portions of fault now
It can’t all fall on me¹

Not fair!
To make me pay for
The harm in entirety²

Girl, the court’s gonna find
that you’re a little bit wrong
and I’m a little bit right

And I say girl!
You know that it’s true
Fault’s a little bit me
Fault’s a little bit you
True…

Don’t  know!
just how it happened
Girl I apologize

You said
drive way more faster
We’ll make it before sunrise³

Girl, the court’s gonna find
that you’re a little bit wrong
and I’m a little bit right

And I say girl!
You know that it’s true
Fault’s a little bit me
Fault’s a little bit you
True…

Brake now!
Couldn’t avoid it.
The curve came up way too fast

Scrapes now!
Could have been much worse
In judgment we both had a lapse

Girl, the court’s gonna find
that you’re a little bit wrong
and I’m a little bit right

And I say girl!
You know that it’s true
Fault’s a little bit me
Fault’s a little bit you
True…

1. Pure comparative negligence eliminates a windfall for either claimant or defendant allowing each party to recover only for the portion of the damages not attributable to their individual negligence. Hilen v. Hays, 673 S.W.2d 713, 718 (Ky. 1984).
2. "The concept of allocating liability proportionate to fault remains irresistible to reason and all intelligent notions of fairness." Hilen 673 S.W.2d at 718 (Ky. 1984) (citing Li v. Yellow Cab Co., 119 Cal.Rptr. 804, 863 (1975)).
3. She was trying to make it to the sunrise yoga class at the beach.     

Keep These Eight Away
(to the tune of You've Got to Hide Your Love Away by Lennon and McCartney performed by The Beatles)

Everywhere     
things aren't clear
terms explain away
(Ambiguities)

UCC
says to me
please allow these three
(COD, COP, TU)

All around
defenses abound
misrep’s not allowed
(Defenses)

Do the right thing
courts will sing
narrow or broad
(Justice)

Hey! the [Parol Evidence] Rule can’t keep these eight away!

Hey! the [Parol Evidence] Rule can’t keep these eight away!

That which comes after
penned or said in laughter,
add a change it's okay
(Subsequent K's modification oral or written)

Separate, collateral
agreements are welcomed in
said or written down
(Separate or collateral oral or written K's)

If you love me
the contract will be
carried through all the way
(Oral conditions precedent to
duty to perform K)

Submit to me
evidence of C
given or not
(Evidence of consideration - given or not)
Hey! the [Parol Evidence] Rule can’t keep these eight away!

Hey! the [Parol Evidence] Rule can’t keep these eight away!

That’s ANOCHE¹
(to the tune of That's Amore by composer Harry Warren and lyricist Jack Brooks and performed by Dean Martin)

On your land there's this guy
Seven years they went by
That's ANOCHE…²

Built a house, fenced his yard in
And planted a garden
It's his now³

You snoozed you lose, snoozy snoozy lose,
snoozy snoozy lose, snoozy lose
It's your own fault⁴

In your face, on your space,
neighbors knew his place, now you have no case⁵
(But you have a new friend)

When you're feeling alone
Look out the window and moan
He has ten yard gnomes⁶

‘Scusa me - that's his tree
His house warming's at 3:00⁷

That's ANOCHE!

1. ANOCHE stands for the common law requirements for adverse possession.  The possession must be Adverse, Notorious, Open, Continuous, Hostile and Exclusive.  Mike Jorgensen, Professor, Florida Coastal School of Law introduced me to this concept and provided me the opportunity to first sing it (albeit very badly) at a study session.
2. Seven years is the prescriptive period for adverse possession under Florida statute §95.16 - Adverse possession under color of title (in which one is asserting adverse possession founded on a written instrument) and §95.18 - Adverse possession without color of title (in which one is claiming possession by virtue of continuous occupation). FLA. STAT. ANN. § 95.16 (LexisNexis 2007); FLA. STAT. ANN. § 95.18 (LexisNexis 2007).  The prescriptive period for adverse possession varies between states: New York - ten years;  Pennsylvania - twenty one years; Alaska - seven years under color and claim of title or ten years under a mistaken belief that the real property which is the subject of the adverse possession, lies within the boundaries of the adjacent property owned by the adverse possessor. N.Y. REAL PROPERTY ACTIONS AND PROCEEDINGS LAW § 501 (Consol. 2007); PA. STAT. ANN § 81 (LexisNexis 2008); ALASKA STAT. § 09.45.052 (2008).
3. Adverse possession without color of title under Florida statute §95.18 requires that the property be protected by a "substantial enclosure" and that the property be "usually cultivated or improved."  See also Van Valkenburgh v. Lutz, 106 N.E.2d 28, 30 (N.Y. 1952) (finding no adverse possession under claim of title, because the property had not been enclosed by a substantial enclosure, the cultivation on the property did not encompass the entire land in question, and that neither the moveable chicken coop nor the garage encroaching the property line by a few inches, nor scattered spare automobile parts in the yard, could be viewed as improvements).
4. "It is only by way of reply to the suggestion that you are disappointing the former owner, that you refer to his neglect having allowed the gradual disassociation between himself and what he claims, and the gradual association of it with another." Oliver Wendell Holmes, The Path of the Law, 10 HARV. L. REV. 457, 476-77 (1897).
5. The requirements of open and notorious are codified by the Florida statutes §95.16 and §95.18 where the "in your face" and "neighbors knew his place" are met by recording the title (§95.16) or by returning a property description to the county property appraiser and paying taxes on the property (§95.18) and by the substantial enclosure and cultivation or improvement requirements.  It also helps to borrow a cup of sugar from the neighbors and then bring them the homemade chocolate chip cookies you baked with the help of their sugar.  It gets you noticed and liked. FLA. STAT. ANN. § 95.16 (LexisNexis 2007); FLA. STAT. ANN. § 95.18 (LexisNexis 2007).
6. At writing,Target.com has a nice selection of gnomes.  My favorite is the Solar-Power Mystic Gnome.  "Darling during the day and enchanting at night" it includes a solar panel inside the magic ball containing a glow-at-night toadstool into which the gnome gazes.  Dreamy.
7. Adverse possession doesn't usually foster strong lasting relationships or encourage party invitations.

Banana Peel (Ode to Anjou) (to the tune of Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds by Lennon and McCartney and performed by The Beatles)

Picture yourself in a store produce section
With tangerine stands
And things to stir fry

Somebody shouts out
You turn rather quickly
Banana peel plus a tall guy

Managers quickly rush to the bad scene
Stretchers to take him away
Look to Anjou for support and he'll have his court day¹

Chorus
Evidence that is circumstantial
May lead to damages that are quite substantial²
Oh Oh

Follow him down to his counselor's office
Where excited lawyers have dollar sign eyes

Store really screwed up
Had constructive notice
A crusty brown peel doesn't lie³

He suffered greatly
And must be made whole
Doctor's reports verify

Look to Anjou and on that case most firmly rely

Chorus
Evidence that is circumstantial
May lead to damages that are quite substantial
Oh Oh

Fade out with chorus

1. Anjou v. Boston Elevated Ry. Co., 94 N.E. 386 (Mass. 1911) (Finding the defendant negligent by inferring through the appearance of the banana peel upon which the plaintiff slipped that it had been on the ground for a long enough period that the defendant should have been aware of its presence and removed it).
2. Helen G. Anjou recovered $1250 with costs. Anjou v. Boston Elevated Ry. Co., 1911 Mass. LEXIS 806.  In today's market this amount would have the purchasing power of $28,140.88. Lawrence H. Officer and Samuel H. Williamson, "Purchasing Power of Money in the United States from 1774 to 2007 available at http://www.measuringworth.com/ppowerus/.
3. The beauty of the banana peel is that it can show age. In Anjou the banana peel was described as "black, flattened out and gritty"  Anjou, 94 N.E. at 386.  Because banana peels darken as they age and in this case, had picked up dirt from being trodden upon, it was reasonable to infer that the peel had been there a while. Id.  They also gave the peel a polygraph test. It passed with flying colors.  Constructive notice is more difficult to prove in cases surrounding a spill.  Some courts have held that defendants had constructive notice when the spill was in clear view of passing employees.  Thoma v. Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, 649 So. 2d 277, 278-79 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995).  Others have held that without temporal evidence to ascertain how long the spill had been present, the employee's proximity to the spill only suggested that they may have been able to see the spill, not that they should have discovered it. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Reece, 81 S.W.3d 812, 813, 816 (Tex. 2002).  The lesson here is that if you are going to take a header in a store, make sure you slip on produce.

Unjust Enrichment (to the tune of Aquarius/Let the Sunshine In by James Rado, Gerome Radni, and Galt MacDermot performed by The Fifth Dimension)

When a guy asks you to paint his house
And then you paint, expecting to be paid
He flakes, and says he’s changed his mind
Denying there was a “K”
You have an action for Unjust Enrichment¹
Unjust Enrichment
Enrichment!
Enrichment!

You thought there was an understanding
Truly he had never meant to be bound
Still he never ever stopped you
He looked out and waved right at you
With a smile that said: he’d pay you,
right after the job was through²
Enrichment!
Enrichment!

Restitution!
Restitution!
It’ll all be paid – Hey, hey, hey!³

1. See Dews v. Halliburton Indus., Inc., 288 Ark. 532, 536 (1986) (finding Dews liable under the quasi-contract theory because he anticipated and accepted the valuable and necessary and services he received and that by not requiring Dews to compensate the claimant drilling company, he would be unjustly enriched).
2. Dews knew the drilling company was conferring a valuable benefit to the land to which he in essence still had rights and allowed the debt to be incurred by not notifying the company that the person who hired them was in breach of a contract which gave him the rights to the land and therefore the right to hire them in the first place. Id. at 537.
3. "...Where a party has in good faith rendered a service, not illegal or contrary to public policy, and the other party has accepted and used the service, the former may recover." Id. citing Dunn v. Phoenix Village, Inc., 213 F. Supp. 936 (W.D. Ark. 1963).

Lyrics, Introduction, Footnotes ©2007 Kristin Herbst (nka Kristin Grossman) E-mail Kristin.

More about Kristin

Kristin Grossman is enjoying her current incarnation as a soon-to-be LL.M. student at Pepperdine University along with her best friend and husband A.J.  She believes strongly in the principles of Therapeutic Jurisprudence (T.J.) and practicing the law in a healing way - for both practitioner and client. Kristin and A.J. plan to integrate T.J. principles into the mediation practice they will create one day.  Kristin also thinks it a good idea to somehow work chocolate into the process.  It makes just about everything better.

Comments

[John Judge]

I thought the lyrics were great--and accurate.

My problem: I can't carry a tune, even with musical accompaniment. I had a hard time a capella, and with unfamiliar lyrics to boot.

[Mark DeAngelis]

Great Job Kristen! I have been using songs of a similar type in my undergraduate Business Law classes. If anyone is interested, you may find them at: http://blawprof.googlepages.com/lawlessongs(lawlessonsinsong)
Keep up the good work.