Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines

ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments

Sponsors

Hosting:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

A test of corporate personhood | 191 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

A test of corporate personhood

Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, January 07 2013 @ 11:00 AM EST

Since the law enforcement official missed the second occupant, how could he/she
remember whether or not the corporation was properly restrained. Most likely,
the seat belt issue will not be pursued.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

A test of corporate personhood

Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, January 07 2013 @ 06:11 PM EST

No, this will not come out as a test of corporate personhood. A traffic court
judge doesn't have the authority to rule on 125 years SCOTUS precedent, rather
he is bound by it.

If the gentleman in questions thinks that the judges only options are to
overturn 125 years of precedent on corporate personhood or void his ticket, he
will discover soon enough that he is badly mistaken.

Assuming the judge allows him to even make the argument, the likely outcome is
that the traffic court judge will likely rule that the incorporation documents
being in the vehicle are not enough to make the corporation a passenger.

The ticket will stand and the gentleman will learn an expensive lesson.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

A test of corporate personhood - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, January 08 2013 @ 01:19 PM EST
- A test of corporate personhood - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, January 08 2013 @ 01:38 PM EST
  - A test of corporate personhood - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, January 08 2013 @ 06:03 PM EST
- OMG(roklaw)! Keyboard alert! - Authored by: hardmath on Tuesday, January 08 2013 @ 07:01 PM EST
  - OMG(roklaw)! Keyboard alert! - Authored by: artp on Wednesday, January 09 2013 @ 12:15 AM EST

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )