Richard A. Hellander, M.D., P.C. v Metlife Auto & Home Ins. Co., 2015 NY Slip Op 25164 (App. Term 2d Dept. 2015)
“In view of some of the remarks contained in the amended order, we take this opportunity to remind the judge that, as one commentator has noted:
“Judges may face a dilemma in trying to write opinions that are [*3]figurative, quotable, humorous, or unique. While they may want to forsake the wooden form of judicial opinion writing (issue, facts, law, application, conclusion), they must, in some way, maintain the dignity and integrity that, at least in part, give the judiciary its legitimacy” (Adelberto Jordan, Imagery, Humor and the Judicial Opinion, 41 U Miami L Rev 693, 695 n 11 [1987]).”
It does not matter what the decision says; in my opinion, leave Judge Straniere alone. His decisions are almost always comical, enlightening, ridiculous and erudite – all in one. If most judges put the time and thought into their decisions as this judge does, we would all be a tad bit wiser.
He was reversed anyway, and the case involves a particular plaintiff who floated 312-a summons for many years at his own risk.
