Funny jokes-Court case

One evening, after attending the theater, two gentlemen were upon foot down the avenue when they observed the rather good dressed as good as attractive immature woman upon foot forward of them. One of them incited to the alternative as good as remarked, "I'd give $250 to outlay the night with that woman."

Much to their surprise, the immature woman overheard their remark, incited around, as good as replied, "I'll take we up upon that offer."

She had the neat coming as good as the pleasing voice, so after behest his messenger great night, the man accompanied the immature woman to her apartment.

The following morning, as he prepared to leave, the man gave her $125. She demanded the rest of the money, stating, "If we do not give me the alternative $125 I'll sue we for it."


He laughed, observant "I'd similar to to see we get it upon these grounds."

Within the few days, he was astounded when he received the summons ordering his presence in justice as the suspect in the lawsuit. He hurried to his counsel as good as explained the details of the case.

His counsel said, "She can't presumably get the visualisation opposite we upon such grounds, though it will be engaging to see how her box will be presented."


After the common preliminaries, the lady's Lawyer addressed the justice as follows:

"Your honor, my client, this lady, is the owners of the square of property, the garden spot, surrounded by the profuse growth of shrubbery, that skill she agreed to lease to the suspect for the specified length of time for the sum of $250. The suspect took possession of the property, used it extensively for the purposes for that it was rented, though upon evacuating the premises, he paid usually $125, one-half of the volume agreed upon. The lease was not excessive, given it is restricted property, as good as we ask visualisation be granted opposite the suspect to assure payment of the balance."


The defendant's Lawyer was not usually astounded though also tender AND amused by the approach his opponent had presented the case. Naturally, his defense was somewhat opposite from the approach he originally programmed to benefaction it. He rose to the occasion!


'Your honor," he said, "my customer agrees that the woman has the excellent square of property, that he did lease such skill for the time, as good as the grade of pleasure was derived from the transaction. However, my customer found the good upon the skill around that he placed his own stones, sunk the shaft, as good as erected the pump, all work achieved privately by him. We claim these improvements to the skill were sufficient to equivalent the unpaid amount, as good as that the plaintiff was adequately compensated for the let of pronounced property. We, therefore, ask that visualisation not be granted."


The immature lady's counsel answered, "Your honor, my customer agrees that the suspect did find the good upon her property. However, had the suspect not known that the good existed, he would never have rented the property. Also, upon evacuating the premises, the suspect private the stones, pulled out the shaft, as good as took the siphon with him. In you do so, he not usually dragged the apparatus by the shrubbery, though left the hole much larger than it was prior to his occupancy, making the skill much reduction fascinating to others. We, therefore, ask that visualisation be granted."


In the Judge's decision, he supposing for two options: "Pay the change $125 to the plaintiff, or have the apparatus isolated from the stream location as good as provide it to the plaintiff for damages."


The suspect wrote out the check immediately.


Case closed!