The case of the ‘mongrel Mercedes’
August 26, 2008
U.S. District Judge Roger W. Titus is at it again.
Earlier this month, Titus seized upon the train theme in a case of alleged racial discrimination to narrate its procedural history.
Last week, the Greenbelt judge likened a Bethesda physical therapist’s allegations that she was sold a “mongrel” Mercedes Benz (PDF) — one pieced together from “leftover spare parts” — to the “Psycho-Billy Cadillac” in Johnny Cash’s ballad about a similar stitch-up job, “One Piece at a Time.”
While Cash’s character was tickled by the success of his caper, Dr. Pepi Schafler was not happy with her “abomination of a car.” In her multi-count complaint filed July 15 against the dealer and various other parties, she alleges the passenger seat’s manual controls “look to be 50 years old,” the dashboard controls are “pretend,” and the car doors are “odd and bizarre.”
After Titus dismissed the case sua sponte for lack of complete diversity two weeks later, Schafler, who claims to have earned a J.D., sought reconsideration, arguing the judge acted beyond his powers.
“However, Plaintiff’s version of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, like her car, is missing some crucial parts,” Titus wrote in a short opinion Wednesday, before pointing out recent revisions to that text.
But if Dr. Schafler’s past litigiousness is any indication, she’s no stranger to such legal wrangling, and I doubt we’ve heard the last from her. As long as the case file doesn’t end up weighing as much as the title paperwork for Cash’s car…
BRENDAN KEARNEY, Legal Affairs Writer
Sphere: Related ContentComments
2 Responses to “The case of the ‘mongrel Mercedes’”
Got something to say?
-
Business
Business posts- UnderArmour to supply apparel for SEC
- The next Great Depression: How ya like them apples?
- It’s all for the kids
- Will CEG shareholders support EDF’s bid?
- Battle of the Beltway
- Any price is too high if you’re broke
- Maryland: 10th-fastest internet speeds in nation
- Where the deals are
- Phelps named Sportsman of the Year
- Can SUV sales make a comeback?
Law
Law posts- Tis’ the season for layoffs
- A case of mistaken identity
- Beware of the blogging juror
- Inmate sought to intervene in Wells Fargo suit
- What’s behind that law firm’s headcount?
- Law blog round-up
- This week in Maryland Lawyer
- A history of football in Baltimore, courtesy of a lawsuit
- Baltimore crime stuck at 12th-worst in U.S.
- First a mongrel Mercedes, now a botched Bentley
Recent Posts
- Tis’ the season for layoffs
- UnderArmour to supply apparel for SEC
- The next Great Depression: How ya like them apples?
- A case of mistaken identity
- It’s all for the kids
Recent Comments
- Jacki Pearlman: Unfortunately, the game will not live up to it’s hype. I am a diehard Redskins fan after being...
- Isolde: Anybody remember GreedyAssociates.com? That’s basically a forum for ads and political weirdos now. Why?...
- Liz Farmer: Thanks for chiming in guys. Ed, you are exactly right. I did not include this in my original post but...
- Rick Rigini: Did you ever read the children’s book Norman the Doorman?
- Ed Waters Jr.: In many articles, it seems the writers tend to overlook the fact that some people need an SUV (or...
On Commenting
We ask that our readers follow a few guidelines, noted below.Please do not post any personal attacks, profanity, spam or other advertisements — they will be removed. Also, please post using only one name or pseudonym, as this consistency helps establish a sense of community. We will delete posts if they are signed with different names but originate from the same IP or email address. And if you’re going to comment using a proper name, please make it your own. Deliberate misrepresentations will be removed.
here’s what confuzzes: if the car was so mongrely, why did the doc buy it in the first place? didn’t the faux-dashboard arouse some suspicion before the deal was done?
UPDATE: As predicted, Dr. Schafler’s car crusade continues.
No, she hasn’t appealed Judge Titus’ decision. Instead, on Monday, she filed a new version of her suit — but without paying the customary filing fee. Schafler included a letter to the clerk of the federal court explaining her unusual tactic and asking that the fee she paid to file the previous iteration of her suit apply to the new action.
In the letter, she claims the U.S. District Court has a “dirty little secret”: censoring pro se complaints and pleadings. She claims the defendants in her suit, not Judge Titus, should have had to make arguments to dismiss her case. “The opponents have advocates paid for by taxpayers,” she wrote.
Schafler also claims she has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus which asks that the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals order Maryland’s District Court to halt the alleged censoring.
I’ll let you know how Judge Titus treats this latest try.