Law School Sample Brief
QUESTIONS PRESENTED
I. Should Jack Thompson be held in contempt of court under Michigan law for the statements he made in a letter sent to the media and Judge Friedman two days after rejecting Thompson's action initiated against Take-Two in an effort to stop the release of the video game "Bully?"
II. Under the Michigan statute, should the game "Bully" be held a public nuisance harmful to public health, affecting public morals?
BRIEF ANSWERS
I. Yes. Jack Thompson should be held in contempt of court. Court proceedings are not immune from criticism as a right of free speech. However, the publication of false or improper statements that reflect improperly on the dignity or authority of the court, and tends to obstruct, prevent or embarrass the due administration of justice, constitutes contempt. The Michigan contempt statute gives a court the inherent authority, as well as statutory authority to punish a person for contempt. Contempt in cases involving publication of statements must affect the outcome of a pending matter. Therefore, Jack Thompson should be held in contempt because he had reason to know that the comments he made about Judge Friedman would impede or impair the functionality of the courts power over the ongoing pending case.
II. No. The game "Bully," should not be held to be a public nuisance. A public nuisance must be harmful to the public health, create interference in use of a way of travel, affect public morals, or prevent the public from the peaceful use of their land and the public streets. The public nuisance statute was designed to eliminate the use of property for or in connection with prostitution, gambling and the illicit possession or transfer of intoxicants and to promote public health, safety, and welfare. Since the game "Bully" has not been released yet it should not be held a nuisance to the public when it has not yet been exposed to the public. Additionally, the game has not created an interference with the way of travel,
I. Should Jack Thompson be held in contempt of court under Michigan law for the statements he made in a letter sent to the media and Judge Friedman two days after rejecting Thompson's action initiated against Take-Two in an effort to stop the release of the video game "Bully?"
II. Under the Michigan statute, should the game "Bully" be held a public nuisance harmful to public health, affecting public morals?
BRIEF ANSWERS
I. Yes. Jack Thompson should be held in contempt of court. Court proceedings are not immune from criticism as a right of free speech. However, the publication of false or improper statements that reflect improperly on the dignity or authority of the court, and tends to obstruct, prevent or embarrass the due administration of justice, constitutes contempt. The Michigan contempt statute gives a court the inherent authority, as well as statutory authority to punish a person for contempt. Contempt in cases involving publication of statements must affect the outcome of a pending matter. Therefore, Jack Thompson should be held in contempt because he had reason to know that the comments he made about Judge Friedman would impede or impair the functionality of the courts power over the ongoing pending case.
II. No. The game "Bully," should not be held to be a public nuisance. A public nuisance must be harmful to the public health, create interference in use of a way of travel, affect public morals, or prevent the public from the peaceful use of their land and the public streets. The public nuisance statute was designed to eliminate the use of property for or in connection with prostitution, gambling and the illicit possession or transfer of intoxicants and to promote public health, safety, and welfare. Since the game "Bully" has not been released yet it should not be held a nuisance to the public when it has not yet been exposed to the public. Additionally, the game has not created an interference with the way of travel,