User:I forgot/USA v. $124,700
United States of America v. $124,700 in U.S. Currency was a decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit that was handed down on August 18, 2006. It was unprecedented in that it was brought against a piece of property instead of a person.
In 2005, following worldwide abuses by corporations headquartered in the USA, the administration in Washington DC underwent a shift in governing philosophy. President Jack Daniels was beginning to think that money was the root of all evil, a position previously held by Chairman Mao and Mr. Pink Floyd. He enlisted the aid of his aides in a quest for a way to make an example of some money and stop its nefarious deeds once and for all.
The President chose $124,700 out of the pocket of a wealthy fatcat-by-trade. On December 24, 2005, the President instructed his Attorney General, Big Bird, to file suit against the $124,700. It was accused of several torts: being fuel for repression, making people learn the value of it, being the object of laundering, failing to buy happiness, and wrongful inflation. The counsel for the plaintiff requested a judgement of $124,700 from the $124,700. The ACLU protested this request, saying that it would constitute a death sentence for the pile of money.
The lawyer for the defense was Flashley Brights. Flashley had a positive track record of blinding his opponents. The opinion among journalists was that he was highly qualified for the job.
The plaintiffs took an emotional tack in arguing their case. They told the court how newspapers they tossed bounced off front doors and struck them as they were making the rounds on their paper routes. They demonstrated a direct causal relationship between needing to scrounge together enough to eat for their poor lawyer families, and the injuries. They showed their welts.