Santa, all court up at Christmas!
In 2002, a municipal criminal court in Ohio had to decide whether a man presenting an Ohio-issued identification card bearing the name ‘Santa Claus’ had committed a first-degree misdemeanor by presenting a “fictitious” identification card to a state patrolman following a car accident.
Mr Claus (AKA Warren J. Hays of Warren, Ohio) presented the court with a birth certificate with DOB “12-25-383” (383 A.D.), several years’ worth of Ohio identification cards, a car registration in his name for a 1965 Volkswagen, a certificate of title for the same vehicle, and evidence of a bank account – all bearing the name ‘Santa Claus’.
After a review of the evidence provided, The Court put the veritable ‘lump of coal’ in the State of Ohio’s stocking and acquitted Mr Claus of using a “fictitious” identification:
Had Santa been charged with being “fabulous, legendary, mythical or apocryphal,” he might well indeed be guilty facing up to 180 days in jail and a $1,000 fine. However, to sustain the burden of going forward, the State must make a showing that Santa knowingly displayed an identification card that was “fictitious.” This the state has not done. The fact that Santa had an ongoing relationship for 20 years with the BMV is not indicative of “artificiality or contrivance,” for, in fact, under the publicly held records of the Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles, Santa has been a “real person” since as early as 1982.
While vindicated, Mr Claus was not satisfied with his criminal issues being at an end. He was still had being subject to the underlying criminal prosecution, personally sued the state patrolman who filed the charges against him, alleging the patrolman’s actions constituted “an abuse of process” and that he was otherwise subjected to a malicious prosecution that violated his Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures and Fourteenth Amendment right not be deprived of liberty without due process of law.
Unfortunately Mr Claus did not get his Christmas wish, with his argument failing at trial court level, and on appeal. The Ohio Appellate Court found Mr Claus was not subjected to a constitutional violation or abuse of process. With several years of litigation at an end, Mr Claus could now dedicate his time to his workshop and tending to his reindeer.
Wishing you all a very merry Christmas and a happy New Year from all of us here at ERA Legal!
- A little or a Lot: costs orders in proceedings involving Owners Corporations
- Preliminary discovery: not enough information to commence a proceeding?
- Litigation Funding: What the court will consider when determining an application under section 477(2B)
- PPSA: when the grantor registers a security interest...over itself
- Unfair Contracts regime enforced by Federal Court
- PPSA - the 20 business day rule: when will the court grant an extension of time to register?
- Voidable transactions - the one who got delay
- Service by post - but I didn't receive that letter?
- Would the real Applicant please wind-up! – Standing under s 459P of the Corporations Act
- The Australian Financial Complaints Authority - accrual proposal? Or a one-stop shop that makes cents?