Court Opinion

ID: 9560603
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 17:52:03.963724+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:13:02.248824
License: Public Domain

THOMAS, Justice,
concurring specially.
The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ,
Moves on: nor all your Piety nor Wit
Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line,
Nor all your Tears wash out a Word of it.
*397The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam, Stanza 71, An Anthology of WORLD Poetry 126 (translated by Edward FitzGerald) (Van Doren ed. 1936).
The immortal words of the poet maintain their verity.
FAMILIARITY BREEDS CONTEMPT.
Aesop’s Fables, The Fox and the Lion 24 (The Harvard Classics 1909).
While the courts of Wyoming well may know all the profane words, Aesop graphically articulates the difference between knowing something and familiarity with it.
I concur in the result of this opinion, but I am unable to join in the opinion. Vulgarity for the sake of vulgarity has no real place, but it is particularly inappropriate in an opinion of a supreme court. “If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it must be a duck.” City of Laramie v. Facer, 814 P.2d 268, 273 (Wyo.1991). It is unfortunate that the court is compelled, for whatever reason, to emulate a naughty, schoolboy attempting to shock the teacher. The result of our decisions is often sufficiently shocking that it is specious to attempt to do it with vulgar language.
In the course of this court’s work, occasions may arise when coarse language is necessary and, for that reason, appropriate. It is indeed probable that situations may arise when such statements are a neces-: sary part of the material facts. Despite the attempt in this instance to justify the inclusion of the vulgarities, this language is not necessary to understand the decision of the hearing officer. In his Findings and-Conclusions, the Appeals Examiner found it sufficient to report:
The claimant protested that he had not intended to quit and entered into an exchange of verbal obscenities with his employer. (Emphasis added.)
In explaining his decision, the Appeals Examiner afforded no significance to this exchange, saying:
The claimant’s actions in contacting the Labor Board, or any other regulatory agency, were within his rights. The claimant intended his absence to be temporary and completed the appropriate paperwork for the employer indicating that his absence was intended to be temporary. The employer’s action in “pulling his time card” is an action which is commonly construed as a discharge. The claimant took no action to end his employment. The end of the employment was determined by the employer. The claimant was discharged but there is insufficient evidence to support a finding that the discharge was for misconduct connected with his work. The claimant is, therefore, not subject to disqualification.
The material facts had ended before the argument occurred out of which the gutter language is quoted, and that language is not relevant to any of the issues in this appeal. The inclusion of those vulgarities serves only to denigrate both the work place and the Supreme Court of Wyoming. It is interesting to note that to the extent the parties found it necessary to address this exchange in materials furnished through counsel to the Unemployment Insurance Commission, they described the event as “screamed obscenities,” “yelling obscenities,” “yell obscenities in a loud and abusive manner,” “use obscenities,” and “scream obscenities.”
The statement of the issues and the able resolution of those issues in the court’s opinion belie the claimed justification for using this language. It appears in the Brief of Appellee, but its use should not be condoned by repetition. I am firmly of the conviction that the citizens of Wyoming deserve the portrayal of a better image by their highest court than this opinion presents. How can we expect to enjoy a shining image in the eyes of our constituency if we go to such lengths to tarnish it ourselves. It is truly unfortunate that this opinion will be remembered, not for the able treatment of the legal issues, but because of the unnecessary invocation of such vulgarity. I am disappointed.