California Judge Rules a Corporation Is Not a Person for Car Pool Lane Purposes

[koeniginator]

[quote]A corporation is considered a person under the law of California (and numerous other states). But that doesn't mean a corporation counts as a passenger when it comes to satisfying a car pool lane requirement that a vehicle contain two or more people, a California judge has ruled.

Jonathan Frieman handed a California Highway Patrol officer incorporation papers from the passenger seat in October, when he was pulled over for the apparent vehicle-occupancy violation, the San Francisco Chronicle reports. But the officer was not convinced that a corporate passenger was present in Frieman's vehicle and told the 56-year-old San Rafael resident he would have to tell it to the judge.

Despite the assistance of an attorney, who argued on Frieman's behalf at a Monday hearing that freeway signs requiring "2 or more persons" in car pool lanes are unconstitutionally vague, a Marin County Superior Court judge wasn't convinced either.

Rejecting the argument by attorney Ford Greene, traffic referee Frank Drago said the underlying purpose of the law shows why a corporation, even if a person, is not a passenger.

"Common sense says carrying a sheath of papers in the front seat does not relieve traffic congestion," Drago told Frieman. "And so I'm finding you guilty."

Frieman plans to appeal the ruling.[/quote]

[url=http://www.abajournal.com/mobile/article/a_corporation_is_not_a_person_for_car_pool_lane_purposes_calif._judge_rules]SOURCE[/url]

[Reds]

Racist.

[Sparkwire]

thats descrimination

[DrLuckyLuke]

disguisting!

[Deunan]

As if it wasn't obvious before - a corporation can define itself as a person only in situations where an actual physical person is not necessary. It's the whole reason for the difference between physical and legal persons.

[Dilbert]

A corporation can most definitely not sit beside you, yet it's counted as a person anyways for blatantly obvious reasons.

You're either a person or not a person. Get it right.

[Lazor]

[QUOTE=elevate;39227877]A corporation can most definitely not sit beside you, yet it's counted as a person anyways for blatantly obvious reasons.

You're either a person or not a person. Get it right.[/QUOTE]

look at this scrub that doesn't know the difference between personhood and legal personality

[Dilbert]

;~;

[JennyC6]

[QUOTE=Lazor;39227888]look at this scrub that doesn't know the difference between personhood and legal personality[/QUOTE]

He's right. It's the court system that's the scrub unable to tell the difference. I'd love to see a bill fly through Congress that says "If an entity is not a physical person, it cannot be considered a legal personality. End of discussion. Oh, and fuck Citizens United."

[Mio Akiyama]

Finally, corporate personhood is something we should not have in this country. Bullshit has been around since the beginnings of corporations and the loophole for this should be closed

[Jaguar]

All according to plan...

[Metashotzo]

Does this mean I can't have awesome car trips with my good pal, Frito Lay anymore?

[Mr. Someguy]

[quote]Common sense says carrying a sheath of papers in the front seat does not relieve traffic congestion[/quote]

Common sense also says that people are people and corporations are entities that exist only in law and paper, of course that didn't stop the Supreme Court from disagreeing with it.

This ruling is pretty much a "Fuck you" to the average citizen. Corporations are allowed to use "person" status to further their own goals, but we're not allowed to do the same.

[Ryll]

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;39231747]Common sense also says that people are people and corporations are entities that exist only in law and paper, of course that didn't stop the Supreme Court from disagreeing with it.

This ruling is pretty much a "Fuck you" to the average citizen. Corporations are allowed to use "person" status to further their own goals, but we're not allowed to do the same.[/QUOTE]

Isn't this ruling good for the average citizen?

[Shitty Bill]

[QUOTE=Ericson666;39231790]Isn't this ruling good for the average citizen?[/QUOTE]

Indeed it is. Get those fucks out of the carpool lane.

Then again, I bus to class on my city's segregated bus lanes, so carpool lanes are things I've basically never made use of.

[KorJax]

[QUOTE=Ericson666;39231790]Isn't this ruling good for the average citizen?[/QUOTE]

Did you read the article?

It pretty much says that corporate personhood exists but the traffic law itself intends to only count passengers, and the papers that he says were his corporate person did not qualify as a passenger (to relieve congestion) in the terms of the traffic law

Basically, its a "fuck you" because it pretty much the judge going, "Corporate personhood is a thing, and the corporation can decide wither or not it wishes to represent itself as a person"

[Deunan]

[QUOTE=KorJax;39232003]Did you read the article?

It pretty much says that corporate personhood exists but the traffic law itself intends to only count passengers, and the papers that he says were his corporate person did not qualify as a passenger (to relieve congestion) in the terms of the traffic law

Basically, its a "fuck you" because it pretty much the judge going, "Corporate personhood is a thing, and the corporation can decide wither or not it wishes to represent itself as a person"[/QUOTE]

Actually the ruling pretty much goes - corporate personhood is a thing and it applies in situation when a physical human is not required.

By the way - corporate personhood is actually incredibly beneficial in a lot of cases. For instance what entity will you get a work contract with if the corporate entity doesn't exist as an entity capable of entering contracts under the law?

[Boxbot219]

So if corporate personhood is a thing does that mean cannibalism has occurred when a corporation absorbs another corporation?

[DanRatherman]

If Corporations are people can I get a restraining order so I don't have to watch commercials anymore?

[EmperorScorpious]

[QUOTE=DanRatherman;39234853]If Corporations are people can I get a restraining order so I don't have to watch commercials anymore?[/QUOTE]

That's...actually quite brilliant.

[Paul McCartney]

[QUOTE=Boxbot219;39233239]So if corporate personhood is a thing does that mean cannibalism has occurred when a corporation absorbs another corporation?[/QUOTE]

Stephen Colbert actually ran ads where it was basically accusing Mitt of murder :v:

[Cl0cK]

[video=youtube;KywseYOdJI8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KywseYOdJI8[/video]
If you're in a hurry, just use a prostitute!

[JennyC6]

[QUOTE=wraithcat;39233063]
By the way - corporate personhood is actually incredibly beneficial in a lot of cases. For instance what entity will you get a work contract with if the corporate entity doesn't exist as an entity capable of entering contracts under the law?[/QUOTE]
A corporation doesn't have to have personhood to be legally allowed to enter contracts. We did just fine before Citizens United, we'll be just fine once it's gotten rid of.

[Lazor]

[QUOTE=TestECull;39236301]A corporation doesn't have to have personhood to be legally allowed to enter contracts. We did just fine before Citizens United, we'll be just fine once it's gotten rid of.[/QUOTE]

legal personhood predates citizens united by centuries you nonce