Court of Petty Appeals: Father Time v. Ballard

Father Time

v.

Ballard

77 U.Va 23 (2025)

Per curiam.

This emergency appeal comes before us due to the actions of a mustachioed rogue identifying himself to the Court as Bandrew Ballard. Since last Thursday, Father Time has been trapped in a time prison of Ballard’s creation, described in Time’s petition as “something out of a Marvel movie.”

In a habeas petition filed in the District Court of Petty Complaints, Time claimed that his due process rights had been violated, as Ballard had not cited any legal authority nor provided any reason for his arrest in the time prison. Father Time petitioned the district court to order Ballard to provide cause for his arrest, or otherwise release him from the time prison.

In response, Ballard asserted that he was holding Time captive at the order of Law Weekly authorities. Ballard also insisted that he could not disclose the identity of his ordering superior, citing the editorial secrets doctrine.

The district court rejected Ballard’s argument, reasoning that such a broad application of the editorial secrets doctrine would allow any person to assert authority to arrest anyone. The court thus entered an order demanding Ballard show cause for Father Time’s arrest by Friday, April 18, or else he must be released from the time prison.

Ballard filed an emergency appeal requesting a stay pending appeal of the district court’s order. We agree with the district court, and we hold that Ballard’s stay application is DENIED. Ballard must comply with the court’s order by Friday.

We note with suspicion that Ballard bears a striking resemblance to Chief Justice Emeritus Andrew Allard ’25. We also take judicial notice of the fact that Ballard is incredibly handsome. But even the sexy must adhere to the law.

So ordered.

Aʟʟᴀʀᴅ, C.J. Emeritus, dissenting.

“Time, he flexes like a whore; Falls wanking to the floor; His trick is you and me, boy.” Thus spake acclaimed singer-songwriter, David Bowie in his single “Time” from the album Aladdin Sane. Well, this insane lad is not a big fan of time, either. I am deeply disappointed by the Court’s order today. For that reason, I am resigning my commission as a member of this esteemed Court effective immediately. But, like, not until the end of this dissent, just to be clear.

I

On September 12, 2022, I attended my very first Virginia Law Weekly meeting. Enticed by offers of free pizza and a vague interest in “journalism,” I stepped into the auspicious walls of Slaughter 279 with no experience writing for a paper. My life was forever changed. I continued to attend, writing frequently, rising through the ranks, and ultimately emerging victorious from a fierce struggle for the highly coveted Editor-in-Chief job. In the past three years, I’ve written articles about dim sum, hunter-gatherers, direct democracy, Star Trek, and, of course, countless opinions for this esteemed Court. And I’m told that some of those articles even had a few readers!

More importantly, I have had the distinct pleasure of working with a team of the Law School’s funniest, kindest, and most creative writers. Working on the paper has always been challenging work. It is truly a labor of love, and for the core editorial board, it means late nights every Monday. But I have always looked forward to those meetings. There is a special magic that happens in our office. I’ve laughed more in that room than anywhere else in the Law School.

This is the last issue of the paper we’ll publish during my time at UVA. With that sad conclusion waiting in the wings, I am hardly incensed by the freezing of time. Indeed, that is why I– err… that is why I imagine Ballard has arrested Father Time. Ballard, too, must fear change. And who can blame him? The future is scary. Life is uncertain. Have we not all, at some point, wished we could return to better days? Are we not always in a race against the inevitability of wrinkles, changing seasons, and unwanted goodbyes? Ballard has simply done what all of us wanted, but none of us were brave enough to do. For that, the Court punishes him.

II

Now, the law. I first note that the Court has ample authority to simply dismiss Father Time’s claim with prejudice. See PRCP 1 (“We do what we want.”). But that wouldn’t be any fun, I suppose, would it? See Gay Section H Law Weekly Staff v. Lake, 75 U.Va 16 (2023) (Lake, C.J., concurring) (“There is nothing more vital to the exercise of justice than committing to the bit.”). The doctrine of uncomical avoidance demands that we pursue a humorous outcome, and our ostensible status as a court demands that we at least pretend to care about the law, much like a real judge would. See 22-77-9CV (Allard, C.J., dissenting) (“Yes, we must commit to the bit, but in doing so, we must follow proper procedure and at least kinda adhere to our law.”).

Still, there are numerous comical grounds upon which to rule in Ballard’s favor. Continuing to detain Father Time would condemn the 1Ls to a perpetual 1L purgatory. Hilarious. It would make Trump the forever president. Terrifying, but also kinda ironic. And it would prevent Jordan Allen ’25 from finally escaping his unwanted obligations to us and the Virginia Law Review. Really funny, depending on who you ask.

Instead, the Court opts for a decision that, while otherwise legally sound, clearly fails under the canon of uncomical avoidance. That cannot stand.

III

It has been a signature of my jurisprudential style to write a meandering, exasperated opinion, only to reverse myself in the last few sentences. I learned this trick from the great Justice Kennedy.

I suppose I must admit that the majority is correct to deny my—I mean, Ballard’s stay request. The Class of 2025 would very much like to get on with their lives. And, ultimately, so would I. I will miss all of this so much—Charlottesville, the Law School, and most of all, the good folks at the Law Weekly. But it’s time to move on. I leave this Court the way I found it—prestigious, playful, but above all, petty.

And with that, I respectfully… resign.