My Straw Man's Better Than Your Straw Man

So I'm preparing for a court hearing later this morning. My plan is to construct an elaborate straw man, a badly distorted reading of my opponent's position taken to an absurd extreme, so that I can then argue that every person of good will and fair conscience must agree that such an dramatically extreme position has to be rejected.

Any of you guys ever do that before?

Boy I'm bored as hail this morning. What else is happening?

Spencer Aronfeld trumpets how unusual it is both in Florida and nationally to get punitive damages against a doctor:

“We’re unaware of any other case in the country where a patient has been allowed to allege — against a physician in a plastic surgery case — punitive damages for an intentional tort,” Aronfeld said.

Curious strategy you got there, Spence. Usually lawyers argue that something you want a court or jury to do is perfectly normal and has been done plenty of times before. Let me try that technique out....

"Judge, I want you to allow something that has never ever been allowed before anywhere in this great country. No jurist before has ever allowed it, and no appellate court has ever approved it. We will all be the first, your honor!"

Hmm, it does kinda roll off the tongue. Maybe I'll weave that into my straw man argument later this morning. If I'm not jailed for contempt or beaten up outside the courtroom I'll let you all know how it goes.