Shakespeare References in Court

Sigma Fin. Corp. v Gotham Ins. Co.
In a US federal district court, Judge Andrew J. Guilford once paraphrased Shakespeare, stating: “in love, a rose by any other name may smell just as sweet, but in lawsuits, naming precisely the right party can mean everything”. This was said during a dispute between Sigma Financial Corporation and Gotham Insurance Company over insurance coverage and professional negligence. Claimant Sigma motioned for leave to add a defendant to the complaint, which was granted by the judge. In an attempt to demonstrate the importance of listing the correct names on legal documents, Judge Guilford presented the literary allusion.  

The Law in Romeo and Juliet
The first clause references the iconic balcony scene in Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet, where Juliet laments the generational family feud that would set back her potential relationship with Romeo. Beginning with the famous line, “O Romeo, Romeo, wherefore art thou Romeo?”, her speech reflects on the arbitrary nature of language, arguing that the intrinsic qualities of an object remain constant, even if its title were to change. Later quoted by Judge Guilford, the rose is the example she gives in support of this argument. 

Romeo and Juliet, despite not featuring an official court scene, is arguably one of Shakespeare’s most ‘legal’ plays. The word, “law,” appears 11 times as an explicitly legal term in six scenes, exerting a constant presence throughout the play. Awareness of the law permeates all social ranks in this fictional depiction of Early Modern Veronese society. This is true even for the characters from a lower social background, who, historically, would not have received a formal education. 

The very first scene stages a conflict between the servants of the Capulets and the Montagues, during which the Capulet servant Samson bites his thumb (an insult akin to the middle finger in Shakespeare’s time, still in use in modern Sicily) at the Montagues. When asked if this was, indeed, directed to the servants of the Montagues, Samson asks his fellow servant Gregory “Is the law of our side if I say ‘Ay’?” The awareness of the law, specifically its utility for one’s personal motives, is demonstrated by these servants. 

Names in the Law
Returning to Judge Guilford in the Sigma v Gotham dispute, the second clause states that “naming precisely the right party” is significant to legal practice. Indeed, one’s name on any official record must match their ID for their identity to be verified, especially to vote. In Early Modern society, however, the standardised system of spelling had yet to be invented. It was common for one to have multiple variations of their name, especially in the case of Shakespeare. Although “Shakespeare” had been the most common spelling, his name was also spelt “Shakspeare,” “Shaxberd,” “Shakespere,” and “Shakespear” in official English documents. 

Considering this context, Juliet’s dilemma about Romeo’s name becomes more apparent. In a world without a standard system of language to represent one’s identity, it is perhaps expected that one becomes disillusioned with how real one’s name is. The sentiment of Juliet’s argument continues to hold some merit in modern society. Rarely do our personal connections to loved ones change if they decide to go by a different name. Legally, however, one must ensure that official documents reflect this name change. 

Conclusion: Shakespeare in the Law
Shakespeare’s references in court like Judge Guilford’s allow for a more clear, and accessible articulation of legal ideas while exploring the historical differences between modern and Early Modern society. Though Shakespeare’s court documents may have embraced a wide variation in spelling conventions, modern courts undergo formal legal procedures to ensure that the correct, standardised spelling of a name is documented. 

By Isabella Jeong