Maybe it's kind of dicey when your wife is the defendant and you're a comedian, but I saw nothing wrong with Jerry Seinfeld's appearance on The Late Show with David Letterman back in October 2007. At that time Seinfeld denied that his wife Jessica had plagiarized from Missy Chase Lapine's The Sneaky Chef when she published her own cookbook of kid friendly healthy recipes, Deceptively Delicious: Simple Secrets to Get Your Kids Eating Good Food.

He also made a few comedic comments, as a comedian is prone to do. Maybe Jessica copied, maybe she didn't. As my brethren at the bar would say, I have insufficient information to confirm or deny that allegation. But I do know this: there's some seriously humorless people out there and a whole lot of them are plaintiffs, lawyers, and plaintiffs' lawyers.

Take plaintiff Missy Chase Lapine for one. In addition to her plagiarism suit against Ms. Seinfeld, she is now suing Mr. Seinfeld for slander, based on his comments on that October evening. Jerry started by complaining about "nutjobs" who bother celebrities, did a lengthy riff on vegetable plagiarism and how his wife must have burglarized Lapine's publisher, and finished up with a punch-line about how Missy Chase Lapine might be a wacko or nutjob, and that he's worried, because many people with three names go on to become assassins. Perhaps not Jerry's A material, but I got a chuckle.

[Fast forward up to 5:50]

Missy claims she's not a public figure, and that Seinfeld's comments were a "malicious, premeditated, and knowingly false and defamatory attack."

Not a public figure? I wonder... If you are a published author, and you file a public lawsuit against a public figure's spouse, and you publicize your lawsuit... aren't you a duck? Don't comedians comment on people in the news - famous or not - all the time? Do the rules change if your spouse is a party to the lawsuit upon which you comment? Aren't you entitled to express opinion?

According to the Washington Post, Lapine's complaint alleges that "a reasonable person watching Seinfeld on Letterman's show would conclude that he had described Lapine as mentally ill with "potentially violent or, at a minimum, hostile, tendencies, proclivities and activities."

Yes, any sentient being would conclude that he had described her as such. I think the proper question is, "Would any reasonable person conclude that Seinfeld was stating any of the above as fact?" It sure sounded like jokes to me, and apparently to the studio audience as well. Yeah, it all depends upon whose ox is being gored, but sometimes it's just bull...

I hope the court dismisses this part of the complaint with just a four word opinion: