WOMBATS, law section

[Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)]

Talisman wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_old_crowd/message/4064 :

<< For instance, in the Law section:
I'm not a big fan of the police state and it is not my first
instinct to run to the gendarmes or government officials to solve
problems with other people--especially family and neighbors.
Is she looking for that sort of reasoning? Or just for someone who
can use deductive reasoning + canon knowledge to come to the *legal*
answer?
I wonder about her expectations regarding test-takers, her goals,
etc.
Because, if you answer by what you would actually do, you risk
seeming ignorant of the stated WW standards.  Especially if you are
me. >>

As it was presented to look like a school test, I assumed that it
desired the legal answers rather than the true answers (somehow that
reminds me of the written part of the driver's license test) and
therefore was a test of trivia acquired via obsession with the ouevre.
And I feel that I failed to know enough trivia.

Talisman wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_old_crowd/message/4055 :

<< I'm likely to get some wrong, though.  For instance, I think 
that how newlyweds entertain each other is strictly their own
business. ;) >>

Until I took the test, I had no idea what you were talking about. When
I took it, I assumed the wife using her husband as an occasional table
was non-consensual, rather than 'entertain each other'. More like
Carolyn, next.

Carolyn wrote in
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_old_crowd/message/4065 :

<< On the one hand, she has the amusing conundrum of whether it is
right to turn your newly-married muggle husband into a coffee-table
(and, um, it *is* a satisfying kind of idea!), but then asks not just
whether a neighbour should inform on this, but which WW law had been
transgressed.. >>

Not whether it is 'right', but whether it is legal. It seems agreed
that using Love Potion on a Muggle man is not 'right', but is legal.
To my mind, as it is her husband, using him as a coffee-table does not
fall under whatever the laws against Muggle-baiting might be. But I
was concerned whether it risks Wizarding Secrecy (not one of the
available options). For a man to marry and quickly vanish might lead
to Muggle investigations. If he is only a part-time coffee table,
other times going to his job and so on, is there a danger he'll tell
Muggles there about being a part-time coffee table?

The one that troubled me was about the neighbors who quarreled over
the ownership of the Mooncalf dancing field. Surely that is a civil
suit in which deeds and surveyors's reports would be read. Is A
accusing B of Summoning the dung or the Mooncalfs? If the dung, if B
owns the field, B has a right to collect the dung whether by Accio or
by shovel. If A owns the field, B doesn't. Mooncalfs are not Pests and
magic is not being Misused. To whom does one take wizarding civil
lawsuits?