How many times can Saucy be revived?
Saucy is back.
I recognize some of you may not be familiar with the Saucy lore.
The Sauciest Intruder first made its Ultra Vires debut in May of 2021 as an advice column. At this point, it had been a few years since UV’s previous advice column, Dear Denning. Dear Denning would pass judgement. Saucy simply gives advice.
Denning has not been heard from in many years now. Maybe it’s for the best. Maybe Denning too will resurrect out of the blue in coming UV issues.
Dear Denning may be analogized to the recently emerged Jury in a Hurry, a hip new advice column gracing the pages of UV. Much like Saucy, the jury stays anonymous, likely to ensure that the weight of their judgements are not tainted by their identities (and because, otherwise, everyone will know that they write for UV—embarrassing). Saucy is not intimidated by Jury in a Hurry. In fact, some healthy competition is certainly appreciated in a time when oligopolies tend to persist. Saucy is happy to share the limelight with fellow advice. There certainly can’t be anything bad about being given different advice from all different directions, right?
Since 2021, Saucy has resurfaced a few times. However, Saucy is as inconsistent and unreliable as your on and off again situationship. Saucy is as hot and cold as your moot coach (one moment, they tell you your factum is hot garbage, and then the next, they ask you to make eye contact with them (buy me dinner first)).
The Saucy Intruder has also been accused of being behind the locker thefts of 2024 (we’re looking at you Shelby Hohmann). That is a deeply upsetting allegation. Saucy would never ever steal from law students (besides, what use is the Canadian Income Tax Act to Saucy who evades taxes like a pro. Saucy also does not want your leftovers from J’s Java—clean your lockers, you freaks).
However, the ‘saucy intruder’ is not a novel invention of Ultra Vires’ contributors of the past. The term appeared in Justice Livingston’s dissent in Pierson v Post, a 1805 New York Supreme Court property law case. You may be familiar with the case (a saga, if you will) if you have taken a class with Professor Angela Fernandez. In the case, Post, a hunter, had his chase of a fox intercepted by Pierson (1800s style beef). The issue in the case involved determining the rightful ownership of the fox, which in turn involved determinations on the notion of “property” in and of itself. Justice Livingston characterized Pierson as a “saucy intruder, who had not shared in the honors or labors of the chase.”
Reader, you may be wondering to yourself: What does Pierson of Pierson v Post have to do with U of T law’s Saucy Intruder? In a way, Saucy intercepts you from ‘catching’ bad decisions with Saucy’s sage advice (I don’t know, we’re trying our best to make the metaphor work). Some of you may also have seen a fox roaming the grounds of Jackman Law—that fox is almost certainly the reincarnation of the fox in Pierson v Post—which means Saucy must be near. In fact, upon seeing the gorgeous orange creature, Saucy was inspired to pick up the pen once again.
Reader, you may also be wondering to yourself: Why is Saucy referring to Saucyself in both the first person and third person. On one hand, Saucy is me, and I am Saucy. However, Saucy has not always been me and will not always be me. Saucy is an identity I have assumed temporarily; however, Saucy’s identity transcends beyond myself. Don’t think about it too hard, you’ll hurt your brain.
So, all that to say yes, Saucy is an advice column. And after that in depth history lesson, Saucy is ready to answer your burning questions and concerns. Saucy’s associates have solicited questions from U of T law students. Concerns are wide-ranging, coming from lovers, keeners, and even from the faculty (deliberately lower case).
Saucy, I hate you. Bring Lord Denning back.
— DDfan62
Well, I hate you too.
Hi Saucy,
I have a massive crush on someone in my small group. She is gorgeous, brilliant, and somehow always has the right answer to cold calls. We both share a love for Justice Brown’s dissent in Reference re Greenhouse Gas Pricing Pollution Act. The problem is, I already have a girlfriend—a fellow law student (but not in my small group!)—and every time I see this small group crush, I feel objectively guilty. What should I do?
— Jane Tortington
Dear Jane,
Congratulations on finding someone with whom you can discuss Reference re GGPPA (yay for provincial autonomy). I’m afraid, however, that your love for federalism may be being misconstrued as love for a classmate.
But, what the fuck is wrong with you? You’ve somehow managed to turn your life into a twisted Shakespearean tragedy (spoiler: those end with someone, or everyone, dead)
My advice is simple.
First, is this love or are you just dazzled by her ability to do readings before class. And are you sure this isn’t just some form of Stockholm Syndrome? In my wisdom, attraction in law school is 90% proximity and 10% panic-induced hero worship. Do some soul-searching to determine whether this is love, admiration, or just Stockholm Syndrome with a casebook.
Second, I’m no honourable Justice, but try to avoid a breach of contract. You already have a girlfriend. Remember, loyalty is not just a virtue; it’s an implied term of your relationship agreement.
By all means, avoid a conflict of interest. You have to choose. You can’t have both women. What, you think you can have a bunch of wives? You get one wife. This is the way the world works.
Should you choose to stay with your current girlfriend, recuse yourself from interactions with your small group crush. Sit on the opposite side of the classroom. Mute the group chat. Avoid sharing long glances. Avoid spending late nights together in Bora Laskin.
Should you choose to dump your current girlfriend, then no one can help you. Before you know it, the whole school will know your business and will have taken a side. You will no longer have pres to go to. Who will you sit with at the library, in class, or at lunch? Who will be your date to law ball? And for what? Someone who likely thinks your name is Jade.
Dear Saucy,
Who should I invite to Law Ball?
— Adonis of Administrative Law
Thank you for your question, self-proclaimed Adonis. In asking this question, you’ve almost provided me with too much information about your philandering ways.
I’ll answer this question assuming you have a variety of options. But I also know you don’t have a partner, because let’s be honest, they would (actually, should) be your one and only choice.
One less lonely girl. The most obvious choice is your OG law school crush, the person you’ve been pining over since the first day of Legal Methods. You may be friends, a will-they-won’t-they sort of situation, or maybe acquaintances at best. It’s time to get over your nerves, declare your love, and ask them to be your date.
The Situation(s?). The beauty—and curse—of situationships is that they leave everything undefined. But Law Ball is where vibes meet reality. Inviting someone can feel like the “soft launch” of a relationship or a bold declaration of something more. Your secret rendez-vous will be everyone’s business (let’s be honest, everyone already knows with the way you seek them out during Call to the Bars). While it may clarify where you stand without having “the talk,” it may also send them reeling very far or a little too close, which could complicate things even more. But isn’t that the point of a situationship—to constantly confuse.
Now, I recognize you might have more than one situation. You may say, like my mother does, that you don’t have a favourite ‘ting’, but, like my mother, you certainly have a favourite.
Find your date at law ball. Why create all the extra work by looking for a date before the night has even started? Instead, woo one of the attendees. Bonus points if you steal someone’s date.
A SNAIL. Bring your non-law school friend. No one will know who they are, so they have to stay by your side the entire time. No one will be able to figure out whether you two are just friends or a thing—you’ll be the talk of Jackman the next day. If you’re feeling extra chaotic, ask a random SNAIL to be your date.
No one. Play it safe, ask no one, fly solo. But don’t go completely alone (that’s weird), go with your friends. I’m hoping you have friends…
Remember, the true spirit of Law Ball isn’t about who you bring; it’s about how much you can drink.
Dear Denning,
On two occasions, I gave a classmate class notes for the lecture on res judicata. They then proceeded to get an H, while I P’ed the class. Can I sue for unjust enrichment?
Sincerely,
Notes for Nothing
Hi Notes,
I’m no Lord Denning (seriously, why does everyone keep sending me Denning questions?). But fine, let’s examine your situation. Unjust enrichment requires three elements: (1) enrichment or benefit (2) you suffered a corresponding deprivation, and (3) an absence of juristic reason for the enrichment.
You likely fail on all of these. Do you truly believe your oh-so unique notes for one class of Civil Procedure took your classmate from a P (or even LP) to H?
Your claim for equity fails. You voluntarily handed over those notes. There was no duress, no unconscionable transaction. You probably even said, “Let me know if you need anything else!” Classic mistake.
Take this as a hard-earned lesson in reciprocity. Next time someone asks for your notes, consider asking for something in return—don’t even try to be charitable (no one is).
Yours truly,
Not Lord Denning (but close enough)
[The following message was sent to Saucy’s personal residence by a letter that was written with magazine cut out text]
Hi Sauciest Intruder,
You think you’re clever, don’t you? Writing your stupid little columns, solving everyone’s problems like you’re the Dean of Morality. But here’s a mystery for you: how many granola bars does it take to satisfy a thief? How many missing textbooks before someone notices?
I’ve been watching you, Saucy. Watching as you strut around Jackman, thinking you’re untouchable. Well, let this be a warning. You’re next. Lock up your locker and lock up your secrets—because I already have the combination.
– Locker thief
Hello most elusive and infamous locker thief,
Well, well. How the turn tables. Everyone better take back their allegations, because I certainly did not write myself that message (I would never ever fake anything in this column).
First of all, I must commend you on your creativity. Magazine cutouts? Truly, you’ve brought a cinematic flair to your petty crimes. If your dedication to thievery matched your study, I dare say you’d be topping the Dean’s List.
However, I sense a deeper meaning in your message. Could it be you’re not here to taunt but to seek absolution? Perhaps you wish to leave your life of petty larceny behind, to turn over a new leaf—or at least stop swiping people’s house keys. If so, I encourage you to return what you’ve taken and embrace a path free of locker larceny.
And let me make one thing clear: if you think you can intimidate me, you’re mistaken. I’ve faced cold calls, moot court judges, and the existential dread of reading Vailov at 3 a.m. You’re the least of my worries.
P.S. I never use my locker—it contains nothing but garbage from 1L orientation, so please help yourself to my branded merch and 1L Cup t-shirt.
Yours truly,
Saucy
Hey Saucy,
This whole ‘open book’ exam policy has me spiraling. The school just dropped a bombshell two days into second semester—no more electronic open book access! Now we’re stuck lugging piles of printed paper and binders into the exam room like we’re starring in some historical reenactment of the pre-digital era. CTRL+F is gone, and I feel like I’m being set up to fail. How am I supposed to prepare for this?
Kindest regards,
Betsy Testie
Dear Betsy,
Ah, the great migration from sleek, searchable PDFs to stacks of color-coded chaos. Nothing screams “law school innovation” like rolling back to the days of physical paper cuts and highlighter fumes. I understand your anxiety—this change feels less like policy adjustment and more like a challenge to prove your ability to function under 19th-century conditions. It may be too late to drop the exam classes now, but fear not, Saucy is more ancient than (some of) the Faculty at the law school, and has got advice for you.
Print everything. Print your textbook (the one you pirated), print previous exams, print all ten outlines off of the SLS Dropbox, print the statute relevant to the course, and, obviously, print your outline and map. Hopefully, the printer will jam and everyone in your class will be stuck sans their materials. Automatic HH.
Make sure to print your materials a few days before the exam. Go through them, get the paper used to your hands (no one wants fresh paper on exam day—you’ll get a paper cut). Rehearse flipping through your materials under a time limit. Do it with your friends, so you know exactly how angry you get when the person behind you does it on the day of the exam.
Just pretend like it’s a closed book exam. Some professors believe, nay know, that exams can be written by just remembering everything (every doctrine, every case, and every notion to which the professor has alluded and from which they will create their policy question). They did in the olden days, how hard could it be?
Best of luck,
Saucy
Dear Sauciest Intruder,
I’m emailing on behalf of the Faculty. Grades were released on Monday, January 20 at approximately 12:45 pm. Students complained that this was “stress-inducing” and not an optimal way to release grades. We at the Fake-ulty are not quite sure how to approach grade release moving forward. What should we do for second semester grades?
Regards,
The Fake-ulty
Dearest Fake-ulty,
Finding the best time to release grades is certainly a challenge. Different days and times of the day offer their advantages and disadvantages. For example, a 3 am grade release means that those fast asleep will wake up to their grades (terrible start) and those awake at this ungodly hour will certainly spiral, on their own. On the other hand, 3pm means students might check grades during class. I certainly don’t need the entire row behind me to see my LP in Competition Law.
While lunch on a Monday is somewhat a cursed time, it gives students the opportunity to leave the building or stay in Jackman and experience opening their academic history with friends and foes.
A 9 pm on a Thursday or Friday night feels like a safe bet. However, know that no matter what you do, you cannot win.
Saucy gives that email a thumbs up.
Do you want Saucy’s advice? Email Saucy at ragu@yahoo.ca
