I'll see you in court....

[F]rom a layperson's or intuitive perspective, it must seem improbable that corporations can speak, assert privacy rights, or invoke the double jeopardy clause. Even in a legal world filled with fictions, the corporate claim to personal Bill of Rights guarantees must appear fantastic to the non-lawyer.
"Personalizing the Impersonal: Corporations and the Bill of Rights", Carl J. Mayer,
41 Hastings Law Journal (March, 1990) 577, 655.

These are the most concise and accurate non-legal literary descriptions that I have ever found of the "judicial" process to which I once was subjecteded as a defendant in Pro Se. Admittedly, I am now biased against the System.
Since The Wizard of Oz is thoroughly imprinted upon our collective consciousness, here is a excellent description of California's current court system. I used an slightly different version of this "meeting the Wizard" routine on a judge once:

My editorial comments are in square brackets [ ] and my emphasis is in boldface.

Excerpts from The Wizard of Oz, (L. Frank Baum, Reilly & Lee Co., Chigago, Ill., 1956) and from A Disagreement with Death, (Craig Shaw Gardner, Ace Books (paperback), New York, N.Y., 1989), used as educational exemplars to help in understanding the nature of the current courts in California.

[At Dorothy and her companions' second visit to the Wizard, after having killed the Wicked Witch of the West:]

"I am Oz, the Great and Terrible. Why do you seek me?"
They looked again in every part of the room, and then, seeing no one, Dorothy asked, "Where are you?"
"I am everywhere," answered the Voice, "but to the eyes of common mortals I am invisible. I will now seat myself upon my throne, that you may converse with me."
Indeed the Voice seemed just then to come straight from the throne itself; so they walked toward it and stood in a row....
... Toto jumped away from [the Lion] in alarm and tipped over the screen that stood in a corner. As it fell with a crash they looked that way, and the next moment all of them were filled with wonder. For they saw, standing in just the spot the screen had hidden, a little, old man, with a bald head and a wrinkled face, who seemed to be as much surprised as they were. The Tin Woodsman, raising his axe, rushed toward the little man and cried out, "Who are you?"
"I am Oz, the Great and Terrible," said the little man, in a trembling voice, "but don't strike me--please don't!--and I'll do anything you want me to." ...
"I thought Oz was...," said Dorothy.
"I thought Oz was ...," said the Scarecrow.
"And I thought Oz was ...," said the Tin Woodsman.
"And I thought Oz was...," exclaimed the Lion.
"No; you are all wrong," said the little man meekly. "I have been making believe."
"Making believe!" cried Dorothy. "Are you not a great Wizard?"
"Hush, my dear," he said; "don't speak so loud, or you will be overheard--and I shall be ruined. I'm supposed to be a great Wizard."
"And aren't you?" she asked.
"Not a bit of it, my dear; I'm just a common man."
"You're more than that," said the Scarecrow, in a grieved tone; "you're a humbug."
"Exactly so!" declared the little man, rubbing his hands together is [sic, in original] if it pleased him; "I am a humbug."
The Wizard of Oz, L. Frank Baum, Reilly & Lee Co., Chigago, Ill., 1956, pp. 172-175.

---

humbug ...n... 1a: something designed to deceive and mislead... b: a person who usu. willfully deceives or misleads others as to his true condition, qualities, or attitudes : one who passes himself off as something that he is not... c: an attitude or spirit of pretense and deception or self-deception... d: something empty of sense or meaning...
WEBSTER'S THIRD NEW INTERNATIONAL DICTIONARY, UNABRIDGED (1976), p. 1101.

"But perhaps it was a bit unfair," Death continued generously [having just won the first contest (bowling) by pitting our heros against a professional bowler], "presenting you with a sport that you had never witnessed before as your first game. I think the next contest shall be a bit simpler--say, a guessing game?"
"A contest of wits?" Snarks [one of the hero's companions, proud of his wit] demanded. "Let's have at it, then, I am ready."
"As I knew you would be. But we are not quite prepared. Give me a moment while I call up an impartial third party."
There was a puff of blue smoke by Death's left side, quickly replaced by a tall, frail fellow with stooped shoulders and squinting eyes.
"Our judge," Death introduced the newcomer.
"I'm as impartial as they get in this kingdom [a dictatorship ruled by Death]." the frail fellow [totally subject to Death] agreed.
"And I have appointed our judge as keeper of the rules," [Death] added. "I trust this is satisfactory?"
"Indeed," I replied, not wishing to quibble over a minor point [the first mistake -acquiescence!]. "And what rules must we follow [the second mistake -asking questions!]?"
The judge unfolded a crumpled sheet of parchment. His voice quavered slightly as he read:
"The first rule is that no one is to ask about the rules. The penalty is an immediate forfeit."
"What?" Snarks demanded. "How can we forfeit a game we don't even know about?"
"It is a little severe, so early in the game," Death agreed. "Why don't we give them another chance?"
"You're the boss," the frail fellow replied. "The game goes on."
"I should say so!" Snarks exclaimed. "Who ever heard of those kinds of rules!"
The judge further unfolded the parchment before him, and again read aloud:
"The second rule is that no one is to complain about the rules. The penalty is immediate forfeit."
"Wait a second!" Snarks demanded. "That rule is all tied up with the first one. This is no fair at all!"
"I'm sorry," the judge replied, "but it says here--"
"Now, now," Death interrupted. "Even I will admit that these rules are a bit arbitrary. Why not give our guests one more chance? That way, no one could possibly accuse us of any bias."
The judge shrugged. "If you say so." He nodded to the rest of us. "You guys are getting off easy here. The game goes on again. Well?" He tapped his foot impatiently. "It's your move!"
Snarks turned to me. "What do we do?"
"Indeed," I replied, for I had given the matter some thought. "We do nothing."
"Nothing?" [Snarks] replied.
"Exactly. For what has happened the last two times we attempted to start the game?"
"We immediately lost." Snark's face brightened as he saw my point. "Oh. I see! You're saying that the game is so constructed that if you attempt to play it--"
"You lose," I finished the thought for him. "So the only thing we can do--the only way we can win--is if we refuse to play."
"Brilliant!" Snarks admitted. "And coming from a human, too.! My hat would be off to you, if I wore one."
"So," the judge called to us. "What is the delay? The game must continue!"
I cautioned my companions to silence with a single glance.
"No response?" the judge frowned. "I see." He further unfolded his parchment and read:
"The third rule is that, should anyone refuse to continue playing the game, they will automatically lose. In other words, immediate forfeit."
This time Death shrugged. "What else can we do? I think the judge and I have been more than fair."
"The game is over," the judge agreed.
Death tsked. "Unfortunately, you have brought this upon yourselves, gentle beings, and you have lost. We now stand tied with one contest apiece."
The judge popped out of existence, and [Death] paused a moment to stare at each of us in turn....
A Disagreement with Death, Craig Shaw Gardner, Ace Books (paperback), New York, N.Y., 1989

"...People who work to weaken the foundations of their own civilization just for the sake of money or power are sick, no matter how hard they protest and orate about being on the side of [justice]. Using tricks to get someone out of what's due them has nothing to do with [justice]."
[I substituted "justice" for "equal rights".] "And The Truth Shall Set You Free", Sharon Green; in Alternatives, Robert Adams, Pamela C. Adams, eds., p. 194-195 (Baen Books (paperback), New York, N.Y., 1989).