At 03:45 PM 6/20/99 +1000, Ron Huttner wrote:
>Andrew Johnson now compounds the silliness of his previous writing, by
>stating:-
>
>>>My options were to conclude this type of citation is: (1) an honest
>>>mistake, or; (2) intentional fraud on the court.
>
>Andrew. The point I was making is that you had yet a *third* option.
>Namely,to conclude that your opponents were either incompetent or
>professionally negligent.
>
>If you can't grasp that point, perhaps you should concentrate on improving
>your golf, and give up the courtroom.
>
llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll
Isn't that a bit harsh, Ron? Andrew does not have as many decades at
the bar as you and I. He is still under the delusion that this profession
is run as ideally as law school moot court. Were only that so. In the real
world, everyone is cutting corners. No one will ever do as indepth a
viewing of dicta vs. holdings again. Law school was the height of your
legal career. Now it is just a trade. Unless you work for a judge. Then maybe
you can make your opinion. count.
========================================
Hal Weiner, Attorney at Law
COLES & WEINER, P.C
Members of the National Employment
Lawyers Association / New York Chapter
342 Madison Avenue New York, NY 10173
(212)856-9530 vox (212)682-3770 fax
http://www.peconic.net/lawyers
E-mail: druidlaw@interport.net
========================================
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 14 2007 - 20:50:07 PST