Michael Harney wrote:
> This isn't a case of judicial activism using symantics to strike down
> something they disagree with, it is clearly a wrongly worded order, and is
> something that the judges *cannot* order. I would *never* want a wrongly
> worded order to be issued in court, as all court orders are legally binding.
> If there is anyone to be angry at, be angry at the lawyer that
> prepared/submitted it. It's who I would be angry at if an issue important
> to me was shot down in court because the documents submitted were not
> correct/appropriate. A lawyer should know what is and is not neccessary,
> and should know not make mistakes like that.
In fact, if I thought I might have reason to need a lawyer in California
anytime soon, I'd want to know which lawyer it was that prepared the
document, so's I'd know to *avoid* that lawyer.
I bet whoever it was is in pretty hot water with his or her buddies.
Julia
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
