[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       quanta
Subject:    Re: [Quanta] OT successors to Quanta+
From:       marbux <marbux () gmail ! com>
Date:       2012-06-23 6:24:04
Message-ID: CAJ1g4g9ZtHXNtEqmFniKcAz11L66r106dWO+wH30wA-j1tn_Bw () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 3:43 PM, Bobby <bobby@d4business.com> wrote:
> Haha, 27 lines in the sig must be a record.
>
> And my favorite, the confidential email notice! Only a lawyer would come
> up with such nonsense.

Correction: Only a lawyer who hasn't done her homework. As a retired
lawyer who had a boutique practice in supervising the preparation for
trial of major cases against multinational corporations I can say
without equivocation that most lawyers hate the Rules of Civil
Procedure discovery rules and never bother to do legal research in
that area, which almost invariably gave me a big advantage.

The practice of stamping a confidentiality notice in the sig line(s)
of every outgoing emails arrived on the scene like a fad. Judges
ignore them as soon as they comprehend that they go on every outgoing
piece of email without any thought given to whether the information
actually is legally privileged from disclosure.

Their only real worth is for the other side, which gets the
opportunity to point to the confidentiality notice and argue to the
jury that the evidence is even more important because of an obvious
attempt to cover it up proved by the confidentiality notice.

Best regards,

Paul
_______________________________________________
Quanta mailing list
Quanta@mail.kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/quanta
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]