.jpg)
judges copy rejected for not being stapled/fastened
Please read the rule book. It is your job to follow the rules. It is not nitpicking to reject documents.
________________________________
To: Cdcbaa Yahoo Listserv
Sent: Wednesday, February 1, 2012 5:48 PM
Subject: [cdcbaa] judges copy rejected for not being stapled/fastened
Judge's copy just got rejected by clerk for not being stapled or fastened together.
Anyone else have to deal with this kind of nitpicking?
Kirk Brennan, esq.
California Law Office, P.C.
www.calibankruptcysite.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments are for the exclusive and confidential use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, distribute or take action in reliance on this message. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail and promptly delete this message and its attachments from your computer system. We do not waive attorney-client or work product privilege by the transmission of this message.
TAX ADVICE NOTICE: Tax advice, if any, contained in this e-mail does not constitute a "reliance opinion" as defined in IRS Circular 230 and may not be used to establish reasonable reliance on the opinion of counsel for the purpose of avoiding the penalty imposed by Section 6662A of the Internal Revenue Code. The firm provides reliance opinions only in formal opinion letters containing the signature of a director.
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
I suppose we could have some colorful cards printed up with pretty
flowers on them so that the judges could give friendly reminders of
these things and perhaps judges would prefer that to sanctioning. Yet,
some people who accept judgeships tend to be heavy handed and like
demonstrations of power.
Seriously, I cannot say I entirely blame them for giving out signals of
how things need to be done in memorable fashion that tend to make their
way around the 21st century water cooler, like say this list serve.
They deal with a truck load of documents and unattached papers and lack
of tabs would be annoying and slow down the processing of cases if the
judge and their clerks are constantly having to guess where the source
documents referred to are in the 6 inch stack of documents. And it's
bad advocacy to not present the papers well.
So if you're annoyed with the judge's "pickiness", and you let us know,
you did exactly what that judge wanted you to do. And the rest of us
should take notice as the judge intended.
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
charsetndows-1252
think of the volume of paper that goes through chambers. If it is a thick unfastened pleading and falls apart in chambers, just think.
Easier to follow the rules, and wiser, given that what you submit to chambers is the only thing the judge sees.
Jason
Jason Wallach
jwallach@gladstonemichel.com
On Feb 1, 2012, at 5:48 PM, Kirk Brennan wrote:
> Judge's copy just got rejected by clerk for not being stapled or fastened together.
> Anyone else have to deal with this kind of nitpicking?
>
> --
> Kirk Brennan, esq.
> California Law Office, P.C.
> www.calibankruptcysite.com
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments are for the exclusive and confidential use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, distribute or take action in reliance on this message. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail and promptly delete this message and its attachments from your computer system. We do not waive attorney-client or work product privilege by the transmission of this message.
> TAX ADVICE NOTICE: Tax advice, if any, contained in this e-mail does not constitute a "reliance opinion" as defined in IRS Circular 230 and may not be used to establish reasonable reliance on the opinion of counsel for the purpose of avoiding the penalty imposed by Section 6662A of the Internal Revenue Code. The firm provides reliance opinions only in formal opinion letters containing the signature of a director.
>
>
charsetndows-1252
think of the volume of paper that goes through chambers. If it is a thick unfastened pleading and falls apart in chambers, just think.Easier to follow the rules, and wiser, given that what you submit to chambers is the only thing the judge sees.Jason
Jason Wallach
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Yes and for not tabbing. Some judges are sanctioning for not following local rules.
Jonathan Leventhal, Esq.
Leventhal Law Group, P.C.
818-347-5800
To: Cdcbaa Yahoo Listserv
Sent: 02/01/2012 5:48 PM
Subject: [cdcbaa] judges copy rejected for not being stapled/fastened
Judge's copy just got rejected by clerk for not being stapled or fastened together.
Anyone else have to deal with this kind of nitpicking?
Kirk Brennan, esq.
California Law Office, P.C.
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Judge's copy just got rejected by clerk for not being stapled or fastened
together.
Anyone else have to deal with this kind of nitpicking?
Kirk Brennan, esq.
California Law Office, P.C.
www.calibankruptcysite.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments are for the
exclusive and confidential use of the intended recipient. If you are not
the intended recipient, please do not read, distribute or take action in
reliance on this message. If you have received this message in error,
please notify us immediately by return e-mail and promptly delete this
message and its attachments from your computer system. We do not waive
attorney-client or work product privilege by the transmission of this
message.
TAX ADVICE NOTICE: Tax advice, if any, contained in this e-mail does not
constitute a "reliance opinion" as defined in IRS Circular 230 and may not
be used to establish reasonable reliance on the opinion of counsel for the
purpose of avoiding the penalty imposed by Section 6662A of the Internal
Revenue Code. The firm provides reliance opinions only in formal opinion
letters containing the signature of a director.
Judge's copy just got rejected by clerk for not being stapled or fastened together.Anyone else have to deal with this kind of nitpicking?-- Kirk Brennan, esq.California Law Office, P.C.
www.calibankruptcysite.comCONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments are for the exclusive and confidential use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, distribute or take action in reliance on this message. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail and promptly delete this message and its attachments from your computer system. We do not waive attorney-client or work product privilege by the transmission of this message.
TAX ADVICE NOTICE: Tax advice, if any, contained in this e-mail does not constitute a "reliance opinion" as defined in IRS Circular 230 and may not be used to establish reasonable reliance on the opinion of counsel for the purpose of avoiding the penalty imposed by Section 6662A of the Internal Revenue Code. The firm provides reliance opinions only in formal opinion letters containing the signature of a director.
The post was migrated from Yahoo.