What We Wish We Could Say In Court
I am working on a reply brief in Laura Lynn Hammett v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, yada yada.
It is so difficult for me to refrain from snarky comments and sarcasm. The court would not be amused.
So, thank you my dear readers, for giving me someone who appreciates my humor to share the portions that land on the cutting room floor. (I am old.)
**********************
PRA’s Arguments:
- PRA did not know who answered the landline or cell phone, and therefore were allowed to call repeatedly until the old lady on the other end answered personal questions about herself.
In support of this argument, PRA followed Judge Rudofsky’s lead by misquoting Hammett’s houseguest in the exact way Hammett was misquoted by Judge Rudofsky. The sentence was truncated, and a period was placed inside the closing quotation mark, without straight brackets, indicating the sentence ended. (Response 8) –you can download PRA’s brief on yesterday’s post.
Actual: “[Laura Lynn] won’t be here until September 11th.”
PRA’s: Plaintiff “wo[uldn’t] be [there] until September.”
Apparently, PRA’s attorneys and Judge Rudofsky read the same litigation playbook.
PRA attorneys from Troutman-Pepper and Rose Law Firm wrote that my complaints about fictionalized transcripts in this Rudofsky case and a Judge Susan Weaver case were part of a “litigation playbook”. I haven’t had time to put together my complaint to the commission on professional conduct, but that is one snarky and unprofessional comment that should be included.
I’m not an attorney and I think it should be left unsaid — in a filed brief.
A Higher Law 