Time:owner-libertylaw@blake.sharpcomm.com Wed Oct 2 15:36:21 1996
Date: Wed, 02 Oct 1996 16:17:58 -1000
To: libertylaw@www.ultimate.org
From: liberty@mcn.net (Paul Andrew Mitchell)
Subject: Re: LLAW: David Miller Pleadings (?)
=======================================================================
LIBERTY LAW - CROSS THE BAR & MAKE YOUR PLEA - FIRST VIRTUAL COURT, USA
Presiding JOP: Tom Clark, Constable: Robert Happy, Clerk: Kerry Rushing
=======================================================================
>In a message dated 96-08-26 23:02:29 EDT, you write:
>
><< Question: I recently received a series of
> similar pleadings which were evidently
> written by Mr. David Miller, a man who
> is evidently quite expert in federal court
> procedure. The problem I am having is
> that these pleadings are riddled with
> spelling, grammatical, and citation errors,
> making them almost impossible to read.
> In fact, I gave up, because the errors
> were getting so much in my way, that
> I could make very little sense out of
> what was trying to be said. Is it possible
> that I was given the wrong set of pleadings?
> I don't mean to be belligerent here, but
> I do not consider these pleadings to be
> up to the minimal standard for first grade
> English grammar and spelling, much less
> satisfactory for federal court, where the
> officers and employees have college
> degrees. Can anybody help me here?
> You will never see a decision from the
> U.S. Supreme Court which isn't published
> in near perfect English. That is why their
> Clerk circulates drafts and invites editorial
> comments before final publication. I think
> that this is a terrific practice which should
> be continued.
>>>
>
>I have used the Favid Miller method of pleading in one of my cases. The
>opposition counsel rebutted with comments like "unintelligible", "gibberish",
>"seems to reffer to...", as well as other comments along the same vain.
>
>David Miller does not use aj
"aj"?
/s/ Paul Mitchell
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail