DiscussMormonism.com

Ah, MDB friends, it is June. The annual silly season at MDB. By month's end, we'll no doubt see a movement afoot for new rules. We must have more rules, after all. It is tradition--at least dating back to 2010!

Have they provisioned a good supply of tar and chicken feathers? Last I heard they were well oversupplied with mayonnaise.

Doesn't the insanity usually peak around the 27th?

I am preparing to vacate to Telestial, maybe have to even cloister myself away elsewhere, for the duration. Mayonnaise doesn't keep well in the heat of summer.

MCB wrote:Doesn't the insanity usually peak around the 27th?

That sounds about right. At least that is a good guess on when the official hand-wringing thread will likely begin. I am just girding up my loins early this year, gotta be prepared.

SP!

I just remembered the words the lawyers caught me on! I'm sitting here watching Wives and Daughters and the word "proximate" was used. That was a sufficient reminder.

So there I am, sitting through a 2-hour deposition for a flooding law suit against the local government. I was hired as the expert witness for the HOA. The defense attorney asks me, "what does proximate cause mean?"

I remembered how the prosecution attorney discussed this briefly with me and convinced me to use this new word in my report. By the time of the deposition, I had forgotten the precise definition. I blurted that the lawyer had me use that word and it sounded good to me. That was fodder for the defense! They talked more about that than what seemed like the meat of the problem!

Here at MDB, we have many similar such situations. Don't you think?

ETA- I made up my last question to keep things roughly MDB related. Mostly, I was excited to relate my law story with you.

zeezrom wrote:SP!

I just remembered the words the lawyers caught me on! I'm sitting here watching Wives and Daughters and the word "proximate" was used. That was a sufficient reminder.

So there I am, sitting through a 2-hour deposition for a flooding law suit against the local government. I was hired as the expert witness for the HOA. The defense attorney asks me, "what does proximate cause mean?"

I remembered how the prosecution attorney discussed this briefly with me and convinced me to use this new word in my report. By the time of the deposition, I had forgotten the precise definition. I blurted that the lawyer had me use that word and it sounded good to me. That was fodder for the defense! They talked more about that than what seemed like the meat of the problem!

Here at MDB, we have many similar such situations. Don't you think?

ETA- I made up my last question to keep things roughly MDB related. Mostly, I was excited to relate my law story with you.

I do, zeezrom, think we have many similar such situations. We talk here about procedure as much or more than substance.

'Proximate cause' huh? It connotes how much of a nexus, in a causal connection sense, the conduct complained of must have to the damage to be considered legal cause-and-effect. I never much liked the term because it merely labels the conclusion, it does not of itself provide a measurement for when something will or will not be deemed to have such a nexus.

I suppose what the local government's attorney was doing was making hay of the fact that the HOA's attorney was shaping your testimony by suggesting you use the term 'proximate cause'. I suspect that the HOA was not doing that as much as simply informing your ideas with legal terms, so that the transcript of your testimony could be used to defeat a motion for summary judgment expected to be filed by the local government. However, the local government's attorney, to find out, needed to probe into what the HOA's attorney told you in advance about testifying at deposition.

You don't know that, Nobody knows for sure, You weren't there.

sock puppet wrote:I suppose what the local government's attorney was doing was making hay of the fact that the HOA's attorney was shaping your testimony by suggesting you use the term 'proximate cause'. I suspect that the HOA was not doing that as much as simply informing your ideas with legal terms, so that the transcript of your testimony could be used to defeat a motion for summary judgment expected to be filed by the local government. However, the local government's attorney, to find out, needed to probe into what the HOA's attorney told you in advance about testifying at deposition.

I think he was also searching for ways to discredit me. Maybe that is what you are suggesting...