Discussion:
TURMEL: Judge Brown okays Salandy's email metadata as proof of service
Add Reply
johnturmel
2018-04-25 22:30:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
JCT: Nathan Salandy had filed a Motion Record asking for
quite a lot of liberties.

He submitted an Affidavit that was not commissioned by a
notary in his motion record but witnessed by a person and
asked that it be accepted.

He also asked that the metadata, To: From: Date: Subject: be
accepted as proof of service.

He got Judge Brown's decision today.

"Request to file an affidavit that is sworn before a witness
who is not authorized to commission affidavits is dismissed
as contrary to Rule 80 and Form 80A of the Federal Court
Rules.
The email material is accepted as proof of service, however
the motion will not proceed without a proper affidavit or
declaration."

JCT: Nathan has to pay $20 to get an Affidavit sworn though
some towns have alternative commissioners of oaths.
Including any lawyer you run into.

I can't blame the judge him for insisting that Rule 80 had
to be followed. That was a stretch.

But I'm really appreciative that he has dispensed with an
Affidavit of Service to allow the email metadata instead.

I've updated the http://johnturmel.com/delscins.pdf to
reflect those changes. So now the Motion Record can be sent
by email and filed online with proof of service.

Should save a real pain in the ass for the patients and,
like I said, trying to get a witness rather than notary was
a stretch.

But someday, they're going to get rid of Notaries for
Affidavits altogether.

Right now, the message is you can lie to the court as long
as it isn't sworn before a notary. Only if it's sworn can
you not lie to the court.

Someday, you won't be able to lie to the court at all, any
lying will be perjury, and there won't be any need for
notaries. Except for Wills and other Asset Documentation.
But not for Statements to the Court which will from
thenceforth be considered to be true under pain of perjury.

Nice day when it happens. But nice of Judge Brown to take
the court into a new era where the obvious and hard-to-fix
email metadata can serve instead of the notary!

Thank you My Lord for a really really wise decision.
d***@gmail.com
2018-04-26 04:02:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by johnturmel
JCT: Nathan Salandy had filed a Motion Record asking for
quite a lot of liberties.
He submitted an Affidavit that was not commissioned by a
notary in his motion record but witnessed by a person and
asked that it be accepted.
He also asked that the metadata, To: From: Date: Subject: be
accepted as proof of service.
He got Judge Brown's decision today.
"Request to file an affidavit that is sworn before a witness
who is not authorized to commission affidavits is dismissed
as contrary to Rule 80 and Form 80A of the Federal Court
Rules.
The email material is accepted as proof of service, however
the motion will not proceed without a proper affidavit or
declaration."
JCT: Nathan has to pay $20 to get an Affidavit sworn though
some towns have alternative commissioners of oaths.
Including any lawyer you run into.
I can't blame the judge him for insisting that Rule 80 had
to be followed. That was a stretch.
But I'm really appreciative that he has dispensed with an
Affidavit of Service to allow the email metadata instead.
I've updated the http://johnturmel.com/delscins.pdf to
reflect those changes. So now the Motion Record can be sent
by email and filed online with proof of service.
Should save a real pain in the ass for the patients and,
like I said, trying to get a witness rather than notary was
a stretch.
But someday, they're going to get rid of Notaries for
Affidavits altogether.
Right now, the message is you can lie to the court as long
as it isn't sworn before a notary. Only if it's sworn can
you not lie to the court.
Someday, you won't be able to lie to the court at all, any
lying will be perjury, and there won't be any need for
notaries. Except for Wills and other Asset Documentation.
But not for Statements to the Court which will from
thenceforth be considered to be true under pain of perjury.
Nice day when it happens. But nice of Judge Brown to take
the court into a new era where the obvious and hard-to-fix
email metadata can serve instead of the notary!
Thank you My Lord for a really really wise decision.
Like with the U.S. State Security Agencies throwing Attorney-Client Confidentiality out of the window with President Trump's Lawyer in the U.S.A. One can see that it is very dangerous to have the State Security Apparatus of a nation upset over you for your politics. Even in a nation with a Constitution that recognizes certain inalienable rights. Sometimes they don't stay inalienable, if certain people who don't like a political rival are in positions to make those decisions. Hang in there, John.
Loading...