Certainly you are free to draw your own conclusions about whatever I have written, but in the opinion of the person who wrote the comments, that being me and I think I know my own mind, my purpose is not to characterize anything you have posted nor is it intended to represent or misrepresent your statements. In fact, I think I completely agree with just about everything you have posted on the matter.
Imagine we are standing out in a field together and you day," Dane what a great and beautiful day it is." And I respond, "Yeah but look at those thunderclouds on the horizon." Both statements are perfectly true and they can coexist in the same universe without conflict.....
Old BPELSG Policy Resolutions
-
dmi
- Posts: 981
- Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 7:42 pm
- Location: San Francisco
- Contact:
Furthmore
This is why we have courts Evan, because people disagree. I have been speaking in the abstract here.
I am not addressing what you would or how you would proceed. I am imagining a scenario that COULD exist and that could in part supply MR Moore with motivation to make the statement publicly that rescinded policy resolutions are no to be used.
Even though I have responded to you directly, I am not interested in debating you or trying to prove you are wrong. I am just discussing the use of rescinded policy resolutions in the face of the fact that the executive for the Board said."Don't use em..."
I would probably agree with in specific cases that there is no daylight between the rescinded resolution and the current state of the law. But this does not stop the other side from making an agreement that there IS daylight. It is possible the other side could win that argument. If they could win that argument, then what is the fall out from that? 1the side using the resolution could be anyone, the board, the claimant, if different than the board or a respondent.
Imagine a scenario where a respondent and their counsel relies upon a rescinded policy as a basis for the respondent not being disciplined. In there minds and in their case theory the resolution is in harmony with the current state of the law
Imagine the board's experts and attorneys demonstrate that in fact the resolution is not useful in this circumstance..... then what ? Not good for the respondent, I would guess.
Thanks very much for your contribution
I am not addressing what you would or how you would proceed. I am imagining a scenario that COULD exist and that could in part supply MR Moore with motivation to make the statement publicly that rescinded policy resolutions are no to be used.
Even though I have responded to you directly, I am not interested in debating you or trying to prove you are wrong. I am just discussing the use of rescinded policy resolutions in the face of the fact that the executive for the Board said."Don't use em..."
I would probably agree with in specific cases that there is no daylight between the rescinded resolution and the current state of the law. But this does not stop the other side from making an agreement that there IS daylight. It is possible the other side could win that argument. If they could win that argument, then what is the fall out from that? 1the side using the resolution could be anyone, the board, the claimant, if different than the board or a respondent.
Imagine a scenario where a respondent and their counsel relies upon a rescinded policy as a basis for the respondent not being disciplined. In there minds and in their case theory the resolution is in harmony with the current state of the law
Imagine the board's experts and attorneys demonstrate that in fact the resolution is not useful in this circumstance..... then what ? Not good for the respondent, I would guess.
Thanks very much for your contribution