Started By
Message
re: Manziel in a sling @ practice
Posted on 10/22/13 at 11:53 am to KaiserSoze99
Posted on 10/22/13 at 11:53 am to KaiserSoze99
quote:
Take ONE class from A&M. Just ONE. Online or otherwise. Let's see how you do.
Ok...I'm completely serious if you or someone pays for it I will balance it with my current law class workload and still be fine...my undergrad was econ so maybe a class somewhere along those lines
get back to me
4
Posted on 10/22/13 at 12:02 pm to beaver
quote:
Ok...I'm completely serious if you or someone pays for it
The on line barb is because it's so much easier to cheat. Given they can have the cams on, it is still basically an honor system. People will flock to help a star player, it doesn't have to be orchestrated by the athletic dept.
Posted on 10/22/13 at 12:05 pm to beaver
It sounded like you were taking a jab at A&M classes. If I misunderstood you, I apologize.
In an employment contract dispute, I want to introduce an email from the defendant stating that he would guarantee my client would be retained or paid for a minimum of two years.
Is the email admissible? Why or why not?
quote:
I will balance it with my current law class workload
In an employment contract dispute, I want to introduce an email from the defendant stating that he would guarantee my client would be retained or paid for a minimum of two years.
Is the email admissible? Why or why not?
Posted on 10/22/13 at 12:22 pm to beaver
Do you have an answer?
Posted on 10/22/13 at 12:31 pm to beaver
Dude, you will never pass the bar if you take that long to answer a simple question like the one I posted.
Here:
Normally, an email would be hearsay, because it is an out-of-court statement or writing offered to prove to truth of the matter asserted. However, this email meets the "party admission" exception to the hearsay rule.
But, that's not enough to get the email admitted. It may be irrelevant. Because this is a contract dispute, most jurisdictions do not allow "parole evidence" to be admitted unless and until the Court finds an ambiguity in the contract in question. Once the Court declares a portion of a contract ambiguous, the parties may introduce "parole" evidence showing the parties' intent. In this matter, the Court must find that the provision regarding employer-defendant's guarantee of pay is ambiguous.
Want me to give you another quiz?
Here:
Normally, an email would be hearsay, because it is an out-of-court statement or writing offered to prove to truth of the matter asserted. However, this email meets the "party admission" exception to the hearsay rule.
But, that's not enough to get the email admitted. It may be irrelevant. Because this is a contract dispute, most jurisdictions do not allow "parole evidence" to be admitted unless and until the Court finds an ambiguity in the contract in question. Once the Court declares a portion of a contract ambiguous, the parties may introduce "parole" evidence showing the parties' intent. In this matter, the Court must find that the provision regarding employer-defendant's guarantee of pay is ambiguous.
Want me to give you another quiz?
Page 1 of 1
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News