Haven’t been able to find any update on what the lawyers determined through the game, or if they resolved their differences without meeting on the courthouse steps. Anyone know?
Martiju
September 14, 2006, 1:30pm
2
And that **isn’**t an Onion article?!?! :eek:
Gfactor
September 14, 2006, 3:21pm
3
Part of a motion to vacate the order:
On June 5, 2006, Plaintiffs filed a Motion to Designate Location of the
Rule 30(b)(6) Deposition of Defendant’s Corporate Representative. (Doc. 105).
On June 6, 2006, this Court entered an Order denying the Motion but
ordering counsel to engage in a game of “rock, paper, scissors” to settle the location for
the Rule 30(b)(6) deposition. (Doc. 106).
The next day, on June 7, 2006, the attorneys met and resolved by
agreement the dispute over the location of the deposition.
Thus, the purpose of the June 6 Order was met without need for a game
of “rock, paper, scissors.”
Granted on 6/26:
Since the dispute underlying this Court’s Order has been resolved, there is no need to
engage in the ADR contest ordered by the Court. With civility restored (at least for now), it is
ORDERED that the Motion is GRANTED. The Court’s Order at Doc. 106 is VACATED.
And here I am watching news on Iraq, kidnappings, murder and mayhem and missed out on the real news. What the hell is wrong with me?
Best line, coming from the president of the U.S. Rock Paper Scissors association:
“We will make sure that rock, paper scissors is not made a mockery by the legal system. When people take rock, paper, scissors into their own hands, mayhem can occur,” he said.
One of my current subjects is Alternative Dispute Resolution . That lawsuit has given the lecturer an almost continuous source of jokes since the semester began back in July. He even joined the society and wears its t-shirt to lectures.