Timeline for When is an email message admissible evidence?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 13:00 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://law.stackexchange.com/ with https://law.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Sep 27, 2016 at 13:46 | vote | accept | aparente001 | ||
| Aug 14, 2016 at 20:11 | history | edited | feetwet♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Amendment on re-reading
|
| Aug 14, 2016 at 19:53 | comment | added | feetwet♦ | @aparente001 - That's good: If he's a lawyer, then he knows that you're not a lawyer, and that it would be unreasonable to expect you to pretend you are. All you have to do is be reasonable and diligent in presenting your case. E.g., if an email message contains evidence that supports your case then just present it. If the counterparty disputes its veracity it's up to the IHO whether to allow that dispute, and if so to assert a process to discern its veracity. (If you obtained it illegally then any IHO would be justified in excluding it.) | |
| Aug 14, 2016 at 19:28 | comment | added | aparente001 | He's a lawyer and has a lot of experience as an IHO. He answers questions when we're in session but he's not terribly responsive to email, and I'm not allowed to talk to him on the phone unless it's a three-way conference. If I follow whatever is kosher in a more stringent environment, I'll be okay in the impartial hearing. | |
| Aug 14, 2016 at 16:59 | history | answered | feetwet♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |