Fun With Redaction

I have a very close friend who was getting a simple, joint, agreed to divorce until her ex got stupid and decided to hire a lawyer. Having taken a Paralegal course many years ago I offered to help her out so she could avoid the expense of a lawyer because it should have still been simple enough.

Well the b*tch of an attorney really ticked me off one day so I wrote this letter for my friend.

The letter was never sent and I instead advised my friend to go ahead and get an attorney because I felt the b*tch attorney was going to go beyond the abilities of my dusty paralegal education.

I just ran across the letter and found it humorous enough for inclusion in the Random section. Redaction to protect the innocent and stupid added to the fun. The name Becky is a derivation of said b*tch attorneys actual name and I'm sure she would be mortified if called that name, (she's way abouve such redneck abbreviations of her name you know) so I didn't redact that. But the b*tch won't be suing me because the misuse of her name and redaction clear me of any potential libel, slander or whatever she'd like to sue me for. And I know she'd love to.

Enjoy.


Dear Becky;

I am in receipt of your correspondence dated January 28th, REDACTED, in regards to my correspondence to Mr. REDACTED dated January 23, REDACTED , which was certified, received on January 25th, REDACTED.

I have read your letter and find myself obligated to clarify a few points that you seem to have misunderstood. Far be it from me to educate an obviously stellar member of the legal community on matters a first year law student would find “simple”, but obviously as your letter demonstrates, there are a few issues that have caused some confusion despite your reputed legal prowess.

#1: A Motion for Protective Order under REDACTED Stat Section 804.01(3) is not a matter of personal contact or personal harassment. Rather, such a Motion refers to LEGAL harassment in the form of unnecessary pleadings designed to cause undue burden upon a party such as say, upwards of 300 Interrogatories to a party when your client has the same access to information and accounts as the other party.

What you refer to in your letter would fall more under the context of a Restraining Order which no one in this matter has requested, and such an Order has not been entered by the Court of Record.

That being the case there is nothing inappropriate in my mailing a Marital Settlement Agreement to Mr. REDACTED for consideration.

Likewise, since the Honorable  REDACTED , within his discretion as presiding Judge in this matter, denied my Motion for Protective Order and instructed that I answer the
interrogatories submitted by you on behalf of Mr. REDACTED (although His Honor was apparently not deemed worthy of you or Mr. REDACTED to receive a copy of said Interrogatories for review), it is fully within my rights as a JOINT Petitioner to submit the same interrogatories to the other JOINT Petitioner.

The fact that you accept your clients’ word as Gospel is neither here nor there when determining whether he in fact has the same access to information that I may be able to provide. He in fact does know full well the names and addresses of all accountants and financial advisors used during our, let’s say “union” for lack of a better term.

To state clearly and without room for doubt, the Motion For Protective Order had not as much to do with Mr. REDACTED 's personal phone calls and text messages as it did your rather cumbersome and, well, ridiculous interrogatories, which for the record will be answered as the Court ordered by the date prescribed in the order. 
 
My recently mailed package was an opportunity for Mr. REDACTED to reconsider
our original agreement and to bring the matter to a speedy conclusion. Obviously
your letter to me indicates that Mr. REDACTED has no desire to revert to our original agreement and conclude peacefully. My offer was a one time offer and therefore I can assure you that no further offers or correspondence will be made to Mr. REDACTED.
 
Any and all correspondence from me will cease upon your receipt of this letter. The Court will make all further decisions in this matter and I am comfortable with the Courts final authority in the matter.

Your statement that you “have made no efforts to delay or complicate this matter” is patently false. The sheer number of your interrogatories which consist of rehashed versions of the same questions are indicative of a desire to extend the time normally required for a jointly filed Divorce. This of course benefits you, as the longer the proceeding takes the more you get to charge your client. Since he cannot apparently contribute to the approximately $1200.00 per month in credit card debt that he acquired under both of our names, I’m not sure how he intends to pay for your services. But that’s your issue to work out. We don’t even need to discuss the other debts that my offer allowed him out of.

As for paragraph four (4) of your letter stating “in the meantime if you have specific interrogatories and/or request for production of documents that you wish to have Mr.  REDACTED complete, please forward to my office…”, the fact is if Mr. REDACTED provided you with the letter I wrote and the Marital Settlement Agreement I offered, he most certainly also turned over the Joint Petitioner-Wife’s First Set Of Interrogatories that accompanied those documents. Your request is mendacious Ms. REDACTED and THAT will be quite clear to the Court as the Court has already been provided with copies of everything I mailed to Mr. REDACTED. Unlike the interrogatories and letter you mailed to me which the Court has no record of.

Concerning the REDACTED , again I am not a Professor of Law but I offer the following instruction: I hold the title to this vehicle. There is no legally accepted or
ordered Temporary or Final Agreement allowing Mr. REDACTED use of a vehicle that I own free and clear, prior to our, let’s say, again, for lack of better terminology “union”. I may not be as smart as you obviously are Becky, but I do know that my DMV title and my keys will get me a Civil Standby from the REDACTED County Sheriff to reclaim the vehicle.

I have no intention of encumbering the vehicle in any way since that would be illegal as we have a pending Divorce action. However; I own the vehicle. YOU quite unequivocally informed me and the Honorable REDACTED that all previous agreements between Mr. REDACTED and I were NULL AND VOID upon your notice of retainer.

As owner of said vehicle I am also aware that Mr. REDACTED and his daughter,  REDACTED ,were cancelled by my insurance company due to an accident resulting in total loss in conjunction with citations for Inattentive Driving and Failure to Keep Vehicle Under Control.

Therefore I have a responsibility to reclaim the vehicle that is titled solely in my name which may be driven by an uninsurable motorist while not under my control.

You are correct in your assumption, although it is an assumption, that is unlikely the Court would award me two vehicles and Mr. REDACTED none. However there is no temporary or final order at this point to prove your point. Again, I’m not a Law Professor but an actual Order of the Court and Assumed Order of the Court are two different things, particularly when the Court has not been asked to issue an Order on a matter.

Your statement that “Assets acquired during a marriage are ‘marital assets’ “ is both inconsequential and irrelevant in terms of the REDACTED as I owned this vehicle free and clear before the “union” between Mr. REDACTED and myself. We were “married” in REDACTED. The last title date of the vehicle in question is clearly REDACTED if you care to do a little research. But we know facts don't mean much to you do they Becky?

Unfortunately this is another example of your client being less than forth coming with you (as I pointed out in my Memorandum in Support of Motion for Protective Order). What other surprises might lay ahead? It does not matter. You have a clear record of pursuing financial gain from the misfortune of others and therefore don’t really care if your clients provide you with facts or fallacy.

My claim to and supervised repossession of the REDACTED are above reproach.

Further, there is a REDACTED that is titled in both of our names that Mr. REDACTED may feel free to claim an ownership stake in and drive at will provided he takes over the loan payments, submits proof of insurance at the minimum limits required by REDACTED Law and makes it legal for use on REDACTED roads, which it is currently not, due to a faulty seatbelt that I cannot afford to fix given that I am currently paying all of Mr. REDACTED's credit card bills to save my credit ( and by default, his) from being destroyed by his irresponsibility and childish behavior.

To be clear, the REDACTED is MY Asset prior to marriage, verifiable and I will reclaim it with Police escort. By the time you receive this, that will probably already have occurred.

The REDACTED may be claimed and picked up by Mr. REDACTED between the hours of REDACTED when I return home from work and REDACTED when I go to bed, any day of the week Mr. REDACTED deems acceptable. Provided that there is a REDACTED County Sheriffs Deputy onsite to witness the transfer of vehicle and to validate proof of insurance on said vehicle covering Mr. REDACTED and exempting me from liability for any accidents that may occur while he or his designee is driving the vehicle.

If Mr. REDACTED cannot meet these conditions, he does have two legs that can walk him from his home in REDACTED to his place of employment and back.

Please be advised Becky that I am not intimidated by your law degree or Mr. REDACTED's apparent largess in hiring you for a jointly filed divorce. Do not waste your time attempting to intimidate me or try to convince me that I should submit to the whims of you and Mr. REDACTED. I am in no hurry. My faith in the REDACTED County Circuit Court is implicit. I guarantee the Court will decide this matter and I will accept its decision.

Not Mr. REDACTED's.

Not yours.



 

REDACTED