I'm going to presume that your remark has something to do with the recent Star Wars movie.... but since i am not a "fan" of Star Wars, the reference is lost on me and potentially lost on the judge hearing your matter.
Its like suggesting that you find yourself stuck between Scylla and Charybdis and finding your audience not recognizing that you are simply suggesting that your are stuck between "having to choose between two evils" or stuck "between a rock and a hard place" with the sound of the sirens attempting to lure you down a dangerous path.
Other than Judge Jones ( whom I gather has given up on the idea of sleep), I think that most judges today are simply too busy with too much paperwork from too many applications and not really interested in our attempt at humor.
------------------------------
Richard Diamond
Managing Partner
Diamond & Diamond P.A.
Millburn, New Jersey
973-379-9292
[email protected]
Original Message:
Sent: 01-29-2016 12:39
From: David Perry Davis
Subject: Good language or omit?
Reply certification in a fairly serious / dire / hard-fought enforcement motion. Adversary says several times "this is not an enforcement issue" when it plainly is.
I'm thinking of saying at one part:
12. Defendant's repetitive statements that "this is not an enforcement issue" is so baseless that it appears to be an attempt at a Jedi mind trick. Yes, "these are the droids the Empire is looking for" and yes, "this is an enforcement issue."
Opinions: Does it detract or is it good?
(PS Everyone going tomorrow to the Symposium? At least there doesn't look like there will be a weather issue like last year....)
<x-sigsep>
David Perry Davis, Esq.
----------------------------------------------------
www.FamilyLawNJ.pro
----------------------------------------------------
112 West Franklin Avenue
Pennington, NJ 08534
Voice: 609-737-2222
Fax: 609-737-3222
</x-sigsep>