This is what discovery is for

來源: lexm5 2014-03-20 11:17:54 [] [舊帖] [給我悄悄話] 本文已被閱讀: 次 (1213 bytes)
First, you probably can prove
(1) Email evidence from the other side is a portion of a thread of Google emails.
(2) Google emails are stored in threads instead of individual snippets.
(3) It follows logically that the other side possesses the whole thread of emails of which the partial email in (1) belongs. 

Therefore, you can ask for the other side to provide the the whole thread, if they can't, you can ask the judge to sanction them or block their partial email evidence to be admitted. 

You probably won't be succesul to ask for a completely different thread of emails, which the other side never use as evidence.

Second, a different issue is whether the emails are admissible at all under hearsay rules.  This is getting very technical and you need a lawyer for that. If you are being sued on "out-of-court statement" (e.g. emails), your case could use some help from a lawyer. 

Rules of Evidence is what lawyer is good at.  A practicing lawyer get paid to find evidence, block evidence, and evidence usually wins your case, not anyone's smarty argument.  

所有跟帖: 

謝謝,一定要請個好的律師了 -LiveForToday- 給 LiveForToday 發送悄悄話 LiveForToday 的博客首頁 (0 bytes) () 03/21/2014 postreply 12:11:55

請您先登陸,再發跟帖!

發現Adblock插件

如要繼續瀏覽
請支持本站 請務必在本站關閉/移除任何Adblock

關閉Adblock後 請點擊

請參考如何關閉Adblock/Adblock plus

安裝Adblock plus用戶請點擊瀏覽器圖標
選擇“Disable on www.wenxuecity.com”

安裝Adblock用戶請點擊圖標
選擇“don't run on pages on this domain”