Thursday, December 13, 2018

Proposal: Who Was That Masked Barrister?

Reached quorum 4 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 14 Dec 2018 09:16:45 UTC

Enact a new rule, “Open Book”:-

The Judge may, if they have not already done so, create a bulleted list at the end of “Clients” which lists the Attorneys of all Clients who are represented by Attorneys, then replace the words “tracked privately by the Judge” with “tracked below” in that rule.

If the above action has been taken, the Judge may repeal this rule.

Having it be a total secret which Attorney represents which Client is starting to seem like a problem because (a) it doesn’t make much sense and (b) it encourages frosty silence during every court case, rather than argument and negotiation.

posted by Kevan at 13 Dec 2018 09:01:00 UTC Comments (3)

Comments

Trigon:

13-12-2018 19:38:49 UTC

imperial I agree that there’s no real reason for the secrecy, but I will ultimately leave it up to the judge.

naught:

13-12-2018 20:44:26 UTC

for I as well agree that there isn’t a need for secrecy about our clientele, however I think the “frosty silence” has more to do with the fact that not all of the Clients are actually represented by a lawyer. It is even possible that Clients assigned to an Attorney are actually in the minority.

pokes:

13-12-2018 23:46:41 UTC

imperial All cases have at least one party with representation, as creating a case involves: “If neither Party of the Case is represented by Attorney, skip the rest of this atomic action”.