Sue Hartigan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hi Ron:
I think it was. It sounds to me though, that you saw the same thing.
Didn't they talk about women coming forward sooner. Or something to
that effect.
I do know that they were talking about the Burlinton case.
Sue
> You may be correct, but are you sure that this is the same case they were
> talking about last week on the news/talk shows? I recall them stating that
> just as Paula Jones is announcing her appeal, a case is starting which will
> test whether a single incident of sexual harassment qualifies as it would if
> Paula Jones were to win her appeal. They seemed to think that a decision,
> concluding that an isolated incident qualifies as sexual harassment, would
> truly benefit Paula Jones. Ron
>
> 99 percent of lawyers give the rest a bad name.
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
--
Two rules in life:
1. Don't tell people everything you know.
2.
Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
