Depending on the case and jurisdiction, it may be sufficient to undermine any argument that information that was inappropriately passed on was done so unknowingly.
In general, however, I agree that it's dumb. Yet, lawyers continue to get paid at rates that typically exceed our own. So, take that. -ASB: http://XeeSM.com/AndrewBaker On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 5:18 PM, Kurt Buff <[email protected]> wrote: > *This written advice is not intended or written to be used, and can not be > used, by a taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be > imposed on the taxpayer.* > >> Norman, Jones, Enlow & Co. - CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION >> >> This e-mail (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic >> Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2521, is >> confidential, and is intended solely for the use of the individuals or >> entities to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient >> or the person responsible for delivering the e-mail to the intended >> recipient, be advised that you have received this e-mail in error and that >> any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or copying of this e-mail and >> any file attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this >> e-mail in error, please immediately notify us by telephone toll-free at (866) >> 841-6888 or by reply e-mail to the sender. You must destroy the original >> transmission and its contents. You will be reimbursed for reasonable costs >> incurred in notifying us. >> >> >> >> >> >> Really? Can Not? How do you intend to enforce this? > > Sigh. > > I hate stupid email disclaimers - oh, wait. That's a redundancy.. > > Kurt > > > > > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
