Paul McNett wrote: > Michael Madigan wrote: > >> The contract was supposed to be an extension of the previous contract, so >> why was it "in legal" for two weeks? >> > > Maybe the lawyer's contracts were waiting to be signed, too. > > Nah - they were signed months ago - but they haven't been paid since then ...
Paul Newton _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
