Tuesday, June 10, 2008

Today's Pet Writing Peeve

Please, for the love of God:

Jones failed to attend the July 6, 2002, meeting.
nor, worse still,
Jones failed to attend the July 6, 2002 meeting.
but rather
Jones failed to attend the meeting of July 6, 2002.
and thereafter
Jones failed to attend the July 6 meeting.
Thank you for your attention.


Blogger Spirit of the Season writes ...

Nothing wrong with "Jones failed to attend the July 6, 2002 meeting."

6:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous writes ...

Always the grammarian. How about some juicy commentary on the Supreme Court rulings this week, in proper or inproper grammatical form.

I prefer Amendment 2. Define militia for Scalia.

7:08 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous writes ...

Here is a darned good Rule 702 opinion from West Virginia:
In re Flood Litigation Coal River Watershed,
--- S.E.2d ----, 2008 WL 2523224, W.Va., June 26, 2008 (NO. 33710, 33711, 33664)
What do you think?

4:00 PM  
Blogger meshil writes ...

Jone was correct in all things then again y he was fail to attend the meeting on 6th july.
Addiction Recovery New Mexico

Addiction Recovery New Mexico

7:09 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous writes ...


4:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous writes ...


3:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous writes ...

It's the Internet, Peter, not Harvard. There are REAL things about which to have pet peeves.

Paulson, Cox and Greenspan, with a little help from Clinton
engaging in his global intitiative to compensate for causing the whole mess by passing NAFTA, failed to attend the meeting. Pelosi was performing fellatio, while they negotiated their Golden Parachutes!

Our future owners in Saudi and China, were late for the meeting, negotiating via conference call with option traders at CBOT. Sell, don't sell? How pissed off can we make Chavez? Do we want to fuck up the financial markets, totally, partially, un petit?

5:11 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Fed. R. Evid. 702: If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise, if (1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data, (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods, and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case.