Paralegal here. Can confirm. The number of window-licking, paste-eating lawyers is staggering. My favorite objection by far is: "Vague. Plaintiff does not know what Defendant means by 'put attach policy docments here for all wholesale equipment for costs to Plaintiff for all years", or other spectacularly retarded word salad.
Michigan is vastly different. "Vague" is used for word salad here. "Ambiguous" is used for unclear rogs or RFP. We see a lot of "Cumulative" - paste-eating associates demanding all correspondence that they sent us (in those words; "Copies of all correspondence (etc.) that Def. sent to Plaintiff"), a SHOCKING amount of demands for "all correspondence between Pl. Atty and client", and way more Bronson objections than I used to see 16 years ago in LA when I was with Dreier Stein.
I am but a lowly paralegal. I do my discoveries and disclosures and auths.
I did case mgmt at Dreier, which was a lot more fun, mostly because the Lexis guy would take us out for nice lunches when they knew big cases were coming up, to schmooze us into using their electronic war rooms... Our office at the Water Gardens didn't hurt either.
Sorry. Taylor Swift isn’t a man. She came into the law firm I used to work at in LA when she was about 18 or so. One of our attorneys had her on his books, along with the Cranberries. I think the Hollywood jews deliberately androgynized her to appeal to the faggotry fan base.
I'm really, really good with Photoshop (had a design company until the Lockdowns killed it) - I need to learn Gimp. I simply don't need all the Adobe stuff anymore.
This is open threats and intended misuse of courts. You can't start a lawsuit just to obtain somebody's private information in order to (break laws and) dox people. That's a crime - perhaps even a federal crime.
I recommend everyone on his list file emotional damages, threats, threats conveyed by digital/electronic means, harassment, and intimidation charges.