Time: Fri Sep 19 21:55:12 1997
	by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id VAA25033;
	Fri, 19 Sep 1997 21:54:43 -0700 (MST)
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 1997 23:06:25 -0700
To: (Recipient list suppressed)
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in toolbar]
Subject: SLS: Notice of Appeal/Intent to Move for Procedural Order
References: <3.0.3.16.19970918113229.316f8be8@pop5.ibm.net>

Thanks, Chris.  I am not seeing these,
because I need new glasses.  Thanks.

What I usually do -- is send a brief
transmittal memo, on top of the new
page, with the old page stapled to it,
and the error highlighted in yellow.

In this way, the Clerks can hold the
two up to the light and see what 
exactly has been changed.  These kinds
of typos are extremely minor.

But, thank you anyway!  I will put
the correction in Monday's U.S. Mail.

/s/ Paul Mitchell
http://supremelaw.com

p.s.  I am glad you folks are actually
reading these pleadings.  



At 05:59 PM 9/19/97 -0700, you wrote:
>I know you hate typos.  So here is one pointed out.
>Here's what post:
>
>> 
>>                     SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
>> 
>>                            PIMA COUNTY
>> 
>> 
>> People of Arizona state  )  Case Number #320831
>> ex relatione             )
>> Paul Andrew Mitchell,    )  NOTICE OF APPEAL AND
>>                          )  NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE MOTION
>>           Petitioners,   )  FOR ACCELERATED PROCEDURAL ORDER:
>>                          )
>>      v.                  )  AR-CAP Rules 6(b), 9(a), 11, 29
>>                          )
>> Pima County Consolidated )
>> Justice Court,           )
>>                          )
>>           Respondent.    )
>> _________________________)
>[snip]
>
>>      Petitioners intend  to invoke  AR-CAP Rule 29 in the instant
>> 
>> appeal, which reads in pertinent part, to wit:
>> 
>>      After an  appeal is  at issue  as defined in Rule 15(a), the
>>      court may  ... upon  motion of a party, order than an appeal <--
>>      be accelerated  under this  Rule.   Any party  may  file  an
>>      objection within  ten days of ...  service of such a motion,
>>      and an opposing party may file a response within ten days of
>>      service of an objection.
>> 
>> Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
>
>"than" might be "that".
>
>

========================================================================
Paul Andrew Mitchell, Sui Juris      : Counselor at Law, federal witness
B.A., Political Science, UCLA;  M.S., Public Administration, U.C. Irvine
                                     :
tel:     (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night
email:   [address in toolbar]        : using Eudora Pro 3.0.3 on 586 CPU
website: http://supremelaw.com       : visit the Supreme Law Library now
ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech,  at its best
             Tucson, Arizona state   : state zone,  not the federal zone
             Postal Zone 85719/tdc   : USPS delays first class  w/o this
_____________________________________:

As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice.  We shall
not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal.
========================================================================
[This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.]

      


Return to Table of Contents for

Supreme Law School:   E-mail