A copy of the email I sent to our attorney:
Hi, T******. Some thoughts about this letter...
First, if you look up Ryan's profile you see that he is a divorce lawyer who also does some estate planning and workman's compensation. This isn't his area of expertise, either... And the ham-handed language of the letter bears that out.
The fact that William Redmond is also with the firm makes me believe that Martha Redmond called up a relative, who handed it off to another junior where he worked.
Also, this document is not on company letterhead. The entire thing was run from a copier... I can tell from my years in the printing business. Ink smudges; toner doesn't. You can literally knock it off the surface of the paper, especially a linen fiber paper like this one (see attached pic).
Why would he do that when the company already paid for letterhead printed in ink, matching the envelope?
For the same reason he's doing things - supposedly on retainer - that aren't really his brand of law. Because he didn't tell his boss, that's why. I doubt that, had Martha Redmond retained this firm, they'd have handed a C&D/harrassment assignment to someone who does estate planning, workman's comp and divorce. I smell a rat, Godfather!
The clincher: The watermark is backward. No pressman would ever, ever print on the wrong side of a watermarked letterhead... Not for a law firm.
So this smells like made-up bullshit to me. I bet if you called up Richard Reed, the lone remaining Partner, he'd have no idea what you were talking about.
We'll see.
Paul
***
Followed up with:
Further grist for my theory... Companies print letterhead for several reasons, mostly aesthetic ones but also for technical ones.
Letterhead and envelopes are ordered at the same time. Makes perfect sense.
No company would simply generate their letterhead through their in-office copier, because they're fussy about "tick marks". They like a clean sheet...
But more than that, if you intend to print out a letterhead with information on it, as firms do, you have to print it on a press in ink. Because toner doesn't sink into stock. So a stack of paper that had been copied as letterhead (with the company info at the top) is taller on the printed half than on the blank half. So running a copy through a copier again won't work. Why?
The thicker side of the sheet goes more slowly through the fuser rollers (think of an old-school laundry press) than the blank side, causing skewing, which ruins the job.
Further, not all copy machines are equal. Some use higher temperature rollers (the toner is baked onto the sheet via heat, pressure and oil). It is very common for pre-copied materials to have their text/images melted off the page and the text/image is then "ghosted" onto every following sheet - again, ruining the job.
That's why letterhead is universally printed on a press, using real ink, which does not increase the thickness of the paper, and is impervious to heat/oil/pressure once it dries. The purpose of letterhead is to add info later. And that can only happen one way.
So that letter is, in all likelihood, a back-door deal that Martha's trying to pull off. Let me know what you think.
***
See where I'm going with this, Dear Reader? That's okay... They don't either. The other hotshot big city lawyer I know, an old friend, had this to say:
Agree that it is not the most professionally written letter. Possibly just a formality and as a precursor to a TRO. Listen to your lawyer - that's why you pay him or her! :-)
Yep.
You want to know what that letter says? You really do, don't you? I want to tell you so badly... No, seriously, if I did you wouldn't believe it, I know. Let me think about it. Maybe I will, I don't know. Should I? You think I should?
Why not? What the hell do I have to lose?
You want to know what that letter says? You really do, don't you? I want to tell you so badly... No, seriously, if I did you wouldn't believe it, I know. Let me think about it. Maybe I will, I don't know. Should I? You think I should?
Why not? What the hell do I have to lose?
pH 12.o9.16
***
