Technical Question re: Authenticating Emails

[Serene]

For the love of God, I am more confused than ever having reread the request to admit:

How to respond to compound statements (do we refuse to admit based on the reason: compound statements?)

Subjective statements: So and so is happy or mad or sad about a certain event.

What if we cant remember stupid silly crap like how many times the kids packed their lunch in a certain month?

OOOOO I need a drink. Or two. Or twenty seven.

[Mess]

Stickies are valuable or important posts that will always be at the top of a forum. IE they are "stuck" there, they don't get pushed down the list by new posts.

Primarily these are threads that have very useful information about self-rep from experienced posters. Also, the forum rules are in a sticky in each forum.

[Serene]

What is a sticky and where do I find them?

[Mess]

Thanks to all for very good descriptions and advice. I am making this thread a sticky.

[Serene]

Thank you all for the assistance. I have a few more questions for Requests to Admit:

How do you answer request for admits that contain compound sentences? i.e. "Susie went to the store on 31 March and bought a new car". If only part of it is true, do you just say false and state reason "not true" in the form?

I am asking because the request to admit are very poorly done. I know that the other party must be writing them themselves now without the lawyer even reviewing them. I'm sure this is to save costs, which is irrelevant in the bigger picture, but I do want to point out that we are not being difficult and that it is next to impossible to answer these questions as they have them.

Some other issues:

The facts have wrong dates, but perhaps the rest of the text is correct within the numbered line item.

A lot of the facts are subjective, i.e. Susie was ecstatic that your wife called your mother.

Some are about third parties within the household, but seem to be irrelevant and personal in nature, i.e, Susie failed grade 2 (Susie is not a child of the marriage but a step child). Can we refuse to admit this based on personal information? I suspect the Request to Admit is trying to be used to make Susie out to be a bad kid which poorly influences the children of the marriage...

Any help you could provide in answering these questions would be appreciated. We don't feel that there is reason to answer some of these questions, especially about other children within the home. Specifically, because it is priveleged information and the other parent of the child has not consented to release this information.

Lastly, most of the facts that we are requested to admit again are very poorly done. It is difficult to even determine what is being said or asked in many of the line items. It almost appears if the English is not the first language of the person writing them and therefore difficult to even figure out what the true meaning of the sentence is.

All your thoughts and opinions welcome!

[limer]

The request to admit includes "document". An email is a document. I can't imagine that an email is not admissible in court if you have authenticated them. Further, some have already been included in affidavits (as exhibits attached to affidavits) and are in the continuing record and trial brief.

Please explain....

You've answered your own question here serena

[limer]

The same as serving materials, you can't serve a pdf court document as an attachment to an email unless it is accepted via Rule 6(19) of the Family Law Rules allows that service of a document may be proved by an acceptance of service written by the party’s lawyer. I've had both scenarios where e-mail wasn't admissable, and where e-mail was accepted under the quoted rule.

Your ex's lawyer is trying to get around all the legal requirements that he would otherwise have to go through (meaning to have a judge rule on it's admissability). If you accept/authenticicate as per his request then it can be admitted into evidence which he is planning on using to his advantage, not yours.

Hence you need to figure out where he might be going with it all, and see if you can twist it back onto him.

Otherwise.... throw up "red flags" to get around it. Respond in writing (not email) something to the effective that you are ignoring his request to admit. Cite reasons in point form.
1.0 The full context of the entire email thread is incomplete. This includes:
1.1 Blacked out portions of text
1.2 Senders names blacked out
1.3 Receivers names blacked out
1.4 Portions of threaded conversations missing
2.0 It is unclear from the list provided on the form what the Author wants authenticicated.

If he goes to get a judge to admit it then you have notified to him your reasons. In the meantime he can either be more definitive in his request to admit or take it to a judge.

While some email might be admitted at motions stage and used, the evidence requirements for trial are a lot more stringent.

[ByMyself]

@ Serene - I was going to mention one thing about the concerns with email threading and how in can become confusing for others to follow.

The requests are being used to simply get the documents admitted into your evidence binder. You don't have to necessarily ask the judge to read the entire emails and understand from that what is going on.

Instead, you may use an affidavit (or testimony) to explain the scenario around the relevant facts in the email, and quote from the email. The material you quote from has to be in that binder for all parties to reference. So you do have quite a bit of control in how the information is organized and presented to the judge.

More than anything - your time in court will be about how well your/ their evidence is presented. Their request to admit may not make sense entirely, but remember it is being used only to introduce the raw materials, to later be used to support/ back up their statements. If anything is incomplete or unclear, refuse to admit based on that, and ask for better versions.

In my case, I am using timelines to help explain relationships between when emails were sent/ received/ cas calls/ police/ telephone calls, etc. - to help clearly establish critical relationships between events. In my case, the action/ reaction scenario with the ex is a relevant pattern I need to point out. The evidence I reference in these timelines has to all be in my book(s) of evidence. To look at each piece individually, it may not seem entirely relevant, but when carefully assembled for a judge, I think it will be entirely clear.

[ByMyself]

What do you mean by that limer - could you explain that a bit more? Thanks

[Serene]

Limer - How can that be? And where are you getting that information? Do you have a source that I can review?

The request to admit includes "document". An email is a document. I can't imagine that an email is not admissible in court if you have authenticated them. Further, some have already been included in affidavits (as exhibits attached to affidavits) and are in the continuing record and trial brief.

Please explain....

[limer]

BTW..... e-mails are in-admissable in court

[Serene]

Very good information ByMyself. I really appreciate your input!

[ByMyself]

I put the suggestion across with the assumption that the improved clarity could help your case.

If their emails are incomplete/ blacked out, and the remainder of the email hurts your case - absolutely make them product the originals, and request written reasons why they refuse to, if that happens.

If they have left out parts that help your case - you producing the complete original shows they may have been hiding something/ misleading the court. You can't use your complete version as proof of that unless you serve it in your request.

[Serene]

One thing I would clarify in the above thread: If the other party is putting together poorly organized or identified documents in their requests to admit, I don't think it is our responsibility to then produce the original documents and serve upon them. The other party needs to get their stuff together and serve it properly. To correct or produce their documents means that we would be assisting the other side and promoting their cause. There simply is not reason to do that.

[limer]

That's easier said than done. I have gmail and even though I've turned off the 'threading' functionality, emails are still not independent.

One could then flow chart the e-mails to show their relationships.