View Single Post
  #11  
Old 04-25-2008, 07:48 PM
Lawdog Lawdog is online now
Mental Jujitsu
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 669
eyes rolling

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry Pitts
Perhaps the refusal for cause was based upon the potential fact that there was no "good advice" to be offered by this alleged "accredited attorney" who calls himself Lawdog or sometimes "Scott"(?).

Jerry Carlos

Look, son....

Would you expect a doctor who's an orthopedic surgeon to treat you for a psychiatric problem? Or ask a psychiatrist to deliver your wife's baby? He can do it, a psychiatrist is a medical doctor, you know.

But in the real world, the orthopedist is going to refer you to a psychiatrist, and the psychiatrist is going to refer you to an ob-gyn. It's called "accepting the limits of your expertise." Or, as Clint Eastwood once put it, "A man's got to know his limitations."

Since I hate tax law and refuse to practice it, I obviously don't bother learning more about it. I do not and would not offer tax law advice to ANYONE, not even close family. I'd give them the same advice I just gave here...sorry, that's outside my field of expertise. Let me refer you to a lawyer who DOES specialize in tax law.

So the answer I gave, if anything, reinforced my bona fides to those with IQs above room temperature...which may or may not include you. The jury is still out on that one.
__________________
We reject Skurdal's argument that he is a "free man" exempt from the laws because he has "no contracts" with either the state or federal governments...No persons in Montana may exempt themselves from any law simply by declaring they do not consent to it applying to them...Accepting Skurdal's assertion of exempt status is an invitation to anarchy. We decline that invitation. - State v. Skurdal, Supreme Court of Montana, 235 Mont. 291, 767 P.2d 304 at 308 (1988).
Reply With Quote