Re: Was Scope of Agreement or Letter of Intent-Now unemployed.

[Peter <pnewman1 -at- optonline -dot- net>]

Andrew Plato wrote:
 
> "Peter" <> wrote ...
 
> > Bringing the right lawyer or professional advisor to the table, is not
> > so much of a fight plan as a self protection plan. I agree that gong to
> > court should be a last resort, but letting the other side understand
> > that you are a reluctant warrior can rarely hurt a good faith
> > negotiation. It is only the bully who takes an attitude that someone
> > seeking professional assistance is only doing it to fight. In that case
> > you may as well commence early and stop screwing around. Remember, the
> > company probably has already received advice, why shouldn't you.
> 
> Its my feeling that the minute you bring a lawyer to a dispute, you've raised
> the stakes of the game considerably. If you tell the other party that you're
> going to speak with a lawyer, there is a good chance they will harden their
> position and shut you off. In other words, it says "diplomacy has failed."

We disagree.

> > > If you lose a case, you can be
> > > held responsible for the other side's legal fees.

> > In what states in the US is there such a rule? I am not aware of any
> > state East of the Mississippi that has such a rule. Most Western states
> > do not. I am curious.
 
> Its not a rule, its a part of a lot of contracts these days. If you read your
> employment contracts carefully, you will probably see a clause that says
> something to the effect "the prevailing party in any dispute will have the
> right to collect reasonable legal fees."

In that case you should have clearly stated so. While a prevailing party
pays clause common, but does not appear in every agreement. 

> Even without suce a clause, if you sue a customer, they can easily countersue
> you back. They can say you did the job wrong and violated the "workmanship"
> clauses of the contract. Now, you're in a two way fight with a corporation that
> probably has a lot more legal resources than you.

If you carefully read my comment, you will see that I did not dispute
that. 

> Read Sun Tzu the Art of War - all battles are won before the fighting starts.
> Keep that in mind next time you call a lawyer because your employer hurt your
> feelings. You're about to fight a battle with a considerably better armed
> opponent. And just being right, doesn't mean you'll win.

This doesn't mean cave in and become a Casper Milquetoast. Remember,
your employer can lose more in the cost of diversion from business.
While he may bring a countersuit, he will have to consider the cost of
collecting. If you have your work well documented and you are right
don't become servile just because someone barks.  
Having said that, you are still better off settling the issue, even if
you get far less than you deserve.




-- 
Peter
- a chrono- logically experienced citizen

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
A new book on Single Sourcing has been released by William Andrew
Publishing: _Single Sourcing: Building Modular Documentation_
is now available at: http://www.williamandrew.com/titles/1491.html.

Help Authoring Seminar 2003, coming soon to a city near you! Attend this
educational and affordable one-day seminar covering existing and emerging
trends in Help authoring technology. See http://www.ehelp.com/techwr-l2.

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot-  Visit
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.