LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 15.5

Help for RECMGMT-L Archives


RECMGMT-L Archives

RECMGMT-L Archives


View:

Next Message | Previous Message
Next in Topic | Previous in Topic
Next by Same Author | Previous by Same Author
Chronologically | Most Recent First
Proportional Font | Monospaced Font

Options:

Join or Leave RECMGMT-L
Reply | Post New Message
Search Archives


Subject: Re: Hypothetical on conflicting laws
From: John Montana <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To:[log in to unmask]
Date:Wed, 4 Dec 2002 12:27:25 -0500
Content-Type:text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
Parts/Attachments

text/plain (75 lines)


Mr. Towne's point is also well taken.  The authorities
might well be amenable to resolving the conflict
legislatively or administratively, since a good many
such conflicts are entirely inadvertent, and most
politicians and bureaucrats will be reasonable when
they realize they've put you in an impossible position.

There are two potential complications, however:

1.  The conflict may be intentional, e.g., a turf war
between two agencies or two jurisdictions, in which
case they really don't give a damn about your problems.
  The whole reason the Uniform Child Custody
Jurisdiction Act was enacted into law was to avoid the
then-all-too-frequent spectacle of two states having a
high-profile cat fight over whose laws would control
custody of some poor little toddler.

2.  Some legislatures (e.g., Congress) move very, very
slowly, and even the most non-controversial things get
bogged down in political fights.  Even if they are
sympathetic, you might be waiting for a long time.

In both cases, court might still be your best, quickest
and cheapest option.  Never hurts to ask before you
sue, though.  Might even be better do both
simultaneously.  If they change the law during the
pendency of the suit, its easy enough to drop it as mooted.

John


Towne, Stephen wrote:

> Mr. Montana's comments are well taken.  But hypothetically speaking,
> before we assume that government authorities are hostile to it, I think
> it might be easier, faster, and cheaper to change the laws in the
> legislature(s) than to go to court to fix the problem.  This approach
> gets to the root of the problem.  State legislatures are relatively
> accessible:  legislators are happy to "author" bills suggested to them
> even if you don't wave rolls of dollars under their noses.  If state
> agencies are interested in the matter it would be all the more easy as
> many legislators will try to be helpful and cooperative.  However,
> choosing the legislator to carry the bill is the critical issue.  The
> key is to build consensus given the political machinations that color
> legislative affairs.  If the conflict in the laws is nonsensical (and
> often is, a result of poor law drafting or oversight) and serves no
> policy purpose, it could be an easy process.
>
> Such has been my experience.  I have had no experience working with
> Congress.
>
> Steve Towne
> IUPUI Special Collections and Archives
>
> List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
> Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
>
>
>


--
John Montana
Montana & Associates, Inc.
29 Parsons Road
Landenberg Pa 19350
610-255-1588
610-255-1558 fax
[log in to unmask]

visit our website at http://www.montana-associates.com

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance

Back to: Top of Message | Previous Page | Main RECMGMT-L Page

Permalink



LISTS.UFL.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager