On Jan 14, 2008 8:55 PM, Ian Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jan 14, 2008 6:52 PM, comex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Naturally, however, if (say) a CFJ is submitted buried in a message > > that has other concerns, as an officeholder I will notice and process > > them. In fact, I will probably be somewhat more lenient with what is > > required to submit a CFJ than you have been-- something else that > > speeds up the court system, because requiring CFJs to be resubmitted > > is counterproductive. > > Better to have it be resubmitted immediately than to let another CFJ > find it invalid a week later and *then* have it be resubmitted.
>From the arguments of CFJ 1845, it is customary to give the officer discretion over whether the submission was in fact valid.
