@thomasfuchs Absolutely, and agree that it's funny. But that language — like a lot of things we lawyers say in letters like that one — is not intended for the recipient; it's performative and intended for a judge (or mediator, arbitrator, or similar) who is probably much older than you and me, and who actually responds well to that kind of language. And who possibly still gets their emails printed for them by an assistant every day.
@thomasfuchs Lawyer here. That’s a pretty standard header, actually. The only oddity was “Federal Express” instead of “FedEx.”
At least in my line of work, we have contracts with most of the other companies we interact with that include “Notice” provisions requiring that messages be sent a certain way, e.g. “via email to xyz@domain.com with a copy to So-and-So via trackable carrier.” Including that header on the letter nerfs any argument that that the notice was not properly sent/received.
@thomasfuchs my favorite instance would be one that charges a mandatory and reasonable monthly fee for access resulting in a sustainable (and non-creepy) business model.
Hi, I'm Josh! I'm interested in politics, Internet law, macOS and iOS development, parenting, and travel. I'm an in-house commercial (and sometimes product) counsel for a major tech company. Proud parent of a neurodivergent superstar. He/himUSA | Pacific time zone All views my own. My employer has neither seen nor approved anything I have ever posted here.