Looks like you're both making butts of yourselves. :D

Your puns are indeed bad, and taking me on is a gamble Sir. After all I'll see you and Raise you every time. But then again its your call.

No we are just being cheeky.

So Councelor, the question remains: "what law should be applied to the case at hand?" or more suscinctly "what hand should be applied to the case?" Put another way if I consent to the Discovery process: (reference:) "order that counsel will be bound over (the bench) for trial. The court will first probe counsel for evidentiary purposes." On what grounds will such intrusion (aka probe) be made? MN or MI ? The statutes for Minnesota and Michigan may not concur.... Other than those govenering the "little brown jug".

Viv, the only thing you'll be raising are those cute buns on command to meet my hand on every swat, or else. :D

And in a conflict between MN and MI law, HM (HeadMaster) law will control. This could prove to be a seminal case, as the dark recesses of the law will be explored in depth.

BTW, who was it who said "The law is an ass"?

A wise man, no doubt.

If your first case fails because of the above, vivian, don't give up. Make another try using a different angle. That would be a good...ummm...re-tort.