AZlawyer
Verified Attorney
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2008
- Messages
- 7,883
- Reaction score
- 2,123
I kind of skimmed through the last 15 or so pages of this thread, so I hope this hasn't been discussed already.
After Tony said he never signed the agreement presented by JB, but instead signed a separate agreement, I checked the language at the beginning of the document, in which the parties are identified.
Normally you would say _____;_____;____;___ (Parties of the First Part) and ___;___;___;___ (Parties of the Second Part). This one says "The Baez Law Firm, ("The Firm"; "Party of The First Part") and Leonard Padilla, Bounty Hunter; and Tony Padilla, Tony Padilla Bail Bonds, Sole Proprietor; Tracy McL*******; and Robert D***; ("Parties of the Second Part); (collectively the "parties").
Bold added by me.
So why does Tony's name have an "and" in front of it? It's almost like he had a separate agreement (between The Baez Law Firm and Tony Padilla) and someone cut and pasted the two agreements to make one agreement.
That said, I think the best evidence that there was NOT any forgery/alteration of the document is that the purportedly altered document is so unhelpful to Baez's argument! If you were going to risk your bar card to create a fraudulent document, why wouldn't you at least create one that said what you needed it to say???
After Tony said he never signed the agreement presented by JB, but instead signed a separate agreement, I checked the language at the beginning of the document, in which the parties are identified.
Normally you would say _____;_____;____;___ (Parties of the First Part) and ___;___;___;___ (Parties of the Second Part). This one says "The Baez Law Firm, ("The Firm"; "Party of The First Part") and Leonard Padilla, Bounty Hunter; and Tony Padilla, Tony Padilla Bail Bonds, Sole Proprietor; Tracy McL*******; and Robert D***; ("Parties of the Second Part); (collectively the "parties").
Bold added by me.
So why does Tony's name have an "and" in front of it? It's almost like he had a separate agreement (between The Baez Law Firm and Tony Padilla) and someone cut and pasted the two agreements to make one agreement.
That said, I think the best evidence that there was NOT any forgery/alteration of the document is that the purportedly altered document is so unhelpful to Baez's argument! If you were going to risk your bar card to create a fraudulent document, why wouldn't you at least create one that said what you needed it to say???