We could make an exception for NOLA. Indeed I demand we make exceptions 
for that. We may be losers most of the time, but I don't believe it is a 
terminal condition. On behalf of all those who are getting a bit long in 
the tooth, time to improve our habits.  I have great faith in Peter S 
and Jim H leading the charge.

Sally

On 6/23/2011 10:03 PM, Bagley, Connie wrote:
> Given our working patterns, the losers will convene in NOLA at 11:30pm. Connie
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Sally Gunz
> Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2011 7:13 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Question
>
> I can't believe what fine company I am in. Connie and Dan -- can we have a special late afternoon session at the conference dedicated to losers.
> It will probably help you meet your budget promises to the hotel?!!
>
> Sally
>
> On 6/23/2011 7:09 PM, Maurer,Virginia G wrote:
>> I'm a loser, too.
>>
>> Ginny
>>
>>
>> ________________________________________
>> From: Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk
>> [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of John Allison
>> [[log in to unmask]]
>> Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2011 7:00 PM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: Question
>>
>> No, I'm also a loser, but it's an hour earlier here (and many degrees hotter).
>>
>> John
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Sally Gunz [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>> Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2011 05:52 PM
>> To: [log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]>
>> Subject: Re: Question
>>
>> This is why I truly love the ALSB -- one minute for the response. Is
>> there any other discipline like it? (alternatively, are Laura and I
>> the only losers still in the office at 6.50 on a Thursday evening?!!).
>>
>> Thanks Laura.
>>
>> Sally
>>
>> On 6/23/2011 6:50 PM, Ginger, Laura wrote:
>>> I believe that in the U.S., this is the equitable remedy of reformation.
>>> Laura
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk
>>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Sally Gunz
>>> Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2011 6:49 PM
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject: Question
>>>
>>> One of my colleagues has asked this question. Please respond to me
>>> personally and I will send out a further email telling you when I
>>> have an answer. Thanks.
>>>
>>> "In Canadian tax law, there is a concept of rectification. The idea
>>> is that the documents do not reflect the intentions of the parties
>>> (i.e., a screw-up), and the parties seek to have a court order that
>>> the documents be corrected. Does this doctrine exist in the US?  If
>>> so, what is it called? "
>>>
>>> Sally