I came across a couple of letters written by counsel for two parties which preceded litigation.  One thing struck me about the letters - the lawyers each snipe regarding how they sent each other correspondence.  A bigger waste of energy I can't think of, but this surprisingly happens often.

It all starts when one of the lawyers throws down the gauntlet and refuses to accept further correspondence via email:

On or about November 6, 2007, we received your correspondence dated October 25, 2007, that was received via UPS.  In addition, your correspondence states that a copy of the document was forwarded via email to Ms. Hodges.  Please note, that since email is NOT a secured means of communication, neither the undersigned nor any other member of firm, monitors, responds, receives, and/or replies to email involving clients' matters.  Please refrain from communicating with this office, via email.

(Caps in original.)

Not to be outdone, upon receipt of the letter, opposing counsel responds as follows:

We acknowledge receipt of your November 9, 2007 letter, the original of which arrived in the mail at our offices on November 19, 2007.  Please note that we have no record of having received a copy via facsimile.

Really, whether either of the communications were sent or received during a certain 10 day time-period is practically (*most likely*) not going to matter.  Lawyers being lawyers are understandably paranoid about this sort of thing.  But before you make this sort of a statement you should really ask yourself whether the time of receipt is going to have any significance.

As a general matter, it's probably time to abandon such paranoia.  Unless something is required (by rule or agreement or some other specific reason) to be delivered in paper, it makes sense to email and fax it.  Opposing counsel who responds to an email saying "we don't monitor or respond to emails" just sounds silly.  That sort of an argument will get less and less viable and seem sillier and sillier as time goes on, and more and more communication shifts away from paper.