Interesting conjecture, that's what you're reading!IBCoupe wrote:
Thoughts?
Did you read through the document I posted?IBCoupe wrote:I don't think that there's any legal significance to be drawn from the format of legal documents, but I encourage you to test your theories.
The whole point is trying to figure out why the names are capitalized.IBCoupe wrote:And I still don't think the capitalization matters.
Clarity: It's much easier to spot a name and understand who's involved when the name is set apart from the rest of the document. Lawyers and court officials are going to skim whenever possible, because it's not very efficient to waste your time figuring out who's involved in the lawsuit when you could be analyzing and researching the claim and its justifications.PoorManQ45 wrote:The whole point is trying to figure out why the names are capitalized.IBCoupe wrote:And I still don't think the capitalization matters.
There is no precedent to capitalize the whole name of an individual person. The only thing found for capitalized complete names is for corporations.
In the private sector, at least, upper case is a standard for names in customer and vendor master records. There are several reasons for this, mostly attributed to reduced possibility for letter confusion.PoorManQ45 wrote:Does anyone here have any information on why you are addressed in all caps on debt bills and court documents?
Why? What difference does it make?PoorManQ45 wrote:The whole point is trying to figure out why the names are capitalized.IBCoupe wrote:And I still don't think the capitalization matters.
Again, what difference does it make? There are companies that chose lower-case for their names ... particularly in logo's.PoorManQ45 wrote:There is no precedent to capitalize the whole name of an individual person. The only thing found for capitalized complete names is for corporations.