Leo Posted December 27, 2013 at 03:21 PM Report Share Posted December 27, 2013 at 03:21 PM Throughout RONR, on twenty some occasions, on pages 59 through 652, the distinction between main motions and incidental main motions is made clear each time the issue of a privileged motion or an incidental motion made when no business is pending is addressed. And on page 101, lines 31–34, the distinction used as an example states, “ An example of an incidental main motion relating to procedure without reference to an item of business would be a motion to take a recess, made when no business is pending…” Later on page 230, lines 29–31, the distinction is omitted when addressing the same motion used in the example on page 101, and simply states, “A motion to recess that is made when no question is pending (whether the recess is to begin immediately or at a future time) is a main motion…” Is there a reason for not using the term “incidental main motion” as opposed to “main motion” when addressing the motion to recess on page 230? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted December 27, 2013 at 03:27 PM Report Share Posted December 27, 2013 at 03:27 PM No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shmuel Gerber Posted December 27, 2013 at 06:33 PM Report Share Posted December 27, 2013 at 06:33 PM I wouldn't say there is any distinction between a main motion and an incidental main motion. An incidental main motion is one type of main motion, and an original main motion is the other type of main motion. You will find a similar "omission" of the term "incidental main motion" on page 234, in the discussion of the motion to Adjourn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leo Posted December 28, 2013 at 06:01 PM Author Report Share Posted December 28, 2013 at 06:01 PM Thank you. I was considering the terms in response to the answers offered on a parliamentary procedure test. If in identifying the motion to recess, or the motion adjourn, when no other motion is pending the term "main motion" is acceptable as the correct answer. However, if the term 'incidental main motion" is one of the options, it is the more accurate answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nancy N. Posted December 29, 2013 at 01:00 AM Report Share Posted December 29, 2013 at 01:00 AM Not more accurate, more precise (if you're willing to make that distinction, which I sometimes am, and if you remember which is which, which I sometimes do). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shmuel Gerber Posted December 29, 2013 at 11:52 PM Report Share Posted December 29, 2013 at 11:52 PM Instructions: Read the examiner's mind and answer accordingly.A motion to recess that is made when no question is pending is:A. a main motionB. an incidental main motion.C. both an incidental main motion and a main motionD. debatableE. amendableF. all of the aboveG. none of the above Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Edgar Posted December 30, 2013 at 12:01 AM Report Share Posted December 30, 2013 at 12:01 AM F. all of the aboveG. none of the above It might be even more amusing if F and G were reversed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Hunt Posted January 4, 2014 at 06:05 PM Report Share Posted January 4, 2014 at 06:05 PM I wouldn't say there is any distinction between a main motion and an incidental main motion. An incidental main motion is one type of main motion, and an original main motion is the other type of main motion.You will find a similar "omission" of the term "incidental main motion" on page 234, in the discussion of the motion to Adjourn. Is a motion that brings a question again before the assembly an incidental main motion, then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted January 4, 2014 at 06:12 PM Report Share Posted January 4, 2014 at 06:12 PM Is a motion that brings a question again before the assembly an incidental main motion, then? Some are, but not all of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Hunt Posted January 5, 2014 at 08:20 PM Report Share Posted January 5, 2014 at 08:20 PM Some are, but not all of them. Sorry, yes. Reconsider certainly isn't, and Take From the Table is not debateable so I guess it's just an incidental motion, then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Honemann Posted January 5, 2014 at 08:58 PM Report Share Posted January 5, 2014 at 08:58 PM Sorry, yes. Reconsider certainly isn't, and Take From the Table is not debateable so I guess it's just an incidental motion, then? No, it's classed as a motion that brings a question again before the assembly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.