Confused by 12:31(1)(b) versus 12.9n4

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

12:31 1(b)

The rules for the insertion or addition of a paragraph are essentially the same as those given above, except that after a paragraph has been inserted, words can still be added to it (that is, placed at the end of the paragraph only) provided that they do not conflict with or modify anything in the paragraph as already inserted. When a paragraph is to be inserted or added, any necessary perfecting should first be done by secondary amendments.

versus

12.9n4

A motion to strike out a paragraph from one place and insert it in a different place is also possible. Such a motion is not a motion to substitute; it is similar to the second of the two types of motions to strike out and insert (applying to words) discussed in 12:58–59. The wording of the paragraph cannot be materially amended by a motion of this type or by any secondary amendments to it. However, once such a motion has been adopted, the transferred paragraph may be amended by any of the usual forms.

These seem to be saying the opposite, and I am wondering why?  If I understand correctly 12:31(1)(b) is to add a completely new paragraph and in such a case, it must be perfected first, and then placed where it needs to go.  Yet, in 12.9n4, in striking and moving an existing paragraph, you cannot perfect it first, but only after.  

Why the exact opposite treatment when it seems these two are very similar?

PS: The information in footnote 12:9n4 really should be stated later (around 12:58-59) when it is actually taking about striking and inserting, and not stuck only in a footnote talking about substitution much earlier.  This was a real bear to find.

 

Edited October 6, 2020 at 03:49 AM by Caryn Ann Harlos

[Shmuel Gerber]

2 hours ago, Caryn Ann Harlos said:

These seem to be saying the opposite, and I am wondering why?  If I understand correctly 12:31(1)(b) is to add a completely new paragraph and in such a case, it must be perfected first, and then placed where it needs to go.  Yet, in 12.9n4, in striking and moving an existing paragraph, you cannot perfect it first, but only after.  

In 12:8(3)(b)n4, the rule is that the wording of an existing paragraph cannot be changed by the same amendment that changes the placement of that paragraph. Doing that would be an attempt to decide two unrelated questions at the same time — just as described in the rules in 12:58–59 relating to striking out and inserting words. However, after a primary amendment is adopted to change the placement of the whole paragraph, its wording can be changed by subsequent primary amendment. I suppose it could be done in the reverse order just as well (changing the wording, and after that the placement), although the book doesn't say so.

In 12:31, when inserting or adding a new paragraph, the maker of the motion to Amend has the opportunity to specify both the wording and the placement. Once those words are inserted in that place by adoption of the amendment, it is not in order to propose changing them (except by adding new wording at the end, or by a motion to Reconsider). Therefore, the proposed new paragraph must be perfected first by secondary amendment while the primary amendment to insert is pending.

[Shmuel Gerber]

3 hours ago, Caryn Ann Harlos said:

PS: The information in footnote 12:9n4 really should be stated later (around 12:58-59) when it is actually taking about striking and inserting, and not stuck only in a footnote talking about substitution much earlier.  This was a real bear to find.

I think you have a valid concern regarding this (but the footnote is to paragraph 12:8(3)(b), not 12:9).

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

Thank you for the citation correction.  I am blurry-eyed from studying for the RP exam.

I see where I was getting hung up on 12:8(3)(b) - I read it in isolation as being a main motion to strike and insert when in fact it is a primary amendment being discussed... correct?

Edited October 6, 2020 at 07:17 AM by Caryn Ann Harlos

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

What made finding it worse is that the e-book version has an odd error.... if you go to that footnote and scroll up it claims it is a footnote in an entirely different and unrelated chapter.  I could only find out where it was really located by hitting on the superscript footnote link.  That is a flaw in the kindle version at least.

[Shmuel Gerber]

2 minutes ago, Caryn Ann Harlos said:

I see where I was getting hung up on 12:8(3)(b) - I read it in isolation as being a main motion to strike and insert when in fact it is a primary amendment being discussed... correct?

Yes. The entire discussion is about the subsidiary motion to Amend, not the main motion to Amend Something Previously Adopted.

But actually, come to think of it, this footnote is not necessarily limited to a primary amendment to a main motion; that is just the simplest case. There might well be a motion to strike out and insert (transfer) a paragraph within a primary amendment involving the insertion or addition of several paragraphs, and such a motion would be a secondary amendment.

[Shmuel Gerber]

15 minutes ago, Caryn Ann Harlos said:

What made finding it worse is that the e-book version has an odd error.... if you go to that footnote and scroll up it claims it is a footnote in an entirely different and unrelated chapter.  I could only find out where it was really located by hitting on the superscript footnote link.  That is a flaw in the kindle version at least.

It is the fourth footnote to Chapter VI (Subsidiary Motions), which comprises §11–§17. The footnote numbering restarts with each chapter, not with each section.

Edited to add: In the e-book, the footnotes are gathered in groups and located at the end of each chapter, with two-way links between the main text and the footnotes. But an individual footnote can usually also be viewed as a pop-up over the text, without having to view the footnotes section.

Edited October 6, 2020 at 07:37 AM by Shmuel Gerber

[Gary Novosielski]

On 10/6/2020 at 3:29 AM, Shmuel Gerber said:

It is the fourth footnote to Chapter VI (Subsidiary Motions), which comprises §11–§17.

Seeing comprise used correctly is a small but welcome gift.  🙂