AaronM

What would I gain by doing that? Allow me to quote from the one you have posted:

The law:

"b) A producer who is a secondary producer ? may satisfy the requirements of this Part to create and maintain records by accepting from the primary producer ? copies of the records ?. Such a secondary producer shall also keep records of the name and address of the primary producer from whom he received copies of the records."

The remarks from your attorney:

"Thus the regulations not only require that secondary producers have a set of records, but also that the records be traceable back to the primary producer."

Now...Let's break this down... "A producer who is a secondary producer...MAY satisfy the requirements..."

Notice the keyword MAY? Lets check the english definition of this word shall we?

"May aux.v. Past tense might (mt)
1: To be allowed or permitted to: May I take a swim? Yes, you may."

Does this mean that they are required to take a swim? No....Yet your attorney states: "Thus the regulations not only require that secondary producers have a set of records"

Your very own attorney condradict the law after quoting it in black and white. If I were you, I would show that attorney the case of Sundance vs. Reno, fire them, and then retain legal council who actually understands the law and can effectivly read the english language.

Paul, It's not your fault that this attorney can not interpret the laws as they are written...I am pretty sure that if I were to pick an attorney from the yellowpages that they would also not have the best understanding of these laws.