What REALLY grinds your gears?

[JoeRedskin]

Writing a Motion with two other authors and two non-writing supervisors (same one as my last post). Conference call with all involved to discuss how to improve draft product.

Non-Author No.1: I think you should argue more facts.
ME: The facts you want argued are irrelevant to the legal point the other side is making.
NA1: Okay, well, perhaps you could just include them in the argument to highlight that they are irrelevant.
ME: Umm, okay - I do that when I include the footnote saying "Since we concede the existence of a contract, the facts stated in paragraphs 10 - 44 of the complaint, alleging the existence of a contract, are irrelevant to whether or not the contract was breached."
NA1: Yeah. Expand that.

LATER SAME CALL:
NA2: Well, I haven't read the cases, but that doesn't seem right. I mean, if the cases say what you say they say, okay. I'm just not sure they do.
ME: I did read them and that's what they say - it's why I used quotation marks and cited to their facts.
NA2: Yeah, but I'm not sure I agree with that.
ME: Okay, but, unless there is a case I didn't find in my 10 hours of research on that specific, limited legal issue, it is what the current law on the matter is in Maryland. Do you know of a case that says something different?
NA2: No, but I'm sure there is one. See if you can find it.

ARRRRGHHHHHHHH