Dear Michael,
How would I go about printing the second or third insurance company on the parties sheet? (or second or third attorney, etc... for that matter)
I know > will give you the name of the representative + insurance firm name and address.
Is there another simple command like this that will do the same for the second or third?
I have currently been using >
Is there a way to position the card to the second insurance, attorney, etc?
Thanks!
Sincerely,
Michael Lerner
Lerner, Moore, Mammano, Strasser, and Silva
www.injuryatwork.com
(909) 889-1131
Printing the second (X)
-
Michael Appell
Re: Printing the second (X)
> will give you the name of the representative + insurance firm name and address. >>
But that is not pulling information from the Parties sheet. It's pulling it directly from the Application. Therefore, if they move, it pulls the address at the time of injury.
>
Usually if not always, when offices want to pull the second or third carrier or attorney, they would need to select which one they want to pull.
If it's for a cc, you just do it this way:
>
I can't see any other reason one would want to position the card to the second insurance, attorney, etc? If you are trying to do a Case Information Top Sheet, that is already done in Version 4.00 by just clicking the printer icon at the client card.
Hope that helps.
Mike
But that is not pulling information from the Parties sheet. It's pulling it directly from the Application. Therefore, if they move, it pulls the address at the time of injury.
>
Usually if not always, when offices want to pull the second or third carrier or attorney, they would need to select which one they want to pull.
If it's for a cc, you just do it this way:
>
I can't see any other reason one would want to position the card to the second insurance, attorney, etc? If you are trying to do a Case Information Top Sheet, that is already done in Version 4.00 by just clicking the printer icon at the client card.
Hope that helps.
Mike
-
Michael Lerner
Re: Printing the second (X)
*>
But that is not pulling information from the Parties sheet. It's pulling it directly from the Application. Therefore, if they move, it pulls the address at the time of injury.*
Okay.. so this means > is different then >>
Does this mean that you should never use the >, >, >, etc in your form letters because if the person moves then wherever you have that code will be sending it to the wrong address because it is the information kept attached in the Injuries tab - Extended application of the injury (static - represents information at time of injury) and not the parties sheet? (which changes to reflect moving?)
You should then always use >, >, or > in general.
OR does this mean that if you are creating a form letter and using the > and the like, you always need to first go to the injuries sheet, click once on the injury you are dealing with so you get the black arrow next to that injury, and then select Forms, and get the form letter you want to merge... Which will pull the information using > and the like from the attaches on that particular injury?
Also, If > is the attorney's information attached in the Extended application of each injury on the Injuries Tab of the Client Card, what is >?
Sincerely,
Michael Lerner
Lerner, Moore, Mammano, Strasser, and Silva
www.injuryatwork.com
(909) 889-1131
But that is not pulling information from the Parties sheet. It's pulling it directly from the Application. Therefore, if they move, it pulls the address at the time of injury.*
Okay.. so this means > is different then >>
Does this mean that you should never use the >, >, >, etc in your form letters because if the person moves then wherever you have that code will be sending it to the wrong address because it is the information kept attached in the Injuries tab - Extended application of the injury (static - represents information at time of injury) and not the parties sheet? (which changes to reflect moving?)
You should then always use >, >, or > in general.
OR does this mean that if you are creating a form letter and using the > and the like, you always need to first go to the injuries sheet, click once on the injury you are dealing with so you get the black arrow next to that injury, and then select Forms, and get the form letter you want to merge... Which will pull the information using > and the like from the attaches on that particular injury?
Also, If > is the attorney's information attached in the Extended application of each injury on the Injuries Tab of the Client Card, what is >?
Sincerely,
Michael Lerner
Lerner, Moore, Mammano, Strasser, and Silva
www.injuryatwork.com
(909) 889-1131
-
Michael Appell
Re: Printing the second (X)
Okay.. so this means > is different then
>>
CORRECT...it is different. For letters, you should probably almost always if not always use the GetParty command. GetParty pulls from the Parties sheet which grabs information directly from the rolodex. command = client, insurance, attorney, etc. pulls information from the Application (also retains compatibility with WCFMS for DOS).
I would not bother with pulling information from the Application (attoney, attorneynew, etc). Keep in mind that the GetParty command allows you to automatically pull the information or allow the user to select one or several parties. Selecting several parties is useful for a cc.
Mike
>>
CORRECT...it is different. For letters, you should probably almost always if not always use the GetParty command. GetParty pulls from the Parties sheet which grabs information directly from the rolodex. command = client, insurance, attorney, etc. pulls information from the Application (also retains compatibility with WCFMS for DOS).
I would not bother with pulling information from the Application (attoney, attorneynew, etc). Keep in mind that the GetParty command allows you to automatically pull the information or allow the user to select one or several parties. Selecting several parties is useful for a cc.
Mike
-
Michael Lerner
Re: Printing the second (X)
*Selecting several parties is useful for a cc.*
If I want to add several parties to a cc:, if I use
>, when I select the parties it gives me the contact name + firm name + entire address. What is the easiest way to use this command if you want everything except the contact name for multiple parties?
Sincerely,
Michael Lerner
Lerner, Moore, Mammano, Strasser, and Silva
www.injuryatwork.com
(909) 889-1131
If I want to add several parties to a cc:, if I use
>, when I select the parties it gives me the contact name + firm name + entire address. What is the easiest way to use this command if you want everything except the contact name for multiple parties?
Sincerely,
Michael Lerner
Lerner, Moore, Mammano, Strasser, and Silva
www.injuryatwork.com
(909) 889-1131
-
Michael Appell
Re: Printing the second (X)
Michael - if you don't want the contact name and only want the firm name to show, then you want the GetParty Style #10 in the dropdown list. So, in order to default to this selection you may want to consider this format:
>
You will notice that this style is the "Firmname and address with linefeed without name." However, the thing that I think is really nice about this command is that if there isn't a firm, then A1-Law will insert the name so that it gets addressed to someone.
By the way - on another note - how do you like the new colors in the support forum? I really did not care for that brownish background color so I changed it.
Mike
>
You will notice that this style is the "Firmname and address with linefeed without name." However, the thing that I think is really nice about this command is that if there isn't a firm, then A1-Law will insert the name so that it gets addressed to someone.
By the way - on another note - how do you like the new colors in the support forum? I really did not care for that brownish background color so I changed it.
Mike
-
Michael Lerner
Re: Printing the second (X)
Dear Michael,
1.What I'm trying to do is keep the person who is writing the letter from having to take too many steps.
> is Great, but it still requires the person writing the letter to have to know which parties they need to cc: for that particular letter. (aka When I'm writing letter 45A, I need to remember to cc: it to the insurance company and the defending attorney... but for 45B, I only cc: it to the insurance company)
I could > but that would mean that the person would have to figure out which insurance company it would go (in case there were multiple injuries with different companies) and would be presented with a list of all parties to choose from, not just the insurance companies.
*Is there a variable that when getparty is used, instead of showing all parties, it would only show insurance cards... or attorney cards, etc...
2. Most cards in the parties sheet will most likely be placed in a specific order.
However, since the applicant may be different then the injured, as in a death case, > would work for slots #1 (the applicant) and #2 (the defendant) since #3+ may be different (#3 could be the injured... or defending attorney, etc.)
It would be nice to be able to pull out the first and second attorney, insurance company, etc. (if the second exists). That way you could have a cc: to multiple attorneys.. or possibly all. So if you need print a letter to all insurance companies you would have the code set to 3 companies.. but if there was only 1, that would be the only one to print.
Now that I think of it.. I may need to investigate that "loop" command...
Thanks for listening!
Sincerely,
Michael Lerner
P.S. I like the new color. It's definately more relaxing then brown.
1.What I'm trying to do is keep the person who is writing the letter from having to take too many steps.
> is Great, but it still requires the person writing the letter to have to know which parties they need to cc: for that particular letter. (aka When I'm writing letter 45A, I need to remember to cc: it to the insurance company and the defending attorney... but for 45B, I only cc: it to the insurance company)
I could > but that would mean that the person would have to figure out which insurance company it would go (in case there were multiple injuries with different companies) and would be presented with a list of all parties to choose from, not just the insurance companies.
*Is there a variable that when getparty is used, instead of showing all parties, it would only show insurance cards... or attorney cards, etc...
2. Most cards in the parties sheet will most likely be placed in a specific order.
However, since the applicant may be different then the injured, as in a death case, > would work for slots #1 (the applicant) and #2 (the defendant) since #3+ may be different (#3 could be the injured... or defending attorney, etc.)
It would be nice to be able to pull out the first and second attorney, insurance company, etc. (if the second exists). That way you could have a cc: to multiple attorneys.. or possibly all. So if you need print a letter to all insurance companies you would have the code set to 3 companies.. but if there was only 1, that would be the only one to print.
Now that I think of it.. I may need to investigate that "loop" command...
Thanks for listening!
Sincerely,
Michael Lerner
P.S. I like the new color. It's definately more relaxing then brown.
-
Michael Appell
Re: Printing the second (X)
1. What I'm trying to do is keep the person who is writing the letter from having to take too many steps.
I understand that - but regarding cc's the getparty is an excellent way to go because it gives the user more control over who is included in the cc and it doesn't take that long at all to select the parties to cc.
1B. I could > but that would mean that the person would have to figure out which insurance company it would go
Chances are the person doing the letter will know who they want to cc anyways and they will want control over who it goes to since every letter and every situation may be a little different.
1C. Is there a variable that when getparty is used, instead of showing all parties, it would only show insurance cards... or attorney cards, etc...
Actually, it is possible to store all the parties in memory variables but that usually comes in handy when dealing with court forms.
2. Most cards in the parties sheet will most likely be placed in a specific order.
Then you could use the command = getparty,1
command = getparty,2
command = getparty,3
etc. to reference any party
2B. However, since the applicant may be different then the injured, as in a death case,
some use either command = getparty,applicant or command = getparty,client to distinguish between the two.
2C. It would be nice to be able to pull out the first and second attorney, insurance company, etc. (if the second exists).
I have made a note of that for an update and will work on it.
2D. Now that I think of it.. I may need to investigate that "loop" command...
Forget that one. That's for multiple clients.
Mike
I understand that - but regarding cc's the getparty is an excellent way to go because it gives the user more control over who is included in the cc and it doesn't take that long at all to select the parties to cc.
1B. I could > but that would mean that the person would have to figure out which insurance company it would go
Chances are the person doing the letter will know who they want to cc anyways and they will want control over who it goes to since every letter and every situation may be a little different.
1C. Is there a variable that when getparty is used, instead of showing all parties, it would only show insurance cards... or attorney cards, etc...
Actually, it is possible to store all the parties in memory variables but that usually comes in handy when dealing with court forms.
2. Most cards in the parties sheet will most likely be placed in a specific order.
Then you could use the command = getparty,1
command = getparty,2
command = getparty,3
etc. to reference any party
2B. However, since the applicant may be different then the injured, as in a death case,
some use either command = getparty,applicant or command = getparty,client to distinguish between the two.
2C. It would be nice to be able to pull out the first and second attorney, insurance company, etc. (if the second exists).
I have made a note of that for an update and will work on it.
2D. Now that I think of it.. I may need to investigate that "loop" command...
Forget that one. That's for multiple clients.
Mike