Sorry to be a grump about the Oxford comma case (O’Connor v. Oakhurst Dairy, First Circuit), but the ambiguity was contrived and “resolve ambiguities in favor of liability” is not a good rule. [Casey Sullivan/FindLaw, Lowering the Bar]
Sorry to be a grump about the Oxford comma case (O’Connor v. Oakhurst Dairy, First Circuit), but the ambiguity was contrived and “resolve ambiguities in favor of liability” is not a good rule. [Casey Sullivan/FindLaw, Lowering the Bar]
4 Comments
For the sentence to have meant what the appellate court found, the sentence would have needed an “or” before packing.
They sacrificed precedent to verdict, endorsing textualism to do so, in the extreme. May they reap the fruits of their labor. We thank them.
That’s why so many older UK statutes don’t have punctuation. Also look up Sir Roger Casement for a more serious penalty regarding the comma!
[…] Lucas (Evil HR Lady), in her column at Inc., uses the Oxford comma trucking-hours case as a jumping-off point for a wider discussion of how the current workplace regulatory regime needs […]