Business Law Basics: "For Want of a Comma" The Words You Use Can be Costly.
Jeshua Lauka
Attorney & Partner @ David, Wierenga & Lauka P.C. Legal advisor to purpose-driven companies & boards Board Member, & Corporate Secretary
Disclaimer: The photo below has nothing to do with this post. It is simply my way of recognizing that I am sick of winter and looking forward to the 15 hour drive to Florida in a few weeks...
Today I read an article posted by the ABAJournal that illustrates the profound impact on word and grammar usage in contracts and legislation.
Oxford comma issue benefits drivers in overtime case
Photo I took of Clearwater Beach, FL
"FOR WANT OF A COMMA"
As the ABA Journal reports:
"Ambiguity caused by lack of a comma in a law on overtime pay has benefited Maine dairy delivery drivers."
"The Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals pointed out the issue in the first sentence of its March 13 decision (PDF). 'For want of a comma, we have this case,” the court said in an opinion by Judge David Barron.
"Because the statute was ambiguous, it should be interpreted in favor of the dairy workers who distribute milk but do not pack it, the appeals court found."
A SINGLE WORD CAN BE LEGALLY SIGNIFICANT TO SHIFT RISK
Last year I wrote about how the words used in a contract dispute significantly impacted the rights and obligations in a business dispute, based upon the Michigan Supreme Court's interpretation.
The Michigan Supreme Court made a distinction between the inclusion of the word “in” in a Title Company's Closing Protection Letter in a prior case, and the “exclusion” of the word “in” in that instant case. In the Court’s determination:
“Although the distinction is slight—the only difference is the word “in”—the distinction is legally significant.”
Words Matter.
E-mail: Jeshua@dwlawpc.com
Twitter: @JeshuaTLauka