Quote:
Originally posted by robustpuppy
In complete sincerity, that makes it even worse. The whole point of reviewing a document is to catch errors the drafter may have missed, even if said drafter is you. To miss something so glaring on even a first read is inconceivable, provided you know what the term ought to be. And there's also no excuse for not checking the final document after your assistant has entered your changes.
|
No excuse?
How about this: No judge has ever thrown out a complaint or cause of action for an error of this nature. Any defendant who called the judge's attention to this would be laughed out of court, if not sanctioned for wasting the court's time. And juries very rarely adjust awards based on grammar.
In other words, perhaps the guy reviewing it gave it a quick read to be sure it stated a cause of action, if that. Put differently, he might have chosen to focus on what actually mattered. Difficult for the grammar-timmy to comprehend, I understand, but there you have it.
