pageok
pageok
pageok
Remember the "L":
Number of times the phrase "pubic policy" has appeared in federal court decisions included in the Westlaw ALLFEDS database: 29. Number of times the phrase has appeared in law reviews included in the Westlaw JLR database: 129.
Oren:
Spell checkers -- still not a substitute for proofreading.
5.25.2009 10:21pm
Some dude:
Someone should really program spell checkers to flag that phrase.
5.25.2009 10:24pm
AF:
Perfect proofreading is impossible. The way to avoid this problem is to become a rigorous originalist and textualist, and eliminate "public policy" from your vocabulary.
5.25.2009 10:25pm
ThreeOneFive (mail):
This one says public-policy four times throughout the opinion. Reisen v. Goodrich Corp., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95013 (E.D. Wash. Nov. 21, 2008)
5.25.2009 10:31pm
ThreeOneFive (mail):
Err, excuse me. pubic-policy.
5.25.2009 10:33pm
johnd:
In college, my girlfriend's roommate was so proud of the personal statement she wrote for admission to law school that she let us check it out (after the fact). Although I'm sure adcomms across the nation had a hearty lulz over her "lifelong dedication to public service," her rejection from every school probably had more to do with her sub-140 LSAT than her unfortunate proofreading skills.
5.25.2009 10:36pm
johnd:
Err. That's lifelong dedication to pubic service.

/Good habits die hard.
//I'll never reach raconteur status at this pace.
5.25.2009 10:38pm
Justin (mail):
I guarantee you at least some of those errors are Westlaw's error, not the law clerk or the author's.
5.25.2009 10:42pm
Jared_:
As a legislative assistant to a state senator, I caught just such an error in another legislator's bill while reading through committee dockets. To make matters worse, the reference was to P3s, and was thus rendered "pubic private partnerships."

To avoid such embarrassing errors, I would recommend that those who must write the word "public" with considerable frequency delete the word "pubic" from Word's dictionary. The amount of times you'll actually intend to write "pubic" are, I imagine, very few, and in those instances, you can simply ignore the flagging of the word. Far more common, and far more embarrassing, is the opposite error that can be made when you retain the word in the spell checker's standard dictionary.
5.25.2009 10:44pm
HoyaBlue:
johnd: lifelong dedication to public service, you say. Sounds like a popular girl.
5.25.2009 11:00pm
OrinKerr:
I guarantee you at least some of those errors are Westlaw's error, not the law clerk or the author's.

Perhaps, but then that's not as funny.
5.25.2009 11:03pm
HoyaBlue:
Sigh. And of course I repeat the non-error. Obviously I meant pubic.

/joke-ruined
5.25.2009 11:13pm
Kent Scheidegger (mail) (www):
Inquiring minds want to know -- what prompted the search?
5.25.2009 11:13pm
krs:
Remember the "L"

...unless, of course, you actually mean to say "pubic policy."
5.25.2009 11:25pm
Oren:

Perfect proofreading is impossible. The way to avoid this problem is to become a rigorous originalist and textualist, and eliminate "public policy" from your vocabulary.

You'd still up arguing whether a trial court can instruct on defenses sea sponge.

I'm afraid much more drastic measure must be taken.
5.25.2009 11:25pm
Oren:



...unless, of course, you actually mean to say "pubic policy."

0 for 129 there.
5.25.2009 11:26pm
Cornellian (mail):
My pubic policy is anything but public.
5.26.2009 12:31am
A. Zarkov (mail):
Ok let's come at this from the reverse direction. In the famous 1886 Pubic Arch Shooting in El Paso Texas, Madam Etta Clark shot rival madame Alice Abbott in the pubic arch. Abbott survived the gun shot wound. The El Paso Herald ran a story on the crime but made a spelling error calling it The Public Arch Shooting. Owing to her obvious reputation, the townsfolk thought the erroneous headline far more accurate adding to Abbott's humiliation. Clark pleaded self defense and was acquitted.

So this error can run both ways.
5.26.2009 1:11am
A. Zarkov (mail):
BTW Google gets 199 hits for "The Public Arch Shooting," but only 2 for the more accurate "The Pubic Arch Shooting." Funny how history remembers things.
5.26.2009 1:16am
Clayton E. Cramer (mail) (www):
The way the Obama Administration seems intent on running everything else, I expect that there will soon be a pubic policy.
5.26.2009 1:58am
NickM (mail) (www):
References to pubic schools are funnier IMO.

BTW, Oren, don't forget causes of action for tortoise interference with contract. [I saw one in the caption of a complaint years ago.]

Nick
5.26.2009 2:23am
LM (mail):
Relax. It's Constitutionally kosher. See the first line of the second full paragraph of page 20.
5.26.2009 3:49am
dmv (www):

My pubic policy is anything but public.

Cornellian:

Less fun for you, my friend.
5.26.2009 5:49am
gdf (mail):
We reserve the right to edit or delete comments, and in extreme cases to ban commenters, at our discretion. Comments must be relevant and civil (and, especially, free 好秘书 我爱皮肤 中国公文网
5.26.2009 6:01am
lonetown (mail):
Very funny!

Can you correlate the data to dates? It would be interesting to see if there are any trends.
5.26.2009 7:32am
martinned (mail) (www):

The way the Obama Administration seems intent on running everything else, I expect that there will soon be a pubic policy.

[Insert your own Bushie snark here...]

(Sometimes getting snarky is just too easy.)
5.26.2009 8:38am
CJColucci:
One of these days, someone is going to mean "pubic policy" -- I look forward to the case -- and it'll appear as "public policy" in Westlaw, Lexis, and the books, and, consequently, never be found or cited.
5.26.2009 12:24pm
One Man's View:
Orin

Why ever did you even look this up??
5.26.2009 4:37pm
Leo Marvin (mail):
One Man's View:

Orin

Why ever did you even look this up??

He's on sabbatical.
5.26.2009 9:55pm

Post as: [Register] [Log In]

Account:
Password:
Remember info?

If you have a comment about spelling, typos, or format errors, please e-mail the poster directly rather than posting a comment.

Comment Policy: We reserve the right to edit or delete comments, and in extreme cases to ban commenters, at our discretion. Comments must be relevant and civil (and, especially, free of name-calling). We think of comment threads like dinner parties at our homes. If you make the party unpleasant for us or for others, we'd rather you went elsewhere. We're happy to see a wide range of viewpoints, but we want all of them to be expressed as politely as possible.

We realize that such a comment policy can never be evenly enforced, because we can't possibly monitor every comment equally well. Hundreds of comments are posted every day here, and we don't read them all. Those we read, we read with different degrees of attention, and in different moods. We try to be fair, but we make no promises.

And remember, it's a big Internet. If you think we were mistaken in removing your post (or, in extreme cases, in removing you) -- or if you prefer a more free-for-all approach -- there are surely plenty of ways you can still get your views out.