Andrew Johmson writes:-
>>I think most of the time, it is an honest mistake to cite opinion, or
>>>>reasoning, as if it were holding.
Good Grief, Andrew. You are not serious are you ? It is nothing of the sort.
Any trial lawyer who cites a case to a court is expected by the court, (and
quite rightly so), to have *read* it properly. Not to have merely *skimmed*
it - whether in print or electronically. Advocates have a **duty** to the
court to state the law *accurately* . It is clear professional negligence
and gross incompetence to mis-cite a case for a proposition for which it
does not stand.
(Try telling a court, "I'm sorry, I never actually read the case, just
printed out a few paragraphs that looked pretty good", and see how
impressed the court will be with your forensic skills !!). There is no room
whatsoever for mistakes in this area - "honest", (whatever that is supposed
to mean in this context), or otherwise. And, on an issue of semantics if I
may be permitted - "mistake" can in fact never be other than honest.
Dishonesty and mistake are mutually exclusive concepts. But mistake and
negligence/incompetence are most certainly not.
Ronald S Huttner LL.B.(Hons)
Barrister And Solicitor
Consultant And Trainer In Computer-Assisted Legal Research
Lecturer In Computerised Legal Research (02.10.95 to 02.10.98)
Internet Sites For Lawyers - http://www.viclf.asn.au/research.html
Personal Home Page - http://www.viclf.asn.au/pers1.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 14 2007 - 20:50:07 PST