This taking occurred in the context of a comprehensive development plan meant to address a serious city-wide depression, and the projected economic benefits of the project cannot be characterized as de minimus.Man, you would think with all those hardcore law review types helping him out, he'd never fall into the most obvious spelling pitfall in all of law.
UPDATE: Here's my new post on the actual substance of the case.
Posts
7 comments:
Kathleen: The clerk should be put in a room with the air conditioner turned up high, Christina Aguilera music played loud, and after one hour, Justice Kennedy should come in a pour a glass of water on the clerk's head.
Charles: The thing is, I'm going to read the case first, and I just haven't had time to. I think there are some overheated statements being made right now, and I'm not just going to join that chorus.
Five so called grown ups who cannot read simple words in a simple way.
Who said my name was Simon?
Oh, yeah.
"I think all practicing lawyers can agree that..."
Well, there's a first time for everything I suppose, but I doubt it!
Daleb: The one word you don't want to misspell when writing about misspelling is "misspell."
The most often misspelled word used in legal writing is "supersede."
-what cheek to simply assume that said private industry will have longevity and success to provide jobs and increased tax revenues, after confiscating private residential property on which to build. How often have government projections and assessments gone awry? Didn't the court rule because a city government told them X number of jobs and X amount of tax dollars would be generated for the good of the community V. the good of private habitation that generates no revenues? I hope my house is taken so a porn mall can be built. Sheesh!
Post a Comment