CAPS LOCK: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) Created page with "{{box|Lawyers who think their caps lock keys are instant "make conspicuous" buttons are deluded. In determining whether a term is conspicuous, we look at more than formatting...." |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{box| | {{box|“Lawyers who think their caps lock keys are instant "make [[conspicuous]]" buttons are deluded. In determining whether a term is [[conspicuous]], we look at more than formatting. [...] A sentence in capitals, buried deep within a long paragraph in [[capitals]] will probably not be [[deemed]] [[conspicuous]]. Formatting does matter, but conspicuousness ultimately turns on the likelihood that a [[reasonable person]] would actually see a term in an agreement. '''''Thus, it is entirely possible for text to be [[conspicuous]] without being in capitals'''''.” (''Conspicuity added'') | ||
'' | ''{{casenote|In Re Bassett}}'', 285 F.3d 882, 886 (9th Cir. 2002)}} | ||
{{Seealso}} | |||
*[[Conspicuous]] | |||
{{plainenglish}} | {{plainenglish}} | ||
Revision as of 15:37, 4 January 2017
- “Lawyers who think their caps lock keys are instant "make conspicuous" buttons are deluded. In determining whether a term is conspicuous, we look at more than formatting. [...] A sentence in capitals, buried deep within a long paragraph in capitals will probably not be deemed conspicuous. Formatting does matter, but conspicuousness ultimately turns on the likelihood that a reasonable person would actually see a term in an agreement. Thus, it is entirely possible for text to be conspicuous without being in capitals.” (Conspicuity added)
'[[In Re Bassett v {{{2}}}]]', 285 F.3d 882, 886 (9th Cir. 2002)
See also
Plain English Anatomy™ Noun | Verb | Adjective | Adverb | Preposition | Conjunction | Latin | Germany | Flannel | Legal triplicate | Nominalisation | Murder your darlings