Perspective
Apr. 15, 2011
Interpretation by Example
The U.S. Supreme Court teaches a lesson to a lawyer who tries too hard to be clever. By Richard L. Kellner of Kabateck Brown Kellner and Jon A. Atabek.
The recent U.S. Supreme Court's opinion in FCC v. AT&T, 2011 DJDAR 3228, provides a good lesson on how a hyper-technical argument on the meaning of words can not only lead to a losing argument, but also can subject the attorney to ridicule. In AT&T, the corporate defendant tried to argue that the corporation has the right to "personal privacy." According to AT&T, the word "perso...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In