Friday, June 03, 2005, 17:49 GMT
Hey, I'm doing research right now into certain laws, and am *so* frustrated with all the legal speak! Here's an example of ONE sentence from 1958 Massachusetts legal code:
Whoever, by playing at cards, dice or other game, or by betting on the sides or hands of those gaming, loses to a person so playing or betting money or goods, and pays or delivers the same or any part thereof to the winner, or whoever pays or delivers money or other thing of value to another person for or in consideration of a lottery, policy or pool ticket, certificate, check or slip, or for or in consideration of a chance of drawing or obtaining any money, prize or other thing of value in a lottery or policy game, pool or combination, or other bet, may recover such money or the value of such goods in contract; and if he does not within three months after such loss, payment or delivery, without covin or collusion, prosecute such action with effet, any other person may sue for and recover in tort treble the value thereof.
Whew... I'm beginning to despise lawyers... There MUST be an easier way to phrase that. I get so lost sometimes just trying to decipher what it's trying to say. I think I get *this* one, but has anyone here come up with a good method of reading legislative code meaningfully? They like to split open clauses and jam a bunch of stuff in, so that by the time I get to the end of the clause I've forgotten the beginning!
Whoever, by playing at cards, dice or other game, or by betting on the sides or hands of those gaming, loses to a person so playing or betting money or goods, and pays or delivers the same or any part thereof to the winner, or whoever pays or delivers money or other thing of value to another person for or in consideration of a lottery, policy or pool ticket, certificate, check or slip, or for or in consideration of a chance of drawing or obtaining any money, prize or other thing of value in a lottery or policy game, pool or combination, or other bet, may recover such money or the value of such goods in contract; and if he does not within three months after such loss, payment or delivery, without covin or collusion, prosecute such action with effet, any other person may sue for and recover in tort treble the value thereof.
Whew... I'm beginning to despise lawyers... There MUST be an easier way to phrase that. I get so lost sometimes just trying to decipher what it's trying to say. I think I get *this* one, but has anyone here come up with a good method of reading legislative code meaningfully? They like to split open clauses and jam a bunch of stuff in, so that by the time I get to the end of the clause I've forgotten the beginning!