I get the chance to review a few pleadings and filings. I am persistently struck by the language that is used in some documents, prepared by otherwise apparently competent and careful attorneys. But there are errors that slip through. Some are easy to spot and others are perhaps more esoteric. The following was copied from a pleading filed in 2017 in a Florida workers' compensation case.
The timing is worth mentioning, 2017. The Florida Department of Labor and Employment Security (DLES) has not existed for almost 20 years. There was a time when the Office of Judges of Compensation Claims (OJCC) and the Division of Workers' Compensation (DWC) were each part of the DLES; the DWC performed the regulatory functions of Florida's system and the OJCC the adjudicatory functions.
That changed in 2001 when DLES was abolished. DLES no longer exists. Since 2001, the regulatory part of Florida workers' compensation, the Division of Workers' Compensation, has been part of the Florida Department of Financial Services. And, for the same 16-plus years the OJCC has been part of the Division of Administrative Hearings.
So, one wonders, why would an attorney prepare a pleading in 2017 that stipulates to the jurisdiction of "The Florida Department of Labor and Employment Security?"
A second error in this document is perhaps easier to spot, but perhaps we overlook it. There is a term recently coined for our ability to read words in which the letters are jumbled. It is referred to as typoglycemia, and has been the subject of many articles and posts. These suggest that your brain is able to skip over errors and rearrange letters. This allows you to read even when the letters are a jumble.
Some have suggested that this innate brain activity is the reason that proofreading can be such a challenge. The letters are transposed, the spelling is incorrect, but our brains just make sense of the word anyway and we skip over the mistake. Of course, spell check usually catches such errors, if it is used.
But while that explains a misplaced letter, that does not explain "Juristuction." Before you waste time and go look that up, no it is not a word. It is the amalgamation that is typed into this recently filed pleading, but it is not a word. But, possibly, even though this misspelling is more than a jumble of the correct letters, perhaps our proof-reading brains might skip over it due to our typoglycemia?
In the space of a few short lines, two glaring errors. One is arguably simpler than the other. Spell check should alert us to JURISTUCTION. That all-caps is intentional. The thinking machines that we have contrived, including word processing programs like Microsoft Word, often ignore misspellings if the words are in ALL CAPS. This may be a default of the program, and one that the user can change.
The user has to decide whether s/he wants to see the spell check stop on various all caps that are not misspellings but "acronyms and initialisms," which consumes proofing time. If one changes the word processor default regarding ALL CAPS, time will be spent on these. But, the alternative is to have Word continue to ignore ALL CAPS and thereby occasionally file something with an embarrassing misspelling like "juristuction." The user can choose. But the user that tells the machine not to help, is making a choice.
The DLES error cannot be blamed on spell check. This is more likely the result of our growing reliance on forms, and the ubiquitous "cut," "copy," and "paste" that make life so much simpler today (at our peril). We save documents, and when the time is right we lift that language and place it into a new document. We use this or that paragraph time and again, in document after document. And in doing so, we may refer to the Department of Labor and Employment Security 16 years after it ceased to exist.
Last year, I reviewed a motion filed in another case, which cited "Florida Rule of Workers' Compensation Procedure 4.045." This Blog has previously focused on procedural rules. The New Rules 2015 (October 2014) and Separation of Powers - An Interesting Analysis (February 2017) are two examples. But, since 2004, the "Florida Rules of Workers' Compensation Procedure" that were created by the Florida Supreme Court have not been in effect. The administrative rules, in Chapter 60Q, Florida Administrative Code, have been in effect for 13+ years. And yet, this attorney filed a 2017 motion referencing, relying upon, the former rules of yesteryear.
Last year, I reviewed a motion filed in another case, which cited "Florida Rule of Workers' Compensation Procedure 4.045." This Blog has previously focused on procedural rules. The New Rules 2015 (October 2014) and Separation of Powers - An Interesting Analysis (February 2017) are two examples. But, since 2004, the "Florida Rules of Workers' Compensation Procedure" that were created by the Florida Supreme Court have not been in effect. The administrative rules, in Chapter 60Q, Florida Administrative Code, have been in effect for 13+ years. And yet, this attorney filed a 2017 motion referencing, relying upon, the former rules of yesteryear.
What do the errors mean? It is possible that the errors demonstrate that someone simply does not care about their work. They may merely mean that someone is moving too fast in completing their daily tasks. They may indicate that although one cares a great deal about their work, she/he simply has more work than can be managed. Or, finally, it is possible that honest, simple, errors sometimes slip through despite our best efforts to review, proofread, and correct.
The point is not that we all make mistakes (I know I do). The better point instead is that we need to remain vigilant for these errors and mistakes. We need to correct our forms and pay attention to changes in law and rules. And, maybe we all need to slow down, to remember that software is no more infallible than we are, and to simply continue to focus on doing our best?