WARNING: Legal dictionaries can be hazardous to your health

[Shoonra]

I have found several repetitions of the supposed Reuters newsclipping on the internet, but none from a newspaper-type source, just websites not very different from SuiJuris. Nor was this "press conference" reported by any other news source. Nor has this Sarah Medhurst otherwise shown up on the internet. Only this, the same exact words attributed to that one purported Reuters article, copied a bunch of times.

There are a bundle of reliable or impartial websites that would have picked up on this if it were authentic, but apparently none of that sort did. So I suspect that the "Reuters" report is a fake (and not really from Reuters), repeatedly picked up and reprinted by gullible websites.

The first and second editions of Black's LD have been reprinted in recent years by another publisher. I imagine copies of the first and second editions, either the West originals or the photoreprints, are to be found in law school libraries all over, so someone can check and see if things are quite as claimed in the supposed Reuters article. However, judging from another thread on SuiJuris, you cannot trust everyone to quote Black's accurately.

[Jerry Pitts]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

I imagine copies of the first and second editions, either the West originals or the photoreprints, are to be found in law school libraries all over, so someone can check and see if things are quite as claimed in the supposed Reuters article. However, judging from another thread on SuiJuris, you cannot trust everyone to quote Black's accurately.

Judging from reading many case law reports printed by the authority of the United States Supreme Court, you cannot trust what that court says, when in FACT that court and the lesser courts refuse to print citations from alleged cases that are allegedly relevant to the case at hand where the citation s were withheld. To wit: "Citation withheld"

Jerry Carlos
Ambassador of Jesus, the Christ.

[Soldier of Truth]

They probably don't want to waste their time answering questions. I suspect it to be fraud.

[weishaupt1776]

It's a hegelian dialectic at work, folks

they made up the article

they don't like us using the defs out of vol 1-6 to rub their nose in the law

they have been "revising" (i.e. redacting helpful definions and case cites) the dictionaries so much that now they just say it's always been a joke?

[Shoonra]

Originally Posted by Jerry Pitts

.... you cannot trust what that {Supreme Court} court says, when in FACT that court and the lesser courts refuse to print citations from alleged cases that are allegedly relevant to the case at hand where the citation s were withheld. To wit: "Citation withheld"

I don't recall - perhaps you can provide an example - seeing a US Supreme Court decision that says "citation withheld".

On the other hand, I have seen, often, "citation omitted" -- but used only when quoting verbatim from something, usually an earlier court decision, which is itself identified and which can be looked up to find all the citations that were glossed over in the court's quotation.

Not so much a "refusal" as just skipping distracting details when making a quotation.

[Jerry Pitts]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

I don't recall - perhaps you can provide an example - seeing a US Supreme Court decision that says "citation withheld".

On the other hand, I have seen, often, "citation omitted" -- but used only when quoting verbatim from something, usually an earlier court decision, which is itself identified and which can be looked up to find all the citations that were glossed over in the court's quotation.

Not so much a "refusal" as just skipping distracting details when making a quotation.

Is that the best you can do shoonra? 'Withheld', 'omitted', what is the difference? Is the citation available in those cases? More often than not, when the expression is used by the courts, they don't even reference the case name.

Jerry Carlos

[Steel]

Originally Posted by Livefire

Does that mean the judge will say "It's clobberin' time!!!" instead of "Will the defendant please rise" at sentencing time???

lol,not, I had a Judge announce one of my cases by saying "Lets Roll this one" I later looked up "roll" one definition is "to rob by force"

In reguards to Blacks Law I have 6th & 7th, 6th is much more interesting than 7th, both where written by men with degrees MA "Master of Arts" the meaning of that alone could be Epic

[Shoonra]

Originally Posted by Jerry Pitts

Is that the best you can do shoonra? 'Withheld', 'omitted', what is the difference? Is the citation available in those cases? More often than not, when the expression is used by the courts, they don't even reference the case name.

Yes there's a difference. Omission is an accepted part of writing and is mentioned, for example, in the notorious Bluebook, which guides most American judges and lawyers in their citation style.

You had said the US Supreme Court says "citation withheld". Please provide an example (or two) because, as I said, I don't seeing them do that.

[Jerry Pitts]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

Yes there's a difference. Omission is an accepted part of writing and is mentioned, for example, in the notorious Bluebook, which guides most American judges and lawyers in their citation style.

You had said the US Supreme Court says "citation withheld". Please provide an example (or two) because, as I said, I don't seeing them do that.

Because there is no existing definition for either ‘withheld’ or ‘omitted’ as stand alone words, then there is no choice but to rely on the ‘common dictionary’ definition for both terms:

omitted
modif.
left out, overlooked, neglected, missing, wanting, slighted, unmentioned, unnamed, not included, uninserted, absent, not present, unnoted, unnoticed, voided, lacking, ignored, withheld, excluded, disregarded, passed over, passed by, counted out, excepted, repudiated, barred, rejected, canceled, cut out, excised, deleted, dropped, precluded, prohibited, kept out; see also missed 1, neglected.


withheld
modif.
concealed, held back, hidden, checked, restrained, delayed, denied, kept on leash, on ice*.

Therefore; MR LEGAL MIND, as you can see above, they are synonymous in meaning. Take your pick of which ever synonym you desire… it all has the same meaning.

Jerry Carlos
Ambassador of Jesus, the Christ.

Here is one of your examples… also learn the English language then you might be able to comprehend what some of the people on this site are saying to you. Bluebook, you mean that judges and lawyers have special hidden textual documents that they use in determining the outcome of a case? Hmmmm.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/script...s/544/709.html

[Shoonra]

Your example was of "citation omitted" -- NOT, as you had originally claimed, "withheld". Except for one quotation from the govt's brief (which is available through many law libaries, some publishers and internet services), these instances of "citation omitted" were also used in quotations from earlier court decisions whose own citations were clearly provided so someone with sufficient curiousity could look up the original quotation with all of its embedded citations.