WARNING: Legal dictionaries can be hazardous to your health

[Jerry Pitts]

Check this one out..... Is this true or what? Jerry Carlos

Black's Law Dictionary Revealed as Hoax

May 28, 2003 - 11:59

Montreal, PQ (Reuters) - Sarah Medhurst (nee Black) shocked journalists and legal scholars at a press conference held at the Black family estate Monday when she revealed that Black's Law Dictionary, a highly regarded legal reference text, was originally written as a joke by her eccentric great grandfather Henry Campbell Black.

Medhurst appeared unapologetic, suggesting that the Black family had never tried very hard to keep it a secret. "Have any of you actually taken the time to read it?" she asked, flipping open the renowned text.& nbsp; "Look at page 840 for instance. 'John-a-Nokes'? Or how about page 347? 'Correality - the quality or state of being correal." She then cast a challenging look around the room.

Medhurst admitted that the entire Black family has participated in the century-long ruse, working together to generate content for the ever-expanding text. She credits her Uncle Bertrand with developing one of their most successful filler techniques: "We created more than 30 new entries just by using the word 'actual'. Actual agency - see agency. Actual allegiance - see allegiance. Actual authority - see authority. And on and on - you get the idea."

Medhurst admits that the family started to get lazy in later editions, at times resorting to stealing terms from other dictionaries. "I remember one time my brother pulled 'Le Roi' (literally: "the king") right out of his French-English dictionary to meet the deadline for the 5th edition while on a three-week ski trip in the French Alps." She claims the ploy has been used sparingly, however, and that the family put a stop to the practice when her brother started bringing the Official Scrabble Dictionary to editorial meetings.

Henry Campbell Black had never intended - or even imagined - that his dictionary would become the authoritative source for legal terminology. "My great granddad had actually written the text for an upcoming firm skit night", Medhurst explains. "It was his way of showing how convoluted and, well, pompous the legal profession had become." The dictionary became an instant hit, however, and Henry Black's comedic intentions went unnoticed. When the money started to roll in, Black elected to pursue a highly lucrative career in legal publishing instead of becoming a marginally talented prop comic.

When asked why the family is revealing the fake after all this time, Medhurst stated that they had grown tired of living a lie, and were genuinely concerned that the universally accepted legal lexicon "is actually just a bunch of made-up gibberish." The family is asking that lawyers and students alike immediately dispose of any editions of Black's Law Dictionary into the nearest trash receptacle or recycle bin.

West Group, the current publisher of Black's, could not be reached for comment.

[palani]

Possibly anyone previously relying upon Blacks' Law Dictionary as a source of legal definitions might consider Marvel Comics as an alternative. After all, they have better pictures although the cover is not as pretty.

[LesActive]

The article itself is a hoax poking fun at how some definitions are circular. I remember seeing this same article last year on fark.com and it was from a satirical site, the link for which I can't locate at the moment.

While probably true in spirit it's not factual, sorry.

[David Merrill]

The article is far more likely the hoax;

"Have any of you actually taken the time to read it?" she asked, flipping open the renowned text.& nbsp; "Look at page 840 for instance. 'John-a-Nokes'? Or how about page 347? 'Correality - the quality or state of being correal." She then cast a challenging look around the room.

I opened mine and Page 840 is the Constitution after the dictionary. Page 347 is in the "J" area of the dictionary. Even a severe repagination would leave the "C"s far from Page 347.

But if you like conspiracy theories Pastor Standring had a video where he proclaimed the Black's Fifth the official law dictionary of the Crown Templars. His was the hardcover and mine is the paperback. He cited a document found at the back of the dictionary - apparently only found in the hardcover edition though...

Get this; This is really true. I found mine at a used bookstore downtown. I took it to the counter and the clerk would not sell it to me! He was trying to tell me that only lawyers could buy that edition! I was so flabberghasted that I think that scared him more than anything. I don't even remember arguing my point, what I said so long ago. This was when I was just awakening to reality of law in about 1992. But in a few minutes he sold it to me.

He has worked at that bookstore so long people call him "Bookstore Guy". Next time I see him I will ask if he recalls that moment.


Regards,

David Merrill.

[Livefire]

Originally Posted by palani

Possibly anyone previously relying upon Blacks' Law Dictionary as a source of legal definitions might consider Marvel Comics as an alternative. After all, they have better pictures although the cover is not as pretty.

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

[Jerry Pitts]

I have to concur with the general consensus of this forum. It is the article which bears the privileged title of 'hoax'. I also looked at my Blacks fourth and found the same inconsistencies. The point of my bringing it up, was for the sole purpose of levity. Hope you all enjoyed this little humor.

Jerry Carlos

[David Merrill]

This is no hoax!

http://www.suijuris.net/forum/office...tml#post136491



P.S. Suitors often give me an early Headsup!

Thanx, TrueName:

David Merrill <sanitized> wrote:
Something has gone south about this article.

I tried the pages and 840 is the Constitution at the end - after the dictionary. Page 347 is in the "J"s. As likely as this article being true is Pastor Standring's opinion that the Black's - especially Black's Fifth is a law dictionary of the British Crown. But mine is the paperback and he was saying that you have that proof in the back of the hardcover. In the video he was boasting his hardcover and talking about some sort of dedicatory paper.

That would support hoax articles like below - the Bar hoping people would discard their Black's Fifth Editions anyway...


-----Original Message-----
From: handle [mailto: sanitized]
Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 11:37 AM
To:
Subject: Blacks Law Dictionary a hoax


This from Legal Name of the Lawmen



I ran across this interesting story about the Black’s Law Dictionary. Some have said that it constitutes a dictionary of commercial terminology since the practice of law amounts to nothing more than a commercial activity. Many people consider it as the authority on legal definitions. But according to the below story, the original author intended it as a hoax. Read the story, browse the dictionary (you can get a venerable 5th edition for as little as $10 or $15 on http://half.ebay.com).


Black's Law Dictionary Revealed as Hoax
Followed by the same article...

[protrust]

This is absolutely amazing! While there are other legal references such as Barron's, Bovier's, etc....Black's has long been a standard legal reference. I guess thats why in the hardcover edition I have the legal definitions are also supported by supreme court cites ascertaining the intent of the definitions therein described. Feel free to confirm the supreme court cites as I have...enough said.

[Shoonra]

I suspect this story is, itself, a put-on.
Henry Campbell Black (1860-1927) was a law teacher and writer, the author of more than 20 leading treatises on various legal topics.

The first edition of his Law Dictionary was published by West in 1891; the second edition, which H.C. Black revised, published by West in 1910. I have seen copies of both the first and second editions and, although I didn't go over them thoroughly, they seemed to be sober and serious. The third edition came out in 1933 (six years after H.C. Black's death), and is attributed to "the Publisher's Editorial Staff", -- it does NOT contain "correality" or "john-a-noakes" (but it turns out that, even before Black's first edition, Brewer's Dictionary of Phrase and Fable mentioned "John-o-Noakes" as an invented name used in medieval England to describe legal situations, much like John Doe and Richard Roe) and it has only seven definitions of phrases beginning with the word "actual" and all seven seem justified. The fourth and fifth editions were similarly revised by "the Publisher's Editorial Staff." The two most recent editions have been attributed to named editors, who had previously worked on other law dictionaries.

The first three or four editions were heavy with obsolete legal expressions, including expressions from medieval English legal history, Norman French, Law Latin, canon law, and the like. An article in the Green Bag, Autumn 1998, mentions that Black's Law Dictionary brought in legal expressions of several foreign or ethnic legal systems, including Jewish, Hindu, and Saxon. These were gradually weeded out in or after the third edition.

[lawstuff]

I saw the post and started to laugh but then I actually called West.

I reached the publicity department for their products. They have no comment and will not talk about it.

It is really easy to just say it is not true. But that was not their answer.

Further, I then went to Reuters and tried to verify the news article. Of course they are now owned by Thompson which of course owns West.

Talk about a run around and run around. It should be a matter of a few seconds to verify the release from their archives. They took one look at the article and sent me to department after department and that was a week ago. No replies to emails either.

Sure is a very strange response from both of the parties for an article that is supposed to be a hoax.