The Past Doesn’t Guarantee the Future
Consider this familiar statement:
Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
Note the singular/plural disagreement.
And consider this: In New York, attorneys who advertise a certain way are required to suspend a rule of grammar (agreement in number) when they do (advertise a certain way, that is).
____________
Take a look at the statement at the very bottom of this article. Does it satisfy the New York Bar Association’s requirement (which says “Any words or statements required by this rule to appear in an advertisement must be clearly legible and capable of being read by the average person . . . “)?
And what of PDF versions of this firm’s promotional materials? Don’t they need to carry the statement as well? As best I can tell, the New York Lawyer’s Code of Professional Responsibility makes no distinction between HTML and PDF versions of attorney advertisements.
____________
When this rule went into effect a year ago, it got some press. The Wall Street Journal’s Law Blog mentioned that attorney Eric Turkewitz discovered that most big law firms were ignoring the rule. At his blog, Turkewitz wrote:
“Despite New York’s new attorney disciplinary rules on advertising going into effect today, and despite months of discussion, most major law firms have apparently failed to comply.”
As best I can tell, Turkewitz is the only attorney in New York who gets the grammatical error in the rule. The Turkewitz Law Firm Web site includes the following:
Throughout this site you will see examples of cases we have handled. Since all cases are different, and legal authority may change from year to year, it is important to remember that prior results cannot and do not guarantee or predict similar outcomes with respect to any future matter, including yours, in which any lawyer or law firm may be retained.
Emphasis added.
14 February 2008 at 11:47
I don’t see a grammatical error here. There is no need for the number of the direct object to corrspond to the number of the subject.
Prior results (however numerous they may be) do not guarantee a similar outcome (for you, the reader, in your case).
14 February 2008 at 12:28
Then consider these statements:
“Last year, we lost a case and we won a case, but we don’t guarantee a similar outcome in your case.”
“Last year, we won 80% of our cases, but we don’t guarantee a similar outcome in your case.”
A similar outcome doesn’t agree in number with prior results. The result is a singular/plural disagreement.
14 February 2008 at 13:03
You have made up some additional facts that are inconsistent with the statement It also would not make sense to say that you won all your cases last year and that you therefore will win my case: it’s illogical.
I still don’t see a grammatical error.
14 February 2008 at 18:35
These aren’t additional facts. They’re examples of why the statement doesn’t work.
If prior results are varied, then you can’t treat them as one.
You could say, “that we’ve won cases similar to yours is no guarantee that we can win yours.”
That’s fine.
But you can’t say, “that we’ve won and lost cases similar to yours is no guarantee of a similar outcome in your case.”
That doesn’t make sense, does it?