Oregon Legal Research Blog
A Law Librarian Blog July 27, 2010, post was interesting on several counts:
1) Yes, the writer is correct. The error should be corrected.
2) Yes, the first Comment writer is also correct, as anyone with a long, detailed To Do List knows. We all have to rank those items in order of priority, but I refuse to throw the first stone at someone who has ordered their top priority items differently from how I would order them.
3) Yes, many non-attorneys and non-law librarians aren’t aware how many errors exist in official sources, let alone in unofficial sources of statutes, cases, and other primary sources of laws.
The lesson I would recommend you take here is to use this case (or blog post) as a “teachable moment” example (and there are many other examples of publication errors out there, from 1066 to the present if you want to include the last 1,000 years of Anglo-American law).