The court held that while there were inappropriate irregularities in the order, none were of sufficient import to justify striking it out. What was important, according to the court at paragraph 14 was: ... As I read the authorities the main thing is to assure that no one is misled even though he or she might be momentarily puzzled. One is not "left to guess what is meant" as was Wilson J. in Knowles v. Peter. The court therefore allowed the order to stand.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.