2: Dry, Typos
The case that forms the basis of this text, DeWeerth v. Baldinger, is interesting, but the rest of it drags. I was significantly bored, for example, during the somewhat repititious discussion of common law in chapter 7, though perhaps this is just the nature of the material. Making things worse, however, are the grammatical errors and typos. My conservative estimate is at least 30 errors, more than I have ever encountered in a published text. Some of them appear to be caused by a lazy copy editor using spellcheck ("We has a general household insurance policy...", pp. 227). Others are just ridiculous, for example, "impressssionistic" on page 193. They are quite distracting, and are sometimes downright confusing, making the task of being attentive to the dry material more difficult.
|
