logoalt Hacker News

piker • today at 10:07 AM • 4 replies • view on HN

Yes. I noted this below. A lot of times you see a decimal point in the wrong place and the courts don't just say "oh well, I guess it's a billion then!"

The rulings are fact-specific, but clearly both parties here had a mutual understanding that the paper was only meant to reflect.


Replies

LanceH • today at 3:08 PM

This is a little different though. The intent was for that amount of shares. So the amount isn't in question, just the vesting schedule. While the schedule may be non-standard, it isn't beyond belief (like 4 days). Also, years to quarters isn't a single typo like punctuation.

➕ show 2 replies
pinchydev • today at 12:42 PM

Not a decimal point, but the courts have shown deference to a comma (or lack there of in the case below) and has resulted in companies paying millions…

https://lawfold.com/oxford-comma-lawsuit/

➕ show 3 replies
mywittyname • today at 2:53 PM

This isn't an "obvious" clerical mistake though. It's common for option schedules to be unique. I could absolutely see a person whose work is supposed to go on for about a year being given a schedule commensurate with that timeline.

As for sitting on it for 30 years. Lawyers are expensive - more than the cost to resolve the issue 30 years ago, but given the recent stock climb, it's now more than worth it.

I would have sued.

➕ show 1 reply
59percentmore • today at 12:01 PM

I think you could forgive people for thinking so, in a society where people get sent to prison for decades on the subjective read of technicalities (and subsequently released early when advocacy bashes the government's head against its own injustice for long enough; of course, at that point, the judge is retired or dead and the prosecutor has had a long, successful career, so everyone wins! /s).

Same for contracts where the written language is absurd, and the agreement one party claims without the necessary evidence is way more reasonable, and the court finds in favor of the absurd contract.