1. Steerpike

    Steerpike Felis amatus Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    11,494
    Likes Received:
    5,671
    Location:
    California, US

    When someone receives "notice..."

    Discussion in 'Word Mechanics' started by Steerpike, Jan 4, 2017.

    ...such as through legal service, for example, have they been "noticed" or "notified?"
     
  2. ChickenFreak

    ChickenFreak Contributing Member Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    10,607
    Likes Received:
    7,251
    I would've assumed "served."
     
    Steerpike and Brindy like this.
  3. Steerpike

    Steerpike Felis amatus Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    11,494
    Likes Received:
    5,671
    Location:
    California, US
    Yeah, that was my first thought. But I'm editing language in an agreement that refers to everything in terms of "notice," so I thought I might stay consistent by using a variation on that term. I hear litigation attorneys in the office talking about having "noticed" an opposing party (meaning they served notice), but I think that may just be slang, in which case I don't want to use it. I actually have "served" as a place holder. Maybe I'll just leave it that way. I think the meaning is certainly clear.
     
  4. ChickenFreak

    ChickenFreak Contributing Member Contributor

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    10,607
    Likes Received:
    7,251
    Maybe flip the grammar so you can use "received notice"?
     
    Steerpike likes this.
  5. Steerpike

    Steerpike Felis amatus Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2010
    Messages:
    11,494
    Likes Received:
    5,671
    Location:
    California, US
    That would work, but I'm leaning toward just using served. It's already such a wordy clause--goes on for almost half a page--that I hate to use three words (party who received notice) when one would do (party served).

    Thanks, CF!
     

Share This Page