Why do lawyers often repeat numbers in parentheses? (i.e.,"I have two (2) cars.")Isn't it redundant?

Question

Many people do this, but it most often seems to be lawyers. I can find no grammatical justicfication for this in any of my style guides or online. I imagine most people would assume that it's to avoid confusion, but do numbers that are spelled out really need to be clarified with a numeral? I've been a professional writer for 10 years and have never found a sufficient answer for why this practice originated.

Answer 1

Yes, but lawyers are creatures of habit. If something works, we tend to repeat it, regardless of inefficiency. After all, if we know the courts will recognize something, why mess with it and add risk over a few keystrokes? At worst, it's just "belt and suspenders". Our goal is to protect our client and serve their interests. If something is redundant, repetitive, or boring, it doesn't really matter so long as it is legal, enforceable, and otherwise serves our client's need. Remember, our purposes for preparing documents are often very different from other writers! And with numbers, we often want certainty- what if the document weren't well cared for and it was tough to see if that was a 5 or an 8 typed there? Remote chance, perhaps, but better safe than sorry, eh? But what if a certain state's law required a numeral while another requires the written word? I think most clients would prefer their lawyer to cover as many risks as possible, even if remote. So long as it doesn't incur unreasonable expense, of course. ;-)

Answer 2

For the best answers, search on this site https://shorturl.im/avnm1

I wrote a little PHP script for this, and from 1000 to 8000, the only useless numbers are: 1004, 1038, 1052, 1073, 1077, 1086, 1090, 1209, 1214, and 1522 Answer to question: 1522 I also had the script fish out the first time a larger width occurred: Format is Width: Sum 1: 1 2: 5 = 1² + 2² 3: 14 = 1² + 2² + 3² 4: 30 = 1² + 2² + 3² + 4² 5: 55 = 1² + 2² + 3² + 4² + 5² 6: 109 = 1² + 2² + 3³ + 4² + 5² + 6² 7: 140 = 1² + 2² + 3² + 4² + 5² + 6² + 7² 8: 222 = 1² + 2² + 3³ + 4² + 5² + 6² + 7² + 8² 9: 285 = 1² + 2² + 3² + 4² + 5² + 6² + 7² + 8² + 9² 10: 507 = 1² + 2³ + 3³ + 4² + 5³ + 6² + 7² + 8² + 9² + 10² 11: 558 = 1² + 2³ + 3² + 4³ + 5² + 6² + 7² + 8² + 9² + 10² + 11² 12: 698 = 1² + 2² + 3² + 4³ + 5² + 6² + 7² + 8² + 9² + 10² + 11² + 12² 13: 823 = 1² + 2³ + 3² + 4² + 5² + 6² + 7² + 8² + 9² + 10² + 11² + 12² + 13² 15: 1538 = 1² + 2² + 3³ + 4² + 5³ + 6³ + 7² + 8² + 9² + 10² + 11² + 12² + 13² + 14² + 15² Vikram: Assuming I want to check all possibilities from 1 to sumLim, I made an array, a23 (23 indicates squares and cubes) indexed from 1 to sqrt(sumLim)+1. At each index, idx, of a23, I compute both the square and cube of idx. Now I have an array, aList, which I start off with a single element, the subarray [1, 1, 1, 0]. Each additional element of aList will be a subarray with values [currentSum, startingIndex, currentIndex, binarySpec]. binarySpec is a bit string encoding whether each element of the sum sequence is squared or cubed. The width is given by currentIndex+1-startingIndex. I set idx to the first position of aList, and now have a while loop to continue until idx has gone past the end of aList. I'll look at the element at the idx position of aList. I'll looks at the currentIndex, add one to that for the next index, and then add both the square and the cube of that to the currentSum. If I don't exceed sumLimit, then I'll append the newly generated element or elements (square, possibly a cube, too) to aList. In this fashion I generate all elements that don't exceed sumLimit. If I were industrious, I would prune my data structure so that if I get identical sums with identical currentIndex values, then I throw the second one away. Between 8000 and 10000 as sumLimit, my machine's memory gets exhausted. Update: I did not state what the above widths represent quite correctly. They should be the first time that a larger width occurs that is not also expressable as a smaller width sum. For example, 91 is the first time that width 6 occurs, but 91 is also a width 2 number as 91=3³+4³. I've also redone my code so that it can check from 1 to 80000 is about 2 minutes. It uses the same idea as above (index based on the sum), only I check for sums in the order 1 to sumLimit in order (as opposed to just sequencing through the entries in the order that they are inserted). Also, each entry is itself an array where the index gives the last integer that was squared or cubed to obtain the sum. The entries for each such index element are the starting integer (that was squared or cubed toward the sum) and the bit spec saying whether to square or cube each integer in the sequence. These entries are only used if one want to extract the specific sum used to get to a number. Once I've checked for a given sum size (and generated any additional higher sums which I'll later check), I remove that element from the array. Keeping the list of sums "clean" this way evidently results in this massive speedup. Also, I found something very interesting. Above 2221 it is the case that every number I checked (to 80000) is useful in at least two ways (specifically, that largest integer that is squared or cubed toward the sum is different in the two sums) Michael: I've found a width 185 way for 22223823: Sum of first 185 squares except that 3, 4, 6, 7, 19, and 45 are cubed and not squared. Width 195 way for 2596479: Sum of the squares of the integers from 2 to 196 except that 2, 5, 7, 9, 15, 47 are cubed and not squared.

Answer 3

This Site Might Help You.

RE:
Why do lawyers often repeat numbers in parentheses? (i.e.,"I have two (2) cars.")Isn't it redundant?
Many people do this, but it most often seems to be lawyers. I can find no grammatical justicfication for this in any of my style guides or online. I imagine most people would assume that it's to avoid confusion, but do numbers that are spelled out really need to be clarified with a numeral?...

Answer 4

Most of the time it's because the lawyers are required by the court system to do it that way. Everyone else just adopted the tradition from the lawyers. They figure it's as good a way to do it as any. The courts require it just for extra confirmation. Some people may see two instead of ten, or vice versa. Especially if they are reading really fast. It's simply a precautionary, or so I was told when I worked in a legal department of a business.

Answer 5

Numbers In Parentheses

Answer 6

Here are some possibilities. I prefer #3, actually. I think you might as well ask why they spell out the number instead of just using numerals.

1. It is more difficult to change/falsify a document if the number is written in both numerals and words, such as on checks.
2. We are used to seeing numerals, so adding the numeral after the word/s makes it easier to comprehend just how many of the thing we are talking about.
3. When scanning a document for certain information, it is easier to pick out a number written in numeral form than in word form.
4. A typo could significantly change the meaning of a numeral. A typo in a spelled word wouldn't change it as much.

Answer 7

The same reason when you write out a check you write the amount in numerals and then in words. That way there is no confusion as to what number you are referring to at the time.

Answer 8

I guess it is done to make sure that people who cannot read numbers may recognize the number... But if they cannot read numbers they probably cant read the rest of whatever they are trying to look at anyway.

Answer 9

The justification is that it needs to be written out in a legal contract, like writing a check. You have the numeric amount in there which makes it easier for the one recieving the check, but the bank has to go on what is written out.

Answer 10

It is done so there should be no mistake of the numbers..it is therefor repeaten in numbers or letters..
John