Uberrimae Fidei, Back in the News:
From Judge Kozinski's opinion yesterday in New Hampshire Ins. Co. v. C'Est Moi, Inc.:
We consider the doctrine that’s on everyone’s lips: uberrimae fidei.
For more on this, see here. Thanks to James S. Tyre for the pointer.
Related Posts (on one page):
- Uberrimae Fidei, Back in the News:
- Uberrimae Fidei:
I half expect the 11th to respond, pointing upwards, "Scoreboard!"
Are there any Latin scholars in this thread who can say how it is meant to be pronounced?
@Mrs L: Based on a recommendation in a comment on this blog, I read A.P. Herbert's Uncommon Law this week. It also contains a chapter on the pronunciation of latin, with a judge and a barrister misunderstanding each other due to their different ideas about latin pronunciation. Having taken latin in high school but not since, I'd have to say that the pronunciation of latin differs greatly from country to country, and, especially for lawyer's latin, usually has little connection to the way the Romans might have pronounced it. (No one knows, that's one of the problems.)
That said, ae is pronounced ai, and for the rest I would say that fidei is pronounced as having three sillables, so fi/de/i, although I guess fi/dei would also be ok, and the u is anybody's guess, although I think I would pronounce it as in the German ü, so short.
Good luck.
[Important Note to Helpful Readers: If we have confusing typos and especially ugly formatting errors, such as an unclosed underline or bold tag, we'd love to hear from you about them -- but please e-mail the author about this, rather than leaving a comment. We often won't read the comments for a while after the post, and if there's a glaring formatting error, we'd see it quickly when we revisit the post, even without the comment; and in any event the comment likely isn't going to be that helpful to your fellow comment readers. So please e-mail us directly about glitches like this. Thanks!]
Comment Policy: We'd like the posts to be civil, of course (no profanity, personal insults, and the like), but we're also hoping that people try to be as calm, reasoned, and substantive as possible. So please, also avoid rants, invective, substantial and repeated exaggeration, and radical departures from the topic of the thread. Sticking with substance -- and staying on-topic -- will make the comments more helpful to other readers, and more pleasant.
As editors, we reserve the right to delete posts, and even to kick out posters, though we hope that both of these will be exceptional events. (We also reserve the right to be busy with other things, and therefore (1) not remove all the posts that might merit removal, and (2) ignore demands such as "You should remove A's posts, because they're just as bad as B's!")
Here's a tip: Reread your post, and think of what people would think if you said this over dinner. If you think people would view you as a crank, a blowhard, or as someone who vastly overdoes it on the hyperbole, rewrite your post before hitting enter.
And if you think this is the other people's fault -- you're one of the few who sees the world clearly, but fools wrongly view you as a crank, a blowhard, or as someone who overdoes it on the hyperbole -- then you should still rewrite your post before hitting enter. After all, if you're one of the few who sees the world clearly, then surely it's especially important that you frame your arguments in a way that is persuasive and as unalienating as possible, even to fools.
Our goal is to provide an interesting and pleasant environment that can help inform readers. To do that, we'll occasionally have to exercise our editorial discretion. Think of this as an in-person discussion group, where having different voices is critical to a great conversation -- but where sometimes the leader has to deal with cranks who sour the conversation more than they enliven it.
Naturally, there's always a risk that this discretion will be used erroneously, no matter how well-intentioned the editor. But discussion groups (especially on the Internet, but also off it) generally need an editor who'll occasionally make such judgments.
And, remember, it's a big Internet. If you think we were mistaken in removing your post (or, in extreme cases, in removing you) -- or if you prefer a more free-for-all approach -- there are surely plenty of ways you can still get your views out.