Re:US Constitution – A Git repo with history of edits
by ska on Thursday October 24, 2019 @01:29PM
(#21346946)
That would be awfully difficult to have accepted by a judge.
Even if it was, proving intent would be very difficult - after all just because you introduced a change doesn't mean I agreed to it.
Often contract clauses start off in a "no way I would sign that" state, and may get carried along for a while as you are focused on different things. The fact it existed in the history is, by itself, pretty meaningless.
Re:US Constitution – A Git repo with history of edits
by gamblor956 on Thursday October 24, 2019 @10:48AM
(#21345192)
As a former litigator, I have never found a judge willing to accept such evidence into the record.
Not true, at least from the point of view of a litigator.
The changes to an agreement can be crucial, especially in the absence of an entire agreement clause. There are, of course, rules about using evidence outside the agreement to construe its meaning, but many exceptions to this rule exist - eg, mistake. The biggest exception is ambiguity, where previous additions/deletions serve to highlight what the parties' intentions were at the time of agreement.