Legal Definitions - compare with

In legal writing, the phrase "compare with" serves as a clear instruction to the reader. It directs them to examine two or more referenced legal sources side-by-side. The purpose of this comparison is typically to highlight similarities, differences, or how these sources relate to the author's main point. This could involve showing conflicting legal interpretations, illustrating different applications of a rule, or demonstrating how a legal concept has evolved.

Here are some examples of how "compare with" is used:

• Example 1: Highlighting Conflicting Legal Interpretations

  Imagine a legal article discussing the responsibility of social media platforms for user-generated content. The author might write:

  "Legal scholars continue to debate the extent to which social media platforms are responsible for harmful content posted by users. Compare Smith v. TechCorp, 123 F.3d 456 (1st Cir. 2020) (holding a platform liable for failing to remove specific defamatory content after notification) with Jones v. GlobalNet, 789 F.3d 101 (9th Cir. 2021) (ruling that platforms generally have immunity for third-party content, even if notified)."

  Explanation: Here, "compare with" directs the reader to look at two different court decisions. By examining them together, the reader understands that different courts have reached different conclusions on a similar legal issue, illustrating a lack of uniform legal standard.

• Example 2: Illustrating a Legal Principle with Diverse Applications

  Consider a legal brief arguing that a contract is valid. The author might explain a core concept like "consideration" (something of value exchanged between parties) and then provide examples:

  "For a contract to be legally binding, both parties must exchange something of value, known as 'consideration.' This principle applies even when the value exchanged isn't monetary. Compare Johnson v. Acme Corp., 456 P.2d 789 (Cal. 1970) (establishing that a promise to perform a service can be valid consideration) with Green v. Blue Co., 112 N.E.2d 345 (N.Y. 1980) (finding that forbearance from pursuing a legal claim constitutes sufficient consideration)."

  Explanation: In this context, "compare with" helps the reader understand the broadness of the "consideration" principle by showing two different ways courts have recognized non-monetary exchanges as valid. It demonstrates the versatility of the legal concept.

• Example 3: Demonstrating the Evolution or Refinement of a Legal Standard

  Suppose a legal analysis is discussing who has the right to bring an environmental lawsuit, a concept known as "standing." The author might show how this standard has changed:

  "The ability of an individual or group to bring a lawsuit, known as 'standing,' often requires demonstrating direct harm. However, the interpretation of 'harm' can vary in environmental cases. Compare Sierra Club v. Morton, 405 U.S. 727 (1972) (requiring a direct injury to the plaintiff's aesthetic or recreational interests for standing) with Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992) (further clarifying and narrowing the requirements for environmental standing, emphasizing concrete and imminent injury)."

  Explanation: Here, "compare with" prompts the reader to examine two landmark Supreme Court cases. This comparison illustrates how the legal standard for "standing" in environmental cases evolved over time, becoming more stringent and specific in its requirements for demonstrating harm.