2 ms·

It all depends on terminology. He might have been breaking the intent of the rules but wasn't technically because the rules weren't properly specified. If an

It all depends on terminology. He might have been breaking the intent of the rules but wasn't technically because the rules weren't properly specified. If an online merchant mistakenly lists an item for 1% of what it's worth by misplacing a decimal point and I buy it for 99% off, did I steal it? Would they be within their rights to cancel the order? It's not immediately clear to me. What if everything was properly marked but someone stole the sign? Clearly he shouldn't be held accountable and the city should be forced to not only drop it but also correct the missing signage problem. But in that case the city isn't obviously wrong to ticket him in the first place; unless knowing the ins and outs of all the relevant laws is the base level of expectation for the people writing these tickets. I'd like it to be, but experience suggests that I'm a fool for wishing for that.

mikeash 12y ago
Cities will nail you on technicalities, so it's only fair to nail them on technicalities too. I'm sure we've all heard stories of people going to a pay station after parking and coming back to a ticket, or getting a ticket at four hours plus one minute as they're getting into the car, or what have you. In any case, the courts are the final arbiter of the rules. They decide what is and isn't legal. Since he got these tickets dismissed, that means that he was within the intent or the letter or whatever part matters of the law. For your hypothetical case of a accidental 99% sale, if the case went to court and the judge rendered a verdict, you'd have an ironclad answer to your question of who was right, legally speaking. Here, it did go to court and the judge did render a verdict, so we don't have to wonder.