How a Missing Comma Sparked a Multi-Million Dollar Lawsuit

Most writers think of punctuation as a matter of style. Lawyers and judges know better. In statutes, contracts, and regulations, the humble comma can determine who wins a case, who gets paid, and how millions of dollars change hands.

One of the most famous recent examples is a wage-and-hour dispute where truck drivers claimed unpaid overtime because of the way a state law listed exempt activities—without using a serial (Oxford) comma. The court’s reading of that list, and the ambiguity created by the missing comma, helped tip the balance in favor of the workers.

This article explains what the serial comma is, why it matters so much in legal texts, how a single punctuation mark fueled a multi-million dollar fight, and what legal professionals can do to avoid similar disputes.

What Exactly Is the Serial (Oxford) Comma?

The serial comma, also called the Oxford comma, is the comma placed before the conjunction in a list of three or more items. It appears before words like and or or at the end of a series.

• With serial comma: “The statute applies to drivers, loaders, and packers.”

• Without serial comma: “The statute applies to drivers, loaders and packers.”

Many general-audience style guides treat this comma as optional. For example, journalistic styles following the Associated Press usually omit it to save space. By contrast, major academic and professional style manuals, such as The Chicago Manual of Style and APA, endorse using it consistently because it avoids ambiguity.

TRENDING

Mass Deportation and the Erosion of Civil Liberties

A comprehensive look at the shift in U.S. immigration policy, highlighting executive overreach, civil rights concer...

Rethinking School Safety: The Impact of Police on Students

Explore the profound effects of police in schools, the criminalization of adolescent behavior, and the urgent push ...

The Erosion of the American Welcome: U.S. Refugee Caps

Explore the systemic dismantling of the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program, the humanitarian toll of historically low ...

Read More

The Future of AI: Preventing a Big Tech Monopoly >

Why Commas Matter More in Law Than in Everyday Writing

In casual writing, readers can often infer the author’s meaning even if punctuation is loose. Legal texts are different. Statutes, regulations, contracts, and wills must operate predictably across thousands of situations and over many years. Courts lean heavily on the exact words and structure of the text when resolving disputes.

Several reasons explain why commas—especially the serial comma—carry so much weight in legal interpretation:

• Textual interpretation: Judges in many jurisdictions begin with the “plain meaning” of the text. If a list can be read in two plausible ways, punctuation (or the lack of it) can tip the balance.

• Legislative drafting manuals: Official drafting guides emphasize that lists in statutes should be clear and structurally consistent. For instance, a U.S. congressional drafting manual states that items in a series should all be separated by commas to avoid misreading.

• High financial stakes: A single comma can determine who owes tax, who qualifies for a regulatory exemption, or who is subject to overtime rules. Past cases include tariff disputes and wage claims worth millions of dollars.

• Difficulty predicting misreadings: Legal writing experts point out that drafters are often bad at anticipating how others might interpret their sentences. Bright-line rules like “always use the serial comma” reduce that risk.

The Famous Truck Drivers Case: When a Missing Comma Meant Millions

One of the most widely discussed punctuation disputes in recent years involved delivery drivers and a state’s overtime law. The law contained a list of activities that were exempt from overtime pay. The list was written without a serial comma, and the dispute centered on whether one of the items referred to a single combined activity or to two separate activities.

The drivers argued that the absence of the serial comma meant the statute did not clearly exempt their work from overtime. The employer argued that the legislature intended to exclude that category of work regardless of the comma. Because the statute was ambiguous, the court turned to interpretive principles and the protective purpose of overtime laws. The appellate court ultimately sided with the drivers, and the case was resolved with a substantial settlement.

Key Legal Lessons from the Dispute

• Punctuation can create true ambiguity: The court found that both readings of the list were grammatically plausible. That uncertainty opened the door to arguments about statutory purpose and legislative history.

• Remedial statutes are often read in favor of workers: Overtime laws are typically considered remedial. When text is ambiguous, some courts construe it in favor of employees, reinforcing the downside of unclear drafting.

• Drafting manuals matter: The state’s own legislative drafting manual discouraged use of the serial comma, which arguably contributed to the problem. Other drafting authorities explicitly endorse the opposite approach, precisely to avoid this kind of dispute.

• Litigation costs dwarf the effort of better drafting: Years of litigation, appeals, and a multi-million dollar resolution could potentially have been avoided by revising a single sentence or inserting one comma.

How the Serial Comma Prevents Ambiguity in Legal Lists

Legal writing guides repeatedly warn that omitting the serial comma can create three recurring ambiguities in complex texts.

1. Are the Final Two Items Separate or Combined?

Without a serial comma, it may be unclear whether the last two items are a single combined concept or two distinct categories.

• Ambiguous: “The license covers drilling, storage and transport.”

• Clear (two items): “The license covers drilling, storage, and transport.”

• Clear (combined final item): “The license covers drilling and storage, and transport.”

For regulatory lists and exemptions, that difference can decide whether an activity is regulated or exempt.

2. Does One Noun Phrase Modify the Others?

In lists where items are themselves phrases, missing commas can make it unclear whether one phrase modifies another.

• “The contract applies to suppliers of food, beverage and transportation services” could suggest that “beverage and transportation” form a single combined category, depending on context.

• Adding a serial comma—”food, beverage, and transportation services”—signals that these are three separate categories, each independently covered.

3. Which Item Does a Prepositional Phrase Modify?

Longer lists often end with a prepositional phrase that may attach to one item or to the entire list.

• “The statute protects owners, tenants and operators of facilities in coastal regions” can be read as protecting only operators in coastal regions—or as protecting all three categories if they are in those regions.

• Careful use of commas and, if needed, restructuring the sentence can clarify whether the prepositional phrase applies to all items or just the last one.

Guidance from Official Legislative Drafting Sources

Legal drafters do not have to invent punctuation policy from scratch. Several respected drafting authorities and official guides offer explicit advice.

• U.S. congressional drafting guidance instructs drafters to separate all items in a series with commas, including the final one, to ensure “clear and unambiguous” laws and to prevent misreading of lists.

• Specialized drafting manuals, such as those for legislative counsel offices, stress that internal consistency in how lists are constructed is critical. They caution that although popular writing sometimes drops the final comma, legislative drafting should not copy that practice because of the risk of misinterpretation.

• Legal writing commentators advocate simple bright-line rules: always use the serial comma unless you are required to follow a conflicting style system, such as a newspaper’s house style.

Best Practices for Lawyers and Legal Professionals

To avoid punctuation-driven disputes, consider adopting the following practical habits in your legal writing.

Adopt a Firm Default Rule

In most legal contexts, the safest default is:

• Always use the serial comma in any list of three or more items, whether in contracts, court filings, internal memos, or legislation drafts.

This consistency makes your documents easier for others to read and reduces the risk that one list is interpreted differently from another.

Check Every Critical List for Ambiguity

Before finalizing a document, perform a targeted review of all lists that carry legal consequences.

• Scan exemptions, definitions, and limitations sections for long lists.

• Ask whether anyone could plausibly treat the last two items as a single combined category.

• Consider reading the list aloud; natural pauses often correspond to where a comma should appear.

Restructure Overly Complex Sentences

Sometimes even a correctly used serial comma cannot fully rescue an overloaded sentence. When you see nested lists or stacked modifiers, it is often better to rewrite than to tinker.

• Break a long list into separate subsections or bullet points, especially in contracts or regulations.

• Use numbering—(1), (2), (3)—for conditions or exceptions that require precision.

• Define complex categories in a dedicated definitions section rather than packing them into one dense sentence.

Align House Style with Legal Risk

If your organization uses a general style guide that discourages the serial comma, consider carving out an explicit exception for legal content.

• Document a policy that contracts, policies, and any binding texts must use the serial comma.

• Train staff who draft legislation, employment policies, and external notices on this distinction.

Beyond One Lawsuit: Other Costly Comma Disputes

The truck drivers case was not the first time punctuation has had serious legal consequences. Historical and modern examples show that commas have affected treason convictions, customs tariffs, and other high-stakes issues.

• In the 19th century, a misplaced comma in a U.S. tariff statute allegedly caused a substantial revenue loss when certain imports were inadvertently exempted from duty.

• Courts have even examined whether a mark in a centuries-old statute was a comma, bracket, or a crease in the parchment when deciding how to interpret a treason law.

• Contemporary legal commentators regularly catalog litigation turning on commas in contracts allocating risk, defining insured parties, or specifying indemnity obligations.

Each of these disputes reinforces the same lesson: punctuation in legal instruments is not decorative. It is part of the operative language.

Practical Checklist: Commas in High-Risk Documents

When reviewing important legal documents, use this quick checklist to reduce comma-related risk:

• Serial comma policy: Have you applied the serial comma consistently to all lists of three or more items?

• Critical clauses: Have you paid special attention to lists in indemnity clauses, exclusions, exemptions, and definitions?

• Parallel structure: Are listed items grammatically parallel (all nouns, all gerunds, etc.) to reduce interpretive confusion?

• Read-aloud test: Does the sentence sound natural and unambiguous when read aloud?

• Alternative drafting: Could you convert a complex sentence into numbered subparagraphs to improve clarity?

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Q: What is the main argument for always using the serial comma in legal writing?

A: The central argument is risk reduction. Using the serial comma eliminates a common source of ambiguity about whether the last two items in a list form one combined category or two distinct ones. Legal writing authorities emphasize that including the comma never creates ambiguity, while omitting it sometimes does, which can be costly in litigation.

Q: Are there any situations where legal writers should omit the serial comma?

A: In legal contexts, the safest course is to always use it unless you are compelled by a binding style rule, such as court-mandated citation formats that explicitly prohibit it in specific locations. Even then, those restrictions rarely apply to the substantive text of contracts, statutes, or briefs. When in doubt, prioritize clarity over stylistic minimalism.

Q: How do courts treat punctuation when interpreting statutes?

A: Courts treat punctuation as part of the statutory text and consider it alongside grammar, context, and purpose. Some decisions note that punctuation cannot override clear substantive language, but when text is ambiguous, commas, semicolons, and other marks often influence which reading is more natural. Legislative drafting guides therefore stress careful and consistent punctuation to support the intended meaning.

Q: What should I do if a client’s existing contract uses inconsistent commas in lists?

A: First, identify any lists that could plausibly be read in more than one way—especially in critical provisions like indemnity, exclusions, or termination clauses. Where ambiguity is possible, consider a written amendment or addendum that clarifies the intended scope. Prospectively, negotiate updated templates that adopt a consistent serial comma policy and clearer list structure.

Q: Does using the serial comma slow down drafting?

A: Adding one comma in a list does not measurably slow down drafting, but it can substantially decrease the time and money spent later on interpretation disputes. Legal writing experts recommend adopting bright-line rules—such as always using the serial comma—to avoid the cognitive load of deciding case by case where to insert it.

Similar Articles

The Battle Over Banned Books in Military K-12 Schools

Mass Deportation and the Erosion of Civil Liberties

Rethinking School Safety: The Impact of Police on Students

The Erosion of the American Welcome: U.S. Refugee Caps

The Future of AI: Preventing a Big Tech Monopoly

The Shift to Probabilistic Computing: The End of Logic

Author

Sneha TeteBeauty & Lifestyle Writer

 

Sneha is a relationships and lifestyle writer with a strong foundation in applied linguistics and certified training in relationship coaching. She brings over five years of writing experience to waytolegal,  crafting thoughtful, research-driven content that empowers readers to build healthier relationships, boost emotional well-being, and embrace holistic living.

Read full bio of Sneha Tete