Imagine you’re injured in a Walmart, and you bring a lawsuit. Your lawyer fights the good fight, and after years of litigation, the jury renders a just verdict. As you’re leaving the courtroom, Walmart’s lawyer turns to your lawyer and congratulates him, and then adds “by the way, you sued Walmart Corporation, but the company is named Walmart Inc. Good luck collecting on that verdict.”
GOTCHA!
Out of luck? No, of course not. The law recognizes that substance rules over form, and you will be allowed to amend the court papers so that your judgment is against Walmart Inc.
This past weekend, we saw one of the most bizarre plays in college football history. Utah against number three Oregon. From deep in its own territory, Utah’s quarterback finds Kaelin Clay on a deep route. Clay had split the defenders and was wide open. After catching the ball, Clay turned on the speed and outran everybody into the end zone. It’s a beautiful play, and Clay’s display of speed was really, as the cliché has it, dazzling.
There was just one problem. Clay released the football about a foot before he crossed the goal line. Although he had clearly beat the defenders and was about four yards in front of the closest Oregon player by the time he reached the end zone, technically he had “fumbled” the football and did not have possession of it when he “scored.” Eventually an Oregon player figured out what was going on, picked up the ball and ran the entire length of the field for an Oregon touchdown. Instead of Utah leading 14-0, the score was now tied.
Was this a just result? The rule is clear and the result is correct under a literal application of the rule. But we also know that sometimes strict application of the rules leads to an unjust result, as was plainly the case here. Clay had outplayed his opponents and his mistake had nothing to do with anything that matters. I would argue that, although he did not have actual, physical possession of the ball when he crossed the goal line, he certainly had virtual possession of it. There is no real excuse for Clay’s mental lapse, but, as the saying goes, no harm, no foul. His early release of the ball did not affect the reality of the play. He got in the open, he caught the football, and he outran his opponents to the end zone. He released the football, because that is what he is supposed to do when he crosses the goal line. His mistake, a matter of inches when running at high speed, was truly inconsequential. I say give the score to Utah.
But rules are rules, you say. Yes, but there are Rules, and there are rules. In baseball, there is an unwritten rule known as the “neighborhood rule.” On a force play at second base, if the infielder has the ball in the “neighborhood” of second base, the out will be called, even if the infielder does not actually touch the bag. While baseball officially denies the existence of the rule, we see it in application all the time.
Ultimately, I think that “GOTCHA” results are undesirable, whether in law, in life, or in sports. My heart goes out to young Mr. Clay. Fortunately, it’s just a game, and I hope he does not take it too hard. I, for one, think he’s enormously talented, and I wish him the best of luck.