Pi v. Delta

Dave Hoffman

Dave Hoffman is the Murray Shusterman Professor of Transactional and Business Law at Temple Law School. He specializes in law and psychology, contracts, and quantitative analysis of civil procedure. He currently teaches contracts, civil procedure, corporations, and law and economics.

You may also like...

4 Responses

  1. I was under the impression that the usual abbeviation for plaintiff was Π rather than &pi — at least, all of the examples I’ve seen written out on blackboards used it. (Me, I just write P and D when time or space is short.) The upper case is consistent with the use of Δ rather than δ.

  2. Bruce Boyden says:

    Yeah, what a trial that was too. Pi’s counsel never finished her opening statement, which went on and on irrationally while never repeating. Delta’s counsel just kept reminiscing about how things used to be…

  3. Nate Oman says:

    I had always assumed that it was because pi makes a p sound as in “plaintiff” and delta makes a d sound as in “defendant” and lawyers are fond of pointless pseudo-erudition as in “res ipsa loquitor.” I know that I am certainly fond of pointless pseudo-erudition.

  4. shamu says:

    i also think that pseudo-erudition is the cause, namely as part of a concerted attempt in the early-mid 20th century to stack up to the ‘hard’ sciences.