[gnabgib]

Discussion yesterday:[0](76 points, 25 comments)

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40043949

[Swenrekcah → gnabgib]

Thanks, this article is incredibly poorly written.

The top comment (by danielvf) in the linked thread explains the whole situation much better.

[bsimpson → gnabgib]

Better link too.

The Register has such a heavy style that I can't always understand what they're trying to say.

[eyelidlessness]

It seems weird to say that filing anything incorrectly doesn’t constitute “procedural irregularity”. I don’t know, maybe that’s a specific term of law in this particular jurisdiction, but if that’s the case it doesn’t seem to mean anything close to what the actual words mean.

[uejfiweun]

I assume the couple will be able to sue for malpractice?

[LoganDark]

Who was supposed to get divorced instead of this couple? Like, what was supposed to happen before the error was made?