In my law practice, I just received a brief with the following statement:

Plaintiffs misapprehend that only the Director may issue a final administrative decision.

I'm not sure what the means. Does it mean:

1. Plaintiffs don't realize that the Director is the only person who may issue a final administrative decision.
2. Plaintiffs mistakenly think that only the Director may issue a final administrative decision.

In other words, does it mean:

1. The Director is the only person who may this. (Plaintiffs believe others may do so, but Plaintiffs' such belief is mistaken.)
2. Plaintiffs believe that the Director is the only person who may this. Bub that belief is mistaken; others may also do so.

You'll notice that the two meanings are diametrically opposite.

Ask them which usage they want to use. Then hope they'll answer you.

I believe that "misaprehend" means the same as "misinterpret". In other words, it is the wrong word to use in that sentence.

My guess is that they really mean is that plaintiffs don't realise that the Director is the only person who may issue a final administrative decisio - but decided to use a clever-sounding word rather than the correct word.

According to MW, misapprehend means to misunderstand. But I think the real problem is not the word but the wording. It certainly could have been made more comprehensible very easily but then there wouldn't be anything to justify the high cost of litigating the wording.

I agree with the other posts. The best way to find out is to contact the writer of the brief for clarification. Or, perhaps, ask the plaintiffs what they actually think.

I read it to mean that the plaintiffs did not understand that only the director could make a final administrative decision. Does the matter being litigated clarify it any? Did some underling go against the director's final administrative decision?

You could always write back that the defense misapprehends the meaning of "misapprehend" and see what they do then.

Wordmatic