I don’t usually get a great deal of amusement from reading Michigan Supreme Court opinions, but today a passage in a recently released case made me laugh. In a case discussing the extent of the defense of self-defense and the defendant’s duty to retreat, the Court stated:

Michigan law imposes an affirmative obligation to retreat upon a nonagressor only in one narrow set of circumstances: A participant in voluntary mutual combat will not be justified in taking the life of another until he is deemed to have retreated as far as safely possible. One who is involved in a physical altercation in which he is a willing participant -- referred to at common law as a “sudden affray” or a “chance medley -- is required to take advantage of any reasonable and safe avenue of retreat before using deadly force against his adversary, should the altercation escalate into a deadly encounter.

Apparently, somewhere between the drafting and the typing, “melee” became “medley,” and no one further along in the editing process noticed the mistake. At least, that what I thought at first. But upon reflection, I considered that a chance medley -- particularly of the kind heard in airport lounge piano bars (but then, is there any other kind of medley?) -- could well have given rise to a doctrine of self-defense in the context of mutual affray. Perhaps the phrase is “chance medley.”

To my further delight, I have now learned that medley and melee are etymological cousins. From Webster’s:

medley [ME medle, fr MF meslee, mesdlee, medlee, fr fem. Of mesle, medle past part. Of mesler, mesdler, meddler to mix, quarrel, fight …] … 1 archaic: COMBAT, MELEE

So, it seems that the phrase -- if from sufficiently ancient authority -- might well be “chance medley,” although to my disappointment the opinion fails to cite the appropriate authority. Otherwise, the phrase manifests a serendipitous typo.