The reader is left to wonder if perhaps she was a difficult taskmaster who was not very much liked by those with whom she worked. It would have been preferable for Hopkins to clear up the matter, one way or the other. While we may admire Hopkins boldness, tenacity, and patience, we also might well be discouraged from becoming involved in such a suit on account of what she experienced. Additionally, Hopkins accounts of her case tend to focus on legal maneuvering rather than the legal issues themselves. Finally, I would be remiss as a reviewer if I failed to point out a problem with this book that is the fault of the editor, not the author.
Some errors are so glaring as to reflect considerable carelessness and lack of attention to detail.
These two mistakes are simply symptomatic of the poor editing that is apparent throughout this book. The failure of the publisher to provide good editing detracts from the quality of the work. I am sure that among its readers will be not only scholars interested in the development of case law, but also those in the general population who want to know about the personal struggle in which one woman engaged.