I've since emended the question; 'commonly-available references' don't answer it. Why was it closed and deleted?
This was closed and deleted by members of the community. Maybe different members have a different view on this.
I've also read Proposal for narrowing the scope of the "reference" close vote.
Link to question: Recover against vs Recover from (it's been deleted, so it's visible only to 10k+ users and only 20k+ users can undelete it). This is the current, edited, text:
“Recover against” vs. “recover from”
From page 53 of Frederick Schauer’s Thinking Like a Lawyer:
If Judge Cardozo had said, “We hold that in all cases involving a nonbusiness consumer and a manufacturer of goods, the consumer may recover against the manufacturer for defects in manufacture. . . .”
Could anyone please explain why it is not recover from here? I’m struggling with the preposition in recover against. Since I’m not asking about the definition proper of recover against, ‘commonly-available references’ don't answer this question.
In general, if X wants to recuperate from or be compensated by Y, then wouldn’t X be recovering money or property from Y?
Doesn’t against denote X’s opposition to Y, which contradicts the fact that X wants something from Y?