meet versus meet with

[Indec]

Which of the following is correct, please?

"I met Peter to discuss our project yesterday"
"I met with Peter to discuss our project yesterday"

Thanks.

[jlinger]

Both. We had this discussion with Join vs Join with. The "with" is inherent in the "met" so it is not necessary, in fact it is redundant, but it is still common and correct usage.

[David L.]

In Brit. Eng., 'met' means to come into someone's company by chance, or arrangement.

Hence, "Guess who(m) I met in the street today?" = 'guess who I bumped into?'
"They met to discuss the project."

If you say, 'met with' then it indicates a formal, arranged meeting.
"The Chancellor of the Exchequer met with the Prime Minister today for top level talks on the crisis in the economy."

You could use 'met with' in your sentence, if this meeting had some importance/formality and you don't interact with Paul most of the time, so that this meeting had to be arranged. Other instances in an ordinary work situation might be ' the Union Rep. met with management, as the Union is protesting the firing of a worker'; and 'Human Resources met with an employee about a disciplinary matter.'