• Home
  • About Me
  • Disclaimer

The Researching Paralegal

~ Articles and Research for Legal Professionals

The Researching Paralegal

Category Archives: Appellate Writing

A Fairy Tale Brief Teaches Clarity and Form, by Stephanie R. Williams, Appellate Advocacy Blog

21 Saturday Nov 2020

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Writing, Legal Writing

≈ Comments Off on A Fairy Tale Brief Teaches Clarity and Form, by Stephanie R. Williams, Appellate Advocacy Blog

Tags

Appellate Advocacy Blog, Stephanie R. Williams

https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/appellate_advocacy/2020/09/a-fairy-tale-brief-teaches-clarity-and-form.html

While clear legal writing is important regardless of the document, it is essential in state and federal appellate cases. Rarely do the parties argue the case before the court. They must rely on their briefs and the record to win.

This humorous example from the Appellate Advocacy Blog shows, among other things, how to write your fact statements clearly and concisely. When judges read briefs, they appreciate the writer who gets to the point and supports the facts with a clear and convincing argument of relevant statutes and case law.

This is why editing your writing is so important. Get your thoughts down in writing. Organize it so that the reader is led through a logical flow of the facts and the argument. In appellate briefs, the format for citations to the record and all other citations format always is always set by court rules.

Go back through your document. Remove all unnecessary words and hyperbole. For example, “in order” can always be deleted.  Some repetition is acceptable. Constant repetition is not. The court will “get it.” Good legal writing is also good story telling.

One of the best writing exercises I can recommend is to rewrite something that is poorly written. It can be anything. If you cannot find something, go to the Internal Revenue Code. You should find plenty of fodder there.  Follow the rule of short – short sentences and short paragraphs. Delete all unnecessary words and legalese. Sensitize yourself to verbosity.

Now, a word of caution. If you are the only author of the document that will bear your name, you have complete control over how it is written. If, however, you are writing for your boss, here is where you need to use good judgment. You may hate legalese, but your boss has certain archaic phrases that he or she use in every document because it just makes it “sound right.” I would not recommend editing someone else’s writing without permission and a clear understanding that your boss reads and approves all changes you have made.

I hope you enjoy Ms. Williams’ “Goldilocks and the Three Bears” example and find it helpful as a legal writing guide. -CCE

Share this:

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

SCOTUS Notes Has the Supreme Court Justices’ Handwritten Notes!

18 Sunday Feb 2018

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Law, Appellate Writing, Legal Analysis, Legal Writing, United States Supreme Court

≈ Comments Off on SCOTUS Notes Has the Supreme Court Justices’ Handwritten Notes!

Tags

Joe Hodnicki, Law Librarian Blog, Legal Analysis, SCOTUS Notes, U.S. Supreme Court

SCOTUS Notes transcribes notes written by Supreme Court justices during conference meetings, posted by Joe Hodnicki, Law Librarian Blog (with hat tip to BeSpacific Blog)

http://bit.ly/2EA7cvK

We can read the U.S. Supreme Court justices’ handwritten notes during their deliberations? What will this mean for legal analysis and where do I sign up? -CCE

SCOTUS Notes is the newest crowdsourcing project under the Zooniverse platform originated at the University of Minnesota. ‘In this project, members of the public transcribe handwritten notes from U.S. Supreme Court justices. Unlike members of Congress, justices cast their votes in complete privacy during weekly conference meetings. Only justices are allowed in the Chief Justice’s conference room when they discuss, deliberate, and make initial decisions on cases that focus on some of the nation’s most pressing legal issues. The only record of what has been said, and by whom, is provided by the handwritten personal notes the justices themselves take during conference. These crucial documents detail the discussions and debates that took place in thousands of cases spanning multiple decades.’

[Emphasis added.]

Share this:

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

Style Guide for the United States Supreme Court.

06 Wednesday Dec 2017

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Law, Appellate Writing, Citations, Citations to the Record, Court Rules, Courts, E-Briefs, E-Filing, Federal District Court Rules, Legal Writing, Local Rules, State Appellate Courts, Style Manuals

≈ Comments Off on Style Guide for the United States Supreme Court.

Tags

Legal Skills Prof Blog, Louis J. Sirico Jr., U.S. Supreme Court Style Guide

The U.S. Supreme Court’s Style Guide, by Louis J. Sirico, Jr., Legal Skills Prof Blog

http://bit.ly/2jnq60t

When I was starting out in my paralegal career, I created cheat sheets for filing motions and briefs in state and federal district courts. The rules, especially for federal circuit court briefs, are complex and require checking multiple sections, local rules, e-filing rules, and your judge’s personal court rules (if any exist). I found these cheat sheets were the most popular handouts at my legal writing courses and paralegal seminars, and included them in the Appendix of Practical Legal Writing for Legal Assistants.

Regardless of where you are in your paralegal career, I recommend creating a similar cheat sheet for yourself. Updating your cheat sheet when the rules change force you to examine every addition or revision. Keeping your cheat sheet current will reinforce the rules in your mind, and will help you stay on top of your game.

When it came to analyzing rules for the U.S. Supreme Court, I passed. I left it to the professionals who format and print these briefs for a living. Now, at last, the U.S. Supreme Court’s Style Guide is available for all. -CCE

Share this:

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

How Long Is Too Long For An Appellate Brief?

10 Tuesday Jan 2017

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, Appellate Law, Appellate Writing, Bad Legal Writing, Brief Writing, Legal Writing

≈ Comments Off on How Long Is Too Long For An Appellate Brief?

Tags

Appellate Briefs, Debra Cassen Weiss, Judge Richard Posner, Legal Writing

Posner criticizes ‘verbosity’ in appeals briefs in decision upholding closed voir dire, by Debra Cassens Weiss, Appellate Practice, ABA Journal.com (with hat tip to William P. Statsky)

http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/posner_criticizes_verbosity_in_appeals_briefs_in_decision_upholding_verdict

Judge Richard Posner is a well-known 7th Circuit jurist, legal writing scholar, and prolific author. Knowing this, it is puzzling why the appellate briefs for both sides were over 200 pages each. Yes, Judge Posner had something to say about it. -CCE

Share this:

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

Contract Interpretation and Ambiguity.

04 Sunday Dec 2016

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Writing, Contract Law, Legal Writing

≈ Comments Off on Contract Interpretation and Ambiguity.

Tags

Contracts, ContractsProf Blog, Legal Writing, Stacey Lantagne

Judicial Disagreement Over Contract Ambiguity: When Are Things OBVIOUS? By Stacey Lantagne, ContractsProf Blog

http://bit.ly/2f3Dtj5

We’ve been talking about contract interpretation in my Contracts class lately and I’m always struck by how many cases involve a lower court ruling of ambiguity and then an appellate court reversal of that ruling, because it always strikes me as such a funny thing. The very definition of ambiguity would seem to be ‘multiple people disagreeing on the meaning of the word,’ but the appellate court decisions in those cases necessarily have to dismiss the reasonableness of the lower court’s understanding of the meaning in order to assert that the meaning is SO OBVIOUS.

Continue reading →

Share this:

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

Honey Pot on Appellate Brief Writing.

19 Saturday Nov 2016

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Writing, Legal Analysis, Legal Argument, Legal Writing, Readability

≈ Comments Off on Honey Pot on Appellate Brief Writing.

Tags

Appellate Brief Writing, Associate’s Mind Blog, Justice Maria Rivera, Keith Lee, Storytelling

The Ten Commandments of Brief Writing, by Keith Lee, Associate’s Mind Blog

http://associatesmind.com/2016/11/17/ten-commandments-brief-writing/

Do not miss this one! Keith Lee gives some excellent advice, and provides a honey pot link to Justice Maria Rivera’s “The Ten Commandments of Brief Writing.” Appellate judges pull no punches when it comes to what works and what doesn’t in appellate briefs. -CCE

Share this:

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

Judges Quote Yoda.

12 Thursday May 2016

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Law, Appellate Writing, Legal Writing

≈ Comments Off on Judges Quote Yoda.

Tags

Anna Massoglia, Appellate Writing, Lawyerist.com©, Legal Writing, Star Wars, Yoda

Galactic Disputes: Judges Channel the Wisdom of Star Wars, by Anna Massoglia, Lawyerist.com©

http://bit.ly/23Dyp5K

Making legal jargon understandable to the general masses is a big job. Some more creative judges think outside of the box to get their point across through pop culture references. With all of the hype surrounding Star Wars: The Force Awakens,  it should come as no surprise that Star Wars references are seeping into judicial opinions.

Continue reading →

Share this:

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

Another Legal Writing Honey Pot

08 Sunday May 2016

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Writing, Legal Argument, Legal Writing, Legalese, Persuasive Writing, Plain Language

≈ Comments Off on Another Legal Writing Honey Pot

Tags

Bryan A. Garner, Legal Writing, The Scribes Journal of Legal Writing, U.S. Supreme Court Justices

Transcripts of Bryan Garner’s Transcripts With Supreme Court Justices On Legal Writing And Advocacy, THE SCRIBES JOURNAL OF LEGAL WRITING©

http://legaltimes.typepad.com/files/garner-transcripts-1.pdf

If you had to pick just one edition of The Scribes Journal of Legal Writing, which would be an incredibly hard thing to do, this is certainly one I would strongly recommend. Bryan Garner’s interviews with Supreme Court Justices on legal writing! Does it get any better than this? If you are a legal writing aficionado, or even if you’re not, you’ll appreciate the wisdom here. -CCE  

Share this:

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

Supreme Court Writing Analysis – Whose Briefs Win and Why.

22 Saturday Aug 2015

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Law, Appellate Writing, Brief Writing, Editing, Grammar, Legal Analysis, Legal Argument, Legal Writing, Persuasive Writing, Readability, United States Supreme Court

≈ Comments Off on Supreme Court Writing Analysis – Whose Briefs Win and Why.

Tags

Appellate Briefs, Legal Analysis, Legal Writing, Persuasive Legal Writing, Plain English, U.S. Supreme Court

Who Wins in the Supreme Court? An Examination of Attorney and Law Firm Influence, by Alan Feldman, University of Southern California, Political Science, SSRN.com (Date posted: August 18, 2015 ; Last revised: August 21, 2015)

http://tinyurl.com/q48ywgq

This paper is a detailed analysis of what type of legal writing and briefs from 1946 through 2013 have been the most influential  with the United States Supreme Court and the lawyers who write them. Interestingly, lawyers who write short sentences in the active voice and who use fewer words than the majority of brief writers are the most successful. It is a fascinating read, and strongly recommended. -CCE

Share this:

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

An Expert’s Guide To Formatting An Appellate Brief.

20 Saturday Jun 2015

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Law, Appellate Writing, Brief Writing, Citations, Citations to the Record, Court Rules, Courts, Legal Writing, Local Rules, Table of Authorities

≈ Comments Off on An Expert’s Guide To Formatting An Appellate Brief.

Tags

Above the Law, Appellate Briefs, Appellate Record, Brief Formatting, Court Rules, Deborah Savadra, Legal Office Guru, Legal Writing

How to Format an Appellate Brief, by Deborah Savadra, Lawyerist Blog

(Deborah Savadra is editor and chief blogger at Legal Office Guru, which offers The WordPerfect Lover’s Guide to Word as well as Microsoft Office video tutorials. You can follow her on Twitter at @legalofficeguru.)

https://lawyerist.com/70334/format-appellate-brief-microsoft-word/

Appellate briefs are not a project for beginners. And, regardless of what you read in this tutorial, you must follow your appellate court rules to the letter.

When your court’s rules tell you that it wants citations done a certain way, it mean exactly that. If the court’s rules say a brief must not go over a certain number of pages, do not even think about “fudging” the rules by changing the font, page size, or line spacing.

You see, all courts, not just appellate ones, write local rules for a reason. Whatever “trick” you may try to skirt around those rules, that court has already seen it and knows it when it sees it again. Courts take their local rules seriously, and so should you.

There are many posts and articles posted on my blog about the strategy and nuances of writing appellate briefs, as well as many excellent books on the subject. This tutorial will help you with the nuts and bolts of writing the bare bones, which is always useful regardless of your writing proficiency.

I also highly recommend Ms. Deborah Savadra’s blog, Legal Office Guru. She does an excellent job. -CCE

35ygj4

The appellate brief is undoubtedly one of the most complex pleadings, formatting-wise. Formatting requirements vary from court to court, going so far as to dictate the size and font of your type, your margins and your line spacing. (If you’ve ever had to do a U.S. Supreme Court brief, I feel your pain.) Even before you consider the text of your argument, you have to wrap your head around which pages have which style of page numbers, whether you must furnish a table of authorities, and how you have to deal with any appendices or references to the record. . . .

Continue reading →

Share this:

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

Where Should Citations Go? Texas Appellate Judges Have An Opinion.

05 Friday Jun 2015

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Judges, Appellate Writing, Brief Writing, Citations, Footnotes, Judges, Legal Writing

≈ Comments Off on Where Should Citations Go? Texas Appellate Judges Have An Opinion.

Tags

Brian Garner, Footnotes, Legal Citations, Legal Writing, Rich Phillips, Texas Appellate Watch

The End of the Great Footnote War in Texas? by Rich Phillips, Texas Appellate Watch

http://tinyurl.com/oq8z9va

I have posted before (and here and here) about a debate that confirms that appellate lawyers are the nerds of the legal world: should citations go in footnotes or in the text?. . . .

Continue reading →

Share this:

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

Who Knew Adverbs Were So Dangerous?

10 Sunday May 2015

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Writing, Legal Writing

≈ Comments Off on Who Knew Adverbs Were So Dangerous?

Tags

Adverbs, American Bar Journal, Debra Cassens Weiss, Grammar, William P. Statsky

Using Adverbs Recklessly Can Hurt Your Appeal And Vex The Courts, by Debra Cassens Weiss, American Bar Journal – Appellate Practice (with hat tip to William P. Statsky)

http://tinyurl.com/mvggq6p

Adverbs can be a boon and a bane to lawyers who argue over the meaning of words such as ‘knowingly,’ ‘intentionally’ and ‘recklessly’ and sprinkle them throughout their briefs.

Indeed, the number of disputes over how to interpret adverbs in criminal statutes has surged since the 1980s, the Wall Street Journal (sub. req.) reports, citing research by Brooklyn Law School professor Lawrence Solan. But losing an argument over statutory construction isn’t the only downside to adverbs. . . .

Continue reading →

Share this:

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

A Novel Approach To Circuit Court’s Word Limit Rule. If Only It Had Worked!

22 Wednesday Apr 2015

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Abbreviations, Appellate Writing, Bad Legal Writing, Brief Writing, Editing, Initialisms, Legal Writing, Readability

≈ Comments Off on A Novel Approach To Circuit Court’s Word Limit Rule. If Only It Had Worked!

Tags

ABA Journal, Abbreviations, Appellate Writing, Court Rules, Debra Cassen Weiss, Legal Writing

Squished-Together Words Don’t Count As One, Federal Circuit Says; Appeal Is Tossed, by Debra Cassen Weiss, ABA Journal (with hat tip to William P. Statsky!)

http://tinyurl.com/kqmddjt

A litigant that squeezed multiple words together and resorted to abbreviations didn’t satisfy word limits in its briefs and won’t be able to pursue its appeal, according to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

The appeals court tossed the patent appeal by Pi-Net International in an April 20 order (PDF). How Appealing links to the opinion and a story by Law360 (sub. req.), which dubbed the creative wording ‘a trick straight out of high school English class.’ . . .

*           *           *

On appeal, JPMorgan objected to Pi-Net’s first brief, saying it attempted to evade the 14,000 word limit by deleting spaces between various words and squeezing them together, according to the Federal Circuit. The Federal Circuit offered an example: One case citation consists of 14 words, but Pi-Net squeezed them together to make them into one word. . . .

Continue reading →

Share this:

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

Are Shorter Appellate Briefs Better? Appellate Judges Seem To Think So.

15 Sunday Mar 2015

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Law, Appellate Writing, Brief Writing, Editing, Legal Analysis, Legal Argument, Legal Writing, Plain Language, Proofreading, Readability

≈ Comments Off on Are Shorter Appellate Briefs Better? Appellate Judges Seem To Think So.

Tags

Appellate Brief Writing, Appellate Judges, James B. Levy, Legal Skills Prof Blog, Legal Writing, Louis J. Sirico Jr., The Wall Street Journal Law Blog

Federal Appellate Judges Want To Shorten The Length of Briefs, Lawyers Object, by Professor James B. Levy, Legal Skills Prof Blog

http://tinyurl.com/m3s85z2

If an appeal is extremely complex, would a reduction in the size of a brief compromise the ability of a party to win an appeal to a federal appellate court? Apparently, appellate judges do not think so.

Before making up your mind, please read Professor Sirico’s posts, also included by Professor Levy in his original post. It may not be a question of length, but experience. What do you think? -CCE

The Wall Street Journal Law Blog has posted this story about the reaction by many appellate attorneys to a proposal that would reduce the word count on federal appellate briefs under the federal rules of appellate practice from 14,000 to 12,500. (Interestingly, my co-blogger Professor Sirico reported last month on a new study (and here) that supports the lawyers’ objections to the proposed rule change insofar as the study found that longer briefs filed by appellants ‘strongly’ correlates with success on appeal. However, the authors of the study cautioned against inferring that it is word count, rather than the complexity of the underlying issues which may require more thorough explanations, that explains the correlation). . . .

Share this:

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

10th Circuit Tips and Resources For New Attorneys and Infrequent Attorney Filers.

12 Thursday Mar 2015

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, 10th Circuit Practitioner's Guide, Appellate Writing, Brief Writing, U.S. Courts of Appeal

≈ Comments Off on 10th Circuit Tips and Resources For New Attorneys and Infrequent Attorney Filers.

Tags

10th Circuit Court of Appeals, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Local Court Rules, Practitioner's Guide, Tenth Circuit Rules

Filing Your Appeal – For New and Infrequent Attorney Filers, The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/clerk/filing-your-appeal/atty

Introduction

If this is your first time in this court, welcome. If it has been a while since you filed a brief with us, welcome back. Practicing in a federal appeals court is different from practicing in a trial court, state or federal, and there are even notable differences from state appellate work. With this in mind, there are a number of resources available to assist you.

As an initial matter, if you intend to practice in this court, you can count on referring frequently to the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, and especially our local Tenth Circuit Rules. Our Practitioner’s Guide is also a good source of information.

If you can’t find the answer to a question in the rules or if you have a special concern about an appeal, do not hesitate to call the clerk’s office at 303-844-3157. We have real people answering the phone and a well-trained staff who can assist you.

The following sections provide general information you may find useful. However, this information is no substitute for a careful review of the federal and our local rules. . . .

Continue reading →

Share this:

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

The Right Way to Assemble Attachments To Appellate Supervisory Writs.

17 Saturday Jan 2015

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Law, Appellate Writing, Legal Writing, Louisiana Supreme Court, Readability

≈ Comments Off on The Right Way to Assemble Attachments To Appellate Supervisory Writs.

Tags

Appellate Law, Appellate Procedure, Appellate Writs, Legal Writing, Louisiana Civil Appeals, Raymond P. Ward

Practical Tip For Assembling A Writ Application, by Raymond P. Ward, Louisiana Civil Appeals

http://tinyurl.com/o2or5jy

Today [January 14. 2015] I started working on an application to the court of appeal for a supervisory writ, and was reminded of my # 1 tip for this task: the first thing you do—before you write a word—is assemble the attachments. Uniform Rule 4-5 lists the attachments that must be included. I like to put them all together and give them provisional page numbers before I start writing the application itself, starting with A1, A2, etc. If your attachments are in PDF (if they’re not, they should be), putting them together and page-numbering them is a snap with Adobe Acrobat or other PDF-handling software.

Assembling the appendix on the front end has at least two advantages. First, when you draft the writ application, you can include pinpoint citations to items in the appendix. Second, you find out immediately if you’re missing something that you need (such as the hearing transcript).

There is one little hitch to my system: Uniform Rule 4-5(B) requires all pages of the application, including the application itself and all attachments, to be consecutively numbered. And if you don’t know how long the application itself will be until you write it, you don’t know until the end of the process the number of the first page of the attachments. But this problem is easy to solve. Once the application is in almost-final form, you know how long it will be. If it’s 25 pages, you know that the number of the first page of attachments will be 26. So when I’m finalizing, say, a 25-page application, I just add 25 to all my “An” citations to the attachments and remove the “A”. A1 becomes 26, A2 becomes 27, etc. Is this time-consuming? A bit. But not nearly as time-consuming as trying to fill in totally blank citations to the attachments.

Which leads to another tip: when, in writing a writ application, you cite one of the attachments, cite it by its consecutive-page number. If it’s a multi-volume writ application, cite by volume and page number. Example: “See writ app. vol. 2 p. 301.” Your job as the writer is to make it as easy as possible for the reader to locate what you’re citing. So give the reader the information needed to instantly locate whatever it is you’re citing.

Share this:

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

In Legal Writing, Why Less Really Is More. Really, Really.

13 Saturday Dec 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Writing, Bad Legal Writing, Brief Writing, Editing, Jury Instructions, Legal Argument, Legal Writing, Readability, Statement of Facts, Summary of the Argument

≈ Comments Off on In Legal Writing, Why Less Really Is More. Really, Really.

Tags

Editing, Legal Writing, Raymond Ward, Readability, the (new) legal writer blog

Less is more. Really. by Raymond Ward, the (new) legal writer blog

http://tinyurl.com/l94vnyd

If you really have the goods, modesty is more effective than piling it on. Mark Herrmann explains this principle.

Share this:

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

Appellate Legal Writing – This Is How You Do It.

27 Thursday Nov 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, Appellate Law, Appellate Writing, Brief Writing, Editing, Legal Analysis, Legal Argument, Legal Writing, Legalese, Plain Language, Proofreading, Propositions and Headings, Readability, Statement of Facts, Summary of the Argument, Table of Authorities

≈ Comments Off on Appellate Legal Writing – This Is How You Do It.

Tags

A Writ In Time, Appellate Writing, Bridging the Gap Seminar, Chief Judge Alex Kozinski, Free CLE Materials and Forms, Legal Writing, Louisiana Civil Appeals Blog, Moot Court, Raymond P. Ward, the (new) legal writer blog

Free La. Appellate CLE Materials, by Raymond P. Ward, Louisiana Civil Appeals Blog

http://tinyurl.com/mg88sy7

Here’s something you don’t see everyday – a top-notch lawyer generously sharing everything juicy in his CLE presentation.  I am a long-time follower of Mr. Ward’s blogs. I strongly recommend this blog, as well as his other blog, the [new] legal writer blog at http://raymondpward.typepad.com/newlegalwriter/. 

Notice how the propositions further the appellate brief’s argument to the court. They are not simply “The Court Should Grant Summary Judgment to Plaintiff” or something equally bland.  Likewise, the propositions are not more than one sentence.

The Statement of the Case is less than one page. The writer doesn’t bog the Court down with unnecessary facts. You can look, but you will not find even a whiff of legalese.

Please pay attention when you read the materials and each sample document (thank you for including them!). Notice that no words are wasted. There is a reason why.

Notice the word choice, the size of the sentences and paragraphs, and the crafting of the propositions and subheadings. The persuasive argument is easy to follow. The writer keeps the reader’s attention – an absolute must for anything you write.

Do you aspire to be a good writer? Write like this. -CCE

This morning [October 28, 2014], I presented an hour of CLE on appellate practice for the Louisiana State Bar Association’s ‘Bridging the Gap’ seminar, a program for newly minted lawyers who passed the February 2014 bar exam. For attendees and anyone else who may be interested, here are some supplemental materials used or discussed in the presentation:

  • My written materials
  • A PDF copy of my PowerPoint presentation
  • My article A Writ in Time, 51 La. B.J. 338 (Feb.–Mar. 2004)
  • Two entertaining and informative articles by Chief Judge Alex Kozinski of the U.S. Ninth Circuit:
    • In Praise of Moot Court—Not!, in which Judge Kozinski discusses the differences between law-school moot-court competitions and real-world appellate practice
    • The Wrong Stuff, in which Judge Kozinski offers tips to help you lose your next appeal

For reasons discussed at the seminar and elsewhere, I recommend against over-reliance on forms. With that caution stated—and with no warranties—I offer some samples of pleadings and briefs, all in PDF:

  • Notice of intent to seek a supervisory writ

  • Application for a supervisory writ

  • Request for oral argument

  • Brief (La. court of appeal)

  • La. Supreme Court writ application

  • La. Supreme Court merits brief

  • US 5th Circuit brief

Share this:

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

Writing the Opening Of A Brief – The Right Way.

21 Friday Nov 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Writing, Bad Legal Writing, Brief Writing, Legal Analysis, Legal Argument, Legal Writing, Litigation, Readability

≈ Comments Off on Writing the Opening Of A Brief – The Right Way.

Tags

Brief Openings, Brief Writing, Kenneth F. Oettle, Legal Writing, Litigation Strategy, Sills Cummis & Gross P.C.

Open A Brief With Substance, Not Bluster, by Kenneth F. Oettle, Newsroom Publications, Sills Cummis & Gross, P.C.

http://tinyurl.com/l7jk5a8

Ken Oettle is one of my favorite legal writers. In my opinion, his book, Making Your Point!, should be on the reference shelf of every serious legal writer. Yes, it’s that good. There are many excellent legal writers. Ken is one of the best.

To comply with copyright, no excerpts can be published. You will still find the entire article at the link from Sills Cummis & Gross, P.C. -CCE

Share this:

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

Improve Your Brief With The Curse of Knowledge Test.

14 Friday Nov 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Writing, Bad Legal Writing, Brief Writing, Legal Analysis, Legal Argument, Legal Writing, Readability

≈ Comments Off on Improve Your Brief With The Curse of Knowledge Test.

Tags

Appellate Writing, Brief Writing, Bryan Garner, Legal Writing, Mark Herrmann, Raymond Ward, Steven Pinker, the (new) legal writer blog

The Curse Of Knowledge: The Root Of Incomprehensible Writing, by Raymond P. Ward, the [new] legal writer blog

http://tinyurl.com/kjpzl9a

Bryan Garner tells participants in his seminars that good writing makes the reader feel smart, while bad writing makes the reader feel stupid. What is the root of this kind of bad writing? Mark Herrmann has an idea about that, drawn from cognitive scientist Steven Pinker: we think that our readers already know what we are trying to tell them. Pinker calls this phenomenon ‘the curse of knowledge.’

So what is the cure for this affliction? Herrmann recommends empathy for the reader. ‘Put yourself in the reader’s state of ignorance,’ he counsels, “and write for that audience.’ Pinker suggests testing your draft on people who don’t already know what you’re trying to tell them:

A better way to exorcise the curse of knowledge is to close the loop, as the engineers say, and get a feedback signal from the world of readers—that is, show a draft to some people who are similar to your intended audience and find out whether they can follow it. Social psychologists have found that we are overconfident, sometimes to the point of delusion, about our ability to infer what other people think, even the people who are closest to us. Only when we ask those people do we discover that what’s obvious to us isn’t obvious to them.

Garner has a similar recommendation in The Winning Brief, at least for cases where the amount at stake is worth the expense: Convene a focus group of lawyers unfamiliar with the case to play the part of appellate judges by reading and reacting to your draft brief. This exercise has many benefits. One of them is to tell you whether the curse of knowledge has infected your brief.

 

 

Share this:

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

Collection of Judges’ Best Advice On Legal Writing.

08 Saturday Nov 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, Appellate Law, Appellate Writing, Bad Legal Writing, District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals, Editing, Legal Argument, Legal Writing, Legalese, Oregon Supreme Court, Plain Language, Readability, Texas Supreme Court, United States Supreme Court, Wisconsin Supreme Court

≈ Comments Off on Collection of Judges’ Best Advice On Legal Writing.

Tags

Appellate Brief Writing, Bryan A. Garner, Joseph Kimble, Legal Writing, Legalese, Michigan Bar Association, Plain Language

Judges on Effective Writing: The Importance of Plain Language, by Bryan A. Garner, Vol 84 Mich. B. J. 44 (February 2005)

http://tinyurl.com/kk6trum

Each quote here is a pearl of wisdom – classical and timeless. Look no further to find the heart and soul of effective legal writing. Click on the hyperlink to find the footnotes for each quotation. -CCE

I trust that, after more than 20 years, some of the Plain Language columns are worth reprinting. This one appeared in March 1994. As I noted then, the survey that Mr. Garner mentions in his introduction is the same one that we first did in Michigan, with very similar results. See the October 1987 and May 1990 columns. The judges are identified by their judicial positions when they make their remarks. —JK (Joseph Kimble)

Lawyers are notoriously poor at gauging what judges prefer in legal writing. Too many of us believe, for example, that judges expect us to use legalese. In 1991, when the Texas Plain-Language Committee surveyed all the state district and appellate judges in Texas, we found that more than 80 percent prefer plain language (Plaintiff complains of Defendant and says) over legalese (Now comes the Plaintiff, by and through his attorneys of record, Darrow and Holmes, and for his Original Petition in this cause would respectfully show unto the Court the following). Indeed, several judges responded to the survey with a plea that we stamp out legalese once and for all.

The results of that survey surprised many Texas litigators—and many changed the form of their court papers. But many more have persisted in the old, legalistic style—perhaps out of a fondness akin to what some people feel for the language of the King James Version of the Bible. Judge Lynn Hughes of Houston speaks directly to those litigators: ‘Anyone who thinks Comes now the Plaintiff is anything like the King James Version has no sense of poetry.’

Literary tastes may differ, of course, but it’s worth knowing what judges say—and have been saying for a long time—about the language we lawyers use. Following are some choice quotations I’ve recently collected. —Bryan A. Garner

Judicial Diagnoses

‘Lawyers spend a great deal of their time shoveling smoke.’ Hon. Oliver Wendell Holmes1, U.S. Supreme Court

‘[Too many lawyers believe that] it is essential to legal English that one write as pompously as possible, using words and phrases that have long since disappeared from normal English discourse.’ Hon. Antonin Scalia2 , U.S. Supreme Court

‘The reason legal writing has gotten to such a low point is that we have had very bad teachers—judges who wrote years ago and wrote badly. We learned bad habits from them and their opinions in law school.’
Hon. William Bablitch3, Supreme Court of Wisconsin

Stick to the Mother Tongue

‘[The advocate] will stock the arsenal of his mind with tested dialectical weapons. He will master the short Saxon word that pierces the mind like a spear and the simple figure that lights the understanding. He will never drive the judge to his dictionary. He will rejoice in the strength of the mother tongue as found in the King James version of the Bible, and in the power of the terse and flashing phrase of a Kipling or a Churchill.’  Hon. Robert H. Jackson4, U.S. Supreme Court

‘[A]void as much as possible stilted legal language, the thereins, thereofs, whereinbefores, hereinafters, and what-have-yous. Use English wherever you can to express the idea as well and as concisely as in law or Latin. A healthy respect for the robust Anglo-Saxon appeals more than does the Latin, whether or not it is Anglicized. The home-grown product in this case is better than the imported, not to say smuggled, one.’ Hon. Wiley B. Rutledge5, U.S. Supreme Court

‘Write so that you’re understood. English is a hard language to learn, but it’s an easy language to communicate in. There’s no reason to put Latin in your brief.’ Hon. Craig T. Enoch6, Fifth Court of Appeals, Dallas

‘Don’t use legalese. It causes you to put your contentions in stale ways.’ Hon. Thomas Gibbs Gee7, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, 1974-91

‘Legalese is an impediment to clear, logical thinking.’ Hon. F. Lee Duggan8, First Court of Appeals, Houston

‘It’s easier for a judge when you’re using common usage. Judges are only human, after all.’ Hon. Carolyn Wright9, Family District Court, Dallas

Simplify, Simplify!

‘For a hundred years, good lawyers have been writing without all the garbage and in a simple, direct style.’ Hon. Lynn N. Hughes10. U.S. District Court, Houston

‘A lawyer should write the brief at a level a 12th grader could understand. That’s a good rule of thumb. It also aids the writer. Working hard to make a brief simple is extremely rewarding because it helps a lawyer to understand the issue. At the same time, it scores points with the court.’ Hon. William Bablitch11, Supreme Court of Wisconsin

‘When a judge finds a brief which sets up from twelve to twenty or thirty issues or ‘points’ or ‘assignments of error,’ he begins to look for the two or three, perhaps the one, of controlling force. Somebody has got lost in the underbrush and the judge has to get him—or the other fellow—out. That kind of brief may be labeled the ‘obfuscating’ type. It is distinctly not the kind to use if the attorney wishes calm, temperate, dispassionate reason to emanate from the cloister. I strongly advise against use of this type of brief, consciously or unconsciously. Though this fault has been called over-analysis, it is really a type of under-analysis.’ Hon. Wiley B. Rutledge12, U.S. Supreme Court

‘The key is to make the brief easy for the judge to follow.’ Hon. Lloyd Doggett13, Supreme Court of Texas

Cut the Verbiage

‘You want your brief to be as readable as possible . . . . If I pick up a brief of 49 and a half pages, it has a little less credibility than one that succinctly argues its points in 25 pages . . . . There’s nothing better to read than a well-written brief from a really good lawyer.’ Hon. Jerry E. Smith14, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

‘Eye fatigue and irritability set in well before page 50.’ Hon. Patricia M. Wald15, U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

‘A brief should manifest conviction . . . . [That] is virtually impossible . . . if it contains an excessive number of quotations or is larded with numerous citations to the authorities. Short quotations sometimes clinch a point, but long ones fail in that objective.’ Hon. George Rossman16. Supreme Court of Oregon

‘Start in the very first sentence with the problem in this case. Put it right up front. Start early. Don’t bury it under a lot of verbiage and preliminaries.’ Hon. Nathan L. Hecht17, Supreme Court of Texas

Does Style Matter?

‘Style must be regarded as one of the principal tools of the judiciary and it thus deserves detailed attention and repeated emphasis.’ Hon. Griffin B. Bell18, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

‘Lawyers are excused from the necessity of interesting their readers, and all too often—let’s face the evidence—they take advantage of this enviable exemption.’ Hon. Jerome Frank19, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

‘Is good writing rewarded? I used to think it doesn’t matter much, in comparison with legal authority, justice, and the like. Now I know better: Good writing is rewarded so automatically that you don’t even think about it.’ Hon. Murry Cohen20, Fourteenth Court of Appeals, Houston

Bryan A. Garner (bagarner@att.net), president of Dallas-based LawProse, Inc. (www.lawprose.org), is the author of many books on writing, including Legal Writing in Plain English (2001) and The Elements of Legal Style (2d ed. 2002). He is also editor in chief of all current editions of Black’s Law Dictionary. He teaches at Southern Methodist University School of Law.

Share this:

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

Amicus Briefs From A Texas Supreme Court Judge’s Perspective.

30 Thursday Oct 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Amicus Briefs, Appellate Law, Appellate Writing, Brief Writing, Legal Writing

≈ Comments Off on Amicus Briefs From A Texas Supreme Court Judge’s Perspective.

Tags

Amicus Briefs, Appellate Law, Appellate Lawyer Blog, Chad Ruback, Don Cruse, Legal Writing, Texas Supreme Court Justice Don Willett

Texas Supreme Court Justice Don Willett’s Thoughts on Amicus Briefs, by Chad Ruback, Appellate Lawyer Blog

http://tinyurl.com/m2mg7un

This afternoon, Texas Supreme Court Justice Don Willett and Austin lawyer Don Cruse spoke at a continuing legal education seminar.  Among other things, they addressed amicus briefs filed in the Supreme Court.

The court requests a response to the petition for review in about 33% of cases.  However, when an amicus brief has been filed prior to the time that the court decides whether to request a response, Mr. Cruse determined that the court requests a response about 85% of the time.  While only 2% of cases have amicus briefs filed prior to the time that the court decides whether to request a response, it seems that those petitions are disproportionately successful in getting a response requested.

The court requests briefs on the merits (a/k/a full briefing) in about 20% of cases.  However, when an amicus brief has been filed prior to the time that the court decides whether to request briefs on the merits, Mr. Cruse determined that the court requests briefs on the merits about 82% of the time.  While only 7% of cases have amicus briefs filed prior to the time that the court decides whether to request briefs on the merits, it seems that those petitions are disproportionately successful in getting briefs on the merits requested.

Consistent with this data, Justice Willett indicated that he enjoys reading amicus briefs and that it is advisable for a petitioner to have supporting amicus briefs filed early in the proceeding (e.g., before the court has decided to whether to request a response or at least before the court has decided whether to request briefs on the merits).

Share this:

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

Appellate Judge Explains How To Lose An Appeal – Works Every Time!

27 Saturday Sep 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Writing, Bad Legal Writing, Brief Writing, Editing, Fonts, Footnotes, Legal Analysis, Legal Argument, Legal Writing, Legalese, Proofreading, Psychology, Readability

≈ Comments Off on Appellate Judge Explains How To Lose An Appeal – Works Every Time!

Tags

Appellate Brief Writing, Appellate Record Citations, Bad Legal Writing, Hon. Alex Kozinski, Legal Writing, The Montana Lawyer

The Wrong Stuff: How You Too Can…Lose Your Appeal, by Hon. Alex Kozinski, 1992 BYU L. Rev. 325, The Montana Lawyer, 23 Mont. Law 5 (Oct. 1997)

Webmaster’s note: This was originally presented as a lecture at Brigham Young University, J. Reuben Clark School of Law on January 21, 1992. It was later recycled as The Wrong Stuff, 1992 BYU L. Rev. 325. The lecture was repeated during the 1997 Montana State Bar Annual Meeting, and again recycled in the Montana Lawyer as How You Too… Can Lose Your Appeal (and you thought Judge Kozinski didn’t care about the environment!).

The BYU L. Rev. edition is available as a PDF scan. What follows is the Montana Lawyer edition.

[former link is broken – see new link below]

https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1748&context=lawreview

 

When George Bousliman called a few months ago and invited me to come, I said, ‘What could I possibly talk about that would be of interest to members of the State Bar of Montana?’ He said, ‘The truth is, we don’t really care what you say; what we really want is a cover boy for The Montana Lawyer.’

Well, I have my pride. I want to be loved for my intellect, not just my face. So, I decided to talk on a totally irrelevant topic that I know a little something about: How to lose an appeal.

* * *

First, you want to tell the judges right up front that you have a rotten case. The best way to do this is to file a fat brief. So if the rules give you 50 *6 pages, ask for 75, 90, 125–the more the better. Even if you don’t get the extra pages, you will let the judges know you don’t have an argument capable of being presented in a simple, direct, persuasive fashion. Keep in mind that simple arguments are winning arguments; convoluted arguments are sleeping pills on paper.

But don’t just rely on the length of your brief to telegraph that you haven’t got much of a case. No. Try to come up with something that will annoy the judges, make it difficult for them to read what you have written and make them mistrust whatever they can read. Here are a few suggestions: Bind your brief so that it falls apart when the judge gets about half way through it. Or you could try a little trick recently used by a major law firm: Assemble your brief so that every other page reads upside down. This is likely to induce motion sickness and it’s always a fine idea to have the judge associate your argument with nausea. Also–this is a biggie–make sure your photocopier is low on toner or take a key and scratch the glass so it will put annoying lines on every page.

Best of all, cheat on the page limit. . . .

Share this:

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

2013 Judicial Writing Manual: A Pocket Guide For Judges.

19 Tuesday Aug 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Writing, Federal Judges, Judges, Legal Analysis, Legal Argument, Legal Writing

≈ Comments Off on 2013 Judicial Writing Manual: A Pocket Guide For Judges.

Tags

Appellate Writing, Federal Judges, Federal Judicial Center, Judicial Writing Manual: A Pocket Guide for Judges (Second Edition), Legal Writing

Judicial Writing Manual: A Pocket Guide for Judges (Second Edition), Federal Judicial Center 2013 (with huge hat tip to William P. Statsky!)

http://www.fjc.gov/public/pdf.nsf/lookup/judicial-writing-manual-2d-fjc-2013.pdf/$file/judicial-writing-manual-2d-fjc-2013.pdf

Yesterday I posted a link to the First Edition of the Judicial Writing Manual. Twenty years after the First Edition, the Federal Judicial Center published this Second Edition. The goal of the Second Edition, like the First, is summed up in its Forward below. -CCE

Indeed, with so much of today’s writing embedded in the truncated protocols of social media and other “real time” forms of expression, the clarity and persuasive quality the authors of the first edition sought to teach are particularly important for judges’ writing. But the elements of good writing are remarkably constant, and we think that you will find the principles explained so thoughtfully in the first edition no less applicable today.

Jeremy D. Fogel, Director, Federal Judicial Center

 

Share this:

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...

Arrogant Legal Writing Gives Texas A Horrible, Terrible Very Bad Day.

26 Saturday Jul 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Appellate Law, Appellate Writing, Bad Legal Writing, Brief Writing, Legal Analysis, Legal Argument, Legal Writing, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, U.S. District Courts, Voting Rights Act

≈ Comments Off on Arrogant Legal Writing Gives Texas A Horrible, Terrible Very Bad Day.

Tags

Attorney Fees, Bad Legal Writing, Judge Rosemary M. Collyer, Kevin Underhill, Legal Writing, Lowering the Bar Blog, Prevailing Party, Shelby County, State of Texas, Voting District, Voting Rights Act

Bad Attitude Costs Texas in Fee Dispute, by Kevin Underhill, Lowering the Bar Blog

http://www.loweringthebar.net/2014/06/bad-attitude-costs-texas.html

 Hey, I get it—sometimes when you win and you think the other side’s position was bogus, it’s hard not to get all smug and self-righteous.

But you really should try.

Not trying very hard—well, not trying at all—cost the State of Texas a lot of money on June 18, when a judge awarded other parties in a voting-rights case $1,096,770 in legal fees and costs, even though Texas had a decent argument that it was the prevailing party and so it should get paid. (McClatchy DC; thanks, Mark.)

In the U.S., normally each side has to pay its own fees, but some statutes say the ‘prevailing party’ is entitled to recover fees from the loser. But exactly who ‘prevails’ in a lawsuit is not always clear, and that was the case in this lawsuit, which involved Texas’s plans to redraw its voting districts. (Skip down three paragraphs or so if that could not sound more boring.)

Under the Voting Rights Act—Still here? Nerd. Under the Voting Rights Act, Texas was one of the states that had to get federal ‘preclearance’ for redistricting because of the history of discrimination there. Texas decided to sue for a declaration that its plans were okay, and the feds opposed. Other parties (Democrats, basically) intervened because they also wanted to oppose. Texas mostly lost in the district court, and it appealed. In the meantime, though, it came up with new plans that were more likely to comply with the court’s order.

One day before the new plans became law, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Shelby County that all this VRA preclearance stuff was unconstitutional—or had become unconstitutional at some point over the last 50 years, anyway, discrimination now being a thing of the past, you see. Told you so, said Texas, and moved to dismiss the still-pending case involving its first set of plans.

Okay, so who ‘prevailed’ in that mess? The Democratic groups said they did, because Texas lost the first ruling and changed its plans, just like they wanted it to, and they filed motions seeking over $1 million in fees. Texas did not agree.

It did not agree so much, in fact, that it didn’t even bother to file responses. Or, rather, it did file something but it couldn’t bring itself to call the document a ‘response.’ It filed this three-page thing it called an ‘Advisory,’ saying that not only did Shelby County mean Texas won, it meant Texas had essentially always been right because the law was unconstitutional all along (an ‘affront’ and a ‘nullity’), and the case never should have been brought. That’s wrong for a couple of reasons, I think, but Texas was so sure of itself that it didn’t bother to say much of anything else.

As the judge’s decision made clear, this was a Bad Idea. . . .

Share this:

  • Print
  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Telegram

Like this:

Like Loading...
← Older posts
Follow The Researching Paralegal on WordPress.com

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Search

Sign In/Register

  • Register
  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.com

Categories

Archives

  • March 2022
  • January 2022
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • January 2021
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • October 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • May 2019
  • March 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013

Recent Comments

Eric Voigt on Top 20 Paralegal Blogs, Websit…
profvoigt on Research Guides in Focus – Mun…
Make Your PDF Docume… on Make Your PDF Document Edit-Pr…
madlaw291282999 on Using Hyperbole -Are You Riski…
How to Treat Bad Cli… on Why Do Bad Clients Deserve The…

Recent Comments

Eric Voigt on Top 20 Paralegal Blogs, Websit…
profvoigt on Research Guides in Focus – Mun…
Make Your PDF Docume… on Make Your PDF Document Edit-Pr…
madlaw291282999 on Using Hyperbole -Are You Riski…
How to Treat Bad Cli… on Why Do Bad Clients Deserve The…
  • RSS - Posts
  • RSS - Comments

Blog at WordPress.com.

  • Follow Following
    • The Researching Paralegal
    • Join 454 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • The Researching Paralegal
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

You must be logged in to post a comment.

    %d bloggers like this: