Category Archives: Grammar

What’s the Clue to Whom Did What, Where, and Why?

03 Friday Aug 2018

Posted by in Bad Legal Writing, Grammar, Legal Writing, Persuasive Writing, Plain Language

≈ Comments Off on What’s the Clue to Whom Did What, Where, and Why?

Tags

, , , ,

Give A Clue (A Linguist Whodunit), by Mark Cooney, 97 Mich. B. J. 60-62 (June 2017) 

“This piece first appeared in Professor Cooney’s book, Sketches on Legal Style, published by Carolina Academic Press.”

https://www.michbar.org/file/barjournal/article/documents/pdf4article3146.pdf

In this tongue-in-cheek parody of Hasbro’s classic board game, Clue©, Professor Cooney delightfully explains the importance of using the active voice rather than the passive.

The basic tenet of good legal writing is to put the subject and verb together, place modifiers next to what they modify, and use the active voice. The passive voice causes confusion rather than clarity because it fails to communicate the writer’s intention. There is only one valid use of the passive voice – when the actor is unknown or unimportant.

Enjoy! -CCE

Bryan Garner Shows Us How to Start a Sentence.

10 Sunday Dec 2017

Posted by in Editing, Grammar, Legal Writing, Persuasive Writing

≈ Comments Off on Bryan Garner Shows Us How to Start a Sentence.

Tags

, ,

How To Start A Sentence: Consider All Your Alternatives, And Sprinkle In Some Conjunctions, Too, by Bryan A. Garner, Bryan Garner on Words, ABA Journal 

http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/how_to_start_a_sentence

Bryan Garner is one of the recognized experts on legal writing. This post isn’t about just how to start a sentence. It shows you why the last sentence in a paragraph is the most important, and how to use the first sentence to set it up.

Check out the second paragraph of the post. Look at the example of how to show, not tell.  Don’t worry about whether you understand his use of words, such as “adverbial elements.” Pay attention to his examples. He will show you what works, and what doesn’t.

Were you taught, as I was, never to use a conjunction to start a sentence? In the latter part of this post, Mr. Garner illustrates how using conjunctions to start sentences is an excellent writing tool. And I agree with him. -CCE

Using Intensifiers Is A Very Bad Horrible Writing Habit.

19 Saturday Aug 2017

Posted by in Grammar, Legal Writing

≈ Comments Off on Using Intensifiers Is A Very Bad Horrible Writing Habit.

Tags

, , ,

Avoid Intensifiers in Your Writing, by Louis J. Sirocco, Jr., Legal Skills Prof Blog

http://bit.ly/2x1Ay34

This is a legal writing lesson I know and have taught, but I am guilty of this bad writing habit all the same. It reminds me never to be complacent about word choice.  -CCE

The Basics of Legal Writing for Legal Professionals.

04 Sunday Jun 2017

Posted by in Editing, Grammar, Legal Argument, Legal Writing, Plain Language, Readability

≈ Comments Off on The Basics of Legal Writing for Legal Professionals.

Tags

, , ,

The Writing Process for New Lawyers: Getting it Written and Right, by Gerald Lebovits, The Legal Writer, 89 N.Y. St. B.J. 80 (May 2017) (with hat tip to William P. Statsky)

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2967050

Although this article is about the basics of legal writing, even seasoned legal writers will find it useful and instructive. Regardless of how well we think we write, we can always improve.

This article puts an emphasis on focusing on the purpose of your document, organizing your thoughts, considering your reader, researching, and editing. In short, all the basics you need to write well. -CCE

New and Updated GPO Style Manual.

18 Wednesday Jan 2017

Posted by in Abbreviations, Editing, Grammar, Initialisms, Legal Writing, Numbers, Punctuation, Style Manuals

≈ Comments Off on New and Updated GPO Style Manual.

Tags

, , , ,

GPO Style Manual: new edition, Barco 3.0: Law Library Reference

http://bit.ly/2is1ipN

The Government Publishing Office has published a thorough and updated Style Manual, which includes rules for punctuation, grammar, abbreviations, and computer terms, among other things. You will find “New Features and Enhancements” at https://www.govinfo.gov/features/release-notes/govinfo-beta-launch.

Make Legal Writing Resolutions for 2017.

03 Tuesday Jan 2017

Posted by in Editing, Grammar, Legal Writing, Persuasive Writing, Readability

≈ Comments Off on Make Legal Writing Resolutions for 2017.

Tags

, ,

3 Easy-to-Keep Legal-Writing Resolutions for 2017, by Lisa Solomon, Now Counsel Network Blog©

http://bit.ly/2hK5QTb

Made your New Year’s resolution yet? Going for the usual? This year I will lose weight, go to the gym, and swear off fried food and chocolate? No way. Giving up chocolate would take a serious toll on my mental health.

So may I recommend honing your legal writing skills as alternative? I promise there’s no gym fees, and you can eat all the chocolate you want. -CCE

What’s Wrong With Using “And/Or”?

06 Thursday Oct 2016

Posted by in Grammar, Legal Writing, Persuasive Writing

≈ Comments Off on What’s Wrong With Using “And/Or”?

Tags

, , ,

Do Not Use “and/or” in Legal Writing, by Ted Tjaden, Slaw Canada’s online legal writing magazine

http://www.slaw.ca/2011/07/27/grammar-legal-writing/

If there was any question in my mind about whether using “and/or” is good legal writing, it is resolved. After reading Mr. Tjaden’s post, supported by detailed, exhaustive research, you too may become a believer. -CCE

I remain surprised at the number of intelligent, articulate, and well-read legal professionals who still use ‘and/or’ in legal writing.

I am therefore creating this post to document a fairly complete list of authorities that support what I think is the better (if not obvious) view: never use ‘and/or’ in legal writing (or any writing). And yes, I said ‘never.’

Continue reading →

Reference, Facts, News, Search Engines, Email, and More. Easy Peasy.

12 Sunday Jun 2016

Posted by in Dictionary, Glossaries, Grammar, Punctuation, Quotations, References, Research, Style Manuals, Thesaurus

≈ Comments Off on Reference, Facts, News, Search Engines, Email, and More. Easy Peasy.

Tags

, , ,

Refdesk.com – Fact Checker for the Internet

http://www.refdesk.com/

Refdesk.com has been around a long time. If you have never seen it or used it, please give me the honor of making the introductions.

Go the home page: http://www.refdesk.com. There is a lot to absorb.  Take your time. Scroll down the page, and check it out.

Bothered by the ads popping up on the page? There is an easy fix. Support Refdesk. Contribute $25, and Refdesk is add free for a year. No, you don’t have to contribute $25. You don’t have to contribute at all. But, if you want to use Refdesk frequently, I encourage you to contribute something.

If you are like me, you do not want to keep scrolling to find what you want to see – you simply want to get there. Go to the top of the website, and look to the right. You will see three search tools: (1) Check Email; (2) Quick Links; and (3) Reference Desk.  Right away, you can see that this has potential as home page.

I want to look up grammar and punctuation rules. Go to Reference Desk, click the down arrow, and choose “Grammar/Style.” That’s a nice assortment of writing guides, but not exactly what I want. I’m looking for The Elements of Style. Click on More at the bottom of the page. There it is.

You have seen one small example of the information this site can give you. I leave it to you to seek out the rest.  -CCE

The Proper Use and Interpretation of “Shall” and “Will.”

26 Thursday May 2016

Posted by in Contract Law, Corporate Law, Grammar, Legal Analysis, Legal Writing

≈ Comments Off on The Proper Use and Interpretation of “Shall” and “Will.”

Tags

, , , , ,

The Legal Writer – The Problem with Shall, by Elizabeth Ruiz Frost, Oregon State Bar Bulletin (February/March)

https://www.osbar.org/publications/bulletin/12febmar/legalwriter.html

When we draft legal documents for our clients, we aim to articulate who can do what and when. Those rights and obligations are established through words of authority. But in legal writing, inconsistent use and interpretation of some words of authority can create ambiguity in our documents.

The word shall can be particularly troublesome. Drafters often use shall in place of other words like does, will, should, might or may. If we use shall sometimes to connote a mandatory term, at other times to connote a discretionary term, and once in a while to connote a future event, how can a reader accurately determine our intent? When a word of authority is used inconsistently, courts are left to determine the word’s meaning. To avoid squabbles over ambiguous terms, think through each word of authority that you write and use these words consistently.

Continue reading →

How To Use “That” and “Which,” And Why You Should Care.

22 Sunday May 2016

Posted by in Contract Law, Corporate Law, Grammar, Legal Writing, Punctuation, Readability

≈ Comments Off on How To Use “That” and “Which,” And Why You Should Care.

Tags

, , , , , ,

Using That and Which Correctly, Better Writing Skills, Writing Resources From Scribe Consulting

http://www.betterwritingskills.com/tip-w022.html

An easy-to-understand example of the difference between “that” and “which” and why, in legal and business writing, it is important to use each correctly.  It also provides an excellent example of how grammar and punctuation mistakes can dramatically change the meaning of your document. -CCE

For more writing tips on common grammar errors, go to http://www.betterwritingskills.com/writing-tips.html.

Just Really Good Legal Writing.

21 Saturday May 2016

Posted by in Bad Legal Writing, Editing, Grammar, Legal Writing, Legalese, Persuasive Writing, Punctuation, Readability

≈ Comments Off on Just Really Good Legal Writing.

Tags

, , , , ,

How To Write Good Legal Stuff, by Eugene Volokh and J. Alexander Tanford, Maurer School of Law© 2001, 2009

http://law.indiana.edu/instruction/tanford/web/reference/how2writegood.pdf

This is a guide to good legal writing. Good writing consists of avoiding common clunkers and using simpler replacements. The replacements aren’t always perfect synonyms but 90% of the time they’re better than the original. Warning: Some changes also require grammatical twiddling of other parts of the sentence. This is not a guide to proper high English usage. We don’t give two hoots whether you dangle participles, split infinitives or end sentences with prepositions. We care that you can write clearly.

Continue reading →

Quick Legal Writing Course.

24 Thursday Dec 2015

Posted by in Bad Legal Writing, Editing, Grammar, Legal Writing

≈ Comments Off on Quick Legal Writing Course.

Tags

, , , ,

Video: A Down and Dirty Writing, Editing and Grammar Course For Lawyers, Gary Kinder, Legal Productivity®

http://www.legalproductivity.com/webinars/video-writing-for-lawyers/

Regardless of how good your legal writing may be, there is always room for improvement. Like anything else, your writing skills improve with practice. 

You may not think your writing skills are less than ideal. You may not think it’s a big deal – who cares whether your grammar or punctuation is perfect? Actually, most people, including clients. -CCE

Plain Language = Good Writing.

28 Saturday Nov 2015

Posted by in Bad Legal Writing, Grammar, Legal Writing, Persuasive Writing, Plain Language, Proofreading, Readability

≈ Comments Off on Plain Language = Good Writing.

Tags

, , ,

The Pros Know: Plain Language Is Just Good Writing, by Mark Cooney, 94 Mich. B.J. 54 (Sept. 2015) (with hat tip to William P. Statsky!)

http://www.michbar.org/file/barjournal/article/documents/pdf4article2701.pdf

Is plain language foreign to ‘real’ writers? To the pros, I mean? Would professional writers, editors, and literary agents outside our field scoff at the plain style that this column has long endorsed? Would plain English draw ridicule in those quarters? Too childish? Dumbed down? Illiterate? And would readers of literate magazines, technical journals, or fiction balk at the simplicity, the directness?

This is an easy one: no—on all counts. . . .

Continue reading →

Grammar Lessons From The CIA.

25 Wednesday Nov 2015

Posted by in Grammar, Legal Writing, Plain Language, Punctuation, Style Manuals

≈ Comments Off on Grammar Lessons From The CIA.

Tags

, , , , ,

11 Grammar Lessons from the Leaked CIA Style Book, by Nick Greene, Mental Floss Inc. © 2012

http://mentalfloss.com/article/57743/11-grammar-lessons-leaked-cia-style-book

In 2014, a leaked copy of the Directorate of Intelligence Style Manual & Writer’s Guide for Intelligence Publications found its way to the Internet. That long title belies what it actually is: A well-written style book for the CIA — the Strunk & White for Spies.

Inside the 181 pages (not including the index) is a terrific guide for normal folks, and not just government sleuths. It still offers some unique advice, however, and you won’t find some of these examples in your copy of the Oxford American Dictionary. . . .

Continue reading →

Plain Language Examples – Before and After.

16 Friday Oct 2015

Posted by in Bad Legal Writing, Editing, Grammar, Legal Writing, Legalese, Plain Language, Proofreading, Punctuation, Readability

≈ Comments Off on Plain Language Examples – Before and After.

Tags

, , , ,

Before-and-After Comparisons, PlainLanguge.gov

http://www.plainlanguage.gov/examples/before_after/index.cfm

There are a number of superior – and free – websites available to anyone who wants to improve his legal writing skills. PlainLaguage.gov is one of them.

I doubt that anyone wants to write poorly. Often, just showing before-and-after examples improve writing skills. One of the most efficient ways I have found when teaching legal writing is to take a bad writing example, identify why it is ineffective or just plain silly, and suggest different ways to fix it.

Here are examples of government regulations, manuals, handbooks, reports, and other publications that show “before and after” examples that use plain language to improve a sentence, paragraph, or document. -CCE

Supreme Court Writing Analysis – Whose Briefs Win and Why.

22 Saturday Aug 2015

Posted by 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

, , , , ,

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

Free Legal Style Guide from Adobe.

31 Friday Jul 2015

Posted by in Adobe Acrobat, Editing, Grammar, Legal Technology, Legal Writing, Numbers, Punctuation, Style Manuals

≈ Comments Off on Free Legal Style Guide from Adobe.

Tags

, , ,

Adobe Legal Department Legal Style Guide (with hat tip to William P. Statsky)

http://www.adobe.com/legal/legal-innovation.html

A free, concise legal writing style guide from Adobe. Definitely worth a look. -CCE

 

Legal Writing Tips Honey Pot.

29 Wednesday Jul 2015

Posted by in Bad Legal Writing, Business Memorandums, Contract Law, Editing, Grammar, Legal Writing, Punctuation

≈ Comments Off on Legal Writing Tips Honey Pot.

Tags

, , , , , ,

Writing Cheat Sheets for Your Summer at the Screen, by Ross Guberman, Legal Writing Tips for Attorneys and Judges

http://legalwritingpro.com/blog/writing-cheat-sheets-for-your-summer-at-the-screen/

There is something here for everyone – student, newbie, or seasoned professional. Writing tips for memos, grammar, punctuation, biggest partner complaints, checklist for drafting contracts, and more. Many thanks, Mr. Guberman! -CCE

As a writing trainer for many of the nation’s top law firms with about 500 summer-associate workshops under my belt, I’ve learned first-hand where summer associates go wrong and how to help them succeed.

Here are some questions that will likely come up over the summer, along with links to some free online resources. . . .

Continue reading →

The Difference Between “Affect” and “Effect.”

14 Tuesday Jul 2015

Posted by in Grammar, Legal Writing

≈ Comments Off on The Difference Between “Affect” and “Effect.”

Tags

, , ,

Affect Versus Effect, by Mignon Fogarty, Grammar Girl

http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/affect-versus-effect

When to use affect and effect is one of the most common questions I get. This is an expanded show based on the original episode covering when to use affect with an a and when to use effect with an e. . . .

Yes! Ohio Court Rules Missing Punctuation Changes Interpretation Of Municipal Code.

11 Saturday Jul 2015

Posted by in Bad Legal Writing, Grammar, Legal Analysis, Legal Writing, Proofreading, Punctuation, Statutory Interpretation

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , ,

Ohio Appeals Court Ruling Is A Victory For Punctuation, Sanity, by Sarah Larimer, The Washington Post (with hat tip to William P. Statsky)

http://tinyurl.com/q7vzjws

Punctuation nerds, rejoice! For all of us who care deeply about really good legal writing, grammar, and punctuation, today we are vindicated! Thank you, Judge Robert A. Hendrickson, of the Twelfth District Court of Appeals in Ohio. -CCE

Look, I know you’re all busy, but let’s just take a minute today and celebrate Judge Robert A. Hendrickson and the 12th District Court of Appeals in Ohio.

These defenders of punctuation.

These champions of copy editors everywhere.

That one court that totally called out a village ordinance for its comma-related failings.

(I know!!!)

Continue reading →