• Home
  • About Me
  • Disclaimer

The Researching Paralegal

~ Articles and Research for Legal Professionals

The Researching Paralegal

Category Archives: Persuasive Writing

Best Tips To Improve Your Writing.

02 Thursday Jan 2020

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Legal Writing, Persuasive Writing, Plain Language, Propositions and Headings

≈ Comments Off on Best Tips To Improve Your Writing.

Tags

Adam Lamparello, Appellate Advocacy Blog, Legal Writing

Tips to Immediately Improve Your Writing Skills, by Adam Lamparello, Appellate Advocacy Blog

http://bit.ly/2Fcfqwe

An excellent list of key skills to improve your legal writing regardless of your proficiency level. This is one of the best legal writing checklists I have seen. Definitely worth a bookmark. -CCE

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...

Professor Lou Sirico, Jr. – A Tribute.

05 Saturday Jan 2019

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

≈ Comments Off on Professor Lou Sirico, Jr. – A Tribute.

Tags

Legal Skills Prof Blog, Professor James Levy, Professor Lou Sirico

I have a collection of favorite legal writing books. Among them is a much-loved, dog-eared, and highlighted book, Persuasive Legal Writing, by Professor Lou Sirico, Jr.

Some years ago, I saw that Professor Sirico was co-editor of the Legal Skills Prof Blog, and became an immediate faithful follower. You will find many references to his posts here at this website. His writing speaks for itself.

Sadly, this extraordinary man passed away on December 26, 2018 from cancer, and this great loss warrants note and the remembrance by someone who knew him well. With his permission, I share this January 2, 2019 post by Professor James Levy, a long-time friend of Professor Lou Sirico and co-editor of the Legal Skills Prof Blog.

https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/legal_skills/2019/01/more-about-professor-lou-sirico.html

It’s been a week since Lou, the co-editor of this blog and a friend and mentor to so many, colleagues and students alike, passed away. I haven’t posted on the blog since then out of respect for Lou’s memory and because I was waiting to find the right words to express what Lou meant to the people who knew him. But after a week I’m still at a loss to adequately describe his contributions. Instead, let me elaborate a bit on my earlier post while sharing some observations and anecdotes that speak to the kind of person Lou was and the many ways he helped others.

The first thought that comes to mind when I think about Lou is that he was one of the most authentic, genuine people I’ve ever met. I recently had the good fortune to spend a year as a visiting professor at the United States Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs (where, ironically enough, one of Lou’s former Villanova students was a JAG officer and professor in the law department) and the Air Force officers I met there, who I greatly admired, reminded me a lot of Lou. What they all have in common is their humility, putting service above self, trustworthiness, loyalty and honor. Lou didn’t have much of a social media presence, and he wasn’t one to tout his own accomplishments so many readers might not realize how much he devoted himself to the service of others. From organizing writing workshops that helped colleagues with their scholarship, to taking leadership positions in AALS, LWI and similar groups, to serving as EIC of the Journal of LWI and on the editorial board of Perspectives, Lou was the kind of guy that if he saw an opportunity to contribute to the profession, he was the first to raise his hand to volunteer. On an individual level, if you needed personal or career advice, he would always lend a patient ear and offer his sage wisdom. And he continued to serve others well into the latter phase of his career when most people are either slowing down or withdrawing altogether from such activities. Lou continued to serve others even when dealing with very serious health issues that for anyone else would have been good reason to dial it back. But Lou was always a work-horse and never a show-horse.

When Lou made a commitment to something, he meant it and kept his word. Take this blog, for example. When Lou agreed to help me start it in 2010, he was committing to blogging nearly every day for more than 8 years. Think about how many other blogs and bloggers have come and gone in that time. I’d like to think Lou continued to blog all these years, even in sickness, because he enjoyed it or found it satisfying, but I also know that he did it because he was a man of his word who honored his commitments. Related to that, Lou was a man of great integrity as evidenced by his decision to resign from an editorial board in protest over the mistreatment of a colleague.

For all these reasons (and more), many years ago I nominated Lou for the Blackwell Award which is given to the legal writing prof who makes an outstanding contribution to the discipline. By the time I’d nominated Lou for the award, I’d known him for more than ten years. During that time, I’d heard some colleagues pronounce his last name “sear-ah-coh,” though I had always pronounced it “sur-ree-coh,” like the famous Watergate judge. Since Lou never corrected me, I assumed I had it right. But during the Blackwell speech I gave on Lou’s behalf at AALS that year, I asked Lou from across the room “have I been pronouncing your name wrong all these years?” Lou sheepishly nodded “yes.” I later realized that Lou would rather endure the mangling of his last name than possibly embarrass someone by correcting them. In other words, another example of Lou putting the feelings of others ahead of his own.

When my mother passed away about a year or two after that, I was about to take over as EIC of J. Legal Writing, a job that Lou had also previously done. Lou was the first person I called for advice because I was thinking about quitting. Lou counselled me not to make any hasty decisions about important life choices like jobs, relationships, etc. following a traumatic event like the death of a parent. Instead, he told me to wait at least a year to put some distance between my mother’s death and any decision about the EIC job. During our last phone call several weeks ago, I reminded Lou of that conversation – which he remembered well – and how I’d been able to pay it forward to others in the intervening years. Yet another example of Lou’s continued service. And during our last phone call, I got emotional when Lou said he likely had less than a year due to the cancer diagnosis. Lou reassured me that he’d made peace with his situation and in so doing was clearly trying to protect my feelings a bit too.

Tom Brokaw called the generation that fought in World War II the “Greatest Generation” because of their dedication to service above self, being committed to a cause larger than oneself and their collective strength of character. Lou was born too late to be part of the “Greatest Generation” in terms of demographics. But in terms of ethos and the way he lived his life, that’s exactly who he was and why we won’t see the likes of Lou Sirico again.

Rest in peace.

(jbl).

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...

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

03 Friday Aug 2018

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP 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

Legal Writing, Mark Cooney, Michigan Bar Association, Passive Voice, Plain Language

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

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...

The True Test of Good Legal Writing.

30 Saturday Jun 2018

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Legal Writing, Persuasive Writing, Plain Language, Readability

≈ Comments Off on The True Test of Good Legal Writing.

Tags

Hon. Gerald Lebovits, Legal Writing, Michagan Bar Journal, Plain Language Committee

Free at Last from Obscurity: Achieving Clarity, by Hon. Gerald Lebovits, 97 Mich. B. J. 6, 38 (May 2017)

https://www.michbar.org/file/barjournal/article/documents/pdf4article3120.pdf

I love the Plain Language Committee of the Michigan Bar Association. Every one of its articles in the Michigan Bar Journal is a legal writing gem. In this article, Judge Lebovits explains why this is your goal and how to do it:

[T]he hallmark of good legal writing is that an intelligent layperson will understand it on the first read.

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...

Law Professor Antonio Gidi’s New Legal Writing Book.

28 Monday May 2018

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Bad Legal Writing, Legal Writing, Persuasive Writing, Plain Language, Readability

≈ Comments Off on Law Professor Antonio Gidi’s New Legal Writing Book.

Tags

Antonio Gidi, Legal Writing Syle, Persuasive Writing

Legal Writing Style, by Antonio Gidi (West 2018), at SSRN.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3157430

Antonio Gidi, law professor at Syracuse University College of Law, recently updated Weihofen’s Legal Writing Style. Professor Gidi is a strong proponent of  concise and persuasive legal writing. A preview of the book is available at the SSRN link above; just click on “Download This Paper.” Plenty for the novice legal writer and good tips for those looking to sharpen their legal writing skills. -CCE

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...

“No Passion in the World is Equal to the Passion to Alter Someone Else’s Draft.” H.G. Wells

20 Wednesday Dec 2017

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Bad Legal Writing, Brief Writing, Editing, Legal Writing, Legalese, Persuasive Writing, Plain Language, Punctuation, Readability

≈ Comments Off on “No Passion in the World is Equal to the Passion to Alter Someone Else’s Draft.” H.G. Wells

Tags

Douglas E. Abrams, Editing, Legal Writing, Missouri Bar Journal, SSRN, University of Missouri School of Law

We are the Products of Editing, Douglas E. Abrams, Precedent, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 12-14, Spring 2008; University of Missouri School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2008-18.

Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1138300 

How many of us take the time to proof and edit what we write? I suspect that most, if not all, good legal writers do it. No, I’m not talking about simply running a review of your grammar, style, and punctuation in Microsoft Word. I mean really reading, proofing, and editing what you write.

When you write for the court, what is your goal? To be understood? Of course. To persuade? Absolutely. To do that, you must keep your reader’s attention. Long sentences that take up an entire paragraph, legalese, and unnecessary words are boring – period. Why would anyone want to read a quote takes up an entire page?

Persuasive legal writing is an art. It takes work, and that means editing and polishing until your writing is clear, concise, and logically flows from one point to the next. Your goal, as I’ve mentioned before, is that, by the time your judge finishes reading your brief or other document, that judge is subconsciously nodding in agreement.

As someone who has seen a state supreme court judge literally throw a party’s brief across the room because it was so badly written, I promise that judges will not waste time reading legal gibberish. If a judge finds one side‘s brief difficult to read, how much frustration does it take to put it down and pick up the other side’s well-written brief to get the facts of the case and legal argument? Folks, it doesn’t take much.

Don’t take my word for it. Mr. Abrams’ article does an excellent job. -CCE

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...

Bryan Garner Shows Us How to Start a Sentence.

10 Sunday Dec 2017

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Editing, Grammar, Legal Writing, Persuasive Writing

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

Tags

ABA Journal, Bryan A. Garner, Legal Writing

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

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...

What Judges Want.

16 Saturday Sep 2017

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Bad Legal Writing, Legal Argument, Legal Writing, Persuasive Writing, Readability

≈ Comments Off on What Judges Want.

Tags

Legal Writing, Legal Writing Pro, Ross Guberman, William P. Statsky

Judges Speak Out Behind Closed Doors: How Your Briefs Might Bug Them, and How You Can Make Them Smile Instead, by Ross Guberman, Legal Writing Pro (with hat tip to William P. Statsky)

https://www.legalwritingpro.com/blog/judges-speak-out/

Ross Guberman is one of my favorite legal writing experts. Mr. Guberman conducted an anonymous and broad survey of judges’ likes and dislikes on legal writing. If you are serious about winning, then you care whether your judge not only reads and understands what you write, but also likes it. -CCE

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...

Former FBI Director Comey Acknowledged As Legal Writing Star.

13 Tuesday Jun 2017

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Editing, Legal Writing, Persuasive Writing, Plain Language, Readability

≈ Comments Off on Former FBI Director Comey Acknowledged As Legal Writing Star.

Why Does Comey Get an “A” in Legal Writing for His Written Testimony? by Megan E. Boyd, Lady (Legal) Writer Blog

http://ladylegalwriter.blogspot.com/2017/06/why-does-comey-get-a-in-legal-writing.html

Guest post writer, Kirsten Davis, J.D., Ph.D., and Megan Boyd, the author of the Lady (Legal) Writer Blog, know great legal writing when they see it. Last Thursday, when appearing before the Intelligence Committee, Idaho Senator James Risch described former FBI Director James Comey’s written testimony as “clear,” “concise,” and “as good as it gets.”  You don’t hear that every day. So, what made Comey’s writing deserve such high praise? Enjoy this lesson on excellent legal writing. -CCE

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...

Use Plain English Rather Than Medical Jargon.

12 Wednesday Apr 2017

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Legal Writing, Persuasive Writing, Plain Language, Trial Tips and Techniques

≈ Comments Off on Use Plain English Rather Than Medical Jargon.

Tags

David Daly, Dr. Oscar Linares, Gertrude Daly, Michigan Bar Journal, Plain English

Plain English Helps Explain Medical Issues Clearly, A Case Study, by Dr. Oscar Linares, David Daly, and Gertrude Daly, 36 Mich. B J. (Jan. 2017)

http://www.michbar.org/file/barjournal/article/documents/pdf4article3039.pdf

Professionals, like doctors, often speak using medical jargon. Other doctors understand it, but not necessarily everyone else. This is true for anyone who uses technical language specific to their work. But in a legal matter, communication is critical. A good reason to use plain English, isn’t it? -CCE

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...

Excellent Example of Appellate Court’s Use of Persuasive Legal Writing Tools.

04 Tuesday Apr 2017

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, Appellate Law, Civil Rights, Legal Analysis, Legal Writing, Persuasive Writing, Second Amendment

≈ Comments Off on Excellent Example of Appellate Court’s Use of Persuasive Legal Writing Tools.

Tags

Lady (Legal) Writer Blog, Legal Analysis, Legal Writing, Megan E. Boyd, Second Amendment

Contrasting Introductions in Kolbe v. Hogan, by Megan E. Boyd, Lady (Legal) Writer Blog

http://ladylegalwriter.blogspot.com/2017/03/contrasting-introductions-in-kolbe-v.html

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals recently held that Maryland’s Firearm Safety Act (FSA), which bans AR-15s, other military-style rifles, and certain large-capacity magazines, is constitutional and does not violate the Second or Fourteenth Amendments.

This decision is controversial for a number of reasons (aren’t all cases involving guns?), but the introductions in the majority and dissenting opinions are particularly interesting. You’d expect an opinion about the constitutionality of a firearm-related statute to start with an exposition of Second Amendment law or a discussion of the specific language of the statute itself.

Not this majority opinion. It starts with a literal bang . . . .

Continue reading →

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...

Tips on Writing Persuasive Propositions.

02 Thursday Mar 2017

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Brief Writing, Legal Writing, Persuasive Writing, Propositions and Headings

≈ Comments Off on Tips on Writing Persuasive Propositions.

Tags

©Now Counsel Network, Briefs, Legal Writing, Lisa Solomon, Persuasive Legal Writing, Propositions, William P. Statsky

How to Write Effective Argument Headings, by Lisa Solomon, NOW Counsel Network (with hat tip to William P. Statsky!)

http://bit.ly/2ljxJbg

Ms. Solomon calls them argument or point headings. I call them propositions. Regardless, their importance as a persuasive writing tool in any brief should never been overlooked.

A proposition or heading is a succinct statement that states the question or issue to be discussed and answered in your brief. If done correctly, the reader – your judge – should follow the logical flow of your brief’s argument by simply reading the propositions and sub-propositions.  

A proposition that is a positive statement is more persuasive than a question.  Even better, your proposition should state positively what the court ought to do and why. X should happen because of Y or, because of Y, X should happen.  Regardless of the format you use, a proposition that says why the court should rule as you want is always more persuasive. -CCE

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...

Legal Writing Myths

11 Saturday Feb 2017

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Brief Writing, Citations, Editing, Legal Argument, Legal Writing, Persuasive Writing, Plain Language

≈ Comments Off on Legal Writing Myths

Tags

Judge Gerald Lebovits, Legal Writing, Michigan Bar Journal, Plain English Subcomittee

Legal-Writing Myths, by the Hon. Gerald Lebovits, Plain English Subcommittee Column, 50 Mich. B.J. (February 2017)©2017

https://researchingparalegal.wordpress.com/?p=4848&preview=true

 

Are longer briefs more persuasive? Is it a legal writing faux pas to start a sentence with “and”? Do judges care if you follow Bluebook citation format? Judge Lebovits has some thoughts on these and other legal writing myths to share, some of which may surprise you. -CCE

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...

Make Legal Writing Resolutions for 2017.

03 Tuesday Jan 2017

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Editing, Grammar, Legal Writing, Persuasive Writing, Readability

≈ Comments Off on Make Legal Writing Resolutions for 2017.

Tags

©Now Counsel Network, Legal Writing, Lisa Solomon

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

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...

Plain English Legal Writing – Proof Positive That It Works.

12 Monday Dec 2016

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Bad Legal Writing, Editing, Judges, Legal Argument, Legal Writing, Legalese, Persuasive Writing, Plain Language, Readability

≈ Comments Off on Plain English Legal Writing – Proof Positive That It Works.

Tags

Joseph Kimble, Legalese, Michigan Bar Journal, Plain English Column

The Proof is in the Reading, Plain Language Works Best, by Joseph Kimble, 52 Mich. B J. (Oct. 2016)

http://www.michbar.org/file/barjournal/article/documents/pdf4article2972.pdf

Joseph Kimble has long been recognized as one of the top legal writing scholars. In this Plain English column of the Michigan Bar Journal (every Bar Journal should have one!), Professor Kimble offers evidence once again that readers, including judges, prefer plain language and why. -CCE

To help round out this plain-English theme issue of the Bar Journal, I offer the evidence of four studies. These four are among 50 that I collect and summarize in my book Writing for Dollars, Writing to Please: The Case for Plain Language in Business, Government, and Law. Of the 50 studies, 18 involved different kinds of legal documents—lawsuit papers, judicial opinions, statutes, regulations, jury instructions, court forms and notices, and contracts. And they included readers of all sorts—judges, lawyers, administrators, and the general  public. The evidence is overwhelming: readers strongly prefer plain language to legalese, understand it better and faster, are more likely to comply with it, and are more likely to read it to begin with. —JK

Continue reading →

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...

Dump This Common Legal Writing Phrase!

09 Sunday Oct 2016

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

≈ Comments Off on Dump This Common Legal Writing Phrase!

Tags

Law Skills Prof Blog, Legal Analysis, Legal Writing, Louis J. Sirico Jr.

Avoid Beginning Sentences with “The court held that . . . .” by Louis J. Sirico, Jr., Law Skills Prof Blog (with hat tip to William P. Statsky)

http://bit.ly/2d5b89q

Busted! I use this phrase all the time. Here’s a way to take your legal writing to another level. -CCE

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...

What’s Wrong With Using “And/Or”?

06 Thursday Oct 2016

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Grammar, Legal Writing, Persuasive Writing

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

Tags

And/Or, Legal Writing, Slaw Canada’s online legal writing magazine, Ted Tjaden

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 →

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...

Bad Brief!

28 Thursday Jul 2016

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

≈ Comments Off on Bad Brief!

Tags

Briefs, IRAC, Jane L. Istvan, Legal Writing, Sarah E. Ricks, SSRN

Effective Brief Writing Despite High Volume Practice: Ten Misconceptions that Result in Bad Briefs, by Sarah E. Ricks, Rutgers School of Law – Camden, and Jane L. Istvan, City of Philadelphia Law Department, 38 U. Tol. L. Rev. 1113, SSRN

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=996907

Excellent paper on the repeated mistakes judges and their staff see in briefs.

In a busy law practice, we may not always have the luxury of researching and editing as thoroughly as we may like when writing a brief. We are so familiar with our case that we often forget the perspective of our reader. Imagine sitting all day in trial immersed in one area of law, and then switching gears afterwards to read and absorb a brief in a completely different type of law.

This paper reminds us how to write persuasively for the court, even when under pressure to meet deadlines. -CCE

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...

Tell Your Client’s Story With A Good Narrative.

19 Sunday Jun 2016

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

≈ Comments Off on Tell Your Client’s Story With A Good Narrative.

Tags

Karen Sneddon, Legal Skills Prof Blog, Legal Writing, Louis J. Sirico Jr., Narrative Techniques, Oklahoma Law Review, Susan Chesler

Using Narrative in Transactional Documents, by Louis J. Sirico, Jr., Legal Skills Prof Blog

http://bit.ly/26buQ9Y

Susan Chesler and Karen Sneddon have written a very interesting article on including narrative in transactional documents. Once Upon a Transaction: Narrative Techniques and Drafting, 68 Oklahoma Law Review No. 2 (2016).

Here is the introduction:  A granddaughter joins the family business as a partner. An entrepreneur licenses his newest product. Two parties decide to settle a dispute. A charitable idea materializes as a private foundation. A parent’s belief in the power of education is perpetuated by a trust agreement. Each of these events forms a narrative. A transaction is more than the scratch of pens across signature pages or the click of keys to email an executed document. A transaction is itself a story.

Continue reading →

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...

What’s It Like In Your Judge’s Shoes?

03 Friday Jun 2016

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Brief Writing, Legal Argument, Legal Writing, Legalese, Persuasive Writing, Readability

≈ Comments Off on What’s It Like In Your Judge’s Shoes?

Tags

Legal Skills Prof Blog, Legal Writing, Louis J. Sirico Jr., Persuasive Writing, Sherri Lee Keene

Advice on Writing to Persuade the Court, by Louis J. Sirico, Jr., Legal Skills Prof Blog (with hat tip to William P. Statsky)

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/legal_skills/2016/06/advice-on-writing-to-persuade-the-court.html

In her article, Standing in the Judge’s Shoes: Exploring Techniques to Help Legal Writers More Fully Address the Needs of Their Audience, Sherri Lee Keene argues that lawyers writing as advocates need to place themselves in the shoes of the judges whom they seek to persuade. Of course, this is not new advice. What is helpful here is her advice on how to do it.

Continue reading →

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...

Just Really Good Legal Writing.

21 Saturday May 2016

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Bad Legal Writing, Editing, Grammar, Legal Writing, Legalese, Persuasive Writing, Punctuation, Readability

≈ Comments Off on Just Really Good Legal Writing.

Tags

Eugene Volokh, Grammar, J. Alexander Tanford, Legal Writing, Maurer School of Law, Punctuation

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 →

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...

Brief Writing – The Summary of the Argument.

13 Sunday Mar 2016

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Bad Legal Writing, Brief Writing, Legal Analysis, Legal Argument, Legal Writing, Persuasive Writing, Summary of the Argument

≈ Comments Off on Brief Writing – The Summary of the Argument.

Tags

Judith Fischer, Legal Skills Prof Blog, Legal Writing, Louis J. Sirico Jr., Summary of the Argument

Drafting the Summary of Argument, by Louis J. Sirico, Jr., Legal Skills Prof Blog

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/legal_skills/2016/03/drafting-the-summary-of-argument.html

Although not all courts require a “Summary of the Argument” in major briefs, you might consider adding one nonetheless. It is the heart of your brief. It concisely sums up your argument – no fluff allowed.

Some busy judges will read your Table of Contents, Table of Authorities, the Summary of the Argument, and nothing else. It is why the Summary of the Argument is at the beginning of a brief, and why it should to get right to the point and stay there.

This is a particularly interesting article on writing by Judith Fischer, and well worth your time regardless of your brief writing skills. -CCE

[B]ecause the summary of the argument appears near the beginning of a brief, it allows the legal advocate to take advantage of both framing and priming to begin to convince the Court. Thus, it’s a mistake for an advocate to treat the section as an afterthought. . . .

Continue reading →

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...

Does Legalese Have A Legitimate Purpose?

13 Saturday Feb 2016

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

≈ Comments Off on Does Legalese Have A Legitimate Purpose?

Tags

Brendan Kenny, Lawyerist Blog, Legal Terms of Art, Legal Writing, Legalese

Lawyers, Stop Writing (and Saying) These Things Immediately, by Brendan Kenny, Lawyerist Blog© 2007–2016

http://bit.ly/1PJPILK

Many lawyers are tired of hearing about legalese, and many still haven’t embraced plain language in their own legal writing and speaking. This post won’t try to change their minds. If Bryan Garner’s life work can’t convince lawyers, how can I?

But there is another issue often lost in the plain-language wars: where did all these legalese words come from? The perception on both sides seems to be these words and phrases once served a purpose, but don’t anymore. But what if we discovered that they never served any purpose? . . . .

Continue reading →

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...

Plain Language = Good Writing.

28 Saturday Nov 2015

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Bad Legal Writing, Grammar, Legal Writing, Persuasive Writing, Plain Language, Proofreading, Readability

≈ Comments Off on Plain Language = Good Writing.

Tags

Legal Writing, Mark Cooney, Michigan Bar Journal, Plain Language

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 →

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: