• Home
  • About Me
  • Disclaimer

The Researching Paralegal

~ Articles and Research for Legal Professionals

The Researching Paralegal

Category Archives: Readability

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...

Full or Left Justification?

01 Tuesday May 2018

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Legal Writing, Readability, Style Manuals

≈ Comments Off on Full or Left Justification?

Tags

Legal Writing, Legible Blog, Wayne Schiess

Are You Justified?, from Legible, A blog from Legalwriting.net by Wayne Schiess

http://sites.utexas.edu/legalwriting/2013/01/17/are-you-justified/

Do you prefer full or left justification? In the legal writing community, this is a serious debate. It ranks up there with whether citations belong in the text or in a footnote, but not quite as serious as whether you follow the rule of one or two spaces after a period.

The point is whether your choice makes your writing easier to read and understand, which is, after all, the legal writing holy grail. -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...

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...

What Will Ignoring the Court Rules Get You? A Big Fat Benchslap.

08 Tuesday Aug 2017

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Bad Legal Writing, Benchslap, Brief Writing, Editing, Footnotes, Judges, Legal Writing, Motions, Plain Language, Proofreading, Readability

≈ Comments Off on What Will Ignoring the Court Rules Get You? A Big Fat Benchslap.

Tags

Court Rules, Editing, Findlaw, George Khoury, Legal Writing, William P. Statsky

Florida Judge Tosses Improperly Spaced Court Filing, by George Khoury, Esq., Strategist, The Findlaw Law Firm Business Blog  (with hat tip to William P. Statsky)

http://bit.ly/2uP9FyB

Mr. Khoury says that “[h]ell hath no fury like a Florida judge who receives an improperly formatted brief.” You better believe it. Why on earth would you ignore the format requirements in your court’s local rules? Folks, this just isn’t that hard.

The author of this motion for summary judgment thought the court would either ignore or not notice that the motion and supporting brief were spaced 1-1/2 lines rather than double-spaced. And who’s going to notice longer-than-usual footnotes? Really? Any judge or clerk whose job it is to read, read, and then read some more every dad-gum day.

Seriously, do you want to plow through heavy footnotes? Hands? Didn’t think so. Neither does your judge. Why risk alienating the person you are trying to convince? The stakes are too high to cling to a style of writing that sets you up to lose before anyone reads your motion or brief.

There are other, and much more effective ways, to trim a motion and brief. Editing is the key.

  1. Eliminate any unnecessary word.
  2. Remember that subject and verbs go together.
  3. Use short sentences.
  4. Delete all legalese. Yes, all of it. No excuses.
  5. You can always delete “in order.” Try it – it will not change the meaning in your sentence. These are an example of filler words that just take up space.
  6. Stop using phrases such as “brief of the plaintiff.” Write “plaintiff’s brief” instead.
  7. Never, never, never use long block quotations.
  8. Quote from a court opinion only when the court says it better than you can.

A quick search of this blog will give you tons of editing tips. I promise that you can get your point across with fewer words. It is not the number of words you use that count; it is what words you choose and how you say 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...

The Basics of Legal Writing for Legal Professionals.

04 Sunday Jun 2017

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

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

Tags

Gerald Lebovits, Legal Writing, SSRN, The Legal Writer

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

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...

Legal Writing – Why Shorter is Better.

08 Thursday Dec 2016

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

≈ Comments Off on Legal Writing – Why Shorter is Better.

Tags

Editing, Good Legal Writing Blog, Legal Writing, Rule of Short, Tiffany Johnson

Make it shorter … and shorter …, by Tiffany Johnson, Good Legal Writing Blog

https://goodlegalwriting.com/2011/02/11/make-it-shorter-and-shorter/

Regardless of whether, in your own opinion, you are a good writer, we can always improve. Here is an opportunity to polish your skills, take note of some bad habits, and hone your editing technique. -CCE

Here’s a good exercise to promote plain writing and dense writing.  The object is to force you to purge your writing of any words that don’t work their butts off on your behalf.  Take the following sentence and reduce it to as few words as humanly possible, without changing the meaning of the sentence.  Shortest re-write wins a prize (respect)!

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...

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...

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...

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

22 Sunday May 2016

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP 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

Better Writing Skills, Contract Writing, Grammar, Legal Writing, That, Which, Writing Resources From Scribe Consulting

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.

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...

A Compilation of Punctuation Guides for the Punctuation Police.

10 Thursday Mar 2016

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Legal Writing, Punctuation, Readability, Style Manuals

≈ Comments Off on A Compilation of Punctuation Guides for the Punctuation Police.

Tags

Advanced Legal Writing & Editing, Legal Writing, Peter Martin, Punctuation, The Bluebook, The Punctuation Guide

If you are a member of the Punctuation Police, you will enjoy this sample of punctuation guides. Depending on your profession, some style guides are more important than others. For example, if you are in the legal profession, you would look to the Bluebook for specific rules on punctuation. 

Another source of multiple style guides, including rules on punctuation and grammar, can be found at http://www.RefDesk.com under http://www.refdesk.com/topgram.html and Library Spot, Grammar and Style, at http://www.libraryspot.com/grammarstyle.htm. -CCE

The Punctuation Guide
http://www.thepunctuationguide.com/style.html

Tips on Grammar, Punctuation and Style
Harvard College Writing Center
http://writingcenter.fas.harvard.edu/pages/tips-grammar-punctuation-and-style

Punctuation and Style: A Quick Reference Guide
Office of Communications, University of Puget Sound
http://pugetsound.edu/files/resources/3379_PSGuide0309.pdf

Introduction to Basic Legal Citation, by Peter Martin, Cornell University Law School, Legal Information Institute (not just for legal citations – CCE)
https://www.law.cornell.edu/citation/

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...

Plain English and the U.S. Supreme Court.

03 Thursday Mar 2016

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

≈ Comments Off on Plain English and the U.S. Supreme Court.

Tags

Plain English, SCOTUS Blog, U.S. Supreme Court

Plain English/Language Made Simple, SCOTUSblog

http://www.scotusblog.com/category/plain-english/

This is our archive of posts in Plain English. You may also be interested in these resources:

Supreme Court Procedure
Glossary of Legal Terms
Biographies of the Justices

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...

Are You Guilty of Using Any of These Overly Used Words?

02 Saturday Jan 2016

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

≈ Comments Off on Are You Guilty of Using Any of These Overly Used Words?

Tags

Blossom Blog, Editing, Good Writing Habits, Laurie Pawlik-Kienlen, Legal Writing, Overly Used Words

51 Over-Used Adverbs, Nouns, and Clichés in Writing, by Laurie Pawlik-Kienlen, Blossom Blog

http://theadventurouswriter.com/blogwriting/51-over-used-adverbs-nouns-and-cliches-in-writing/

This post is like preaching to the choir. I found several words that I often use on this list. Time for a New Year’s Resolution! Remove these words from our writing and vocabulary. -CCE

Do you want your writing to get noticed – in a good way? Ditch these over-used adverbs, nouns, and cliches when writing articles, stories, and books.

*             *                  *

I promised a reader in the comments section of 5 Over-Used Words and Phrases for Writers to Avoid that I’d write this post . . . and here it finally is . . . better late than never. What’s that you say? The cliché ‘better late than never’ is over-used and boring, and belongs on my “over-used words and phrases in writing” list? If you caught that, you get a gold star! (jeez, there I go again with the tired clichés).

Ditch these boring words and phrases! Stop using amorphous adverbs and namby-pamby nouns! Delete crummy clichés!

And, here are 51 over-used words and phrases in writing – which I hope helps you become a more successful, confident writer. Compiling this list has certainly opened my eyes to my own weak writing habits…

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...

The Effort to Make and Keep Patents Correct and Clear.

08 Sunday Nov 2015

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Bad Legal Writing, Intellectual Property, Legal Writing, Legalese, Patent Law, Plain Language, Readability

≈ Comments Off on The Effort to Make and Keep Patents Correct and Clear.

Tags

Dennis Crouch, Intellectual Property, Michelle K. Lee, PatentlyO Blog, Patents, Plain Language, US Patent and Trademark Office

Director Michelle Lee: Moving toward Patent Clarity, posted by Dennis Crouch, PatentlyO Blog

http://tinyurl.com/q4dvog7

The following is a post from Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO Michelle K. Lee and was published on the PTO Director’s blog.

Patent quality is central to fulfilling a core mission of the USPTO, which as stated in the Constitution, is to ‘promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts.’ It is critically important that the USPTO issue patents that are both correct and clear. Historically, our primary focus has been on correctness, but the evolving patent landscape has challenged us to increase our focus on clarity.

Patents of the highest quality can help to stimulate and promote efficient licensing, research and development, and future innovation without resorting to needless high-cost court proceedings. Through correctness and clarity, such patents better enable potential users of patented technologies to make informed decisions on how to avoid infringement, whether to seek a license, and/or when to settle or litigate a patent dispute. Patent owners also benefit from having clear notice on the boundaries of their patent rights. After and after successfully reducing the backlog of unexamined patent applications, our agency is redoubling its focus on quality.

We asked for your help on how we can best improve quality—and you responded.

Continue reading →

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...

Plain Language Examples – Before and After.

16 Friday Oct 2015

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

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

Tags

Editing, Grammar & Punctuation, Legal Writing, Plain Language, Readability

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

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...

4 Writing Tips For Persuasive Briefs.

29 Tuesday Sep 2015

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

≈ Comments Off on 4 Writing Tips For Persuasive Briefs.

Tags

Active Voice, Editing, Lawyerist Blog, Legal Writing, Mark Herrmann, Raymond Ward

4 Edits I’ve Never Made, by Mark Herrmann, Lawyerists Blog (with hat tip to Raymond Ward!)

http://abovethelaw.com/2015/09/4-edits-i-have-never-made/

I have revised an awful lot of briefs in my life.

I clerked for a year; worked as a litigation associate at a small firm for five years; worked first as an associate (for three years) and then as a litigation partner (for 17 years) at one of the world’s largest firms; and have now served as the head of litigation at a Fortune 250 firm for the last five years.

I repeat: I have revised an awful lot of briefs in my life.

There’s been a world of variety in the substance of briefs that I’ve revised. Labor law, First Amendment cases, commercial disputes, product liability cases, tax spats, securities fraud, insurance and reinsurance matters, IP cases; you name it.

But there’s been almost no variety in the revisions that I’ve made to briefs.

As I’ve ranted before, I’ve spent my decades generally making all the same changes to draft briefs.

So I’m not going to list here the usual edits that briefs need. I’m going to do the opposite: What edits have I never made to a brief over the course of three decades practicing law? . . . .

Continue reading →

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...

When Peter Martin, aka Bluebook Yoda, Talks About The Bluebook, I Listen.

16 Wednesday Sep 2015

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Abbreviations, Acronyms, Brief Writing, Citations, Initialisms, Legal Writing, Parentheticals, Punctuation, Quotations, Readability, String Citations, The Bluebook

≈ Comments Off on When Peter Martin, aka Bluebook Yoda, Talks About The Bluebook, I Listen.

Tags

20th edition of The Bluebook, ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct, Citing Legally, Peter Martin, Restatements, Ubiform Code

Bluebook (20th ed.) and Restatements, Model Codes, etc., by Peter Martin, Citing Legally

http://citeblog.access-to-law.com/

Prior to publication of the new Bluebook, law journals, lawyers, and judges were in pretty close agreement on how to cite a Restatement section (e.g., Restatement (Second) of Torts § 46 cmt. j (1965) [as cited in the May 2015 issue of the Harvard Law Review] or Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 349, cmt. a (1981) [as cited in an Aug. 2015 decision of the Seventh Circuit]). Journals put the titles in large and small caps.  Lawyers and judges didn’t. Furthermore, consistent with their treatment of other static material, many lawyers and judges left off the date element. In an era in which briefs are held to a maximum word count, why include the redundant ‘(1965)’ or ‘(1981)’? The Bluebook reflected that consensus. Its prescribed formats for citations to provisions in Uniform Codes, Model Acts, the federal sentencing guidelines, and the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct were consistent with it. See The Bluebook R. 12.9.5 (19th ed. 2010).

Without warning the 20th edition of The Bluebook changed that. . . .

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 455 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: