• Home
  • About Me
  • Disclaimer

The Researching Paralegal

~ Articles and Research for Legal Professionals

The Researching Paralegal

Category Archives: Readability

Writing For The Court – It’s Not All About Content.

15 Sunday Jun 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Bad Legal Writing, Brief Writing, Legal Argument, Legal Writing, Legalese, Plain Language, Proofreading, Readability

≈ Comments Off on Writing For The Court – It’s Not All About Content.

Tags

Brief Writing, BriefRight, Kirby Griffis, Legal Writing

TrialRight Again, by Kirby Griffis, BriefRight

http://briefright.com/trialright-again/

Picture yourself as the judge or the judge’s law clerk. You read briefs and other documents all day. Most are boilerplate language. When someone does have an original thought, the writer ruins it with redundancies and poor grammar and punctuation. 

Imagine the Court’s relief when someone writes a brief that makes a concise legal point supported by correctly formatted citations. This is a short article, but it makes a strong argument for clear writing. -CCE

Last week, I wrote about how some of the principles of briefwriting apply just as strongly to trial practice. There’s another important principle that applies strongly to each. I learned it years ago from an excellent trial lawyer: everything is evidence.

In court, the jurors start to evaluate who in the courtroom they can trust and believe from the moment they first walk through the door, from before voir dire to after closing argument. Their scrutiny is not limited to the content of your formal speeches and witness examinations: it extends to your demeanor as you sit at counsel table, how much you object and when, whether you fumble with exhibits, whether you arrive to court each day in a limo, and everything else that they can see. You must think about all of these things.
Similarly, in your legal briefs, the judge is not just paying attention to content. She is also influenced by how long the brief is, its formatting, its clarity, and many other factors as well. . . .

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • More
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

Candy For Writers! Grammar Girl’s Editing Checklist.

14 Saturday Jun 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Legal Writing, Proofreading, Readability, Spell Checking

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Editing, Grammar, Grammar Girl, Legal Writing, Mignon Fogary, Punctuation, Spellchecking, Writing

Grammar Girl’s Editing Checklist, Mignon Fogary, Grammar Girl Blog

http://tinyurl.com/qy3efup

At the end of a recent writing webcast, we distributed a Grammar Girl editing checklist that turned out to be so popular we decided to make it widely available. Print out the checklist and keep it on your desk as a handy reference to use when you’re editing.

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • More
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

Best Brief Writing Checklist.

08 Sunday Jun 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Bad Legal Writing, Brief Writing, Citations, Footnotes, Legal Analysis, Legal Argument, Legal Writing, Legalese, Plain Language, Proofreading, Quotations, Readability, Spell Checking, Statement of Facts, Summary of the Argument

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Brief Writing, Citations, Hon. Patricia M. Wald, Legal Argument, Persuasive Writing, Proofreading

“Briefly Speaking,” Brief Writing – Best Practices, Washington State Court of Appeals, Division I, CLE

 http://tinyurl.com/lsrzxjy

This is the essence of writing a persuasive and winning brief. Each section is important. Ignore the guidance here at your peril.

The icing on the cake is the advice from the Hon. Patricia M. Wald, Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, taken from her article, “19 Tips from 19 Years on the Appellate Bench,” The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process, Vol. 1, No. 1 (Winter 1999).  She is right – this is your opportunity to tell your client’s story. Short and to the point is always more persuasive than long-winded recitations of fact and case law.

Make this your brief writing checklist. -CCE

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • More
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

Benchslap Open Season on Acronyms.

30 Wednesday Apr 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Acronyms, Appellate Law, Bad Legal Writing, District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals, Legal Writing, Legalese, Readability

≈ Comments Off on Benchslap Open Season on Acronyms.

Tags

Acronyms, Benchslap, Brief Writing, Chief Judge Alex Kozinski, D.C. Circuit Judge Kavanagh, D.C. Circuit Judge Silberman, Legal Writing, Legalese, Mark Hermann, Ross Guberman

Alphabet Attack, by Ross Guberman’s Legal Writing Blog

http://legalwritingpro.com/blog/alphabet-attack/

It wouldn’t be spring in America without some federal judges publicly criticizing attorneys in a genre now known as ‘benchslap.’

The offended court this time: the D.C. Circuit. The court’s target: acronyms in briefs filed in a complex telecom dispute. The benchslap: “’It is ordered . . . that the parties submit new briefs that eliminate uncommon acronyms used in their previously filed final briefs.’ The court even cited its own practice handbook for good measure: ‘[i]n briefs the use of acronyms other that those that are widely known should be avoided.’ . . .

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • More
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

Making Sense When Writing For Non-Lawyers – It’s Not That Hard.

27 Sunday Apr 2014

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

≈ Comments Off on Making Sense When Writing For Non-Lawyers – It’s Not That Hard.

Tags

Above the Law (blog), Bad Writing, Compliance, Legal Writing, Mark Herrmann, Non-Lawyers

Why Are The Lawyers Pestering Us? Communicating About Law And Compliance, by Mark Herrmann, Above The Law Blog (with hat tip to Raymond Ward, the [new] legal writer blog)

http://tinyurl.com/mu8vg7g

At a law firm, law matters. Law is the center of the institution’s universe, and it’s all everyone is thinking about.

It’s the other functions that don’t matter: ‘Another email from IT? Telling me about interfaces and gigabytes? Why don’t those clowns leave me alone?’

‘Another email from finance hectoring me about time sheets? Don’t those morons know I’m busy?’

At corporations, law (and compliance) is an ‘other function.’ The businesses are concentrating on their businesses, and law and compliance — along with human resources, information technology, and finance — are, at best, a means to an end. If you mirror the other ‘shared services’ and send incomprehensible communications to the businesses, the businesses will soon realize that you’re just one of the pests, meant to be ignored.

Inevitably, if a business person accidentally steps over some legal line, you’ll hear that the business guy had no clue that the line existed: ‘Yeah, yeah. Now that you’re telling me about it, I understand that we have that rule. But how was I to know? The rule is buried on the fourth page of some impenetrable policy hidden somewhere in our computer system. I spend my time selling; I can’t waste time trying to make sense of your legalese.’

If you don’t sympathize with that guy, then you’ve been a lawyer for too long. His criticism is not just an excuse for having violated the rules; his criticism may well be the truth. How can you change that reality? . . . .

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • More
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

Add This Writing Tool To Your Arsenal.

30 Sunday Mar 2014

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

≈ Comments Off on Add This Writing Tool To Your Arsenal.

Tags

Elizabeth Bezant, Legal Writing, Readability, The Fog Index, The Gunning Fog Index, Writing to Inspire

The Gunning Fog Index, by Elizabeth Bezant, Writing to Inspire Blog

http://www.writing-information-and-tips.com/fog-index.html

If you want to increase the readability of everything you write, consider using the Gunning Fog Index – more commonly known as the Fog Index. It is the copywriter’s favorite statistics measurement. The idea behind the Fog Index is to show you the education level your reader must hypothetically have to understand what the document says.

I am not asking you to “dumb it down.”  But, remember that the goal in any legal writing project is to be understood, regardless of the complexity of the subject. If you are struggle with writing shorter sentence and paragraphs or simply making your writing more readable, this tool will help.

If you teach legal writing or any kind of writing course, encourage your students to use the Fog Index. It can be used by those who seek to improve their writing skills to a more sophisticated level. It can help anyone clarify their writing and write more concisely. But, most importantly, it gives you a way to determine whether what makes sense to you will make sense to anyone else.

Even though lawyers and judges have a high degree of education, when writing about complex issues, it helps to keep your document as simple and clear as possible.  The goal is to keep your Fog Index from ten to fifteen. Major publications, such as the New York Times and Times Magazine, have a Fog Index of eleven to twelve. If your document is meant for a wide audience, go for a Fog Index of less than twelve. If you are writing a document that you want to be universally understood, your target is a Fog Index of less than eight. For example, the Bible’s Fog Index is six.

See also http://gunning-fog-index.com/.

For more readability tests, see http://juicystudio.com/services/readability.php. -CCE

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • More
  • Share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...
Newer 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

  • Create account
  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.com

Categories

Archives

  • June 2024
  • 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

lawyersonia's avatarlawyersonia on In Custodia Legis – Lega…
Eric Voigt's avatarEric Voigt on Top 20 Paralegal Blogs, Websit…
profvoigt's avatarprofvoigt on Research Guides in Focus – Mun…
Make Your PDF Docume… on Make Your PDF Document Edit-Pr…
madlaw291282999's avatarmadlaw291282999 on Using Hyperbole -Are You Riski…

Recent Comments

lawyersonia's avatarlawyersonia on In Custodia Legis – Lega…
Eric Voigt's avatarEric Voigt on Top 20 Paralegal Blogs, Websit…
profvoigt's avatarprofvoigt on Research Guides in Focus – Mun…
Make Your PDF Docume… on Make Your PDF Document Edit-Pr…
madlaw291282999's avatarmadlaw291282999 on Using Hyperbole -Are You Riski…
  • RSS - Posts
  • RSS - Comments

Blog at WordPress.com.

  • Subscribe Subscribed
    • The Researching Paralegal
    • Join 460 other subscribers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • The Researching Paralegal
    • Subscribe Subscribed
    • 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