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

How Long Is Too Long? Lawyers and Judges Disagree.

20 Thursday Oct 2016

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

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

Briefs, James B. Levy, Legal Skills Prof Blog, Legal Writing, Page Number Limit

Judges Want Briefs to Be Shorter but Lawyers Push Back, by James B. Levy, Legal Skills Prof Blog

http://bit.ly/2dQjl5R

Often courts have local rules limiting the length of a brief. Have you ever wondered why? In everything you’ve ever heard or read about good legal writing, can you imagine a judge saying this?

“Yes, please, write a long, detailed brief. Use as many obscure legal authorities as possible. I have loads of time and plenty of staff to look up each one. Repeat your argument several times to make sure I know how important it is. Above all, make it as hard to read as possible.

I want lengthy quotations. Ideally, make them at least a page long, if not longer. One sentence paragraphs are the best! And by all means, pile on the legalese. Verbosity and obscure language is always appreciated.”

Of course not. They simply do not have the luxury of time to read huge briefs, especially if they are poorly written. I have said before that, while working for an Oklahoma Supreme Court Justice, I literally saw a bad brief go flying across the room. The Judge, in disgust, tossed it aside, and picked up the other side’s brief. Ouch! -CCE

Bryan Garner Says Citations In Footnotes are Okey Dokey.

04 Sunday Sep 2016

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

≈ Comments Off on Bryan Garner Says Citations In Footnotes are Okey Dokey.

Tags

Briefs, Bryan Garner, Citations, Footnotes, Legal Writing, On Lawyering Blog, Rich Cassidy

Bryan Garner Says: Put Your Citations in Footnotes, by Rich Cassidy, On Lawyering Blog

http://onlawyering.com/2014/03/bryan-garner-says-put-your-citations-in-footnotes/

After posting on one judge’s opinion of against citations in footnotes, for the sake of balance, here is Bryan Garner’s opinion against putting them anywhere else but footnotes.

When it comes to writing briefs, let the court rules dictate which method you use. If a court or judge goes to the trouble to address such details, there is a reason. Ignore the court’s preference at your own risk! -CCE

[I]n the February 2014 issue of the ABA Journal, and in the corresponding ABA Journal Law News “Bryan Garner on Words” column, “Textual Citations Make Legal Writing Onerous, for Lawyers and Nonlawyers Alike,” Garner promotes a suggestion for writing briefs and memoranda. . . . The suggestion is simple: Instead of including bibliographical material — the numerical citation used to find a case or legal authority — in the text of a legal document, Garner suggests publishing this material in a footnote.

Continue reading →

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