• Home
  • About Me
  • Disclaimer

The Researching Paralegal

~ Articles and Research for Legal Professionals

The Researching Paralegal

Tag Archives: Legal 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...

Using Hyperbole -Are You Risking Your Credibility With A Promise You Cannot Deliver?

19 Friday Oct 2018

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Hyperbole, Legal Argument, Legal Writing, Recent Links and Articles

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Legal Writing, Persuasive Litigator

Avoid Hyperbole, by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Persuasive Litigator™

https://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2016/12/avoid-hyperbole.html

What is hyperbole anyway? Here’s a quick example. How would you respond as opposing counsel to a statement that there are “countless obvious examples” of the opposing party’s errors? Perhaps, something like, “Oh really?” “Countless and obvious, you say? How interesting that you did not name anything specific. We did what any reasonable company would do in a similar situation.” And, then you must explain what you meant all over again – if you get the opportunity.

Simply put, hyperbole is deliberate exaggeration. Although often misguidedly used for emphasis, rhetoric, or even sarcasm, you invite an attack to prove your statement. At best, you may have illustrated that the other side’s behavior is outlandish. At worst, you have lost credibility with the court because you are unable to back up your statement with hard facts. Never imply a promise that you cannot deliver.

This is a good time to remember that your writing is more persuasive when you show, don’t tell. If the opposing party has behaved beyond the pale, telling the court or the jury what happened (who did what to whom and why) will be more persuasive than rhetorical outrage.

You will find in legal blogs on the use of hyperbole. This post is one of my favorites. As always, there is the bonus of hyperlinks to posts on similar subjects at the bottom of the page. -CCE

 

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...

A $10 Million Punctuation Mistake.

25 Saturday Aug 2018

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

≈ Comments Off on A $10 Million Punctuation Mistake.

Tags

Kelly Gurnett, Legal Writing, Oxford Comma, The Write Life

Take That, AP Style! Court of Law Rules The Oxford Comma Necessary, by Kelly Gurnett, The Write Life (republished here with permission)

https://thewritelife.com/is-the-oxford-comma-necessary/

Which of these two sentences look right to you?

I need a pen, my notes, and a legal pad.

I need a pen, my notes and a legal pad.

The first sentence includes the Oxford comma, sometimes called the “serial comma.” If you do not already use it, you may ask why bother? It is about clarity versus ambiguity. In this case, the Oxford comma made all the difference.

“In this class action lawsuit, drivers for Oakhurst Dairy sued the company over its failure to grant them overtime pay. According to Maine law, workers are entitled to 1.5 times their normal pay for any hours worked over 40 per week. However, there are exemptions to this rule. Specifically, companies don’t need to pay overtime for the following activities:

The canning, processing, preserving, freezing, drying, marketing, storing, packing for shipment or distribution of:

Agricultural produce;

Meat and fish product; and

Perishable foods

Note the end of the opening line, where there is no comma before the ’or.’”

The employer argued the employees did not qualify for overtime because “packing for shipment” and “distribution” were two different things. The employees argued that, without the comma before the “or,” they should be paid for both. The court agreed with the employees. The language determining overtime pay was ambiguous because of the missing comma.

“Without that comma, as the judge maintained, this distinction was not clearcut:

Specifically, if that exemption used a serial comma to mark off the last of the activities that it lists, then the exemption would clearly encompass an activity that the drivers perform. And, in that event, the drivers would plainly fall within the exemption and thus outside the overtime law’s protection. But, as it happens, there is no serial comma to be found in the exemption’s list of activities, thus leading to this dispute over whether the drivers fall within the exemption from the overtime law or not.”

How much did this missing comma cost the employer? Approximately $10 million. Proper punctuation matters, especially in legal writing.

Feeling the need for a punctuation refresher? Try this website: http://www.thepunctuationguide.com/comma.html

-CCE

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...

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...

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...

Using Intensifiers Is A Very Bad Horrible Writing Habit.

19 Saturday Aug 2017

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

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

Tags

Grammar, Legal Skills Prof Blog, Legal Writing, Louis J. Sirico Jr.

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

http://bit.ly/2x1Ay34

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

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...

Updated Annual Guide to Law Review Submissions.

31 Monday Jul 2017

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Law Reviews, Legal Writing, Research

≈ Comments Off on Updated Annual Guide to Law Review Submissions.

Tags

James B. Levy, Law Journals, Law Reviews, Legal Skills Blog, Legal Writing, Professor Allen Rostron, Professor Nancy Levit, SSRN

The Latest Update to Rostron’s and Levit’s Annual Guide to Law Review Submissions, by James B. Levy, Legal Skills Blog

http://bit.ly/2uP9FyB

Thinking about submitting an article to a law review or journal? If so, you need to read this. It will give you everything you need to know about which publication is accepting submissions, required procedures and formats, and more. -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...

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...

Punctuation – The Devil Indeed Is In the Details.

06 Monday Mar 2017

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

≈ Comments Off on Punctuation – The Devil Indeed Is In the Details.

Tags

Legal Writing, Oregon State Bar Bulletin, Punctuation, Suzanne E. Rowe©2007

Legal Writing is Precise Writing, by Suzanne E. Rowe©2007, Oregon State Bar Bulletin — NOVEMBER 2007

https://www.osbar.org/publications/bulletin/07nov/legalwriter.html

A colleague appeared in my office with a pressing question about hyphens. He was writing an article about people who own small businesses. But he was concerned that a punctuation mistake might make the article about small people, instead of small businesses. That concern (and perhaps a touch of procrastination) propelled him to my office. Was he writing about small business owners or small-business owners?

Legal writing is precise writing. Sometimes the missing hyphen, misplaced word or extra comma can change the meaning of a sentence. In quotations, lack of precision can hurt your reputation (or just make you look sloppy). The devil’s in the details.

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...

Why We Need Clear Legal Writing in Contracts.

20 Monday Feb 2017

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Bad Legal Writing, Contract Law, Legal Writing, Plain Language

≈ Comments Off on Why We Need Clear Legal Writing in Contracts.

Tags

Aird & Berlis, Contracts, Legal Writing, Plain English, Sherry Altshuler

Sesquipedalianism and an Expatiation Upon Its Antithetical Impact on Interpersonal Communications: Big Words and Why They’re Bad, by Sherry Altshuler, Aird & Berlis, LLP (with hat tip to Louis J. Sirico, Jr., Legal Skills Prof Blog)

http://www.airdberlis.com/Templates/Blog/Entry.aspx?Page=71&ID=11120

This post on using plain English does what good legal writing should. Rather than telling you that big or complicated words are a sure way to lose your reader, it shows you with a wonderful example.  I love “show, don’t tell.” It also provides an excellent list of good legal writing tips. This one is worth a bookmark. -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...

New and Updated GPO Style Manual.

18 Wednesday Jan 2017

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Abbreviations, Editing, Grammar, Initialisms, Legal Writing, Numbers, Punctuation, Style Manuals

≈ Comments Off on New and Updated GPO Style Manual.

Tags

Barco 3.0: Law Library Reference, Grammar, Legal Writing, Punctuation, Style Manual

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

http://bit.ly/2is1ipN

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

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...

How Long Is Too Long For An Appellate Brief?

10 Tuesday Jan 2017

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, Appellate Law, Appellate Writing, Bad Legal Writing, Brief Writing, Legal Writing

≈ Comments Off on How Long Is Too Long For An Appellate Brief?

Tags

Appellate Briefs, Debra Cassen Weiss, Judge Richard Posner, Legal Writing

Posner criticizes ‘verbosity’ in appeals briefs in decision upholding closed voir dire, by Debra Cassens Weiss, Appellate Practice, ABA Journal.com (with hat tip to William P. Statsky)

http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/posner_criticizes_verbosity_in_appeals_briefs_in_decision_upholding_verdict

Judge Richard Posner is a well-known 7th Circuit jurist, legal writing scholar, and prolific author. Knowing this, it is puzzling why the appellate briefs for both sides were over 200 pages each. Yes, Judge Posner had something to say about it. -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...

“How To” On Drafting Dispute Resolution Agreements.

25 Sunday Dec 2016

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Contract Law, Dispute Resolution, Legal Writing, Settlement

≈ Comments Off on “How To” On Drafting Dispute Resolution Agreements.

Tags

Dispute Resolution, John M. Newman, Legal Skills Prof Blog, Legal Writing, Louis J. Sirico Jr., Settlement Agreements, SSRN

Drafting for Dispute Resolution, by John M. Newman, SSRN (with hat tip to Louis J. Sirico, Jr., Director of Legal Writing, Villanova Univ. School of Law, Legal Skills Prof Blog)

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2867692

Not all cases end in litigation and go to trial. At times, the best service counsel can give to clients is an out-of-court resolution. Careful drafting of an agreement between the parties includes numerous considerations to protect your client and to assure acceptance by everyone involved. Definitely worth a bookmark. -CCE

This is a brief guide to drafting for dispute resolution. Topics covered include mandatory-arbitration provisions, class waivers, choice of law, choice of venue, exculpatory and liquidated-damages clauses, fee and cost allocations, and more. . . .

This guide seeks to concisely identify and explore, from a transactional perspective, the relevant questions, considerations, and law relating to these powerful tools. It also provides illustrative examples of well-drafted provisions, often drawn from real-world legal instruments. . . .

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...

Contract Interpretation and Ambiguity.

04 Sunday Dec 2016

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

≈ Comments Off on Contract Interpretation and Ambiguity.

Tags

Contracts, ContractsProf Blog, Legal Writing, Stacey Lantagne

Judicial Disagreement Over Contract Ambiguity: When Are Things OBVIOUS? By Stacey Lantagne, ContractsProf Blog

http://bit.ly/2f3Dtj5

We’ve been talking about contract interpretation in my Contracts class lately and I’m always struck by how many cases involve a lower court ruling of ambiguity and then an appellate court reversal of that ruling, because it always strikes me as such a funny thing. The very definition of ambiguity would seem to be ‘multiple people disagreeing on the meaning of the word,’ but the appellate court decisions in those cases necessarily have to dismiss the reasonableness of the lower court’s understanding of the meaning in order to assert that the meaning is SO OBVIOUS.

Continue reading →

Share this:

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

Like this:

Like Loading...

The Plain Language Argument Against Using Latin Legal Terms of Art.

30 Sunday Oct 2016

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Bad Legal Writing, Legal Writing, Legalese, Plain Language, Terms of art

≈ Comments Off on The Plain Language Argument Against Using Latin Legal Terms of Art.

Tags

Chadwick C. Busk, Latin, Legal Terms of Art, Legal Writing, Michael Braem, Michigan Bar Journal, Plain Language

Curiouser and Curiouser Excuses for Legal Jargon, by Chadwick C. Busk & Michael Braem, 95 Plain Language, Mich. B.J. 30 (2016)

Click to access pdf4article2967.pdf

Earlier today, I posted about the use of Latin for legal terms of art, although legal writing scholars usually advise against using them. This article addresses that very subject. -CCE

I don’t know the meaning of half those long words, and I don’t believe you  do either.” —Eaglet, Alice in Wonderland (1865), Chapter III

“Some lawyers and academicians attempt to justify legal jargon and “traditional” legal writing—legal writing that’s ‘wordy, unclear, pompous, dull1’  and even “wretched.’2 But legal jargon in contracts burdens all those who must deal with it: the parties to the agreement who try to understand it, lawyers who mistakenly think they must use it, and judges who have to interpret it. Legal jargon often creates ambiguity, and ambiguity invites litigation. Many legalisms have been fodder for courts to puzzle over, including herein, therein, hereby, and thereof; shall; and/or; and best efforts.

However, some academicians, most recently Professor Lori Johnson of the UNLV William S. Boyd School of Law, have modernized old excuses for legal jargon and concocted new ones. Can these arguments withstand a reasoned analysis, or are they merely fanciful declarations from Wonderland?

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: