ILNews

What are lawyers' pet peeves when it comes to legal writing?

Jenny Montgomery
July 6, 2011
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

In April, a Missouri attorney filed an eight-page motion seeking clarification of the opposing counsel’s pleading. Attorney Richard D. Crites criticized his opponent’s grammar, use of apostrophes, and lack of detail, writing in his motion that the pleading “is the worst example of pleading that Defendant’s attorney has ever witnessed or read.”

Legal bloggers quickly picked up the story, with lawyers around the country chiming in about what distinguishes good legal writing from bad.

Stodgy wording

Anne Cowgur, a litigation partner for Bingham McHale in Indianapolis, talked about some of the language she could live without.
 

cowgur-anne-mug.jpg Cowgur

“‘Enclosed please find …’ – my reaction to that is: Are we begging them to find it?” Cowgur said. “Why can’t we just say ‘Enclosed is’” and continue with the thought.

Cowgur has an undergraduate degree in broadcast journalism from the University of Illinois. Her mother was an English teacher, so she said her disdain for poor writing may be hereditary.

“I have a big problem with when you use a lot more words to say something than what you really need,” she said.

Cowgur said she objects to: “Anything that’s like, ‘Lookie here! I’m about to say something!’” The phrases, “Further affiant sayeth not (or naught),” and “Comes now the plaintiff” are among her least favorite in legal writing.

Terry English, a solo attorney with offices in Bloomington and Bedford, said that while some lawyers could benefit from stronger writing skills, he thinks legal writing is clearer today than in years past.

“I’ve seen it evolve over the past 30 years or so – it used to be, from my perspective, substantially more stilted,” he said.


english-terryBW-mug.jpgEnglish

English is a former managing editor for the (Bloomington) Herald-Telephone, which later became the Herald-Times. He also taught advanced newspaper reporting at Indiana University and is a board member for the Indiana Journalism Hall of Fame.

“If you keep in mind that the sole reason you write is to communicate, then that takes a lot of the stuffiness out of it,” English said.

Lawrenceburg solo attorney Leanna Weissman holds undergraduate degrees in English and journalism from Indiana University. She works solely on appellate cases.

“I think having the journalism degree has helped me to write as a lawyer,” Weissman said. “Because you learn how to put things out there clearly, and you learn how to organize your thoughts in such a way that you put the most important thing first.

“Especially in the appellate arena, clear language is important,” she said. “I think they want you to get to the point and say it clearly and directly.”

English said judges may have limited time to read court documents, and that’s one reason why attorneys should be succinct in their writing.

“One of the things that I do notice about language is that I believe that a lot of attorneys believe that a judge in a particular case will have the opportunity to read and understand everything that they say, and I don’t believe that’s the case,” he said.

English relies on a tool of journalistic writing – the inverted pyramid – to make sure judges read the most important information first.

“I don’t believe that judges have the time to go over 10- or 12- or 14-page briefs,” he said.

Indiana Rules of Court, Rules of Trial Procedure, Rule 8(E)(1) specifies that: “Each averment of a pleading shall be simple, concise, and direct.” Although, not all court documents follow those guidelines.

“You’ll see these relatively simple motions that start with the complete history of the case,” Cowgur said.

Know your audience

In July 2010, the Indiana Judges Association’s Civil Instructions Committee announced the debut of simplified jury instructions. The Indiana Model Civil Jury Instructions use plain language and simple examples that help jurors understand concepts like circumstantial evidence. Lawyers, however, don’t need clarification of standard legal terms or concepts, English said.

English said that terms such as “res gestae” or “res ipsa loquitur” could be explained more clearly, but doing so isn’t necessary when writing for other attorneys.

Weissman agrees that attorneys should tailor their writing for the people reading it.

“A brief that you write to the trial court is going to be a lot different than the brief you write to the court of appeals,” she said.

Although lawyers and judges may be accustomed to seeing Latin phrases and other terms not found in everyday writing, some legal documents could benefit from a little fine-tuning, Cowgur explained.

“Especially in litigation documents … when you’re filing court pleadings, and when you write 30 days, it bothers me when you write ‘thirty (30) days.’” She said that using both the numeral and the word for “thirty” is a safeguard, because typographical errors are common with numerals.

“So that’s the reason for it, and it makes sense in complicated transactional documents, but when you’re asking for a 30-day extension of time, it really doesn’t make sense,” she said.

Teaching good writing

“Education in America now doesn’t teach students to be grammarians or great spellers,” English said. He said that while teaching journalism at IU, he spent a substantial amount of time teaching students about basic grammar.

“I think quite honestly that there needs to be even more of an emphasis on legal writing in law school,” he said. “You’re only required to have – as I recall – one class, one year, of legal writing and research. I think it would be beneficial to attorneys to have more than that.”•

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Hmmmmm ..... How does the good doctor's spells work on tyrants and unelected bureacrats with nearly unchecked power employing in closed hearings employing ad hoc procedures? Just askin'. ... Happy independence day to any and all out there who are "free" ... Unlike me.

  2. Today, I want to use this opportunity to tell everyone about Dr agbuza of agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com, on how he help me reunited with my husband after 2 months of divorce.My husband divorce me because he saw another woman in his office and he said to me that he is no longer in love with me anymore and decide to divorce me.I seek help from the Net and i saw good talk about Dr agbuza and i contact him and explain my problem to him and he cast a spell for me which i use to get my husband back within 2 days.am totally happy because there is no reparations and side-effect. If you need his help Email him at agbuzaodera(at)gmail. com

  3. The practitioners and judges who hail E-filing as the Saviour of the West need to contain their respective excitements. E-filing is federal court requires the practitioner to cram his motion practice into pigeonholes created by IT people. Compound motions or those seeking alternative relief are effectively barred, unless the practitioner wants to receive a tart note from some functionary admonishing about the "problem". E-filing is just another method by which courts and judges transfer their burden to practitioners, who are the really the only powerless components of the system. Of COURSE it is easier for the court to require all of its imput to conform to certain formats, but this imposition does NOT improve the quality of the practice of law and does NOT improve the ability of the practitioner to advocate for his client or to fashion pleadings that exactly conform to his client's best interests. And we should be very wary of the disingenuous pablum about the costs. The courts will find a way to stick it to the practitioner. Lake County is a VERY good example of this rapaciousness. Any one who does not believe this is invited to review the various special fees that system imposes upon practitioners- as practitioners- and upon each case ON TOP of the court costs normal in every case manually filed. Jurisprudence according to Aldous Huxley.

  4. Any attorneys who practice in federal court should be able to say the same as I can ... efiling is great. I have been doing it in fed court since it started way back. Pacer has its drawbacks, but the ability to hit an e-docket and pull up anything and everything onscreen is a huge plus for a litigator, eps the sole practitioner, who lacks a filing clerk and the paralegal support of large firms. Were I an Indiana attorney I would welcome this great step forward.

  5. Can we get full disclosure on lobbyist's payments to legislatures such as Mr Buck? AS long as there are idiots that are disrespectful of neighbors and intent on shooting fireworks every night, some kind of regulations are needed.

ADVERTISEMENT