Originally published by Wayne Schiess.
When asked to define “weak” legal writing, I began listing traits that I think make legal writing weak. I continue my list here.
Abstraction. Legal writers sometimes focus heavily on concepts and principles and ideas—instead of concrete things and actions.
Over-intensifying. In trying to persuade, some writers overuse intensifiers like blatantly, clearly, completely, extremely, highly, obviously, plainly, substantially, totally, very, and wholly.
Avoidance of personal pronouns. Although not always appropriate, many client memos could use you/your and we/us/our instead of proper names, initials, or abstract descriptors. So this [on law-firm letterhead]:
- Great Mountain Savings Association (“GMSA”) has requested that this firm address whether Board Resolution 17-009 (“BR 009”) was validly approved. BR 009 was approved on …
becomes this
- You asked us whether Board Resolution 17-009 was validly approved. The Resolution was approved on …
Backing in. Too often, we begin a document, a section of a document, or a paragraph with background information or with the first event chronologically—then build to the key point. Legal writing is usually better front-loaded: key point first, background second. So this
- You asked us whether Board Resolution 17-009 was validly approved. The Resolution was approved on …
becomes this
- You asked us whether Board Resolution 17-009 was validly approved. Our opinion is that the Resolution was validly approved. The background and analysis follow. …
Missing chances to tell stories. We legal writers are sometimes guilty of dumping information on top of information when structuring the content as a story would be more inviting—and compelling. It’s not always possible to turn a tax memo into a pleasant narrative, but many legal documents have a statement of facts that could be told as a story.
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
from Texas Bar Today http://ift.tt/2gXJf70
via Abogado Aly Website
No comments:
Post a Comment