Legal writing seems so subjective. Professors and judges have their pet peeves, and there don’t appear to be any “universal” rules. How am I supposed to become a good legal writer if everyone has a different opinion about what makes writing good?
Wondering 1L
Dear Wondering,
You are correct—there is some subjectivity in legal writing.
But that doesn’t mean there aren’t universal rules. I think the pet peeves you
reference are just that—pet peeves that don’t really impact the quality of
writing. Whether you refer to the prosecuting party as “Plaintiff” or “the
plaintiff” isn’t substantively relevant. And, practically speaking, the
“Statement of the Facts” is no different than the “Factual Background.”
While you’re a student, though, follow your legal writing
professor’s guidance. Once you become a practicing attorney, you’ll need to
develop your own voice in your writing and decide what works for you. But remember—good writing is good writing. If
you follow IRAC, CREAC, or some similar organizational form, your brief will be
organized. And all professors and judges agree on good grammar
practices—subject-verb agreement, proper word choice, correct use of colons and
semicolons etc. While you don’t need to learn every rule in the Bluebook or
ALWD manual, know how to use the manuals and make sure your citations are
correct. And always, always, always follow the local rules, which often outline
certain sections and subsections for briefs, limit the number of pages, and
require specific formatting.
Poorly written briefs can sink a case—no doubt. But an
otherwise well-written brief that contains one or a few of a judge’s pet peeves
isn’t going to lose your client’s case. Focus on learning the structure of
legal writing and working to improve your grammar and writing ability. Read
good writing—both legal and non-legal. I think you’ll find there are many
universal characteristics of good writing that you can implement in your own
work.
LLW
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.