Legal Writing Style
Authors:
Gidi, Antonio / Weihofen, Henry
Edition:
3rd
Copyright Date:
2018
17 chapters
have results for writing
Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION 22 results (showing 5 best matches)
- You never merely write. You always write to someone; you write with a purpose. Part of knowing how and what to write is determining to whom you write. Once you know your audience, write to that person as you would want that person to write to you.
- It is practice, then, that improves writing style. You learn by doing, not by reading advice on how to do it. A writing style manual can be helpful, just as a book on swimming can help you learn to swim. But the advice that you get from a writing style manual does not become meaningful until you put it into practice.
- But what is a natural writing style? All writing is artificial in the sense that it is something one must learn (and legal writing is
- Collected Letters (1874–1897) 465 (1965) (“You will never write a good book until you have written some bad ones . . . . write a thousand words a day for the next five years.”).
- Some Open Questions on the Work of State Appellate Courts, 24 U. Chi. L. Rev. 211, 218 (1957). See also William Zinsser, On Writing Well 147 (2006) (“Writing is thinking on paper. Anyone who thinks clearly can write clearly”); Robert Gunning, The Technique of Clear Writing 11 (1973).
- Open Chapter
Chapter 7. ORGANIZATION 101 results (showing 5 best matches)
- In thinking about a case, a judge might come to a definite conclusion yet find the conclusion indefensible when he tries to write an opinion explaining and justifying it. The reason is that we do not think entirely in words, and certainly not entirely in sentences and paragraphs. Inarticulable or even unconscious feelings and impressions fill in around the sentence fragments that form in our minds as we think about a problem. This silent, incompletely verbalized thinking can be insightful . . . . But it can also be muddy, with the result that when we try to systematize it in sentences and paragraphs that are unmistakable because written down and not just imperfectly remembered, we may find that our confident conclusion is wrong; it “will not write.” Reasoning that seemed sound when “in the head” may seem half-baked when written down, especially since the written form of an argument encourages some degree of critical detachment in the writer, who in reading what he has written will...
- The need to think ahead does not mean that writing merely puts a finished thought to paper.
- So write with a combination of short, medium, and long sentences. Create a sound that pleases the reader’s ear. Don’t just write words. Write music.
- A remarkably effective device for detecting fissures in accuracy and logic is the reduction to writing of the results of one’s thought processes. . . . Somehow, a decision mulled over in one’s head or talked about in conference looks different when dressed up in written words and sent out into the sunlight. . . . [W]e may be in the very middle of an opinion, struggling to reflect the reasoning all judges have agreed on, only to realize that it simply “won’t write.” The act of writing tells us what was wrong with the act of thinking.
- “If you want to write long sentences,” wrote Zinsser, “be a genius. Or at least make sure that the sentence is under control from beginning to end, in syntax and punctuation, so that the reader knows where he is at every step of the winding trail.”
- Open Chapter
Chapter 2. PRECISION 59 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Sometimes you recognize that the word you have written is not precisely what you want, but you cannot find another that will do. Consider recasting the whole sentence to put the thought in another
- because the context would disambiguate the sentence. They claim that examples of ambiguity in published writing are rare.
- On your own, you do not have to write with precision. It is your prerogative to write any way you want and blame the reader who fails to understand your meaning. But you do not have that freedom when you represent a client’s interest.
- Write so that the gender issue will be invisible, and will not even occur to your reader, who will focus on your message, instead of seeing your writing either as sexist or awkwardly or ostentatiously nonsexist.
- write
- Open Chapter
Chapter 8. A TOUCH OF ELOQUENCE 30 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Writing is not a visual art any more than composing music is a visual art. To write is to create music. The words you write make sounds, and when those sounds are in harmony, the writing will work . . . Read aloud what you write and listen to its music. Listen for dissonance. Listen for the beat. Listen for gaps where the music leaps from sound to sound instead of flowing as it should. Listen for sour notes. Is this word a little sharp, is that one a bit flat? Listen for instruments that don’t blend well . . . There are no good sounds or bad sounds, just as there are no good notes or bad notes in music. It is the way in which you
- Experts agree that rhythm is desirable. A sentence’s impact depends not only on the words used but also on the effect their arrangement creates. Rhythm is always present in well-written prose. Writing is rhythmical if the words fall naturally into
- In antithetical statements, as in writing generally, the more concise wording is more vigorous; separating the contrasting ideas by punctuation alone (comma, semi-colon or colon) is usually stronger than using words such as
- This lesson was captured by Gary Provost: “Writing is not a visual art. It is a symphony, not an oil painting. . . . The words you write make sounds, and when the sounds satisfy the reader’s ear, your writing works.”
- The well-written works are the only ones that will go down to posterity: the amount of knowledge in a book, the peculiarity of the facts, the novelty even of the discoveries, are not sure warrants of immortality. If the works . . . are written without taste, without nobility, without inspiration, they will perish; since the knowledge, facts, and discoveries, being easily detached, are passed on to others, and even gain intrinsically when appropriated by more gifted hands
- Open Chapter
Chapter 3. CONCISENESS 58 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Rewriting, therefore, is not the mechanical task of catching misspellings and tweaking words here and there. Rewriting is an intellectual task of the same magnitude as writing. Rewriting is not something you do when you have finished writing: rewriting is thinking, rewriting is writing.
- “Writing is hard work. A clear sentence is no accident. Few sentences come out right the first time, or even the third time. Remember this in moments of despair. If you find that writing is hard, it’s because it is hard.”
- “Lawyers are wordy,” wrote David Mellinkoff, “it takes them a long time to get to the point.”
- It is easier to be wordy than concise. Being concise takes more than time and effort; it takes dedication and attention to detail. After having written a long letter, Blaise Pascal famously apologized: “if I had more time, I would have written a shorter letter.”
- We all tend to use unnecessary words. When you read your writing looking for flab, you will probably be astonished to find how many words would never be missed. “Good writing,” said Ernest Hemingway, “is writing wherein you can’t remove one word without changing the meaning.”
- Open Chapter
Preface 8 results (showing 5 best matches)
- The first edition of this book was published in 1961, during the pre-history of modern legal writing. A pioneering work, well ahead of its time, it shaped the style of generations of lawyers and law students. A second edition, lightly updated, was published in 1980 at the dawn of the legal writing movement.
- This book addresses the key principles of writing, principles that have been debated for centuries. They are not immutable rules, but flexible, complementary, and conflicting guidelines that depend on context, objective, and, ultimately, your own taste and judgment. Take all these principles into consideration and you may write effectively; follow them blindly and your style will become formulaic.
- As you cultivate an appreciation for style, you will learn to write deliberately instead of by accident. Only then can you exercise control over your message: you will say what you mean and mean what you say. Empowered by an understanding of the consequences of your stylistic choices, you will find your own voice.
- Although short, this is not a leisure book for a carefree Sunday afternoon. But if you decide to take on the task of digesting it, you will become a more mature writer. It will change the way you think and write.
- May this renewed edition of Weihofen’s classic continue to guide generations of law students and professionals as they craft their own legal writing style.
- Open Chapter
Chapter 4. SIMPLICITY 45 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Yet, as Ernest Weekley said, “[t]he key to an effective style . . . is simplicity. Most of the bad writing that prevails today is due to the attempt to write ‘well.’ ”
- Certain Latin terms are still used in formal writing, more by lawyers than by others. At least in writing to lay people, it is better to translate or avoid them:
- We write to make spoken words permanent. No matter how far the written text may depart from speech, it still maintains a voice.
- One screenplay writer said, “I do everything in my power to make my writing not look like writing.”
- See Reed Dickerson, The Fundamentals of Legal Drafting 156–81 (1986); Joseph Kimble, Lifting the Fog of Legalese: Essays on Plain Language (2006); id., Writing for Dollars, Writing to Please: The Case for Plain English in Business, Government, and Law (2012).
- Open Chapter
Chapter 6. FORCEFULNESS 38 results (showing 5 best matches)
- A compelling writing style, however, demands muscular verbs, words of action that infuse your writing with vitality and vigor. Too often, legal writers opt for flabby verbs that enervate their writing.
- Readers like personal references, whereas nominalization is impersonal. When talking, we might say, “when you describe a thing, make sure . . . .” In legal writing, we are likely to think that too informal. So we nominalize. We write, “the description of a thing should . . . .” This takes the actor out of the picture, and leaves only an impersonal act with no action. Readers find this harder to visualize; their minds have to work harder to get your message.
- Legal writing deals with complex analyses that are difficult to comprehend even when well written. Do not make it more burdensome by using fuzzy verbiage. Specific and concrete words are clearer and more precise than general and abstract ones.
- Nevertheless, a new twist can be given to an old saw. To “think twice before you act” is a cliché. But it can be renovated to sound like new: “this will compel the administrator to think once, if not twice, before acting.” “Not worth the paper it’s written on” is a drab cliché; but was revitalized when Judge Francis Biddle said that in his court, “the unwritten law is not worth the paper it isn’t written on.”
- The subject of most legal writing is complex and demands a reader’s concentrated attention. But readers tire and stop paying attention. Writing thus becomes a psychological campaign, an exercise in holding the reader’s interest. The writer must continually spur the reader on, now tickling his fancy with a neat turn of phrase, now stirring or shocking him with a moving or vivid word, constantly stimulating him to think more keenly, see more clearly, or feel more strongly. A vigorous style is particularly important for lawyers, who need to make the impact on the reader strong and indelible.
- Open Chapter
Chapter 5. CLARITY 41 results (showing 5 best matches)
- But being clear is not a given. You must cultivate a burning desire toward clarity. For too many lawyers, however, this is not a priority: “too much legal writing,” quipped David Mellinkoff, “looks like it was dropped, not written.”
- Much fuzzy writing is the result of fuzzy thinking. The writer may know the subject but may not be thinking about how to best express the idea. There’s no substitute for clear thinking.
- For Arthur Schopenhauer, “[n]othing is easier than to write so that no one can understand; just as, contrarily, nothing is more difficult than to express deep things in such a way that everyone must necessarily grasp them.”
- Careless writers caught composing ambiguous sentences may become defensive, arguing that the meaning is clear in context and that any criticism is unfair. Context may disambiguate many ambiguous sentences, but writing an inadvertently ambiguous sentence hoping it will be understood in context is not the hallmark of a superior writing style. “You know what I meant” is a last resort argument: it is unlikely to persuade the audience, repair your credibility, or win the case.
- Often, too, the context does not help. Judging from the amount of litigation on ambiguous clauses, reliance on context only invites trouble. Moreover, those who write using context as a crutch tend to be careless in all their constructions. So it pays to be constantly alert: do not put yourself in a position that needs to be saved by context, by a reasonable or attentive reader, or by luck. Always write clearly.
- Open Chapter
Chapter 9. CONCLUSION 10 results (showing 5 best matches)
- This book has displayed a compilation of common stylistic blunders. Do not assume, however, that lawyers’ writing is worse than that of most people. All writers are tempted at times to indulge in pompous or pretentious words. Others also fail to think through
- What is written without effort is in general read without pleasure
- Fine writing is generally the effect of spontaneous thoughts and a labored style
- But easy writing’s vile hard reading
- Easy reading is damn hard writing.
- Open Chapter
Appendix. FURTHER READINGS 13 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Although you will not learn to write good prose merely by reading books on style, they can help you reach your finest form. As you gain awareness, you will learn to identify and avoid bad practices and adopt good ones. If you care about your writing—and you should—read several books on style. As you absorb their advice, note which lessons resonate with you, so you can find your own voice. Below are some that even Menken would endorse.
- With precious few exceptions, all the books on style in English are by writers quite unable to write
- This book offers an introductory approach to legal writing style. A superb writer, like any artist, is born, not made. Whatever expertise you may acquire will likely come from reading good prose and practicing composition. Extensively.
- General Writing Style
- William Zinsser, On Writing Well
- Open Chapter
Center Title 1 result
Index 7 results (showing 5 best matches)
Title Page 1 result
Acknowledgments 3 results
- I also acknowledge the many students, practitioners, and scholars who trusted me with their writings over the past two decades. Their reactions to my suggestions helped me forge my own theories on legal writing style.
- When I sent an early version to Geoffrey C. Hazard, Jr., he was 87 years old, in the last year of his life. Within a few weeks, he mailed me a bound copy with hundreds of handwritten suggestions that made my writing sharper, more modern, and more vigorous. Age and disease might have taken a toll on his body, but not on his mind. He was a superb legal stylist, a friend, and a mentor; he refined my thinking and my writing. I miss him profoundly.
- Finally, I thank my family, without whom I would have had more time to write a better book. But then I’d have no one to tickle.
- Open Chapter
- Publication Date: March 28th, 2018
- ISBN: 9781634592963
- Subject: Legal Writing
- Series: Hornbooks
- Type: Hornbook Treatises
- Description: Legal Writing Style promotes the art of good writing by teaching students and practitioners the tools to make their prose clear, precise, simple, and forceful. With examples of what works and what doesn’t, this short but comprehensive treatise provides an invaluable resource for recasting writing for maximum impact and ultimate success.
