Legal Writing Handbook
<<Previous Next>>
I. Writing In The Law Office
As with most specialized occupations, writing in the legal profession takes on a life of its own. Terms of art, format and substance are not utilized and placed into legal documents by mere happenstance. Instead, legal writing is more of an art form which follows particular general rules, rather than a strict directives.
This seminar will focus on "how" to write rather than "what" to write. There is room in legal writing to allow your own style and individuality to shine -- if you so desire. Those merely looking for a "go-by" can be equally rewarded here today: generations of legal documents have generated simply by creating a new document by changing only the caption of an old document. There are plenty of "go-bys" contained in this material.
A. Grammar and Usage
No seminar on legal writing would be complete without discussing grammar and word usage as the first topic. Here, we will attempt to answer the twin questions of:
What are they?
Why are they so dad-gummed important that you have talk to us about them?
"Grammar" is the systematic study and description of a language. "Descriptive grammar" is the study and description of a language as it is actually used. "Prescriptive grammar" is the study and description of a language as it "should"(1) be used.
When we speak of "usage," we refer to the correct use of words. The accepted meanings of words, the levels associated with those words, and the grammatical forms appropriate for use with these words are all involved in usage questions.
Rules of grammar and usage apply to dialects of a language. There are many dialects of English. Among the dialects is standard, formal, business English. This is the dialect which we use in the law office. In selecting the proper grammar and usage, we must consider the purpose of our communication, the intended target of our communication, and the impression that we wish to leave on those with whom we communicate.
As to the inescapable conclusion that grammar and usage are important, in the worst case, divergence from the standard can lead to misunderstanding at the least, and malpractice at the worst. Most commonly, divergence from the standard leaves a poor impression on your supervisor, clients, witnesses and judges. Whether it is fair or not, we are judged by our knowledge and skill in writing the standard dialect. When we discuss these issues, we do not suggest that nonstandard usages are any less logical or reasonable than standard usages. We do not suggest that users of nonstandard dialect are any less intelligent or any less well educated. We do suggest that the better you follow the prescriptive rules of standard business English, the better your communication will be received by your reader.
We must use our educated ear to decide what usage is familiar and what usage is not.
Which of these passages is in English?
b. 'Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe;
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.
Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
The frumious Bandersnatch!
nunc nuper narravisti, sed nunc Anglice.
What is wrong with these pictures?
To move the cabin, push button of the wishing floor. If the cabin should enter more persons, each one should press the number of wishing floor. Driving is then going alphabetically by natural order. Button retaining pressed position shows received command for visiting station.
Policeman: What countryman are you?
Sailor: I am sailor belong to the Golden Eagle, the British ship.
Policeman: Why do you strike this jinriksha man?
Sailor: He told me impolitely.
Policeman: What does he told you impolitely?
Sailor: He insulted me, saying loudly "the Sailor, the sailor" when I am passing here.
Policeman: Do you striking this man for that?
Sailor: Yes.
Policeman: But do not strike him for it is forbidded.
Sailor: I strike him no more.
All the king's servants, and the people of the king's provinces, do know, that whosoever, whether man or woman, shall come unto the king into the inner court, who is not called, [there is] one law of his to put [him] to death, except such to whom the king shall hold out the golden scepter, that he may live: but I have not been called to come in unto the king these thirty days.
Any person who, by means of any machine, instrument, or contrivance, or in any manner, intentionally taps, or makes any unauthorized connection, whether physically, electrically, acoustically, inductively, or otherwise, with any telegraph or telephone wire, line, cable,, or instrument of any internal telephonic communications systems, or who willfully and without consent of all parties to the communication, or in any unauthorized manner, reads, or attempts to read, or to learn the contents or meaning of any message, report, or communication while the same is in transit or passing over any such wire, line or cable, or is being sent from or received at any place within this state, or who uses, or attempts to use, in any manner, or for any purpose, or to communicate in any way, any information so obtained, or who aids, agrees with, employs, or conspires with any person or persons to unlawfully do, or permit, or cause to be done any of these acts or things mentioned above in this section, is punishable by a fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500), or by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year, or by imprisonment in the state prison not exceeding three years, or by both such fine and imprisonment in the county jail or in the state prison.
--California Penal Code § 631(a) quoted by Richard Wydick.
Exodus 8:7 Altered Version
[A]s the Lord In accordance with the
commanded . . . he directive theretofore
lifted up the rod and received from higher
smote the waters of the authority, he caused
river . . . and all the the implement to come
waters that were in the into contact with the
river were turned to water, whereupon a
blood. And the fish polluting effect was
that were in the river perceived. They
died; and the river consequent toxification
stank; and the reduced the conditions
Egyptians could not necessary for the
drink the waters of the sustenance of the
river; and there was indigenous population
blood throughout all of aquatic vertebrates
the land of Egypt. below the level of con-
tinued viability.
Olfactory discomfort
standards were
substantially exceeded,
and potability declined.
Social, economic and
political disorientation
were experienced to an
unprecedented degree.
--Exodus 8:7 (Translated by Richard Wydick).
<<Previous Next>>