Legal writing in plain english free download

Use the preceding paragraph as a guide to the conventional form and punctuation of that type of tabulation. See Exercise 9, Appendix A. Draft No. See R. When the items on the list are complicated you can put ";and" or ";or" after each item in the list except the last.

That helps the reader stay on track. See, e. Which of them do you prefer? Passage One. The conclusion which has been reached by my client is that if there is a continuation of your insistence on this position, the termination of the contract will be taken into serious consideration by her.

PassageTwo: My client has concluded that if you continue to insist on this position, she will seriously consider terminating the contract. Passage Two is better, is it not? Passage One clanks along like a rusty tank. It is an overblown example of two common legal writing faults: 1 the writer has overused the passive voice, and 2 the writer has converted crisp base verbs like continue into sodden derivative nouns like continuation.

Base Verbs v. Derivative Nouns andAdjectives At its core, the law is not abstract; it is part of a real world full of people who live and move and do things to other people. Car drivers collide. Plaintiffs complain. Judges decide. Defendants pay. To express this life and motion, a writer must use verbs-action words. The purest verb form is the base verb, like collide, complain, decide, and pay. Base verbs are simple creatures. They cannot tolerate adornment. If you try to dress them up, you squash their life and motion.

Unfortunately, that is done all too easily. The base verb collide can be decked out as a derivative noun, collision. Likewise, complain becomes complaint, decide becomes decision, andpay becomes payment.

Lawyers love to ruin base verbs. Lawyers don't act-they take action. They don't assume-they make assumptions. They don't conclude-they draw conclusions. With too much of this, legal writing becomes a lifeless vapor. When a base verb is replaced by a derivative noun or adjective, surplus words begin to swarm like gnats. But to get the same work out of statement, you need a supporting verb make , an article a , and a preposition of. The derivative noun objection attracts a similar cloud of surplus words.

Do not conclude from this that derivative nouns and adjectives are always bad; sometimes you need them. But do not overuse them in. When you spot one, stop to see if you can make your sentence stronger and shorter by using a base verb instead. See Exercise 10, Appendix A. The Active Voice v. The Passive Voice When you use the active voice, the subject of the sentence acts: "The union filed a complaint. First, it takes more words.

When you say, "the union filed a complaint," filed does the work by itself. But when you say, "a complaint was filed by the union," the verbfiled requires a supporting verb was and a preposition by.

With the active voice, the reader can usually see who is doing what to whom. But the passive voice often leaves that unclear: It is feared that adequate steps will not be taken to mitigate the damages which are being caused. Who is doing the fearing?

Who is supposed to take the steps? Who is causing the damages? We cannot tell because the actor in each case is hidden in the fog of the passive voice. The passive voice can be particularly noxious in technical legal writing. Consider this patent license provision: All improvements of the patented invention which are made hereafter shall promptly be disclosed, and failure to do so shall be deemed a material breach of this license agreement.

Who must disclose what to whom? Must the licensee disclose improvements it makes to the licensor? Must the licensor disclose improvements it makes to the licensee? Must each party disclose the improvements it makes to the other party? If it ever becomes important, the parties probably will have to fight it out in an expensive lawsuit.

The passive voice has its proper uses. Second, you can use it where the actor is unknown or indefinite: The ledgers were mysteriously destroyed. Third, you can use it to place a strong element at the end of the sentence for emphasis: In the defendant's closet was found the bloody coat.

Fourth, you can use it on those rare occasions when detached abstraction is appropriate: All people were created with a thirst for knowledge.

But elsewhere, use the active voice; it will make your writing stronger, briefer, and clearer. See Exercise 11, Appendix A. But in English, word order does affect meaning, as this sentence shows: The defendant was arrested for fornicating under a little-used state statute. To avoid that sort of gaffe, you must take care in arranging your words.

Normal Word Order and InversionforEmphasis To make your writing easy to understand, most of your sentences should follow the normal English word order-first the subject, then the verb, and then the object if there is one : The complaint wasfiled. The defendantfiled a demurrer. The next-strongest place is at the beginning of the sentence. Suppose that in this sentence you want to emphasize the word conspiracy: Plaintiffs complaint makes a conspiracy charge against the defendants.

One way is to put conspiracy at the beginning of the sentence: Conspiracy is charged in plaintiffs complaint against defendants. Note that in each of the three sentences the subject comes before the verb. On rare occasion, you may want to place extra stress on the subject by inverting the normal word order and putting the subject at the end of the sentence: Basic to our liberties is fair procedure. See Exercise 12, Appendix A. Keep the Subject Close to the Verb and the Verb Close to the Object Lawyers like to test the agility of their readers by making them leap wide gaps between the subject and the verb and between the verb and the object.

In that sentence the reader must span a twenty-two-word crevasse to get from the subject claim to the verb may befiled. The best remedy for a gap this wide is to turn the intervening words into a separate sentence: Any injured party may file a claim with the Office of the Administrator. Smaller gaps between subject and verb can be closed by moving the intervening words to the beginning or end of the sentence: GAP This agreement, unless revocation has occurred at an earlier date, shall expire on November 1, The defendant, in addition to having to pay punitive damages, may be liable or plaintiffs costs and attorney fees.

The defendant may have to pay plaintiffs costs and attorney fees, in addition to punitive damages. The problem is the same when the gap comes between the verb and the object: The proposed statute gives to any person who suffers financial injury by reason of discrimination based on race, religion, sex, or physical handicap a cause of action for treble damages. One remedy is to make two sentences. Another is to move the intervening words to the end of the sentence: The proposed statute gives a cause of action for treble damages to any person who suffers financial injury by reason of discrimination based on race, religion, sex, or physical handicap.

See Exercise 13, Appendix A. For example, this sentence conveys three different pictures, depending on where you put the modifier: The judge ordered the marshal to eject the photographer. That will help avoid sentences like these: My client has discussed your proposal to fill the drainage ditch with his partners. The defendant is accused of assaulting Professor Appleman while he was teaching a class maliciously and with intent to do great bodily harm. Being beyond any doubt insane, Judge Weldon ordered the petitioner's transfer to a state mental hospital.

Beware of the "squinting" modifier--one which sits mid-sentence and can be read to modify either what precedes it or what follows it: A trustee who steals dividends often cannot be punished.

What does often modify? Does the sentences tell us that crime frequently pays? On that frequent crime pays? Squinting modifiers are especially mischievous in technical legal instruments: If this contract is terminated under paragraph 3 d 1 , Agent shall be notified immediately to cancel all outstanding workorders. What must be immediate, the notice or the cancellation?

Once discovered, a squinting modifier is easily cured. Either choose a word that does not squint, or rearrange the sentence to avoid the ambiguity. In the last example, immediately could be put before notfied or after cancel, whichever would express the parties' intent. For example, in this sentence, the word only could go in any of seven places and produce a half a dozen different meanings: She said that he shot her. To keep only under control, put it immediately before the word you want it to modify.

Shares are sold to the public only by the parent corporation, Lessee shall use the vessel for recreation only. Only the parent corporation sells shares to the public. Watch out for ambiguity in sentences like this one: The grantor was Maxwell Aaron, father of Sarah Aaron, who later married Pat Snyder.

Who married Pat-Maxwell or Sarah? Some lawyers try to clear up such ambiguity by piling on more words: The grantor was Maxwell Aaron, father of Sarah Aaron, which said Maxwell Aaron later married Pat Snyder.

But it's easier than that. You can usually avoid ambiguity by placing the relative pronoun like who, which, and that right after the word to which it relates. Claims for expenses must be made within 30 days.

See Exercise 14, Appendix A. Those same readers will be distracted if you end a sentence with a preposition when you do not need to.

Most of what lawyers write is read by people, not because they want to, but because they have to. Their attention is, therefore, prone to wander. Further, they are usually surrounded by outside distractions-the ring of the telephone, the cough at the library table, and the clock that tells them time is short. Language quirks add to those distractions and are thus to be avoided. Elegant Variation Elegant variation" is practiced by writers whose English teachers told them not to use the same word twice in one sentence.

The readers are left to ponder the difference between a case, apiece of litigation, and a suit. By the time they conclude that there is no difference, they have no patience left for settled, disposed of out of court, and amicable accord,much less for what the writer was trying to tell them in the first place.

Elegant variation is particularly vexing in technical legal writing. Franchise payments shall be made on or before the 15th day of each month. Are franchisepayments something differ than the usefee? If so, what are they, and when must the use fee be paid?

Do not be afraid to repeat a word if it is the right word and if repeating it will avoid confusion. If the repetition sounds clumsy, try a pronoun or recast the sentence: The arresting officers did not The arresting officers did not inform the defendant of her right inform the defendant of her to remain silent, and the arresting right to remain silent, and they FowLER, A The plaintiff alleges that he was deprived of his rights under the first amendment and under the fourteenth amendment.

The plaintiff alleges that he was deprived of his rights under the first and fourteenth amendments. Only slightly less confusing than elegant variation is the use of a word in one sense and its repetition shortly after in a different sense: The majority opinion gives no consideration to appellant's argument that no consideration was given for the promise.

The remedy is obvious-replace one of the pair with a different term: The majority opinion ignores appellant's argument that no consideration was given for the promise. Noun Chain Confusion Avoidance Technique As the heading of this section demonstrates, a long chain of nouns used as adjectives is apt to strangle the reader. Military writers are fond of noun chains. They have their radiationcontaminationdetection devices, their retrogrademotion simulation capabilities, and their programmedprecounterinsurgencycountermeasures.

Lawyers are not immune. To bring a noun chain under control, lop off any of the descriptive words that are unnecessary. If that is not enough, then insert some words to break up the chain, like this: "objections to the request for pretrial identification of documents. Women are tired of being told that "words importing the masculine gender include the feminine as well. If you write "each judge has his own ideals," you will be faulted for ignoring the women on the bench.

If you write "each judge has his or her own ideals," you will be faulted for clumsy construction. If you write "all judges have their own ideals," you will be faulted for not stating clearly what you mean.

Nonetheless, the sex bias of our language can be mitigated in several ways: PLAIN ENGLISH FOR LAWYERS ] 1 Avoid expressions that imply value judgments based on sex: a man-size job a manly effort took it like a man a real sob sister an old-maid attitude a member of the weaker sex 2 Avoid expressions that suggest that men are the only people on earth: AvoID man's basic liberties reasonable man the wisdom of man 3 USE basic human liberties reasonable person human wisdom Avoid sex based descriptions and titles when there are reasonable substitutes: AVOID workman congressmen policeman mayoress authoress foreman newsman USE worker members of Congress police officer mayor author supervisor reporter, journalist 4 When referring to both sexes, use parallel construction: Avom USE men and their wives husbands and wives ladies and men men and women, ladies and gentlemen President Washington and President and Mrs.

Washington Martha 5 Avoid using masculine singular pronouns when the referent is not necessarily male. Phrases like he or she can be used in moderation, but it is usually less clumsy to recast the sentence in one of these ways: a Omit the pronoun: The average citizen enjoys his time on the jury.

The average citizen enjoys jury duty. Adjective-Adverb Mania Most legal writing is declaratory. Its simply states the facts, without comment and without trying to persuade anyone of anything.

Statutes, apartment leases, corporate bylaws, and bills of lading fall in this category. But some legal writing does comment; through commentary, it seeks to persuade the reader to believe what the writer believes.

Legal briefs and judicial opinions are obvious examples. Defendant's sales agents maliciously took advantage of people with little money and limited intelligence. Defendant's sales agents preyed on the poor and ignorant. When you need to use an adjective or adverb for commentary, choose one that fits. Do not use a firey one and then douse it with water.

If a witness is described as telling the "honest truth," what are we to say of those who tell only the "truth"? Is a "dead murder victim" any colder than a "murder vic See Part IVB supra. Is a "completely revoked" contract offer any more lifeless than one that has only been "revoked"?

What are we to say when asked our "actual age"? Throat Clearing Just as some public speakers clear their throats at every pause, some legal writers feel the need to clear the clogs from their pens every fifty words or so.

The result is a collection of phrases like this: It is important to add that Clear beyond dispute is the fact that It may be recalled that In this regard it is of significance that It is interesting to point out that William Zinsser writes: If you might add, add it. If it should be pointed out, point it out. If it is interesting to note, make it interesting. Being told that something is interesting is the surest way of tempting the reader to find it dull 31 Words like clearly are favorite throat clearers.

In addition to this book, on our site you may reading manuals and diverse artistic books online, or download their.

We want draw your attention what our website does not store the book itself, but we provide ref to site wherever you can downloading or read online.

Garner by B. Garner pdf, in that case you come on to the correct website. We will be happy if you go back again and again. Garner [B. Garner] on Amazon. Fowler, David Crystal: Amazon. If you're constantly stopping yourself to edit the Carpenter's work, you're slowing yourself down.

And you're getting into a different frame of mind—that of editor, as opposed to writer. Still, though, the Carpenter exercises considerable discretion in following the Architect's plans. The Carpenter will make architectural refinements here and there when producing paragraphs and sections.

For many writers, this is where the fun begins. You have the makings of a solid piece of writing, but now you can fix the ragged edges. The Judge does everything from smoothing over rough transitions to correcting grammar, spelling, and typos. Each character has an important role to play, and to the extent that you slight any of them, your writing will suffer. You'll be asking the Carpenter to do not just the carpentry, but also the Madman's and the Architect's work.

That's a tall order. People who write this way tend to procrastinate. If you decide that you can begin with Roman numeral I in an outline, you'll still be asking a lot: the Architect will have to dream up ideas and sequence them simultaneously. That's why it's critical to allow the Madman to spin out ideas in the early phases of planning a piece. In a perfect setting, the ideas come to you so rapidly that it's hard to get them all down as your mind races. One way of doing this—and of getting yourself into the Madman frame of mind—is to use a nonlinear outline.

Among lawyers, the most popular type of nonlinear outline is the whirlybird. Then you begin adding ideas—the more the better. For every major idea you have, use a branch off the center circle.

For supporting ideas, try branching off from a major branch. Everything you might want to mention goes into the whirlybird —which has no top and no bottom. You're striving for copious thoughts without having to worry about getting them in the right order.

You'll know all the materials. It will just be a matter of having the Architect organize them sensibly. The next step might look like this: Dismissal for Violence at Work 1. Was the termination justified? Detailed factual statement 3. Decision in this case: the facts suggest that threat was real.

Internal appellate-review board agreed. Conclusion Once you have this type of linear outline—something that many writers can create only if they do a nonlinear outline first—writing your first draft becomes much less intimidating. You eliminate the straitjacketing effect of As, Bs, and Cs, which can cause you to force ideas into premature categories. You can avoid writer's block.

And the whirlybird is an excellent reminder of ideas that might otherwise get dropped. Once the Architect has finished organizing the Madman's ideas, the Carpenter's job—the one that writers most often procrastinate on—becomes relatively easy. It's just a matter of elaboration. Further, the Judge will be able to focus on tiny matters of form, and that's what the character is best suited for.

The Judge shouldn't have to think on several levels at once. If you were to give me a pile of writing samples, I'd critique them according to this paradigm. The writer who allows typos in the final draft needs work on the Judge. Each character in the Flowers paradigm must have its time as leader. What you don't want to do is let one character dominate so much that the others get squeezed out.

The writing will suffer. Perhaps the most crucial phases—because they're the most unpredictable and mysterious—are the first two: Madman and Architect. They will determine the degree of originality and insight in your writing.

If you don't consciously involve them, the Carpenter will waste a lot of time. A carpenter must follow plans. So, as you can see, writing well is much more than getting the grammar and spelling right. Those are matters for the Judge, who in the end will tidy things up.

Just remember that the Judge part of your brain won't contribute many interesting or original thoughts. Although you might fear that you'll never have time to go through all four phases, try it: it's one of the surest and quickest ways to good writing. In a one-hour span, you might spend 10 minutes as Madman, 5 minutes as Architect, 25 minutes as Carpenter, and 10 minutes as Judge—with short breaks in between.

That's a productive way to spend an hour. But it won't happen without conscious planning. You have to plan how you're going to turn mushy thoughts into polished prose. Exercises Basic While planning and researching a legal memo, fill out a whirlybird.

You're ready to begin once you know enough about the problem to have an idea or two. Use unruled paper. Take your time. Then, when the paper starts getting full—and only then— create a linear outline using bullets. Remember that you're working on the basic unit of organization: once you have that, you'll organize further according to issues and answers. Intermediate Do the same with a trial or appellate brief.

Advanced Do the same with a journal article or continuing-legal-education paper. For this one, you might need a large sheet of butcher paper. Though ordering your material logically might not seem difficult, it will often be one of your biggest challenges.

This is especially so because of some odd conventions in law. One example among many is the stupefying use of alphabetized organization in certain contracts. That is, some forms actually have provisions in alphabetical order according to headings: assignments, default, delivery, indemnity, notices, payment, remedies, and so on. A better strategy—if clarity is the goal—is to follow the logic and chronology of the deal. In what order are the parties to do things?

Even when narrating events, legal writers often falter when it comes to chronology. Disruptions in the story line frequently result from opening the narrative with a statement of the immediately preceding steps in litigation. For most readers, that doesn't easily compute. Consider a before- and-after example. It comes from an amicus brief submitted to a state supreme court, seeking to overturn a lower court's ruling on an aspect of the state's oil-and-gas law.

Here's the original two-paragraph opener, in which the two meanings of hold in the first paragraph present a stumbling block: I. Introduction The Court of Appeals held that capability of the lease to produce in paying quantities does not hold an oil and gas lease after the primary term and that actual marketing is necessary to perpetuate the lease in the secondary term. As this Court is well aware, thousands of wells across Arkansas have been shut-in or substantially curtailed from time to time.

The issues of this case already affect a dozen or more cases now being litigated in Arkansas. Could you track the argument there? Does it hold any dramatic value? Now consider the revision. Note the greater emphasis on story, achieved in part simply by highlighting the historical perspective and tucking in some transitional words.

Note, too, the heightened drama of the case on which millions of dollars were riding : I. The court further held, incorrectly, that equities may be ignored in determining whether a lease terminates. These holdings, besides being legally incorrect, are apt to prove catastrophic, since they will create title uncertainty in thousands of oil-and-gas leases in this state.

As this Court well knows, thousands of wells across Arkansas have been shut in or substantially curtailed from time to time. Under the new ruling, litigants will argue that many currently productive and profitable Arkansas oil-and-gas leases actually terminated years ago when, for whatever reason, gas was not taken from a lease in paying quantities for the period specified in the cessation-of-production clause—often as short a time as 60 days.

Indeed, the issues in this case already affect a dozen or more Arkansas cases in various stages of litigation. Ask yourself about the qualities that distinguish the two versions. What is the sequence of each? Which one is more logically organized, assuming that these are the first words a reader encounters?

Did either version make you feel stupid when you first started reading it? What does that say about the writing? Exercises Basic Improve the sequence of ideas in the following sentence. Intermediate Rewrite the following passages to reassemble the elements in chronological order. Again, you might need to break one or more sentences into separate sentences. The Commission filed a petition for declaratory judgment and application for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction on February 16, , to determine whether Pan- American could lawfully cancel its surety bond.

Pan-American made its request after legislation had been passed that, according to Pan-American, would increase its liability under the bonds. The trial judge disagreed with Pan-American.

At the request of the Commission, after a brief evidentiary hearing, a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction were granted on February 16, , preventing Pan-American from canceling the bond at issue until final judgment on the declaratory-judgment action. Sinclair's niece was suing Purdy's estate for one-half interest in property that she claimed her uncle owned and had promised to bequeath to her in exchange for caring for him until his death.

The court observed that the property was purchased in his sister's name. This was done for business purposes and because he and his sister shared a close relationship. There was also an agreement between the siblings that the sister would be allowed to keep only half the property. The court ruled that withholding the property from the niece would be a breach of promise; hence, a constructive trust was awarded in favor of the niece.

Kathcart initially filed an application in the U. When he filed abroad, however, in , he expanded his claims to include certain ester derivatives of the originally claimed compounds. It is the claims to these esters, which Kathcart has made the subject of a subsequent continuation-in-part application, the application now before the court, that are the issue here. Both foreign patents issued prior to the instant application in the U.

Advanced Find a published case in which the presentation of the facts is marred by disruptions in chronology. Write a short explanation specifying why the un-chronological narrative was difficult for you to read. Rewrite the factual statement as best you can, omitting irrelevant facts and putting in brackets any facts you might want to add but weren't given in the case itself.

If you belong to a writing group or class, bring a copy of your before-and-after versions for each colleague. Once you've determined the necessary order of your document, you should divide it into discrete, recognizable parts. Its strength is multiplication—multiplying thoughts and multiplying words. Still, with a little effort, you can learn to divide a document into readable segments of text.

You can do this even as you're writing. While you're figuring out a structure, make its parts explicit. This will help both you and your readers. The more complex your project, the simpler and more overt its structure should be. When writing a memo or brief, try thinking of its contents as a series of points you want to make. Each point will account for a chunk of the whole—a chunk on this, a chunk on that, yet another chunk on this other point. You'll probably need to go even further by devising subheadings as well.

Small sections are far easier than large ones to organize logically. And busy readers welcome having a stream of information divided up this way. State and federal judges routinely emphasize this point at judicial-writing seminars. They say that headings and subheadings help them keep their bearings, let them actually see the organization, and afford them mental rest stops. Another advantage they mention is that the headings allow them to focus on the points they're most interested in.

You'd think these things would be obvious. But to many writers, they're not. Let's take a short example—a paragraph from an amended agreement of sale. The problem is that paragraph 4. Without significant effort, the reader won't be able to see what each paragraph is about. After all, other lawyers are paid to read them! And we're not talking just about making the reader's task more pleasurable. When you put a heading on the paragraph, look what happens: 4. Subparagraph E suddenly sticks out: it doesn't fit within the category of the heading, and it doesn't fit with the other subparagraphs.

We'll need to do something about it. Depending on the larger context, we'll either put it as a subparagraph somewhere else or make it a paragraph of its own. But all this might have been difficult to see if we hadn't gone to the trouble to think about headings for every decimal-level paragraph.

A device as simple as headings can help you think more clearly. Exercises Basic Find a pre law-review article or treatise with long stretches of text uninterrupted by headings.

Devise appropriate headings. If, as a result of this exercise, you find that the organization is poor, note the organizational deficiencies. If you're a member of a writing group or class, bring a copy of the relevant pages and be prepared to explain where your headings would go and to discuss any organizational problems you uncovered. Devise better headings. If you're a member of a writing group or class, be prepared to explain why your edits would improve the regulation.

Advanced Find a proxy statement or prospectus with long stretches of uninterrupted text. Break up the long paragraphs into smaller paragraphs and add headings where appropriate.

See Betty S. Three good things happen when you combat verbosity: your readers read faster, your own clarity is enhanced, and your writing has greater impact.

Both you and your readers benefit. The following sentence, at 35 words, isn't grossly overlong, but it's still quite verbose. It comes from the Code of Federal Regulations: It is not necessary that an investment adviser's compensation be paid directly by the person receiving investment advisory services, but only that the investment adviser receive compensation from some source for his or her services. Nearly two-thirds of the sentence can be cut with no loss in meaning—but with enhanced speed, clarity, and impact: Although the investment adviser must be paid, the source of the payment does not matter.

Imagine how this helps in sentence after sentence, paragraph after paragraph. Take a longer sentence, at 79 words, from a recent law-review article: Since, under the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Guidelines pertaining to sexual harassment, an employer is liable for hostile-environment sexual harassment only if it knew or should have known of the harassment and failed to take prompt and effective steps to end the harassment, it is possible for employers to be exonerated from liability for hostile-environment sexual harassment when sexual harassment has occurred by individuals within an organization, but the organization took prompt action to prevent further harassment.

That sentence meanders. And its basic point tends to get lost in the welter of words. At 24 words, the rewrite is two-thirds shorter than the original. But that figure only hints at the heightened vigor and lucidity. The English language has vast potential for verbosity. Almost any writer can turn a word sentence into a word sentence that says the same thing.

Many writers could make it a word sentence. And a truly skilled verbiage- producer could make it 40 words without changing the meaning. In fact, almost all writers unconsciously lengthen their sentences in this way. Reversing this process is a rare art, especially when you're working with your own prose.

You see, you're likely to produce first drafts that are middlingly verbose—each sentence being probably a quarter or so longer than it might be. If you know this, and even expect it, you'll be much less wedded to your first draft.

You'll have developed the critical sense needed to combat verbosity. Exercises Basic Delete at least four consecutive words in the following sentences and replace those words with just one word.

You may rephrase ideas and rearrange sentences, but don't change the meaning. Consequently, strict product liability was intended to relieve the plaintiff of the burden of having to prove actual negligence. Rule 3— is concerned primarily with situations in which the attorney's duty of loyalty and duty of confidentiality to clients are called into question. Therefore, to date, there are no Rule 3— cases disqualifying a district attorney as a result of a prosecution of an individual whom the district attorney used or is used as a witness in another prosecution.

Most cases that involve district-attorney conflicts under Rule 3— consist of a former attorney-client relationship between an accused and a district attorney.

In such cases, the rule serves to protect an accused from a prosecution in which a district attorney unfairly benefits from information gained during the course of his or her representation of the accused. Other Rule 3— cases involve overzealous prosecutions in cases where a district attorney is for one reason or another personally or emotionally interested in the prosecution of the accused.

Cut it. If you're a member of a writing group or class, bring a copy of the before-and-after versions for each colleague. The length of your sentences will determine the readability of your writing as much as any other quality. That's why readability formulas rely so heavily on sentence length. That is, you should have some word sentences and some 3-word sentences, as well as many in between. But monitor your average, and work hard to keep it to about 20 words.

In law, many things converge to create overlong sentences. Another is the fear of qualifying a proposition in a separate sentence, as if an entire idea and all its qualifications must be squeezed into a single sentence. A third is the nonsense baggage that so many writers lug around: the idea that it is poor grammar to begin a sentence with And or But.

And a fourth is the ill-founded fear of being simple and, by implication, simpleminded—of perhaps seeming to lack sophistication. Many legal writers suffer from these turns of mind. And the ones who do must work hard if they wish to pursue a clear, readable style.

Is a word goal realistic? Many good writers meet it, even when discussing difficult subjects. Consider how Professor W. Buckland—with an average sentence length of 13 words—summed up part of the philosopher John Austin's thought: Austin's propositions come to this.

There is in every community but he does not really look beyond our community a person or body that can enact what it will and is under no superior in this matter. That person or body he calls the Sovereign. The general rules that the Sovereign lays down are the law. This, at first sight, looks like circular reasoning.

Law is law since it is made by the Sovereign. The Sovereign is Sovereign because he makes the law. But this is not circular reasoning; it is not reasoning at all.

It is definition. Sovereign and law have much the same relation as center and circumference. Neither term means anything without the other. But with the limitation that it is not universally true, there is not much to quarrel with in Austin's doctrine. More legal writers ought to emulate it. But is this type of style achievable in law practice? You bet. Here's a splendid example from a response to a motion to continue, by Thomas D.

Boyle of Dallas: Gunther demanded an early trial date and breakneck discovery. What Gunther wanted, Gunther got. Now that Findlay seeks a hearing on its summary-judgment motion, however, Gunther wants to slam on the brakes, complaining that it needs more time to gather expert opinions. Gunther ostensibly demanded the accelerated trial date to force a prompt resolution of its claims. Gunther may now have that resolution, but does not want it.

Must Findlay's motion, already delayed once, be delayed again to accommodate Gunther's tactical timetable? It lacks authority and merit. It is no more than an attempt to get more time to answer Findlay's motion for summary judgment, which has already been reset once. Even so, by the time Findlay's motion is heard on August 13, Gunther will already have had eight weeks to prepare a response.

If Gunther wants to defeat Findlay's motion, it needs only to identify disputed facts for each point in the motion. Indeed, Gunther spends much of its motion for continuance arguing the merits. Rather than wasting time and money with its delay tactics, Gunther should simply address the points in Findlay's motion head on. If Gunther shows the existence of genuine factual issues, then so be it. Although these sentences vary in length, the average is just 15 words.

The variety, coupled with the short average, improves readability and generates speed and interest. CBI Industries, Inc.

Iso-Tex, Inc. Equally bad, while the footnotes, carefully read and digested, may enable the sophisticated analyst to arrive at a reasonably accurate understanding of the underlying economic reality, the comparison of figures published by one firm with those of any other is bound to result in seriously misleading distortions. Long before there was general acknowledgment of the need for universal formal education, the Religion Clauses had specifically and firmly fixed the right to free exercise of religious beliefs, and buttressing this fundamental right was an equally firm, even if less explicit, prohibition against the establishment of any religion by government.

The values underlying these two provisions relating to religion have been zealously protected, sometimes even at the expense of other interests of admittedly high social importance. The invalidation of financial aid to parochial schools by government grants for a salary subsidy for teachers is but one example of the extent to which courts have gone in this regard, notwithstanding that such aid programs were legislatively determined to be in the public interest and the service of sound educational policy by states and by Congress.

While the jury is unauthorized to convict unless it finds that Johnson himself had guilty knowledge, such knowledge may be proved by circumstances here to warrant the conclusion that Johnson, when he purchased the sugar, knew it to have been stolen, and did not in fact honestly believe that the sellers were sugar dealers or were properly authorized by the Ralston Mill to sell sugar for it.

Rewrite it to make the average under A sentence has two vital elements: a subject and a predicate typically consisting of a verb and an object. It seems simple: The partnership may buy a bankrupt partner's interest. But legal sentences get complicated, and legal writers often complicate them unduly by separating the vital words: If any partner becomes a bankrupt partner, the partnership, at its sole option, exercisable by notice from the managing general partner including any newly designated managing general partner to the bankrupt partner or its duly appointed representative at any time prior to the th day after receipt of notice of the occurrence of the event causing the partner to become a bankrupt partner, may buy, and upon the exercise of this option the bankrupt partner or its representative shall sell, the bankrupt partner's partnership interest.

Even if you needed some of the details in that second version, you'd be better off keeping the related words together, at the outset: The partnership may buy any bankrupt partner's interest. To exercise its option to buy, the managing general partner must provide notice to the bankrupt partner no later than days after receiving notice of the event that caused the bankruptcy.

The reason you should put the subject and verb at or near the beginning is that readers approach each sentence by looking for the action. So if a sentence has abundant qualifiers or conditions, state those after the subject and verb. Itemize them separately if you think a list might help the reader. You'd certainly want to restructure a sentence like this one: In the event that the Indemnitor shall undertake, conduct, or control the defense or settlement of any Claim and it is later determined by a court that such Claim was not a Claim for which the Indemnitor is required to indemnify the Indemnitee under this Article VI, the Indemnitee shall, with reasonable promptness, reimburse the Indemnitor for all its costs and expenses with respect to such settlement or defense, including reasonable attorney's fees and disbursements.

Remember: related words go together. Lenderfield, during the course of her struggle to provide for her children as a single parent, accrued considerable debt to her family and others. Advanced Find a published legal example of either subject—verb separation or verb— object separation. The worse the separation, the better your example. Retype the sentence, with the citation, and then type your own corrected version below it.

Remember it this way: if you're active, you do things; if you're passive, things are done to you. It's the same with subjects of sentences. In an active- voice construction, the subject does something The court dismissed the appeal. In a passive-voice construction, something is done to the subject The appeal was dismissed by the court.

Although these advantages generally hold true, they are not absolutes. Plan all three parts: the beginning, the middle, and the end. Use the "deep issue" to spill the beans on the first page. Vary the length of your paragraphs, but generally keep them short.

Draft for an ordinary reader, not for a mythical judge who might someday review the document. Minimize definitions. If you have more than just a few, put them in a schedule at the end--not at the beginning.

Break down enumerations into parallel provisions. Put every list of subparts at the end of the sentence--never at the beginning or in the middle. Prefer numerals, not words, to denote amounts.