the (new) legal writer

Phrase finder

If you’re going to use an idiom, you may as well get it right. You may even want to cite the original source. So bookmark Phrase Finder, and refer to it the next time you want to quote, say, a memorable line from a Star Trek movie. (Hat tip to Daily Writing Tips.)

PEEL your argument.

Over at Writing to Done, guest poster David Masters offers an interesting structure for an argument: PEEL, which stands for Point, Evidence, Evaluation, and Link.

Why you must be upfront with adverse authority.

If you’re not, someone like Judge Posner may slam you in full color.

Quotation of the day: On stating the issue

West’s headnote of the day:

In the statement of the issues on appeal, every ground of appeal ought to be so distinctly stated that the reviewing court may at once see the point which it is called upon to decide without having to “grope in the dark” to ascertain the precise point at issue.

Jones v. Lott, 692 S.E.2d 900 (S.C. 2010).

Why learn the difference between real rules and mere superstitions

John McIntyre has posted some worthwhile thoughts on grammar-and-usage superstitions. The whole post is worth reading, but my favorite part is why these superstitions should not be passed on:

In the first place, they don’t teach you in school how to dress or what booze to drink, but they are supposed to teach you how to write. And if they are wasting their time and yours with a load of codswallop, they are inhibiting your ability to use the language with facility and grace.

Standard of review in 5 easy steps

Every appellate brief must state the standard of review applicable to each issue raised in the appeal. Over at Vodzaklegal, Caroline Vodzak provides a simple, 5-step formula for doing so.

Quotation of the day — The importance of practice

“What we hope ever to do with ease, we must learn first to do with diligence.”

—Samuel Johnson. (Hat tip to What About Clients/Paris?)

Let it snow. Not.

Words are like snow—something to remember the next time you’re tempted to unleash a blizzard of words.

One (1) habit to avoid

Years ago, I heard Mike Fontham riff against writing numbers in both numerals and prose, such as “fifty-seven (57).” Said Mike, “Which one can’t they read?” Kendall Gray riffs on the same subject at his blog. So read Kendall’s post. And read his stuff regularly, because it’s good. And for our sake, pray that his head doesn’t explode.

Brainless writing

Says here that “[t]here’s a new advance in the effort to write prose without any direct involvement of a human brain.” As a reader of legal writing since 1986, I’d say the legal profession is way ahead of that curve.