The perils of bad legal writing

Good legal writing won't necessarily get your motion granted. But bad legal writing could very well get it denied. That's what happened to the moving party in a bankruptcy case in Texas. The court's order, including footnote, reads as follows:

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR INCOMPREHENSIBILITY

Before the court is a motion entitled “Defendant’s Motion to Discharge Response to Plaintiff’s Response to Defendant’s Response Opposing Objection to Discharge.” ... The court cannot determine the substance, if any, of the Defendant’s legal argument, nor can the court even ascertain the relief that the Defendant is requesting. The Defendant’s motion is accordingly denied for being incomprehensible.¹

_________
¹ Or, in the words of the competition judge to Adam Sandler’s title character in the movie, “Billy Madison,” after Billy Madison had responded to a question with an answer that sounded superficially reasonable but lacked any substance,

Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I've ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response was there anything that could even be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

Deciphering motions like the one presented here wastes valuable chamber staff time, and invites this sort of footnote.

Comments

[ashley]

"Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it." I felt that way about the State of the Union address...