Seminar #7
The Sequel: Your Brief as a Best Selling Novel
Contra Costa County Bar Association: 2015 MCLE Spectacular
November 20, 2015
Presenters:
Claudia Hagadus Long, Attorney/Mediator at ADR Services, Inc.
Wendy McGuire Coats, Appellate Attorney at McGuire Coats LLP
Themes:
Powerful Word Choices & Rewriting Revision
NOTES:
Shitty First Drafts
4
Anne Lamott from Bird by Bird
Born in San Francisco in 1954, Anne Lamott is a graduate of Goucher College
in Baltimore and is the author of six novels, including Rosie (1983), Crooked Little
Heart (1997), All New People (2000), and Blue Shoes (2002). She has also been the
food reviewer for California magazine, a book reviewer for Mademoiselle, and a
regular contributor to Salon’s “Mothers Who Think.” Her nonfiction books include
Operating Instructions: A Journal of My Son’s First Year (1993), in which she
describes her adventures as a single parent, and Tender Mercies: Some Thoughts on
Faith (1999), in which she charts her journey toward faith in God.
In the following selection, taken from Lamott’s popular book about writing,
Bird by Bird (1994), she argues for the need to let go and write those “shitty first
drafts” that lead to clarity and sometimes brilliance in our second and third drafts.
1
2
3
Now, practically even better news than that of short assignments is the idea of
shitty first drafts. All good writers write them. This is how they end up with good
second drafts and terrific third drafts. People tend to look at successful writers who
are getting their books published and maybe even doing well financially and think
that they sit down at their desks every morning feeling like a million dollars, feeling
great about who they are and how much talent they have and what a great story they
have to tell; that they take in a few deep breaths, push back their sleeves, roll their
necks a few times to get all the cricks out, and dive in, typing fully formed passages
as fast as a court reporter. But this is just the fantasy of the uninitiated. I know some
very great writers, writers you love who write beautifully and have made a great deal
of money, and not one of them sits down routinely feeling wildly enthusiastic and
confident. Not one of them writes elegant first drafts. All right, one of them does, but
we do not like her very much. We do not think that she has a rich inner life or that
God likes her or can even stand her. (Although when I mentioned this to my priest
friend Tom, he said you can safely assume you've created God in your own image
when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do.)
Very few writers really know what they are doing until they've done it. Nor do
they go about their business feeling dewy and thrilled. They do not type a few stiff
warm-up sentences and then find themselves bounding along like huskies across the
snow. One writer I know tells me that he sits down every morning and says to
himself nicely, "It's not like you don't have a choice, because you do -- you can
either type, or kill yourself." We all often feel like we are pulling teeth, even those
writers whose prose ends up being the most natural and fluid. The right words and
sentences just do not come pouring out like ticker tape most of the time. Now,
Muriel Spark is said to have felt that she was taking dictation from God every
morning -- sitting there, one supposes, plugged into a Dictaphone, typing away,
humming. But this is a very hostile and aggressive position. One might hope for bad
things to rain down on a person like this.
5
6
7
For me and most of the other writers I know, writing is not rapturous. In fact, the
only way I can get anything written at all is to write really, really shitty first drafts.
1
The first draft is the child's draft, where you let it all pour out and then let it romp
all over the place, knowing that no one is going to see it and that you can shape it
later. You just let this childlike part of you channel whatever voices and visions
come through and onto the page. If one of the characters wants to say, "Well, so
what, Mr. Poopy Pants?," you let her. No one is going to see it. If the kid wants to
get into really sentimental, weepy, emotional territory, you let him. Just get it all
down on paper because there may be something great in those six crazy pages that
you would never have gotten to by more rational, grown-up means. There may be
something in the very last line of the very last paragraph on page six that you just
love, that is so beautiful or wild that you now know what you're supposed to be
writing about, more or less, or in what direction you might go -- but there was no
way to get to this without first getting through the first five and a half pages.
I used to write food reviews for California magazine before it folded. (My writing
food reviews had nothing to do with the magazine folding, although every single
review did cause a couple of canceled subscriptions. Some readers took umbrage at
my comparing mounds of vegetable puree with various ex-presidents' brains.) These
reviews always took two days to write. First I'd go to a restaurant several times with
a few opinionated, articulate friends in tow. I'd sit there writing down everything
anyone said that was at all interesting or funny. Then on the following Monday I'd
sit down at my desk with my notes and try to write the review. Even after I'd been
doing this for years, panic would set in. I'd try to write a lead, but instead I'd write a
couple of dreadful sentences, XX them out, try again, XX everything out, and then
feel despair and worry settle on my chest like an x-ray apron. It's over, I'd think
calmly. I'm not going to be able to get the magic to work this time. I'm ruined. I'm
through. I'm toast. Maybe, I'd think, I can get my old job back as a clerk-typist. But
probably not. I'd get up and study my teeth in the mirror for a while. Then I'd stop,
remember to breathe, make a few phone calls, hit the kitchen and chow down.
Eventually I'd go back and sit down at my desk, and sigh for the next ten minutes.
Finally I would pick up my one-inch picture frame, stare into it as if for the answer,
and every time the answer would come: all I had to do was to write a really shitty
first draft of, say, the opening paragraph. And no one was going to see it.
So I'd start writing without reining myself in. It was almost just typing, just
making my fingers move. And the writing would be terrible. I'd write a lead
paragraph that was a whole page, even though the entire review could only be three
pages long, and then I'd start writing up descriptions of the food, one dish at a time,
bird by bird, and the critics would be sitting on my shoulders, commenting like
cartoon characters. They'd be pretending to snore, or rolling their eyes at my
overwrought descriptions, no matter how hard I tried to tone those descriptions
down, no matter how conscious I was of what a friend said to me gently in my early
days of restaurant reviewing. "Annie," she said, "it is just a piece of chicken. It is just
a bit of cake."
But because by then I had been writing for so long, I would eventually let myself
trust the process -- sort of, more or less. I'd write a first draft that was maybe twice
as long as it should be, with a self-indulgent and boring beginning, stupefying
descriptions of the meal, lots of quotes from my black-humored friends that made
them sound more like the Manson girls than food lovers, and no ending to speak of.
The whole thing would be so long and incoherent and hideous that for the rest of the
day I'd obsess about getting creamed by a car before I could write a decent second
draft. I'd worry that people would read what I'd written and believe that the accident
had really been a suicide, that I had panicked because my talent was waning and my
mind was shot.
8
9
10
The next day, I'd sit down, go through it all with a colored pen, take out
everything I possibly could, find a new lead somewhere on the second page, figure
out a kicky place to end it, and then write a second draft. It always turned out fine,
sometimes even funny and weird and helpful. I'd go over it one more time and mail
it in.
Then, a month later, when it was time for another review, the whole process
would start again, complete with the fears that people would find my first draft
before I could rewrite it.
Almost all good writing begins with terrible first efforts. You need to start
somewhere. Start by getting something -- anything -- down on paper. A friend of
mine says that the first draft is the down draft -- you just get it down. The second
draft is the up draft -- you fix it up. You try to say what you have to say more
accurately. And the third draft is the dental draft, where you check every tooth, to
see if it's loose or cramped or decayed, or even, God help us, healthy.
1.
Lamott says that the perceptions most people have of how writers work is
different from the reality of the work itself. She refers to this in paragraph 1 as
“the fantasy of the uninitiated.” What does she mean?
2.
In paragraph 7 Lamott refers to a time when, through experience, she
“eventually let [herself] trust the process – sort of, more or less.” She is
referring to the writing process, of course, but why “more or less”? Do you
think that her wariness is personal, or is she speaking for all writers in this
regard? Explain.
3.
From what Lamott has to say, is writing a first draft more about the product or
the process? Do you agree in regard to your own first drafts? Explain.
Lamott, Anne. "Shitty First Drafts.” Language Awareness: Readings for College
th
Writers. Ed. by Paul Eschholz, Alfred Rosa, and Virginia Clark. 9 ed.
Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2005: 93-96.
2
HOW TO WRITE GOOD LEGAL STUFF
© 2001, 2009
Eugene Volokh1 and J. Alexander Tanford2
This is a guide to good legal writing. Good writing consists of avoiding common clunkers and
using simpler replacements. The replacements aren't always perfect synonyms but 90% of the time
they're better than the original. Warning: Some changes also require grammatical twiddling of other
parts of the sentence. This is not a guide to proper high English usage. We don't give two hoots
whether you dangle participles, split infinitives or end sentences with prepositions. We care that you
can write clearly.
PART ONE -- TOP 10 SIGNS OF BAD LEGAL WRITING
10. USING PASSIVE RATHER THAN ACTIVE VOICE
BAD LEGAL WRITERS USE PASSIVE VOICE
a) "the ruling was made by the judge"
b) "the complaint was filed by the plaintiff"
c) "It was held that..."
GOOD WRITERS USE THE ACTIVE VOICE
a) "the judge ruled"
b) "the plaintiff filed a complaint"
c) "the court held..."
SPOTTING GUIDE
a) Check for the word "by" (search for "by[space]")
b) Look for sentences or phrases starting with "it is" or "it was."
EXCEPTION. Use the passive voice when you do not know the actor or when the result is more
important that who did it.
a) "The documents were mysteriously destroyed." (actor unknown)
b) "Ted Stevens was re-elected anyway" (result important)
1
Gary T. Schwartz Professor of Law, UCLA Law School. Prof. Volokh had the idea for this
guide and wrote the material included as groups 1, 2 and 5 in part II..
2
Professor of Law, Indiana University Maurer School of Law - Bloomington. Prof. Tanford
expanded on Prof. Volokh's work, added his own ideas about good writing (not all of which are
shared by Prof. Volokh), and is primarily responsible for the final form of the guide.
1
9. NOMINALIZATIONS
BAD LEGAL WRITERS TURN VERBS INTO NOUNS, AND THEN ADD AN EXTRA VERB
TO TAKE THE PLACE OF THE ONE THEY CONVERTED
a) "reached a conclusion"
b) "granted a continuance"
c) "involved in a collision"
d) "take action"
GOOD WRITERS JUST USE THE FIRST VERB
a) "concluded"
b) "continued"
c) "collided"
d) "act"
SPOTTING GUIDE
Look for words ending in "ion."
8. FEAR OF CALLING THINGS BY THEIR NAMES
BAD LEGAL WRITERS ARE AFRAID TO CALL THINGS BY NAME, USING GENERIC
TERMS INSTEAD
The plaintiff
The defendant
The day in question
The scene of the accident
Her place of employment
GOOD WRITERS GIVE THEIR CHARACTERS NAMES
Susan Jones
Michael Fitzhugh
June 3rd
In the parking lot
Pizza Hut
7. VERBOSITY
BAD LEGAL WRITERS USE RUN-ON SENTENCES CONTAINING NUMEROUS
QUALIFYING PHRASES
"The court in Chester v. Morris, a case involving a similar traffic accident, held that a person
riding a bicycle must adhere to the same standards as a person driving a car, although it limited
its holding to the facts of that case, which included the fact that the bicyclist was intoxicated."
GOOD WRITERS USE SEVERAL SHORT SENTENCES
"Chester v. Morris involved a similar traffic accident. The court held that a bicyclist must adhere
to the same standards as a person driving a car. The opinion is limited to situations in which the
bicyclist is intoxicated."
2
6. QUALIFYING PHRASES
BAD LEGAL WRITERS PUT QUALIFYING PHRASES IN THE MIDDLE OF SENTENCES
WHERE THEY DO NOT BELONG
a) "the court, although it limited its holding, held that a bicyclist must adhere to traffic rules"
b) "the court has, although with limits, held that a bicyclist must adhere to traffic rules"
c) "the court held, although with limits, that a bicyclist must adhere to traffic rules"
GOOD WRITERS PUT QUALIFYING PHRASES AT THE END OF SENTENCES OR
ELIMINATE THEM ALTOGETHER
a) "the court held that a bicyclist must adhere to traffic rules, although it limited its holding ..."
b) "the court held that a bicyclist must adhere to traffic rules"
5. REDUNDANCY
BAD LEGAL WRITERS LIST EVERY KNOWN SYNONYM, AS IF THEY WERE WRITING
A THESAURUS, IN A MISGUIDED EFFORT TO BE PRECISE
a) "Every town, city, or village"
b) "Cease and desist"
c) "Give, devise and bequeath"
d) "Null and void"
GOOD WRITERS USE A SINGLE WORD
a) "Every municipality"
b) "stop"
c) "give"
d) "void"
SPOTTING GUIDE Look for "or" or "and."
4. MEANINGLESS ADVERBS USED IN A VAIN EFFORT TO MAKE A
WEAK POINT APPEAR STRONGER
BAD LEGAL WRITERS USE MEANINGLESS ADVERBS THINKING THEY MAKE AN
ARGUMENT STRONGER
a) Chester v. Morris clearly held that bicyclists must adhere to the rules of the road.
b) The fact that he was drunk is extremely important
c) The holding is very narrow.
d) It is really important that he was not wearing a helmet.
e) He was undoubtedly drunk.
f) It is manifestly obvious that drunken bicyclists are dangerous.
GOOD WRITERS DILIGENTLY AVOID USELESS ADVERBS
a) Chester v. Morris held that bicyclists must adhere to the rules of the road.
b) The fact that he was drunk is important
3
c) The holding is narrow.
d) It is important that he was not wearing a helmet.
e) He was drunk.
f) It is obvious that drunken bicyclists are dangerous.
SPOTTING GUIDE
Look for words ending in "y"
3. MEANINGLESS WEASEL WORDS USED BECAUSE YOU'RE AFRAID TO TAKE A
POSITION
BAD LEGAL WRITERS ARE AFRAID OF BEING WRONG AND USE WEASEL WORDS IN
AN EFFORT TO AVOID TAKING A CLEAR POSITION
alleged
maybe
quite possibly
at best/at least
might be
seems to
appears to
perhaps
so-called
implicates
probably
tends to
2. DOUBLE NEGATIVES
ONE OF THE CLEAREST SIGN OF THE BAD LEGAL WRITER IS THE DOUBLE NEGATIVE
"not uncommon"
"failed to show inability"
"not insignificant"
"not uncomplicated"
"no small part"
"not incapable"
"not inappropriate"
GOOD WRITERS USE SINGLE POSITIVES
"common"
"showed ability"
"significant"
"complicated"
"large part"
"capable"
"appropriate"
4
1. PHRASES WITH ABSOLUTELY NO MEANING WHATSOEVER
AND THE CLEAREST SIGN OF THE BAD LEGAL WRITER IS THE USE OF TOTALLY
MEANINGLESS (AND USUALLY POMPOUS) PHRASES
"I would like to point out that Chester v. Morris was overruled"
"I would argue that Chester v. Morris is not applicable."
"It should be noted that Chester v. Morris was decided before the statute was amended."
"Evidence that the defendant was drunk does not operate to remove the issue of contributory negligence"
"Despite the fact that the defendant was drunk, he operated his bicycle carefully."
"In fact, he should be commended."
"During the course of his ride, he never fell off his bicycle"
"It has been determined that he was wearing his helmet."
"It is obvious that a drunken bicyclist is a danger on crowded streets."
"It is clear that he had the right of way and was justified in crossing the street"
"Chester v. Morris is distinguishable (or worse, clearly distinguishable). It does not apply
because it involved an intoxicated bicyclist"
GOOD WRITERS OMIT THEM
"Chester v. Morris was overruled"
"Chester v. Morris is not applicable."
"Chester v. Morris was decided before the statute was amended."
"Evidence that the defendant was drunk does not remove the issue of contributory negligence"
"Despite the defendant's drunkenness, he operated his bicycle carefully."
"He should be commended."
"During his ride, he never fell off his bicycle"
"He was wearing his helmet."
"A drunken bicyclist is a danger on crowded streets."
"He had the right of way and was justified in crossing the street"
"Chester v. Morris does not apply because it involved an intoxicated bicyclist"
5
PART TWO -- A DICTIONARY OF LEGALESE
Group one -- hideous prepositional phrases and their plain English alternatives
at present -- now
at the place -- where
at the present time-- now
at the time that -- when
at that point in time -- then
at this point in time -- now or currently
by means of -- by
by reason of -- because
for the duration of -- during or while
for the purpose of -- to
for the reason that -- because
from the point of view -- from
in a case in which -- when or where
in accordance with -- by or under
in all likelihood -- probably
in an X manner -- Xly, e.g., "hastily" instead of "in a hasty manner"
in close proximity -- near
in connection with -- with or about or concerning
in favor of -- for
in light of the fact that -- because or given that
in order to -- to
in point of fact -- in fact (or omit altogether)
in reference to -- about
in regard to -- about
in relation to -- about or concerning
in terms of -- in
in the course of -- during
in the event that -- if
in the nature of -- like
inasmuch as -- because or since
on a number of occasions -- often or sometimes
on the basis of -- by or from
on the part of -- by
to the effect that -- that
until such time as -- until
with a view to -- to
with reference to -- about or concerning
with regard to -- about
6
Group two -- hideous phrases ending with prepositions and their plain English
alternatives
a number of -- many or some or give the actual number
is desirous of -- wants
is dispositive of -- disposes of
concerning the matter of -- about
the totality of -- all
is binding on -- binds
accord respect to -- respect
advert to -- mention
due to -- because
prior to -- before
is able/unable to -- can/cannot
Group three -- bad ways lawyers start sentences
As stated previously, ...
There are ....
It is ....
I might add ...
It is interesting to note ...
Group four -- words commonly viewed as sexist and their neutral alternatives
rights of man -- human rights
reasonable man -- reasonable person
workman -- worker
congressman -- member of Congress
foreman -- supervisor or foreperson
chairman -- chair or chairperson
the judge .... he -- the judge .... the judge
Group five -- words that only lawyers use, and their plain English alternatives
accord (verb) -- give
acquire -- get
additional -- more
additionally -- also
adjacent (to) -- next (to) or near
adjudicate -- determine/try
afforded -- given
aforementioned -- none --- omit
ambit -- reach or scope
any and all -- all
approximately -- about
ascertain -- find out
assist -- help
7
as to -- about
as well as -- and
case at bar -- this case
attempt (verb) -- try
cease -- stop
circumstances in which -- when or where
cognizant of -- aware or knows
commence -- start
conceal -- hide
consensus of opinion -- consensus
consequence -- result
contiguous to -- next to
counsel -- lawyer
deem -- find/believe
demonstrate -- show
desire -- want
donate -- give
echelon -- level
elucidate -- explain/clarify
endeavor (verb) -- try
ensue -- take place/follow
evidence (verb) -- show/demonstrate
evince -- show
exclusively -- only
exhibit (verb) -- show/demonstrate
exit (verb) -- leave
expedite -- hurry
facilitate -- help
firstly, secondly -- first, second, ...
foregoing -- these
forthwith -- immediately
frequently -- often
fundamental -- basic
has a negative impact -- hurts or harms
indicate -- show or say or mean
individual (noun) -- person
inquire -- ask
locate -- find
manner -- way
methodology -- method
modify -- change
narrate -- say
negatively affect -- hurt, harm or injure
notify -- tell
notwithstanding -- despite
numerous -- many
8
objective (noun) -- goal
observe -- see or watch
obtain -- get
owing to -- because
period of time -- time or period
permit -- let or allow
personnel -- people
pertains to -- refers or belongs to
point in time -- time or point
portion -- part
possess -- have
post hoc -- hindsight
prior to -- before
procure -- get
provide -- give
provided that -- if or but
provision of law -- law
purchase -- buy
purport -- claim or intend
rate of speed -- speed
referred to as -- called
remainder -- rest
render assistance -- help
request (verb) -- ask
require -- need
respond -- answer
retain -- keep
said (adjective) -- the or this ("this contract" not "said contract")
stipulates -- says
subsequent -- later
subsequent to -- after
subsequently -- after or later
substantiate -- prove
sufficient -- enough
sufficient number of -- enough
termination -- end
the case at bar -- this case
the fact that -- that
the instant case -- this case
the manner in which -- how
upon -- on
utilize -- use
verbatim -- word for word
was aware -- knew
wheras -- since/although
9
PART THREE - CONCISE GUIDE TO HOW TO WRITE CRITICALLY
ABOUT ANYTHING
STEP ONE -- GENERATE ALTERNATIVES
Alternatives can come from current news stories, interesting cases, common experience or your
personal experience. In litigation, the alternatives are often defined by the two sides of the case.
In scholarly and judicial writing (in which the author pretends to be neutral), the alternatives
should be stated fairly -- the best possible case for each side. For example:
This case presents the issue of whether a physician should be exempt from jury
duty. A good argument can be made that the community benefits from having its
doctors caring for the sick. On the other hand, we have a historical principle of
universal jury service. Surely the community also benefits from having its juries
representative of a cross-section of all the community.
In advocacy writing (in which the pretense of neutrality is impossible), you should slant the
alternatives favorably. You state the best plausible case for your side and the worst plausible case
for the other side, but both sides must be plausible. This is where the famous "slippery slope"
argument comes into play -- you point out the logical implication of the other side's position, and
then attack the implication rather than the original position. For example:
The state argues that Dr. Jones should be exempt from jury duty because he is a
surgeon and has patients waiting. That argument could be made by all educated
professionals -- doctors, dentists, lawyers, architects. If they are all excused, we
end up with a predominantly blue-collar jury that does not fairly represent a
cross-section of the community. We argue that everyone must take his or her turn
serving on a jury, so we can achieve a jury that is truly a fair cross-section of the
community.
STEP TWO -- MARSHAL THE RELEVANT INFORMATION
An informed choice rests on information. In the absence of information, choices can only be
made on the basis of personal biases, stereotypes and prejudices. Whether you are writing in a neutral
or an advocacy style, you want your conclusion to appear to be reasoned rather than based purely on
bias. Therefore, you need to marshal information which common sense suggests will be relevant to
an intelligent decision. Such information is of three kinds: facts, legal authority, and social authority.
In "neutral" scholarly and judicial writing, all relevant information is mentioned, regardless of
which side it supports. Neutral writing must summarize the information favoring each alternative.
For example (very abbreviated):
Court records indicate that the issue has come up in Bloomington seven times in
the last five years -- six physicians have been excused from jury service, one has
served. There are no cases in Indiana on this issue, although cases concerning
other exemptions have held that the matter is generally within the discretion of the
10
General Assembly. Thirty other states have statutes specifically exempting
doctors; twenty do not. Other state courts have also generally held that the
question of eligibility for jury service is within the discretion of the legislature.
The Supreme Court, however, has held that the sixth amendment guarantee of an
"impartial jury of the state and district" requires that the jury be drawn from a fair
cross-section of the community. Any blanket occupational exemptions must be
justified by a compelling state interest, although individual decisions to excuse
someone from jury service are within the trial judge's discretion. Against this
background are several studies by social psychologists showing that juries without
educated elite jurors such as physicians produce different verdicts than juries on
which educated jurors participate.
In advocacy writing, the summary of relevant information should be slanted to favor your side.
Note that I said slanted, not tipped over onto its head. You can't misstate facts or omit major
Supreme Court precedent. However, you can be selective in which facts you report and which of the
hundreds of relevant cases you include. Two examples (very abbreviated):
For the state: Court records indicate that the issue has come up in Bloomington rarely in
the last five years and that not all physicians are excused. Indiana cases hold generally that
deciding whether to create a statutory exemption is within the discretion of the General
Assembly. A majority of other states follow the Indiana practice of exempting doctors, and
the practice has been approved by a majority of state courts. The Supreme Court has held
that a jury in a criminal case should be drawn from a fair cross-section of the community
and that any exemption that removes a substantial number of potential jurors from the pool
must be justified by a compelling state interest. The Court has not previously ruled on the
issue of physician exemptions, but has said that the trial judge's decision in an individual
case is within the judge's discretion. The issue has not been specifically addressed by the
social psychologists who study jury behavior.
For the defense: Court records indicate that in every Bloomington case in the last five
years a physician who invoked the exemption was excused from jury duty. There are no
cases in Indiana on this issue, and other states are divided on the wisdom of creating a
blanket physician exemption. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that because the sixth
amendment guarantee of an "impartial jury of the state and district" requires that the jury
be drawn from a fair cross-section of the community, any blanket occupational exemption
must be justified by a compelling state interest. Several studies by social psychologists
demonstrate that juries without physicians produce different verdicts than juries on which
physicians and other educated elite participate.
STEP THREE
CRITICALLY
--
EXAMINE
THE
RELEVANT
INFORMATION
The important part of an argument is the critical examination of the information that could be
used to support one or the other alternative. A critical examination is one that uses principled
reasoning to assess the relative strengths and weakness of each piece of supporting information -bolstering the pieces of your own argument and weakening your opponent's. Bear in mind that
11
information is rarely completely reliable or completely bogus. For example, eyewitness testimony
from a 85-year-old woman with cataracts describing a complete stranger she saw for three seconds
during a bank robbery is not totally useless -- it has some value. Some common examples:
! Did a witness have an adequate opportunity to observe? Is the witness of good character.
Does s/he have a bias or vested interest?
!
!
!
!
!
!
Is a case cited in a brief recent or old, from this or a different jurisdiction, from a lower or
higher court, a majority opinion or a split decision?
Does an expert have appropriate education and training, adequate experience, a bias or
vested interest, good institutional affiliations?
How are the facts of another case similar or dissimilar
Is an argument or witness account consistent or inconsistent with other evidence, human
experience, or the laws of physics?
Has a case been cited approvingly or criticized by other judges, in treatises, or in law
review articles?
Is a witness's opinion supported by adequate personal observations? Do the data support
it?
STEP FOUR -- REACH A CONCLUSION ABOUT WHICH IS THE BETTER
ALTERNATIVE
The better solution does not need to be the best; it does not need to be perfect. It is enough that
one alternative rises above the other(s). If no alternative is clearly better than any other, the better
solution may be a compromise.
The alternative you ultimately select is not necessarily the one that "wins" the critical analysis.
Legal decision making is not mathematical, and no judge or lawyer would weigh all issues equally.
For example, some judges place great weight on the single principle of how widely held a particular
legal doctrine is, or adheres to precedent for the sake of stability in the law, even if the reform
alternative has the better of most of the analysis. However, a good judge first expresses some
concern about the result, given that his or her analysis of other factors suggests that the majority may
be wrong.
12
WRITING EFFECTIVE POINT HEADINGS∗
© 2003 The Writing Center at GULC. All rights reserved.
Each argument in a brief begins with a complete sentence called an argument heading or
point heading. The heading is a concise summary of the argument in that section and is set off
from the text that follows. Argument headings are conventionally in capital letters and are
single-spaced. Few students, and in fact, few practitioners, however, realize just how important
and effective good point headings are. Point headings in briefs are more than just the organizing
tools they are in objective memos. Good point headings are often the cornerstone to a good
brief, whether at the trial level or on appeal.
Point headings can serve at least three crucial roles in brief writing. As a prewriting tool,
many writers find point headings a very effective way to create an outline. As you lay out the
foundation to your argument, you are also laying out the point headings and vice versa. Writing
point headings before you start actually writing can help the writer realize how far their
argument has come and what further development is necessary to reach finality. Second, almost
universally, people will read the point headings to a brief, even if that is all they read. For that
reason alone, good point headings are necessary to either pull the reader in to read the whole
brief, or to inform the reader who will not finish the brief as to what your main arguments are. A
point heading may be your only chance to inform a busy judge as to what your argument is. If
your point headings are complete encapsulations of your overall argument, then even the judge
who only reads your point headings will know what the premise of your argument is. Good
point headings also serve a third purpose: they provide a figurative rudder and guide to the
reader. They not only highlight where the argument is and where it will go next (as a guide), but
they can also help push the reader in that direction through effective rhetoric (as a rudder). To
that extent, point headings serve a crystallizing purpose. They should distill the essence of the
argument, and encourage the reader to follow along and reach your conclusions for themselves.
So what makes a good point heading good? As in many other areas of legal writing,
there are no absolute rules when it comes to point headings, but because the object is to achieve
the goals listed above, there are certain accepted principles about what makes a one heading
better than a another.
1)
∗
Headings should always be argumentative rather than topical or even assertive.
The same is true for subheadings. Make sure to never follow a main heading with
only one subheading. Subheadings are generally in Title Case and are underlined.
By Kara Thompson and Zach Brez
2)
The point headings should be related to the questions presented, but should not
mirror them exactly. While the point headings should state, usually affirmatively,
the resolution of the issues raised in the Question Presented, the point headings
should not simply restate the question as an affirmative sentence. Why pass up
another opportunity to persuade through artful expression? Different rhetoric
styles will appeal to different readers, and point headings are another chance to
convince the reader who wasn’t convinced from the Question Presented. If the
Question Presented is more narrowly focused, make the point headings more
general, and vice versa.
3)
Effective argument headings will identify the applicable law; the way in which
the law applies to the facts of the case; and the conclusion that follows from that
application.
4)
While not every relevant fact can fit into a point heading, the writer should try to
imbed the heading into the memory of the reader through the use of powerful
wording and precise facts while avoiding adjectives and adverbs that may only
serve to exaggerate the argument.
5)
Point headings should always use tight, concise, well-though-out language that
works to engage the reader. You should continually re-craft your point headings
as your work through different drafts of your brief, working to hone your
language to be the most persuasive it can be.
On the following pages are some examples of good and not-so-good point headings.
Example 1.
Not so good: WHETHER THE SUIT IS BARRED BY LACHES.
[This is an ineffective point heading because it is a question that does not help the
reader in any way. Answering that question is the job of the writer, not the
reader, who usually looks for more guidance in a heading. This is just a sentence
fragment identifying an issue.]
Good:
THIS SUIT IS BARRED BY LACHES.
[This is better, but it is essentially just an answer to the question presented. The
reader has no sense of the “why” or “because”]
Better:
THIS SUIT IS BARRED BY LACHES BECAUSE IT WAS BROUGHT
TWENTY-FIVE YEARS AFTER THE ISSUANCE OF THE ORIGINAL
CERTIFICATE.
[This is much better. After reading the “because” part, the reader knows exactly
where the writer is going with his argument.]
Example 2.
Not so good: THE PLAINTIFFS SHOULD NOT GET DAMAGES.
[This is a pretty ineffective point heading. The sentence is just a direct response
to the Question Presented and therefore does not advance the writer’s rhetoric.]
Good:
THE COURT SHOULD NOT AWARD THE PLAINTIFFS DAMAGES FOR
THE COSTS OF RAISING THEIR NORMAL, HEALTHY DAUGHTER TO
MAJORITY.
[This is better, especially because the language is more precise and powerful.
Still, the writer has failed to give the reader the “why.”]
Better:
I.
THE COURT SHOULD NOT AWARD THE PLAINTIFFS DAMAGES
FOR THE COSTS OF RAISING THEIR NORMAL, HEALTHY DAUGHTER
TO MAJORITY.
A.
Suzanne’s Birth Did Not Injure The Plaintiffs Because They
Sought Sterilization For Non-Economic Reasons.
B.
Awarding Full Child-Rearing Costs Harms The Mental Health Of
Unwanted Children And Will Discourage Doctors From
Performing Needed Sterilizations.
[This is much better. It really helps to crystallize the argument by using
subheading and the writer is using powerful language to sway the reader with
both legal and public policy arguments, which are effectively separated into
subheadings.]
Example 3.
Not so good: THE TRIAL COURT’S DECISION IS REVERSIBLE.
[Yes, the decision is reversible, but what decision, and why is it reversible?]
Good:
THE TRIAL COURT’S DENIAL OF APPELLANT’S MOTION TO SUPPRESS
DIANA’S STATEMENT SHOULD BE REVERSED.
[Now we know what decision we are talking about, and the writer has
affirmatively stated her goals, but she has failed to give us the why.]
Better:
THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN ADMITTING DIANA’S STATEMENT
BECAUSE HER STATEMENT WAS THE FRUIT OF AN ILLEGAL POLICE
SEIZURE AND THEREFORE MUST BE SUPPRESSED UNDER THE WONG
SUN DOCTRINE.
[Now we know what should have been suppressed and why. Also, the writer has
given the reader a guide as to the area of law that will be discussed in this
section.]
Example 4.
Not so good: IS THERE JURISDICTION FOR REVIEW OF A REFUSAL TO REOPEN A
MEDICARE PROVIDER’S COST REPORT UNDER THE FEDERAL
QUESTION STATUTE, 42 USC §1331.
[Once again, this is essentially a question that does not help the reader in any
way.]
Good:
FEDERAL COURTS DO NOT HAVE JURISDICTION UNDER 28 USC §1331
TO REVIEW REOPENING DENIALS.
[This is better, but just answers the question presented. The reader has no sense
of the “why.”]
Better:
I.
FEDERAL COURTS DO NOT HAVE JURISDICTION UNDER 28 USC
§1331 TO REVIEW REOPENING DENIALS BY INTERMEDIARIES
A.
42 USC §405(H) Prohibits Review Of Reopening Denials Under
28 USC 1331.
B.
Preclusion Of Judicial Review Under 28 USC 1331 Is Consistent
With Bowen V. Michigan Academy Of Family Physicians.
[This is much better. Even though the technical language is fairly dense, the
writer has done a good job of creating accessibility for the reader by separating
the arguments into subheadings that deal with separate issues. The writer has
applied the facts of the case to the underlying legal principles.]
Sources:
Alan D. Hornstein, Appellate Advocacy in a Nutshell (1998).
Robert J. Martineau, Appellate Practice and Procedure (1987).
Myron Moskovitz, Winning an Appeal (1985).
Introduction to Advocacy: Research, Writing and Argument (6th ed.1996).
TIPS FOR EFFECTIVE PUNCTUATION IN LEGAL WRITING *
© 2005 The Writing Center at GULC. All Rights Reserved.
Punctuation can be either your friend or your enemy. A typical reader will seldom notice good
punctuation (though some readers do appreciate truly excellent punctuation). However,
problematic punctuation will stand out to your reader and ultimately damage your credibility as a
writer. The tips below are intended to help you reap the benefits of sophisticated punctuation
while avoiding common pitfalls. But remember, if a sentence presents a particularly thorny
punctuation problem, you may want to consider rephrasing for greater clarity.
This handout addresses the following topics:
THE COMMA (,)........................................................................................................................... 2
PUNCTUATING QUOTATIONS ................................................................................................. 4
THE ELLIPSIS (. . .) ..................................................................................................................... 4
THE APOSTROPHE (’) ................................................................................................................ 7
THE HYPHEN (-).......................................................................................................................... 8
THE DASH (—) .......................................................................................................................... 10
THE SEMICOLON (;)................................................................................................................. 11
THE COLON (:) .......................................................................................................................... 12
*
By Alison Suthers and Michael Roberts, November 2005.
1
THE COMMA (,)
COMMA: The comma is probably the most commonly used punctuation mark. 1
Commas can show the reader how extra information has been added to a sentence:
1) Use a comma to set off introductory phrases. The comma is sometimes considered optional
for very short introductory phrases.
To prevail in this matter, the plaintiff must satisfy four elements.
First, the plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant’s statement was false.
2) Use a comma to set off an interrupting phrase or “nonrestrictive” clause.
The complainant, a local homeowner, has contacted police nine times.
The officer pushed on the door, which was in a state of disrepair, and it opened.
The witness claimed that he, not the defendant, was driving the car.
The judge, however, focused on the policy implications of the decision.
3) Use a comma to indicate that more information follows.
The plaintiff filed his reply brief, which was longer than court rules permitted.
The court held for the plaintiff, finding that the defendant’s explanation was not credible.
4) Use a comma before a conjunction that introduces a new subject and verb.
The Court declined the appeal, but the Governor is considering clemency.
Commas are also used to coordinate dates, separate items in a list, and set off quotations. For
more information on the use of commas with quotations, see infra on “Punctuating Quotations.”
TIP: Avoid using a comma between a subject and its verb. For example, do not use a comma
between two subjects that share a verb or between two verbs that share a subject.
The leaders of the union and the owners of the team met to begin negotiations.
NOT: The leaders of the union, and the owners of the team met to begin negotiations.
The lawyer objected to the statement and moved to strike it from the record.
NOT: The lawyer objected to the statement, and moved to strike it from the record.
1
LAUREL CURRIE OATES ET AL., THE LEGAL WRITING HANDBOOK: ANALYSIS, RESEARCH AND WRITING 797 (3d.
ed. 2002). The information in this section has been adapted from OATES at 798-99, and MARY BERNARD RAY &
JILL J. RAMSFIELD, LEGAL WRITING: GETTING IT RIGHT AND GETTING IT WRITTEN 79-82 (3d ed. 2000).
2
THE COMMA, continued
TIP: Use a comma between the last items in a series. Though sometimes considered optional,
the use of this comma in legal writing is recommended to avoid any possible confusion.
My estate is to be divided equally among my nephew, my son, my daughter, and my sonin-law. 2
TIP: Commas are generally used with “which” clauses but not with “that” clauses.
▪ The word “which” usually indicates a “nonrestrictive” clause, which is a phrase that
provides additional information but does not restrict or limit the object it modifies.
“The taxes, which have been paid, should not appear on this statement.”
(All taxes have been paid.)
▪ The word “that” usually indicates a clause that provides essential information restricting
or limiting the object it modifies, also known as a “restrictive” clause.
“The taxes that have been paid should not appear on this statement.” 3
(Only some of the taxes have been paid.)
TIP: The “pause” rule is imperfect.
▪ “Many fairly good legal writers . . . rely on the ‘rule’ that one should use a comma
whenever the reader should pause—advice that works only about 70 percent of the
time.” 4
▪ However, when polishing a piece of writing, you may use the “pause” rule to find and
fix problem areas, especially if reading the piece aloud.
2
RAY & RAMSFIELD, supra note 1, at 81.
Id. at 369-70.
4
OATES, supra note 1, at 797.
3
3
PUNCTUATING QUOTATIONS
QUOTATIONS: Some special considerations apply to punctuation used in conjunction with
quotation marks.
1) Use a comma before a quote when a phrase introduces the quote, but do not use a comma if
the quote is integrated into a larger sentence.
He replied, “I think the car was blue.”
He replied that the car was “blue with white racing stripes.”
2) Commas and periods always go inside of the closing quotation mark. 5
3) All other marks go inside the closing quotation mark only if the mark is part of the quote.
He asked, “What time is lunch?”
4) All other marks go outside the closing quotation mark if the mark is part of the larger
sentence.
Did he really call his classmate an “obsequious sycophant”?
She said “next Sunday”; however, I think she meant tomorrow.
THE ELLIPSIS (. . .)
ELLIPSIS: An ellipsis (three periods separated by spaces) is used to indicate the omission of
one or more words from a quotation. 6
Advantage: Ellipses help writers retain conciseness in legal writing and draw clearer meaning
out of quoted language by permitting the omission of text that is not necessary for the present
discussion.
Disadvantage: The overuse of ellipses may suggest that you are manipulating the authority and
thus may harm your credibility with the reader.
CAUTION: Use care not to omit material that is necessary to retain the original meaning of
quote. 7
5
British English follows a different rule.
For more information on omissions from quotations, see THE BLUEBOOK: A UNIFORM SYSTEM OF CITATION R. 5.3,
at 70-71 (Columbia Law Review Ass’n et al. eds., 18th ed. 2005).
6
4
THE ELLIPSIS, continued
TIP: According to the Bluebook, include a space before and after each period in an ellipsis. 8
Note that some word processing autocorrect features automatically insert a special “ellipsis”
character when you type three periods; this character does not conform to the Bluebook.
“Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech . . . .”
TIP: Include ending punctuation after an ellipsis if the sentence ends with the quotation.
Above, the second ellipsis (for an omission at the end of the sentence) is followed by the original
ending punctuation (the fourth period in the sequence).
TIP: Do not use an ellipsis to begin a quotation or indicate the alteration of an individual word.
Brackets are typically used in these instances. 9
“[N]o warrant shall issue, but upon probable cause . . . .”
TIP: Do not use an ellipsis to begin or end a quotation when the quoted language is used only as
a phrase or clause of the ultimate sentence.
Congress, the drafters agreed, could “make no law” that abridges the fundamental
democratic freedoms of speech and the press.
NOT: Congress, the drafters agreed, could “. . . make no law . . . ” that abridges the
fundamental democratic freedoms of speech and the press.”
TIP: When omitting text after the end of a quoted sentence and the sentence is followed by
further quotation, retain the original punctuation at the end of the sentence and then include an
ellipsis before continuing. Do not add a space before the ending punctuation.
From: “The Plaintiff met her burden. The Defendant has raised no affirmative defenses,
and thus judgment is granted for the Plaintiff.”
To: “The Plaintiff met her burden. . . . [J]udgment is granted for the Plaintiff.”
7
Lawyers may be subjected to sanctions for misrepresenting the meaning of quoted language through selective
omission. See Precision Specialty Metals, Inc. v. United States, 315 F. 3d 1346 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (affirming formal
reprimand for government attorney whose omission broadened the original meaning of a quoted passage).
8
THE BLUEBOOK, supra note 6, R. 5.3, at 70.
9
For more information on alterations, see THE BLUEBOOK, supra note 6, R. 5.2, at 69-70.
5
THE ELLIPSIS, continued
TIP: When a paragraph or more is omitted from a quotation, start a new line, indent, and
include four periods with spaces in between (representing an ellipsis and a fourth period for the
ending punctuation).
Our opinions, like our building, have recognized the role the Decalogue plays in
America's heritage. The Executive and Legislative Branches have also acknowledged the
historical role of the Ten Commandments. These displays and recognitions of the Ten
Commandments bespeak the rich American tradition of religious acknowledgments.
....
There are, of course, limits to the display of religious messages or symbols. For
example, we held unconstitutional a Kentucky statute requiring the posting of the Ten
Commandments in every public schoolroom. In the classroom context, we found that the
Kentucky statute had an improper and plainly religious purpose. 10
TIP: Do not use an ellipsis to indicate the omission of a footnote or citation. Instead include a
“(footnote omitted)” or “(citation omitted)” parenthetical explanation. 11
10
Van Orden v. Perry, 125 S. Ct. 2854, 2863 (2005) (citations and footnotes omitted). The original passage
included an additional paragraph:
Our opinions, like our building, have recognized the role the Decalogue plays in
America's heritage. The Executive and Legislative Branches have also acknowledged the
historical role of the Ten Commandments. These displays and recognitions of the Ten
Commandments bespeak the rich American tradition of religious acknowledgments.
Of course, the Ten Commandments are religious—they were so viewed at their inception
and so remain. The monument, therefore, has religious significance. According to Judeo-Christian
belief, the Ten Commandments were given to Moses by God on Mt. Sinai. But Moses was a
lawgiver as well as a religious leader. And the Ten Commandments have an undeniable historical
meaning, as the foregoing examples demonstrate. Simply having religious content or promoting a
message consistent with a religious doctrine does not run afoul of the Establishment Clause.
There are, of course, limits to the display of religious messages or symbols. For example,
we held unconstitutional a Kentucky statute requiring the posting of the Ten Commandments in
every public schoolroom. In the classroom context, we found that the Kentucky statute had an
improper and plainly religious purpose.
Id. (citations and footnotes omitted).
11
THE BLUEBOOK, supra note 6, R. 5.2-5.3, at 69-71.
6
THE APOSTROPHE 12 (’)
APOSTROPHE: Apostrophes are used to indicate letters missing from words and to create
possessive forms of nouns.
TIP: Avoid the use of informal contractions (e.g., “shouldn’t”) in formal legal writing.
TIP: Do not use an apostrophe to form possessives of pronouns.
his, hers, its, theirs, ours, yours, whose
TIP: Do not use an apostrophe to create a plural form of a name that ends with an “s.” Instead
add “es” to the word.
two Robertses on the Court, four Joneses at the reunion
TIP: Use an apostrophe in legal writing to form the plural of a letter, figure or symbol. 13
7’s, C’s, M’s, 1960’s, Boeing 767’s
TIP: Apostrophes are used to abbreviate words in citation sentences (e.g., “Nat’l” for
“National” in case citations). Consult the Bluebook rule for your particular source; cases and a
few other sources utilize the abbreviations in Table T.6 of the Bluebook.
Tips for Possessive Forms 14
TIP: Nouns that do not end with “s” (singular & plural) Æ Add apostrophe and “s”
defendant’s alibi, family’s income, children’s guardian, everyone’s concern
TIP: Plural nouns that end with “s” Æ Add an apostrophe but not an “s”
framers’ intent, workers’ rights, thirty days’ notice
12
See generally RAY & RAMSFIELD, supra note 1, at 19; OATES, supra note 1, at 835-39.
Some modern style guides disagree and omit the apostrophe, but the Bluebook and Government Printing Office
Style Manual still require this apostrophe when expressing plural forms. See RAY & RAMSFIELD, supra note 1, at
19.
14
These rules have been adapted from OATES, supra note 1, at 835.
13
7
THE APOSTROPHE, continued
TIP: Singular nouns that end with “s” Æ it depends (and style guides differ)
▪ Use the apostrophe plus “s” form (’s) if the resulting word is not difficult to pronounce.
Congress’s authority, witness’s testimony, James’s contract 15
▪ If the possessive word is followed by a word beginning with an “s” sound, creating
three “s” sounds together, the “s” after the apostrophe is dropped for ease in
pronunciation. 16
business’ sales, witness’ signature
TIP: To show possession for two or more nouns:
▪ Use the apostrophe plus “s” (’s) after the last name only to indicate joint possession.
John and Mary’s stocks (stocks jointly owned by John and Mary)
▪ Use the apostrophe plus “s” (’s) after each name to indicate individual possession.
John’s and Mary’s stocks (some stocks owned by John, some owned by Mary)
THE HYPHEN 17 (-)
HYPHEN: Hyphens can be used between two words that function together to modify a
subsequent word in the sentence, as in “well-pled complaint.” Hyphens can also be used to
connect some prefixes to words.
Advantages: Hyphenated words can assist with conciseness by eliminating the need for
additional adverbial phrases.
CAUTION: Emphasis and sometimes meaning will change when replacing a descriptive phrase
with hyphenated words.
15
Oates notes that some style guides recommend the use of an apostrophe alone with singular proper names. See
OATES, supra note 1, at 835 n.3.
16
Id. at 835.
17
See generally RAY & RAMSFIELD, supra note 1, at 166-167; OATES, supra note 1, at 853-56.
8
THE HYPHEN, continued
TIP: Hyphenate the two words that work together when they appear before the word they
modify, but not when they appear after:
The brief contained well-developed policy arguments.
The brief contained policy arguments that were well developed.
TIP: A hyphen can be used to connect some prefixes to words. 18
(a) Use a hyphen when adding a prefix to a proper name: un-American.
(b) Use a hyphen when the prefix ends with the same vowel that begins the main word:
re-examine, semi-independent.
(c) Use a hyphen with self- when the word is used as a prefix: self-employed, self-sufficient.
(d) Use a hyphen with ex- when the word means former: ex-wife.
(e) Use a hyphen whenever omitting it will confuse readers. He wanted to re-lease the
apartment. Or reword the sentence to avoid the problem. He wanted to lease the
apartment again.
TIP: Do not hyphenate proper names.
the Supreme Court building, the South American trade embargo
TIP: Do not confuse hyphens with Em dashes (—), which are alternate ways to include
additional information in a sentence (see infra on “The Dash”).
18
RAY & RAMSFIELD, supra note 1, at 167.
9
THE DASH (—)
DASH: Dashes set off additional information or a modifying clause.
One crucial witness—the defendant’s mother—refused to corroborate the alibi.
Effect: As opposed to parentheses or commas, dashes create emphasis and give the impression
that the added information is important, surprising, or abrupt.
CAUTION: Dashes can also connect related clauses or ideas. However, when used to connect
clauses, dashes can be too vague and informal for legal writing. 19 Dashes indicate that what
follows is a marginally-related afterthought. The following example does not tell the reader how
the ideas are connected. It is not clear to the reader whether the writer was actually expecting a
plumber to come or why the writer stayed home today.
I stayed home from work today—the plumber didn’t come.
Using a colon or semicolon instead of a dash can indicate a more precise logical relation between
ideas. See infra on “The Semicolon” and “The Colon.” The following example more strongly
conveys the idea that the writer stayed home from work to wait for the plumber and is a bit
annoyed about being stood up.
I stayed home from work today: the plumber didn’t come.
Please note, however, that the preceding example still requires the reader to use logical
inferences to make assumptions about the writer’s meaning. As a legal writer, you should strive
to avoid any ambiguity by explicitly providing all of the information the reader needs.
I stayed home from work today to wait for the plumber; yet the plumber never came.
TIP: For a more polished look, use Em dashes (—) rather than double hyphens (--) or En dashes
(–). Do not use a space on either side of the dash. This is the style preferred by many law
journals.
19
OATES, supra note 1, at 856. You will nevertheless find that many respectable legal writers use dashes
prolifically. Use your best judgment.
10
THE SEMICOLON (;)
SEMICOLON: Semicolons connect independent sentences that are logically closely related or
work together as part of a larger idea.
Effect: Semicolons tell the reader that more information, following the semicolon, will clarify
your meaning. They add emphasis to the second clause as an important explanation of the first.
Advantages: Semicolons can highlight connections between ideas that will help the reader
understand your meaning.
Disadvantages: Critics complain that writers use semicolons to gloss over imprecise thought. 20
Like any sentence structure, semicolons can be over-used.
Semicolons also separate items in a list when the individual items are long or if any one item
contains a comma.
I have lived in New York; Washington, D.C.; and Bismarck, North Dakota.
The elements of defamation include a defamatory statement concerning another;
publication to a third party; and fault amounting to at least negligence.
TIP: To avoid charges of imprecise thinking, make sure that the logical connection between
phrases joined by a semicolon is clear.
▪ For example, you can use a conjunctive adverb (such as also, furthermore, nevertheless,
thus, however) after the semicolon to more precisely describe the relation between
ideas. 21
▪ Additionally, some writers prefer to use a semicolon before the coordinating
conjunctions “yet” and “so.” 22
20
See LYNNE TRUSS, EATS, SHOOTS, & LEAVES: THE ZERO TOLERANCE APPROACH TO PUNCTUATION 124 (2003)
(citing Paul Robinson, The Philosophy of Punctuation, THE NEW REPUBLIC, April 26, 1980, available at
http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/721833.html).
21
OATES, supra note 1, at 828. Other conjunctive adverbs include accordingly, besides, consequently, hence,
however, indeed, instead, likewise, meanwhile, moreover, still, then, and therefore.
22
Id. at 830-31.
11
THE COLON (:)
COLON: Colons end a sentence that creates anticipation or suspense that the next sentence or
phrase resolves. 23
Effect: Colons create an expectation that what follows is surprising, important, or especially
interesting.
Advantages: Colons can highlight crucial information by adding emphasis to what follows the
colon.
Disadvantages: Because the colon is a dramatic sentence structure, colons can lose emphasis
and credibility if over-used. 24 Generally, use colons when no other punctuation can create the
desired effect.
Colons also introduce a list or introduce a quotation that is not integrated into the writer’s
sentence.
The court applied the following four factors to the facts at issue: . . .
The court explained that location can also contribute to reasonable suspicion: “[O]fficers
are not required to ignore the relevant characteristics of a location . . . .” 25
TIP: Some readers and writers think of a colon simply as shorthand for “for example” or
“therefore.” 26 However, you can also use colons to add an extra element of drama or suspense.
TIP: Because the colon introduces what will follow, it is usually preceded by a complete
sentence. What follows the colon may or may not be a complete sentence.
Days later the plaintiff received a reply to her harassment complaint: a pink slip.
The court’s decision is not likely to eliminate controversy: environmentalists say they
will continue the debate in the legislature.
23
RAY & RAMSFIELD, supra note 1, at 78.
Id.
25
Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119, 124 (2000).
26
JOSEPH M. WILLIAMS, STYLE: TEN LESSONS IN CLARITY AND GRACE 233 (8th ed. 2005).
24
12