Passive voice: sorrow is offered
always apologize in the active voice.
--Roy Peter Clark, Writing Tools 25 (Little, Brown 2006).
Wayne Schiess's legal-writing blog. Home is here: Legalwriting.net
always apologize in the active voice.
Question
If you're going to use a case--that is, if you're going to compare it to your problem or draw legal points from it--you should describe it first. Don't give only an abstract thumbnail, and don't expect the reader to digest the story of the case while simultaneously digesting how the case applies. Describe the case first.
My own effort at plainifying the Texas Pattern Jury Charges.
"Except in hard cases, the law doesn't reward creativity. It rewards logic and experience."
Sometimes a jury gets stuck and reports to the judge that it cannot reach a verdict. Often the judge reads the jurors a stiff and stilted charge (Allen charge) that tells them to go back and try again. Here is a better approach from the new and improved Arizona jury instructions:
This instruction is offered to help your deliberations, not to force you to reach a verdict.
You may wish to identify areas of agreement and areas of disagreement. You may then wish to discuss the law and the evidence as they relate to areas of disagreement.
If you still have disagreement, you may wish to identify for the court and counsel which issues or questions of law or fact you would like counsel or the court to assist you with. If you elect this option, please list in writing the issues where further assistance might help bring about a verdict.
I do not wish or intend to force a verdict. We are merely trying to be responsive to your apparent need for help. If it is reasonably probable that you could reach a verdict as a result of this procedure, it would be wise to give it a try.
Very good, don't you think? Flesch score is 68 and grade level is 8. I give it an A-.
But just so you can see what a zealot for plain English would do, I offer my rewrite:
The Flesch score is now a ridiculous 88 and the grade level is 6. Did I go too far?What I’m about to say is meant to help you decide the case, not to force you to reach a verdict.
It might help to list the things you agree on and the things you don’t. Then discuss the law and the evidence as they relate to the things you do not agree on. If it is reasonably probable that you could reach a verdict by doing this, it would be wise to give it a try.
If you still disagree, you can tell me the issues or questions of law or fact you would like the lawyers or me to help you with. If you do this, please write down the issues we could help you with.
Again, I do not wish or intend to force a verdict. I only want to respond to your request for help.
Varying your words for the sake of variation can make the job of writing more interesting, but it can also make the job of reading more difficult. Linguist H.W. Fowler condemned the overuse of "elegant variation" in his classic book Modern English Usage:
"Mastering the arcana of citation forms . . . is not a productive use of judges' or law clerks' time. The purpose of citations is to assist researchers in identifying and finding the sources; a form of citation that will serve that end is sufficient. In addition, the form of citation should be consistent to avoid the appearance of lack of craftsmanship and care." Judicial Writing Manual 24 (Fed. Jud. Ctr. 1991).
Here are the paraphrased conclusions of a study of Miranda-warning texts used in the counties of Alabama:
Here's some readability information, which I'm always interested in, and my rewrite of the original, which is a compulsion with me.