Archive for May, 2008

____________

13 May 2008

An Interesting Quote

From this article (titled “Lawyers’ writing skills still bad”) in the National Law Journal:

“Most of us would be far better writers if we’d never gone to law school.”

That’s the word from Douglas Winter, writing instructor at Bryan Cave.

____________

11 May 2008

Shifting Gears (from Briefs to Alerts)

Here’s what can happen when an attorney who writes one way all day is asked to write a client alert, but he doesn’t (or can’t) take the time to shift gears first, to go from his usual voice (formal and passive) to something livelier. If he can’t make the shift, the alert could start like this:

If expressly permitted by a corporation’s certificate of incorporation through a “blank check” provision, a corporation’s board of directors may authorize a new series of preferred stock by adoption of a resolution setting forth the rights and preferences of such preferred stock.

That’s the first line in this alert. It’s stuffy and old-fashioned. It sounds more like the start of a brief than a client alert. It doesn’t sound like it’s meant to attract business.

What would it sound like if it was meant to attract business, if that was its main purpose?

(more…)

____________

4 May 2008

Not Your Average, Run-of-the-Mill Law Firm

The Valorem Law Group knows a thing or two about marketing legal services. It knows that standing out from competitors is the way to go. And its Web site demonstrates that very well.

Take a look at the site’s disclaimer. That’s certainly not your average, run-of-the-mill disclaimer, and this can’t possibly be your average, run-of-the-mill law firm.

____________

4 May 2008

Touched by an Editor

Yet another answer to our perpetual question: what can an editor do for you?

Consider the following copy, the first line in a client alert:

The Ninth Circuit ruled earlier this month in Fair Housing Council v. Roommates.com that a website that specializes in matching renters with those with rooms to rent violated the Fair Housing Act and California housing laws by requiring users to input information about their sex, sexual orientation, and whether children would be brought into the house.

There’s a least a few things an editor would do with this. First of all, users would be gone, and renters would simply be called renters. Why? Because, without that, it’s not entirely clear that they’re one and the same.

The phrase requiring users to input information would be abbreviated. In general, phrases that can be abbreviated do get abbreviated, for the reader’s sake. If you can say something in fewer words, and you want to impress your readers, then use fewer words.

Next, the house would be gone. Why? Because rooms to rent aren’t all in houses. Some are in apartment buildings and condos. Some aren’t rooms at all.

An editor might revise that first line like so:

The Ninth Circuit ruled earlier this month in Fair Housing Council v. Roommates.com that a website that specializes in matching renters with those with rooms to rent violated the Fair Housing Act and California housing laws by requiring renters to disclose their sex, their sexual orientation, and whether children live with them.

As always, the advantage goes to the author. She looks better. 

And that’s what editors do. They make others look better.

 

A skilled and experienced editor offers advice to those who could use one.