Set in Style

A common error many attorneys make when writing client alerts is this: they use exactly the same style of writing that they use in their daily work.

But that doesn’t work very well. When you write a brief, someone else has to read it. But when you write a client alert, no one has to read it.

If you want your alert to attract an audience, write it so it’s as easy to read as can be. The easier you make it for readers to read what you wrote, the more likely they are to do just that (and recommend what you wrote to others).
(more…)

You’ve got a deadline. You’re reviewing your work, and then you realize an important section begins with this*:

A California Court of Appeal recently interpreted the state’s Song-Beverly Credit Act to allow merchants to require extra personal identifying information from customers to be recorded on credit card slips when giving a customer credit for returned merchandise. The statute prohibits retailers from requiring customers to provide extra personal identification information, such as a driver’s license or Social Security Number, on credit card transaction slips, or using slips which have pre-printed spaces for such information.

Once you realize this, what do you do?

A. Read on and realize what comes next?
B. Read it again?
C. Edit it?

(more…)

This anonymously authored Note in the Harvard Law Review has gotten lots of attention recently.

Here’s a bit of it:

Now, suppose Ms. Anonymous engaged Mr. Wordsmith to edit that article?

Then it might have turned out like so:

Less wordy; less convoluted; more pleasing to readers, and the author seems like a fairly good writer.

Look . . . you just can’t function as your own editor. No one can. Not even editors!

It’s like trying to cut your own hair.

Thinking of submitting something to a law review? Then check this out.

Better yet, take a look at this.

And rely on those resources (Out of the Jungle, by Betsy McKenzie, et al. and Academic Legal Writing by Eugene Volokh) if you plan to write a magazine article. I believe you’ll find them very helpful.

If you’re an attorney at some great big law firm, and you’ve just been asked to write a client alert, and it has to be ready in two days (why else call it an alert?), and you’ve never written such a thing before, and no one’s ever shown you how, and you’re wondering where to begin, start here:

Read what’s written!

Now, if you don’t much care whether people read your alert, or whether they find it timely or informative or well written, review some alerts published by your firm. You’ll see what’s acceptable (or accepted as passable).

But if you want to gather an audience, if you want to attract potential clients or impress potential employers (i.e., if you want to get something from your effort), then take a look at the alerts of Anthony Valiulis of Much Shelist. You’ll see what works.

Here’s one good example of a Valiulis alert.

Now, that isn’t really an alert. (After all, who publishes alerts on a regular schedule?) But it is a good example of an effective writing style for an alert. People will take their time to read alerts articles written the way Valiulis writes his. Which means his alerts (or articles) might do some good (i.e., persuade people to consider Valiulis).

Note: If people don’t read your alert (or whatever it is) you cranked out in two days, then you wasted the time you spent writing it. You could have spent that time being productive.

Well . . . to tell you the truth, not all lawyers need editors. The ones who don’t are the ones who aren’t read, except by those (law clerks, judges, opposing counsel) who really have no choice (because they’re involved in a certain matter).

As things change, more and more lawyers get to write more and more things besides memos and briefs. Many of them write client alerts or newsletter articles for their firms, and some write for blogs.

Those authors need editors.

Why? For much the same reason those authors visit their barbers and stylists and cleaners before they go before a live audience: To look good!
(more…)

I highly recommend this advice by Wayne Schiess (director of legal writing at the University of Texas law school). It’s a great tip on how lawyers can improve their writing.

I recommend it, especially, for those lawyers who feel as if they need no help at all with their writing (while others can see they certainly do).

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.

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.

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.