Joe Regalia Profile picture
Jul 18, 2022 9 tweets 4 min read Read on X
With a slew of #SCOTUS opinions comes lots of great #legalwriting examples!

In Justice Kagan's Wooden v. U.S. opinion, let's break down three simple tools we can all use:

1. TLDR Intros
2. Simple Sentences
3. Trendy Transitions

1/x
TLDR Intros (quick intros that dish the key points in a document) are now common with judges and lawyers alike.

How do the greats craft them?

1. Give readers context - why is this dispute here?
2. Insert choice details to prime
3. Highlight your legal pitch
In a paragraph, Justice Kagan orients you to the situation and highlights several charged facts:

(1) that the defendant faces a hefty 15-year sentence,

(2) that the lower court is piling on 20 years after the fact, and

(3) this was a single facility on a single evening.
She also includes her key legal pitch: It's absurd to base a statutory trigger on distinct moments in time rather than a common-sense understanding of a single event.
Great legal writers spoon-feed ideas to readers - using sentences that tend toward the simple. Many of the best sentences are so simple all they need is a period.

When great writers get more complex and pack more groups of words (and ideas) into a sentence, they have a reason.
The first sentence is a simple clause.

The second sentence offers two simple, related ideas.

The third sentence is again only two groups of words and a simple structure (a phrase with some context to set the scene for the officer's visit)...
The fourth sentence is another simple single-clause sentence. And then when we finally get a few groups of words in the fifth sentence, it's crafted complexity. A narrative sentence meant to convey unfolding events and a scene.
Finally, the greats often do two things with transitions.

First, transition by adding helpful guides to your sentences - don't just insert empty transitions like "furthermore" that tell readers "another point is coming."
Second, vary your transition phrases throughout your document so that readers don't notice them. And vary also by echoing words or concepts from the prior sentence (instead of always relying only on transition phrases).

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Joe Regalia

Joe Regalia Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @writedotlaw

May 27
Legal tech used to be something most lawyers could safely ignore.

You needed an email. You needed PDFs. You needed to survive the firm’s document-management system. But the machinery underneath? That could stay with IT.

In the age of AI, that’s no longer an option. 🧵
AI now touches legal research, contract review, litigation strategy, legal writing, firm operations, and law school classrooms.

Lawyers do not need to become engineers, but they do need a working vocabulary.

So here are the AI concepts every lawyer should know by now: (2/10)
1️⃣ Artificial intelligence is the broad category.

It covers tools that do tasks we associate with human intelligence: spotting patterns, classifying information, predicting outcomes, recognizing images, generating language, and more. (3/10) Image
Read 10 tweets
Apr 11
Most lawyers research in a straight line.

They find the statute. They find the leading cases. They pull a few quotations. Then they start explaining why their facts fit.

That works sometimes. It just does not take you very far. 🧵
The lawyers who do exceptional work use authority differently.

They do not treat it as a pile of answers.

They treat it as evidence. Something to test. Something to pressure. Something to compare, narrow, widen, flip, and question. (2/7)
That shift matters because the hard part of legal analysis usually is not finding some authority.

It is figuring out what that authority is really doing, what it leaves open, and how to explain that clearly enough that a judge sees it too.

A few moves make that possible: (3/7)
Read 7 tweets
Apr 4
We use commas throughout our writing, but many legal writers place them where they aren’t needed.

Others remove them from phrases or clauses even when they are necessary to avoid ambiguity.

Let’s break down the rules for when to use commas—and when to leave them out. 🧵
First, use commas to separate two independent clauses (full sentences) with a coordinating conjunction.

✅ Joe went to Saipan, and he loves reading. (2/8)
Do not use commas to join two full sentences without a conjunction (also called a comma splice).

❎ Joe went to Saipan, he likes to read. (3/8)
Read 8 tweets
Mar 4
Agents are changing the game for lawyers.

If you’re still thinking about “prompt engineering” as a spell-casting exercise, you’re already behind.

Let’s slow down and get clear on what’s actually happening. 🧵
An agent is a system that can break a task into sub-tasks, decide what to do next, evaluate intermediate outputs, and revise its own work.

Instead of one prompt and one answer, you get a loop.

Think less “question and answer” and more “junior associate with a workflow.” (2/7)
The new reality: workflow > wording.

When you’re using an agent, the real leverage is upstream and downstream:

What materials you feed it, how the task is staged, what checkpoints exist, who verifies what, what tools it can access, and what it is forbidden to do. (3/7) Image
Read 7 tweets
Feb 27
The Supreme Court just heard a major case: whether the President can use a 1977 emergency-powers statute to impose tariffs.

The private respondents—represented by Neal Katyal and a team of elite advocates—filed a merits brief that reads like a legal writing masterclass.

🧵
☑️ Open By Telling a Story, Not Stating a Rule

Most lawyers launch their briefs with procedural history or legal standards.

The best legal writers do something different—they tell a story first. Before readers can care about your rule, they need to care about the stakes. (2/6) Image
☑️ Turn Your Opponent’s Own Words Into Your Best Evidence

There’s no more devastating move in legal writing than using the other side’s own words against them.

When your opponent concedes a point, don’t let it slide by—put it center stage. (3/6) Image
Read 6 tweets
Jan 3
Most lawyers spend more time fighting Microsoft Word than using it.

That frustration usually gets chalked up to Word being “quirky.” It isn’t.

Here are the Word tools and skills that actually matter for lawyers and power users in 2026. 🧵
☑️ Start by Letting Styles Do the Heavy Lifting

If you format headings by changing font size and bolding text manually, Word treats every heading as unrelated.

That’s why numbering breaks, tables of contents fall apart, and cross-references stop updating. (2/7) Image
☑️ Fix Numbering the Way Word Expects You To

Legal numbering fails when people click the numbering button and hope for the best. Stable numbering comes from multilevel lists linked to heading styles.

The correct workflow looks like this: (3/7) Image
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(