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

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
Dec 5, 2025
Kirkland & Ellis’s brief in the blockbuster AI case, Thomson Reuters v. ROSS, lands like a masterclass.

It shows how advocates frame a narrative, marshal facts, and push the reader toward one inescapable conclusion.

Let’s unpack the writing techniques that make this one hum. 🧵
1️⃣ Choose a Frame That Carries the Whole Story

Kirkland doesn’t warm up. It opens with the entire case in a single hit. (2/8) Image
2️⃣ Distill the Point Before You Dive Into the Details

Great briefs announce the takeaway before the reader ever has to work for it. Kirkland does this over and over. (3/8) Image
Read 8 tweets
Aug 5, 2025
If you’re still unsure where GenAI fits in your legal writing, start here: summarizing and restyling.

Why these two? Because you’re feeding the tool your own material. Full control. Low risk. High reward.

Here’s how to do it right 👇 (1/8)
1⃣ Summarizing: Compress Without Losing the Thread

GenAI is fast and ruthless when it comes to boiling text down. Give it a long court opinion or a five-page email chain, and it’ll give you something short, useful, and readable. As long as you tell it how. (2/8)
➡️Prompt: Summarize a Court Opinion for Internal Use

You’re giving the model a role, a clear goal, sectioned instructions, and formatting constraints. That reduces fluff and hallucination. (3/8) Image
Read 8 tweets
Dec 23, 2024
The best legal writers are those with the biggest boxes of authority evidence.

These attorneys can work creatively to make readers question, even when a precedent seems like it binds the result.

Here are five tools to help you start filling your authority-evidence toolbox. 🧰
1️⃣ Use multiple types of authority evidence for key points.

Often it’s more persuasive to combine multiple types of authority evidence—a quote, a comparable fact, and so on—rather than relying on only one dimension of an authority. (2/6) Image
2️⃣ Quote authority.

Use quotes to illustrate how rules work. As with all quotes, use the smallest portion of text that will illustrate the most useful information. (3/6) Image
Read 6 tweets
Dec 20, 2024
Let’s take a look at an opinion penned by the writing maven Judge Don Willett (@JusticeWillett).

The Judge gave us a holiday present better than anything under the tree:

A document packed with writing examples and visuals that might convince you to try something similar. 🧵
➡️ Use visuals when words aren’t enough.

If you’re explaining complicated concepts, untangling processes, or showing readers data—pull out your visual toolbox.

Judge Willett teaches us how an esoteric blockchain technology works using some simple diagrams. (2/8) Image
Image
➡️ The best legal writers are trusted guides on the reading journey.

They give you useful shorthands to make remembering complicated concepts a snap.

And they explain terms in simple words whenever it might not be obvious. (3/8) Image
Read 8 tweets
Dec 10, 2024
Adding insight or explanation in a parenthetical after a citation can do wonders for your readers.

But too many thoughtless parentheticals can make this tool worthless.

Let’s explore three common mistakes to avoid: 🧵
First, parentheticals are not the place to deliver crucial points for the first time.

If you’ve never made the transferred intent point in this next example, then don’t expect your reader to see it crammed inside a parenthetical. (2/6) Image
Second, don’t use parentheticals for tangential points that won’t help your reader understand the law, the facts, or your reasoning.

In other words, don’t use parentheticals to pad your legal writing so that it looks more “supported.”

Readers won’t be impressed. (3/6)
Read 6 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!

:(