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
Another set of legal writing lessons from @Kirkland_Ellis's Paul Clement that I so wish more folks would use. It's not that hard (sorry Paul), and you can do it too! This is all from an everyday cert petition (linked at the end). 1/X
First, Clement shows us how to put the question/issue presented to good use. Crafting a good issue-presented is true art: You've got a few sentences to capture the nub of the dispute--all while trying to frame things favorably, but not too favorably.
Clement was faced with the sort of mind-twister of an issue that many legal writers would fumble with. But he uses a well-placed emdash to juxtapose the two positions at odds--while subtly framing the dispute in favor of his client.