When imagining the best legal writers, you might think of big names at big firms.
But small firms have powerhouses, too.
Case in point: A ridiculously good brief penned by a plaintiff's attorney at the boutique Hilton Parker LLC.
Check this out. 1/X
In the introduction:
☑️ You need no background to get into the story.
☑️ Facts do the heavy lifting instead of opinions.
☑️ Readers aren't bogged down by case law.
☑️ Storytelling is center stage (as are emotional facts); sentences are about actors carrying out actions.
After those two warm-up paragraphs make the legal pitch, the lawyers weave in their emotional one.
Once you've explained how the law favors you, include the why—why would adopting your position be a good thing?
Do the hard work for readers by explaining first before making them juggle the details and complexity.
Notice how the first sentences throughout the brief dish up the specific, persuasive points (rather than bland topic sentences).
Examples are a superpower. Need to illustrate a complicated legal doctrine? Share a quick hypothetical or emblematic case.
Need to show your readers the line drawn by the law? Share an example of both when the law is satisfied and when it's not.
Need to drive home a critical point? Share several examples that build to a single conclusion.
Then there's the small-picture style.
In this example, notice how the lawyers use active voice to paint the opposing party as a bad actor, and they use passive voice to put the victim on the receiving end of those bad acts.
The lawyers use concrete verbs throughout the brief.
Verbs are an easy way to make your writing simpler, easier to understand, and more forceful.
Simple sentences sell. The same goes for familiar, everyday language that we can all process without effort. Many of the sentences in this brief require little to no punctuation because they are so simple.
Dry, dense legal issues in the hands of incredible legal writers at @omelvenymyers, @SidleyLaw, @McDermottLaw, @JennerBlockLLP, @troutmanpepper, @BlankRomeLLP, @DorseyWhitney, and Kellogg, Hansen?
Easy-to-read and easy-to-understand briefs.
Let's see how (a🧵1/x)
Responding Done Right.
Many legal writers pen their responses and replies as if their readers had carefully memorized every detail in the prior documents. No.
Check out how the @omelvenymyers pros remind you of enough specifics in a reply so that you can understand now.
Usually, we can lead with our affirmative pitch: The question the court must answer is X, and here are the tools to answer that question.
But when you need to take opposing views head-on, use your opponent's words against them and immediately provide specifics to combat them.
What happens when legal writing pros at firms like @JennerBlockLLP and @bsfllp tackle a tough case?
Fantastic legal writing lessons for us all.
Check out how some of the best lawyers craft the crux, prime audiences to win, and list their path to victory! /x
Introductions are everything.
Legal readers these days want the specific questions and answers at the outset. If they can decide your case in five minutes, all the better!
Start by orienting readers to what your document is about and the questions they need to answer.
Prime with context.
If readers might be set out against you (as is often the case when appealing an adverse ruling below), prime readers with helpful context so they are in the best headspace to receive your argument.
@Disney's complaint against Florida is a master class in advocating through pleadings.
A killer ToC, emotional priming, and surgical quoting give us a lot to learn from!
1/x
☑️ Emotional Priming: Reframe the Bad Facts.
The greatest legal writers don't run from the bad facts.
Instead, they often manage the bad in a couple of ways: (1) providing counter facts that detract from the bad or (2) reframing the bad facts so they look better.
☑️ More Emotional Priming: Shifting the Focus.
Now let's look at the other sort of emotional priming: sharing favorable details to detract or redirect your reader's attention.