For me, the greatest single wedge driven between clients and lawyers is “legal” writing. In response to this blawg’s December 14 post Writing For Clients–Just Say It-Part 2…Can We Start With Courts?, Patrick Lamb at In Search Of Perfect Client Service made a good comment. He brought me to my senses when he said: “writing is writing.” So, Pat suggests to me, why make a distinction between writing for clients and courts or anyone? Good writing is good writing.
My first instinct was to respond to Pat that the profession isn’t ready for a 100% sane, simple, unpretentious new folkway in writing. Bit by bit is better. For instance, Pennsylvania in particular has some archaic if charming terms floating around: lots of “whereupon/hereinafter”-type words (as in other jurisdictions), “tipstaff” (deputy or bailiff), “true and correct copy”, “respectfully submitted/Honorable Court” and the usual obsequious expressions used lavishly, and referring to each other as “Attorney” Jones and “Attorney” Smith.
California, Maryland and DC also have some old jargon. When I do state court work, usually in Pennsylvania or Maryland, I balk at these terms–but I still use some of them. If I really think about it, the one I won’t ever use is “COMES NOW”. So I have been doing my part piece by piece–by either outright chucking or replacing these phrases and practices with saner stuff–but not nearly enough so.
Doesn’t changing legal writing to just clear and simple writing come down to to leadership? Maybe I should start setting a better example. Why not buck the traditions 100%–whether it’s writing to courts, to clients or to other lawyers–and never use those expressions again? Ever.
And Just Say It?