Empathy for the Reader: Persuasive Legal Writing in Plain Language

The problem with most legal writing is that it's written for the writer's benefit-not the reader's.

That's why it's notorious for convoluted sentences, ad hominem attacks, pompous vocabulary, and conclusory analyses. And, unfortunately for the writer, these are traits that most readers-including judges-hate.

Presented by appellate attorney Dana Heitz, this presentation relies on case law to illustrate the fundamentals of writing that's easy to understand and more likely to stick-in other words, we learn from courts themselves how to write in a reader-friendly way. After discussing the perils of bad writing, we explore why writers should keep themselves out of the spotlight and how they can, then review strategies that simplify a message. Finally, we look at empirical and anecdotal evidence which underscores the impact that plain-language, reader-focused writing can have on a client's case.

Learning Objectives:

1. Describe bad habits that pervade the legal profession; identify characteristics of good writing
2. Recognize discrete steps within the writing process necessary for a well-structured, polished product
3. Explore the extent to which bad writing impacts a reader's assessment of an argument's credibility, and identify specific instances where confusing writing has had practical costs

This course originally appeared as a part of our June 2018 Bridge the Gap Event.