TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Re: Legal English (was RE: Using M-dash and N-dash?)
Subject:Re: Legal English (was RE: Using M-dash and N-dash?) From:"Paul Strasser" <paul -dot- strasser -at- ennovationinc -dot- com> To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Wed, 11 Feb 2004 13:04:53 -0700
> The nasty thing about legal writing though is that it doesn't strive to
> avoid confusion and encourage clarity by using clear and concise writing
> to avoid court cases in the first place.
>
> Instead it strives to use whatever phrases have already been through the
> courts and have been interpreted in a way that the writer wants.
>
In a former life I sold real estate, which is where all unnecessary legal
forms go to die. Or so I thought when I first started on that career. The
size and complexity of the forms that were part of a real estate transaction
ballooned by over 100% in my seven years in that business. And as an
attorney once explained to our office: "The reason every new phrase, comma,
section, or paragraph is in these forms is that somebody was sued because
they weren't there." The new stuff was put there to avoid legal
entanglements, not secure a positive outcome in the courts.
In California (where I was in this field) there was a "plain English"
requirement for these forms. Believe it or not, they were pretty clear.
Just interminably long. It was rare (I don't even recall a case, although
it surely might have occurred) where clients actually read this stuff. They
just listened to my explanation and signed where I told them to sign.
I disagree with the honorable sentiment I quoted above, namely that legal
writing doesn't strive to avoid confusion and encourage clarity. In many
cases the "What ifs" are so numerous, and the opportunities for mistrust are
so common, that legal english is the only way to clear things up.
(And, if it matters, the number of real estate forms in California - at
least at my old firm - has again doubled since I left. Interestingly, the
number of lawsuits, mediations, or arbitration involving my firm has
declined despite an impressive increase in their sales. There is no doubt a
relationship between these two facts.)
Paul Strasser
Ennovation, Inc.
2569 Park Lane, Suite 100
Lafayette, Colorado 80026
Phone: 303-468-1164
FAX: 303-926-1510