Legal Writing in Plain English.

Legal Writing in Plain English 

Bryan A. Garner The University of Chicago Press www.press.uchicago.edu 242 pp., $15

There is a good deal more to Bryan Garner's latest book, Legal Writing in Plain English, than its title suggests. It is at one level a well-organized practical companion. If you spend a good part of your day writing or editing memos and briefs, it would be a valuable addition to the basic reference books you keep close at hand.

But you should understand that the author has a mission.

Garner seeks to break the cycle of "wordy, stuffy, artificial, and often ungrammatical" legal writing that is perpetuated when lawyers simply imitate the poor writing of their predecessors. So, interspersed with rules of good writing is a revolutionary manifesto packaged in a plain gray wrapper. This book won't draw attention merely by sitting on your shelf, but if you put certain pieces of its advice into the next legal document you draft, you are sure to raise the eyebrows of any lawyer who reads it.

The radical message of this book--write clearly and in your own voice for the "ordinary reader"--sounds deceptively simple. Garner urges writers to challenge certain long-held conventions of legal writing that are so standard, I wonder how a junior attorney could manage to do so.

To his credit, Garner concedes that following his advice may elicit a less-than-enthusiastic reaction from supervising attorneys: "Maybe an employer will tell you that you're being too clear in your writing. ... Maybe an employer will disapprove of your departing from some mind-numbing convention." If this happens, he suggests you do what you have to do but not surrender your goal of writing clearly, even boldly, one day in your career.

These are just a few of the changes that Garner would like to see in the next generation of legal documents: Use contractions. Make everything you write "speakable." Don't start a "question presented" with "whether." Use more than one sentence when stating an issue. Omit "shall" and minimize the use of definitions when drafting nonpersuasive documents such as contracts, wills, or legislation.

For attorneys who share Garner's enthusiasm and have the time and discipline to embark on a writing self-improvement project, the book offers a comprehensive, step-by-step approach. It is divided into five main parts: Principles for All Legal Writing, Principles Mainly for Analytical Writing and Persuasive Writing, Principles Mainly for Legal Drafting, Principles for Document Design, and Methods for Continued Improvement. Each contains several short sections that prescribe remedies for various writing ailments.

The section titles aren't descriptive. Instead, they are written in the imperative: [sections] 1 Have something to say--and think it through; [sections] 6 Keep your average sentence length to about 20 words; [sections] 22 Use the "deep issue" to spill the beans on the first page; [sections] 30 Be forthright in dealing with counterarguments. One could merely read the table of contents of this book and walk away with a fistful of sound writing tips.

Consider [sections] 5--Omit needless words--under Principles for All Legal Writing. It starts with a short explanation of the benefit of writing sparely, illustrated by easy-to-understand examples. Then, as in all the sections, Garner provides basic, intermediate, and advanced exercises. You can try your hand at revising for leaner sentences under the basic exercises and check your answers in the back of the book. No answers are provided for the more advanced exercises.

Garner envisions practitioners working together on the advanced exercises in informal writing groups. The idea that many litigators would form writing groups seems optimistic, especially in highly competitive law firm environments with steep billable-hour requirements. If forming a group seems unrealistic to you, there is still plenty to be gained by working through the book at your own speed.

Lawyers who are unable or unwilling to take the self-guided writing course will still find the book useful. Two of its great strengths are its scope and flexibility. You can easily dip into the book for help on a particular aspect of your writing. It offers sound advice on every part of the writing process, from developing ideas to punctuating sentences.

Have a writing project hanging over your head and can't get started? Turn to Part One--Principles for All Legal Writing--put on your "madman" hat, and set to work on a "whirlybird," a nonlinear outline that allows you to "spin out" ideas and give them a rough organization at the same time.

As one who hates outlines but is skeptical of gimmicks, I decided to give the whirlybird a try. I found it an efficient way to brainstorm ideas. It was much less intimidating than staring at a blank page, waiting for inspiration.

Want to make your documents look snappier? Check out Part Four--Principles for Document Design--and take a tip from commercial publishers: Simple changes like updating your typeface and adding what Garner calls "meaningful" white space will add polish and flair to your legal documents.

Basic punctuation rules are covered in a well-indexed appendix. Under each type of punctuation, Garner gives examples of common uses and common misuses. A "not this/but this" juxtaposition provides the kind of quick-and-dirty answer I would want 15 minutes before a filing deadline. For those who want more, the author provides a list of grammar and usage books for reference when time allows.

The importance of Garner's book is that he is calling on attorneys to set aside old habits and look closely at a central aspect of their profession: the drafting of documents. For lawyers who don't have time to thoroughly rework their writing, the book is still a useful guide to good writing practices. Attorneys who take on Garner's bolder project will probably find themselves emerging from the process as more effective and interesting writers--and, if Garner's hypothesis is correct, more successful attorneys.

Susan C. Wawrose is a professor at the University of Dayton School of Law.