DEFECTIVE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: ANOTHER VIEW FROM THE BENCH (USA STYLE)

I have written before about written advocacy and given examples of robust approaches from American judges. There is a site devoted to good legal writing.  It gives an example of a judge who pulls no punches.

A SECRET PACT TO CHARM THE COURT?

Here’s an example of what can happen when judges are less than impressed with attorneys’ legal briefs:

“Before proceeding further, the Court notes that this case involves two extremely likable lawyers, who have together delivered some of the most amateurish pleadings ever to cross the hallowed causeway into Galveston, an effort which leads the Court to surmise but one plausible explanation. Both attorneys have obviously entered into a secret pact — complete with hats, handshakes and cryptic words — to draft their pleadings entirely in crayon on the back sides of gravy-stained paper place mats, in the hope that the Court would be so charmed by their child-like efforts that their utter dearth of legal authorities in their briefing would go unnoticed. Whatever actually occurred, the Court is now faced with the daunting task of deciphering their submissions. With Big Chief tablet readied, thick black pencil in hand, and a devil-may-care laugh in the face of death, life on the razor’s edge sense of exhilaration, the Court begins.“

The judgement goes on in similar terms.   It is a website worth visiting.   It is obviously from a different jurisdiction, but many of the principles it considers  are of general application.

ANOTHER USEFUL LINK: THE RESEARCHING PARALEGAL

The link comes from another useful American blog “The Resarching Paralegal” – another useful resource from another jurisdiction.