New York Lawyer
August 23, 2001

Submit Your Question

Find More Answers

Recently I answered a question from a frustrated partner who complained about a lack of writing skills among associates. That drew the following response:

�I read with interest your column on yesterday's NYLawyer.com regarding associates' purported lack of writing ability. While I agree that many members of my generation may not write as well as may be ideal, I feel that there is another, more likely, explanation for the problem.

�Many members of the old generation subscribe to outdated or even incorrect stylistic rules, which they believe to be firm grammatical precepts. The author of the original letter to you, for example, complained about the use of the passive voice. The passive voice may often be used to great effect, or at least in a manner superior to a more awkward active formulation, as it is in this sentence. Many closed-minded partners, however, appear to instinctively recoil from the passive voice, erroneously declaring any use of that voice, however correct or justified, to be incorrect. Similar often inappropriate "pet peeves" include split infinitives or ending sentences with prepositions. I'm not saying that any of these grammatical devices should be used regularly or are always acceptable.

�However, many partners need to learn that these "rules" are general stylistic principles, not iron-clad rules of grammar, and that their use is not inherently wrong. In fact, in many cases, their use may be superior to the alternative.�

I agree completely that the definition of good writing differs from person to person and often can include misguided and outdated notions. (The best example is with split infinitives. Apparently that �rule� was made up by some guy in England in the 18th century, just because he felt like it.) Fortunately these sorts of disagreements lend themselves to spirited debate, and to the extent you feel comfortable you should try (respectfully) to explain your view. I don�t think there�s a soul alive who would point to legal writing as some kind of paragon of creativity or clarity.

Having said that, there�s little question that some beginning lawyers sport writing skills that are seriously wanting. Misspellings, incomplete sentences, missing or incorrect citations, and incomprehensible arguments do not fall into the category of debatable stylistic differences � they�re just wrong, and embarrassing.

Some firms employ writing specialists to help out; most just let people muddle through or spend valuable time re-doing documents, somtimes writing off the time because they can�t possibly charge the client for doing a brief twice. Make no mistake that superior writing skills continue to be vital for a successful lawyer, whether arguing a case before a court or drafting a document for a transaction. If you have issues with your writing do everything you can to brush up.

Sincerely,
Holly English
Principal Consultant, Values at Work