New York Lawyer
February 13, 2003

Q:
I am a first-year associate at a small firm. I also have a master's degree in English and have been told by several professors and employers that I write more clearly and concisely than they do.

At my current job, I am frequently asked by a more senior attorney to "proof" his motions and briefs. They are abominable! He is a whiz in his specialty but I always find myself correcting his grammar, spelling, and sentence structure, as well as the formatting, citations, etc. I think to let his unfinished work product go out the door unedited (at least a little) reflects badly upon him and the firm. I don't know how he's gotten along this far sending out such unpolished work without his reputation suffering.

However, after the last task he gave me, he was miffed that I suggested improvements to some of his phrasing and grammar. Am I crossing the line when I do this?

Please help!

Submit Your Question

Find More Answers

A:

You have two tasks to attend to here: doing the best job for the client, and ensuring that you protect yourself politically. Sometimes people get caught in a perplexing challenge, which is wanting to do a superior job while seemingly blocked or inhibited by the actions of a boss. In this case, you cannot just plow ahead red-pencilling his errors without thinking carefully about how to proceed. You risk alienating him, in which case he may not want to work with you. Therefore your objectives in this instance are to produce the best possible job for the client while at the same time negotiating the delicate task of not unduly offending the senior guy so that you can maintain a positive working relationship.

So: what to do? You say he's a "whiz," so presumably his written efforts haven't detracted terribly from his success. Technical aspects of his work such as grammar, spelling, and citations absolutely must be corrected, and any other outright inaccuracies, but phraseology and word choice are personal to each individual and therefore more debatable. Keep that in mind and do a lighter editing job that you'd like in a perfect world. Remember that while his style and approach may vary from yours, that doesn't make them wrong or ineffective.

You said he asked you to "proof" his work, which is a very narrow task, as opposed to doing a rewrite. And you say he got miffed with the last assignment. You should ask him to spell out what he'd like you to do, by saying: "Just so there's no misunderstanding, can I ask you to clarify my assignment on these documents?" Once you review a document, make sure to say something positive to him that you feel sincere about (the structure, the nature of the arguments, etc.), so that he doesn't think that you're secretly harboring negative thoughts about him. He needs to feel that you are supportive, otherwise he won't think that you're on his side. You may not have been in a supervisory position yet in your working life. Once you get to that position, you, too, are likely to expect that those doing work at your direction will maintain a positive attitude, and not appear to undermine you.

Another idea is to ask another associate who has had experience working with this partner how he or she dealt with the senior attorney's lackluster work. They may give you some tips about how to manage this situation.

Still another approach is to adjust your assumptions and attitudes. I'm sure you are a very good writer; however, more senior people who've earned their stripes in the profession correctly believe that the practice of law is comprised of many aspects (such as client development and strategy), not just writing. Therefore they expect some respect from beginning lawyers, which is understandable. While you assuredly can add value to his written work, be a little more deferential than you would ideally like in the interests of maintaining harmony, preserving your relationship, and ensuring that you will keep getting assignments from this partner.

Sincerely,
Holly English
Principal Consultant, Values at Work