Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Amicus Curiae Briefs: A Message From The 7th Circuit, Douglas E. Abrams
Amicus Curiae Briefs: A Message From The 7th Circuit, Douglas E. Abrams
Faculty Publications
Like other brief writers, the amicus brief’s writer must heed the court’s rules of practice and procedure, including rules that prescribe a brief’s maximum page length. But a brief writer can meet the court’s circumstances and expectations without going to the max. A few months before he ascended to the Supreme Court bench in 1943, D.C. Circuit Judge Wiley B. Rutledge advised advocates to strike a balance by being “as brief as one can be consistent with adequate and clear presentation of his case."
An amicus’ prudent approach to concise brief writing is to adapt the advice delivered by opera …
References To Children's Stories And Fairy Tales In Judicial Opinions And Written Advocacy, Douglas E. Abrams
References To Children's Stories And Fairy Tales In Judicial Opinions And Written Advocacy, Douglas E. Abrams
Faculty Publications
Jones v. State is typical of recent state and federal court decisions that have spiced substantive or procedural points with references to classic children’s stories or classic fairy tales. These literary resources have won places in American popular culture and are likely generally familiar to readers, especially when (as in Jones) the court provides any necessary context explaining the resource’s relevance to the decision.
In previous Journal of The Missouri Bar articles, I have written about judges’ invocation of an array of influential cultural markers that are generally familiar to Americans. These articles explored written opinions that accompanied substantive or …
Mincing No Words: When The Court's Opinion Criticizes An Advocate's Writing, Douglas E. Abrams
Mincing No Words: When The Court's Opinion Criticizes An Advocate's Writing, Douglas E. Abrams
Faculty Publications
In recent years, court opinions have chastised counsel’s briefs or other written submissions for such structural deficiencies as improper citations; missing exhibit labels; incomplete tables of citations; mis-numbered counts; failure to cite to the record; and skirting of court rules that regulate font size, maximum page limits, mandated margins, and the like. Beyond structure, opinions have also chastised counsel for written submissions that are “riddled with misspellings, typographical errors, punctuation errors, and grammar and usage errors” and for those marked by careless cutting-and-pasting from forms or other prior work product, or by careless reliance on spell-check.
Some opinions identify the …
Generalist Judges And Advocates' Jargon, Douglas E. Abrams
Generalist Judges And Advocates' Jargon, Douglas E. Abrams
Faculty Publications
Clerking is a privilege. Fresh out of law school and eager to begin their careers, law clerks at any level of the federal or state judiciary covet the opportunity to learn from a judge’s reservoir of knowledge. But law clerks who anticipate careers writing as advocates are also well-positioned to learn about something that a judge may not know when briefs or other adversary submissions land on the desk.
That “something” concerns jargon, this article’s focus because its use by advocates can impede the court’s understanding of a case’s facts and law. “Jargon” refers to “special words or expressions that …