<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Jennifer M. Cooper &#187; &#187; Bryan Garner</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.jennifermcooper.com/tag/bryan-garner/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.jennifermcooper.com</link>
	<description>Innovative Legal Education In Academic Success &#38; Legal Writing</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2026 18:36:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.1.42</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Judges do not like &#8220;redundancy, verbosity, and legalism&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2012/11/16/redundancy-verbosity-and-legalism/</link>
		<comments>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2012/11/16/redundancy-verbosity-and-legalism/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Nov 2012 23:34:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jennifer M. Cooper]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal Writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bryan Garner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Merry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Plain-English]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jennifermcooper.com/?p=203</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here&#8217;s the dilemma. You cannot see how you could possibly reduce your brief to meet the court&#8217;s (stingy!) page limit. Every word , every sub-sub-section you slaved over is precious. What to do? You file a motion with the court to submit your overstuffed, er, overlength brief. The court&#8217;s response? Instead of simply denying your [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2012/11/16/redundancy-verbosity-and-legalism/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>More Readability, Less Alphabet Soup: Why Lawyers Should Minimize The Acronyms</title>
		<link>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2012/10/12/more-readability-less-alphabet-soup-why-lawyers-should-minimize-the-acronyms/</link>
		<comments>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2012/10/12/more-readability-less-alphabet-soup-why-lawyers-should-minimize-the-acronyms/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Oct 2012 22:37:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jennifer M. Cooper]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal Writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[acronyms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Antonin Scalia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bryan Garner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Making Your Case]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jennifermcooper.com/?p=191</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#160; Using more acronyms do not make your writing seem impressive or make you sound more knowledgeable. In fact, the opposite may be true. For example: Following execution of the Select/CL &#38; P Letter Agreement, CL &#38; P filed an action with the DPUC to allow CL &#38; P to recover from its customers the increased [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2012/10/12/more-readability-less-alphabet-soup-why-lawyers-should-minimize-the-acronyms/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How to Avoid Sexism in Legal Writing: A Pronoun Primer</title>
		<link>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2012/10/10/how-to-avoid-sexism-in-legal-writing-a-pronoun-primer/</link>
		<comments>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2012/10/10/how-to-avoid-sexism-in-legal-writing-a-pronoun-primer/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Oct 2012 22:31:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jennifer M. Cooper]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal Writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bryan Garner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[modern american usage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sexism in legal writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sexist pronoun]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[slant]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jennifermcooper.com/?p=185</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Good legal writers should write in such a way that no one could call sexist, but also appears totally natural and not contrived. Bryan Garner recommends that legal writers adopt a style that &#8220;no reasonable person could call sexist [and that] never suggests that you&#8217;re contorting your language to be nonsexist.&#8221; In Modern American Usage, Garner [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2012/10/10/how-to-avoid-sexism-in-legal-writing-a-pronoun-primer/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Top 20 Common Sentence-Level Legal Writing Faults (And How To Fix Them)</title>
		<link>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2012/02/28/sentencelevellegalwritingfaults/</link>
		<comments>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2012/02/28/sentencelevellegalwritingfaults/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Feb 2012 17:55:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jennifer M. Cooper]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal Writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bryan Garner]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jennifermcooper.com/?p=166</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;If you can remember and identify these faults, you&#8217;ll become a more effective writer and self-editor,&#8221; according to legal writing guru, Bryan Garner. If you become a more effective and productive writer and self-editor, you will get a promotion and a raise. And win more cases. Okay, the last two are &#8220;maybes.&#8221; Bryan Garner works tirelessly in his [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2012/02/28/sentencelevellegalwritingfaults/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>On The Light Side: Humor In Judicial Opinions</title>
		<link>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2011/06/30/on-the-light-side-humor-in-judicial-opinions/</link>
		<comments>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2011/06/30/on-the-light-side-humor-in-judicial-opinions/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Jun 2011 17:42:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jennifer M. Cooper]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal Writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bryan Garner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court Opinions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Kozinski]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jennifermcooper.com/?p=114</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A recent article in the Wall Street Journal, &#8220;Court Jesting: These Sentences Don&#8217;t Get Judged Too Harshly,&#8221; discussed a trend in judicial opinions &#8211; dare I say it, FUN!  Nathan Koppel reports that some judges attempt to use humor or references to pop-culture to lighten the tone.  Koppel provides examples from all levels of the [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2011/06/30/on-the-light-side-humor-in-judicial-opinions/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Legal Writing According to SCOTUS: Keep It Short &amp; Simple and Skip the Legalese</title>
		<link>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2011/06/15/according-to-scotus-keep-it-short-simple-and-skip-the-legalese/</link>
		<comments>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2011/06/15/according-to-scotus-keep-it-short-simple-and-skip-the-legalese/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2011 19:33:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jennifer M. Cooper]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal Writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bryan Garner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SCOTUS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court of United States]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.jennifermcooper.com/?p=29</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A recent story on NPR features insights on writing from the experts &#8211; the Justices of the United States Supreme Court.  In 2007, Bryan Garner interviewed each Justice about legal writing and advocacy.  Videos of the interviews can be seen here. Bryan Garner is a prominent legal writing scholar and author of The Redbook, A Dictionary [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2011/06/15/according-to-scotus-keep-it-short-simple-and-skip-the-legalese/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
