<?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; Legal Writing</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.jennifermcooper.com/tag/legal-writing/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>Exercise for Writing Gains, Not Just for Weight Loss</title>
		<link>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2012/10/10/exerciseforwritinggains/</link>
		<comments>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2012/10/10/exerciseforwritinggains/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Oct 2012 21:57:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jennifer M. Cooper]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal Writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BDNF]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ben Opipari]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Exercise and Writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Miracle-Gro for the Brain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Persuasive Matters]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jennifermcooper.com/?p=177</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Exercise isn&#8217;t just for weight loss. We all know that there are many benefits to regular exercise such as stress reduction, weight loss, increased energy, and many other health benefits. Exercise can also immediately and positively effect your thinking and writing. Ben Opipari of Persuasive Matters wrote an article for Perspectives: Teaching Legal Research and [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2012/10/10/exerciseforwritinggains/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>To Practicing Attorneys: Stop Writing Law Review Articles, Steer Clear of Pedantry and Mystification</title>
		<link>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2012/10/10/to-practicing-attorneys-stop-writing-law-review-articles-steer-clear-of-pedantry-and-mystification/</link>
		<comments>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2012/10/10/to-practicing-attorneys-stop-writing-law-review-articles-steer-clear-of-pedantry-and-mystification/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Oct 2012 20:27:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jennifer M. Cooper]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal Writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[law reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[writing for practice]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jennifermcooper.com/?p=168</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Is the Law Review dead? Many think it is. Or, that it is dying. According to Walter Olson of The Atlantic on the subject of law reviews: &#8220;They&#8217;re outdated, impractical, and slowly dying. It&#8217;s time to put them to rest.&#8221; Let&#8217;s just be honest &#8211; we just don&#8217;t have the attention span for law review articles [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2012/10/10/to-practicing-attorneys-stop-writing-law-review-articles-steer-clear-of-pedantry-and-mystification/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>#1 Secret of Great Writers: Rewriting</title>
		<link>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2012/07/31/1-secret-of-great-writers-rewriting/</link>
		<comments>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2012/07/31/1-secret-of-great-writers-rewriting/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Jul 2012 20:29:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jennifer M. Cooper]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal Writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rewriting]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jennifermcooper.com/?p=173</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Good writing means rewriting and lots of it. Good writing requires many &#8220;writing&#8221; steps: outlining, drafting, revising, rewriting, editing, proofreading. Unfortunately, many harried legal practitioners simply do not have time for multiple steps in the writing process beyond drafting and proofing. For some, &#8220;writing&#8221; is simply drafting and submitting. Great writers aren&#8217;t great because they write [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2012/07/31/1-secret-of-great-writers-rewriting/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Typography for Lawyers: Clarity in Content &amp; Composition</title>
		<link>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2012/06/21/typography-for-lawyers-clarity-in-content-composition/</link>
		<comments>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2012/06/21/typography-for-lawyers-clarity-in-content-composition/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Jun 2012 17:38:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jennifer M. Cooper]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal Writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legal Writing Institute]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Matthew Butterick]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Typography for Lawyers]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jennifermcooper.com/?p=150</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Legal Writing Institute recently presented the Golden Pen Award to Matthew Butterick for his groundbreaking book, Typography for Lawyers. Butterick is both an attorney in Los Angeles, California specializing in criminal appeals and artists&#8217; rights, as well as a graphic designer and typographist. In Typography for Lawyers, Butterick states that while legal writing is central [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2012/06/21/typography-for-lawyers-clarity-in-content-composition/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>Judges Find Plain-English Legal Writing More Persuasive</title>
		<link>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2011/12/05/judges-find-plain-english-legal-writing-more-persuasive/</link>
		<comments>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2011/12/05/judges-find-plain-english-legal-writing-more-persuasive/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Dec 2011 00:49:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jennifer M. Cooper]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal Writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Plain-English]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Writing to Persuade Judges]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jennifermcooper.com/?p=153</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A recent survey of almost 300 judges, including federal trial, federal appellate, state trial, and state appellate judges, reveals that judges overwhelmingly prefer plain-English legal writing to traditional &#8220;legalese&#8221; legal writing. Judges commented that the plain-English version of a writing sample compared to a traditional legalese version of the same writing sample was &#8220;more persuasive because [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2011/12/05/judges-find-plain-english-legal-writing-more-persuasive/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Using Quotations Effectively in Legal Writing</title>
		<link>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2011/12/05/using-quotations-effectively-in-legal-writing/</link>
		<comments>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2011/12/05/using-quotations-effectively-in-legal-writing/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Dec 2011 23:50:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jennifer M. Cooper]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal Writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paraphrase]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Quotations]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jennifermcooper.com/?p=151</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Beginning legal writers often lack confidence in their own words and instead rely on others to express what the novice cannot.  This reliance on quotations results in bulky and clumsy legal writing.  Unfortunately, experienced legal writers overuse quotations. Readers (judges, other attorneys, your clients) want to know what YOU know and what YOU think, not that you read something and picked [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jennifermcooper.com/2011/12/05/using-quotations-effectively-in-legal-writing/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
