Judge Lebovits isn’t your run-of-the mill housing court judge: he’s a legal writing expert who’s published over 100 articles on the subject (as well as numerous articles on other topics). He’s also a popular legal writing professor and CLE presenter.

Now you can download his Advanced Judicial Opinion Writing: A Handbook for New York State Trial and Appellate Courts (as well as all of his other articles) from the Social Science Research Network.

The first half (roughly) of the Handbook focuses on judicial opinion writing, while the second half addresses legal writing in general. Nevertheless, I strongly urge you to read the entire manual for two reasons. First, much of the material in the first half is just as applicable to brief writing as to opinion writing (for example, “briefs” could easily be substituted for “judicial opinions” in the section entitled “What Readers of Judicial Opinions Hate: the Top 30 Vices”). Second, understanding how and why judges write opinions, as well as the different types of opinions, will add a whole new level of meaning to the opinions you read.

I’m sharing this information with you for two reasons. First, I’ve long believed that studying judicial writing manuals can make lawyers better writers. Second, I’m honored to call Judge Lebovits a colleague and friend: among other things, we co-authored (along with Alifya Curtin) a law review article entitled Ethical Judicial Opinion Writing, and we’ll be presenting Powerful Writing Techniques to Help You Persuade Judges and Win Clients at the ABA’s National Solo & Small Firm Conference in October.

Finally, I can’t pass up this opportunity to respectfully urge all members of New York’s Appellate Division, Third Department (or at least Justices Yesawich, Mikoll, Crew, Spain and Mugglin) to review the Handbook. I make this suggestion after reading that court’s opinion in Krouner v. Krouner, 267 A.D.2d 575, 699 N.Y.S.2d 220 (3d Dep’t 1999), which, although brief, is rife with errors (noted in red in the following quotation from the opinion):

By this proceeding, petitioner Leonard W. Krouner [footnote omitted] (hereinafter Krouner) seeks, inter alia, to have respondent deposit funds in a segregated account to repay a college student loan obtained by their son Kenneth Krouner (hereinafter Kenneth). Krouner and respondent (hereinafter collectively referred to as the parties) [As if we couldn't have figured that one out ourselves . . . .] were divorced in 1986. A stipulation defining their child support obligations was incorporated but not merged into the divorce decree and, despite modifications since its inception, the stipulation is silent with respect to the parties’ responsibilities to pay for Kenneth’s college education. Petitioners appeal Supreme Court’s dismissal of the petition.

In dismissing the petition, Supreme Court concluded that because Kenneth was over the age of 21 it could not compel respondent to contribute to his college education. Notwithstanding the absence of language in the stipulation as to the parties’ obligation to provide for Kenneth’s college education expenses and the fact that he has attained the age of 21 and payment for such expenses is not required by statute (see, Domestic Relations Law § 240[1-b][b][2] ), such payment may be enjoined if special circumstances exist (see, Domestic Relations Law § 240[1-b][c][7]; see also, Hapeman v. Hapeman, 229 A.D.2d 807, 810, 646 N.Y.S.2d 583; Smith v. Smith, 174 A.D.2d 818, 819, 571 N.Y.S.2d 127; Haimowitz v. Gerber, 153 A.D.2d 879, 880, 545 N.Y.S.2d 599). Inasmuch as each parent has a postgraduate degree and Kenneth has demonstrated academic ability (see, Hutter v. Hutter, 112 A.D.2d 543, 544, 491 N.Y.S.2d 480), whether special circumstances obtain turns on respondent’s ability to provide the necessary funds (see, id., at 544, 491 N.Y.S.2d 480). And, as to that, although petitioner has proffered various documents purportedly indicating that respondent has the wherewithal to help defray Kenneth’s education expenses-a premise vigorously disputed by respondent-[these should be em-dashes, not hyphens] the parties’ submissions on this issue are not sufficiently developed in the record to enable us to pass on this aspect of the petition. Accordingly, a hearing must be held at which testimony and evidence is [subject/verb disagreement] to be produced as to respondent’s financial ability.

(The commas after the introductory signals and id. are not required by the Tanbook, which dictates citation format in New York State Court documents.)

While you’re there, check out my guest post, The Road Less Traveled: Working as a Contract Lawyer.

Also, make sure you read this post for more details about a free Attorneys in Transition Seminar that Law Bulletin Publishing Co. will be presenting on May 8 at John Marshall Law School in Chicago’s Loop.

Yesterday, while working on a project for Ben Glass (a successful Virginia personal injury and medical malpractice lawyer, and the founder of Great Legal Marketing), I realized that it would be helpful to be able to poke around the American Law Reports (ALR) database. So I typed “ALR” in the “Search for a Database” field on my Westlaw homepage. I was pleasantly surprised to see, on the very next screen, an offer for two weeks’ free access to the ALR database. Of course, I accepted.

As I got deeper into the project, I decided it was necessary to see the parties’ briefs in two Virginia Supreme Court cases. So I called Westlaw for information about the cost of a “find” request in the Briefs database. After I explained my inquiry to the reference attorney, she told me that West would give me a password entitling me to two hours’ complimentary access to the Briefs databases in both New York (where I live and where most of my clients are) and Virginia, as well as free printing (up to 5,000 lines). Score!

The reference attorney also explained that, after I’ve used my two hours (which I can do any time within the next month), my Westlaw representative will contact me to see if I’m interested in subscribing to the Briefs database. I figure that’s a pretty fair trade.

Just to be clear, I didn’t ask for free access to any of these materials: Westlaw took the initiative, offering these promotions to me after it learned about my interest in the materials.

So, if you’d like to test-drive any materials not included in your current subscription, you might want to try simply searching on Westlaw for a database that’s outside your plan, or calling the reference attorneys (at 800-REF-ATTY) to find out what the cost will be to access specific documents that are outside your plan. While I can’t promise that you’ll have the same results that I had, it’ll take very little time, and almost no effort, to test this yourself.

How to get the best deal on your subscription plan from Lexis and Westlaw is just one of the topics that I’ll be covering in next week’s teleseminar, Freelance Freedom (2009): How to Get Started as a Contract Lawyer.

The webinar was presented by Stetson University College of Law. The panelists are Kirsten Davis, Associate Professor of Law and Director of Legal Research and Writing at Stetson; Raymond “Tom” Elligett, Jr. of Buell & Elligett, P.A.; and Tracy Raffles Gunn of Gunn Appellate Practice, P.A.

The webinar, which is 1 hr. 16 min. long, has been approved for one hour of CLE credit in Florida.

If you’re serious about legal writing, I highly recommend that you join Scribes.

Update: Congratulations to contest winner Kathleen St. Onge of Halloran & Sage LLP in Hartford, Connecticut. Thanks to everyone who entered the contest!

As you may know, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and legal writing guru Bryan Garner recently co-authored Making Your Case: The Art of Persuading Judges Now, you can enter the LRWP Making Your Case contest for a chance to get legal writing advice directly from the horse’s mouth (although some would argue that anything from Scalia would be from the horse’s other end).

Putting politics aside, who wouldn’t want a chance to win a ticket to hear Scalia speak about legal writing? On August 9, he’ll be speaking in New York City at the annual meeting of Scribes-The American Society of Legal Writers. I’ve got an extra ticket to the event (which includes lunch), and I look forward to sharing this special opportunity with the lucky contest winner.

The winner will also receive a copy Making Your Case, so you’ll be ready for the book signing following Justice Scalia’s remarks.

As if that weren’t enough, when you enter the Making Your Case contest, you will receive a copy of the Legal Research & Writing Pro Legal Writing Resources List, which features free and low-cost resources to help you improve your legal writing skills. To enter, simply fill out the brief form below.

The winner will be chosen at random in a drawing held at 5 p.m. Eastern on Wednesday, August 6. If you’re the winner, we’ll notify you by e-mail (and by phone, if you have provided a telephone number).

Grammar Girl (a/k/a Mignon Forgarty) is a freelance technical writer and editor who writes a blog and produces a podcast about—you guessed it—the fine points of English grammar.

According to her About page, “Grammar Girl believes that learning is fun, and the vast rules of grammar are wonderful fodder for lifelong study. She strives to be a friendly guide in the writing world. Her arch enemy is the evil Grammar Maven who inspires terror in the untrained and is neither friendly nor helpful.”

Here’s a video of an interview with GG herself:

As a subscriber to the Legal Writing Journal, you’ll receive an e-mail every so often with short abstracts of the newest articles. Whether or not you subscribe, you can browse or search the archives, which currently contain 90 articles.

Some of my favorite articles include Homer Simpson Meets the Rule Against Perpetuities: The Controversial Use of Pop-Culture in Legal Writing Pedagogy and [Insert Song Lyrics Here]: The Uses and Misuses of Popular Music Lyrics In Legal Writing. Next up on my reading list: The Lexicon Has Become a Fortress: The United States Supreme Court’s Use of Dictionaries . I’m sure the authors’ appendix of terms defined by the United States Supreme Court will come in handy someday.

That’s why I was as surprised as anyone when I learned that West publishes a number of high-quality, free print newsletters. I subscribe to Perspectives: Teaching Legal Research and Writing, a print newsletter for legal research and writing instructors and law firm and law school librarians.

While practicing lawyers won’t have much use for pieces like Laptops in the Classroom: Pondering the Possibilities, many of the articles—such as Topic Sentences—Potentially Brilliant Moments of Synthesis and Finding and Using Statistics in Legal Writing, to name a few—contain valuable information for practitioners. The articles aren’t a slog, either: most are only a few well-written pages long.

West offers three other free print newsletters that also look interesting: GlobalLaw Quarterly, Practice Innovations and Law Librarians in the New Millenium (although, somehow, I don’t think West had Above the Law’s Law Librarian Hotties contest, male and female divisions, in mind). All four print newsletters are also available online in .pdf format.