On Thursday, October 7 from 1:00-2:00 p.m. Eastern, I’ll be presenting my popular program, Powerful Writing Techniques to Help You Persuade Judges and Win Clients, as a complimentary webinar.

The ability to write forcefully and effectively is critical to your success as a lawyer. In this webinar, lawyers will learn to write more persuasively by using the same powerful techniques that copywriters have relied on for years. Discover what these techniques are and how to apply them in both briefs and client-focused writing.

Attorneys who attend this webinar will learn about:

• The greatest challenge your writing must overcome to persuade readers to take a desired action
• Basic concepts underlying all effective persuasive writing—ignore these and you’re sunk
• How to write a compelling brief that the judge just can’t put down
• The role of emotion in jurisprudence and how to trigger the reader’s emotions
• The things readers absolutely hate—and how to avoid them
• How to deal with objections to your position
• Closing the deal: conclusions and calls to action

This webinar is part of a series of complimentary webinars from Avvo, a website that offers ratings and profiles for 90% of U.S. lawyers, as well as client reviews, peer reviews and attorney disciplinary records. The website currently covers all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

Once again, that’s Thursday, October 7 at 1 p.m. (EDT). To register, click here.

If you’re in the New York City area and would like to get CLE credit for attending this program, I’ll be presenting it live at the New York County Lawyer’s Association (downtown at 14 Vesey Street) on Monday, October 4 from 7:45-9:00 p.m. The program (part of a four-credit Bridge the Gap session) is suitable for both new and experienced lawyers. To register, click here.

Two more Opportunities to Learn About the Benefits Solos and Small Firm Lawyers Can Reap by Working With Contract Lawyers

If you missed last week’s How to Work With Contract Lawyers to Save Your Firm Money, Increase Profits and Get Your Life Back webinar, you haven’t missed the boat: in the next few weeks, I’ll be talking about contract lawyering both live in New York City and online.

On Tuesday, October 5 from 6:30-8:30 p.m., I’ll be co-presenting Minimize Growing Pains—Expand Your Small Firm Practice with the Help of Contract Attorneys at the New York City Bar Association, 42 W. 44th St. in Manhattan.

Attend this program to learn how contract lawyers can help you achieve work/life balance by providing a safety valve when you’re swamped with work, increase professional satisfaction by enabling you to focus on those legal tasks you find most rewarding and increase profits without adding to your firm’s overhead.

The program will be moderated by Alla Roytberg, Director of the NYC Bar’s Small Law Firm Center. I’ll be joined on the panel by Edgar De Leon of De Leon & Associates, PLLC, who will discuss his experience working with contract lawyers.

A wine and cheese reception from 6:30-7:15 will be followed by the program from 7:15-8:30.

Once again, that’s Tuesday October 5 from 6:30-8:30 p.m. To register, click here.

Not in the New York City area? Listen to Law Firm Staffing Alternatives: Contract Lawyers on Total Expert Radio, on Friday, October 15 from 1:00-2:00 p.m. (Eastern). Outsourcing is the wave of the future. But it doesn’t necessarily mean sending work overseas, and it’s not just for big firms. Solos and small firms can garner many benefits by outsourcing substantive legal work to independent, US-based contract (a/k/a freelance) lawyers. Join us to learn how to use contract lawyers in your law firm to fill both long-term and temporary staffing needs.

The live, Q & A format show is part of a series of shows about the hottest topics in law practice management from Total Attorneys, a technology-enabled service provider dedicated to assisting with every aspect of small and solo law firm practice management, growth and development. Although pre-registration is not required, you may want to bookmark the show page so you can quickly return to it on October 15.

This program teaches lawyers to write more persuasively by using the same powerful techniques that copywriters have relied on for years. Topics covered in this course include:

• The greatest challenge your writing must overcome to persuade readers to take a desired action
• Basic concepts underlying all effective persuasive writing—ignore these and you’re sunk
• How to write a compelling brief that the judge just can’t put down
• The role of emotion in jurisprudence and how to trigger the reader’s emotions
• The things readers absolutely hate—and how to avoid them
• How to deal with objections to your position
• Closing the deal: conclusions and calls to action
• And more . . . .

CLE accreditation (for 1.5 hours in 50-minute states and 1.8 hours in 60-minute states) is pending.

You can register for the program at the ABA’s website.

On Thursday, October 8, social media and legal technology maven Nicole Black and I will be presenting The 6 Things You Need to Know About Social Media as part of two-part program on social media for lawyers. In this program, lawyers will learn about six important principles, applicable across social media platforms, that will help them use social media to promote and market their practices, showcase their areas of expertise, and network with other attorneys

The program starts at 8 a.m., and is followed by Twitter for Lawyers. The second session, on October 14, features programs on Social Media-The Vulnerabilities and Liabilities and Blogs, Facebook, Linkedin For Lawyers. Registration is available for one or both sessions, and a total of 6 CLE credits will be available (pending accreditation). The program is sponsored by and will take place at New York Law School, 57 Worth Street in Manhattan.

Nicole and I will be reprising our social media presentation at the ABA GP|Solo Division’s National Solo & Small Firm Conference at the Millenium Biltmore Hotel in Los Angeles on Friday, October 16, under the title Social Media for Lawyers: Six Important Principles for Effective Participation. It’ll be another early morning, with the program once again starting at 8 a.m.

On Saturday, October 17, I’ll be co-presenting Powerful Writing Techniques to Help You Persuade Judges and Win Clients with Hon. Gerald Lebovits. This program teaches lawyers to write more persuasively by using the same powerful techniques that copywriters have relied on for years. Topics covered in this course include:

• The greatest challenge your writing must overcome to persuade readers to take a desired action
• Basic concepts underlying all effective persuasive writing—ignore these and you’re sunk
• How to write a compelling brief that the judge just can’t put down
• The role of emotion in jurisprudence and how to trigger the reader’s emotions
• The things readers absolutely hate—and how to avoid them
• How to deal with objections to your position
• Closing the deal: conclusions and calls to action
• And more . . . .

This program runs from 1:15-2:15 p.m. (thank goodness!).

I look forward to seeing you at these exciting educational programs!

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.

This cartoon is courtesy of Courtoons, a blog by Ohio appellate lawyer David Mills that features daily cartoons skewering all aspects of the law.

(As a fellow appellate lawyer, I’m also partial to Honest Briefing and A Uniform Normal Person’s System of Citation.)

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.

Scalia (who once taught legal writing at the University of Virginia Law School) denied that “legal writing” exists as a separate genre of writing; rather, he includes legal writing in the broader category of nonfiction prose. Thus, he considered that the students who performed poorly in his classes didn’t lack legal writing skill: they lacked writing skill.

Scalia’s description of a particular brief that he read while sitting on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals was particularly inspiring to those of us who take legal writing seriously. After all these years (Scalia left the D.C. Circuit in 1986), Scalia recounted with pleasure how the brief “woke him up,” “grabbed his attention” and “leapt out of the pack” of the numerous briefs in the case.

As those who have read Making Your Case are aware, Garner and Scalia vehemently disagree concerning whether case citations belong in the text of briefs or should be relegated to footnotes. Commenting on this controversy, Scalia observed that the nature of the common law system itself requires that allusions to authority be scattered throughout the text.

Scalia closed by offering two observations: he asserted that writing genius consists primarily of an ability to place one’s self in the reader’s shoes, and maintained that careless, sloppy writers have careless, sloppy minds.

Because I’m a such a fangirl (though not of Scalia’s politics), I made sure to get pictures with both Scalia and Garner:

And, of course, I got their autographs on my copy of Making Your Case: The Art of Persuading Judges:

 
 
 
As an aside, it’s clear from the luncheon pictures above that Garner is much taller than Scalia. However, take a look at this photo from the back of the Making Your Case book jacket. Hmmm . . . .

Finally, at the luncheon I had the pleasure of meeting Kathleen St. Onge, the winner of the Making Your Case Contest. Kathleen got a shot with both esteemed writers:

For more tips on how to write hard-hitting, effective briefs, check out the recording of our recent teleseminar, Powerful Persuasive Writing Techniques for Your Marketing Materials and Briefs.

According to Cox, the SEC will be “relentless in seeing to it that the language in which both regulation and disclosure are written is plain English.” Cox started out by reminding the group that lawyers did not always speak legalese:

It’s fitting that we’re gathered at a law school, because it reminds of us howwildered we all once were when we first heard the jargon and cant of the lawyer. Back when the deep structure of our minds was not influenced by the densely reticulated vocabulary of legalese, we could relate to the experiences of today’s investors trying to make sense of their proxy statements.

The speech is interesting and includes diverse references to John Grisham, Oliver Wendell Holmes and Mark Twain, all of whom recognize the value of plain English.

Thanks to the CorporateCounsel Blog.