Read on Twitter
Hi folks! The 11th Cir. handed down a new election opinion yesterday and if you’ve been following me you won’t be surprised that I have Some Things To Say about C.J. Pryor’s writing choices. (I’m going to use #WilenskyOnStyle – h/t @daniellecitron – to collect these threads.) /1
The full opinion is here. : https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/7334748/12-5-20-11th-Circuit-Opinion-Wood-v-Raffensperger.pdf /2
This thread is especially directed at law students. Judicial opinions differ from legal memos, motions, etc. – different purposes, different audiences – but this opinion happens to use some standard techniques that work well for many kinds of legal writing. /3
In particular, this opinion models several organizational strategies I want my students to adopt. /4
And I like this opinion bc it demonstrates key organizational things that make the reader’s job easier in ways that are unobtrusive – and often nearly invisible. The reader may not realize what techniques the writer used; she just knows that the document is easy to understand. /5
First, the general-to-specific organization, which you can see in the three paragraphs that introduce the discussion. Para 1 is about “big picture” concepts that frame the entire discussion. Para 2 makes those concepts specific to this lawsuit. /6
Para 3 states the overall conclusion in a way that also provides a road map to the individual sections that follow. (My students will recognize these three paragraphs as a standard “umbrella” section.) /7
(And notice how it doesn’t need its own heading? The background law immediately follows the main Discussion heading w/o “Introduction” or “Background Law” or some other sub-heading. Students sometimes resist including these paragraphs w/ no sub-heading of their own.) /8
Oooh, let’s talk about topic sentences! This opinion is full of excellent ones. Nearly every paragraph has an informative topic sentence – one that identifies the key point of the paragraph – and each paragraph focuses tightly on just that point. Like here: /9
And here: /10
Notice, in particular, the technique C.J. Pryor uses to introduce paragraphs that reject the plaintiff’s args. Many writers fall into the trap of starting counter-analysis paragraphs with the other side’s arguments: “Plaintiff argues X. Now let me tell you why X is wrong.” /11
The better approach is to write a topic sentence that conveys YOUR key point (“Argument X is wrong.”) not the other side’s key point (“Here’s Argument X.”) Here are some examples of how to do that: /12
I particularly love this one because I’m a sucker for a great pair of em-dashes. /13
Really, just add all of these topic sentences to a writing toolbox you can pull from to introduce counter-arguments. /14
It works for distinguishing case law too! /15
One way you know the organization + topic sentences are effective is to use an editing strategy I suggest to students: Go through the Discussion and read just the topic sentences. You’ll get a good sense of the entire thing from just that skeleton. /16
(Seriously. Go read the topic sentences in order; I’ll wait.) /17
The Facts section (what this opinion calls “Background”) isn’t as amenable to using topic sentences in quite the same way, but you’ll notice that each paragraph is still organized around a single theme. For example, this paragraph describes the law about absentee ballots. /18
This paragraph describes an earlier lawsuit brought by the Democratic Party, which provides important background for the present lawsuit. /19
Here's one more example of an effective organizational technique: connecting two related paragraphs by repeating a word or phrase from the end of one paragraph at the beginning of the next. /20
And finally, one thing I’d tweak. The introduction starts w/ a clear statement of the issue, but then makes the reader wade through a few more sentences to get the answers. I’d add a sentence – “We do not.” – after the first sentence here. /21
C.J. Pryor’s former law clerk – now fellow 11th Cir. judge – J. Brasher has a nice example of Issue + Answer in an another recent election case. (Example in next tweet.) /22
(H/t to another Pryor clerk, @ElbertLin for the suggestion that J. Brasher learned this technique from Chief Judge Pryor himself.): /23 https://twitter.com/bethwilensky/status/1335007242790297607?s=20
That’s it! Students, you are now free to return to studying for finals. =) /fin
