Garma, Chyler Bon Aehrold S.

Assignment #1

Mark Osbeck’s detailed article on dealing with “Good Legal Writing” and “Why Does it
Matter?” presents a pedadogical approach on the issue of legal writing. The subject, he observed,
is too often disregarded and only pursued later on in a legal practitioner’s career. That is why in
his article, he focuses on how one should write in relation to legal practice. My initial prejudice
was that I was going to read a textbook or instruction, but surprisingly, his lessons are properly
instilled in his writing—that is, informative while also captivating. To briefly summarize, Osbeck
portioned his discussion into 3 parts: 1) the Concept of Legal Writing, 2) the Elements that makes
a “good” legal writing, 3) and the importance of executing elegance. Briefly speaking, Osbeck
illustrates how to acquire the spirit of a novelist whilst serving a practical function, i.e. the law.

In the first part of the article, the concept of Legal Writing and what makes it good was
tackled. “Legal writers,” Osbeck elucidates, “do not write in a vacuum, they write in order to
accomplish specific objectives.” In its foundation, the function of legal writing is to serve a
practical purpose. It is of course an instrument of the law. Additionally, “Legal writing is an
inherently social activity in which the legal writer puts pen to paper in order to have a certain effect
on a target audience.” Legal writing’s practical purpose is not simply note-taking akin to a student
during a lecture. But it functions as to provide information.

“Unlike readers of fiction, they are not looking for writing that entertains them or edifies
them in some way. Rather, lawyers and judges read legal documents because they need to
extract information from these documents that will help them make decisions in the course of
their professional duties. […] This information in turn helps the lawyer decide how best to make
an argument, structure a transaction, or advise a client as to a proposed course of action. […]
Good legal writing, therefore, is best understood as writing that helps legal actors make
decisions in the course of their professional duties.”

Basically, that answers the first part of Osbeck’s discussion—what is Good Legal Writing and
Why does it Matter? It serves a practical purpose, it functions as an instrument of the law, it is only
good if it functions well enough that legal practitioners benefit from the information it provides.
Contrary, bad legal writing neither serves a decent function nor provide a useful legal information.

But I have quoted enough from the author, hereon if I continue quoting, it would not be a decent
paper but a summary of his work. Now, as to also follow Osbeck’s structure, which providing an
objective first part, this latter part of my paper will delve into what I learned in his article.

The second and last part of the article explicates how a good legal writing is crafted. Clarity,
Conciseness, and Audience Engagement are the essential elements that produces a well-written
legal piece. Clarity, as understood, is the clearness of the writing. How could one extract
information if the source is murky? Here, Osbeck wants the writer to be master of the language.
Mastery of grammar and other language tools is necessary in creating clear writing. Clarity can
also be induced by properly constructing a structure, rhythm of the sentences and repetition of key
concepts are the recipes in building the structure. This creates an emphasis on the subject by
navigating the reader (using the rhythm) to the focal point of the writing (through repetition). An
ebb and flow of the piece, if you will.

Another tool-concept of Osbeck is use of plain words and also incorporating legal jargons.
While at first glance this may appear to be contradictory, it can serve as complimentary to each
other. If only jargon is use, then it would not be clear for one’s audience; however, if only plain
language is manifested, then what difference would legal writing be from regular writing. That is
why mastery of both is highly useful in writing a legal piece.

Next is Conciseness. This is an extension of the first element. Nonetheless, it is an important

aspect in legal writing. To do this, one must have the skill to seek the superfluity in one’s writing
and eliminate it. This elimination of superfluous components leads the reader directly to the point.
Furthermore, in only eliminating the superfluity, it highlights the proper level of detail. This is
very important in disseminating information (as to serve the original purpose). But in order for one
to attain this element of conciseness, one must have proper judgment, as to not mistake what is
important from superfluous.

Lastly, the element of Engaging the reader. The last element can fuse with the last part of the
article which is Elegance. Both contradicts the 2 former elements. How can one beautify a piece
without the risk of losing its practical value? Clarity and Conciseness agrees more into a direct
approach towards writing, while the latter 2 seeks to expound the writing to make it more engaging,
aesthetic, and even at times, poetic (certain Justices write poetic decisions and are still being quoted
numerous times in cases or in other articles). Well, the compromise would be that by attaining
balance between Clarity and Elegance, once can achieve a level of lucidity that readers are both
captivated and informed. The 3rd element provides various methods in order to achieve such
captivating appeal. Variety of structures makes the text more interesting, rather than staring into
a bulk of words. Patterns reaches towards the audience to maintain their focus into the topic at
hand. Humor keeps the discussion more exciting—often an unobserved and disregarded factor
when writing. Story-telling is a skill that captures the imagination of the reader and leads them
into a more interesting discussion. Also, the tone of the writing, similar to the rhythm in Clarity,
defogs an otherwise monotonous set of sentences. There is a certain music in every writing,
especially in poetry and fiction; it is not prohibited that it be employed in legal writing. Lastly, the
classic method of rhetoric, specifically the rhetoric of pathos.

Lawyers equipped with good writing can be regarded as philosophers. Since time immemorial,
both fields intersect with each other, if not one all together. That is why in Good Legal Writing,
one cannot accomplish such if not for the employment of Elegance. Sure, information is the
foundational purpose, but would it not be better if such information is not limited to only those
who can endure dull and strenuous writings? That is why Osbeck, albeit not explicitly stating that
one should write more beautifully whilst not disposing clarity, it can be inferred that law, although
a profession, is also an art. Law is an art that serves a practical purpose.

Hence, to conclude, as a Law student who encounters legal writing in almost every part of my
waking life, I would prefer that, if I were to endure myriads of assigned pages, I would want them
to be written as aesthetically as possible to keep study spirits high. I agree with Mark Osbeck’s
“What is “Good Legal Writing” and Why Does it Matter?”