CHOOSING YOUR WORDS

ATTY. DELFIN M. SUAREZ JR.

JMC College of Law
 LEARN TO DETEST SIMPLIFIABLE JARGON

In addition to mastering grammatical consistency and simplicity, develop an intolerance

for unnecessary jargon.

Every profession has its own jargon. Yet to the educated person who is not a doctor, a
police officer, or a lawyer, those who use jargon sound more than a little silly.

Example: “observed a fungal infection of unknown etiology on the upper lower left
extremity”

Example: “the patient is being given positive-pressure ventilator support”

Excerpt from a police report:

“When SP01 Mendoza entered the lot, he observed the two males exiting the lot. He
then initiated a verbal exchange with a female white subject, who stated that she had
observed two male whites looking into vehicles. When she pointed out the subjects as
the two male whites who had exited the lot previously, SP01 Mendoza promptly
engaged in foot pursuit of them.”

Engaging in the foot pursuit – running after

Observed – saw
Exiting – leaving
Initiated a verbal exchange – started talking
Stated – said
Male whites – white men
That the work of judges is prosaic, arid, jejune, unemotional, unimaginative, bare of all dramatic
interest, productive of ennui, is a prevalent idea in many persons. Their mistake is due to the failure
of their minds to penetrate the screen of appearances in their surface and to discover the real cosmos
lying beneath. They forget that in the market of human interests, in the uninterrupted confusing
euripus of passions and actions, in the inevitable conflicts arising from the motley and variegated
social activities, tribunals are called upon to function as a kind of clearing-houses, settling
differences, fixing values, wiping obstructions, so as to smoothen the flow of human life. There are
legal problems the solution of which would exhaust all the ingenuity of a judge. Sometimes they call
for intellectual and moral heroism to fight external hidden forces striving to veil the light of truth or
to skew the line of duty traced by conscience. Sometimes the feeling of tragic defeat is inevitable.
But there are times when discovery, invention, and achievement would duplicate the glorious feeling
of Galileo in front of the leaning tower of Pisa, of Newton looking at the falling apple, of
Archimedes shouting "Eureka!" in the streets of Syracuse, of Thomas Aquinas when, attending a
royal banquet in the court of King Louis IX of France, suddenly brings down his huge fists on the
great table, with a crash that startled everyone like an explosion, causing goblets to leap and rattle,
and crying out in a strong voice "and that will settle the Manichees!“

-Talabon v. The Iloilo Provincial Warden (G.R. No. L-1153, June 30, 1947)
Legalisms should become part of your reading vocabulary, not part of your writing
vocabulary.

Legalism refers not to unsimplifiable terms of art (like habeas corpus) but to legal
jargon that has an everyday English equivalent.

Legalsim Plain English

anent about
dehors the record outside the record
inter sese among themselves
motion for vacatur motion to vacate
sub suo periculo at one’s own peril
Legalism Plain English
As to about, of, by, for, in
Bring an action against sue
Herein in this (agreement, etc.)
Inasmuch as since, because
Instant case here, this case
In the event that if
Not less than at least
Prior to before
Pursuant to under, by, in accordance with
Said (adj.) the, this, that
Same (pron.) it, them
Subsequent to after
Such that, this, those, the
Thereafter later
Therein in it, in them, inside
Example of an opaque tongue-twister:

The Undersigned hereby extends said lien on said property until said indebtedness and
Loan Agreement/Note as so modified and extended has been fully paid, and agrees that
such modification shall in no manner affect or impair said Loan Agreement/Note or the
lien securing same and that said lien shall not in anymanner be waived, the purpose of
this instrument being simply to extend or modify the time or manner of payment of said
Loan Agreement Note and indebtedness and to carry forward the lien securing same,
which is hereby acknowledged by the Undersigned to be valid and subsisting.

With a little effort – and by giving “the Undersigned” a name – it’s possible to boil that legal
gibberish down to this:

Williams extends the lien until the Note, as modified, has been fully paid. The
modification does not affect any other terms of the Note or the lien, both of which
otherwise remain in force.
The moral is this: do not be too impressed by the Latin and archaic
English words you read in law books. Their antiquity does not make
them superior. When your pen is poised to write a lawyerism, stop to see
if your meaning can be expressed as well or better in a word or two of
ordinary English.
 USE STRONG PRECISE VERBS.
MINIMIZE IS, ARE, WAS AND WERE.

There are eight be-verbs in the English language

is
are
was
were
been
being
be
am

Be-verbs lack force. If they appear frequently, the writing becomes inert.
Example: If there is information to which the company has reasonable access, the designated
witness is required to review it so that the witness is prepared an all matters of
question.

Edit: If the company has reasonable access to information, the designated witness must
review it to prepare for all matters of questioning.

Example: Affecting vitally the problem of the burden of proof is the doctrine of presumptions. A
presumption occurs in legal terminology when the fact-trier, whether a court or a jury,
is required from the proof of one fact to assume some other fact not directly testified
to. A well-known example is the presumption that a person is dead after seven years if
he or she has been shown to have been absent for seven years without being heard
from.

Edit: The doctrine of presumptions vitally affects the burden-of-proof issue. A presumption
occurs in legal terminology when the fact-trier, whether a court or a jury, must deduce
from one fact yet another that no one has testified about directly. For example, the law
presumes that a person has died if that person has been absent for seven years without
being heard from.
 TURN –ION WORDS INTO VERBS WHEN YOU CAN

It’s not just passive voice and be-verbs that can snap the strength of your sentences. So can
abstract nouns.

Avoid using words ending in –ion to describe what people do.

Examples:
• Write that some has violated the law, not that someone was in violation of the law
• That something illustrates something else, not that it provides an illustration of it
• That a lawyer has decided to represent the defendant, not that the lawyer has made the
decision to undertake the representation of the defendant
• That one party will indemnify the other, not that the party will furnish an indemnification
to the other
Wordy Better wording
Are in mitigation of mitigate
Conduct an examination of examine
Make accommodation for accommodate
Make provision for provide for
Provide a description of describe
Submit an application apply
Take into consideration consider
Why concentrate on editing –ion words? Three reasons:

• You will generally eliminate prepositions in the process, especially of

• You will often avoid inert be-verbs by replacing them with action verbs
• You will humanize the text by saying who does what

The underlying rationale in all this is concreteness. By uncovering buried verbs, you
make your writing much less abstract - it becomes much easier for readers to
visualize what you’re talking about.
SIMPLIFY WORD PHRASES. WATCH OUT FOR “OF”

Bloated Phrase Normal Expression

an adequate number of enough
a number of many several
a sufficient number of enough
at the present time now
at the time when when
at this point in time now
during such time as while
during the course of during
for the reason that because
Bloated Phrase Normal Expression
in the event that if
in the near future soon
is able to can
notwithstanding the fact that although
on a daily basis daily
on the ground that because
prior tobefore
subsequent to after
the majority ofmost
until such time as until
in all likelihood probably
Example: Mrs. Smith knew of the existence of the access port of the
computer.

Edit: Mrs. Smith knew the existence of the computer’s access port.

Example: The Court did not err in issuing its order of dismissal of the claims
of the Plaintiff.

Edit: The Court did not err in issuing its order dismissing the Plaintiff’s
claims.
 AVOID DOUBLETS AND TRIPLETS

Legal writing is legendarily redundant, with time-honored phrases such as

these:

alienate, transfer and convey (transfer suffices)

due and payable (due suffices)
give, devise, and bequeath (give suffices)
indemnify and hold harmless (indemnify suffices)
last will and testament (will suffices)
The problem isn’t just that doublets and triplets, old though they may be,
aren’t legally required. They can actually lead to sloppy thinking. Because
courts must give meaning to every word—reading nothing as mere
surplusage2—lawyers shouldn’t lard their drafts with unnecessary words. The
idea isn’t to say something in as many ways as you can, but to say it as well
as you can.

To avoid needless repetition, apply this rule: if one word swallows the
meaning of other words, use that word alone. To put it scientifically, if one
term names a genus of which the other terms are merely species—and if the
genus word supplies the appropriate level of generality—then use the genus
word only. And if the two words are simply synonyms (convey and
transport), simply choose the one that fits best in your context.
 REFER TO PEOPLE AND COMPANY BY NAMES

Legal writers have traditionally spoiled their stories by calling people

“Plaintiff” and “Defendant,” “Appellant” and “Appellee,” or “Lessor” and
“Lessee.” It’s a noxious habit that violates the principles of good writing.

Most people, you see, don’t think of themselves as intervenors, mortgagors,

obligors, prosecutrixes, and the like. Even lawyers end up having to backtrack
and continually translate. You’re better off supplying the translations in
advance.
Yet the preference for real names does have three limited exceptions:

(1)when you’re discussing a case other than the one you’re currently involved
in;

(2)when the adversary is extremely sympathetic in comparison with your

client; and

(3)when multiple parties are aligned in such a way

 DON’T HABITUALLY USE PARENTHETICAL SHORTHAND
NAMES. USE THEM ONLY WHEN YOU REALLY NEED THEM

Example: Gobel Mattingly (“Mattingly”), shareholder on behalf of Allied Ready

Mix Company, Incorporated (“Allied”) and Jefferson Equipment Company,
Incorporated (“Jefferson”), has appealed from a nunc pro tunc order (the “Nunc
Pro Tunc Order”) of the Jefferson Circuit Court (the “Court Below”) in this
stockholder derivative action (“the Action”).
Only use parenthetical shorthand names when there is a genuine possibility of
confusion. For example, if you’re writing about a case with two or more entities
having confusingly similar names, a shorthand reference will dispel the
confusion.

Example: Portland Credit Corporation (“Portland Credit”) has sued Portland

Credit Engineering Corporation (“PC Engineering”) for trademark infringement.