Law Documents Drone On for Several Reasons

A Los Alamitos woman writes with some common complaints about lawyers, among them the “verbosity and confusing sentence structure” they use. . . . Bluntly, why can’t lawyers speak, and write, in understandable English?

Her frustration stems from her painful review of a revocable living trust, a document often filled with legalese.

Helen M. Low complained that the document contained “lengthy, complicated sentences with clauses within clauses and, very frequently, inadequate punctuation.”

“Many sentences had over 100 words and one had 152 words,” she complains. She put those 152 words in a “readability” software computer program, which described the sentence as “pompous.” To say the least.

“The wording in some legal documents is so-called boilerplate,” Low notes correctly. “I would like to know the origin of this, why well-educated and competent lawyers accept the inadequacies of it, and why (in view of the high fees paid for legal services) a client cannot expect an attorney to refine such writing so that it is clear to the reader?”

Part of the answer is training, part of it’s economics, and part of it’s the sanctity of precedent.

Legal documents are probably not going to change any time soon, notwithstanding a movement among law schools to improve students’ writing ability. Clear writing has been neither a high priority nor a required course of study. Law students don’t write term papers or get much feedback on their writing style, except in clinical courses, which are few and far between.

Boilerplate is used to describe standard provisions in a contract or legal document. The provisions are generally used repeatedly, and most lawyers are reluctant to change them.

Precise, exacting language is essential in legal matters. A contract’s meaning may seem obvious when you sign it, but years later in court, a well-researched, carefully drafted provision may be what convinces a judge that the contract means what you think it says.

Lawyers like boilerplate provisions because it’s reassuring if a clause in question has been the subject of previous litigation. If an appellate court once approved the meaning of a provision, most lawyers will use the same language, knowing the case can be cited as precedent, even if the provision is difficult to decipher.

Legal documents tend to be wordy because lawyers are trained to consider every possible contingency.

Laziness often results in legalese; it takes much longer to write clear, understandable prose than to regurgitate standardized language. (And clients would have to pay for the time it takes to make every paragraph perfect.)

Some lawyers use legalese to maintain the mystery of the law, viewing themselves as part of a high priesthood of practitioners who can charge high fees and impress clients with their specialized knowledge.

And, like those in other professions, many lawyers simply feel more comfortable using the language they learned in school. They know other judges and lawyers will understand them.

But communicating with your lawyer shouldn’t be like reading a car rental agreement. You should demand and receive legal advice in clear, understandable language. Don’t be afraid to tell your lawyer if you don’t know what he or she is talking about.

Don’t forget, you should never sign any legal document that you don’t fully understand. And given what we’ve just said, that’s particularly galling advice.