Truly ironic in a piece about how LAWYERS are poor writers...

"...adding that he has encountered co-workers who respond only to e-mail once an hour or at other designated times."

So, once an hour, his co-workers respond to email but to nothing else? Or did the writer mean to say "...respond to e-mail *only* once an hour..."?

mainstream media stealing Above the Law's stories without attribution: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080509/ap_on_re_us/judging_a_judge;_ylt=AnXUrR.BrLHzBOIPMc1_wf9H2ocA

How was that ever ATL's story in the first place? It was all over the local news in LV long before it was ever reported here.

I can haz righting good?

5:46,

I think the point of the piece went completely over your head.

Not to nitpick. But Bryan Garner would regard himself as the editor in chief of Black's, without hyphens. Not the editor-in-chief.

And they call us bad writers. Amateurs.

What's with the photo of the scarves? A non-sequitur itself?

Guys at my high school used to make blog posts with no content all the time, it was no big deal.

Obama=Tuvok/Spock

Seriously, what lawyer uses the "check grammar" function? If you need a computer to spot the passive voice, maybe you should be reviewing documents rather than drafting them.

I supose this is all just an answer to L2L's question regarding what top flight lawyers can do that lower tier lawyers can do (note, I do not doubt that top flight lawyers come from lower tier law schools). If you're using grammar check to review your documents, then shut up and make my chai.

Agreed 5:46. Misplacing the adverb is one of the most common errors in bad writing and doing it often produces a silly statement of the sort you identify.

Your critic at 11:40, demonstrates another of the most common errors - identifying a mistake and making it at the same time. If you have trouble figuring out what that means 11:40, just say so and I'll explain. Reading may not be in your skill set, as the expression goes.

9:20 -

Please read your post again and then kick yourself in the balls. Per your post, I guess you should get back to reviewing documents.

p.s. I like my chai with two splenda.

What? Who doesn't love the "Check Grammar" function?! I love it! It's like getting a paper back from your teacher with a big red "A" and "Good Work!" when you get a "Passive Sentences 0%."

I have so little in life that brings me happiness during the day - why are you such a hater?

9:20

"I supose this is all just an answer to L2L's question regarding what top flight lawyers can do that lower tier lawyers can do"

You see kiddies, what happens when you don't use spelling or grammar check?

Legal writing often suffers due to the "too many cooks in the kitchen" effect. When I finish a brief, it's well-structured and organized. Unfortunately, by the time the partner and the senior associate finish their "revisions" the brief no longer flows because each of them has edited different parts, and the point has been lost somewhere along the way.

11:01 - re: the scarves, see item #3.