—> “Regard” creates clauses that are long, clunky, and awkward.

Instead, try using “On” or “As to.”

❌ “Regarding the first claim, plaintiff cites no support.”

At first, I hesitated when I got that question—was it even appropriate? (It’s kind of a sensitive topic to me—like asking my weight or salary.)

I also felt embarrassed: “Dear 1L” is never going to be some New York Times bestseller.

What’s your first move?

Try my P-E-N-C-I-L approach. It systematically roots out the 6 worst sins in legal writing:

Here’s my run down of the big changes I see:

🔹 1990’s:

-Use complex words nobody knows.
-Use no charts, timelines, or photographs.
-Use boldface & italics, for emphasis.
-Stick to Times New Roman font.
-Use acronyms for party names.
-Use footnotes to save space.
-Maximize use of legalese.

This is AFTER both the student and their school’s Career Office have signed off and think the resume is “final.”

➡️ Please do not rely on Career Services to proofread your resume. That is not their job. The job is yours alone.

So I created this checklist for you. It targets the 10 mistakes I see the most often.

They’re an exclusive club, and I’ve definitely never been “in” it.

In fact, before doing what I do now, I failed to get the 3 professor jobs I applied to.

 👉 That made me feel like the entire law-school universe disapproved of me.

You might think the greatest gripe I get has to do with the depth of analysis or lack of sophistication in advocacy style.

You’d think the gripe at least had SOMETHING to do with the LEGAL part of legal writing.

But no.

It’s their grammar.

I made this staircase for you, so you can see all of the 10 common ways we express causation:

🔺 As
🔺 For
🔺 Since
➖ Because
🔻 Based on
🔻 As a result of
🔻 For the reason that

🔹 1: The first pillar is clarity. That’s the holy grail.

If your writing isn’t clear, it will not persuade.

No judge will take time to decipher what you mean to say.

A client may throw up their hands in dismay.

Today’s story starts in Nov 2021—when I was NOT ready to be a podcast guest.

I’d never appeared on one before; I didn’t know what to expect; and I got a bit blindsided.

And after that first one, although I thought I did “okay,” I knew equally well that I could get much, much better. So I worked hard at it!

1: Chris Schandevel: Chris is my favorite legal-writing creator: he’s always bold and crystal clear about his opinions (even those I disagree with!). An appellate advocate based in Virginia, Chris litigates U.S. Supreme Court cases and posts tips from his famous “Brief Ninja” Style Guide, along with stories of his brief-writing tactics. Chris also is the best at giving back, as he regularly supports all the top accounts I list.

It is called “Legal Writing in Color.”

Its mission is to make learning legal writing more accessible, less unpleasant, and a lot more fun.

There will surely be a book at some point;
I have saved the domain;
I’ll seek trademark status for the name.

“Such” is vague.
“Such” is overused.
“Such” makes your sentences sound AWKWARD!

Worse, when used to refer back to something, “such” can create real confusion about what is actually being referenced. ⤵️

Family legend says my uncle and he were friends since the ’50s, and when Buffett became CEO of Berkshire Hathaway in 1970-with Class A stock under $50-he apparently gifted my uncle two shares.

But now I wonder, what about what AI says?

So I prompted Perplexity,

“Who is Amanda Dealy Haverstick? Her email is amanda@ dear1L. com.”

The response blew me away (see below).