Dear Legal Writer, Stop using “would” before your verbs.

Dear Legal Writer, Stop using “would” before your verbs.

The word “would” wreaks special havoc in a complaint.

E.g.

❌ “Plaintiff would drive 45 minutes longer for the new role.”

❌ “Plaintiff would contribute $100,000 to the fund.”

Each is ambiguous.

In fact, each arguably asserts nothing at all.

—Did Plaintiff actually drive at all?

—Did Plaintiff ever actually contribute?

In legal writing, though, unless you are TRYING to obfuscate, you should always use words that are clear and precise.

So skip the word “would.”
That’s my advice. 🙂

TL/dr*:

❌ “Plaintiff would do X.”

✅ “Plaintiff did X.”

Please let me know if you have any questions!

💌 Amanda

#DearLegalWriter

*TL/dr: “Too Long/didn’t read”
 (aka, “Here’s a summary.”)

**

P.S. When you write “Plaintiff would do X,” you might mean any of at least 10 different things!

 1: Plaintiff was willing to do X (but we’re not sure if she actually did).

 2: It was understood that Plaintiff must be willing to do X (but we’re again not sure if she actually did).

 3: Plaintiff intended to do X (but may or may not have followed through).

 4: Plaintiff agreed to do X (as part of a contract or arrangement, but the action might not have occurred yet).

 5: Plaintiff was expected to do X (based on circumstances or prior agreements).

 6: Plaintiff was obligated to do X (but we’re not sure if she fulfilled the obligation).

 7: Plaintiff had the capacity or ability to do X (but it’s unclear if she exercised this capacity).

 8: Plaintiff typically did X in similar situations (implying a pattern of behavior without confirming this specific instance).

 9: Plaintiff would have done X (if certain conditions had been met, suggesting a hypothetical scenario).

 10: Plaintiff was in the process of doing X (implying an ongoing action without confirming completion).

**

And that’s a lot of AMBIGUITY!!!

📬 What other words are taboo in complaints?