Page 1 of 1
Why are lawyers the only professional writers arrogant enough to not use copy editors?
Posted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 1:26 pm
by Desert Fox
Re: Why are lawyers the only professional writers arrogant enough to not use copy editors?
Posted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 2:10 pm
by Jay2716
Why would I pay someone else to do what I can bill for myself?
Re: Why are lawyers the only professional writers arrogant enough to not use copy editors?
Posted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 2:12 pm
by Jay2716
Also, lol at trusting someone else to make sure my motion to compel has consistent spacing after periods.
Re: Why are lawyers the only professional writers arrogant enough to not use copy editors?
Posted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 2:15 pm
by TLSModBot
Hey DF why don't you lead the way with some proofreading over your posting
Re: Why are lawyers the only professional writers arrogant enough to not use copy editors?
Posted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 2:34 pm
by SmokeytheBear
Capitol_Idea wrote:Hey DF why don't you lead the way with some proofreading over your posting
that split infinitive made my teeth hurt.
My firm has legal assistants do book reads on any and everything.
Re: Why are lawyers the only professional writers arrogant enough to not use copy editors?
Posted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 2:42 pm
by Lincoln
My firm has a proofreading department, which is kind of the same thing.
Re: Why are lawyers the only professional writers arrogant enough to not use copy editors?
Posted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 2:58 pm
by sublime
Lincoln wrote:My firm has a proofreading department, which is kind of the same thing.
Same. Although people don't seem to really use them which I don't get.
Re: Why are lawyers the only professional writers arrogant enough to not use copy editors?
Posted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 3:12 pm
by foregetaboutdre
Admin staff at my firm will proofread, but I think maybe justly or unjustly many of the attorneys don't "trust" their edits (even though its redlined etc..) and will continue to proof and bill (which is an incentive to keep proofing) to turn in something perfect.
Some of this I think is also because of some silly things like the files getting mixed up and shit in between edits etc... (even though everything is on a cloud service).
Re: Why are lawyers the only professional writers arrogant enough to not use copy editors?
Posted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 3:27 pm
by malibustacy
Other than client confidentiality and conflict of interest concerns?
Re: Why are lawyers the only professional writers arrogant enough to not use copy editors?
Posted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 3:34 pm
by Desert Fox
Lincoln wrote:My firm has a proofreading department, which is kind of the same thing.
Mine doesn’t, which is nuts.
Re: Why are lawyers the only professional writers arrogant enough to not use copy editors?
Posted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 3:35 pm
by Desert Fox
malibustacy wrote:Other than client confidentiality and conflict of interest concerns?
You can get around those issues.
Re: Why are lawyers the only professional writers arrogant enough to not use copy editors?
Posted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 3:39 pm
by Desert Fox
SmokeytheBear wrote:Capitol_Idea wrote:Hey DF why don't you lead the way with some proofreading over your posting
that split infinitive made my teeth hurt.
My firm has legal assistants do book reads on any and everything.
I don’t get the dislike of split infinitives.
Re: Why are lawyers the only professional writers arrogant enough to not use copy editors?
Posted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 4:11 pm
by lolwat
I always like having a second (or third) pair of eyes to make sure there aren't typos or grammatical errors, and that everything makes sense. But I wouldn't hire people to specifically do that. I get good results just sending it to another associate to review and edit... and they can bill for that, too. Win-win for everyone, except maybe in terms of cost to the client (although I'm sure firms would find ways to shift the cost of a copy editor to the client, anyway).