Anonymous User wrote: ↑Fri Feb 02, 2024 3:48 pm
What are your tips and strategies for pushing past writers' block / overwhelm / anxiety in drafting big briefs? As I've gotten more senior, I've been asked to take the lead on writing some really long, thorny briefs. This month writing a motion to dismiss a 100+ page complaint and some other large writing projects felt like swimming through sand. It's especially hard to dig into complex writing and research with dozens of little tasks percolating throughout the day.
What are your go-to tips / tricks / strategies for big projects like this?
I have struggled with writers' block/anxiety. The best way I've found is to break the brief into discrete tasks and, to get momentum going, start with the ones that are the most straightforward/least daunting, especially when they set you up to do the other tasks. This is helpful both generally and when you've got other tasks distracting you--discrete chunks are easier to complete quickly so you don't leave them hanging to do something else.
Let's take your MTD a 100+ page complaint. What are the most straightforward tasks? Here are some ideas. Flip to the back of the complaint and take a look at the claims. Go find out the elements of each of the claims and then write an outline with the headings for each claim, an initial sentence laying out the elements, and then a heading corresponding to each element you think you'd consider challenging. Once you've handled the claims, I would then turn to the facts; because it's a MTD, your goal (and I know you kow this) in your statement of facts is to recount the facts in the complaint in a manner that is both accurate and persuasive. I would have the complaint side by side with the draft and, in the same way as I did the claims, do the headings and subheadings of the statement of facts; you can then list the salient facts in bullet form under each heading (or even just copy + paste the relevant allegations so you can get started).
If you've completed these tasks, you've laid the foundation for the main analytical work, namely researching and writing the arguments. On research, I'd apply the same general approach--try to identify the low-hanging fruit (for example, are they seeking a category of damages in a contract claim that looks a little funky to you?) and knock those out. Then research the more complex stuff. Once you've got the research down, write headings as above.
On writing, one of the big impediments to working speedily is the tendency to edit/wordsmith while you write. Beautification should always come after substance. Write everything out in as bland and straightforward a manner as possible in the first instance; you might even use a voice-to-text feature to overcome your natural tendency to edit. So, instead of finding the most elegant way to state a proposition, say something blunt like, "Plaintiff pleads X. That is insufficient under A v. B." Do that with respect to every substantive point you'd like to make and, eventually, you will have a blunt, terse, but substantially complete brief.
Once you've got the substance substantially there, put the brief down, ideally for a day or for at least an hour (if you have the time). Then do a general completeness check--are there any substantive points you missed? If so, repeat the above with respect to those points. If not, you can start wordsmithing/turning bullet points into prose. Finally, once you've made your substantive sections crisp and beautiful, you can write your preliminary statement and incorporate the points/themes you make in the substantive sections.
Then it's proof proof proof until you're satisfied/can't take reading it anymore.