Top Law Schools

This must be the most common grammatical error I see in briefs, or the one that jumps out at me the most. It's more infuriating since there are so many ways it can come up in a litigation (principal of a loan, principal member of a company, legal principles) and I'd think lawyers understood the difference. /rant.

Anyone have any other briefing related rants?

Anonymous User wrote:This must be the most common grammatical error I see in briefs, or the one that jumps out at me the most. It's more infuriating since there are so many ways it can come up in a litigation (principal of a loan, principal member of a company, legal principles) and I'd think lawyers understood the difference. /rant.

Anyone have any other briefing related rants?

It's not really a rant, because it mostly made me laugh, but whenever anyone starts waxing poetic about RIGHTS and FREEDOMS and LIBERTY and THE CONSTITUTION, I know they have a loser case.

A. Nony Mouse wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:This must be the most common grammatical error I see in briefs, or the one that jumps out at me the most. It's more infuriating since there are so many ways it can come up in a litigation (principal of a loan, principal member of a company, legal principles) and I'd think lawyers understood the difference. /rant.

Anyone have any other briefing related rants?

It's not really a rant, because it mostly made me laugh, but whenever anyone starts waxing poetic about RIGHTS and FREEDOMS and LIBERTY and THE CONSTITUTION, I know they have a loser case.

Somebody cited The Federalist once. I lol'd.

Anonymous User wrote:

A. Nony Mouse wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:This must be the most common grammatical error I see in briefs, or the one that jumps out at me the most. It's more infuriating since there are so many ways it can come up in a litigation (principal of a loan, principal member of a company, legal principles) and I'd think lawyers understood the difference. /rant.

Anyone have any other briefing related rants?

It's not really a rant, because it mostly made me laugh, but whenever anyone starts waxing poetic about RIGHTS and FREEDOMS and LIBERTY and THE CONSTITUTION, I know they have a loser case.

Somebody cited The Federalist once. I lol'd.

I once cited the Federalist in a draft order for my judge. The judge lol'd.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:

A. Nony Mouse wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:This must be the most common grammatical error I see in briefs, or the one that jumps out at me the most. It's more infuriating since there are so many ways it can come up in a litigation (principal of a loan, principal member of a company, legal principles) and I'd think lawyers understood the difference. /rant.

Anyone have any other briefing related rants?

It's not really a rant, because it mostly made me laugh, but whenever anyone starts waxing poetic about RIGHTS and FREEDOMS and LIBERTY and THE CONSTITUTION, I know they have a loser case.

Somebody cited The Federalist once. I lol'd.

I once cited the Federalist in a draft order for my judge. The judge lol'd.

I think I can top that, although it was a bench memo. Saw an opportunity to cite Leviticus and jumped on it.