The Ambiguity and Unfairness of Dismissing Bad Writing

57 Pages Posted: 18 May 2020

Date Written: February 1, 2020

Abstract

Courts routinely choose to explicitly dismiss arguments and issues raised by parties, regardless of their merit, based on unexplained determinations that the briefing was bad. This practice, which I call abandonment by poor presentation, is sometimes justified by practicality, by pointing to federal and local rules, by waiver and forfeiture doctrines, and by the norm of party presentation. None of these justifications holds water. I contend that the real reason judges find abandonment by poor presentation is agenda control: judges rely on the practice as a means of retaining control over how they decide cases. This unexplained, poorly justified, and subjective practice creates a number of problems for litigants and the law. I propose a simple solution: judges should stop finding abandonment by poor presentation. As common as the practice is, it actually serves little purpose and can easily be avoided.

Keywords: civil procedure, jurisprudence, pro se, legal writing, appellate procedure, waiver

Suggested Citation

Raker, Ben, The Ambiguity and Unfairness of Dismissing Bad Writing (February 1, 2020). Cleveland State Law Review, Forthcoming, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3579700

Ben Raker (Contact Author)

Independent ( email )

United States

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
93
Abstract Views
1,015
Rank
730,864
PlumX Metrics