Charles Dickens\u27 Novels in the Courts

This article examines written judicial opinions that contain references to novels by Charles Dickens (1812-1870), the British novelist and social critic who is widely regarded as one of the greatest writers of the Victorian Age. Americans today still read Dickens’ best-known novels, and the U.S. Supreme Court and the lower federal and state courts have cited and quoted from them

What Great Writers Can Teach Lawyers and Judges: Precise, Concise, Simple and Clear

Despite some imperfections across disciplines, advice from well-known fiction and non-fiction writers can serve lawyers and judges well because law, in its essence, is a literary profession heavily dependent on the written word. There are only two types of writing - good writing and bad writing. As poet (and Massachusetts Bar member) Archibald MacLeish recognized, good legal writing is simply good writing about a legal subject. Lawyers would be better off, said MacLeish, if they stopped thinking of the language of the law as a different language and realized that the art of writing for legal purposes is in no way distinguishable from the art of writing for any other purpose

Plagiarism in Lawyers\u27 Advocacy: Imposing Discipline for Conduct Prejudicial to the Administration of Justice

In a recent high-profile prosecution, the federal district court criticized defense counsel for filing a post-trial brief that copied passages from previously published material without attribution. The court followed other recent decisions that, since about 2000, have chastised lawyers for briefs marked by plagiarism. Some lawyers had copied passages from earlier judicial opinions that rest in the public domain, and some lawyers (as in the recent prosecution) had copied passages from private sources that are subject to the copyright laws. In either event, courts have labeled lawyers’ plagiarism “reprehensible,” “intolerable,” “completely unacceptable,” and “unprofessional.

References to Television Programming in Judicial Opinions and Lawyers’ Advocacy

“Think of the poor judge who is reading . . . hundreds and hundreds of these briefs,” says Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. “Liven their life up just a little bit . . . with something interesting.” Lawyers can “liven up” their briefs with references to television shows generally known to Americans who have grown up watching the small screen. After discussing television’s pervasive effect on American culture since the early 1950s, this Article surveys the array of television references that appear in federal and state judicial opinions. In cases with no claims or defenses concerning the television industry, judges often help explain substantive or procedural points with references to themes and fictional characters from well-known dramas or comedies. The courts’ use of television references invites advocates to use these cultural markers in the briefs they submit