3 TRANSITIONAL ANd NON-TRANSITIONAL MCLE CREdITS:

This course has been approved in accordance with the requirements of the New York State Continuing Legal Education Board for a maximum of 3 Transitional and Non-Transitional credit hours; 3 Skills.

This program has been approved by the Board of Continuing Legal Education of the Supreme Court of New Jersey for 3 hours of total CLE credit. Of these, 0 qualify as hours of credit for ethics/professionalism, and 0 qualify as hours of credit toward certification in civil trial law, criminal trial law, workers compensation law and/or matrimonial law

NY

CL

A-

CL

E

IN

st

It

ut

E

The ArT of WriTTen PersuAsion

Prepared in connection with a Continuing Legal Education course presented at New York County Lawyers’ Association, 14 Vesey Street, New York, NY

scheduled for March 24, 2011.

F A C u L t Y :

Herald Price Fahringer, Fahringer and DubnoErica dubno, Fahringer and Dubno

Theodore Blumberg, Esq.

Information Regarding CLE Credits and Certification The Art of Written Persuasion

Thursday, March 24, 2011, 6:00PM – 9:00 PM

The New York State CLE Board Regulations require all accredited CLE providers to provide documentation that CLE course attendees are, in fact, present during the course. Please review the following NYCLA rules for MCLE credit allocation and certificate distribution.

i. You must sign-in and note the time of arrival to receive your

course materials and receive MCLE credit. The time will be verified by the Program Assistant.

ii. You will receive your MCLE certificate as you exit the room at

the end of each day. The certificates will bear your name and will be arranged in alphabetical order on the tables directly outside the auditorium.

iv. If you arrive after the course has begun, you must sign-in and note the time of your arrival. The time will be verified by the Program Assistant. If it has been determined that you will still receive educational value by attending a portion of the program, you will receive a pro-rated CLE certificate.

v. Please note: We can only certify MCLE credit for the actual time you are in attendance. If you leave before the end of the course, you must sign-out and enter the time you are leaving. The time will be verified by the Program Assistant. If it has been determined that you received educational value from attending a portion of the program, your CLE credits will be pro-rated and the certificate will be mailed to you within one week.

vi. If you leave early and do not sign out, we will assume that you left at the midpoint of the course. If it has been determined that you received educational value from the portion of the program you attended, we will pro-rate the credits accordingly unless you can provide verification of course completion. Your certificate will be mailed to you within one week.

Thank you for choosing NYCLA as your CLE provider!

New York County Lawyers’ Association

Continuing Legal Education Institute 14 Vesey Street, New York, N.Y. 10007 • (212) 267-6646

The Art of Written Persuasion Thursday, March 24, 2011, 6:00PM – 9:00 PM

AGENDA Faculty: Erica T. Dubno, Fahringer & Dubno Herald Price Fahringer, Fahringer & Dubno

Ted Blumberg, Esq.

6:00 PM – 7:00 PM The Art of Legal Writing, Herald Price Fahringer 7:10 PM – 7:50 PM No Clarity, No Persuasion, Ted Blumberg 8:00 PM – 8:40PM Tricks of the Trade, Erica Dubno 8:50PM – 9:00PM Questions and Answers

NEW YORK COUNTY LAWYERS’ ASSOCIATION

The Art of Written Persuasion

Herald Price Fahringer, Esq. Erica T. Dubno, Esq. Fahringer & Dubno 120 East 56th Street, Suite 1150 New York, New York 10022 (212) 319-5351

March 2011

© 2011 Herald Price Fahringer/ Erica T. Dubno

Table of Contents

Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1

The Silence of Space is Persuasive .............................................................................. 2

“A Clear Statement is the Power of the Bar” ............................................................. 4

Newspaper Short............................................................................................................. 6

“These Ornaments are Useful, Because They Obtain an Easier Reception for Truth”..................................................................................... 8

The Question Presented............................................................................................... 11

Summarize the Case in Two Pages............................................................................ 12

Putting Your Faith in the Facts ................................................................................... 15

That “Miraculous Thing” -- the Opening Sentence ............................................... 16

The Use of Road Signs to Point the Way for the Court ................................................................................................................................ 19

“You’re a Woman. That’s a Man.”.................................................................. 19

“Even Victors are by Victories Undone” ...................................................... 20

The Lure of a Quotation............................................................................................... 22

Metaphors and Analogies ........................................................................................... 23

ii

A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words -- the Use of Charts, Diagrams and Visual Aids ............................................................................ 24

Exploit Key Exhibits ..................................................................................................... 27

The Ever-Continuing Debate Over Footnotes......................................................... 27

The Twang of Exclamation Marks............................................................................. 30

The Style of the Brief ................................................................................................... 31

Babe Ruth Struck Out More Times than Anyone .................................................. 33

Conclusion...................................................................................................................... 35

Introduction

A legal brief can be judged in at least two ways. Its

competency involves such things as the issues raised, the

cogency of the research, as well as the brief’s overall

logic, to mention just a few of its more prominent

capabilities. The second criterion concerns the brief’s

artistry, which includes the use of engaging language, a

good narrative strategy and, perhaps, the employment of

effective visual devices -- all of which can add

considerable force to the writing.

The methods discussed here concern the art of legal

writing. These strategies can be as simple as inserting

provocative topic headings in the text to excite the

reader’s interest, or they may involve using a one-page

introduction that tells the court what the case is about,

or the employment of charts and diagrams to help the reader

understand complicated factual situations. Of course, other

factors that contribute to the power of the brief are the

choice of words, organization of thoughts, and sentence

structure.

The techniques suggested in this article can be

utilized in any form of brief writing -- including trial

courts, appellate courts and other legal proceedings.

However, you must always confer with the specific court’s

rules to make certain the approach is permissible.

The visual methods advocated may seem to some

theatrical and controversial. But, new techniques often

appear extreme to those whose tastes have been dulled by

habit. Remember, a major premise of this article is to

encourage the use of our imaginations in finding new

methods of making our views clearer to the court.

2

The Silence of Space is Persuasive

Studies in the publishing industry have shown a high

correlation between page design and readability. Design

includes type styles, the arrangement of text on the page,

and even the paper on which the words appear. Overcrowded

pages, crammed full of words, are eye punishing and cause

claustrophobia. On the other hand, ample white space

created by clean, bright pages, with broad borders, beckons

to the reader. The silence of space is soothing.

They say that Dashiell Hammett’s publisher insisted on

extensive white space on his pages that almost equaled the

quantity of print. This stark, naked space gave added power

to Hammett’s tough, bare-knuckled prose.

Moreover, openness can add to persuasiveness by

evoking a sense of clarity. Thus, the way words sit on a

page is important. For example, justified margins are more

pleasing and appear neater than those that are uneven and

ragged. Also, consider leaving three single spaces between

paragraphs, as well as between point headings and the text

of the argument. Try not to have any paragraph exceed ten

lines. And, when possible, start a new topic or point

heading on a fresh page.

3

The font used in this article, called “Courier New,”

is clear and easy to read. Thus, by utilizing technology,

the brief’s appeal can be enriched and its reading made

more pleasant.1

Jean Paul Sartre said, “Art thrives on appearances.”

Psychologists tell us that a pleasing appearance improves

our chances of persuading others. Therefore, we dress well

and neatly when we go before a judge or jury. We all know

the importance of first impressions. A beautifully typed

and handsomely mounted brief has a distinct advantage over

a shoddy one.2

1 We are reminded of the comment, made by an appellate judge, that reading the average brief was like making a two-hour forced march in one’s own living room.

2 William S. Pfeiffer, Ph.D., author of Proposal Writing: The Art of Friendly Persuasion, Merrill Publishing Company, lists “neatness” as number one in silent persuasion.

4

“A Clear Statement is the Power of the Bar”

“A clear statement,” Daniel Webster said, “is the

power of the bar.” How true that is. The sovereign

ingredient in any form of legal writing is clarity. It is

obtained by writing that is simple and straightforward.

Your eloquence should be an elegance of simplicity.

This can be achieved by using short words, short

sentences and short paragraphs. Long words often require

translation and slow the reading down. The shorter the

word, the harder it hits. Lengthening words weakens them.

For instance, “violate” is stronger than “violation”;

“calamity” is better than “calamitous”; and “devastate” is

more powerful than “devastation.”

5

Similarly, cars collide, plaintiffs complain, lawyers

argue and judges decide. When verbs are converted into

nouns -- such as “collide” to “collision”; “complain” to

“complaint”; “argue” to “argument”; and “decide” to “deci-

sion” -- they lose a great deal of their strength. Active

words grip the reader and enliven the narrative.

Lengthy sentences are more difficult to understand and

tire the reader. The aim is to move the narrative along in

quick, simple steps, from one idea to the next. Tight,

concise sentences that follow in rapid succession quicken

the pace. Short sentences also reduce the risk of

grammatical or syntactical errors.

6

Newspaper Short

“Newspaper short” paragraphs are easier to read than

solid gray blocks of prose. Also, a new paragraph can

provide a resting place for the reader -- a spot to take a

breath. And, to get through what we have to write about,

the more resting places the better! Although each new

thought should start a new paragraph, on occasion

paragraphs can be improvised to improve readability.

Another effective literary tactic is to isolate an

important statement in a single paragraph. In Herman Wouk’s

best selling novel, The Caine Mutiny, the trial of Stephen

Maryk for mutiny formed the book’s central event. As

suspense mounts over the outcome of the trial, suddenly,

without warning, Wouk stuns the reader with:

The court debated for an hour and ten minutes. Maryk was acquitted.

Although we do not have at our disposal all of the

figurative powers of fiction, there is no reason why some

of the novelist’s skills cannot be adapted to the writing

of a powerful brief. To summarize, short words, short

sentences, and short paragraphs should be the rule.

7

“These Ornaments are Useful, Because They Obtain an Easier Reception for Truth”

Language is still the most powerful of all human

forces. It has been said that English contains more words

than any other language in the world -- over 600,000! In

addition, more than a thousand words are added to our

language every year. Thus, it is the richest of all

languages. As a consequence, there is no excuse for verbal

ineptitude. We must learn to harness this great language

and exploit its most powerful aspects.

Asked to justify his employment of fine allusions,

bright images and elegant phrases, Dr. Samuel Johnson

replied: “Why, Sir, all these ornaments are useful, because

they obtain an easier reception for truth.” So too, a

superbly written brief, rich in colorful, strong language,

can create a greater reception for the truth.

8

Of course, the recruitment of strong language must

come from the vast assemblage of words stored in a

competent dictionary and comprehensive thesaurus.3 Verbal

resourcefulness is developed from these two essential

books.

John Steinbeck’s favorite book was the Oxford English

Dictionary. And, they say that Truman Capote, as a child,

carried around a dictionary and told his aunt that he was

going to memorize it.

When finalizing a brief, replace anemic or overworked

words with synonyms that are stronger or more apt. Learn to

write with a thesaurus and dictionary at your side. Take

the time to find the right words to strengthen and animate

your arguments.

3 Webster’s New World College Dictionary (4th ed. 2000), is portable and authoritative. J.I. Rodale, The Synonym Finder, Warner Books (1986), is organized like a dictionary and easy to use.

9

Verbal prowess is an act of faith, not a trick of

grammar. The weariness that comes from gaining command of a

large vocabulary must be borne if success is to be gained.

Developing a hardy vocabulary is like keeping your body

strong. It has to be exercised every day.

A lawyer must learn how to bring the court face-to-

face with the brutal aspects of a criminal conviction or

the horror of the loss of life. Also, episodes that are

attended by alarm or dread should be dramatically

described. Through the use of words, make the court see,

hear and feel the pain and suffering endured by your

client. There is no place in our work for verbal

squeamishness. Sometimes the nature of your client’s cause

requires you to drive language past the point of endurance.

10

The Question Presented

The “Question Presented,” strategically located at the

very tip of the brief, is normally the first thing read. It

enjoys that priority because it embodies the issue to be

decided. As a consequence, shaping the question presented

achieves paramount importance. The question should fairly

capture the essence of the issues raised by the brief.

Counsel should design it to emphasize its significance and,

at the same time, invite a favorable response. Here is an

example:

Whether P.L. § 245.01 is unconstitutional because it violates the equal protection clauses of the federal and state constitutions by forbidding women, but not men, from exposing their breasts in public.4

4 People v. Santorelli, 80 N.Y.2d 875, 587 N.Y.S.2d 601 (1992). We recognize that this example comes from a criminal case. However, the art of crafting forceful questions is equally essential in criminal and civil cases.

11

Try to pare the question down to its core elements so

that it is easily understood.5 Questions that are complex,

comma-ridden and bogged down with subordinate clauses are

ineffectual. The question presented is usually prepared

last, after a full understanding of the issues and relevant

facts has been mastered.

Summarize the Case in Two Pages

A good brief announces itself on its opening pages.

Whatever distinctiveness of vision and discipline of

language the author can muster should be displayed in the

front of the brief. Today, when our courts are confronted

with staggering caseloads that have pushed our judicial

system to the edge of collapse, we must find ways to get

our points across as quickly as possible. A short

“Preliminary Statement” or “Introduction” can distill the

whole case in one or two pages.

5 The First Department’s rules require a concise statement of the “questions involved without names, dates, amounts or particulars.” 22 NYCRR § 600.10(d)(2)(ii).

12

Achieving this objective requires enormous discipline.

The writing must be clean and spare, sacrificing much of

the historical data. To be successful, it must be kept to

the bare bones. Too many summaries found in briefs tell, in

paralyzing detail, the complex process of how the case got

from the trial court to the appellate court. More often

than not, they are burdened with backward-moving details

that merely recite the sad litany of the judgment and the

deadly procedural history.6

6 If relevant, counsel must provide “a statement that proceedings on the judgment or order appealed from have been stayed pending a determination of the appeal.” 22 NYCRR § 600.10(d)(2)(iii).

13

Notice the extraordinary achievement of Thomas

Buckley’s opening lines in his review of Life for Death, by

Michael Mewshaw, which told of a homicide that occurred in

a small town in Maryland:

One morning in January 1961, fifteen-year-old Wayne Dreshback shot his adoptive parents dead in their large and pleasant home on the shores of Chesapeake Bay in Frankline Manor, Maryland, and fled in his mother’s car. His younger brother, Lee, ran sobbing to tell the neighbors. They notified the police, who arrested the boy as he talked with friends about other matters at a nearby gas station. Wayne Dreshback readily confessed to the murders, without apparent emotion. There had been trouble the night before, he told his questioners, when he returned home late from a basketball game.

In just 96 words Mr. Buckley has summarized a highly

dramatic episode by using everyday language and simple,

declaratory sentences. The events literally speak for

themselves -- generating drama and suspense. This

introductory paragraph provides an excellent model for a

preliminary statement.

14

Putting Your Faith in the Facts

The first canon of good legal writing is accuracy. In

other words, being persuasive requires mastering the

virtues of precision and documentation. Although our

writing is partisan, it is imperative that we maintain an

almost religious zeal for faithfulness to the record.

Ideally, every factual statement should be punctuated with

a record reference or exhibit number.

Only through this form of exactitude can we earn the

court’s trust. One cannot blame judges for harboring a

healthy skepticism when a lawyer never bothers to cite to

the record. A careful documentation of the facts gives the

brief its credibility. Legal prose can be scrupulously

accurate while, at the same time, absorbing and dramatic.

Therefore, devotion to detail and a passion for

documentation must be cultivated.

In writing briefs, more often than not, we must put

our faith in the facts. Thus, the skillful deployment of

the facts may have more to do with your eventual success

than the law. The facts form the foundation for everything

that follows. As a consequence, capitalize on the power of

the concrete and particular to convince the court that the

15

result you seek is reasonable. Remember, the truth is in

the details.

Most factual statements recount the trial events

chronologically, in an economical, straightforward way.

However, it may not be to your advantage to organize them

chronologically. For instance, in a criminal case, the

defendant may have been the last witness to testify.

Starting with his version of what happened may prove far

more beneficial.

There is nothing wrong with pulling from the trial

record those facts that play to the strength of your

position -- as long as the statement of facts is balanced

and fairly stated. No effort should be spared in stating

the facts as accurately as possible. Strive to establish a

high index of integrity with the court early on. What

carries the reader successfully through the facts is a

belief in their authenticity.

16

That “Miraculous Thing” -- the Opening Sentence

“Grab the reader by the lapels and shake him! That’s

what a good opening line must do,” an editor of a major

publishing company once told me. Among journalists and

authors it is generally recognized that the opening

sentence is one of the most important statements in the

composition. Eudora Welty called it a “miraculous thing.”

A harrowing opening sentence is found in P.D. James’

novel Devices and Desires, which is about a serial killer:

The Whistler’s fourth victim was his youngest, Valerie Mitchell, age fifteen years, eight months, and four days, and she died because she missed the 9:40 bus from East Haven to Cobb’s Marsh.

How could anyone put that book down after sensing the

hidden terror that echoes through that opening line? What

lures the reader in is the appalling randomness of death in

today’s urban world.

17

Even though we rarely have such dramatic events to

excite the reader, there is no reason why a tantalizing

opening line cannot be used in a brief. Consider this:

It all happened at 10:08 a.m. on November 15, 2006, when the prosecutor rose to deliver his final argument to the jury. During the next 27 minutes he unleashed a blistering attack on the Defendants. And, by the time the prosecutor was finished, any chance John Smith and Mary Martin had of obtaining a fair trial was utterly destroyed.

Another tactic is to tempt the court with a

provocative aspect of the question presented. For instance:

Why would a trial judge refuse a jury’s request to read back the testimony of a critical witness?

Here is another example:

At the outset, there are two questions this brief will tackle: Is it illegal for two agents to be in the grand jury while each is testifying? And, does that illegality require a dismissal of the indictment?

The opening line should not be merely an attention-

getting device. It must have a purpose. Therefore, a great

deal of thought must go into choosing the words that open

the brief.

18

The Use of Road Signs to Point the Way for the Court

Psychologists say that the mind absorbs better that

which appears in small parts. Thus, breaking the brief into

smaller sections, in the same way newspapers and magazines

subdivide their stories, makes it easier to read. This can

be accomplished by using subheads. Moreover, historical

reconstruction is improved by signs that tell the reader

what is to come.

A good subhead should attract interest and, at the

same time, should be informative. Like “Post-it” notes,

they can be displayed with considerable force. A quotation

from the record can catch the court’s attention and convey

the essence of what is to follow.

19

“You’re a Woman. That’s a Man.”

In People v. Santorelli, 80 N.Y.2d 875, 587 N.Y.S.2d

601 (1992), nine women bared their breasts in a park in

Rochester, New York, to publicize their grievances against

Penal Law § 245.01. That law prohibited women, but not men,

from exposing their chests in a public place. The women

were arrested, tried and convicted in the Rochester City

Court.

In the trial, one of the women testified about how she

took her top off while sunbathing. A park policeman ordered

her to put her shirt back on. She complained that a man

close by had his shirt off, and the officer replied:

“You’re a woman. That’s a man.” When the case reached the

New York Court of Appeals, that quotation from the record

was used as a striking subhead.

20

“Even Victors are by Victories Undone”

On occasion, quotations from literature can be used as

apt subheads. For instance, in a case involving an

adversary’s gross misconduct or overkill, consider John

Dryden’s “Even victors are by victories undone.” Other

quotations that might prove appropriate are “All looks

yellow to the jaundiced eye,”7 in a case of bias; “The

explanation is often worse than the blunder,”8 regarding a

cover-up; or “An open foe may prove a curse, but a

pretended friend is even worse,”9 to denounce an informant.

Benign subheads, such as “Procedural Events,” “History

of the Case,” “Analysis of the Indictment,” and “The

Testimony of Officer Brown,” are less helpful because of

their vagueness than those that are more specific. Also,

well-crafted subheads can transform your Table of Contents

into a compelling summary of the arguments.

7 Alexander Pope, Essay on Criticism, part ii.

8 Turkish proverb.

9 John Gay.

21

The Lure of a Quotation

Biblical and literary allusions are an authentic part

of our craft. When listening to a speech, sermon, or

lecture, recall how your interest is elevated when the

speaker says, “It was Franklin Delano Roosevelt who

said....” Our attention is heightened by the recognition of

the great historical figure. A quotation, if apt, gives the

argument a special force because of the stature of the

author.

If your case depends on a crucial document, consider

Carl Sandburg’s statement, “The best witness is a written

paper.” For a defendant who relied on character witnesses

and wants to emphasize the importance of a good reputation,

quote Shakespeare:

He that filches from me my good name robs me of that which not enriches him, and makes me poor indeed.10

10 William Shakespeare, Othello, act iii, sc. 3.

22

The over-aggressive act of entrapment by a law

enforcement officer may warrant reference to, “The serpent

beguiled me, and I did eat.”11 For a case in which there was

a dying declaration, consider Shakespeare’s “For they

breathe truth that breathe their words in pain.”12 And,

relating to an attorney’s conflict of interest, you may use

“No man can serve two masters.”13 By simply consulting

Bartlett’s Familiar Quotations, you can find an appropriate

quotation for almost any circumstance.

11 Genesis 3:13.

12 The Tragedy of King Richard II, act 2, sc. 1.

13 Matthew 6:24.

23

Metaphors and Analogies

A single metaphor allows the brief writer to introduce

a point rapidly and, at the same time, make it memorable.

The metaphor is a way of thinking that is available to

everyone. As one writer put it, “metaphors nudge the brain

along well worn paths.”

All great speakers have used metaphors. Abraham

Lincoln, perhaps more than any other historical figure,

used them extensively: “A house divided against itself

cannot stand.” And, Shakespeare wrote almost exclusively in

metaphors: “Now is the winter of our discontent.”14 Where

appropriate, try to find a suitable metaphor to enliven

your brief.

14 King Richard III, act 1, sc. 1.

24

A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words -- the Use of Charts, Diagrams and Visual Aids

Today, we live in a visual society. The image is

slowly, but surely, replacing the word. As a consequence,

the visual strategy of your brief warrants attention. There

are occasions when you simply cannot tell the judges

everything. Sometimes you have to show them. Studies have

established that over a 72-hour period, an audience will

remember roughly 10 percent of what it hears but will

retain 65 percent of what it sees. Therefore, finding ways

of illustrating what you want to convey is important.

A chart is an efficient way to deliver a large amount

of information quickly and effectively. It can illustrate

what cannot be easily explained. Moreover, in addition to

elevating the level of comprehension, a chart or picture

can dramatize as well. Most judges cheer any device that

will help them better understand the facts or issues.

Subjects that are difficult to describe in words

include time sequences involving significant historical

events. Their importance is better understood if presented

in a simple outline. The complexity of multiple

conspiracies charged in modern day indictments may be best

25

illustrated by a drawing that shows the separate and

unconnected circles of criminal activity.

An intricate statute can be explained through an

outline. The following three-part sentence conveys the

heart of the complex 500-word federal gambling statute:

18 U.S.C. § 1955, in essence, provides:

(1) If five or more persons conduct an illegal gambling business

(2) that has remained in continuous operation for more than 30 days or has grossed $2,000 in a single day and

(3) it violates the state law,

the persons are guilty of syndicated gambling.

A graphic presentation, to be successful, must often

go through several renditions before serving its ultimate

purpose. Simplicity is the guiding principle of any chart

or diagram. Care must be taken that such devices do not

become visual stunts or contrivances. As always, good taste

and sound judgment must preside. And, as with everything

else, a chart or diagram must be accurate.

26

Exploit Key Exhibits

If an important exhibit exists, such as a letter,

police report, statement or contract, that is helpful to

your case, seek permission to reproduce it in the body of

your brief or as an attachment. Color photographs or

reproductions can be particularly influential. No text,

however detailed and refined, has the ability of a

photograph to transform what cannot be explained in words

into distinctive images. A copy of an important statute or

rule that is central to the debate may also be included in

the brief, if the court rules permit it.15

15 Under the rules of the First Department, permission must be obtained to attach any document or chart to the brief. 22 NYCRR § 600.10(d)(1)(iii).

27

The Ever-Continuing Debate Over Footnotes

It is strange that the lowly footnote should prove to

be one of the most controversial subjects in the whole

field of brief writing. A number of prominent jurists and

authors oppose them. Some judges have actually declared

that they will not read them. Other courts forbid them.16

And, yet, other respected judges and appellate advocates

find them indispensable.

Those that denounce footnotes believe that they are

diverting. And, there is no question that a brief heavily

freighted with footnotes places an inordinate strain on the

court’s patience. The footnote most likely gained its bad

reputation from its close association with law review

articles where it sometimes appears as though whole file

drawers of information have been dumped in them. In that

setting, they may chew up three-quarters of a page, and are

unsightly. Only the bravest and most tolerant will venture

down into them.

16 For example, the Fourth Department does not permit footnotes in any brief. See 22 NYCRR § 1000.4(f)(2).

28

Despite their drawbacks, footnotes do have some

utility. If used prudently, they can strengthen a brief’s

structure. Virtually every argument carries with it some

material that is supplementary. A footnote is a convenient

place in which such collateral or extra information can be

stored.

For instance, when counsel quotes a few pertinent

lines from a statute in the body of the brief, the court

may wish to examine in a footnote the entire text of that

law. Moreover, where a salient line of testimony is quoted

in the text of the brief, out of a spirit of fairness,

adjacent lines may be housed in a footnote.

Footnotes can also be used for simplification. They

can attest to the author’s care in making sure the court is

furnished with all relevant facts or authorities. Footnotes

should be tough, to the point, and used sparingly.

29

A rule of thumb in relegating material to a footnote

is whether it is essential to the principal argument. Ask:

Can my argument succeed without the information deposited

in the footnote? If it can, then it has been properly

classified. But, whatever you do, never allow an important

argument to languish in the margins of your brief.17

17 The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has held that an issue cannot be preserved in a footnote. See United States v. Restrepo, 986 F.2d 1462 (2d Cir. 1993). Moreover, the Second Department seems to support that proposition as well. See, e.g., People v. McDaniel, 295 A.D.2d 371, 371, 743 N.Y.S.2d 532, 533 (2d Dept. 2002) (issues only addressed in various footnotes, but not in the brief, were not considered by the court on appeal).

30

The Twang of Exclamation Marks

Some lawyers so distrust their readers that they

italicize or underline every other word for emphasis. This

literary bellowing is unseemly. An outpouring of italics,

capital letters, heavy underscoring and antic punctuation

can be offensive. And, if the brief becomes too boisterous,

it will alienate the court. In fact, the First Department’s

rules provide that “[b]oldface type shall not be used

except in point headings or subheads.” 22 NYCRR

§ 600.10(d)(1)(iii).

However, there are exceptional occasions when a single

word or two deserves additional emphasis. For instance, you

may want to stress that the legislature used the word

“shall” in place of “may” in a statute to accentuate its

mandatory intent. When quoting from a case, there may be a

need to underscore the court’s use of the conjunctive

(“and”) rather than the disjunctive (“or”).

31

The Style of the Brief

Style is what holds the brief together and gives it a

special force. A whole host of factors, some large and

others small, go into making up a distinctive style. As we

have discussed here, bright sentences, tantalizing

subheads, a captivating opening line and the use of

imaginative charts, all play a significant role in creating

a unique style.

The differences in narrative styles are many. A

sensible, somber brief touches us with its understatement,

while a flamboyant, dramatic brief can excite and inspire

the reader. Prose that addresses itself quietly and

intelligently to the issues can be just as effective as one

that is rich with colorful language. However, the first

rule of style is to be true to yourself. Whatever style you

choose, it should be authentic and natural.

One final caveat: no amount of literary

accomplishment, exciting visual detail or vibrant words can

make a brief succeed that is not sound in both authority

and logic.

32

Babe Ruth Struck Out More Times than Anyone

We are the only profession where our future lies in

the past. Since our system of justice is built on

precedent, we spend much of our time looking backwards. To

some extent, we are handicapped by tradition, which can

provide the most oppressive confinement of all. Our

greatest enemy is habit. Therefore, to be inventive, we

must discard the shackles of convention.

Albert Einstein said, “imagination is more important

than knowledge.” That is true. It is not that as lawyers we

lack imagination; it is that we don’t always connect our

imagination to our work.

In 1927, when Babe Ruth established the record for

hitting more home runs than any player in either league, he

also set another record that no one reads about: He struck

out more times than anyone in the American League!

33

If there is a lesson to be learned from those

seemingly inconsistent statistics, it is if you want to be

distinctive, you have to swing for the fence. And, often,

you’ll miss -- and miss badly. But, better that, than a

life of professional mediocrity. Let your imaginations take

flight and try new techniques that will make your briefs

more effective, more compelling and, hopefully, more

successful.

The whole environment of brief writing should move

toward more experimentation and away from convention. We

can be in the forefront of this movement. Don’t be afraid

to take chances.

34

Conclusion

The privilege of briefing and arguing a case can be

one of a lawyer’s highest and most rewarding achievements.

When given that opportunity, you must make the most of it.

We hope, in some small way, this article helps you attain

that success and satisfaction.

March 2011

Herald Price Fahringer, Esq. Erica T. Dubno, Esq. Fahringer & Dubno 120 East 56th Street, Suite 1150 New York, New York 10022

(212) 319-5351

35

No Clarity, No Persuasion©

by

Theodore L. Blumberg

2

If the reader or listener understands what we, as advocates, are saying, he or she

may or may not be persuaded; persuasion depends on a complex set of circumstances

including the facts, the law, the society’s political climate, the fact finder’s predispositions,

etc. Many, even most, of those variables are normally beyond our control. But if the

reader or listener cannot understand what we’re saying the game is lost. Persuasion begins

with clarity. Here are seven tips that will add clarity to your utterance, written or spoken.

Use the active voice

As Strunk and White point out in The Elements of Style, the active voice is usually

to be preferred because it’s direct and vigorous: “I shall always remember my first visit to

Boston,” is better than “My first visit to Boston will always be remembered by me.”1

The passive voice fights the way we naturally process language. Comprehension

depends on the reader’s ability to translate words into images and ideas. By detaching

syntax from the way it is most readily understood—as a meaningful sequence of events—

the passive voice often slows comprehension.2 “The ball was thrown by the quarterback”

makes the reader work to associate the words with the things they signify and then

rearrange the sentence so it can be apprehended as a logical sequence of events. “The

quarterback threw the ball,” on the other hand, is immediately understandable. It’s clear.

1 William Strunk, Jr. & E.B. White, The Elements of Style 18 (1979). 2 See Bryan A. Garner, Legal Writing in Plain English 25 (2001).

3

The active voice orders ideas in the way in which native speakers of English most

readily comprehend them. “When you use a verb in the active voice, the subject of the

sentence does the acting. ‘John kicks the ball.’”3 In other words, “its syntax meets the

English-speaker’s expectation that the subject of a sentence will perform the action of the

verb.”4 And it just sounds better:

“Joe saw him” is strong. “He was seen by Joe” is weak. The first is short and precise; it leaves no doubt about who did what. The second is necessarily longer and it has an insipid quality: something was done by somebody to someone else . . . A style that consists of passive con- structions will sap the reader’s energy. Nobody ever quite knows what is being perpetrated by whom and on whom.5 In addition to its other virtues, the active voice makes for shorter, terser sentences.6

Anything that eliminates unnecessary words is to be valued. Unnecessary words are

clutter. The active voice, with its natural ordering of syntax and its tendency to promote

concision, is a valuable weapon in the fight for clarity.

Nevertheless, precisely because of its inherent shortcomings, the passive voice can

be useful on those occasions when we need to distance the reader from our words.

Litigators can use the passive voice to take the emotional charge out of ugly facts.

“Defendant Faber had three beers, left the bar, got into his Pathfinder and started driving

up Lexington Avenue. At 40th Street he ran a red light and slammed into Kyle Chan as the

3 Richard C. Wydick, Plain English for Lawyers 29 (1998). 4 Garner at 25. 5 William Zinsser, On Writing Well 68 (1998). 6 See also Strunk & White at 19 (“when a sentence is made stronger [through using active voice] it usually becomes shorter . . . brevity is a by-product of vigor.”); Garner at 25 (the active voice “usually requires fewer words.”).

4

boy was crossing the street on his skateboard. According to witnesses, Chan flew into the

air, crashed onto the Pathfinder’s windshield, shattering it, and fell to the ground.”

Let’s say you represent Faber. Your characterization of the facts will be quite

different. You’ll want to be passive and abstract. “Several beers were consumed at the bar

by Mr. Faber. A quarter of an hour later, at approximately 4 p.m., as the intersection of

Lexington Avenue and 40th Street was approached by his vehicle, the traffic light turned

from yellow to red. Tragically, at that moment the decedent skated into the crosswalk on

his skateboard. Unable to stop his vehicle in time, the intersection was entered by the

vehicle, and the decedent was struck by the vehicle.”

The passage is noticeably longer in the second version, and part of that length is

caused by the passive voice. Note, too, the juxtaposition of the passive voice (“as the

intersection . . . was approached by his vehicle”) with the active voice (“the traffic light

turned from yellow to red.”) The passive voice slows the action, the active speeds it up to

create the impression that the light changed abruptly. The overall effect of the second

version, though it’s admittedly heavy-handed in its use of the passive voice to illustrate the

point, is to distance the reader from the squeal of brakes, the thudding crack of steel

against flesh and bone, the sound of shattering glass, and the soft thud of a body falling to

the asphalt.

Film directors use different speeds, lenses, and angles. Lawyers have words,

words, words but words are more than enough. This, after all, is the point of rhetoric, an

5

unjustly maligned term of late7 that is at the heart of what we do as advocates. It’s not

what you say; it’s how you say it.

Avoid “Abstract Expressionism”

Concrete language conveys the sense of real people doing things—leaving property

to their children, selling a business, proving they were in Cleveland when the victim was

murdered in Astoria. Because we deal in the practical, our writing should be vivid yet

plain, clear and concise. A good test is to ask yourself, when reading something you’ve

written, if you can picture the events you’ve written about. “Anticipatory repudiation”

sounds important but I can’t conjure an image of what it means to flesh-and-blood people.

Tell me Ajax, Ltd. was habitually paying your client’s bills three to six months late, which

led your client to suspect that Ajax was about to founder, so she canceled Ajax’s contract

to prevent losing money. That I can picture.

Shun abstraction in favor of the concrete. We help people do what they need or

want to do. Our language should be plain and practical as hardware, and as quietly

handsome in its unadorned way.

Watch the Dictatorial Adverbs

Every law student learns to avoid “clearly,” as in “Clearly, the agreement was void

from the outset.” Too bad “significantly,” “incredibly,” “undoubtedly,” “erroneously,”

“fallaciously,” etc., aren’t also singled out. They occur in legal writing with annoying

7 See Brian Vickers, In Defence of Rhetoric viii, 1 (1988); Richard A. Posner, Cardozo, A Study in Reputation 54 (1990).

6

frequency, often as the first word of a sentence: “Significantly, the agreement was

modified after Barnes had signed it . . .” “Incredibly, the Government contends that the

search was justified by exigent circumstances . . .” “Undoubtedly, the rubber ducky was

dangerous when it came off the assembly line, and the manufacturer clearly knew of the

danger . . .”

Indiscriminate use of adverbs, like overindulgence in italics, insults the reader’s

intelligence.8 If your point is significant or fallacious, clear or incredible, there is no

reason to shout. Adverbiage, as I call it, creates resistance in the reader to the very

conclusion you would like her to draw. This is particularly true of judges, who wade

through brief after brief in which lazy lawyers, rather than making the points plain through

careful writing, take the adverbial shortcut and sabotage themselves. Allowing readers to

conclude from the undisputed facts that your point is incredible or significant is more

powerful than trying to force it upon them by auctorial fiat.

Most of us don't like to be told what to think or feel. This goes double for lawyers

and judges, who are trained to read with a skeptical eye and varying degrees of scrutiny.

Go over your writing with a pen at hand and circle the adverbs. Determine whether you’re

taking adverbial shortcuts because you haven’t bothered to make the point through careful

writing, or whether the adverbs are useful. When in doubt, make significant points

significant through content and context and let the reader discover the significance on his

own.

8 See Effective Appellate Advocacy at 148.

7

Can you please be briefer, please?

Think of every brief you file as an infliction.

Judges don't read our briefs because they look interesting or have flashy covers

with imaginative illustrations of contracts being sundered, marriages destroyed by

adulterous trysts or patents being infringed by unscrupulous upstarts. There is no author

photo on the back cover with a brief bio: “Janet Hastings, a partner at Childs, Reznor and

Calabash, lives in Alexandria, Virginia with her husband Tom and their sons Peter and

Raoul. A recipient of the National Advocacy Foundation’s award for her groundbreaking

work on federal jurisdiction, this is her fifth brief on the Commerce Clause.” Judges read

our briefs (at least we hope they read them) because they have to.

In short, write short. Never use fewer words than necessary but never use more.

Your reader has an attention span of about 30 seconds.9 Edit ruthlessly. Most first drafts

can be cut by 50 percent without losing any information.10 Cut the underemployed words,

superfluous citations, and needlessly repeated ideas. If you still produce a long document,

you’ll know every word is earning its keep.

One good way to edit is by putting in brackets every word and phrase that’s likely

expendable.11 Re-read the piece and skip the stuff in brackets. If it still makes sense,

jettison the bracketed material. Repeat the process. More can almost always be cut. Pay

close attention to long sentences (any sentence of thirty or more words). They often form

9 Zinsser at 9. 10 Id. at 17. 11 Id. at 17-18.

8

verbal labyrinths the reader will get lost in. When you’re in the initial stages of writing,

write to your heart’s content. Get it all on the page. Every idea, no matter how odd or

useless it might seem. First drafts, as Hemingway once put it, are always garbage.

(Though he didn’t use the word “garbage.”) Then start reordering and trimming. When

you have your second or third draft, start cutting and keep cutting.

One of the chief causes of wordiness is redundancy, particularly when it takes the

form of pleonasm or tautology, the needless use of two or more words to say the same

thing (“baby puppies” “wet water” “terrible tragedy”). Legal writing is full of what Bryan

Garner calls “doublets” and “triplets.” 12 “Cease and desist.” “Indemnify and hold

harmless.” A common triplet is “give, devise, and bequeath.” These should be removed

from our forms, our writing, and our sensibility.

Another bad habit that contributes nothing but verbosity is “The Superfluous Title.”

You open a letter from a lawyer. Centered and in bold, underscored for good measure, it

says:

Re: Roberts v. Private Reserve, Inc., Case no. 8799/06 (Shirer, J.)

Then the opening sentence: “I am writing with regard to the above-referenced action . . . .”

What else would the letter be about? The “Re:” line gave it away. It would be better to get

on with it: After the salutation (“Dear Mrs. Tanzanite”) jump in: “The court has

scheduled a preliminary conference for May 1 at 2 p.m.”

I call it the Superfluous Title because it’s nearly always seen in briefs. A lawyer

files a brief with the title “Plaintiff’s Memorandum of Law In Support of Her Motion for

12 Bryan A. Garner, The Redbook, A Manual on Legal Style (2002).

9

Sanctions Because of Defendant’s Spoliation of Evidence.” Nine times out of ten the

brief’s opening sentence will be something like “Plaintiff Sheila Squeri, through her

counsel, respectfully submits this Memorandum of Law in support of her motion for

sanctions due to defendant Michaels’s spoliation of evidence.” A wordy, stultifying,

pointless way to make a first impression.

Let the title do its job. Use your first sentence to grab the reader’s attention:

“When Michael Smith, the defendant’s Director of Compliance, received the Complaint,

which was filed on December 4, 2006, he pulled Ms. Squeri’s personnel file, took out her

memoranda to the company’s President, in which she complained that Smith was sexually

harassing her, and shredded them.”

Here’s Justice Scalia’s opening sentence from a watershed decision: “Petitioner

Michael Crawford stabbed a man who allegedly tried to rape his wife, Sylvia.”13 No

procedural jabber or throat clearing. Scalia gets to it. That opening sentence tells us what

we need to know about the background. Its concision reassures me that the decision will

get to the points and stick to them. I know that I’m in the hands of a masterful stylist.

From the opening sentence, my interest is engaged and the writer’s credibility is

established.

Make your points clearly and as quickly as possible. Strive to be brief. Robert

Frost’s advice to poets (or maybe it was Gertrude Stein to Hemingway) is also good for

lawyers: “Concentrate, concentrate, concentrate.”

13 Crawford v. Wash., 124 S.Ct. 1354, 1356 (2004).

10

Use footnotes sparingly, if at all

Footnotes intrude and distract. They’re a phone that won’t stop ringing.

I mean speaking footnotes, the ones that create digressive blocks of text at the

bottom of the page. Using footnotes purely for citations, on the other hand, is an excellent

idea. Bryan Garner suggests relegating every citation to a footnote to avoid distracting

islands of citations that interrupt the text.14 Whenever you feel tempted to use a speaking

footnote, ask yourself if the information is indispensable. If the answer is yes, put it in the

text. If no, cut it. If the information falls somewhere between useless and essential; if it’s

truly helpful to the reader but just doesn’t belong in the text, then consider relegating it to a

footnote.

Once is usually enough

Good writing makes every word count. Here’s a paragraph from Orwell’s essay

Politics and the English Language. See if you can find extraneous words.

Most people who bother about the matter at all would admit that the English language is in a bad way, but it is generally assumed that we cannot by conscious action do anything about it. Our civilization is decadent and our language—so the argument runs—must inevitably share in the general collapse. It follows that any struggle against the abuse of language is a sentimental archaism, like preferring candles to electric light or hansom cabs to aeroplanes. Underneath this lies the half-conscious belief that language is a natural growth and not an instrument which we shape for our own purposes. 15

14 Bryan A. Garner, The Winning Brief 114-19 (1999). See also William Glaberson, Legal Citations on Trial In Innovation v. Tradition, N.Y. Times, July 8, 2001, at A1. 15 George Orwell, Politics and the English Language, in A Collection of Essays 156 (Harvest, 1981).

11

Here’s a passage from a factual statement in a brief written by a law firm that ranks

as one of the top ten firms in the country. I’ve bracketed unnecessary words and changed

the names of the parties:

In June 2002, HYZ terminated Smith [from his employment as a senior auditor and assistant vice-president] based on the deterioration of his job performance over [a period of] several years. In November 2004, Smith commenced an arbitration before the New York Stock Exchange seeking [both] compensatory and punitive damages based on allegations that he was [wrongfully] discharged because he [had] detected money laundering in HYZ’s Chicago office. Smith also sought compensation for consulting services he provided to HYZ after his termination. On March 1, 2005 [in connection with the arbitration] Smith and HYZ entered into a confidentiality agreement concerning any documents from HYZ [that were] in Smith’s possession, [as well as discovery material exchanged in the course of the arbitration] . . . . The passage is full of redundancy. Smith was terminated. Leaving aside the question

whether “discharged” or “fired” would be a better verb, we know he was terminated from

his employment. We know what deteriorated was his job performance as opposed to, say,

his acumen playing spoons. If he seeks compensatory and punitive damages, both is

unnecessary. Cutting “wrongfully” eliminates a needless word and sharpens the issue: the

reader will be prompted to wonder “Is it against the law to fire someone who finds out his

employer is committing a crime?”

In Tristram Shandy Laurence Sterne satirizes legal writing by including a contract

brimming with tautologies. Shandy was published in 1760, but its parody of legal writing

looks like contracts and forms that cross my desk every week. The editor of my edition

12

states, “The . . . contract parodies legal language that says the same thing as many different

ways as possible in an attempt to keep slippery life under control . . . .”16

Well, that’s the point. Slippery life is so slippery that trying to control it with

language—let alone redundant language—is a fool’s errand. Look at the thousands of

lawsuits over documents that were full of doublets and triplets and all the boilerplate that

has failed the test of time.

Think—and write—positive

Our minds have a hard time comprehending something that isn’t. Linguists and

psychologists posit that the unconscious is incapable of grasping the negative; the negative

part of the statement remains unprocessed.17 Doctors versed in hypnotherapy frequently

give patients directives loaded with double-negatives. Because the unconscious can’t

grasp them, the conscious mind has to untangle the meaning, which distracts the patient

while suggestions directed to the unconscious can be embedded in the doctor’s speech.18

So if you’re a doctor trying to induce a light trance, double-negatives are not entirely

unhelpful if you don’t want the patient not to stop focusing on what you aren’t offering to

his conscious mind.

If you’re a lawyer, double-negatives are verbal algebra. But they’re often used in

legal writing. Here’s a quote from a recent decision I found while leafing through the Law

16 Laurence Sterne, Tristram Shandy 27-28 n.4 (W.W. Norton & Co., 1980). 17 See, e.g. Milton H. Erickson, M.D. & Ernest L. Rossi, Hypnotherapy, An Exploratory Casebook 153 (1992). 18 Id.

13

Journal: “The government has not contested that a claim of ineffective assistance of

counsel is not procedurally barred by the failure to raise it on direct appeal, nor could it.”19

Why not “A claim of ineffective assistance of counsel may be raised in a habeas petition

whether or not it was raised on direct appeal”?

Use a double-negative and you give the reader a puzzle. If the reader wanted a

puzzle she’d likely peruse math texts, crosswords, or murder mysteries set in places with

names like Derbyshire. Change double-negatives to positive statements. Instead of saying

swimming is not prohibited, tell us it’s allowed. If settlement is not unlikely, say it’s likely

or probable. Even single-negatives should be made into positive statements. “At

Ramsdale Ltd., office romances are not encouraged” is nice and coy. Who needs nice and

coy in an employee handbook? “At Ramsdale Ltd., office romances are discouraged.”

Sometimes one has to grit the teeth, gather the courage, and make a positive

statement in a simple declarative sentence.

Conclusion

I had dinner with a close friend who’s also a client. We talked about a legal

question he’d hired me to answer. After researching the issue I sent him an opinion letter.

I asked if he’d read it. He had. I asked if he understood it and said my question wasn’t

meant as an insult but some of the issues were tough. He said it was the only letter from a

lawyer he’s ever read all the way through—and understood. I was flattered. He’s dealt

with his share of attorneys. I asked, “Why don’t you read letters from lawyers?”

19 Graziose v. United States, 2004 WL 1194590, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. June 1, 2004).

14

He said, “They’re impossible to decipher. Lawyers don’t write for people. They

write for each other.”

He’s right.

And if you write clear, durable prose you’ll likely be viewed as a heretic. At many

firms new associates who write well despite law school often find that their work is revised

(that is, corrupted) until it’s got the ring of legalese. Prose that would pass muster in The

Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, or The New Yorker would likely be viewed as

crude and undignified by many a lawyer, who would want to gild it with jargon and a big

dose of incomprehensibility. Of course this is self-defeating. Legalese disguises sloppy

thinking and fools not only the client but the lawyer who wrote it into believing he’s said

something of substance. Only in the legal profession is clear and plain English considered

subversive. The best legal writing should be as good as the best journalism and literature.

And it can be. Write plain English. Commit to clarity.

Then when someone says you “don’t write like a lawyer” give me a call. I’ll bring

the champagne.

Faculty Biographies

Erica T. Dubno

Erica T. Dubno has practiced law with Herald Price Fahringer for more than 15 years. She represents individuals and corporations in all stages of criminal and civil proceedings, including white-collar criminal defense, free speech matters and administrative hearings. Together with Herald Fahringer, she has drafted criminal and civil appeals in the federal Courts of Appeals for the Second, Third, Fourth, Eighth and Ninth Circuits, as well as the Supreme Court of the United States and New York’s Court of Appeals.

Ms. Dubno graduated with honors from Oberlin College. Thereafter, she worked for Shearman & Sterling LLP, before attending Brooklyn Law School, from which she earned a J.D. in 1994. Ms. Dubno joined the firm of Lipsitz Green Fahringer Roll Salisbury & Cambria LLP at its New York City office in 1995, and subsequently became a member of Fahringer & Dubno.

She teaches Continuing Legal Education classes for the New York County Lawyers’ Association and the Rockland County Bar Association. In addition, Ms. Dubno lectures at Monroe College Summer Law for High School Students program and has been a guest speaker at Fordham University. As a faculty member of Lawline.com, Ms. Dubno presented classes on “The First Amendment: Defamation on the Internet;” “The Use of Demonstrative Evidence to Achieve a Successful Outcome;” “The Basics of Legal Writing;” and “Sentencing: Making the Best of a Bad Situation.” Ms. Dubno has co-authored a number of published articles and book reviews with Herald Price Fahringer.

Ms. Dubno is admitted to the Bars of New York and New Jersey. She is also admitted to practice before the Supreme Court of the United States, the federal Courts of Appeals for the Second, Third, Fourth, Eighth, Ninth and Tenth Circuits, and the District Courts for the Southern, Eastern and Northern Districts of New York, as well as the District of New Jersey.

Herald Price Fahringer

Herald Price Fahringer has tried cases in 27 states and has

briefed and/or argued more than 400 appeals, including 15 in the

United States Supreme Court. His Law Day speech, given in 1998,

was voted the best in the nation by the American Bar

Association. In 1999, he received the Outstanding Practitioner

Award from the Criminal Justice Section of the New York State

Bar Association. In 1995, he received the New York State

Association of Criminal Defense Lawyer’s Thurgood Marshall Award

for outstanding contribution to the criminal law. And, in 2008,

he received the New York Criminal Bar Association’s award for

professional excellence.

Mr. Fahringer is a Fellow of the American College of Trial

Lawyers, the American Academy of Appellate Lawyers, the

International Society of Barristers and the American Board of

Criminal Lawyers. He is the former General Counsel to the First

Amendment Lawyers Association. He has published more than 50

articles in law review journals and other legal publications

covering a wide range of subjects. Herald Fahringer is a member

of Fahringer & Dubno / Herald Price Fahringer PLLC.