Judge Richard Posner of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals used a concurring opinion to express his views against the use of legal jargon and convoluted rhetoric in court opinions. In U.S. v. Dessart, ___ F.3d _____ (2016, 2016 WL 2893267) Judge Posner concurred in a decision affirming the conviction of a Wisconsin resident Shontay Dessart. Among opinions criticized were those of the Supreme Court of the United States. That portion of his opinion is well worth reading. Judge Posner summed up saying:
“To repeat what I said at the outset, I don’t disagree with the decision to affirm the district court. I disagree merely with the rhetorical envelope in which so many judicial decisions are delivered to the reader. Judicial opinions are littered with stale, opaque, confusing jargon. There is no need for jargon, stale or fresh. Everything judges do can be explained in straightforward language – and should be.”
While Judge Posner’s criticism deals specifically with judicial decisions, it should apply to much of the legal writing by members of the Bar.