As my Legal Writing students reminded me the other day, it’s one thing to know a word when reading. It’s another to figure out how to use it correctly in writing.
In this case, the troublesome legal English word is “precedent.” Below are a few sample sentences from my students’ writing with attempts to use the word:
- “According to the precedent case, the police officer’s supervisor issued a ticket to a person who threw a candy wrapper on the ground.”
- “The precedent shows that coffee poured on the ground is not litter while a candy wrapper is litter.”
- “The precedent is the police officer’s supervisor has issued a ticket to a person who threw a candy wrapper on the ground.”
- “One precedent is that a person who threw a candy wrapper on the ground was issued a littering ticket.”
Grammatically, these sentences are fine. Yet, as a native English speaker and teacher of legal writing, the use of “precedent” sounds decidedly off. But why? What you might find yourself saying is, “It just doesn’t sound right.” Yet that feels like an insufficient explanation given that the fundamental ability a non-native English speaker lacks is the ability to know what sounds right.
So what is a legal writing professor of LLM students to do? Continue reading