Though egregious examples abound, much legal writing is not terrible. But it can easily be improved. Let’s take this example:

* Before

On April 26, 2001, claimant-appellant, Howard Ward, injured his right knee in the course of and arising from his employment with appellee Coin Co., a self-insured employer. Coin certified the claim for “right knee sprain” but refused to certify the conditions of medial meniscus tear and chondromalacia of the right knee. On Nov. 28, 2001, a district hearing officer allowed the knee sprain but disallowed the latter conditions “by direct causation or aggravation.” The order was affirmed by a staff hearing officer on Aug. 16, 2001, and further appeal was refused by the Industrial Commission.

Ward appealed to the Bovine County Court of Common Pleas pursuant to R.C. 4123.512. In his complaint, Ward sought to participate in the Workers’ Compensation Fund for medial meniscus tear and chondromalacia of the right knee. However, a month before the scheduled trial date of June 12, 2003, Ward filed a motion to amend the complaint to add the conditions of aggravation of preexisting degenerative joint disease and aggravation of preexisting osteoarthritis. The trial court granted the motion over Coin’s objection and rescheduled the trial for Sept. 25, 2003. Ward then dismissed his chondromalacia claim, and the cause proceeded to trial by jury on the remaining claims.

None of us would be surprised to see these two paragraphs in the middle of a brief or opinion. But look at this revision:

* After

Appellant Howard Ward injured his knee while working for appellee Coin Co., a self-insured employer. Coin certified the claim for “right knee sprain” but refused to certify the conditions of medial meniscus tear and chondromalacia of the right knee. A district hearing officer allowed the knee sprain but disallowed the latter conditions “by direct causation or aggravation.” A staff hearing officer affirmed the order. The Industrial Commission refused further appeal.

Ward appealed to the Bovine County Common Pleas Court.1 He sought to participate in the Workers’ Compensation Fund for medial meniscus tear and chondromalacia of the right knee. A month before the scheduled trial date, Ward moved to amend his complaint to add the conditions of aggravation of preexisting degenerative joint disease and aggravation of preexisting osteoarthritis. The trial court granted the motion over Coin’s objection. Ward then dismissed his chondromalacia claim. The case was tried by a jury on the remaining claims.

The length has been cut from 202 words to 154, a 24 percent reduction. This was done by (1) taking out non-essential dates – remember that when you put in an exact date you are signaling to the reader that the exact date is important, although few are; (2) taking out legalisms such as in the course of and arising from – this was not even an issue in the case; (3) shortening the sentences; (4) making the passive voice active; and (5) taking the jumble of letters and numbers out of the paragraph by using footnotes.

While we might differ over some of the changes – for instance the last two sentences could easily be one – I think we would all agree that the second version is much better than the first.

All of the changes decrease clutter and increase readability. Because of the medical terms, the readability score can never go very high for this piece. But it did go from 25 to 38, a 52 percent increase. And the words per sentence went from 22 to 15. The grade level made the most difference – from grade 14.3 (mid-college) to 10.7 (mid-high school) on the Flesch readability ease score.

[1] See R.C. 4123.512