![]() ![]() If not, use it comfortably knowing that thousands of judges and lawyers have done so before. ![]() Ĭonsider carefully whether "and/or" creates the potential for confusion or error as you intend to use it. See also Robbins, "And/Or" and the Proper Use of Legal Language, _ Md. that is never an independently sufficient reason for granting a new trial. In this order, the use of "and/or" leaves open the possibility that "in the interest of justice and fairness" is the sole rationale. Here, the trial court's four articulated reasons, including "in the interest of justice and fairness," are all preceded or followed by "and/or." Many courts and critics have denounced the use of "and/or" in legal writing. The Texas Supreme Court explained in In re United Scaffolding, Inc., 377 S.W.3d 685, 689-90 (Tex. Brief searching reveals thousands of judicial decisions using "and/or" without the walls of the courthouse tumbling down. E.g., Do Not Use "and/or" in Legal Writing at (collecting many critics). It is surely surprising to many that use of "and/or" is now condemned with vigor and vehemence. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |