What the first-year LRLW course can can't do

Every lawyer, law professor, and legal-writing teacher should read Douglas Laycock's article:

Douglas Laycock, Why the First-year Legal-writing Course Cannot Do Much about Bad Legal Writing, 1 Scribes J. of Legal Writing 83 (1990).

His point: when lawyers complain about poor writing by young lawyers, they are usually referring to style, rhetorical force, and essentials of grammar and punctuation; but the first-year legal-writing course does not teach those things at all or very much--and can't.

The first-year legal-writing course does not prepare students to do the kind of writing lawyers do. That is not its purpose. Its purpose is to acquaint students with the basics of written legal analysis, the conventions of legal discourse, and the form of some basic legal documents. Those are big jobs all by themselves, as any legal-writing teacher will tell you.

To expect the first-year legal-writing course to prepare students to do the kind of writing lawyers do is like expecting the civil procedure course to prepare students to try a federal case. It's like expecting the contracts course to prepare students to draft contracts and close deals.