As lawyers who write appellate briefs in the 21st century, we must pay attention to how our briefs will be read by the judges who are deciding the case.
Fewer judges read our briefs on paper, reading them instead on a computer screen or tablet device. Electronic filing has made it more difficult to continue the old habit of reading from paper. Judges who like to read briefs on paper must generally print them from our electronic filings. Increasingly, our effectiveness as lawyers depends on how wisely and how well we understand and take advantage of the revolutionary changes that are now occurring.
Time to Discuss Transition from Paper to Digital is Now
The transition from paper filing to electronic filing of court documents has raised serious questions about how paper texts differ from digital texts. Many people think that difficulties they experience in reading and retaining text from a screen, as opposed to their experiences when they read from a paper text, are somehow personal to them, their preferences or their habits. In fact, the issues that raised by reading important legal materials only from a screen are universal and significant. In subtle ways that have largely escaped broader discussion, there are real issues with reading from a screen that cannot be satisfactorily explained by a suggestion that the reader is from the wrong generation or is simply inexperienced with the format.
These issues can be viewed as second generation electronic filing issues common to all courts that require submissions filed by electronic means. These issues are particularly timely in Florida because the state courts are just completing the transition from paper to electronic filing of court documents in the trial and appellate courts, and the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals still requires paper filing of briefs and appendices along with the electronic filing of those documents. Therefore, this is a logical time to focus on the more subtle consequences of the shift to electronic filing.
Differences in Digital and Paper
Personal experience and recent research suggest that there may be differences in comprehension and retention when information is obtained from reading an electronic, rather than a paper, text. Abigail Sellen, from Microsoft Research Cambridge, England, suggests that “[t]he implicit feel of where you are in a physical book turns out to be more important than we realized . . . . Only when you get an e-book do you start to miss it.”
Maryanne Wolf, a developmental psychologist and cognitive scientist of Tufts University, explains that: “There is physicality in reading, maybe even more than we want to think about as we lurch into digital reading — as we move forward perhaps with too little reflection.”
Research suggests that something may be lost when we read a text without holding a paper document in our hands. Is something lost when a judge reads our argument only from an electronic screen? Reading a legal document from a screen is different from reading it from a paper text. That difference requires a conscious adaptation in the way we design and draft our filings and our court rules. How the technology we use changes the way we read is an important question for lawyers and judges, as we rush headlong into a new era of electronic filing.
As Marshall McLuhan famously said in 1962: “Any technology tends to create a new human environment . . . . Technological environments are not merely passive containers of people but are active processes that reshape people and other technologies alike.” As digital texts and technologies become more pervasive, are we still reading as attentively and as thoroughly as we did when we read from paper texts?
In addition, full comprehension for accurate decision-making may depend on making notes related to a particular text during the act of reading it. During the era of paper submissions, counsel were required to file additional copies of their briefs so each appellate judge would have his or her own copy to mark up with notes or underlining while they were reading. Questions have arisen concerning whether and how the shift from paper to electronic filing may impact a judge’s ability to make notes that closely associated with the text of the briefs.
Top Priority in Digital is Improving Comprehension and Retention
Because there are real differences between paper and electronic texts, and because, as advocates, the results we achieve are often tied to the effectiveness of our communication, we must focus on ways that we can maximize the opportunities provided by this new type of interaction with text, and minimize any problems with it. Approaches that can improve the navigability and impact of electronic filings, and lead to improved comprehension and retention from them, must be a top priority.
How to Approach Briefing in The ‘Post-Revolutionary’ Environment
Robert Dubose, in Legal Writing for the Rewired Brain: Persuading Readers in a Paperless World, suggests that when appellate advocates switch from paper briefs to electronic briefs, they should rethink legal writing. This may cause lawyers to abandon long-winded text, long paragraphs within that text and lengthy argument development in favor of briefs that look more like web pages, with highly structured text that is easy to scan and read rapidly. Dubose makes many suggestions for electronic briefs, including using:
- outlines to show the overall structure
- frequent headings to remind the reader of his or her place in the argument
- well-crafted topic sentences that persuasively summarize the argument included in the paragraph
- lists or bullet points to delineate examples or support for the argument
We expand and develop more ideas and suggestions for improving brief writing in this new environment in our recent article in the American Bar Association’s Law Practice Today electronic publication.
Search Blog
Follow Us
Recent Posts
- Construction Contractors Should Prepare for the Effects of Potential New Tariffs on Construction Material Prices and Availability
- Federal Court Strikes Down the DOL’s Increased Salary Thresholds for Executive, Administrative, Professional, And Highly Compensated Employee Overtime Exemptions
- Breaking News: FinCEN Postpones Beneficial Ownership Reporting Deadlines for Companies Impacted by Recent Major Storms
- What You Need to Know About the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Build America TIFIA Loan
- Breaking News: Federal Judge Blocks Nationwide Implementation of the FTC’s New Rule Banning Noncompete Agreements
- September 4th is Almost Here: How Employers Can Prepare for the Upcoming Effective Date of the FTC’s Non-Compete Rule
- Florida’s New Statutory Home Warranty: What Home Builders Need to Know
- Orange County Proposes Temporary Suspension Ordinance on New Development Applications
- Raising the Roof: The U.S. Department of Labor Announces Rule Raising Salary Thresholds for Overtime Exemptions
- New Guidelines Anticipated Following HHS’s Health Cybersecurity Concept Paper
Popular Categories
- Construction
- Construction Litigation
- Employment and Labor
- Litigation (Labor & Employment)
- Construction
- Business of Real Estate
- Landlord-Tenant
- Department of Labor
- Real Estate Law
- Competition
- Cybersecurity
- Intellectual Property
- Salary
- Appeals
- Contracts
- Litigation
- Trusts and Estates
- Data Security
- Business
- Supreme Court
- Development/Land Use
- Public Private Partnership
- IP Litigation
- Technology
- Privacy
- Patents
- Litigation (Appellate)
- Business
- Public Finance
- Regulatory Compliance
- Florida Government Contracts
- Foreclosures
- Trademark
- Contracting
- Health Care
- Financial Institutions
- Compliance
- Estate planning
- International Dispute Resolution
- Florida Public Contracts
- Government Contracting
- Government Contracts
- Property Tax
- Government
- Lease
- Conveyances
- Appellate Blog
- Patent Office
- Insurance
- Wealth planning
- Federal Government Contracting
- Florida Bid Protests
- Public Contracts
- Infringement
- Cyber fraud
- Proposal Writing
- Public Bidding
- GAO
- Bid Protest
- International Arbitration and Litigation
- Americans with Disabilities Act
- Arbitration
- International
- Restrictive Covenants
- Grant Writing
- Copyright
- Promissory Notes
- Title
- Small Business
- Florida Procurement
- Public procurement
- PTAB
- General Liability
- Technology
- Consumer Privacy
- International Arbitration
- Liens and encumbrances
- Liens
- Creditor's Rights
- Bidding
- Attorneys' Fees
- Inter Partes Review
- Consumer Protection
- Regulation
- Venue
- Power Generation
- Contracting
- Government Vendor
- State Government Contracts
- Ad Valorem Assessments
- Florida Administrative Law
- Attorneys' Fees
- Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure
- Bankruptcy
- Florida Public Procurement
- Russia-Related Arbitration
- Mortgages
- Record on Appeal
- FINRA
- Rehearing
- Eviction
- Loan guaranties
- Patents - Assignor Estoppel
- Statute of limitations
- Statute of repose
- Dispute Resolution
- Liens
- Damages
- Maritime
- Briefing
- Request for Proposal
- Patents - Obviousness
- Commercial Brokerage
- Trade Secrets
- Bid Writing
- Florida Bidding Strategies
- Renewal
- Attorneys' Fees
- Florida County Lands
- Florida Economic Incentive Packages
- Jury Instructions
- Design Professionals
- Stay
- Certiorari
- email hacking
- Forum Selection
- Offers of Judgment
- Prevailing Party
- Settlements
- Assignment of Contract
- Assignment of Proceeds
- Lis Pendens
- Appellate Jurisdiction - Deadlines
- Banking
- Designer Liability
- Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure
- Finality
- Fintech
- Marketing/Advertising
- Unlicensed Contracting
- Evidence
- Evidence
- Expert
- Expert Science
- Federal Supply Schedule
- Florida Public Records Law
- Mootness
- Preservation
- Socio-Economic Programs
- Sunshine Law
- Veteran Owned Business
- Homestead
- Partnerships and LLCs
- Standing
Editors
- Of Counsel
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Associate
- Partner
- Partner
- Associate
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Senior Associate
- Partner
- Associate
- Partner
- Senior Associate
- Partner
- Associate
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
- Of Counsel
- Senior Associate
- Partner
- Associate
- Partner
- Partner
- Associate
- Partner
- Partner
- Partner
Archives
- December 2024
- November 2024
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- February 2024
- November 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- October 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016