I’ve explained elsewhere that it’s inane to use an initial capital A in a contract’s references to that contract (as in this Agreement). Go here for my December 2025 post revisiting this issue. I’ve been aware for a while that the urge to inflict an unnecessary initial capital on stuff that’s … IMPORTANT occurs outside of contracts. Namely, law-review articles … Read More
One of the joys of scholarship is that it offers plenty of opportunity for you to be a doofus. I’ve taken advantage of that over the years. It goes with the territory: if your scholarship is worth anything, it will venture into the unknown (unknown to you, at least), and the unknown is where you stumble. My most recent opportunity … Read More
File this under “Better late than never.” Way late. The second printing of A Manual of Style for Contract Drafting came out in spring 2024. If you have a copy of the first printing, you might want to note in it changes I made to the second printing. Here they are: As changes go, I think we can say they’re … Read More
Yesterday I received from longtime reader Chris Lemens an email complaining about someone opting for indemnify, hold harmless, and exonerate. It’s bad enough to have hold harmless, not to mention defend—why add exonerate! I looked into indemnify plus exonerate, and yes, it’s a thing: But inspired by Chris, I looked for other gratuitous additions to indemnify, and I found protect: … Read More
[Revised on 11 September 2025 to change the title and the text. The original title was If AI Gets One Thing Wrong, It Might Get Other Stuff Wrong.] Recently I saw on LinkedIn, in this post by Kara Dowdall, the following assessment of a contract: This assessment was generated by artificial intelligence. Or more specifically, by Claude, from Anthropic. I … Read More
The image below is from my repost of a LinkedIn post by Chris Lemens, who has been reading my stuff for as long as I have written stuff. What prompted my repost was two comments Chris added to this LinkedIn post by Nada Alnajafi: So Chris makes it explicit—the simplest way to demonstrate your value to Chris would be to … Read More
The next Drafting Clearer Contracts presentation is on 23 and 24 July 2025, from 11:00 a.m. to 2:10 p.m. Eastern Time (US). Go here for more information Why should you consider registering? Because as I explain in this 2024 blog post, you cannot be an informed consumer of contract language without consulting my book A Manual of Style for Contract … Read More
In a previous blog post (here), I offer thoughts on a law review article, Tara Chowdhury, Faith Chudkowski & Mitu Gulati, The Form Knows Best, 79 U. of Miami L. Rev. 607 (2025). The same issue of that law review contains Glenn West’s response to that article—The Form Doesn’t Know Anything: A Response to Chowdhury, Chudkowski & Gulati, 79 U. … Read More
One of my corporate partners, Thomson Reuters Asia, is contemplating something old-fashioned—having me do Drafting Clearer Contracts presentations in Hong Kong, Singapore, Jakarta, Bangkok, Manila, and Mumbai (details below). Yes—really. I offer Drafting Clearer Contracts training online, but in-person presentations can be more fun. But my contact at TR tells me that some potential participants have suggested there’s no point. … Read More
In a LinkedIn post, I challenged readers to find for me a contract that used shall be or will be in creating an autonomous definition. I wasn’t surprised that I was the only entrant in that thrilling competition. I submitted the following example: Using shall be in this context is as unhelpful as using is. That’s something I discuss in … Read More
