In this 2014 blog post and this 2023 blog post, I mull over which is the better choice, individual or human being. Here’s what I say in the 2014 post about individual and person: I find natural person too legalistic to use in contracts. Using human being instead isn’t a sober option. I use individual. Garner’s Dictionary of Legal Usage says that “individual is best confined to contexts in which … Read More
In this 2020 blog post, I say that no one takes me on in the marketplace of ideas. Nothing has changed in the years since. I’ll spare you any editorializing. Instead, I offer you … a contest! I invite you to critique my article Eliminating the Phrase Represents and Warrants from Contracts, 16 Tennessee Journal of Business Law 203 (2015). I’ll send … Read More
Hot on the heels of my post on material efforts, here are two contract extracts that feature the phrase unreasonable efforts. The first (immediately below) is redundantly tacked on to a reasonable efforts obligation. And generally, using a reasonable efforts standard is more efficient than deploying the double negative involved in expressing that someone doesn’t have to do something unreasonable. … Read More
Excuse me for interrupting the nonstop fixation on AI, but I feel compelled to report another front in the efforts wars. It took me 20+ years to get around to it, but on a whim I searched on EDGAR for obligations to use material efforts. They don’t occur much, but it’s a thing. Here are five examples: I’m particularly fond … Read More
A reader sent me a link to this Times article on “weasel words.” I’ve already done battle with weasel words. See this 2012 post about likely and probable, which features two court opinions expressing differing notions on how likely relates to probable. And here’s some of what MSCD has to say: Even if you assume that it’s clear what likely … Read More
Here’s an instance of the phrase greater or lesser: Unobjectionable, right? Here’s another instance: Unobjectionable too, no? Here’s another example of the same sort: That’s unobjectionable too, right? Actually, the second and third examples don’t work. The first example refers to something getting bigger or smaller. So in that context, greater means “bigger” and lesser means “smaller”. By contrast, the … Read More
Let’s fill a gap in A Manual of Style for Contract Drafting! MSDC has something to say about mutually agree, and it has something to say generally about reasonably modifying a verb, but it doesn’t say anything about reasonably agree. I’m here to tell you that if you’re contemplating using reasonably agree in a contract, you might want to hold … Read More
The relentless Kevin Toll (see this blog post) has proposed that I ditch thereafter. Here are some of his proposed changes to Adams Contracts templates: Regarding afterward, Garner’s Modern English Usage 37 (5th ed. 2022) says, “Afterwards (= later) is often changed to afterward by American editors, though in popular usage the two forms are used interchangeably. Across World Englishes, … Read More
I plucked from the SEC’s EDGAR system, largely at random, an asset purchase agreement filed earlier this month. It was drafted by a big law firm [updated 11 January 2025: the firm in question is Allen & Overy], and it contained, along with the usual dysfunction, some glitches that caught my eye. In particular, here are the different efforts (and … Read More
Yesterday I saw this tweet by Kaitlyn Fydenkevez: I have spent a large portion of my day fighting over whether a particular contract should refer to itself as “this Form” or “this form”. @AdamsDrafting, what have you done? What we’re seeing here is what happens when you eat the fruit of the contract-drafting tree of knowledge—you look around with new … Read More
