怎樣提高英文法律文書（主要是Research Memo）的寫作水平？

01-24

中國法本，正在美國讀J.D.
上了Legal Writing課，參加了Moot Court , 也正在Journal做editor 。但是感覺寫起Memo來還是很吃力。和美國同學的速度和質量都相差甚遠。請問有沒有什麼的好的訓練方法呢？前輩們是怎麼跨過這個門檻的呢？
謝謝！

在學了很多所謂「高級」表述和「萬能」句式以後，回過頭來看法律寫作這個問題，才愈發意識到Scalia大法官說得兩點很重要：

1. 介紹一個案件事實時，要像在雞尾酒會上對著剛認識的人寒暄，聊自己最近工作如何那樣；

2. 在引用法律時，要像一個第一次準備出庭的年輕律師向旁邊身經百戰的合伙人介紹自己等一下的戰術一樣。

也就是說，談事實要「引人入勝」，三言兩語抓住最有意思的核心要點，

而談法律要心懷敬畏，每一點要經得起推敲。

當年在Wisconsin Supreme Court做intern，每天寫的memo/ bench memo/opinion至少在10頁+，兩個星期後覺得writing skills飛速提升。一開始寫的東西都是track changes和comments，後來就很少了。

現在有很長一段時間不寫，又倒退了。這玩意，除了靠練別無他途。加油啊小夥子。

渾水創始人關於寫作的6個問題可以借鑒

原文是英文部分翻譯是中文部分英語水平有限有能力的同學可以直接看英文

THE
TOP SIX LEGAL WRITING MISTAKES THAT CHINESE ATTORNEYS COMMONLY MAKE

中國律師常犯的六大法律寫作錯誤

Carson Block, www.legalwritingshanghai.com

卡森?布洛克[mint1] , &< http://www.legalwritingshanghai.com/ &>

Common
Mistake #1: Unclear organization

常見錯誤一 結構不清

In general, legal writing should adhere to
the following organizational structure in each paragraph (although there are times
when you would deviate somewhat from this formula):

一般來說,法律寫作應該遵守以下的組織結構,每個段落(儘管有些時候你會偏離這個公式):

· Conclusion (in blue)

· Rule (in yellow)

· Proof (in green)

·Application (in
purple)

·結論(藍色)

·規則(黃色)

·證明(綠色)

·應用程序(紫色)

Here is an example of a properly written
「CRPA」 paragraph:

這裡是如何正確寫「CRPA」 paragraph的例子:

A court will likely hold that because Mr.
Davis is a public figure, Ms. Jones is not liable for defaming him. For a public figure to prevail in a defamation
claim, he must show that the defendant published the defamatory statement with
「actual malice.」 New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964). The Sullivan
Court defined actual malice as publishing a statement 「...with reckless
disregard of whether it is false or not.」 Sullivan, 376 U.S. at 280. The
failure to check alleged facts that potentially embarrass the subject of the
publication does not constitute actual malice. In Sullivan, the
defendant was a newspaper that published a prominently displayed paid
advertisement accusing government officials in Montgomery, Alabama of civil
rights violations. Some of the accusations in the advertisement were
shown in court to be untrue. Even though the newspaper did not check the facts
alleged in the advertisement, the court held that the publication did not meet
the actual malice requirement.

It is undisputed that
as a famous athlete, Mr. Davis is a public figure. After obtaining the
information that Mr. Davis finds objectionable, Ms. Jones corroborated it with
various sources, including Mr. Davis himself.

Thus, although
Sullivan holds that a reporter need not check such facts, Ms. Jones made a good
faith effort to do so. Therefore, Mr. Davis』 status as a public figure likely
ensures that he will not be able to show actual malice.

這部分其實是這樣的但是知乎沒有顏色

法院將判令Ms. Jones不構成誹謗罪，由於Mr. Davis是一個公眾人物。對於一個公眾人物想要獲得「誹謗索賠」必須證明被告發表了「實際惡意的誹謗性言論」。New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254
(1964). The Sullivan Court對「實際惡意誹謗性言論」做出如下解釋「肆意捏造事實」Sullivan, 376 U.S. at 280. 由於未能核實所謂的事實,尷尬的出版物並不構成實際惡意[微軟用戶2] 。 Sullivan案中，被告為一家報紙，其發表了一則指責「Montgomery, Alabama政府官員民權違規」的付費廣告。在法庭上，廣告中的部分指責被認定為虛假的。儘管報紙沒有核實廣告中所發表的事實，但是法院認定該報紙的行為不符合「肆意捏造事實」的認定標準。

Mr. Davis作為一名著名運動員無疑一名公眾人物。在得知「誹謗信息」後，Mr. Davis發現異議在於Ms. Jones可以證實信息的來源為Mr.
Davis本人。

因此，儘管Sulliva法官認為發布者不需要核實事實，並且Ms. Jones顯得誠實守信。但Mr. Davis作為一個公眾人物不能證明其造成「實際惡意」。

Furthermore, the structure of
the entire document needs to be organized properly. Attorneys should write
documents so that a reader who is in a rush can quickly understand the main
issues and conclusions. Writing substantive introductory paragraphs to documents
and sections is about 60% of this process. Relatively few Chinese attorneys
structure their documents in this way.

此外,整個文檔的結構需要組織得當。律師出具的文檔應方便讀者快速理解主要問題和結論。實質性的介紹性文檔寫作段落和段落中大約60%的這個過程。相比之下，很少有中國律師採用這種結構的文檔。

Common Mistake #2: Non-identification of the key legal issues

常見錯誤二 不能識別爭議焦點

Chinese attorneys often bury
important legal issues deep inside the text of their documents. Because readers
need to see the key information quickly and clearly, burying key issues within
the document is a major error. For examples of how this error commonly occurs,
see the markup of the sample memorandum by

中國律師經常將爭議焦點「深藏」於浩瀚[微軟用戶3] 的文檔中。讀者需要快速明確的獲得關鍵信息，所以「深藏」爭議焦點是一個嚴重的錯誤。舉以下文檔作為常見的「深藏」爭議焦點的例子。

by clicking on the following link: http://legalwritingshanghai.com/wp-
content/uploads/2009/02/apollo_memo_markup.pdf.

Common Mistake #3: Giving a 「data dump」 of the law without regard to
relevance

常見錯誤三 不考慮法律「數據源」的關聯性

Attorneys should limit direct
quotations of the law (and other source materials) to those that are absolutely
necessary. Any quoted material should be wholly and directly relevant to the
point the attorney is making. Rather than quoting material in a 「data dump」
fashion, the attorney can save the reader』s time by summarizing the applicable
provisions.

律師絕對有必要限制直接引用法條（和其他原始資料）。任何引用素材應完全並直接的與律師的訴訟策略相匹配。引用「數據源」並非一種時尚，律師應當總結使用條款以節省讀者的時間。

Below is a typical data dump
in a legal memorandum:

下面是一個典型的「數據源」在法律備忘錄中的使用:

According to Article 3 of the
「Provisions
on the Establishment of Investment Companies by Foreign Investors」
promulgated by the Ministry of Commerce on February 13, 2004, a foreign
investor who intends to establish an investment company shall meet the
following conditions:

根據商務部於2004年2月13日發布的「Provisions on the
Establishment of Investment Companies by Foreign Investors」第三條規定，[mint4] 外國投資者建立一個投資公司應當符合下列條件:

（a）It is in good credit status and has necessary economic strength to
establish an investment company, with its total amount of assets for the year
immediately preceding the

application being not less than 400 million USD, and it has established a FIE
(or FIEs) inside the territory of China, with the amount of registered capital
it has actually contributed being above 10 million USD, and it has three or
more planned projects; or, alternatively, it is in good credit status and has
necessary economic strength to establish an investment company, and it has
established 10 or more foreign-funded enterprises inside the territory of
China, with the amount of registered capital it has actually contributed being
more than 30 million USD;

（一）
1.外國投資者資信良好，擁有舉辦投資性公司所必需的經濟實力，申請前一年該投資者的資產總額不低於四億美元，且該投資者在中國境內已設立了外商投資企業，其實際繳付的註冊資本的出資額超過一千萬美元，並有三個以上擬投資項目的項目建議書已獲得批准，或者；2.外國投資者資信良好，擁有舉辦投資性公司所必需的經濟實力，該投資者在中國境內已設立了十個以上從事生產或基礎設施建設的外商投資企業，其實際繳付的註冊資本的出資額超過三千萬美元；

(b)
If it establishes an investment company by means of joint venture, the Chinese
investor shall be in good credit status and have necessary economic strength to
establish an investment company, with its total amount of assets for the year
immediately preceding the application being no less than RMB 100 million RMB;
and

（二）
以合資方式設立投資性公司的，中國投資者應為資信良好，擁有舉辦投資性公司所必需的經濟實力，申請前一年該投資者的資產總額不低於一億元人民幣；

(c)Instead, this could have been written in
the following way (depending on the circumstances of the client). (Keep in mind
the proper organization described in Point 1 above, but note that there is
little analysis in the below example because in this instance the regulation is
quite clear):

（三）
投資性公司的註冊資本不低於三千萬美元。

申請設立投資性公司的外國投資者應為一家外國的公司、企業或經濟組織，若外國投資者為兩個以上的，其中應至少有一名佔大股權的外國投資者符合本條第一款第（一）項的規定。

ClientCo qualifies to
establish a statutory investment company (「SIC」). Article 3 of the 「Provisions
on the Establishment of Investment Companies by Foreign Investors」 promulgated
by the Ministry of Commerce on February 13, 2004 provides that a foreign investor
having (a) at least USD $400 million in assets as of the prior calendar year
end, (b) contributed at least USD $10 million in registered capital to FIEs in
China, and (c) at least three planned investments in China, may establish a SIC
provided that the SIC』s registered capital is at least USD $30 million. Based
on the information ClientCo has provided, it meets each of these three
requirements, and thus may establish a SIC.

ClientCo具備設立投資公司(「SIC」)的主體資格。依據商務部於2004年2月13日發布的「Provisions
on the Establishment of Investment Companies by Foreign Investors」第三條規定：「 (a) 本會計年度前外國投資者至少擁有4億美元資產；（b) 其實際繳付的外商投資企業註冊資本的出資額超過一千萬美元； (c)至少三個擬計劃投資在中國。SIC的註冊資本至少3000萬美元，可以建立一個提供碳化硅。」基於ClientCo提供的信息滿足以上註冊條件，因此可投資設立SIC公司。

Common
Mistake #4: Run-on sentences

常見錯誤四 流水賬

Good writing requires concise, tight
sentences that generally make only one point. If you see a lot of commas or
「and」 in a sentence, you should investigate to see

The registered capital of the investment
company shall not be less than 30 million USD.

whether you can break it up.

寫作要求用簡潔、緊湊的句子表達一個觀點。如果你在句子里看到很多「，」或者「」，那麼你應該探究一下究竟

投資公司的註冊資本不得少於3000萬美元。

你能否打亂以上句子？

Here is an example of a run-on sentence:

下面是一個流水賬的例子：

Ms. Wang』s claim that Mr. Zhu
hit her with his car is incorrect because Mr. Zhu was at his office at the
time, which his co-workers can corroborate, and his wife had the car at the
time, and he rarely ever drives himself.

王女士主張是朱太太開車撞她的，因為當時朱先生在辦公室辦公，他的同事可以證實，並且朱先生很少自己開車。[mint5]

Here is one way of fixing the sentence:

不流水賬的方式:

There are three reasons why Ms. Wang』s
claim that Mr. Zhu hit her with his car is incorrect. First, Mr. Zhu was at his
office at the time, which his co-workers can corroborate. Second, Mr. Zhu』s
wife had the car at the time of the accident. Finally, Mr. Zhu rarely ever
drives himself.

關於王女士主張的並非朱先生開車撞她有一下三點理由：首先，朱先生當時在辦公室；其次，事發當時是朱太太開的車；最後，朱先生很少自己開車。

Common Mistake #5: Use of passive voice

常見錯誤五 被動語態

Although there are times when
attorneys should use passive voice, most writing should use active voice.
「Passive voice」 writing is when the subject is the recipient of the action (the
verb). For example:

雖然有些時候需要使用被動語態，但是律師應該盡量使用主動語態。「被動語態」有接受action的含義。例如：

he street was crossed by Xiao
Ming.

馬路被小明穿過。

「Active voice」 writing is when
the subject is the actor. For example:

「主動語態」的主體是actor。例如：

Xiao Ming crossed the street.

小明穿過馬路。

One of the biggest problems
with passive voice is that it tends to make the writer omit the actor (e.g.,
「The street was crossed」). Because legal writing is the art of writing
precisely, we want to clearly know. Moreover, we usually prioritize the actor
over the action. Thus, we use active voice.

被動語態的最大問題在於筆者傾向於忽略了actor（e.g.,「路被穿過」）。恰到好處的法律寫作藝術在於表達「who the actor is」。此外,我們通常將actor優先於action考慮。因此,要盡量使用主動語態。

Common Mistake #6: Overuse of the word

常見錯誤六 過度使用「relevant」 （有關）

Chinese attorneys love to
write and say the word 「relevant.」「Relevant」 is an important word, but Chinese
attorneys often use it unnecessarily. Because we want to eliminate unnecessary
words, attorneys should use it only in limited circumstances. Here is one of my
favorite examples of its overuse:

「According to the relevant
regulations...」

中國律師喜歡寫和說「有關」。「有關」是一個重要的詞,但中國律師經常不必要的使用它。律師向想省略不必要的話僅能在特定語境下使用「有關」。例如：

「根據有關規定……」

In the above example,
「relevant」 is both unnecessary and somewhat humorous. Why? Because nobody would
ever care about what irrelevant regulations hold!

在上面的示例中,「有關」既不必要，又顯得滑稽。為什麼?因為沒有人會在乎什麼無關緊要的規定!

Sent from Evernote

禁止轉載

[mint1]簡介一下這個是「渾水」的創始人

[微軟用戶2]可以參照我國關於誹謗的構成：民事刑事

[微軟用戶3]深有感悟：包括發表辯論意見的過程中，一大篇一大篇的，最後還得法官幫忙總結（這地方表揚一下法官）

[mint4]應該是《關於舉辦外商投資性公司的規定》（商務部令〔2004〕第22號，以下簡稱「22號令」）這個，但是發布日期怎麼不對？

[mint5]怎樣顯得很流水賬，我不是很會翻譯

1、隨手找幾個你覺得不錯的memo，把脈絡整理出來，以後按這個套路寫。

2、背誦大量例句和表達方式。

3、多寫。

4、如有條件，找牛人給你改並講解。

如果有時間，摘抄大量句子和表達方式，按一定規則排序後存起來（方便檢索），沒事就翻出來看看。