(If any): Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
A two-word motif that, as much as any other, belies an [[Mediocre lawyer|attorney]]’s deep existential fear of his own language. It speaks of a nervousness that, should a dependent clause bite on something that isn’t there, somehow the whole linguistic edifice will come crashing down; en edifice that can yet miraculously be affixed to the firmament with this single wipe of the [[mediocre lawyer|attorney]]’s {{tag|flannel}}. | {{pe}}A two-word motif that, as much as any other, belies an [[Mediocre lawyer|attorney]]’s deep existential fear of his own language. It speaks of a nervousness that, should a dependent clause bite on something that isn’t there, somehow the whole linguistic edifice will come crashing down; en edifice that can yet miraculously be affixed to the firmament with this single wipe of the [[mediocre lawyer|attorney]]’s {{tag|flannel}}. | ||
{{plain|each {{csaprov|Other CSA}}, [[if any]],|''any'' {{csaprov|Other CSA}}}} | {{plain|each {{csaprov|Other CSA}}, [[if any]],|''any'' {{csaprov|Other CSA}}}} | ||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
Also, like “[[or any part thereof]]”, a neat exclamation point if you want to get the last word in a round of “who’s the most anal lawyer” in the negotiation. Appending that, sole, comment to a sheaf of 5.5pt font and faxing it back an hour before the deal is due to close entitles one to a swept-back wing knee slide. | Also, like “[[or any part thereof]]”, a neat exclamation point if you want to get the last word in a round of “who’s the most anal lawyer” in the negotiation. Appending that, sole, comment to a sheaf of 5.5pt font and faxing it back an hour before the deal is due to close entitles one to a swept-back wing knee slide. | ||
{{ | {{sa}} | ||
*[[Or any part thereof]] | *[[Or any part thereof]] | ||
*[[Entire agreement]] | *[[Entire agreement]] | ||
*[[Counterparts]] | *[[Counterparts]] | ||
Revision as of 00:34, 5 January 2020
|
Towards more picturesque speech™
|
A two-word motif that, as much as any other, belies an attorney’s deep existential fear of his own language. It speaks of a nervousness that, should a dependent clause bite on something that isn’t there, somehow the whole linguistic edifice will come crashing down; en edifice that can yet miraculously be affixed to the firmament with this single wipe of the attorney’s flannel.
Why say “each Other CSA, if any,” when you mean “any Other CSA”?
See how it stymies your sentence’s natural flow, but remember: to the happy counsel it is a percussive feature; a syncopated rim-shot in the great jungle beat of the law.
Rejoice in this recently-minted example from the brow of those excellent folk at ISDA:
1(b) Scope of this Annex and the Other CSA: The only Transactions which will be relevant for the purposes of determining “Exposure” under this Annex will be the Covered Transactions specified in Paragraph 11. Each Other CSA, if any, is hereby amended such that the Transactions that will be relevant for purposes of determining “Exposure” thereunder, if any, will exclude the Covered Transactions and the Transaction constituted by this Annex. Except as provided in Paragraph 9(h), nothing in this Annex will affect the rights and obligations, if any, of either party with respect to “independent amounts” or initial margin under each Other CSA, if any, with respect to Transactions that are Covered Transactions.
In your face
Also, like “or any part thereof”, a neat exclamation point if you want to get the last word in a round of “who’s the most anal lawyer” in the negotiation. Appending that, sole, comment to a sheaf of 5.5pt font and faxing it back an hour before the deal is due to close entitles one to a swept-back wing knee slide.