Legal mark-up: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
(Redirected page to Mark-up)
Tag: New redirect
 
(8 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{a|negotiation|}}A [[Mediocre lawyer|lawyer’s]] stock-in-trade, her currency, the oxygen that gives her daily routine meaning and her role physical substance. For what is she if not her comments?
#redirect[[mark-up]]
 
''[[Ego sum id quod dico]]''  - ''[[Si quaeris causidicum loqui, locutus est tibi]]''
 
If you ask a lawyer for [[comments]], she will give you some, whether your draft needed them or not. This is a founding crux of the [[anal paradox]]. For a mark-up proves you have read an agreement, considered its content, and justified your fee. It's in her nature. It is what she does.
 
No text is immune from adjustment, and if your only objective is to show you've read it, slipping in a harmless “[[for the avoidance of doubt]]”, a “[[without limitation]]”, an “[[as the case may be]]” or — though on a fraught negotiation this is pushing it, be warned — an “[[(if any)]]” is a professionally satisfying but yet non-invasive way of achieving that.
 
No such ornamentation is [[calculated]] to improve the elegance of the text, of course. To do that you will need to disentangle some convoluted grammar — perhaps by deleting an [[as the case may be]]<ref> be careful not to ''add'' the same thing n one place and ''delete'' it in another: this will be seen as hostile action.</ref>. This will be seen as enemy action, especially if your edits are not directed at ''some'' legal content, however spurious.
 
{{plainenglish}}
 
{{dramatis personae}}
{{ref}}

Latest revision as of 10:46, 14 October 2022

Redirect to:

Retrieved from "https://jollycontrarian.com/index.php?title=Legal_mark-up&oldid=68295"