Noah Feldman, Columnist

Lawyers Can Write Shorter, But It'll Cost Them

Federal courts are lowering the maximum length of appellate briefs and not everyone is happy about it.

October 7, 2016 at 1:54 PM UTC

Noah Feldman is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist. A professor of law at Harvard University, he is author, most recently, of “To Be a Jew Today: A New Guide to God, Israel, and the Jewish People."

That's a lot of paper.
Photographer: Dimas Ardian/Bloomberg

Provide news feedback or report an error

Site feedback:

Take our Survey

It may not seem that significant to a civilian. But a rule-change that will lower the maximum length of appellate briefs from 14,000 words to 13,000 words1475845978195, effective Dec. 1, is getting plenty of pushback from the lawyers who specialize in federal appeals. To the readers, a 7 percent reduction in legalese is definitely good news. Yet to the writers, it could mean a 7 percent reduction in billable hours -- and in revenue. That’s no small matter. The economics of appellate law are already pretty tenuous from the standpoint of managing partners who employ appellate specialists, often against their will.

Before getting to the money, let’s start with what appellate lawyers like to call “the merits” -- that is, who’s right and who’s wrong. Is it a good idea to cut the briefs’ length?