§ 5. Omit needless words.
at least four consecutive words in the following sentences, replace those words
with just one word. You may rephrase ideas and rearrange sentences, but don't
change the meaning.
- Even assuming that the fog caused injury to
Roelke, Amskills had no duty to prevent that injury because it was
idiosyncratic and Amskills could not have been expected to foresee such injury.
- At no time prior to the initial public offering did the underwriters
or any officers, directors, or employees have knowledge of any facts that would
suggest that "Palm Harbor" could not be completed on schedule and in accordance
- Beale has wholly failed to allege facts that, if true, would
establish that competition among the nation's law schools would be reduced or
that the public has been in any way injured, and this failure to allege facts
that would establish an injury to competition warrants the dismissal of her
- The Business Corporation Law does not address the ability of a New
York corporation to indemnify individuals who are not its employees.
- The court examined a number of cases and stated that there appeared
to be only a limited number of instances in which there would exist a duty to
disclose the illegal conduct of persons who, through political campaigns, seek
election to a public office.
the following sentences to make them as lean as you can without changing the
The County sent an inspector who made observations as to the condition of the
sidewalk and concluded that it was uneven.
Although a review of the caselaw reflects that there are no decisions
in the Eleventh Circuit concerning this issue, the great weight of federal
authority favors the exclusion of third parties from a Rule 35 independent
- There is caselaw for the proposition that use restrictions are not
always strictly enforced when a lease is assigned by a tenant in bankruptcy and
the property in question is not part of a shopping center.
- The court appeared to premise much of its opinion upon the argument
that consumers stand at a significant disadvantage in product-liability actions
based on ordinary negligence principles. Consequently, strict product liability
was intended to relieve the plaintiff of the burden of having to prove actual
- With respect to matters not covered by the provisions of the Uniform
Rules for the New York Court of Claims (the Uniform Rules), the Court of Claims
adheres to the rules set forth in the Civil Practice Law and Rules (the CPLR).
Ct. Cl. R. § 206.1(c). Because the Uniform Rules do not discuss disclosure
of expert witnesses, it follows that the Court of Claims' rules on the subject
are governed by the CPLR.
- There are cases that are factually similar to the present case, but
that are controlled by older statutes--i.e., the pre-1965 legislative scheme.
There are no cases that have been explicitly decided under § 1511 since
the 1965 amendment, so it is unclear what effect the amendment has on cases
that are factually similar to the present case.
Arbitration as a means of settling disputes was at first viewed by the courts
with much disfavor, but today is being used increasingly as a substitute for
litigation for the adjudication of disputes arising out of contracts.
The court rejected the defendant's argument that the headlines were not the
product of sufficient skill or effort, finding that because many of the headlines
consisted of eight or so words that imparted information, copying of the
headlines might at least in some instances constitute copyright infringement.
- To say that one who has contracted to serve for a number of years at a low salary
or at distasteful work and seeks to better his or her condition by a contract
with another party should be penalized in every case by inability to enforce
this second contract seems harsh, and under these or other extenuating
circumstances, the courts have often deemed damages to be sufficient recompense
to the injured employer without also invalidating the second
the following 193-word paragraph in fewer than 130 words without changing the
In addition to the two cases cited just above,
both (as mentioned) dealing with the California State Bar Rules of Conduct,
Rule 3-310 of the California State Bar Rules of Professional Conduct describes
circumstances in which an attorney is embroiled in the representation of adverse
interests. Rule 3-310 is concerned primarily with situations in which the
attorney's duty of loyalty and duty of confidentiality to clients are called
into question. Therefore, to date, there are no Rule 3-310 cases disqualifying
a district attorney as a result of a prosecution of an individual whom the
district attorney used or is used as a witness in another prosecution. Most
cases that involve district-attorney conflicts under Rule 3-310 consist of a
former attorney-client relationship between an accused and a district attorney.
In such cases, the rule serves to protect an accused from a prosecution in
which a district attorney unfairly benefits from information gained during the
course of his or her representation of the accused. Other Rule 3-310 cases
involve overzealous prosecutions in cases where a district attorney is for one
reason or another personally or emotionally interested in the prosecution of
a wordy sentence that you can reliably cut in half without changing the
meaning. Cut it. If you're a member of a writing group or class, bring a copy
of the before-and-after versions for each colleague.
- Exercise -