The Cost of Careless Drafting
Recent judicial action underscores a critical, often financially impactful, lesson for the legal profession: poor writing carries a tangible economic cost. A report from Law.com detailed a ruling by a Pennsylvania judge that resulted in a substantial reduction of a lawyer’s hourly rate, directly attributable to the quality of the attorney’s written submissions.
As chronicled by Shannon P. Duffy, a federal magistrate judge differentiated significantly between attorney Brian Puricelli’s oral advocacy and his written work. The judge praised Puricelli’s courtroom performance, describing it as “smooth” and “artful” in achieving a $430,000 verdict in a civil rights suit.
Two-Tiered Compensation Based on Skill
However, the assessment of the written materials yielded a starkly different conclusion. The judge found the pleadings to be “careless” and burdened with typographical errors. This lack of precision in the written submissions led the court to implement a two-tiered compensation structure for the court-awarded fees.
Specifically, the ruling dictated that the lawyer would be compensated at an hourly rate of $300 for the effective courtroom work, but the rate for work on the pleadings was dramatically halved to $150 per hour.
This decision serves as a clear financial incentive for all legal professionals to prioritize accuracy, clarity, and grammatical precision in their documents. The judiciary is not only scrutinizing the substance of legal arguments but also holding attorneys accountable for the fundamental quality of their legal drafting.
