Capitalization For Practitioners: Consistency Counts!

As a legal writing professor, one of my goals is to inspire my students to strive for excellence in their work. But this month, as I thought about what to say in this column, it was my students who inspired me. In late February, they turned in their rough drafts of their final assignment, and as I was reading, I noticed that their capitalization of certain words was wildly inconsistent, not only from draft to draft, but even from one page of a draft to the next.

In my students’ defense, we hadn’t spent much class time on capitalization, because in the big scheme of things, it is not as critical to good legal writing as content, structure, and readability. And at the draft stage, I wasn’t expecting perfection, and I wasn’t “grading” their capitalization. I’m sure that in the final briefs, which sit in a huge pile on my side table at home, most of the capitalization inconsistencies have been corrected.

However, “small things” like capitalization do affect our readers’ overall impression of our work. To a perfectionist (which many of our legal readers are), inconsistent capitalization may suggest at best that we are careless and at worst that we are not knowledgeable about capitalization rules. That, in turn, may suggest carelessness or lack of knowledge in our analysis, which affects the reader’s view of our credibility.

It seemed likely that if my students need some help with the rules of capitalization in legal documents, my colleagues who read this column might also need some help. Fortunately, my go-to source for legal writing style, the Aspen Handbook for Legal Writers, has a great summary of capitalization rules for some of the most common words used by legal writers.[i] I’ve “summarized the summary” below, drawing some examples from the Handbook and adding a few of my own.

Act