Law Imitates Art?

To paraphrase the inimitable Oscar Wilde, law imitates art far more than art imitates law (if at all). I would bet most people think the words “art” and “law” don’t even belong in the same sentence.

Not me. I’ve always considered argument making to be more of an art than a purely logical exercise. I try to create briefs more like fine literature than dry legal formulae. I use storytelling techniques and common literary devices to show, rather than tell, a compelling point.

I want the briefs I write to be a pleasure to read—not least because I want the judge or clerk to finish it, and be in a good mood while they do. Every element helps in the art of persuasion.

But the other day I was organizing some files and I came across something that looks like actual art: a series of whirlybird sketches from my past briefs.

I’ve written before about how I use the whirlybird technique (which I learned from the inimitable legal writing guru, Bryan Garner) as an indispensable step in my streamlined writing process. Its purpose is to brainstorm all of the different arguments to be made in a particular brief. The middle circle is the overarching point in the brief (e.g., the motion court wrongly denied summary judgment) and each of the arms represents smaller points to be organized later.

Whirlybirds literally focus the swirling arguments in my mind, which helps me structure a persuasive—and enjoyable—piece of writing within the confines of a rigid legal reasoning structure.

I use the whirlybird technique for every. single. brief. So I have dozens of them in my files, each one a bit different.

I highly recommend you to use whirlybirds, too. It will result in better briefs for your clients. And you’ll get some quirky looking art!