FALL 2009
Licensing Intellectual Property
 
Course No.:  9200-705 (&805)-801
Course IDs:  85285, 85286
Tu 6:30 - 9:30 p.m.
Room W-215
Professor Jay Dratler, Jr.
Room 231D (IP Alcove)
(330) 972-7972
jdratler@gmail.com
Copyright © 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2008, 2009   Jay Dratler, Jr.   For permission, see CMI.
 


Mark-up Abbreviations

Introduction

General Abbreviations

Abbreviations for Citations



Introduction
    Over the course of nearly two decades of marking up students' papers, I have developed a list of abbreviations for common problems.  This list serves three purposes.  First, it promotes efficiency.  It allows me to refer to complex explanations simply by writing a few letters or, at most, a word or two.
    Second, the list promotes equity in giving feedback.  Each abbreviation comes with a detailed explanation of the corresponding problem and often examples of how to fix it.  This single explanation helps insure that you will have no more or less feedback than other students whose writing has similar problems, whatever my level of interest or fatigue in marking up your paper.
    Third, and most important, the list promotes learning.  I am a firm believer in learning by doing.  Accordingly, I don't fix problems but simply point them out and leave the fixing to you.  The explanations in this list are designed to insure that you have the information you need to fix each problem, should you decide to undertake this essential step in your learning process.
    CAUTION:  Not every abbreviation applies to every kind of writing.  This list, however, is designed to be comprehensive.  So if you read the list in the hope of avoiding common problems, please be aware that not every abbreviation may apply to the type of writing you are doing.  For example, the very first abbreviation, A/D (analogy or distinction), applies more to office memos, legal briefs, and third-year papers than to letters to clients.  You are not likely to engage in detailed factual analogies or distinctions in letters to clients (although occasions for doing so sometimes may arise).

General Abbreviations
A/D Analogy or distinction.  A portion of the writing begs for analogizing or distinguishing other cases, whether precedents or hypotheticals.  Try to compare the facts at issue explicitly with the facts of other cases and show, step by step, why the rationales of those cases, as applied to the factual similarities or differences, would require the same or a different result.  Making good analogies and distinctions is one of the most important skills in legal reasoning.
AS "As such" is used incorrectly.  This phrase should have a specific noun as an antecedent and otherwise should not be used.  Correct: "A lawyer is not only a zealous advocate, but an officer of the court.  As such, she has a duty of candor and honesty."  Here the word "such" has a direct antecedent, "officer."
AUD Audience.  The approach is inappropriate for your audience.  Who your audience is should affect a number of characteristics of your writing, including the level of detail (see DET), the level of abstraction, as distinguished from a practical approach (see PRAC), and the tone of your writing (see TONE).  A high level of detail and abstraction may be appropriate in briefs and office memos, as well as (sometimes) in letters to opposing counsel.  It is usually not appropriate in letters to clients (unless the "client" is an in-house attorney).  Most clients normally want conclusions and solutions, not lengthy analysis.  Detail and abstraction also may be inappropriate in letters to opposing counsel because it may give away more of your strategy and tactics than is wise at the time.
AWK Awkward phrasing, although not grammatically incorrect.  Most common: words with slightly inapposite meaning, too many words to express a particular concept, or awkward (but not technically incorrect) grammatical construction.
BROAD A statement is too broad for the relevant facts, holding, dictum or other support for it.  Review the support or authority for the statement carefully and consider conditions, qualifications, or limitations that would make it correct.  Avoiding overstatement is an important skill in legal writing.  (See also QUAL)
CL "Clearly," "clear," or "obvious."  These words, as well as words to the same effect, are a dead giveaway for writer's insecurity.  If something is really clear, you can show it with specific reasoning or argument.  If it is not, no amount of bare insistence will make it so.  Good lawyers look for words like this in their opponents' papers because these words indicate where arguments are weak, incomplete, or undeveloped.
COLL Colloquialism.  Contractions (such as "they'll," "don't," "won't," "isn't") and colloquial expressions ("plaintiff was screwed", "the nitty gritty", etc.) are not used in formal writing and are usually not used in writing to clients.  More formal or conventional phrasing should be substituted.  Colloquialisms can be used in writing to a client whom you know personally and well. (See AUD)
COMP Complex sentence structure.  A sentence or clause is too long, complicated in form, or convoluted in meaning.  You should break it up into shorter, clearer parts.  If necessary, the order and priority of thoughts should be reconsidered.
COMPAR Comparative.  A comparative form of an adjective is grammatically incorrect (e.g., "more better," "lastest"), the comparative form used does not exist ("legitimatest"), or the sentence does not make clear what is being compared with what.
CONC? Conclusion?  A conclusion to a paragraph, section, or line of reasoning is missing, unclear, or incomplete.  (See also MS)
CONJ Conjunction.  A conjunction appears to be missing or inappropriate.  Common errors are substituting "but" for "and" or "since" for "although."  This is often a problem of logic and meaning, not just grammar.
CONS? Consequences?  The consequences of an argument, holding, result, conclusion or action should be explored.  The consequences may be practical, social, business, or economic.  For example, in a letter to a client, you may want to state the consequences of a certain course of action (e.g., the client might be sued and lose).  In argumentative documents, you may want to show how the decision maker's failure to decide an issue as you would like may have negative social or economic consequences.  (See also PRAC).
DET Detail is excessive.  This comment occurs most often when a description of the facts of a case is excessively detailed and lengthy, or when irrelevant details obscure legally relevant facts.  Summarize, condense, and select legally relevant facts for discussion.  Focus, focus, focus!

The appropriate level of detail also depends upon your audience (see AUD).  Generally speaking, detailed analysis is more appropriate in briefs and office memos than in letters to your client or opposing counsel.
DP Dangling participle: a participial form of a verb has no matching subject, or what appears to be the subject does not match or make sense. Incorrect: "Turning to the second element of the tort, causation was inadequately proved."  It is not "causation" that turns, but "we" or the writer; therefore the participle "turning" has no real subject in the sentence and is dangling.  Dangling participles can be corrected by adding a subject or rewriting the sentence.  Correct: "Turning to the second element of the tort, we see [or "I note," or "the court ruled"] that causation was inadequately proved."  OR "With regard to the second element of the tort, causation was lacking."
E Ellipsis has (or appears to have) incorrect form.  An ellipsis should: (1) have spaces between the three or four periods; (2) use four periods (with intervening spaces) when the material omitted includes the end of a sentence; and (3) put the first of four periods immediately adjacent to the preceding text (without a space) when—and only when—a sentence in the quoted material ended there.
ECON Economics.  Does the statement noted make economic sense?  Does it cohere with currently accepted economic theory or not?  What economic consequences does it implicate (see also CONS, PRAC)?
EMPH Emphasis (boldface, underlining or italics).  The emphasis in quoted material was not designated as present in the original, added by the quoter, or omitted by the quoter, respectively, by using the signals "(emphasis in original)," "(emphasis added)," or "(emphasis omitted)."
FACTS The facts needed to understand or appreciate a case, judicial decision, argument or hypothetical are missing, incomplete, inaccurate, or misleadingly stated.  The most common errors are failing to state any facts at all, failing to select the most important and relevant facts, and failing to indicate, by context or verbal signals, how the key facts relate to a result, holding, or rationale.  (This problem occurs most often in argumentative writing.)
FRAG [Sentence] fragment.  There is part of a sentence, but not enough to make a complete one. (See also IS, NAS)
FT Functional terms.  Use functional (substantive) terms instead of procedural terms.  Functional terms are those like "employee," "employer," "infringer," "intellectual property owner," "injured party" and "tortfeasor," which describe a party's functional or substantive role in a case or situation.  As compared to procedural terms like "plaintiff," "defendant," "appellant," and "appellee," functional terms make it easier to understand what is going on.  Using functional terms instead of procedural terms nearly always reduces the possibility of confusion, increases the vividness of writing and aids understanding.  The only general exception is in discussing procedural issues.
GARB Garbled sentence, phrase, or clause.  Something is missing, misplaced, or distorted, but what and how is not clear.  Rethink and/or rewrite.
GRAM Grammatical error (nonspecific).  Common errors include: (1) disagreement in number between noun and pronoun (using "they" for singular nouns), and (2) confusing "like" and "as" ("like" is a preposition, "as" is an adverb).
HEAD Heading is missing, incomplete, inappropriate for the text that follows, or used as if it were part of the text.  Headings should always be thought of as separate from the text; the text and its logical flow should be complete without them.  (This comment is primarily applicable to argumentative and analytical writing, especially briefs and third-year papers, although it can apply to letters when they have substantive headings.)
HIST? History.  The history of a law, legislation, policy, decision, or series of decisions requires deeper or better explanation.  (See also LEGHIST)  (This comment is most applicable to argumentative and analytical writing, such as briefs and third-year papers.)
HYPERB Hyperbole, or gross exaggeration.  Exaggeration should be avoided: (1) in legal analysis because it impairs objectivity and (2) in legal advocacy because it impairs credibility.
IC Inconsistent.  This signal may refer to ideas, words, or grammatical form.  A common error is inconsistency in style, for example, using singular and plural words indiscriminately for the same thing.  A more important error is using inconsistent words for the same thing, such as "employee" and "plaintiff" alternately for the same party.  Unlike creative writing (in which you may have been taught to use the Thesaurus and vary your use of words), legal writing requires consistency.  The goal is not variety and versatility, but straightforward and unmistakable communication.  This objective requires picking the best term for a single concept and sticking with it throughout a document.
INN Innuendo.  Legal writing should, insofar as possible, avoid innuendo or implication.  Instead, it should state all assumptions, facts, steps in reasoning, and conclusions explicitly.  It should leave little or nothing to chance or to the reader's intelligence or imagination.  Try to state directly and explicitly what you are implying.
IS Incomplete sentence.  Sentence does not have both subject and verb or appears broken in the middle.
ISSUE? A legal issue is not stated, misstated, unclear, or obscure.  The most common error is confusing a legal issue with the result in a case.  Incorrect: "The legal issue is whether the plaintiff should be granted a preliminary injunction."  Sometimes a legal issue and the result are two sides of the same coin, but in most cases the legal issue is narrower.  This is true much more often today than in the past, because lawyers today "shotgun" their arguments, raising multiple issues in each case.  Correct: "One legal issue was whether the plaintiff had made a sufficient showing of irreparable harm to justify the grant of a preliminary injunction."
LEGHIST Legislative history.  What bearing does the legislative history (congressional committee reports, conference reports, floor debates, legislative hearings, etc.) of a statute or a treaty have on the point in question?
LO Logical order.  The sentences, phrases, clauses or thoughts appear to be out of logical order.  Inserted numbers or letters (if present) designate parts or concepts that need re-ordering.
LR Logical relationship.  The logical relationship between/among concepts, ideas, sentences, or clauses is unclear, because it is not stated, not stated explicitly enough, or not stated correctly.  This is a more general signal than LO (logical order) or NS (non-sequitur), and it may indicate more subtle problems.
MOOD Mood error in verb form.  Although rare in English, the subjunctive or conditional mood is still required in certain cases and permitted in others.  It is required, for example, in "that" clauses expressing a requirement, request, order or mandate.  Correct: "The court asked that the defendant appear [subjunctive mood] promptly."  OR "The court asked the defendant to appear promptly."  Incorrect: "The court asked that the defendant appears [indicative mood] promptly."  The subjunctive mood is also required in "lest" clauses.  Correct: "We must weigh our answer carefully, lest we be [subjunctive mood; not "are"] hasty."

In this respect British English differs from American English; the British use the subjunctive only in the last example, not the first two.
MAN More analysis needed.  The portion of text marked raises a question, begins an assessment or analysis, or suggests a line of reasoning or argument that begs for further development and analysis.  The same text also may invite or require further study and research.  This signal is most commonly used when the facts and results or rationales of a case invite comparison (analogy or distinction) with those of other cases (See A/D).  It is not, however, limited to case law or to argumentative writing.

For first-draft papers, this is one of the most important signals in this memo, for it identifies the nuggets of analysis that, if refined and purified, may serve as key points or conceptual foci in a later draft.  Whether they so serve, however, is up to you.  This legend is only a suggestion; it requires thoughtful evaluation before responding.
MM Mixed modes in analyzing case law.  There are generally four levels of legal analysis of case law: (1) reporting the facts and result in a case, (2) reporting the rationale for the decision, (3) analyzing the effect of the decision on "the law" as a whole, and (4) analyzing the result and effect on the law critically, for example, in terms of logic, consistency with precedent, and social and economic consequences.  Although there are exceptions, the best writing normally does not mix these separate modes of analysis in the same sentence or paragraph.  Keeping them separate normally avoids confusion.  Common errors are failing to indicate by context or signals ("the court reasoned," "it seems") which mode of analysis is intended and whether the statements reflect your own analysis or the court's.
MS Missing step or steps.  One or more steps in the logical reasoning or progression of the argument appear to have been omitted.
MW Missing word or words.  A word or words appear to have been omitted, leaving the sentence, clause or phrase incomplete, ungrammatical, or nonsensical.  This signal is usually inserted at the place where words appear to be missing.
NARROW A statement seems too narrow or timid.  Review the relevant facts or source of legal authority and consider broadening the statement by eliminating or changing conditions, qualifications, or limitations.  (Compare BROAD, QUAL)
NAS Not a sentence, usually for reasons other than simple incompleteness (see FRAG, IS).  This signal may reflect missing words, typographical errors, or just garbling.
NEC? Necessary?  Asks whether particular words, phrases, clauses, or sentences are necessary to the writing or the argument, or are surplus or redundant.  Consider deleting or condensing the material marked.
NO Number.  A number is used incorrectly in text.  A common error is beginning a sentence with a number in numerical form.  Although sentences may begin with numbers in spelled-out form, numbers in numerical form are not used to begin sentences.  The second most common error is failing to spell out numbers less than thirty.  (See SP)
NOR Error in using "nor."  Courts often begin sentences with "nor," but this is correct only when the previous sentence states a clear negative.  Otherwise "nor" should be used only when negating two, and only two, phrases or clauses, in the construction "neither . . . nor . . ."
NP No predicate.  A statute, case, term, concept, fact, source, name, idea or legal principle is introduced suddenly, as if everyone knows it; but the target audience is unlikely to be familiar with it.  The necessary predicate or background should be provided, either just before the item is first mentioned or (as is often preferable) in an introductory or background section.  This is one of the most common organizational errors, especially for inexperienced legal writers.
NPG Next page.  Usually indicates a dangling heading or widow lines that should appear on the next page.
NS Non-sequitur (Latin: "it does not follow").  The marked sentence, clause or phrase does not logically follow from what comes before.  This may indicate a missing step in reasoning (see MS) or a more serious problem of substance.
OOP Out of place—a general organizational error.  A paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase appears out of place in terms of logic, chronology, or the flow of explanation or argument.  (See also LO, LR, POP, and TS)
P-P "Ping-pong" organization.  The analysis or argument seems like a ping-pong match because it states one side, then the other, then the first, etc.  The writing should be reorganized to collect all arguments on the dominant or more persuasive side, then (in an office memo or paper) to state all arguments on the other side.  The appearance of two "buts" or "howevers" in succession is a common symptom of this organizational error.
PLW Placement of words.  The placement of words in a sentence is confusing or misleading.  The most common error is misplacing prepositional phrases, thereby creating ambiguities or unintended meanings.  This signal is similar to OOP (out of place) but refers to placement in a single sentence.
POLICY? The policy underlying a law or supporting an argument or explanation should be explored.  This may mean researching policy from scratch or simply applying policy discussed elsewhere in the writing.
POP The point of a paragraph is unclear.  Generally speaking, every paragraph should have (and develop!) a single idea or theme, expressed in a short sentence or phrase.  Common problems are: unclear topic sentences or multiple themes (see TS), rambling, vagueness, and failure to come to a conclusion.  Unlike TS (topic sentence), this signal requires reassessing both the internal structure of the paragraph and its place in the larger organizational scheme of the document.
POS Possessive.  A possessive form was omitted or incorrectly used.  The most common error is in ordering the apostrophe and the "s."  For example, "plaintiff's complaint" refers to a single plaintiff and "plaintiffs' complaint" to more than one.  The second most common error is forgetting that "it's" and "who's" are contractions (of "it is" and "who is," respectively).  They are not possessives and are not used in legal writing (see COLL).  The correct possessives are "its" and "whose," respectively, without apostrophes.
PRAC Practical.  Designated portion of writing could benefit from practical, as well as or instead of abstract or legal argument, advice or analysis.  Are there any practical angles that you could state or explore?
PV Passive voice.  Passive constructions ("the case was decided" or "it was determined that . . .") are grammatically correct but ponderous, wooden, and often confusing.  They are useful only when the subject of the verb is unknown or indefinite or the writer wishes to conceal the subject.  Otherwise, passive voice—particularly if used repeatedly—is a sign of wooden and heavy writing, not a good style for advocacy!  Better: "the court decided the case" or "the judge determined that . . ."
QUOT Quotation error.  Most common errors: (1) omitting a quotation mark at the beginning or end of the quotation; (2) using duplicate double quotation marks ("), rather than single quotation marks (') for embedded quotations; and (3) failing to modify quoted language to fit into the grammatical structure of your writing and to indicate your modifications with square brackets ([]).
QE Quoting excessively.  Too many quotes appear in succession, or quotations are too long.  Try to express all concepts and reasoning in your own words, keeping quotation to the minimum necessary to reflect absolutely essential nuances of what is quoted or words and phrases that may be or become terms of art.  (See also UOW).
QL Quotation of long excerpt.  Excerpts of more than fifty words or two sentences should be indented and single spaced.
QUAL Qualification needed.  The statement is nearly correct, but is not precisely so without qualification or limitation.  (See also BROAD)
RAT? Rationale?  The rationale (for your conclusion, a court's decision or a legislature's act) should be stated or designated as such (i.e., distinguished by context or verbal signals from your own commentary).  (Compare MM)
RED Redundant.  The same thing was already said somewhere else, or is said later in the writing.  This often indicates organizational error.
RESULT? The result in a case (who won or which way an issue was decided) is unclear, not stated, or stated incompletely.  The statement of result should be as complete and specific as necessary for the discussion at hand.  A result may be for the case as a whole (who won, whether a preliminary injunction or summary judgment was granted or denied, whether a JMOL or dismissal on the pleadings was granted, etc.).  Or it may be for a particular issue (whether there was proximate cause, or whether a damage award was proper).  Whatever the level of specificity, the writing should state the relevant result explicitly and make clear, by verbal signals or from context, that it was the court's decision.
SIC? Latin for "thus."  The word "sic," in square brackets and usually italicized [sic], must be used to indicate where a grammatical or other error in a quoted passage appears in the original, so the reader does not think the error is yours.  The question mark indicates uncertainty whether an error noted is yours or the quoted source's.
SP Spelling error or "spell out."  This signal indicates a spelling mistake, a typographical error, the improper use of an abbreviation instead of the complete word or words, or the failure to spell out numbers less than thirty.
T The tense of a verb is incorrect, confusing, or not consistent with the tense of other verbs in the same paragraph or section of the document.  Normally, descriptions of the facts of cases and courts' reasoning should be in the past tense and statements of current law in the present.
T/A Term of art.  A legal term of art is used incorrectly, or non-customary language is used where a legal term of art should be used.  Examples of legal terms of art are: "negligence," "proximate cause," "probable cause," "reasonable suspicion," "infringement," and "misappropriation."  This is one of the few exceptions to the general rule that it is better to use your own words; you should not make up your own terms of art where accepted ones already exist.  (Compare UOW)
TONE The tone of the writing is inappropriate for the audience (see AUD) or the situation.  Common problematic tones are: (1) condescension (e.g., in letter to client, "You may not know this, but . . ."), (2) insults, whether express or implied ("Only an idiot would conclude . . ."), (3) disrepect (to client: "You must do an IP audit." OR "You have made a bad mistake!"), and (4) insubordination (to client: "Make sure this brief is filed by next Wednesday."). Generally speaking, it is better to say the same thing more softly and diplomatically, in a way more likely to be received favorably, no matter who your audience may be.  Once in a great while, however, you may wish to make a harsh statement to opposing counsel ("Your argument is frivolous and likely to result in sanctions against your client"), in the hope that the opposing client also will read the statement and question the advocate's tactics.  Even in this case, however, harsh or undiplomatic statements should be used with care, as they may backfire.  As for your own clients, remember that they are your "bosses," able to fire you at any time.
TR Transition problem.  A transition between paragraphs, arguments, or sections of the writing is nonexistent, abrupt, weak, lame or misleading.  Think about the logical relationship between the parts that need connecting and try to write a smooth and helpful transition.  Good transitions are based upon ideas and their logical relationship, not just clever or stock phrases.
TS Topic sentence.  The topic sentence (of a paragraph) is missing or unclear or states more than one theme, or there is more than one candidate for the role of topic sentence.  The solution is: (1) to identify the main theme of the paragraph and any sentence or sentence fragment that states it; (2) to rewrite that sentence or fragment (or to write one if none exists) so as to state the theme clearly and concisely; (3) to rewrite the paragraph around that theme; and (4) to remove all extraneous material, including other candidates for topic sentences, to other paragraphs.  (See also POP)
UC Unclear.  The meaning of a paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase or word (as marked) is unclear as stated.  Sometimes clarifying requires just rewriting; sometimes it requires rethinking what you are trying to say.
UOW Use [your] own words.  Try to restate a quoted passage in your own words.  If you can point precisely and confidently to a term of art that must be used, or to a nuance that requires expression in the original words, use that term or the minimum number of original words needed, but try to rewrite everything else.  Using your own words makes the concepts your own, increases your understanding and appreciation, improves the flow of the paper, and avoids any tendency toward plagiarism.  (See also QE)
V Verb form or forms are incorrect.  The most common error of this type is disagreement between the number of the subject of the sentence and the number of the verb ("she see" or "they talks").  Another common problem occurs in series of nouns with "and" or "or;" in "or" series the number of the verb should agree with the noun that is closest to the verb in the sentence.  Correct:  "A lapse, an error, or omissions in text make it difficult to read."  (In this sentence, the plural verb form "make" is correct because the plural noun "omissions" is closest to the verb.)
VA Vague.  A paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase, or word is vague, nonspecific, imprecise, or misleading.  The most common error is failure to include short prepositional phrases that tie things down.  Vague (depending on context): "The court refused to decide the issue."  Precise: "The court refused to decide the issue of proximate cause."
VR Vague reference, usually a pronoun.  Either the antecedent is indefinite because there is no specific noun within reasonable reach, or the antecedent is ambiguous because two or more specific nouns are near enough to serve grammatically, and the reader has to think to determine which is the right one.  The solution is simple: when in doubt, use a specific noun, not a pronoun or other general word.  Eradicating this sort of vagueness is an important skill of legal writing.  Good lawyers never make the reader think about what they are trying to say; they lead readers to an inexorable conclusion.

This error also can occur with nouns.  The most common error is shifting from one noun to another in describing a particular person or thing, in such a way as to leave the reader in doubt regarding the antecedent.  Incorrect: "The plaintiff worked hard all year.  Then the defendant fired the employee without warning."  (Are the "plaintiff" and "employee" the same person?)  The solution is simply to use the same noun that was used in the antecedent or to add an explanatory or identifying phrase if that noun occurred too far back.
W/C Word choice is incorrect.  Common errors of this type include confusing "effect" and "affect" and using "finds," "holds," "rules" and "opines" interchangeably.  A judge "finds" facts, "holds" as to law, "rules" on the result in a case or a principle of law, and "opines" if he/she is not in the majority.
W/T Which/that/who error.  Most common errors are: (1) failing to use a comma before a "which" or "who" clause that is explaining, rather than defining; (2) using a comma before such a clause that is defining; (3) using "who" (nominative case, used for subject of sentence) instead of "whom" (objective case, used for object of verb or preposition), or vice versa; (4) using "who" for an inanimate thing or "which" for an individual; or (5) using "that" when "which" would be better.

"That" is permissible (and usually preferable) in defining clauses, that is, those clauses in which the pronoun should not be preceded by a comma.  Ordinarily "that" should not be used in explaining clauses, i.e., those that need a comma.  Correct: "Lawyers who are careless are unlikely to be successful."  [No comma is used because the "who" clause defines the type of lawyers meant by the speaker; without that clause the sentence does not make sense.  Here "that" could replace "who."] Also correct: "Distracted lawyers, who are often careless, may do their clients damage."  [Commas are required here because the "who" clause is explaining, not defining, and the sentence could stand without it.]
WORDY Verbose.  Too many words express a desired thought or concept; try to shorten or condense the phrasing or simply omit unnecessary words.
WP Wrong preposition.  For example, a person may have rights "in" or "to" property, so one may speak of copyright in a book, but not copyright "of" a book.   Most unabridged dictionaries point out the correct prepositions to use with particular words, either directly or by example.
WS "Who is speaking?"  The writing fails to indicate the source of the thought or expression at issue, whether by context or explicit verbal signals (e.g., "the court said," "in the court's view," "in my view," "it seems").  You should rewrite to make clear whether the statement is yours, a court's, or another cited source's.
1SP One-sentence paragraph.  Although permissible in business letters and occasionally used for emphasis in briefs, one-sentence paragraphs are disfavored and rare in formal writing.  A one-sentence paragraph usually indicates one or more of the following organizational problems: (1) a missing or lame conclusion in the previous paragraph, (2) a missing or weak topic sentence in the following paragraph, (3) a poor, weak or nonexistent transition between paragraphs, or (4) failure to develop, expand, or support the idea underlying a topic sentence.
// [Two parallel lines] Parallel structure is absent or incomplete.  This usually refers to a series that is not in grammatically parallel form.  Incorrect: "Suing requires filing a complaint, that the lawyer take lots of depositions, and zealous advocacy."  Correct: "Suing requires filing a complaint, taking lots of depositions, and advocating zealously."  OR "Suing requires commencement of the action, work on depositions, and zealous advocacy."
// ORD Parallel order of concepts is absent or incomplete.  Incorrect: "Judges and lawyers must be zealous and impartial."  Since judges are impartial and lawyers are zealous, correct writing requires reversing the order of one pair of words or the other.  This is true whether or not the word "respectively" is added to highlight the correspondence.

Abbreviations for Citations
Repeated bluebooking errors are marked only the first time they occur, but you should correct all instances of the same type of error in your next draft.

[NOTE: These abbreviations are most relevant to writing that contains extensive citation to legal authority, especially in footnotes, such as third-year papers, law review articles, and briefs or memoranda of law.  They are less relevant to letters and memoranda to clients and opposing counsel, in which citation to legal authority appears seldom, if at all.]
A Author.  An author's first name is not included, the name is incorrect, or the names of multiple authors are not in bluebook form.
AB Abbreviation.  An abbreviation is used when it should not be used or is incorrect.  Abbreviations other than firm designators ("Co.," "Inc.," "Ltd.," etc.) should not be used in case names in text, but they may be used in case names in footnotes.
AUTH? Authority?  Authority is absent, out of place, incomplete, or inappropriate.  This signal is often used when no citation is given, but it may occur when a citation to questionable or doubtful authority for point made.
BB Bluebooking.  Nonspecific bluebooking error; check the bluebook for the type of source you are citing.
CT Court.   The court is incorrectly noted or not included at all.
D Date.   The date is incorrect in form or substance.  The most common errors are: (1) failing to include a year-date at all; (2) failing to include the day and month for—and only for—unreported cases; and (3) including redundant year-dates in both the principal case and an affirmance, reversal, or denial of certiorari.
F Form.  Form of citation is incorrect.  The most common error is not presenting a citation string in the form of a complete "citation sentence," with a period at the end and semicolons between separate citations.  The second most common error is failing to set off a citation or citation string with commas (and semicolons between separate citations) when it appears in the middle of a sentence.
FNP Footnote placement is incorrect or misleading.  Every footnote should be placed so that the cited sources support everything stated in the sentence or part of the sentence footnoted.  For example, suppose the sentence contains two independent clauses, the first of which is supported by the cited authority, and the second of which is your own conclusion.  In that case, the footnote should appear at the end of the first clause, not the end of the sentence, because it does not support your own conclusion in the second clause.

Furthermore, every citation in a footnote must support all the text to which the footnote relates by virtue of its placement in the text.  If two different citations in a footnote support different parts of a sentence, use two footnotes instead of one.
HYRT? "Have you read this?"  Indicates that source cited is so far from supporting the point for which it is cited, or that a quote is so inaccurate, as to bring into question whether you have actually read the cited source.  This may occur when you crib primary sources from secondary sources (which good lawyers generally should not do!).  Believe it not, busy judicial clerks sometimes make egregious errors in citing and quoting authority.
IC Inconsistent.  Use of different bluebooking styles in different footnotes.  Even though both styles may be correct in themselves (or at least permissible under the applicable citation rules) their inconsistent use is an error.
N Name.  The name of a party is misspelled or incomplete, or firm designators ("Co.," "Inc.," "Ltd.," etc.) are used incorrectly or improperly omitted.
NPA Not proper authority.  The source cited does not properly support the point for which it is cited.  The most common errors are citing a decision for an interpretation of it made in a later decision, or a statute for a point that is not expressed or clearly implied in the statute, but which was established by a later decision.  In both cases the later decision establishing the interpretation or point in question must be cited instead.  (See also 2S)
P Pinpoint or "jump" page citation.  A pinpoint page citation (jump page) is missing or is obviously incorrect (e.g., 726 F. Supp. 626, 524).
REP Reporter.  A case reporter's title is incorrectly abbreviated.  Note that most abbreviations of one or two letters do not use spaces (e.g., U.S., S.Ct., and L.Ed.2d), but that abbreviations with three or more letters do (Cal. App. 3d).  But see Bluebook, Rule 6.1 (recommending spaces for letter abbreviations of more than one letter, but not for abbreviations or ordinals (under this rule the following are correct: S. Ct., L. Ed., D. Mass, and P.2d).
SIG Signal.  A signal for a citation (such as "see," "see also," "see generally," "but see," "cf.," "but cf., etc.) is used incorrectly.  The most common error is using any signal with a direct quote or appositive.  [These notations do not affect your grade but may be marked for your information.]
SF A short form of citation is incomplete or incorrect.  The most common errors are failure to identify the volume (of the reporter or other source) and volume number (if any), if they are not uniquely identified in the preceding long-from citation.  The second most common error is failure to include a cross-reference to the note containing the original cite (this is not necessary with "Id." cites).  See also "XREF" Correct: See Able v. Baker, note 75 supra, 372 U.S. at 504.  The very next footnote, however, could cite this same case as: Id. at 505.
SQ (The original) source of a quotation is not indicated or appears incorrect.
TITLE The title of the source cited appears incorrect.
UL Underlining (or, equivalently, italics) is missing or improperly used.  Case names should be underlined or in italics in text but in regular (Roman) type in footnote.
XREF Cross reference (to your own paper).  The point noted invites a cross-reference to a similar or related discussion or citation elsewhere in your paper.
2S Secondary source.  The citation does not identify the primary or most direct source (highest authority) for the point cited.