Legalese can be confusing for anyone not trained in law. Contracts, court filings, legal notices, and formal agreements often use language that feels far removed from everyday English.
For lawyers, courts, and legal transcription services, that language may be familiar. For clients, witnesses, and ordinary readers, it can be difficult to understand.
In this article, you’ll learn…
- what legalese means and why it appears in legal writing
- why some lawyers still defend traditional legal language
- why plain English is becoming more important in law
- common legal writing habits that make documents harder to read
- how legal transcription services help preserve accuracy in complex legal matters
What Is Legalese?
Legalese is a specialized style of writing used in legal documents, contracts, statutes, briefs, and other law-related materials. It often includes technical legal terms, Latin phrases, long sentences, formal wording, and references to specific sections, clauses, or definitions.
People often complain that legalese uses:
- Rare or outdated words
- Long sentences
- Repetitive phrasing
- Passive voice
- Dense definitions
- Multiple clauses in a single sentence
- Terms that are familiar to lawyers, yet unclear to everyone else
Here is an intentionally exaggerated example:
In accordance with the requisite stipulations articulated within Article VIII, Subsection (c)(ii) of the Amalgamated Compact for Interstate Commerce, herein referred to as the “Compact,” the undersigned party, hitherto denoted as the “Contracting Entity,” heretofore consents to and acknowledges the irrevocable delegation of fiduciary responsibility and corresponding entitlement to recompense, as established in Article XII, Subsection (a)(vii), to the designated Arbitral Consortium, henceforth designated as the “Consortium,” in contemplation of the dispute resolution mechanisms delineated within Article XV, Subsections (b) through (e). The said delegation is predicated upon the full spectrum of arbitration obligations, encompassing, among others, arbitration fees, costs, and impartial tribunal selection, as delineated herein.
That is a lot to process. In simpler terms, it means:
- The Contracting Entity delegates responsibility for handling disputes to the Arbitral Consortium.
- That responsibility includes arbitration costs and fees, as well as selecting an impartial tribunal.
- Once the agreement is signed, the Contracting Entity cannot withdraw that decision.
- Certain parts of the existing Compact apply to the agreement.
The plain English version is shorter, easier to follow, and much more useful for someone trying to understand what they are agreeing to. Still, legal professionals often avoid overly casual language because legal documents, including those prepared through court transcription services, must remain formal, accurate, and enforceable.
That tension is at the heart of the legalese debate.
Legalese vs. Plain English
| Legalese | Plain English |
| Uses long, formal sentence structures | Uses shorter, clearer sentences |
| Relies heavily on traditional legal terms | Uses familiar words when possible |
| Often sounds more official | Often feels more readable |
| May preserve established legal meaning | May improve client understanding |
| Can be difficult for non-lawyers to follow | Helps readers understand obligations and rights |
Plain English does not mean oversimplifying legal rights or removing necessary legal terms. It means using clear language whenever clarity does not reduce accuracy.
Why Do Lawyers Use Legalese?
Legalese has not survived by accident. Lawyers continue to use it for several reasons, some stronger than others.
One major reason is precision. Law depends on exact meaning. A small change in wording can change how a contract, statute, or court filing is interpreted. Certain legal terms have established meanings because courts have interpreted them over time. Lawyers may rely on those terms to avoid ambiguity.
For example:
In the event of a default by Party A under this Agreement, Party B shall have the unqualified right to demand, within thirty (30) calendar days of said default, the immediate repayment of the principal sum of one million United States dollars ($1,000,000), along with accrued interest at a fixed annual rate of six percent (6%), compounded quarterly, calculated from the date of said default until the date of full repayment.
This sentence is dense, yet it does communicate important details:
- What happens if Party A defaults
- Who has the right to demand payment
- How long Party B has to act
- The principal amount owed
- The interest rate
- How interest is compounded
- When interest starts and ends
In legal work, details like these matter.
Another reason lawyers use legalese is tradition. Legal documents have used formal language for centuries. Many lawyers are trained to read and write in that style, and many templates, statutes, contracts, and court documents still contain it.
There is also a practical reason. Reusing established templates can save time, especially in transactional law. Lawyers may hesitate to replace familiar language if they believe the old wording has already been tested, reviewed, or accepted.
However, not every reason is equally persuasive. Some legalese survives because it sounds official, impressive, or lawyerly. Those are weaker justifications, especially when the wording makes it harder for clients to understand their rights and obligations.
The Case for Plain English in Legal Writing
The plain English movement argues that legal documents should be as clear as possible without losing legal accuracy. The idea is simple: people should be able to understand documents that affect their rights, money, property, work, health, or freedom.
Plain language has also become part of government communication standards. The Plain Writing Act of 2010 requires federal agencies to write certain public communications clearly so the public can understand and use them.
The push for clearer legal and government writing predates that. Federal plain language efforts gained momentum in the 1970s, including President Richard Nixon’s direction that the Federal Register be written in layman’s terms. Later, President Carter issued executive orders encouraging clearer government regulations.
Plain English does not mean removing every technical term. Some legal terms are necessary, especially in contracts, court proceedings, and trial transcription services, where exact wording can matter. However, plain English does encourage writers to:
- Use familiar words when they work
- Keep sentences manageable
- Avoid unnecessary repetition
- Use active voice when possible
- Define technical terms clearly
- Avoid outdated words when modern alternatives are clearer
- Organize documents so readers can follow the logic
The goal is not to make legal writing casual. The goal is to make it understandable.
Should Lawyers Stop Using “Shall”?
One of the most debated words in legal writing is “shall.”
For years, lawyers used “shall” to create obligations. A contract might say, “The tenant shall pay rent on the first day of each month.” The problem is that “shall” has been used inconsistently. Sometimes it means “must.” Sometimes it sounds like “will.” Sometimes it appears that neither meaning is clear.
Legal writing expert Bryan Garner argued in the ABA Journal that lawyers should abandon “shall” and use clearer words instead, especially “must” when creating a duty.
That advice reflects a broader legal writing trend: use the word that says exactly what you mean.
For example:
| Instead of | Consider |
| The buyer shall deliver payment. | The buyer must deliver payment. |
| The seller shall receive notice. | The seller is entitled to receive notice. |
| The agreement shall terminate. | The agreement will terminate. |
The issue is not the word itself. The issue is whether the reader can clearly understand the obligation.
Common Legal Writing Problems
Legalese is not only about unusual words. Many legal documents become hard to read because of basic writing problems. These same issues can also affect deposition transcription services, where unclear phrasing, interruptions, and dense legal language must be captured accurately.
Common issues include:
- Passive voice: “The agreement was signed by the parties” instead of “The parties signed the agreement.”
- Nominalizations: “Make a determination” instead of “determine.”
- Redundancy: “Each and every” instead of “each” or “every.”
- Double negatives: “Not uncommon” instead of “common.”
- Overloaded sentences: Too many clauses, conditions, and exceptions in one sentence.
- Unnecessary synonyms: Using several words when one accurate word would work.
- Weak qualifiers: Phrases like “it appears,” “quite possibly,” or “may perhaps” when a firmer statement is appropriate.
Some legal documents need technical detail. However, technical detail does not have to be buried in a confusing structure.
Do Lawyers Understand Legalese Better Than Everyone Else?
Lawyers are trained to read legal documents, yet research suggests that even they often prefer plain English.
A study titled Even lawyers do not like legalese found that lawyers, like non-lawyers, had more difficulty understanding and remembering contract language written in legalese than equivalent language written in simpler English. The study also found that lawyers rated simplified contracts as no less enforceable and often preferable in terms of quality and the likelihood of the client signing.
That finding matters because it challenges one of the strongest defenses of legalese: that complex language is necessary to make legal documents enforceable or professional.
In many cases, clearer writing may help everyone involved.
Is Legalese Going Away?
Legalese is not disappearing overnight. It is too deeply embedded in law, legal education, court systems, legislation, contract templates, government transcription services, and professional habits.
However, legal writing is changing.
Many lawyers, courts, government agencies, and legal writing experts now encourage clearer communication. Clients also expect documents they can understand. That expectation matters. A contract, instruction, or legal notice has limited practical value if the person affected by it cannot understand what it means.
Legalese will probably remain part of legal work, especially where specialized terms are necessary. However, unnecessary complexity is becoming harder to defend.
The better future is not legalese versus plain English. It is accurate legal writing that uses plain English whenever possible and technical legal language only when necessary.
Why Legalese Matters in Legal Transcription
Legalese is not limited to written contracts or statutes. It also appears in spoken legal settings, including:
- Depositions
- Court hearings
- Attorney dictation
- Client interviews
- Witness statements
- Arbitration proceedings
- Legal conferences
- Law enforcement recordings
- Trial preparation materials
That creates a challenge for transcription. Legal transcription is not simply typing what someone says. It requires careful listening, familiarity with legal terminology, attention to context, and the ability to distinguish similar-sounding words with very different meanings.
For example, a transcriptionist may need to recognize:
- “Tort” versus “taught”
- “Statute” versus “status”
- “Counsel” versus “council”
- “Voir dire” versus a phonetic misunderstanding
- Party names, case numbers, exhibits, objections, and procedural terms
When legal audio includes overlapping speakers, poor sound quality, accents, interruptions, or dense terminology, accuracy becomes even more important.
Why Clients Choose Ditto for Legal Transcription Services
Legal language can be difficult to follow, especially when recordings include formal terminology, multiple speakers, objections, unclear audio, or references to case-specific details. In those situations, accurate transcription requires more than basic speech-to-text software.
At Ditto Transcripts, we support attorneys, law firms, courts, law enforcement agencies, and other legal professionals who need accurate, organized transcripts they can rely on. Our legal transcription services are designed for clients who need clarity, confidentiality, and careful human review.
Clients choose Ditto because we offer:
- Human-reviewed transcription: Legal audio often includes technical phrasing, procedural language, and industry-specific terms that automated tools can misinterpret.
- Experience with legal content: We handle recordings such as depositions, hearings, interviews, court proceedings, attorney notes, and other legal documentation.
- Clear, usable formatting: Legal transcripts should be easy to read, reference, and use in professional workflows.
- Verbatim transcription options: When every word, pause, false start, or interruption matters, we can provide verbatim transcripts based on the client’s needs.
- Confidential handling: Legal recordings often contain sensitive information, so secure workflows and discretion are essential.
- Flexible turnaround times: Clients can choose delivery options that fit case deadlines, internal review schedules, or urgent documentation needs.
- Transparent pricing: Clients can review service options, turnaround expectations, and legal transcription prices before starting a project.
- No long-term contracts: Legal professionals can use Ditto when they need support without committing to unnecessary ongoing agreements.
- Responsive service: Our team focuses on clear communication, dependable delivery, and transcripts prepared with professional care.
Whether your recording involves plain English, dense legalese, or a mix of both, Ditto Transcripts can help turn complex legal audio into accurate, readable documentation. Don’t believe us? Here’s a client testimonial that may change your mind:
Balancing Legal Precision With Clarity
Legalese exists for a reason, yet that does not mean every legal document needs to be difficult to read. Some technical legal language helps preserve precision. Too much of it can confuse clients, slow down the review, and make important documents less useful.
Plain English is not the enemy of legal accuracy. In many cases, it supports accuracy by making obligations, rights, and procedures easier to understand.
For legal professionals, the best approach is balance. Use precise legal terms when necessary, and write and speak clearly whenever possible. And when legal conversations, proceedings, or dictations need to become written records, accurate transcription helps preserve both the words and the meaning behind them.
Ditto Transcripts is a Denver, Colorado-based FINRA, HIPAA, and CJIS-compliant transcription services company that provides fast, accurate, and affordable transcripts for individuals and companies of all sizes. Call (720) 287-3710 today for a free quote.