As one of your legally-inclined readers, excellent job!
"maybe it was some kinds of Terms & Conditions" --> fun fact: T&C are called contracts of adhesion, in which one side has all the bargaining power. these are boilerplate and non-negotiable, so there's not much point in reading them anyway; you either take it or leave it.
"most legal docs sit and collect dust once they are finalized" --> yup. until you urgently need to check the contract you signed, only to find out that you have no idea where it is.
"disregarding the irony of a verbose academic paper criticizing legal documents for being hard to read" --> LMAO. some people don't look in the mirror enough.
"challenges to edits were exacerbated by the use of center-embedded and passive sentences" --> for all the preaching from law profs on concision, clarity, and active voice, these weird sentences sure plague legalese.
“'...clients defer to the firm and don’t read through standard documents'” --> wtf? this and the following statements sound like such gaslighting. and i bet the firm was charging exorbitant rates for this "work".
Thank you for the validation and for adding so much quality context to the post!!! Glad to know that this is something discussed in the legal world and not just outsiders spinning their wheels.
I didn’t know that about the terms and conditions - is there some kind of assumption of “reasonableness”, where a “humancentipad” clause would not be permitted?
And yeah, I think our lawyers just think we’re small fish that they’re spending too much time on. Hard to blame them but it’s been rough sledding.
Yes, there is an assumption of reasonableness. Anything that is substantively “unconscionable” (i.e. shocking to a normal person’s conscience) is going to be subject to legal scrutiny.
As one of your legally-inclined readers, excellent job!
"maybe it was some kinds of Terms & Conditions" --> fun fact: T&C are called contracts of adhesion, in which one side has all the bargaining power. these are boilerplate and non-negotiable, so there's not much point in reading them anyway; you either take it or leave it.
"most legal docs sit and collect dust once they are finalized" --> yup. until you urgently need to check the contract you signed, only to find out that you have no idea where it is.
"disregarding the irony of a verbose academic paper criticizing legal documents for being hard to read" --> LMAO. some people don't look in the mirror enough.
"challenges to edits were exacerbated by the use of center-embedded and passive sentences" --> for all the preaching from law profs on concision, clarity, and active voice, these weird sentences sure plague legalese.
“'...clients defer to the firm and don’t read through standard documents'” --> wtf? this and the following statements sound like such gaslighting. and i bet the firm was charging exorbitant rates for this "work".
Thank you for the validation and for adding so much quality context to the post!!! Glad to know that this is something discussed in the legal world and not just outsiders spinning their wheels.
I didn’t know that about the terms and conditions - is there some kind of assumption of “reasonableness”, where a “humancentipad” clause would not be permitted?
And yeah, I think our lawyers just think we’re small fish that they’re spending too much time on. Hard to blame them but it’s been rough sledding.
Yes, there is an assumption of reasonableness. Anything that is substantively “unconscionable” (i.e. shocking to a normal person’s conscience) is going to be subject to legal scrutiny.