Very brief. 
Interesting. I guess if you see that error page when starting a thread it can get lost.
OK, why are legal opinions so freaking long? News stories in the paper say that “in Judge Smith’s 1200 page opinion…”. Judge Smith didn’t write 1200 pages, did he? I’m assuming that there are 1185 pages of cites and quotations. Yes?
As long as the judge wants.
Generally, they’re not that freaking long.
Really? Cite please.
No. In the last 75-page opinion that I read (and it’s a rare opinion that’s that long), there were only about five or so pages of endnotes.
Judicial opinions lay out the analysis that the judge undergoes. In a complicated case with many issues in the table, that analysis takes several pages. Nonetheless, even in complex cases most opinions aren’t more than, say, 20 or 30-something pages long. OTOH, in those same complex cases, other judges on the panel are likely to have concurring or dissenting opinions of their own which add to the length of the opinion.
–Cliffy
These days, most judicial opinions are not written by judges themselves, but by their law clerks, who are recent law school graduates.
There is very little premium placed on elegance and much emphasis placed (by default if not by conscious design) on plodding through the facts and the legal issues. In other words, the clerks just want to make sure they don’t leave anything out. They are “graded” on completeness and thoroughness, not brevity.
A few federal judges, notably Richard Posner and Frank Easterbrook of the 7th Circuit and Alex Kozinski of the 9th Circuit, still write their own opinions.
As a current first-year law student, I have the opportunity to lament the length of judicial opinions on a daily basis.
A professor of mine told our class that judicial opinions have become much longer in the last 20 years since what used to take a long time to research in books and type out on a manual typewriter can now be done in a few mouse clicks. He said that in the time it used to take to cite and analyze 1 case, you can Ctrl-C and Ctrl-V many, many more citations
I don’t have any quantitative data to back this up but I do know that of the cases I’ve read, the ones from more than about 30 years ago tend to be quick and to the point while the more recent opinions tend to be much longer and cite many more cases. Another explanation, of course, would be that there are more and more cases decided every year, so there are more and more relevant opinions to cite…
Typically, these law clerks are devastatingly attractive and loads of fun at parties. 
I thought about mentioning this, but assumed that it was already common knowledge.
For a case involving patent law or somesuch you may see a couple hundred pages of technical data; otherwise, any opinion over 30 or so pages is just ridiculously long and seems to suggest that the judge can’t figure out what the issue is in the case at hand…
In Australia, the record for length probably goes to the 2,000 page decision in 2001 where a judge of the New South Wales Supreme Court awarded prominent Sydney lawyer, John Marsden, almost $600,000 in damages after finding that a television station broadcast two defamatory programs alleging John Marsden had sex with underage boys.
However, this complex case was heard over a record 229 hearing days, under a system not found anywhere else in Australia, or indeed in any other part of the common law system.
See Transcript from
http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/s320016.htm
27/6/2001
Marsden wins defamation case against Channel 7
JOHN MARSDEN: No amount of money, no matter what it could be, can compensate me for the anguish, the pain, the humiliation of the past few years.
No sum will restore me in any way to the position I was in before these outrageous allegations.
They were homophobic and that’s what they were intended to be.
TRACY BOWDEN: Six years and 6 million dollars after launching a defamation action against Channel 7, judgment day for Sydney’s solicitor, John Marsden.
JOHN MARSDEN: I think I’ve fought a David and Goliath battle in which the fight of corporate wealth was to delay, frustrate, and if this case shows nothing it shows there is no equality before our present legal system.
PETER MANNING, FORMER EXECUTIVE PRODUCER, ‘WITNESS’: It was a matter of public importance.
He was the head of the Law Society.
He is a major power figure in our society.
It was a matter of particular public – particular – it was a matter of particular public concern, if there was any truth to the allegations of paedophilia.
JIM MARSDEN, BROTHER AND LEGAL PARTNER: It’s been a very arduous six years.
It’s had a significant impact on family, friends, our firm and right now I’m absolutely delighted, elated with the verdict.
TRACY BOWDEN: Marsden versus Amalgamated Television Services, or Channel 7.
It’s been an astonishing court case on a number of fronts.
229 hearing days.
113 witnesses.
Millions in legal costs, and today a weighty judgment of more than 2,000 pages.
PROFESSOR MICHAEL CHESTERMAN, UNIVERSITY OF NSW: I can’t think of any other NSW case or indeed Australian case that’s got anywhere near that number of days of hearing.
One other aspect is the way “pages” are counted - from my experience.
When Appellate Courts publish opinions, they are printed in these little booklets, maybe 8"x6".
District court opinions are generally double spaced.
In the official reporters, all opinions are single spaced, 2 columns per page.
I frequently encounter district court judges and magistrate judges who feel compelled to issue 30 page decisions on very run-of-the-mill cases.
It also depends on the nature of the ruling. If the ruling is a decision from a bench trial, then the judge may be compelled to make a very detailed finding of fact, in a long case there may have been dozens of witnesses, the judge can’t simply say, “Defendant wins” and leave no grounds for an appeal. The judge has to say what she found the facts to be, and then explain how the law applied to those facts. Having said all that, I don’t think 1,200 page decisions are all that common.
As a slight hijack, I would like to give props to Justice Clyde Kuehn of the Fifth Appellate District of Illinois. He writes his own opinions, and inserts some of the more sardonic and dryly witted commentary it’s ever been my pleasure to read.
In one case, an accused home intruder was identified by a police officer using the aid of a police dog named Cain. Cain tracked a path from the home’s front door to a point a few blocks
away - the same point at which the accused had been arrested moments ago by police combing the area looking for someone of the defedant’s description.
At trial, the officer testified at length about his dog’s performance, including what the dog thought about his own performance, all without objection from defense counsel.
On appeal, the defendant raised two points of error: whether the admission of the dog evidence was proper, and whether he suffered from ineffective assistance of counsel due to his attorney’s failure to object.
Justice Kuehn’s opinion begins: “This case features the mark of Cain and questions whether counsel was able.”
The case is People v. Lefler. It would have been in the 1997-99 timeframe, if you want to hunt it down. It’s brilliant writing.
- Rick
Worth a read. It’s at 294 Ill.App.3d 305, 689 N.E.2d 1209, 228 Ill.Dec. 788 (5th Dist 1998).
I liked this statement of the issue presented to the Appellate Court: “On appeal, defendant raises Cain.”
I looked it up again, just for the sheer joy of the read.
Another favorite line… when analyzing the claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, Justice Kuehn comments dryly on the defense lawyer’s silence during the trial:
Justice Kuehn is a true asset to the legal world of Illinois.
- Rick
Posner is brilliant. But I like Kozinski. He ended the Mattel v. MCA records case with the following: “The parties are advised to chill.”
A discussion of fine judicial writing can’t go without some words of wisdom from the esteemed Lord Denning, MR:
For a funny read, also see Smith v. Colonial Penn* 943 F.Supp 782 - the background is that the defendant insurance company (from New England) wants to transfer venue to be closer to the airport in Houston, the Galveston Judge is not ammused, nor is he impressed:
And, who can forget Washington v. Alaimo, 934 F.Supp 1395 (1996) the infamous “Motion to Kiss My Ass” case. You will never find a better illustration of abuse of process. The first time I read that one, I cried I laughed so hard. Good times, good times.
/law school geek
UNITED STATES ex rel. Gerald MAYO v. SATAN AND HIS STAFF