英语新闻】[资讯][运动][娱乐][生活][文教][经济][科技][时事]【英语考试】[专四][专八][大三][大四][大六][MBA][自考][公共][高考][中考][职称][初中][高中][笔译][金融][阅读]
留学英语】[GRE][GMAT][LSAT][PETS][TOEIC][出国考试]【TEM英语】[TEM介绍][TEM4指导][TEM4试题][TEM8指导][TEM8试题]
CET英语】[动态][技巧][真题][模拟题][语法][听力][口语][写作][翻译][阅读][词汇]【BEC英语】[动态][介绍][指导][试题][口语][初级][中级][高级][经验]
TOEFL托福】[动态][介绍][指导][真题][模拟题][技巧][词汇]【IELTS雅思】[技巧][模拟题][真题][听力][写作][阅读][词汇][口语][介绍][动态]
英语作文】[小学][初中][高中][大学][四级][六级][考研][指导][中考][高考]【英语故事】[双语][民间][情感][童话][寓言][幽默][传记]
英语笑话】[双语][司法][愚人][成人][儿童][动物][宗教][女性]【娱乐英语】[星座][时尚][英语][影视][幽默][名言][赠言][历史][脑筋][轻松][万花筒][异域][文库]
行业英语】[财会][商贸][外贸][运输][医务][传媒][电信][工程][公务员][法律][政治][技术][其他]【英语学习】[新概念][小笨霖][大学][洋话][疯狂][美国][专题][杂谈][方法][品牌]
生活英语】[旅游][日常][电话][购物][酒店][实用][市民]【工作英语】[简历][求职][商务][办公][会议]【奥运英语】[奥运][体育][术语][人物][运动][奥运知识][体坛][资讯]
法律英语】[涉外][案例][术语][法律]【英语口语】[名人][总统][情景][教程][听力技巧][口语技巧][音标][英语口语][俚语]
英文阅读】[心灵][散文][诗词][原版][文学][短文][少儿][初级][高级][文摘][科普][小说][技巧][双语]【写作翻译】[书信][发表][欣赏][贴士][点滴][写作][写作技巧][日常写作]
词汇语法】[专业词汇][特色词汇][马虎词汇][英语语法][语法技巧][词汇技巧][词海拾贝][分类词汇][新闻热词][日积月累]
您现在的位置: 3edu教育网 >> 英语角 >> 法律英语 >> 涉外文书 >> 正文    3edu教育网,教育第三方,完全免费,天天更新!

How to write a good appellant brief三

分类:涉外文书   更新:2016/6/18   来源:本站原创

    You can preserve your credibility for formulating the issues on appeal even-handedly; but there is another challenge: You must also make the questions comprehensible. If the judges cannot understand what the case is about from the initial substantive exposure to your writing — a statement they expect to be clear — they may have far less patience with the parts of your brief that may legitimately be complex.

    A good brief writer can formulate clear, neutral-sounding questions but frame them in a way that tends (subtly, of course) to suggest the answer the writer seeks. The question should not present your argument, but it should express a clear point of view about the case.

    An example from one of our recent cases may demonstrate the distinction. It was an antitrust case. Our opening brief (for the appellants) stated five issues presented and did so in less than half a page. We slightly loaded one of them with what we thought were helpful facts:

    Whether defendant can be labeled a “monopolist” under Section 2 of the Sherman Act because it owned the only bowling center in a small area, even though uncontradicted evidence showed that defendant lacked power to exclude competition or control price.

    Our adversaries took a different approach. They heavily loaded their issues presented and took five pages of their brief to state them. The first issue presented, according to our adversaries, was:

    Was the finding of the jury that [defendant] possessed monopoly power in the Antelope Valley of California (“the relevant market”) supported by substantial evidence when there was evidence (a) that over time [defendant‘s] share of the relevant market increased and, ultimately culminated in [defendant] achieving a 100% share of such market; (b) that two competitors of [defendant] withdrew from, and no competitors entered, the

[1] [2] [3] 下一页

| 设为首页 | 加入收藏 | 联系我们 | 版权申明 | 隐私策略 | 关于我们 | 手机3edu | 返回顶部 |