1. The New Plain Language Family Law Court Forms:  Improving Justice and Saving Money
M. Lynn Greiner, Charles R. Dyer, Josefina Cerrillo-Ramirez, and Judge Laure Gene Middaugh
On behalf of the Washington State Access to Justice Board

2. The language of law must not be foreign to the ears of those who are to obey it.
Learned Hand
OUR purpose AND PLAN

3. Justice requires it 50% of US adults read below a 6th grade level.
65% of family law litigants are pro se.
In 80%, only one side is represented.
The numbers peak for themselves. 65 percent of litigants do not have lawyers. They must be able to understand the forms, not only to use them, but also to understand the legal obligations they are under when they receive them.
In August 2010, the Department of Justice wrote a letter to all state supreme court chief justices, stating that all litigants should have court interpreters in any kind of case without barriers. Plain language forms help reduce the cost of interpreters and make the interpretations go better. We have to face the fact that we are destined to have huge increased costs without plain language forms.
In January 2012, the Washington State Supreme Court has also written a letter specifically supporting the Pro Se Project and the development of plain language family law court forms.
Besides aiding mediators and translators, plain language forms enable lawyers to reach middle and low income clients they might otherwise not be able to represent by making it much easier to employ limited scope representation (also known as unbundling).

4. The Benefits of Plain Language
Completion of forms on the first try
Increased readership and understanding of documents.
Plain forms aid all litigants, judges, court personnel, mediators and translators.

5. The lawyer's greatest weapon is clarity, and its whetstone is succinctness. Judge Prettyman
Our objectives

6. Readability Use short, simple sentences. Use bullets for lists.
Use common words.
Use check-off boxes.

7. Readability, part 2 Headings distinguish different parts.
Number the steps on a form.
Leave lots of white space.
Use graphics when appropriate.

8. Grammatical aspects Use active voice
Short paragraphs/one major concept
Set required explanations in boxes or indented text
Avoid dependent clauses and too many levels of subordination

9. Logical aspects Use orderly steps.
Group similar elements; e.g., factors affecting a judge’s decision vs. list of financial aspects.
Leave room for flexibility; e.g., “Other:” when a list is not exhaustive.

10. Concert ticket exercise
A Readability Exercise:
Draft a concert ticket and flyer using the scenario provided in your materials.
Concert ticket exercise

11. Finished Ticket

12. Flyer

13. Words vs. concepts: facts vs. law
The price of clarity, of course, is that the clearer the document the more obvious its substantive deficiencies. For the lazy or dull, this price may be too high. Reed Dickerson, Professor of Law, Indiana University.
Words vs. concepts: facts vs. law

14. Forms are Factual Statements
Forms reflect statutory and case law.
Forms list the facts required for a litigant to show that he/she is a member of the class affected by the law.
Facts can be represented by simple words and sentences.
Say this ---Forms do not present novel theories of law or argue legal theories.

15. Facts in Legal Discourse
Many legal terms rename factual terms to comport with a legal concept; e.g. Petitioner” is the person who filed the lawsuit.
Some legal terms are ambiguous.
“Jurisdiction” mean different things in different contexts, and most of those meanings are simple facts.

16. Statutory Language
Each form now conforms to the statutory requirements.
Required terms are now defined.
Confusing terms are clarified
- “Motion” or “Request”
- “Divorce” or “Dissolution”.
- “Custody” or “residential time”.
The statutory language that is embodied in each form is examined thoroughly. Many forms have been found not to comply exactly with statute, and these are being corrected. However, when particular words are required, we examine whether they can be substituted by plain language. If not, then we define the statutory language.

17. Acceptance
Thirty six states now use plain forms. Our state Supreme Court has endorsed the forms effort here.
(Charley– we decided to not give our adversaries an idea to challenge this so I’m deleting this part of the slide. Instead, let’s talk about the huge success/support of the forms all across the country. Washington state is late to the game… but we’re finally on it.
So far, not one plain language form has been tested by litigation.
Of course, litigation could happen. There are two cases in Washington State that litigated two of our current forms.

18. Comparing old and new: an exercise