The BUSKLAW Newsletter

  Most lawyers draft contracts. That's what lawyers do. And they use perceived terms of art ("TOAs") because they want to be paragons of contract-drafting precision. But here is where the canker gnaws:  the words that lawyers insert in their contracts as TOAs are actually not, potentially causing problems in clarity and interpretation. And as I've said time and again, these problems lead to disputes, and disputes lead to litigation, which is always time-consuming and expensive for the parties involved.  Let's first define TOAs in the legal context. According to Professor Bryan Garner in his Dictionary of Legal Usage , TOAs have specific, precise meanings that are "locked tight" and based on legal precedent. But then there are the faux TOAs, "whose meanings are often unhinged." Expert contract drafters, Garner says, know that clear, simple drafting is less subject to misinterpretation than using TOAs that are nothing more than "mere jargon....

(Author’s Note: I originally wrote this post for Y2K, but I’ve updated it using plain English.  Happy April Fool’s Day 2016!)             A standard force majeure contract clause, where "Acts of God" excuse one party from performing their obligations without that non-performance being a breach of contract, are so 20th Century. So what if fire, flood, hurricane, snowstorm, or riot excuse contractual non-performance. Those events are too mundane to contemplate! Contract lawyers desperately need a force majeure clause for the clear and present dangers of the new(er) millennium! So, as a public service to the legal profession, I’ve assumed the heavy burden of drafting a "new age" force majeure clause for my colleagues to freely use: Either party's non-performance of this agreement will be excused to the extent that it is caused by the occurrence of any of the following events or circumstances: (i) Alien abduction, alien i...