This was the opinion in which Gorsuch “seemed to hit his stride” as a writer, Nina Varsava, author of the study of his opinions and both a Yale law student and Stanford doctoral candidate, said in the New York Times. I started with Gorsuch’s majority opinion in the water dispute, Texas v. WordRake and BriefCatch perform a one-time analysis - one calls it a “rake,” the other a “catch” - while PerfectIt performs a series of tests. In contrast, PerfectIt is a proofreading tool its suggestions are more granular and encompass punctuation, formatting, citation style, capitalization, and more. Breyer.Īt the outset, it is important to note that these three programs operate differently and perform different functions. WordRake and BriefCatch are similar to each other in that they focus on enhancing clarity and concision. Roberts Jr., Clarence Thomas and Stephen G. I had previously reviewed both of the other programs, calling PerfectIt a virtual, eagle-eyed proofreader, and twice testing WordRake against Supreme Court opinions, first against the writings of Justices Antonin Scalia and Elena Kagan, and then against Justices John G. I decided to test Gorsuch’s opinions against three of these programs: BriefCatch, PerfectIt and WordRake. The most-popular ones operate as add-ins to Microsoft Word, performing grammatical and stylistic analyses of briefs, memoranda and other legal documents.
Gorsuch photograph by Franz Jantzen, 2017.īut what do legal editing programs think of Gorsuch’s writing? There are several such programs available to lawyers.
0 kommentar(er)
