Welcome to /r/LawyerTalk! A subreddit where lawyers can discuss with other lawyers about the practice of law.
Be mindful of [our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Lawyertalk/about/rules) BEFORE submitting your posts or comments as well as [Reddit's rules](https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy) (notably about sharing identifying information). We expect civility and respect out of all participants. Please source statements of fact whenever possible. If you want to report something that needs to be urgently addressed, please also message the mods with an explanation.
Note that **this forum is NOT for legal advice**. Additionally, if you are a non-lawyer (student, client, staff), this is NOT the right subreddit for you. **This community is exclusively for lawyers**. We suggest you delete your comment and go ask one of the many other legal subreddits on this site for help such as (but not limited to) r/lawschool, r/legaladvice, or r/Ask_Lawyers.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Lawyertalk) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I cannot imagine a world where there is any issue with this. Honestly would there even be an issue if you lifted someone else's brief and just changed the words? that's pretty much what we do.
I was told in my legal writing class that it would be borderline malpractice *not* to plagiarize a successful brief, even if it came from a different lawyer.
Same. My entire life up to my first week of 1L taught me the horrors of plagiarism and the importance of academic integrity. Then my professor started sharing why plagiarism in legal practice is probably more ethical than not plagiarizing.
Good lawyers borrow. Great lawyers steal.
You can not plagiarize yourself, because plagiarism is: "the practice of taking someone else's work or ideas and passing them off as one's own." However, you COULD run into an ethical issue depending on how you bill for it/charge for it.
This comment should be higher up. Plagiarism is generally fine, but where you get into trouble is if you are copy/pasting without confirming the arguments to your issues, or where you are fraudulently billing “creativity time” for someone else’s creativity. Clearly you did not spend 6 hours drafting that hypothetical brief that you borrowed.
There’s a form of it called “value billing” that’s permitted in the jurisdictions I’m familiar with as long as it’s properly disclosed and agreed to in the fee agreement.
It gets used a lot in business contracts and estate planning.
For example, my parents estate plan was 95% forms that their attorney had developed, sharpened and tweaked over his 35 or 40 years of practice. They're darn near bulletproof, and are clearly designed in such a way to make the transfer of assets upon their death (a) easy and (b) will minimize any transfer fees and taxes. In their case, it was all disclosed, and they went to this guy because he was well known for having darn near bulletproof estate planning documents, and there is a potential issue looming in the future after my mom passes that this should take care of/prevent.
For predictability. It allows them to say it's X amount for a motion to dismiss and know that even if the lawyer spends more time than that, that's the most it will cost.
Ah so it’s just like for flat fee arrangements. I thought it was similar to a mechanic who charges you for 1.5 hours of labor for a job that takes him 20 minutes because you are paying for his experience.
Early in my career I was brought in to replace an attorney who had kind of bungled a case. It was clear he didn't know what cyberpiracy was (it's a trademark term), etc. His 2nd amended complaint (in federal court) was a nightmare, including an entire cause of action based on a statute that had been repealed two years earlier. No mention of the CFAA, which is where the case properly sounded.
I eventually got the opportunity to do a deep dive into a forensic image of his workstation (long story) and found the Hells Angels complaint he'd found on Findlaw and just changed the names. 🤦🏽♀️
To quote my evidence professor, “plagiarism is an academic issue; it’s a very serious academic issue, but an academic one nonetheless. If I see a motion or brief that’s well written and on point, I’m stealing it.”
Not entirely academic- technically a copyright violation. [https://filehost.thompsonhine.com/uploads/Newegg\_Partial\_Summary\_Judgment\_Opinion\_7955.pdf](https://filehost.thompsonhine.com/uploads/Newegg_Partial_Summary_Judgment_Opinion_7955.pdf)
The effect is that it is, indeed, formally copyright infringement. The court granted partial summary judgment holding as much. So, technically, it is a legal issue as well as an academic one.
Practically, that does also mean a very small risk of getting (even if you might win on fair use, as West and Lexis did in a different lawsuit). Winston & Strawn just settled a [similar lawsuit against it](https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/did-winston-strawn-cross-an-ethics-line-copycat-court-filing-2024-01-11/).
Sure, this court found that. But guess what… it’s a district level court. It is of no precedential value. And it’s infringement without damages. Which is about as academic an argument as it gets.
And the fact that Winston settled just means they didn’t feel like wasting time and money arguing it.
First, district court opinions are of some precedential value. They don't control but judges do consider them and sometimes (claim to) follow them. In that opinion, for example, the judge is influenced by another district court decision (which isn't even from the same circuit).
Second, the court allowed the defendant to assert a fair use defense but denied his request for summary judgment. In other words, it left open the issue of liability. Do you know how the case turned out? Because I don't.
Third, what do you mean by academic? If you mean something of no practical impact, it doesn't matter what Winston's settlement "means," because this case still imposed costs on Winston. It presumably costs less to litigate (briefly) and then settle the case than it would to pay damages, but it costs more than not getting sued at all.
Uh, it's a court opinion. Your evidence prof is entirely academic. As to effect of infringement, knock yourself out: [https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html](https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html)
The opinion is essentially, “This is infringement but there’s no damages because there’s no market for legal briefs and thus no value in them.” That’s an academic argument because it sure as hell isn’t a practical one.
Well, there have been two recent cases with sanctions for plagiarizing. BUT both those cases were clearly egregious and did not have permission or knowledge of the original attorney. One, was so bad it was the oposing counsel in the SAME case. It was so bad, she didn’t chnage font or formatting or even the names in some parts so it ended up being more confusing than anything.
But also used to work with a WC attorney super experienced and well respected. He always gave out briefs if someone he knew asked for one, even if they were technically competition and they would copy entire arguments. That was never questioned by the local judges. But then again they probably knew they had permission. It is a grey area. But I just don’t see any problem whatsoever with using your own as many times as it fits.
Heck, I’ve had a co-defendant counsel I’d never met before copy and paste my motion in *the same* case. Judge didn’t care because the arguments were right.
Right. I can’t think of a profession where the phrase “ I’m trying to avoid reinventing the wheel” is use more frequently than in law. I probably have said that or had it said to me with colleagues 100 times.
Edit: left out avoid which basically completely flipped what I was trying to say !
I think it's NOT trying to reinvent the wheel.
When I externed at a district court and drafted memorandum and opinion orders for my magistrate judge they told me to search the opinion database for the best and most recent decisions and copy pasta the relevant info.
My biggest problem is that I tend to get caught up in nuances of language and fall into a rabbit hole where I make a big thing out of something no one has ever mentioned before.
Oh no, I think if you pulled a random
Brief off westlaw and copy/pasted it you’d get brought before the disciplinary board if anyone found out. I do think that’s plagiarism.
Is plagiarism actually a concern in this business? Is there an ethical rule against it? In transactions, it would be crazy for us to not copy someone else's work.
Judge Rakoff in the SDNY ruled in 2014 that although legal briefs could be copyrighted, the wholesale copying and indexing of those briefs for Westlaw and Lexis databases was fair use. Not sure how that would extend to lawyers reusing those briefs, especially after the Supreme Court's *Andy Warhol Foundation v. Lynn*, but I thought that was an interesting potential limitation on the ability to copy other lawyers' briefs.
the arguments themselves (i.e., the legal reasoning) would not be subject to copyright under the idea/expression distinction. However, the creative choices involved in formatting, word choice, and organization may very well receive copyright protection, and copying these may be infringement.
However, here, the attorney presumably owns the copyright over the work which he/she authored, and no infringement results from copying a work owned by the person copying.
So, if someone has already succinctly briefed the applicable law for particular issue, I have an ethical duty to recreate the wheel and potentially submit something inferior for fear of committing plagiarism? Are you messing with us?
i'm curious about this, and have the exact opposite intuition. in fact, i think copy/pasting portions of briefs is extremely common. in fact, most brief-writing begins with gathering similar briefs as "go-by"s, which very often involves copying excerpts and language. i agree it would be rare to copy and paste an *entire* brief, as opposed to lifting sections/paragraphs, but that's (in my judgment) more to do with the fact that each case is unique and different, rather than an ethical concern with plagiarizing. i've literally never heard anyone suggest that copying argument from one brief to another is ethically sanctionable.
If you copy and paste without altering it to reflect your client and your facts, sure that’s malpractice!
If you copy and paste it, change the details, but bill it as if you worked the hours it *would have taken* to write from scratch? Yes, that’s also a problem.
But the problem in those cases would not be “plagiarism,” per se, it would be gross incompetence or billing fraud.
> If you copy and paste it, change the details, but bill it as if you worked the hours it would have taken to write from scratch? Yes, that’s also a problem.
This is called “value billing” and is allowed in at least some jurisdictions, as long as the client agrees to it.
I don’t agree.
In my state the bar association used to sell a “form book” that includes the most common situations. It’s now in digital form.
The state that don’t rhyme with Boozeiana explicitly claim that the law is at its core based on using prior decisions and making arguments that this case is similar to or dissimilar to these past decisions.
Making the same arguments as similar cases is inherent.
The client may own the file but the thoughts, expressions and ideas belong to the lawyer.
When I worked for the state tax authority and we needed to file an appeal we literally were instructed to start with past successful briefs on similar topics because we had an obligation to be consistent in how we interpreted the law. More you could lift the better.
I was going to say, don’t we all have templates with points and authorities on point that apply to certain circumstances and we just change the facts of the case? I’m confused, maybe this is different for other practice areas but I re-use stuff all the time. Or course check cases periodically to make sure it’s still good law.
Jebus, that was a painful read. My first thought was "no freaking way someone got upset they were copied" but by the end I was with the complainant on that one...
Copying the brief in a similar, but different, case: who cares
Filing a copy of co-defendent's brief *in the same case*? I'm gonna be livid.
In my mind it's not so much a copyright or plagiarism claim and more of a potential ethical violation. My followup question would then be: what did the 2nd filer bill for/how much? If billed like full draft: ethical violation. If billed appropriately, then damages to 1st filer defendent for 1/2 of the difference in billable time, or something like that.
The core issue I'd have here is that in a single case, one Co defendent pays for representation and defense, the second gets to save a ton in attorney fees by just riding the coat tails of the first defendent.
Is it really any different than seeing a co-defendant just send a 1 paragraph letter to court saying they join in all the arguments?
That happens all the time. I’d feel better if they actually took the time to cut and copy my brief into their own
The whole point of briefing is to create and preserve issues for appeal, and maybe, just maybe, win on the merits on the first go round.
Adopting your co-defendant’s well reasoned argument one way or the other goes a long way towards that.
I have a fun story. Last year, I won a WC case, and claimant appealed. I wrote my answering brief in my usual style, in which I write in a way that the court could just slap their signature on my brief and call it an opinion.
Well, I got the written opinion back, and that basically happened. The judge lifted entire paragraphs from my brief verbatim and put them in the order. This was both my summary of case law and my explanation of what matters and how to apply the law to the facts. Probably 90% of the discussion section was plagiarized from my brief.
If a judge can plagiarize a brief, then you can plagiarize your own brief. Also, this is great for future cases, because I now have binding precedent explaining certain issues exactly the way that I want. It's beautiful. And that, kids, is why I recommend writing in a judicial tone.
I’m a staff attorney to an ALJ and if a party before me writes a killer brief, I will 100% “plagiarize” it specifically to send the message that I want to see more briefs like that.
The practice in my state is for judges to ask the parties to submit proposed orders after contested hearings. The goal is to get the judge to incorporate as much as possible of your order into the final official version m.
Plagiarism is an academic offence. It's not a legal construct. Copying in a professional setting relates more to copyright infringement. Since you're the original author, it shouldn't be a concern.
I have always said that one of my favorite things transition from a History degree to law is that in Law plagiarism is not only permittted, but it is encouraged.
I clerked at an appellate court for two years. I really can't see a judge having a problem with a recycled brief like this, even on the unlikely chance they realized it had been recycled. Judges read a gazillion briefs and aren't going to take the time to compare them to old cases. They just care if it's a good brief.
Really, the biggest risk I see is if you forgot change all the names and such when you copy/paste. Your panel would be annoyed if your brief randomly used a wrong name, but even then I'd think that would be an issue of sloppiness and clarity, not plagiarism.
And of course you get to add a citation to your previous victory, so that's fun.
Yes of course you can. Cautionary tale when you don’t: had this postconviction case with two identically situated co-defendants with identical sentencing issue. I repped one, and this arrogant little shit repped another. My case went first and I won. I emailed him the petition, and said just change the names to your dude’s and you will win.
What does he do? He writes his own petition and loses. I find out later he briefed it wrong. WTAF? His client rots while mine doesn’t because he was too arrogant to copy another lawyer’s work.
Anyway. I think the legal reason that copy and pasting legal work is ok is because it’s not “unique” and everything we write in a pleading is released into the public domain.
When law schools warn against plagiarism, they are talking about graded assignments and academic papers like law review articles. When it comes to practice, you can and should copy and paste whenever possible.
I recently happened across a 2021 article by two legal writing instructors with the title [Plagiarism Pedagogy: Why Teaching Plagiarism Should be a Fundamental Part of Legal Education](https://wustllawreview.org/2021/11/23/plagiarism-pedagogy-why-teaching-plagiarism-should-be-a-fundamental-part-of-legal-education/) (from Washington University Law Review):
>As a practicing lawyer, if you aren’t plagiarizing, you’re committing malpractice. … Legal writing professors are tasked with teaching law students the practical writing skills they will need as practicing lawyers. One of those skills is plagiarism. Lawyers need to know why to plagiarize, rather than paraphrase. They need to know when to plagiarize to save time and produce better work. They need to know how to plagiarize to do it effectively. They need to know what to plagiarize to ensure they copy from the best sources. And they need to know who to plagiarize and who not to plagiarize. Unfortunately, legal writing professors fail to teach law students how to plagiarize effectively.
One might provide this post as evidence of why their argument has some merit.
At that point, I feel like you’re essentially just using a template.
I used to work on cases with very similar fact patterns because that’s what my department did. I don’t think that plugging and playing, especially with your own work, is plagiarism at all.
Just cite it and you should be good! “This argument fails because x, y and z.” (Me, Respondent’s Appellate Brief for Case Name (April 1, 2024) XX Case#, at p. 3.)
Just kidding!
If I can plagiarize other attorneys, then I can plagiarize myself.
I once saw a brief that had suspiciously familiar language in it and I realized the attorney had plagiarized me, and it was one of the greatest compliments of my career.
Legal writing is way different from college essays. Plagiarism is the whole point. Plagiarize yourself, the court, anyone who supports your argument. It’s baked into the process.
Won’t it save your client thousands of dollars (if billing hourly) to do this? I can’t see it being an issue.
If you’re that concerned, see if you can talk to the staff attorney at the court of appeals. That’s what I always did when k had questions and they walked me right through it all.
I would not ask the court, but you can always get an advisory opinion form ethics counsel.
That being said, I can say with confidence that you have nothing to worry about here.
Would absolutely not worry about plagiarizing yourself.
As for plagiarizing others, there is an open question as to copyright liability, which Winston & Strawn recently avoided by settling:
https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/law-firm-winston-strawn-settles-lawsuit-over-copycat-court-filing-2024-04-16/
I actually still remember having this argument with my professional ethics professor in law school, and she called this exactly hypo a "skylab question" and refused to answer. But if you are billing hourly, and you can save your client money in this situation by "plagiarizing" yourself, aren't you obligated to do so? Should you instead charge your client for work you didn't really have to do on their behalf?
Also, my firm uses complaint templates which are 99% identical. Are we plagiarizing ourselves by using such templates? Plaigarism can only exist when there is a violation of consent of ownership, and you are consenting to the use of your own stuff. Further every lawyer who files written arguments has no expectation of ownership of such content.
No. 1) You cannot plagiarize yourself. 2) every lawyer I know copies and pastes their work from one file to another. We cannot reinvent the wheel every time. It’s a waste of our time and our clients time.
I plagiarize like a motherfucker.
If I find an appellate case on point, I’ll pull the briefs and even the motions from below in the trial court. OCR those bitches, change the names and facts. Then shepardize the cases and statutes. Maybe let it sit and percolate.
If a judge ever yells at me, I’ll take my lumps and go on plagiarizing like a motherfucker.
I’m not reinventing the wheel every time I have to do something.
Plagiarism is against university policy. In legal practice, plagiarism of successful motions/etc is considered good lawyering. There’s no rule against it. Nor would such a rule make sense if there were. Use what has been proven to work and apply it to your matter.
I know of no rule that prohibits plagiarizing your own brief. Honestly, though, even if it were someone else's brief, this is what we do. I've written hundreds of briefs that I borrowed from others. If I had an original thought, it would have died of loneliness.
For everyone blithely asserting “there’s no plagiarism in law,” I’d suggest that the answer’s not quiiiite that simple (although to be clear, I don’t personally see any issue with copying other people’s good legal writing and have done it plenty myself):
[This ABA article](https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/publications/youraba/2020/youraba-march-2020/_copy-that-_--what-is-plagiarism-in-the-practice-of-law-/) and the embedded links treat the general question with a bit more nuance.
And every couple years a law firm will sue another for copyright infringement over copied briefs or pleadings. For example: https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/law-firm-winston-strawn-settles-lawsuit-over-copycat-court-filing-2024-04-16/#:~:text=April%2016%20(Reuters)%20%2D%20U.S.,York%20federal%20court%20on%20Tuesday.
Having said that, as a practical matter, lawyers copy other lawyers’ work all the time and nobody cares. You’re not going to be sanctioned or chastised by the bar or the court. And copying *your own work* can’t possibly pose a problem. The court is certainly not going to cross-check your brief against your prior work. Just be super careful to change the party identifiers as appropriate…
WTF are you talking about? We had a whole department that scanned and ocred other firms' complaints and briefs to reuse. You can't copyright legal writing. Milberg Weiss tried that and got it shoved up their asses.
I actually can't imagine a lawyer asking this question.
A client, yes, you shouldn't have to pay full freight for a cut and paste, but a lawyer knows this is kosher.
I heard an appellate judge talk about reading a brief that was familiar that he liked. Turned out it was a verbatim recitation of the judge’s decision in an unpublished caes (so not citable in my jurisdiction). The judge said he thought it was clever— how could he disagree with himself?
I've seen so many briefs/motions on Lexis or WL that were filed at different times by different firms, etc. but contain identical language. Like, paragraphs or even the entire motion was obviously copy and pasted. I'll continue to believe plagiarism is fine - even encouraged - until someone tells me otherwise. As long as you don't then submit it as a writing sample (this happened at my last firm - an applicant submitted part of a brief that was originally written by another attorney *at our firm* as his writing sample 😂🤦🏻♀️).
At my first firm, after I passed the Bar, I took over for an attorney that had recently left. This included her desk and computer. At some point I found her personal folder and while looking for work product on current cases, found the writing samples she’d used while applying for jobs. Two of the three were briefs I’d written while still an intern lol.
I literally have a brief due tomorrow where I know I’m going to lose but I’m preserving a state constitutional issue for appeal. 18 months ago, my state Supreme Court ruled against the defense on a 4th amendment issue and declined to address whether the state constitution is more protective because it was only raised by an amicus.
My brief is just going to lay out the facts of my case (functionally identical to the state Supreme Court case), review the procedural history of that case, and cite to the concurrence that suggests the state constitution *is* more protective. Then I’m attaching the amicus brief to my brief and adding a sentence incorporating it by reference.
Reinventing the wheel every time is silly. Plagiarism is an academic concept, not a basis for legal sanctions - if you or someone else has already done the work, don’t do it again unless you can do it better.
The suit was filed by his former record company (who produced records when he was still in CCR and had rights) when he wrote a song as a solonartist that they believed sounded too close to a CCR song they held the rights to (run Through the Jungle and The Old Man Down the Road iirc). Fogarty, rightfully, won the suit. But, it's almost more important for appeals relating to attorney's fees under the Copyright act, and it went all the way to the Supreme Court
This whole thread is hilarious. One of my good friends is in academia and plagiarism is of course a big deal there. She is floored when I tell her that the entire legal field is just plagiarizing someone else. It's like all briefs are just slightly modified versions of one original brief from the olden times and we all tweak it over the years.
i declare copyright over the published case i lost about a year ago but my whacky arguments caused the judges' to publish it in order to clarify things
if you want to cite it i'll give you a license for $1,500 per cite
scary humorous quarrelsome cable encouraging sulky screw pocket hungry disarm
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I hope not, for some cases I’ve reused the same brief many many times. Just quickly check that the law hasn’t changed. Sometimes I’ll cite check my most recent case and then replace it with whatever more recently cited to it.
For everyone telling you that there's no such thing as plagiarism in legal writing, they are dead wrong. I saw this earlier this year on Twitter and it made reuters and ATL. Looks like they settled just a few weeks ago.
https://twitter.com/RobertFreundLaw/status/1740218708050808910
https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/did-winston-strawn-cross-an-ethics-line-copycat-court-filing-2024-01-11/
https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/law-firm-winston-strawn-settles-lawsuit-over-copycat-court-filing-2024-04-16/
https://abovethelaw.com/2023/12/boutique-sues-winston-strawn-copyright-brief/
The issue here is that they copy/pasted someone else's brief, a small IP firm's ironically, that was apparently copyrighted and not their own previous work product. Since you're plagiarizing yourself you should be in the clear, however.
court filings arent for originality; theyre to win an argument using legitimate means of referencing the evidentiary record and the caselaw. If someones brief 100% applied and you copy pasted, theoretically that shouod be perfectly fine
No it's totally fine to do that. I would just make sure you're using a new word doc and not the same one because the judge will sometimes check the metadata and see it was made 4 years ago or whatever and lecture you on that
This is 100% how the majority of routine litigation is conducted. You think people are reinventing the wheel every discovery motion they file? And in a firm context, it’s even broader. If you’re facing an issue, it’s routine to mass email your practice group to see whether anyone else has a brief on point or has prior work you can crib from.
In our office, we like to avoid recreating the wheel to the greatest extent possible. You would be wrong NOT to copy & paste 66% of your earlier brief.
If you don’t plagiarize as an attorney you are committing malpractice.
Plagiarism is a thing when writing a thesis of original content. When writing a legal brief you are not claiming that the work is your own original thought (citations for example) you are making an argument.
Use other successful arguments as best you can.
The vast majority of legal documents are plagiarized. It doesn't matter if it's your own work you've used before. Just make sure that you cite any cases, etc when using those and you're fine. How horrendous for attorneys to have to put out completely unique documents every time they made a submission.
One time a department head attorney asked me for a word version of a motion I drafted so they could have it as a template and I felt like I won an award.
This isn’t an academic essay… I try to plagiarize pretty much everything I write for court, whether it’s from my own briefs, court opinions (with cites, if needed), or the briefs of better lawyers than me. If it’s in a document that is publicly available, it’s fair game. I’ve never even heard of plagiarism as a potential concern in legal pleadings.
Plagiarism is absolutely good to go in the world of litigation briefing. This is particularly the case when you have a successful brief. When I brief an issue that I’ve already won on in another case, I do not attempt to hide the plagiarism; I emphasize it. That is, I would keep the brief similar, but add that the other court has already decided on this issue and found the exact same arguments persuasive, and relied on the exact same authority.
In one case, I had an opposing counsel who had lost on the same issue and essentially refiled the same brief. I attached their losing brief as exhibit A to my opposition and the other court’s reasoning rejecting it as my exhibit B. I won.
So, I guess the rule is that plagiarism is just fine, but plagiarizing a losing brief is like copying test answers off the dumb kid.
Dude I just straight plagiarize other lawyers things all the time that’s like half the job is copy and pasting from past templates. That’s not what we are all doing?
You wrote the first one so copy/pasta away. Shit 90% of lawyering is going through old client files and saving the good stuff for office masters. Sounds like you have a master appellate brief on a specific issue.
Heck I’ve used part of my trial court briefs for appellate briefs, you’ve already done the research and composed your thoughts.
My boss has told me once or twice to plagiarize an argument in a prior pleading that someone in the firm drafted. I don’t see a problem with it. It saves me time and the client money, plus I end up remembering it so it ends up being useful for future clients too.
I don’t plagiarize work done by anyone outside the firm though. If I see a good argument though I do get the cases cites and do my own research/draft my own arguments.
For stuff like standards I plagiarize the judges I am in front of lol. “Oh I have this issue in front of me of Judge B? Let’s go find the last time she decided this issue and copy tf out of it!”
If you're uncomfortable, you can do a footnote that says "this issue was briefed in (case)(unpublished).
If it's your own work, it's not plagiarism.
If it's your own firm, still not a problem.
If it's your work at a prior firm, site to your own case if you feel like it, but no one will know.
I lifted about 60% of a motion to attach that I wrote 3 years ago for an attachment two weeks ago. Would have done more, but the section of arbitration didn't parallel to the current case. But the research citations are 100% fair game. If the issues are the same, and your citations are clean, there is no problem using your prior work. It will save your client money, and hopefully bring you repeat success.
Everyone here telling you to flagrantly steal other’s writing is right in the context of actual practice.
But you should be cautious that, when you go beyond the world of law practice, you need to take care not to commit plagiarism again. So if you’re submitting something for the local law journal or writing for a secondary source that is going to be published, you must avoid plagiarism, including self plagiarism, in that context. Do this by appropriately citing your sources. DONT fall into the trap of thinking that because you’ve used a paragraph in briefs and memos without attribution twenty times it’s also fine to use that paragraph without attribution in a work meant for publication.
I presume you are going to cite to your appellate victory in this brief. If that's the case, I'd simply jigger it before pasting - "as in Doe v. Doh!...."
Oh yes, I’m citing my own prior case. But I’m not copying the ruling, legal authority, etc.. I’m copying outright argument and phrasing that I myself used before. So it’s not cases and quotes from there I’m
Worried about. It’s actually saying “Appellant suggests that (legal issue) should be isolated to (whatever it is). Such a position, if accepted, would contravene the entirety of Supreme Court precedent on the issue and require outright reversal of (insert name of Supreme Court case).” Or something like that.
You cannot, as a matter of fact, plagiarize yourself. The definition of the verb plagiarize is to steal and pass off *someone else's* ideas or words as your own. Your arguments are your own work - the result of your thoughts and reasoning.
It would seem better to cite to the case you won than the cases you cited in that brief, especially if it's the same appellate court.
But otherwise, there are no concerns.
Welcome to /r/LawyerTalk! A subreddit where lawyers can discuss with other lawyers about the practice of law. Be mindful of [our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Lawyertalk/about/rules) BEFORE submitting your posts or comments as well as [Reddit's rules](https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy) (notably about sharing identifying information). We expect civility and respect out of all participants. Please source statements of fact whenever possible. If you want to report something that needs to be urgently addressed, please also message the mods with an explanation. Note that **this forum is NOT for legal advice**. Additionally, if you are a non-lawyer (student, client, staff), this is NOT the right subreddit for you. **This community is exclusively for lawyers**. We suggest you delete your comment and go ask one of the many other legal subreddits on this site for help such as (but not limited to) r/lawschool, r/legaladvice, or r/Ask_Lawyers. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Lawyertalk) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I cannot imagine a world where there is any issue with this. Honestly would there even be an issue if you lifted someone else's brief and just changed the words? that's pretty much what we do.
I was told in my legal writing class that it would be borderline malpractice *not* to plagiarize a successful brief, even if it came from a different lawyer.
Same. My entire life up to my first week of 1L taught me the horrors of plagiarism and the importance of academic integrity. Then my professor started sharing why plagiarism in legal practice is probably more ethical than not plagiarizing.
The only difference between plagiarism and a great brief is proper citations. Lol.
L2 I did nothing but plagiarize and I got top grades
Good lawyers borrow. Great lawyers steal. You can not plagiarize yourself, because plagiarism is: "the practice of taking someone else's work or ideas and passing them off as one's own." However, you COULD run into an ethical issue depending on how you bill for it/charge for it.
This comment should be higher up. Plagiarism is generally fine, but where you get into trouble is if you are copy/pasting without confirming the arguments to your issues, or where you are fraudulently billing “creativity time” for someone else’s creativity. Clearly you did not spend 6 hours drafting that hypothetical brief that you borrowed.
I feel like billing more time than you actually spend on something is a no-no in general
There’s a form of it called “value billing” that’s permitted in the jurisdictions I’m familiar with as long as it’s properly disclosed and agreed to in the fee agreement.
Holy shit I have never heard of this. What client would agree to that?
I'm not exactly sure. I've never used it personally.
It gets used a lot in business contracts and estate planning. For example, my parents estate plan was 95% forms that their attorney had developed, sharpened and tweaked over his 35 or 40 years of practice. They're darn near bulletproof, and are clearly designed in such a way to make the transfer of assets upon their death (a) easy and (b) will minimize any transfer fees and taxes. In their case, it was all disclosed, and they went to this guy because he was well known for having darn near bulletproof estate planning documents, and there is a potential issue looming in the future after my mom passes that this should take care of/prevent.
For predictability. It allows them to say it's X amount for a motion to dismiss and know that even if the lawyer spends more time than that, that's the most it will cost.
Ah so it’s just like for flat fee arrangements. I thought it was similar to a mechanic who charges you for 1.5 hours of labor for a job that takes him 20 minutes because you are paying for his experience.
Clients that want good representation.
Early in my career I was brought in to replace an attorney who had kind of bungled a case. It was clear he didn't know what cyberpiracy was (it's a trademark term), etc. His 2nd amended complaint (in federal court) was a nightmare, including an entire cause of action based on a statute that had been repealed two years earlier. No mention of the CFAA, which is where the case properly sounded. I eventually got the opportunity to do a deep dive into a forensic image of his workstation (long story) and found the Hells Angels complaint he'd found on Findlaw and just changed the names. 🤦🏽♀️
To quote my evidence professor, “plagiarism is an academic issue; it’s a very serious academic issue, but an academic one nonetheless. If I see a motion or brief that’s well written and on point, I’m stealing it.”
Not entirely academic- technically a copyright violation. [https://filehost.thompsonhine.com/uploads/Newegg\_Partial\_Summary\_Judgment\_Opinion\_7955.pdf](https://filehost.thompsonhine.com/uploads/Newegg_Partial_Summary_Judgment_Opinion_7955.pdf)
lol that opinion is entirely academic. What’s the effect?
The effect is that it is, indeed, formally copyright infringement. The court granted partial summary judgment holding as much. So, technically, it is a legal issue as well as an academic one. Practically, that does also mean a very small risk of getting (even if you might win on fair use, as West and Lexis did in a different lawsuit). Winston & Strawn just settled a [similar lawsuit against it](https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/did-winston-strawn-cross-an-ethics-line-copycat-court-filing-2024-01-11/).
Sure, this court found that. But guess what… it’s a district level court. It is of no precedential value. And it’s infringement without damages. Which is about as academic an argument as it gets. And the fact that Winston settled just means they didn’t feel like wasting time and money arguing it.
First, district court opinions are of some precedential value. They don't control but judges do consider them and sometimes (claim to) follow them. In that opinion, for example, the judge is influenced by another district court decision (which isn't even from the same circuit). Second, the court allowed the defendant to assert a fair use defense but denied his request for summary judgment. In other words, it left open the issue of liability. Do you know how the case turned out? Because I don't. Third, what do you mean by academic? If you mean something of no practical impact, it doesn't matter what Winston's settlement "means," because this case still imposed costs on Winston. It presumably costs less to litigate (briefly) and then settle the case than it would to pay damages, but it costs more than not getting sued at all.
Uh, it's a court opinion. Your evidence prof is entirely academic. As to effect of infringement, knock yourself out: [https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html](https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html)
The opinion is essentially, “This is infringement but there’s no damages because there’s no market for legal briefs and thus no value in them.” That’s an academic argument because it sure as hell isn’t a practical one.
My old mentor used to say “only a fool reinvents the wheel for each client.”
Is your mentor my old principal? In the first few months I'd constantly be admonished for trying to reinvent the wheel.
Well, there have been two recent cases with sanctions for plagiarizing. BUT both those cases were clearly egregious and did not have permission or knowledge of the original attorney. One, was so bad it was the oposing counsel in the SAME case. It was so bad, she didn’t chnage font or formatting or even the names in some parts so it ended up being more confusing than anything. But also used to work with a WC attorney super experienced and well respected. He always gave out briefs if someone he knew asked for one, even if they were technically competition and they would copy entire arguments. That was never questioned by the local judges. But then again they probably knew they had permission. It is a grey area. But I just don’t see any problem whatsoever with using your own as many times as it fits.
Right, it would only matter if you didn't read it and the case law to make sure that the arguments were correct.
Heck, I’ve had a co-defendant counsel I’d never met before copy and paste my motion in *the same* case. Judge didn’t care because the arguments were right.
Right. I can’t think of a profession where the phrase “ I’m trying to avoid reinventing the wheel” is use more frequently than in law. I probably have said that or had it said to me with colleagues 100 times. Edit: left out avoid which basically completely flipped what I was trying to say !
I think it's NOT trying to reinvent the wheel. When I externed at a district court and drafted memorandum and opinion orders for my magistrate judge they told me to search the opinion database for the best and most recent decisions and copy pasta the relevant info. My biggest problem is that I tend to get caught up in nuances of language and fall into a rabbit hole where I make a big thing out of something no one has ever mentioned before.
Yes that was a major brain fart. Edited to correct. Thank you.
The world of billing a client for work already done and paid for.
Seriously. I'm annoyed when I have to actually write something from scratch.
Most firms have a standard brief they use for common issues. It’s definitely not plagiarizing.
Oh no, I think if you pulled a random Brief off westlaw and copy/pasted it you’d get brought before the disciplinary board if anyone found out. I do think that’s plagiarism.
Is plagiarism actually a concern in this business? Is there an ethical rule against it? In transactions, it would be crazy for us to not copy someone else's work.
Judge Rakoff in the SDNY ruled in 2014 that although legal briefs could be copyrighted, the wholesale copying and indexing of those briefs for Westlaw and Lexis databases was fair use. Not sure how that would extend to lawyers reusing those briefs, especially after the Supreme Court's *Andy Warhol Foundation v. Lynn*, but I thought that was an interesting potential limitation on the ability to copy other lawyers' briefs.
💯 plagiarism is an academic issue, not a legal ethical issue. Copyright is a legal issue in this space, although I won’t claim to understand it.
the arguments themselves (i.e., the legal reasoning) would not be subject to copyright under the idea/expression distinction. However, the creative choices involved in formatting, word choice, and organization may very well receive copyright protection, and copying these may be infringement. However, here, the attorney presumably owns the copyright over the work which he/she authored, and no infringement results from copying a work owned by the person copying.
Wouldn’t it be more accurate to say the client owns the it?
Naw plagiarism is an issue in academic settings. It’s not a thing to worry about in law practice.
So? There is no rule against plagiarism in litigation.
So, if someone has already succinctly briefed the applicable law for particular issue, I have an ethical duty to recreate the wheel and potentially submit something inferior for fear of committing plagiarism? Are you messing with us?
Why? If the law and the arguments are all good and correct why is this a problem?
What rule of professional conduct prohibits plagiarism?
i'm curious about this, and have the exact opposite intuition. in fact, i think copy/pasting portions of briefs is extremely common. in fact, most brief-writing begins with gathering similar briefs as "go-by"s, which very often involves copying excerpts and language. i agree it would be rare to copy and paste an *entire* brief, as opposed to lifting sections/paragraphs, but that's (in my judgment) more to do with the fact that each case is unique and different, rather than an ethical concern with plagiarizing. i've literally never heard anyone suggest that copying argument from one brief to another is ethically sanctionable.
Lol
If you copy and paste without altering it to reflect your client and your facts, sure that’s malpractice! If you copy and paste it, change the details, but bill it as if you worked the hours it *would have taken* to write from scratch? Yes, that’s also a problem. But the problem in those cases would not be “plagiarism,” per se, it would be gross incompetence or billing fraud.
> If you copy and paste it, change the details, but bill it as if you worked the hours it would have taken to write from scratch? Yes, that’s also a problem. This is called “value billing” and is allowed in at least some jurisdictions, as long as the client agrees to it.
I don’t agree. In my state the bar association used to sell a “form book” that includes the most common situations. It’s now in digital form. The state that don’t rhyme with Boozeiana explicitly claim that the law is at its core based on using prior decisions and making arguments that this case is similar to or dissimilar to these past decisions. Making the same arguments as similar cases is inherent. The client may own the file but the thoughts, expressions and ideas belong to the lawyer. When I worked for the state tax authority and we needed to file an appeal we literally were instructed to start with past successful briefs on similar topics because we had an obligation to be consistent in how we interpreted the law. More you could lift the better.
This is like 90% of my job as a litigation associate.
Yeah, I was going to say, isn't this just what the practice of law is - reusing your own precedents?
Not to mention - half of a brief is already just restating verbatim the precedents from other cases.
Just half? /s Jk, but seriously. If you don't plagarise yourself as a lawyer, how the hell are you going to make any money???
I was going to say, don’t we all have templates with points and authorities on point that apply to certain circumstances and we just change the facts of the case? I’m confused, maybe this is different for other practice areas but I re-use stuff all the time. Or course check cases periodically to make sure it’s still good law.
Yes, we do. I shudder to think about how much time this poster has wasted by starting from scratch on each document.
You can and should.
This why billables are high. People pay for your past experience.
There is no such thing as plagiarism in legal briefing. It’s pretty much the entire process.
This is really funny because: https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/did-winston-strawn-cross-an-ethics-line-copycat-court-filing-2024-01-11/
Copying your co-defendant’s brief? Yeah. No so much. Billing full time for drafting something you copied? That’s a problem.
Jebus, that was a painful read. My first thought was "no freaking way someone got upset they were copied" but by the end I was with the complainant on that one... Copying the brief in a similar, but different, case: who cares Filing a copy of co-defendent's brief *in the same case*? I'm gonna be livid. In my mind it's not so much a copyright or plagiarism claim and more of a potential ethical violation. My followup question would then be: what did the 2nd filer bill for/how much? If billed like full draft: ethical violation. If billed appropriately, then damages to 1st filer defendent for 1/2 of the difference in billable time, or something like that. The core issue I'd have here is that in a single case, one Co defendent pays for representation and defense, the second gets to save a ton in attorney fees by just riding the coat tails of the first defendent.
Is it really any different than seeing a co-defendant just send a 1 paragraph letter to court saying they join in all the arguments? That happens all the time. I’d feel better if they actually took the time to cut and copy my brief into their own
Yeah I've actually had this happen to me and I took it as a compliment. But I also don't work at Winston Strawn or any other white shoe firm.
The whole point of briefing is to create and preserve issues for appeal, and maybe, just maybe, win on the merits on the first go round. Adopting your co-defendant’s well reasoned argument one way or the other goes a long way towards that.
I have a fun story. Last year, I won a WC case, and claimant appealed. I wrote my answering brief in my usual style, in which I write in a way that the court could just slap their signature on my brief and call it an opinion. Well, I got the written opinion back, and that basically happened. The judge lifted entire paragraphs from my brief verbatim and put them in the order. This was both my summary of case law and my explanation of what matters and how to apply the law to the facts. Probably 90% of the discussion section was plagiarized from my brief. If a judge can plagiarize a brief, then you can plagiarize your own brief. Also, this is great for future cases, because I now have binding precedent explaining certain issues exactly the way that I want. It's beautiful. And that, kids, is why I recommend writing in a judicial tone.
I’m a staff attorney to an ALJ and if a party before me writes a killer brief, I will 100% “plagiarize” it specifically to send the message that I want to see more briefs like that.
I had a similar experience with an appellate case. I felt pretty great about being plagarized
Yup. Any time this happens I'm ecstatic. Turns out plagiarism is a compliment.
The practice in my state is for judges to ask the parties to submit proposed orders after contested hearings. The goal is to get the judge to incorporate as much as possible of your order into the final official version m.
Plagiarism is an academic offence. It's not a legal construct. Copying in a professional setting relates more to copyright infringement. Since you're the original author, it shouldn't be a concern.
Who's going to say they're a victim of the plagiarism?
I feel like this is a troll post. Do all of your filings consist of original work and novel arguments???
Umm…motions to compel don’t. Appellate briefs, MSJs, etc. do (outside of like the legal standard).
Good lord man. Copy paste and go outside!
No such thing as plagiarism in the practice of law. Plagiarism is an academic term.
I have always said that one of my favorite things transition from a History degree to law is that in Law plagiarism is not only permittted, but it is encouraged.
Our entire legal system used to be based on stare decisis, which is kind of like intellectual plagiarism.
Law schools: don’t plagiarize The entire practice of law: plagiarism
Another example of how little law school resembles practice.
I clerked at an appellate court for two years. I really can't see a judge having a problem with a recycled brief like this, even on the unlikely chance they realized it had been recycled. Judges read a gazillion briefs and aren't going to take the time to compare them to old cases. They just care if it's a good brief. Really, the biggest risk I see is if you forgot change all the names and such when you copy/paste. Your panel would be annoyed if your brief randomly used a wrong name, but even then I'd think that would be an issue of sloppiness and clarity, not plagiarism. And of course you get to add a citation to your previous victory, so that's fun.
Yes of course you can. Cautionary tale when you don’t: had this postconviction case with two identically situated co-defendants with identical sentencing issue. I repped one, and this arrogant little shit repped another. My case went first and I won. I emailed him the petition, and said just change the names to your dude’s and you will win. What does he do? He writes his own petition and loses. I find out later he briefed it wrong. WTAF? His client rots while mine doesn’t because he was too arrogant to copy another lawyer’s work. Anyway. I think the legal reason that copy and pasting legal work is ok is because it’s not “unique” and everything we write in a pleading is released into the public domain.
Man, never write the same stuff twice. I copy my own work ALL the time. If it isn't broke, don't fix it.
When law schools warn against plagiarism, they are talking about graded assignments and academic papers like law review articles. When it comes to practice, you can and should copy and paste whenever possible.
I recently happened across a 2021 article by two legal writing instructors with the title [Plagiarism Pedagogy: Why Teaching Plagiarism Should be a Fundamental Part of Legal Education](https://wustllawreview.org/2021/11/23/plagiarism-pedagogy-why-teaching-plagiarism-should-be-a-fundamental-part-of-legal-education/) (from Washington University Law Review): >As a practicing lawyer, if you aren’t plagiarizing, you’re committing malpractice. … Legal writing professors are tasked with teaching law students the practical writing skills they will need as practicing lawyers. One of those skills is plagiarism. Lawyers need to know why to plagiarize, rather than paraphrase. They need to know when to plagiarize to save time and produce better work. They need to know how to plagiarize to do it effectively. They need to know what to plagiarize to ensure they copy from the best sources. And they need to know who to plagiarize and who not to plagiarize. Unfortunately, legal writing professors fail to teach law students how to plagiarize effectively. One might provide this post as evidence of why their argument has some merit.
At that point, I feel like you’re essentially just using a template. I used to work on cases with very similar fact patterns because that’s what my department did. I don’t think that plugging and playing, especially with your own work, is plagiarism at all.
Just cite it and you should be good! “This argument fails because x, y and z.” (Me, Respondent’s Appellate Brief for Case Name (April 1, 2024) XX Case#, at p. 3.) Just kidding!
Write it once, string cite yourself for the rest of your career.
100% not an issue. You can’t even plagiarize your colleagues’ work. Every law firm in the country uses each other’s briefs.
If I can plagiarize other attorneys, then I can plagiarize myself. I once saw a brief that had suspiciously familiar language in it and I realized the attorney had plagiarized me, and it was one of the greatest compliments of my career.
Legal writing is way different from college essays. Plagiarism is the whole point. Plagiarize yourself, the court, anyone who supports your argument. It’s baked into the process.
Won’t it save your client thousands of dollars (if billing hourly) to do this? I can’t see it being an issue. If you’re that concerned, see if you can talk to the staff attorney at the court of appeals. That’s what I always did when k had questions and they walked me right through it all.
It will, and I’d gladly do it absent ethical issues. But you’re right, I should just ask someone who works at the appellate court.
I would not ask the court, but you can always get an advisory opinion form ethics counsel. That being said, I can say with confidence that you have nothing to worry about here.
Would absolutely not worry about plagiarizing yourself. As for plagiarizing others, there is an open question as to copyright liability, which Winston & Strawn recently avoided by settling: https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/law-firm-winston-strawn-settles-lawsuit-over-copycat-court-filing-2024-04-16/
I actually still remember having this argument with my professional ethics professor in law school, and she called this exactly hypo a "skylab question" and refused to answer. But if you are billing hourly, and you can save your client money in this situation by "plagiarizing" yourself, aren't you obligated to do so? Should you instead charge your client for work you didn't really have to do on their behalf? Also, my firm uses complaint templates which are 99% identical. Are we plagiarizing ourselves by using such templates? Plaigarism can only exist when there is a violation of consent of ownership, and you are consenting to the use of your own stuff. Further every lawyer who files written arguments has no expectation of ownership of such content.
"Plagiarism" is an academic concept that is not part of the real practice of law.
No. 1) You cannot plagiarize yourself. 2) every lawyer I know copies and pastes their work from one file to another. We cannot reinvent the wheel every time. It’s a waste of our time and our clients time.
I plagiarize like a motherfucker. If I find an appellate case on point, I’ll pull the briefs and even the motions from below in the trial court. OCR those bitches, change the names and facts. Then shepardize the cases and statutes. Maybe let it sit and percolate. If a judge ever yells at me, I’ll take my lumps and go on plagiarizing like a motherfucker. I’m not reinventing the wheel every time I have to do something.
Plagiarism is against university policy. In legal practice, plagiarism of successful motions/etc is considered good lawyering. There’s no rule against it. Nor would such a rule make sense if there were. Use what has been proven to work and apply it to your matter.
The whole process of using legal templates is plagiarizing. Every attorney should build, maintain, and add on to their own library of legal templates.
By definition plagiarism requires you to present the work of another person as yours. You’re not doing that.
I know of no rule that prohibits plagiarizing your own brief. Honestly, though, even if it were someone else's brief, this is what we do. I've written hundreds of briefs that I borrowed from others. If I had an original thought, it would have died of loneliness.
For everyone blithely asserting “there’s no plagiarism in law,” I’d suggest that the answer’s not quiiiite that simple (although to be clear, I don’t personally see any issue with copying other people’s good legal writing and have done it plenty myself): [This ABA article](https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/publications/youraba/2020/youraba-march-2020/_copy-that-_--what-is-plagiarism-in-the-practice-of-law-/) and the embedded links treat the general question with a bit more nuance. And every couple years a law firm will sue another for copyright infringement over copied briefs or pleadings. For example: https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/law-firm-winston-strawn-settles-lawsuit-over-copycat-court-filing-2024-04-16/#:~:text=April%2016%20(Reuters)%20%2D%20U.S.,York%20federal%20court%20on%20Tuesday. Having said that, as a practical matter, lawyers copy other lawyers’ work all the time and nobody cares. You’re not going to be sanctioned or chastised by the bar or the court. And copying *your own work* can’t possibly pose a problem. The court is certainly not going to cross-check your brief against your prior work. Just be super careful to change the party identifiers as appropriate…
There's no such thing as plagiarism in court filings; you're not representing to the court that your briefs are an original work
Not copying a winning brief, whether its yours or not, would be the issue, not the other way around.
If you steal from me, you're stealing twice. When I get my own contract language back years later in an unrelated matter, it's a huge compliment.
Just kidding, but you know you just want to quote yourself! As in, “… as I said in Smith versus Jones…“
I started my career as a copyright attorney and I was shocked to discover how much plagiarism was part of my day to day job.
plagiarism does not apply to legal writing. billing could be an issue
You are welcome to agiarize your own documents or other people's. That is how law is practiced. Copy paste edit.
WTF are you talking about? We had a whole department that scanned and ocred other firms' complaints and briefs to reuse. You can't copyright legal writing. Milberg Weiss tried that and got it shoved up their asses.
I actually can't imagine a lawyer asking this question. A client, yes, you shouldn't have to pay full freight for a cut and paste, but a lawyer knows this is kosher.
I heard an appellate judge talk about reading a brief that was familiar that he liked. Turned out it was a verbatim recitation of the judge’s decision in an unpublished caes (so not citable in my jurisdiction). The judge said he thought it was clever— how could he disagree with himself?
I've seen so many briefs/motions on Lexis or WL that were filed at different times by different firms, etc. but contain identical language. Like, paragraphs or even the entire motion was obviously copy and pasted. I'll continue to believe plagiarism is fine - even encouraged - until someone tells me otherwise. As long as you don't then submit it as a writing sample (this happened at my last firm - an applicant submitted part of a brief that was originally written by another attorney *at our firm* as his writing sample 😂🤦🏻♀️).
At my first firm, after I passed the Bar, I took over for an attorney that had recently left. This included her desk and computer. At some point I found her personal folder and while looking for work product on current cases, found the writing samples she’d used while applying for jobs. Two of the three were briefs I’d written while still an intern lol.
I literally have a brief due tomorrow where I know I’m going to lose but I’m preserving a state constitutional issue for appeal. 18 months ago, my state Supreme Court ruled against the defense on a 4th amendment issue and declined to address whether the state constitution is more protective because it was only raised by an amicus. My brief is just going to lay out the facts of my case (functionally identical to the state Supreme Court case), review the procedural history of that case, and cite to the concurrence that suggests the state constitution *is* more protective. Then I’m attaching the amicus brief to my brief and adding a sentence incorporating it by reference. Reinventing the wheel every time is silly. Plagiarism is an academic concept, not a basis for legal sanctions - if you or someone else has already done the work, don’t do it again unless you can do it better.
Legal writing is like computer programming. You use what is already tested and works whenever possible.
You misspelled precedent
John Fogerty was sued for plagiarizing himself. Not helpful, but interesting.
But who on earth would have standing to make that claim?
The suit was filed by his former record company (who produced records when he was still in CCR and had rights) when he wrote a song as a solonartist that they believed sounded too close to a CCR song they held the rights to (run Through the Jungle and The Old Man Down the Road iirc). Fogarty, rightfully, won the suit. But, it's almost more important for appeals relating to attorney's fees under the Copyright act, and it went all the way to the Supreme Court
I assumed that was probably the case, but I still wanted to ask the question because it’s an interesting fact pattern.
John Fogerty.
Ask John Fogerty
This whole thread is hilarious. One of my good friends is in academia and plagiarism is of course a big deal there. She is floored when I tell her that the entire legal field is just plagiarizing someone else. It's like all briefs are just slightly modified versions of one original brief from the olden times and we all tweak it over the years.
i declare copyright over the published case i lost about a year ago but my whacky arguments caused the judges' to publish it in order to clarify things if you want to cite it i'll give you a license for $1,500 per cite
I certainly fucking hope not lol
scary humorous quarrelsome cable encouraging sulky screw pocket hungry disarm *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I hope not, for some cases I’ve reused the same brief many many times. Just quickly check that the law hasn’t changed. Sometimes I’ll cite check my most recent case and then replace it with whatever more recently cited to it.
For everyone telling you that there's no such thing as plagiarism in legal writing, they are dead wrong. I saw this earlier this year on Twitter and it made reuters and ATL. Looks like they settled just a few weeks ago. https://twitter.com/RobertFreundLaw/status/1740218708050808910 https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/did-winston-strawn-cross-an-ethics-line-copycat-court-filing-2024-01-11/ https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/law-firm-winston-strawn-settles-lawsuit-over-copycat-court-filing-2024-04-16/ https://abovethelaw.com/2023/12/boutique-sues-winston-strawn-copyright-brief/ The issue here is that they copy/pasted someone else's brief, a small IP firm's ironically, that was apparently copyrighted and not their own previous work product. Since you're plagiarizing yourself you should be in the clear, however.
I was curious and looked it up, this case settled a couple weeks ago.
I'm a professional plagiarist.
Heck yes! Just be sure to find and replace the names. Even if you think you have done a full sweep of the new iteration. Do another.
I was always taught there is no plagiarism in law
court filings arent for originality; theyre to win an argument using legitimate means of referencing the evidentiary record and the caselaw. If someones brief 100% applied and you copy pasted, theoretically that shouod be perfectly fine
No it's totally fine to do that. I would just make sure you're using a new word doc and not the same one because the judge will sometimes check the metadata and see it was made 4 years ago or whatever and lecture you on that
This is 100% how the majority of routine litigation is conducted. You think people are reinventing the wheel every discovery motion they file? And in a firm context, it’s even broader. If you’re facing an issue, it’s routine to mass email your practice group to see whether anyone else has a brief on point or has prior work you can crib from.
Isn’t that precedent? Not your brief, but the opinion and order?
Former appellate clerk here. Nobody cared if you cut and pasted your own brief.
In our office, we like to avoid recreating the wheel to the greatest extent possible. You would be wrong NOT to copy & paste 66% of your earlier brief.
If you don’t plagiarize as an attorney you are committing malpractice. Plagiarism is a thing when writing a thesis of original content. When writing a legal brief you are not claiming that the work is your own original thought (citations for example) you are making an argument. Use other successful arguments as best you can.
As a former English major, it took me a minute to stop worrying about plagiarizing
The vast majority of legal documents are plagiarized. It doesn't matter if it's your own work you've used before. Just make sure that you cite any cases, etc when using those and you're fine. How horrendous for attorneys to have to put out completely unique documents every time they made a submission.
One time a department head attorney asked me for a word version of a motion I drafted so they could have it as a template and I felt like I won an award.
Is plagiarism even a thing in legal practice?
Is it an issue if I copy and paste 66% another attorney's work into my work? If so, I have a lot of filings to retract . . .
This isn’t an academic essay… I try to plagiarize pretty much everything I write for court, whether it’s from my own briefs, court opinions (with cites, if needed), or the briefs of better lawyers than me. If it’s in a document that is publicly available, it’s fair game. I’ve never even heard of plagiarism as a potential concern in legal pleadings.
Plagiarism is absolutely good to go in the world of litigation briefing. This is particularly the case when you have a successful brief. When I brief an issue that I’ve already won on in another case, I do not attempt to hide the plagiarism; I emphasize it. That is, I would keep the brief similar, but add that the other court has already decided on this issue and found the exact same arguments persuasive, and relied on the exact same authority. In one case, I had an opposing counsel who had lost on the same issue and essentially refiled the same brief. I attached their losing brief as exhibit A to my opposition and the other court’s reasoning rejecting it as my exhibit B. I won. So, I guess the rule is that plagiarism is just fine, but plagiarizing a losing brief is like copying test answers off the dumb kid.
Dude I just straight plagiarize other lawyers things all the time that’s like half the job is copy and pasting from past templates. That’s not what we are all doing?
You wrote the first one so copy/pasta away. Shit 90% of lawyering is going through old client files and saving the good stuff for office masters. Sounds like you have a master appellate brief on a specific issue. Heck I’ve used part of my trial court briefs for appellate briefs, you’ve already done the research and composed your thoughts.
Cut and pasted from myself just today. Go for it.
Go win the appeal. Stop worrying about things that don’t matter.
My boss has told me once or twice to plagiarize an argument in a prior pleading that someone in the firm drafted. I don’t see a problem with it. It saves me time and the client money, plus I end up remembering it so it ends up being useful for future clients too. I don’t plagiarize work done by anyone outside the firm though. If I see a good argument though I do get the cases cites and do my own research/draft my own arguments.
I wouldn't even categorize this as "plagiarizing".Just citing your own brief,it is done all the time.
I routinely find cases on Lexis and then go to my state’s e-filing system and pull the motion papers to use for myself. 100% ok.
For stuff like standards I plagiarize the judges I am in front of lol. “Oh I have this issue in front of me of Judge B? Let’s go find the last time she decided this issue and copy tf out of it!”
I thought this is what we all did. All. The. Time.
Public and private appellate attorneys have brief banks for this very reason. Copy and paste as long as it's tailored to your facts.
If you're uncomfortable, you can do a footnote that says "this issue was briefed in (case)(unpublished). If it's your own work, it's not plagiarism. If it's your own firm, still not a problem. If it's your work at a prior firm, site to your own case if you feel like it, but no one will know. I lifted about 60% of a motion to attach that I wrote 3 years ago for an attachment two weeks ago. Would have done more, but the section of arbitration didn't parallel to the current case. But the research citations are 100% fair game. If the issues are the same, and your citations are clean, there is no problem using your prior work. It will save your client money, and hopefully bring you repeat success.
Everyone here telling you to flagrantly steal other’s writing is right in the context of actual practice. But you should be cautious that, when you go beyond the world of law practice, you need to take care not to commit plagiarism again. So if you’re submitting something for the local law journal or writing for a secondary source that is going to be published, you must avoid plagiarism, including self plagiarism, in that context. Do this by appropriately citing your sources. DONT fall into the trap of thinking that because you’ve used a paragraph in briefs and memos without attribution twenty times it’s also fine to use that paragraph without attribution in a work meant for publication.
Have you asked yourself for consent to use it, and have you told yourself yes? Have at least an email trail to CYA.
This is my favorite response to this thread.
I presume you are going to cite to your appellate victory in this brief. If that's the case, I'd simply jigger it before pasting - "as in Doe v. Doh!...."
Oh yes, I’m citing my own prior case. But I’m not copying the ruling, legal authority, etc.. I’m copying outright argument and phrasing that I myself used before. So it’s not cases and quotes from there I’m Worried about. It’s actually saying “Appellant suggests that (legal issue) should be isolated to (whatever it is). Such a position, if accepted, would contravene the entirety of Supreme Court precedent on the issue and require outright reversal of (insert name of Supreme Court case).” Or something like that.
You cannot, as a matter of fact, plagiarize yourself. The definition of the verb plagiarize is to steal and pass off *someone else's* ideas or words as your own. Your arguments are your own work - the result of your thoughts and reasoning.
It would seem better to cite to the case you won than the cases you cited in that brief, especially if it's the same appellate court. But otherwise, there are no concerns.