In a previous column for this publication, I discussed how incivility in legal writing—by attorneys or judges—often has the effect of undermining one’s argument. This is so because uncivil writing is inconsistent with the three pillars of rhetoric identified by Aristotle: ethos (credibility of the speaker), logos (logical reasoning), and pathos (emotional appeal). That is, writing that is hostile or hyperbolic tarnishes the author’s credibility, diminishes the argument’s logical prowess, and chips away at the audience’s sympathy for the claims presented.

Yet, incivility in appellate briefs continues to rear its head. And it can have consequences other than killing the argument in your client’s case.