🔑 Legal Writing: Addressing What a Case Is Not About

The Problem

Opposing counsel sometimes frames the case incorrectly.

A common response is:

• “This case is not about X.”
• “This case does not concern Y.”

That formulation is weak. It is indirect and fails to tell the court what the case is about.

The Better Approach

In Drafting Motions & Briefs in Federal Court (Lawline CLE, May 25, 2021), Brian Morrison recommends using clear, direct, and active language when addressing opposing arguments.

When correcting a mischaracterization, he recommends:

• Using active voice
• Identifying the actor
• Stating the problem directly

Examples:

• “Defendant misstates the issue.”
• “Defendant incorrectly cites the case law.”
• “Defendant’s cases have nothing to do with the facts at issue.”

These formulations are more direct than “this case is not about . . .” and immediately tell the reader what is wrong.

Lead With the Point

Morrison also emphasizes that the opening sentence of a paragraph should convey the point.

If opposing counsel has framed the case incorrectly, address it at the outset:

Defendant misstates the issue. This case concerns [your issue].

Do not make the court wait to understand your position. Lead with it.

Replace, Don’t Negate

Do not stop at rejecting the opponent’s framing. Replace it with your own.

• Weak: “This case is not about breach of fiduciary duty.”
• Strong: “This case concerns a failure to comply with statutory notice requirements.”

The stronger version tells the court exactly how to understand the dispute.

Bottom Line

Avoid indirect phrasing.

Identify the actor, state the error, and tell the court what the case is about.

Applied Examples: Weak vs. Strong

Below are examples of how this issue typically appears in briefs—and how to fix it.