As I search the archives of my memory I seem to discern…
![“As I search the archives of my memory I seem to discern six types or methods [of judicial writing] which divide themselves from one another with measurable distinctness. There is the type magisterial or imperative; the type laconic or sententious; the type conversational or homely; the type…” quote by Benjamin Cardozo](https://sms4smile.com/q/i/6ef/benjamin-cardozo-15481_archives_as-i-search-the-archives-of-my-memory-i_2901354.jpg)
“As I search the archives of my memory I seem to discern six types or methods [of judicial writing] which divide themselves from one another with measurable distinctness. There is the type magisterial or imperative; the type laconic or sententious; the type conversational or homely; the type refined or artificial, smelling of the lamp, verging at times upon preciosity or euphuism; the demonstrative or persuasive; and finally the type tonsorial or agglutinative, so called from the shears and the pastepot which are its implements and emblem.”
About This Quote
This interpretation was drafted with AI assistance. It is one reading of the quote, not the author's own explanation.
Cardozo categorizes judicial writing into six distinct styles, each with unique characteristics and purposes.
In simple terms: Judges write in six different ways.
Key Takeaway
Recognize and adapt to varied legal writing styles.
Themes
legal writing
style
analysis
Mood
analytical
reflective
Type
explanatory
educational
When to use this quote
- court opinions
- law school teaching
- legal drafting
- judicial training
Key Concepts
rhetoric
genre
communication
Questions to Reflect On
- How does style affect legal interpretation?
- When is a particular style most effective?
A Different Perspective
Each style may be limited by audience expectations or institutional constraints.