The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Is it too rude to call the opposing side's argument "silly" in a brief?
Poast new message in this thread
Date: December 6th, 2025 12:29 PM Author: Candy Ride It is silly. I would say it is retarded or brain dead but that seems clearly over the line. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5806993&forum_id=2"#49488467) |
 |
Date: December 6th, 2025 12:32 PM Author: Paralegal Six Nine I wouldn't. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5806993&forum_id=2"#49488479) |
Date: December 6th, 2025 12:34 PM Author: (._.`) this sounds like a good idea. I also think you should quanitfy it by adding "really" silly, or perhaps "super" silly. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5806993&forum_id=2"#49488493) |
|
Date: December 6th, 2025 12:37 PM Author: Paralegal Six Nine Maybe go so far as to call it "gay" (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5806993&forum_id=2"#49488503) |
|
Date: December 6th, 2025 12:46 PM Author: GREED * LUST * ENVY * RUIN (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5806993&forum_id=2"#49488525) |
|
Date: December 6th, 2025 12:37 PM Author: ever-growing, towering monument of mental illness (gunneratttt) pejoratives only make your own arguments appear weaker and you look worse to the court. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5806993&forum_id=2"#49488501) |
|
Date: December 6th, 2025 12:47 PM Author: Candy Ride People say ridiculous all the time. How is silly a bridge too far. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5806993&forum_id=2"#49488531) |
|
Date: December 6th, 2025 12:56 PM Author: ever-growing, towering monument of mental illness (gunneratttt) bad lawyers do. i'm talking about all pejoratives including "ridiculous."
there is no advantage to doing this. if the argument is ridiculous the court won't have to be told that. if they agree with you your use will either have a neutral or negative impression. so there's no advantage.
tcr instead of just saying "it's silly" is to highlight its silliness instead of just saying it outright. there are plenty of ways you can shit on OC's arguments without just saying "they're silly." if it truly is silly this shouldn't be difficult. |
|
Date: December 6th, 2025 1:20 PM Author: UhOh (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5806993&forum_id=2"#49488652) |
|
Date: December 6th, 2025 1:19 PM Author: UhOh (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5806993&forum_id=2"#49488646) |
|
Date: December 6th, 2025 12:48 PM Author: barnabyjones use "unserious" instead (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5806993&forum_id=2"#49488536) |
|
Date: December 6th, 2025 12:55 PM Author: (._.`) could also use 'baseless'. This is one of my favs (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5806993&forum_id=2"#49488556) |
|
Date: December 6th, 2025 12:58 PM Author: Paralegal Six Nine Nonsensical (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5806993&forum_id=2"#49488565) |
|
Date: December 6th, 2025 1:00 PM Author: ever-growing, towering monument of mental illness (gunneratttt) "X argument is not supported by the law" (see, e.g. fundamental case that every idiot knows).
recently ACB cited marbury when addressing a KTJ dissent that was absolutely ruthless. that's far more effective and devasting than saying "KTJ's dissent is silly." don't say it's silly, show why it's silly. |
|
Date: December 6th, 2025 1:01 PM Author: Zezima Seems cheap (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5806993&forum_id=2"#49488572) |
|
Date: December 6th, 2025 1:17 PM Author: Ass Sunstein wacky (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5806993&forum_id=2"#49488636) |
|
Date: December 6th, 2025 1:18 PM Author: Paralegal Six Nine finna make shiz up (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5806993&forum_id=2"#49488642) |
|
Date: December 6th, 2025 1:19 PM Author: christmas time “trooned out” (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5806993&forum_id=2"#49488651) |
|
Date: December 6th, 2025 1:25 PM Author: Darn tootin (πΎπ£) frankly, opposing counsel’s argument is deadass specious, unsupported by precedent or statute, and should be afforded no weight by the court (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5806993&forum_id=2"#49488669) |
|
Date: December 6th, 2025 1:25 PM Author: ever-growing, towering monument of mental illness (gunneratttt) the court should low key consider sanctions no cap frfr (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5806993&forum_id=2"#49488673) |