Careful attention to all portions of the brief.

• Jurisdiction: United States

Section 37. Careful attention to all portions of the brief.—Just as it is a mistake to toss in a dry statement of facts on top of a good argument on the law, and thus to mar the finished product, perhaps with irreparable injury to the case, so also it is a mistake to neglect any other portion of the brief. The circumstance that these other portions are easier to write or less important still does not warrant giving them so little attention that they depreciate the quality of the whole. Three parts of a brief, too frequently given but little care, are considered here.

(a) Summary of argument. The rules of the Supreme Court and of some circuits require that all briefs, or all except the very shortest ones, contain a summary of the argument.²⁰³ A number of courts prescribe in detail just how such a summary is to be constructed, and require that it contain a citation to every authority relied upon in the argument proper.²⁰⁴ What follows is addressed only to the usual situation, not to the specially prescribed forms.

First of all, consider the importance of the summary. It is required in order that the court may have a bird's-eye view of your argument, in somewhat more elaborate form than that available from the index (which, of course, simply sets forth your headings). And, mark this, the summary is one of the portions of the brief read at the outset.²⁰⁵ You will in consequence be well advised to make your summary as appealing as possible, rather than dry-as-dust, and, generally, to expand it substantially over a mere repetition of your headings.²⁰⁶

Therefore, within the space at your disposal, don't be afraid to make it long enough to be effective. The real secret of a good summary of argument is to go beyond mere assertion, because the further you get beyond that, the more convincing the summary will be to the reader. And, although a summary normally should not cite many cases (except when specifically required by rule of court), it is a very good idea to sprinkle your summary with a few of the leading authorities on which you rely. It is well, too, to set off the paragraphs of the summary of argument with roman numerals and sub-letters corresponding to the divisions of the argument proper.

One caution to be added is that the summary should not deviate from the Argument proper; it should be a synopsis of the Argument, not a novel or different train of thought.

(b) Conclusion. Generally the conclusion should be pretty formal, as for example:

The judgment below should be affirmed.

For the foregoing reasons, the judgment below should be reversed, with directions to dismiss the petition.

Or, in a supplemental brief:

For the foregoing additional reasons, the judgment of the district court should be reversed, with directions to enter a judgment granting appropriate relief to the appellant.

On occasion, it is helpful to expand the conclusion somewhat, and to summarize the nub of the argument. Thus, in the case that involved the refusal of a State court to entertain an action based on a Federal statute,²⁰⁷ the conclusion of the petitioner's brief read:

The decision below is based upon a misconception of the nature of the federal system. The judgment should therefore be reversed with instructions to enter judgment on the verdict.

And, in the Haupt treason case,²⁰⁸ a long brief was concluded as follows:

Petitioner was convicted of treason after a sober, careful, and eminently fair trial, on the basis of evidence clearly establishing by the required two witnesses a number of legally sufficient overt acts of aid and comfort to the enemy, and clearly showing intent to betray. Reversal of the judgment below can be supported only by artificial refinements and technicalities which find no support in the treason clause of the Constitution. We therefore respectfully submit that the judgment below should be affirmed.

Similarly, in the Cleveland Stock Yards case,²⁰⁹ the prevailing brief, some points of which have already been set out in Section 30 (supra, p. 70), concluded as follows:

The ruling of the district court sanctions the continued enforcement of a private contractual arrangement which obstructs the free flow of interstate commerce by the levy of a discriminatory...