Writing Law Tutors LLC

🔷 For individual attorneys & law firms:

-Conduct 1:1 legal-writing instruction for practicing attorneys to improve the clarity, conciseness, readability, and persuasiveness of their legal and other professional writing. 
-Devise lesson plans to teach fundamental writing skills based on review of past writing samples. 
-Prepare suggestions and feedback to improve current writing projects, including briefs, memos, business letters, and thought-leadership/marketing publications. 
-Publish LinkedIn columns to provide legal-writing tips under #DearLegalWriter.

🔷 For law students:  

Provide law-school academic, career, and legal writing coaching for law students. Services include: (1) 1:1 coaching; (2) resume & cover-letter reviews; (3) detailed suggestions on legal writing samples for submission with job applications; (4) interview preparation; (5) career counseling; (6) LinkedIn profile reviews & networking support.  Publish content for law students in 💌 Dear 1L column under #Dear1L.

Founder | Legal Writing Coach & Trainer

Legal Writing Coach | Law School Tutor & Career Consultant

University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School

Conduct mock interviews for law students preparing for law-firm, on-campus job interviews (OCI).  Review law-student resumes and writing samples in advance of submission for OCI and judicial clerkships.

Career Consultant

Reed Smith LLP

Counsel

Proskauer Rose LLP

Special Employment Law Counsel

The Hershey Company

Senior Counsel

Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP

Senior Associate

Associate

Goodwin Procter LLP

Summer Associate

Testa, Hurwitz & Thibeault, LLP

Paralegal

The Princeton Review

Course Instructor

Legal Writing Coach | Teacher | Writer | Creator, Dear 1L® & Dear Legal Writer | Former BigLaw Litigator (L&E) | Law-Mom

Hi. I’m Amanda. I work with lawyers who want to improve their legal writing—whether that’s drafting more persuasive briefs, sending clearer emails to clients, writing thought-leadership articles, or just saving time on revisions. 

I also have a broader mission: to improve how lawyers and law students learn legal writing. We need more up-front teaching and less after-the-fact criticizing. Most of the time an associate makes a mistake, it’s because no one ever taught them otherwise. I aim to fill that gap.

I am a teacher at my core, and I adore nurturing both new and not-so-new legal writers. I’d love to help you make legal writing a superpower that propels your career forward the way it did mine.

Before doing what I do now, I spent 20 years as a BigLaw litigator writing for demanding partners in high-stakes, complex, motion-heavy litigation. I did briefs, blogs, letters, client alerts, long-form articles, appeals, and everything in between. I also served as co-editor for two law department blogs and supervised associates in their drafting work. In the process, I got trained by some of the best legal writers in the business.

In 2021, I branched out on my own & formed Writing Law Tutors LLC. Since then, my focus has been on improving the legal writing experience of lawyers & law students everywhere. 

📕 To that end, I have an Amazon best-seller, “Dear 1L: Notes to Nurture a New Legal Writer.” I recommend it for all as the best place to start!

▪️ For litigators: I provide the tools, training, feedback you need to become a confident legal writer. Let me be a “Secret Senior Counsel” who helps you improve your drafts before you turn them in. That will mean less red ink and a lot better reviews.

▪️ For law students: You know me from my Dear 1L letters and my book. I bring the same passion to my coaching sessions. I’d love to help you on your journey to becoming a super-powered legal writer. 

▪️ For pre-law students: Work with me on your law school personal statement and prepare for law school writing the summer before you start. 

⚓️  My anchor is my family. I am a mother of three girls who are in their 20s. I am fortunate to have an amazing husband, Matt, a managing partner at Kleinbard in Philadelphia, who helps support my journey. 

CONTACT:  You can best reach me through Dear1L.com, or by email at Amanda@Dear1L.com. 

I will be psyched to hear from you!

💌 Amanda

When I was 24, I was single, broke, and childless. 

—All I said to myself was, ‘I can’t wait to finish law school and start making money,’ and ‘I long to get married + have children.’

When I was 34, I was married with 3 girls under age 5. 

We paid for 1 full-time nanny & 2 full-time daycares at an after-tax cost of ~80K annually. I worked 2700 hours in BigLaw. 

—All I said to myself was, ‘I can’t wait for the girls to go start kindergarten,’ and ‘I long to stop working so hard.’

When I was 44, we had 3 busy tweens who couldn’t drive themselves to anything. 

We’d amassed 10 years of childcare debt and still lived with a full-time nanny. I was still grinding it out in BigLaw, albeit less so.  

—All I said to myself was, ‘I can’t wait for the girls to be old enough to drive themselves,’ and ‘I long to retire.’

This year, I turned 56. We’ve long-since turned debt into savings, I work for myself (much, much less), and we live in an empty nest. 

Although I might say to myself, ‘I can’t wait for grandchildren,’ and ‘I long for Matt to retire,” (indeed, both are true), that isn’t the full truth.

The full truth is that there were wonderful things at 24, 34, and 44, and I didn’t take enough time to live in the moment and soak those things in. I was too busy looking for that next, so-called “better” stage. 

But today, I’m soaking in all the good things that DO come with this age. There’s no sense waiting or longing for the next stage. It will come, soon enough.

And so, if you’re like me, at 24, 34, 44, waiting and longing for what’s next, please pause and reflect. Soak in the good things of this stage—all of them—fully. 

Your next stage will come, soon enough.

💌 Amanda

Amanda Haverstick

Creative Legal Writing Coach & Pre-Law Advisor. Amazon Bestselling Author, “Dear 1L: Notes to Nurture a New Legal Writer.” Big Law Alum. Law Mom.

Dear Legal Writer, I turn to these five books so often that I need them no matter where I am.

So as I head home today to Philly and leave these copies behind in Rhode Island, it’s not because I can do without them—it’s because they’re so essential to me, I keep a set in each place.

📘 Bryan A. Garner’s “Legal Writing in Plain English”: 

This is the book that, two decades ago, first energized me to try to become an excellent legal writer. It remains gold today. Every legal writer NEEDS this book.

📘 Simon & Cooney’s “The Case for Effective Legal Writing”: 

This 2024 release immediately grabbed my attention. It’s full of compelling examples showing how poor legal writing led to actual legal consequences. A must-read for legal-writing professors and coaches.

📘 Ryan McCarl’s “Elegant Legal Writing”: 

Also new in 2024, this book offers a clear, organized discussion of everything you need to write well. Whenever I’m unsure about a writing principle, I check to see what Ryan says.

📘 Ross Guberman’s “Point Made”: 

Every time I return to this book, I find something new and insightful. Ross walks you through each section of a legal brief, sharing the best examples from top appellate writers. It’s gold—worthy of being savored by all appellate writers everywhere.

📕 Amanda Haverstick’s “Dear 1L”:

My own book for incoming law students, but it’s proved its value as a reference for all stages. Inside, you’ll not only find practical writing strategies from my 20 years in Big Law, but also answers to legal-writing questions that arise all the time (“which v. that” and how to use “However,” to name a few). 

I use it myself, often, and every legal writer will find it a welcome addition to their library.

**
As I leave these copies behind, I realize again how vital good books are to our growth as legal writers. 

📬 What book has most transformed your writing? I’d love to hear what tops your list.

📬 Anyone like me leave a copy of a book in two places?

💌 Amanda

#DearLegalWriter

No alternative text description for this image

Dear 1L, I got a 35 on my Contracts midterm.

(35 out of 100.)

It was Oct 1993.
It was my first & only feedback.
I thought the world was going to end.
And it forced some intense soul-searching.

To be sure, like most 1L midterms, mine was merely a “practice” exam. But to me, it was devastating.

My initial, angry disbelief quickly became embarrassment. I also didn’t know what I’d done wrong.

I had done all the reading.
I had attended every class. 
And I had studied SO much.

I knew the material by heart. I really did. 

Really!

⬇️

Some takeaways:

I failed because the point was to apply the material I knew to brand new situations. I had no idea how to do this. Most 1Ls do not either—in early October.

You can learn. It just takes practice. 

So, do your soul-searching. Kick and scream, get mad, cry. But get it out of your system and MOVE ON.

Plan to learn how to write an IRAC essay and start practicing.

A poor midterm grade should not matter. 

I ended up with a flat A in Contracts. 

You can, too!

Let’s GO!!!

💌 Amanda

#Dear1L

Dear 1L, Commas + periods go INSIDE the quotes in legal writing. Here’s a way to remember: “𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐭𝐥𝐞 𝐤𝐢𝐝𝐬 𝐦𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐲 𝐈𝐍𝐒𝐈𝐃𝐄 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞.”

🩳 “Little kids” are short. 
Periods and commas [.,] are little kids. 
They sit on or below the line.
They’re too short for cars to see. 
They must play safely INSIDE the fence (the quotes).

👖 “Big kids” are tall. 
Question marks, exclamation points & semi-colons [?!;] are big.
They sit above the line.
They’re tall enough for cars to see.
They can play safely OUTSIDE the fence (the quotes).

TWO IMPORTANT NOTES:

1️⃣ Commas and periods ALWAYS go inside the quotes. This is true even if they didn’t appear in the original that you’re quoting. 

Let me demonstrate that last part:

🔷 𝔼𝕩𝕒𝕞𝕡𝕝𝕖 𝟙:

Original by court: “The complaint lacked sufficient facts to survive summary dismissal, but we granted leave to amend.”

Your sentence: The court dismissed the complaint because it “lacked sufficient facts,” but plaintiff got leave to amend. ✅

	NOTE:  The comma after “facts” goes inside the quote marks, even though no comma was there in the original.

🔷 𝔼𝕩𝕒𝕞𝕡𝕝𝕖 𝟚:

Original by court: “We vacate and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”

Your sentence: The court “remand[ed] for further proceedings.” ✅

	NOTE: The period after “proceedings” goes inside the quote marks, even though no period was there in the original.

2️⃣ Ending question marks, exclamation points, and semi-colons go outside the quotes if they weren’t present in the original. But if they did appear in the original, we put them inside the quote marks.

To illustrate:

◾️ Did she ask, “What time is it?”
◾️ Did she assert, “I’ll leave at 9:00”?

***
Please ask me any questions you might have. These punctuation/quote rules trip up lots of folks, and they are DIFFERENT outside the US.

💌 Amanda

#DearLegalWriter

“If you want sexy work, get good at grunt work.”

Starting in Big Law? Take note!

When I supervised associates, I could always tell when one was less than thrilled to receive a project.

I’d sense a subtle eyeroll, 
an inner groan,
or even a little sigh.

That made me NOT want to work with the associate again.

So please go in with a better attitude:
▪️ No project is beneath you.
▪️ You are eager and enthusiastic.
▪️ You are genuinely grateful for the chance to prove yourself.

Otherwise, you won’t just NOT get any “sexy” work, you may get no work at all.

👉 Unless and until you master grunt work, senior lawyers will never trust you with more substantive assignments.

Wishing luck to all the new folks starting out in Big Law this fall!

💌 Amanda

Legal Writing Coach & Pre-Law Advisor. Amazon Bestselling Author, “Dear 1L: Notes to Nurture a New Legal Writer.” Big Law Alum. Law Mom.

Dear 1L, Be careful not to fall into a dicta trap on your memo. 

I did my 1L fall, and it was fatal. 

I focused on what the courts SAID instead of how the courts RULED. 😯 

In other words, I chased rhetoric, strong language, and “important statements” in the opinions, thinking those words controlled the outcome. 

They didn’t.

I had fallen straight into a DICTA TRAP.

🔷 “Dicta” (from the Latin “obiter dictum”) just means an “aside”

—something said in a judge’s opinion that isn’t essential to deciding the case. 

Dicta may sound elegant. 
Dicta may even be persuasive.
But dicta is not the binding law. 

So PLEASE make sure when reading the cases for your own memo that you steer clear of all dicta!

⬇️
 
Here’s the 3-KEY secret to avoiding a dicta trap:

🔑 Choose cases for your memo that have facts most like yours. 

🔑 Compare the specific facts in those cases with the specific facts in your hypo. Get granular—down to the smallest details that might flip a result. 

🔑 Don’t rely on what the courts say. Courts say a lot of things that don’t matter to the outcome. Stick to how the case actually came out (i.e., who won).

***
I didn’t learn these keys until months later, thanks to a kind 1L friend who let me into the secret.

I’ve never forgotten it—or her generosity.

Learn from my blunder early. Dicta can fascinate you, distract you, and destroy your analysis all at once. 

Please don’t let my mistake happen to you.  

💌 Amanda

#Dear1L

Dear Legal Writer, Stop using “would” before your verbs.

The word “would” wreaks special havoc in a complaint.

E.g.

❌ “Plaintiff would drive 45 minutes longer for the new role.”

❌ “Plaintiff would contribute $100,000 to the fund.”

Each is ambiguous. 

In fact, each arguably asserts nothing at all.

—Did Plaintiff actually drive at all?

—Did Plaintiff ever actually contribute?

In legal writing, though, unless you are TRYING to obfuscate, you should always use words that are clear and precise.

So skip the word “would.”
That’s my advice. 🙂

TL/dr*:

❌ “Plaintiff would do X.”

✅ “Plaintiff did X.”

Please let me know if you have any questions!

💌 Amanda

#DearLegalWriter

*TL/dr:  “Too Long/didn’t read” 
                    (aka, “Here’s a summary.”)

**

P.S. When you write “Plaintiff would do X,” you might mean any of at least 10 different things!

 1: Plaintiff was willing to do X (but we’re not sure if she actually did).

 2: It was understood that Plaintiff must be willing to do X (but we’re again not sure if she actually did).

 3: Plaintiff intended to do X (but may or may not have followed through).

 4: Plaintiff agreed to do X (as part of a contract or arrangement, but the action might not have occurred yet).

 5: Plaintiff was expected to do X (based on circumstances or prior agreements).

 6: Plaintiff was obligated to do X (but we’re not sure if she fulfilled the obligation).

 7: Plaintiff had the capacity or ability to do X (but it’s unclear if she exercised this capacity).

 8: Plaintiff typically did X in similar situations (implying a pattern of behavior without confirming this specific instance).

 9: Plaintiff would have done X (if certain conditions had been met, suggesting a hypothetical scenario).

 10: Plaintiff was in the process of doing X (implying an ongoing action without confirming completion).

**

And that’s a lot of AMBIGUITY!!!

📬 What other words are taboo in complaints?

Dear 1L, Pretend your professor knows NOTHING about your Memo.

—She doesn’t know any of the facts in the hypothetical.
—He doesn’t know any of the cases you’ve found in your research.
—They don’t know any of the legal principles you’ve found for your analysis.

NOTHING.

Your professor is just some random lawyer who happens to pick up your memo to read.

Could that random lawyer follow your memo?

The answer needs to be “yes.”

So you need to spell things out.

Here’s what I mean by that:

👉 In terms of FACTS, put every single fact that matters in your Facts section. Don’t paraphrase. Describe what happened. 

—Remember, your reader knows nothing about your case. 

Can they follow your facts? Can they visualize what happened as well as you can now do? Those are the questions you want to be answering “yes” to.

(Also, you aren’t allowed to bring up a fact in your Discussion section if it wasn’t in the Facts section, so this rule is important for multiple reasons.)

👉 In terms of the “E” in CREAC, describe each of the example cases completely, including every fact that matters.

—Remember, your reader has read none of the example cases. 

Can they visualize what happened in the example case as well as you can? Can they feel confident in your description so they don’t have to go read the case on their own to understand it? Answer “yes” to those questions.

(Also, you can’t later argue about a fact from an example case unless you’ve already told the reader what that fact is earlier.)

👉 In terms of the “A” in CREAC, you need to compare or contrast the specific facts of your hypo with the specific facts of the example cases you have already described. Don’t generalize; compare hypo facts directly to case facts.

Spell out how each example case is similar to or different from your hypo.

RECAP:

Your professor is just a random lawyer who picks up your memo to read.

Spell it out so they can follow you.

Sending you good luck and godspeed. This legal-writing process is long and agonizingly hard, I know. Stay the course. You can do this.

💌 Amanda

#Dear1L

Dear 1L, Big Law opens its portals Nov. 1! 

(That’s for 𝟐𝐋 𝐬𝐮𝐦𝐦𝐞𝐫 jobs; yes, it is nuts).  

👉 And it means you’ve got FIVE urgent tasks.

1-  Update and perfect your resume. (Yes, it really needs to be “perfect.”)

2-  Complete & improve your LinkedIn profile. (That’s the FIRST place firms will look you up: Don’t be underwhelming.)

3-  Research firms, figure out what they do, and decide where to apply.
 
4-  Decide what YOU generally want to do. (Transactional? Litigation? Something else?)

5-  Start networking!!! (Many of your classmates have already been doing this.)

In October, I’ll be sending out a series of emails containing my best advice for 2025-26 on all these topics—with letters going out as soon as THIS week.

But you have to be signed up to receive them, or you’ll miss out.

The link is here, and it’s FREE!  https://lnkd.in/ewDKjEqd
   I hope you’ll join my growing group of special 1L subscribers!

💌 Amanda

#Dear1L

P.S. Last week, I presented to a class of 1Ls at BC Law School about resumes, LinkedIn, and networking. 

I’ve got a golden slide deck from the talk that I’ll also be sharing by email. Sign up here to receive your free copy: https://lnkd.in/ewDKjEqd

Open article: Archive - Writing Law Tutors by writinglawtutors.com

Taplio

Amanda Haverstick's Linkedin Analytics

Amanda Haverstick

Performance ScoreAmanda Haverstick's LinkedIn Performance

What is Amanda talking about?

Amanda Haverstick's Best Posts (last 30 days)

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

Taplio

.css-6ytdur{background-image:linear-gradient(284deg, rgba(39, 43, 72, 1) 0%, rgba(33, 47, 183, 1) 100%);color:transparent;-webkit-background-clip:text;background-clip:text;}Amanda Haverstick's Linkedin Analytics

Amanda Haverstick

Performance Score.css-goub6s{font-size:var(--chakra-fontSizes-md);font-weight:500;color:var(--chakra-colors-gray-600);display:block;margin-top:var(--chakra-space-1);}Amanda Haverstick's LinkedIn Performance

What is Amanda talking about?

Amanda Haverstick's Best Posts .css-1emoo84{font-size:var(--chakra-fontSizes-md);font-weight:400;color:var(--chakra-colors-gray-600);}(last 30 days)

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

Amanda Haverstick's Linkedin Analytics

Performance ScoreAmanda Haverstick's LinkedIn Performance

Amanda Haverstick's Best Posts (last 30 days)