i thought legal documents were meant to be difficult to read...

Hence the term: "Legally Blind"

:-)

I think the standard is to use the absolutely smallest type on your computer combined with the absolutely longest words in your thesaurus.

I guess the drier the subject, the more lighthearted the responses. :-)

Hereinafter we (Veer) will reserve the right to modify, tweak, re-typeset, and change the aforementioned legal documents for the purposes of, but not limited to, improving readability, legibility, and visual organization. IN NO EVENT SHALL VEER BE LIABLE FOR INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, EXEMPLARY OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES FOR ANY BREACH OF ITS OBLIGATIONS OR WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED RESULTING FROM THESE TYPOGRAPHIC IMPROVEMENTS, (INCLUDING LOSS OF PROFITS OR BUSINESS, LOST OPPORTUNITY OR LOSS OF BUSINESS REPUTATION), EVEN IF VEER HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. Which we haven't. I guess.

Thanks anyway.

Jon

TWAS BRILIG WITH SLIVEY TOVES

Every company has his own standards. Everyone typeset their docs as they want. I don't think there's a standard imposed by a law.

Of course, if you think about a doc for, let's say, Library of Congres, I know there's a manual of style.

"Every company has his own standards. Everyone typeset their docs as they want. I don't think there's a standard imposed by a law."

Not quite. There is a minimum type size required by law, or the contractual information is not considered binding. I had an acquaintance get out of a contract based on this defense. I can't recall the measure off hand but it is based on old Linotype metal type size standards. Linotype was used in setting legal documents because of oft required line changes that were facilitated by the Linotype process. And, though not used much anymore, the metal type size is still the legal standard.

Gerald

the metal type size is still the legal standard

The smallest metal type i saw was at 4pt.

Anyway, where im from, Romania, there's no such standards. Hehe, there are NO standards at all. Sadly�

As a lawyer, I think I can comment generally, though of course details vary from place to place. Needless to say, my response should not be taken as giving legal advice to anyone about how to draft their contracts!

(1) There are very few formal standards for typefaces in legal documents like contracts. Courts do sometimes have quite detailed standards, specifying minimum size etc. The Supreme Court of the United States, for instance requires documents to be in type no smaller than what it thinks is 11 point (which it ascertains by measuring the apparent size of the type: Times 11 point, eg, fails).

(2) There often are standards which require particular clauses to be made prominent if they are to be effective. To that extent the "prominence" of particular clauses may matter. One judge said that some clauses were so unfair and unexpected that they ought to be written in red bold type with a hand pointing to them in the margin.

(3) Attempts are often made to "incorporate" contractual terms by placing them on the back of documents which are not inherently contractual. For instance, an invoice (since ex hypothesi it is issued after the agreement has been made) is not obviously a "contract document". Yet it often attempts to incorporate terms. Similarly with tickets and so forth. In these cases, the prominence and obviousness of the contractual terms may matter.

(4) Contrary to what is generally believed, I do not believe that the use of small type stems from any desire on the part of the lawyer to make terms hard to read. The lawyer, when s/he wishes to obfuscate, does it by using incomprehensible language, not invisible ink. It flows, I think, simply from a practical desire to cram a lot of text into a confined space. When lawyers do not have space constraints, they generally opt for legible (though not always readable) typography.

(5) On the whole, the lawyers would always be happy to have the type larger. It tends to be the client and the designers who want small type. Clients generally don't like reminding their customers more than they absolutely must that they are entering into a legal transaction at all. It's a passion killer.

(6) No doubt typographical help could improve these dreadful documents. But the underlying problem is one of wordiness in a confined space. The real remedy is rewriting in clear language: a lawyer's job, not a typographer's.

(7) Many of the contracts one sees are hopelessly badly drafted. Many of them would fail to prove enforceable in court. But people go on using terms that are unfair or unenforceable, because experience shows that most people do not go to court, and do not know their rights. And from inertia and conservatism, two well-known friends of the law.

Very useful info, Paul - thanks very much for you considered response! Cheers, Jon Parker

I've remembered this: in France there's a law who says that the ISBN shoud be typeset in 9pt minimum.

"The Supreme Court of the United States, for instance requires documents to be in type no smaller than what it thinks is 11 point"

Wow...our highest court in the nation, a court which depends highly on printed documentation, can't figure out a more specific definition of legible type?

*sigh*

O no, on the contrary, it has very strict standards. So far as I can see, its idea of 11-point rests on either the x-height or the ascender height (not clear which) of 11pt New Century Schoolbook -- it's own preferred typeface. There seems to be some degree of confusion as can be seen from the following extract from the guide to filing paid cases.

---

quote:

The petition shall be typeset in traditional Roman 11-point or larger type with 2-point or more leading between lines. Footnotes must be 9-point or larger with 2-point or more leading between lines. Please note that computer generated �Roman� type is smaller than traditional Roman type and you may need to increase the font size. Any type that does not measure on a typesize finder to be 11-point for the body and 9-point for footnotes will not be accepted. There is a discrepancy between what traditionally is considered 11-point type and what today�s computers refer to as 11-point type. The problem encompasses both typeface and type size. The Roman type mentioned in the Rules refers to traditional roman type (as opposed to script or italics). It does not refer to computer-generated "Roman" such as "Times New Roman" font. Likewise, computer-generated 11-point type size does not always correspond to 11-point type size produced using traditional printing methods. The typeface should be similar to that used in the current volumes of the United States Reports. Rule 33.1(b). New Century Schoolbook 11-point type closely approximates the typeface used in the United States Reports. Times New Roman is acceptable if 12-point type is used for the body of the petition and 10-point type is used for footnotes.

---

This is a document I had to set (redesign) when I worked in a studio
doing pharmaceutical packaging.

QualiFarma Copia Commissione Copia_COMMISSIONE.pdf (30.9 k)

>quote:

The petition shall be typeset in traditional Roman 11-point or larger ...losely approximates the typeface used in the United States Reports. Times New Roman is acceptable if 12-point type is used for the body of the petition and 10-point type is used for footnotes.<

Now that was surely written by the Government Printing Office (GPO). GPO must think evrything they write must be at least a page long, even if it causes more confusion than clarity.

When I bought a flat recently, the contract was set in 12pt Avant Garde. It hurt my eyes.

Avante Garde hurts my stomach every time I see it. In the mid-eightys, when the computer industry chose Avante Garde as one of the original 35 "freebe" fonts included with every laser printer, it made me ill to think that the world would be flooded by pages of it instead of something well designed like Futura. Luckilly, computer companies are more likely to consult good typgraphers these days.

ChrisL