Commonly Misused Legal Words and How to Use Them Correctly
A practical guide to the legal terms lawyers, paralegals, and support staff most often misuse—and how to fix them.
Precision is the backbone of effective legal writing. A single misplaced word can change a party’s obligations, weaken an argument, or confuse a judge or client. Misused terms are more than minor style issues in law; they can affect how a document is interpreted and whether it is enforceable.
This guide highlights frequently confused words in the legal industry, explains their correct meanings, and offers practical examples aimed at lawyers, paralegals, law students, and legal support professionals.
Why Word Choice Matters So Much in Law
Legal documents often function as binding rules—contracts, statutes, court orders, and opinions must be clear enough that a reasonable reader can understand rights and obligations. Courts routinely interpret language according to its ordinary meaning, which makes accuracy in word choice critical.
- Ambiguous wording can lead to disputes and litigation over interpretation.
- Incorrect terminology may undermine credibility with courts and clients.
- Inconsistent usage within a document can be used to argue for or against particular interpretations.
Developing a habit of checking commonly misused words is therefore a simple but powerful way to improve legal writing quality.
Confusing Pairs That Change Legal Meaning
Many misused terms come in pairs that look or sound similar but carry distinct meanings. The following subsections focus on pairs that frequently appear in briefs, contracts, and correspondence.
1. Affect vs. Effect
| Word | Typical Role | Core Meaning | Example (Legal Context) |
|---|---|---|---|
| affect | Verb | To influence or change something | “The new regulation may affect existing settlement agreements.” |
| effect | Noun (usually) | The result, outcome, or consequence | “The effect of the order was to stay all proceedings.” |
Memory tip: Affect is usually an action; effect is usually an end result.
The Future of AI: Preventing a Big Tech Monopoly >
2. Imply vs. Infer
- Imply: What the speaker or writer suggests indirectly.
- Infer: What the listener or reader concludes from the information.
Examples:
- “The letter implies the parties anticipated further negotiations.”
- “From the witness’s hesitation, the jury could infer uncertainty.”
In legal analysis, misusing these verbs can blur who is doing the communicating and who is drawing conclusions—a distinction courts often treat very carefully.
3. Farther vs. Further
- Farther: Physical distance.
Example: “The accident occurred farther from the intersection than the complaint alleges.” - Further: Non-physical distance, time, degree, or as “in addition.”
Examples: “The court declined to inquire further.” “Further, the statute supports this interpretation.”
Because legal writing often deals with both physical locations and analytical reasoning, choosing the correct term clarifies what kind of distance is at issue.
4. Principle vs. Principal
- Principle: A rule, doctrine, or guiding standard.
Example: “The principle of stare decisis promotes stability in the law.” - Principal (noun): A person in a leading or primary role (e.g., party to a transaction, school principal, principal in an agency relationship).
Example: “The principal authorized the agent to sign the contract.” - Principal (adjective): First, foremost, or main.
Example: “The principal issue on appeal is jurisdiction.”
Confusing these terms can cause real ambiguity in contracts and agency law, where a “principal” is often a legally significant party.
5. Proscribe vs. Prescribe
- Proscribe: To forbid or prohibit.
Example: “The statute proscribes insider trading.” - Prescribe: To order, set forth, or provide a rule.
Example: “The regulations prescribe the procedure for filing complaints.”
In legislation, “proscribed” conduct is forbidden, while “prescribed” procedures or time limits are set out as requirements. Mixing them reverses the meaning.
6. Due Diligence vs. Do Diligence
- Due diligence: A defined legal and business concept describing the investigation or review conducted before a transaction or decision.
- Do diligence: A mistaken phrase that should not appear in formal writing.
“Due diligence” has developed as a term of art in corporate, securities, and transactional practice, referring to the systematic examination of risks and representations before closing a deal. Spelling it incorrectly weakens professionalism and can suggest unfamiliarity with standard practice.
Timing and Logic: Words That Mislead Readers
Some expressions are misused not because they sound alike, but because they are applied in the wrong logical or temporal relationship.
7. Consequently vs. Subsequently
- Consequently: Indicates cause and effect.
Example: “The plaintiff missed the filing deadline; consequently, the claim was dismissed.” - Subsequently: Indicates sequence in time only.
Example: “The parties settled; subsequently, the court dismissed the case.”
Confusing these terms suggests a causal link where there may only be a chronological sequence, which can distort a fact pattern or support an unfounded inference about liability.
8. Than vs. Then
- Than: Used for comparison.
Example: “The revised order is broader than the original injunction.” - Then: Indicates time or logical order.
Example: “The court granted summary judgment and then entered final judgment.”
In legal drafting, using then instead of than in comparisons may not always confuse meaning, but it is grammatically incorrect and undermines clarity and professionalism.
9. As Such vs. Therefore (and Other Connectors)
The phrase as such is widely misused as a synonym for “therefore” or “accordingly.” In formal legal writing, that usage is discouraged.
- Use as such only when it clearly refers back to a previously identified noun.
- Use therefore, thus, or accordingly to introduce a conclusion.
Correct usage:
- “The fourth paragraph is nonbinding dicta. As such, it has no precedential value.” (Here, “as such” refers to “dicta.”)
- “The plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies; therefore, the claim is barred.”
Subtle Pairs With Big Practical Differences
Some confusing pairs may not completely change the meaning of a sentence, but choosing correctly makes your writing sharper and more professional.
10. Attain vs. Obtain
- Attain: To reach or achieve a goal or level.
Example: “The parties attained a mutually acceptable settlement.” - Obtain: To acquire or get possession of something.
Example: “Counsel must obtain the client’s written consent.”
In regulatory or compliance contexts, confusing these words may blur whether the focus is on achieving an objective or physically acquiring a document or asset.
11. Forego vs. Forgo
- Forego: To come before (precede).
Example: “The recitals that forego this agreement provide background.” - Forgo: To do without or waive.
Example: “The plaintiff agreed to forgo punitive damages.”
Most legal writers intend “forgo” (to give up), especially in settlement and waiver clauses. Using “forego” instead suggests an earlier event rather than a relinquished right.
12. Tortious vs. Tortuous
- Tortious: Relating to a tort or civil wrong.
Example: “The complaint alleges tortious interference with contract.” - Tortuous: Winding, complex, full of twists and turns.
Example: “The negotiations followed a tortuous path.”
Because tort law is fundamental in civil practice, keeping these spellings distinct is essential. Courts and legal dictionaries treat “tortious” as the standard adjective for tort liability.
Usage Pitfalls That Weaken Legal Writing
Beyond specific word pairs, certain habits routinely weaken clarity and concision in legal documents.
13. Felt vs. Thought / Concluded
Using felt to describe reasoning suggests emotion rather than analysis:
- Weaker: “Counsel felt the offer was unfair.”
- Stronger: “Counsel concluded the offer did not reflect the client’s damages.”
Legal writing is typically expected to present reasoned conclusions, not personal feelings. Replacing “felt” with “believed,” “reasoned,” or “concluded” clarifies that an analytical judgment is being described.
14. Very and Really as Empty Intensifiers
Intensifiers like very and really add little to legal arguments. Instead of “very important,” describe why an issue is dispositive, jurisdictional, or outcome-determinative. Many style guides for lawyers recommend replacing vague intensifiers with specific, concrete description or removing them altogether to tighten prose.
15. As Per vs. Per
In formal legal writing, as per is needlessly wordy. Per alone is sufficient and widely accepted:
- Wordy: “As per the court’s order, discovery is stayed.”
- Cleaner: “Per the court’s order, discovery is stayed.”
Many legal writing programs and style guides encourage avoiding unnecessary filler phrases to keep sentences direct and readable.
Practical Strategies to Avoid Misused Legal Words
Improving word choice is less about memorizing every pair and more about adopting a disciplined approach to drafting and editing.
- Slow down on first drafts
When using a term that has a commonly confused partner (e.g., “affect/effect,” “proscribe/prescribe”), pause long enough to confirm that the chosen word matches your intended meaning. - Create a personal checklist
Keep a one-page list of the terms you frequently misuse. Review it before finalizing important briefs, contracts, and client letters. Law school writing centers routinely recommend personal error lists as an editing tool. - Use trusted legal dictionaries
Authoritative legal dictionaries and style manuals, such as Black’s Law Dictionary and legal writing guides used in U.S. law schools, provide precise definitions and usage notes that can resolve doubts. - Read opinions and model documents
Appellate decisions and pattern jury instructions often show how courts use terminology in context. Observing consistent judicial usage is one of the best ways to internalize correct legal meanings. - Ask for peer review
Encourage colleagues to flag misused terms in your drafts, and do the same for them. Over time, repeated corrections help eliminate persistent habits.
Quick Reference Table: Selected Commonly Misused Legal Words
| Term | Use This When You Mean… | Avoid or Check |
|---|---|---|
| affect | To influence something | effect (unless you mean result) |
| effect | The outcome or result | affect (as a verb) for influence |
| imply | Speaker/writer suggests | infer, which is what the reader does |
| infer | Reader/listener concludes | imply, which belongs to the speaker |
| proscribe | To forbid or prohibit | prescribe (to order or set forth) |
| prescribe | To establish a rule or requirement | proscribe (if you mean ban) |
| principle | Rule or doctrine | principal (person or main thing) |
| principal | Main person or primary item | principle (abstract rule) |
| tortious | Relating to a tort | tortuous (winding or complex) |
| farther | Physical distance | further (for time or degree) |
| further | Additional discussion or non-physical distance | farther (for literal miles or feet) |
| due diligence | Pre-transaction investigation | “do diligence” (incorrect phrase) |
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
Q: Why are misused words such a serious issue in legal documents?
A: Legal texts often function as enforceable rules or evidence of intent. Courts rely heavily on the ordinary meaning of words and on precise drafting to interpret statutes, contracts, and pleadings. Misused terms can create ambiguity, affect outcomes, or open the door to costly disputes.
Q: Should I prioritize legal terms of art over plain language?
A: Use terms of art when a specialized legal meaning is required, but favor clear, plain English wherever possible. Many legal writing authorities and judicial style guides now encourage minimizing unnecessary jargon while preserving technical accuracy.
Q: How can law students train themselves to avoid these mistakes?
A: Law schools often provide checklists of commonly misused words, and writing centers recommend consulting such lists during editing. Students can also compare their drafts against judicial opinions, use reputable legal dictionaries, and keep a personal record of recurring errors.
Q: Are judges and clerks really paying attention to these distinctions?
A: Yes. Appellate judges, trial judges, and law clerks routinely evaluate briefs for clarity, precision, and credibility. Major courts and bar organizations publish guidance on effective legal writing that emphasizes careful word choice and avoidance of common usage errors.
Q: Is it ever acceptable to use informal phrases like “as per” or strong intensifiers like “really” in filings?
A: In most formal filings—motions, briefs, and contracts—those phrases are best avoided. Legal writing resources recommend concise, direct alternatives (such as “per” or “therefore”) and specific factual support instead of vague intensifiers.
References
- Law and Language: Effective Communication in Legal Settings — Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. 2020-08-14. https://www.uscourts.gov/statistics-reports/law-and-language-resources-effective-communication
- Commonly Misused Words and Phrases — Columbia Law School Legal Writing Center. 2022-05-01. https://www.law.columbia.edu/sites/default/files/2022-05/WC%20Handout%20Misused%20Words%20%26%20Phrases.revised%205.22.pdf
- Plain Language in Government Writing — Plain Language Action and Information Network (PLAIN). 2023-03-10. https://www.plainlanguage.gov/guidelines/
- Due Diligence in Business Transactions — U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of Investor Education. 2021-11-18. https://www.investor.gov/introduction-investing/investing-basics/how-investments-work/understanding-due-diligence
- Introduction to Legal Writing and Analysis — University of North Carolina School of Law Writing and Learning Resources. 2020-09-01. https://law.unc.edu/academics/legal-writing/
Similar Articles
Read full bio of Sneha Tete
