TOD:
Legalese drives me up the wall sometimes. One of the worst examples is the pretentious use of "utilize(d)" when "use(d)" is more direct, simpler and clearer in EVERY instance of its use (or, "utilization").
I don't work for lawyers, but I know it's from legal documents that the project managers whom I support get their cues for using "utlilize". In letters, memoranda and every form of writing, they use "utilize" as though its usage was a hallmark of their intellect. Writing simpler is a hallmark of intellect, in my opinion.
Whereas DR RLP, hereinafter referred to as "the party of the first part", and DR Vixmom, hereinafter referred to as "the party of the second part" hold differing opinions regarding the usage of formal legal language, hereinafter referred to as "legalese" and inasmuch as the party of the second part holds in high regard the party of the first part and furthermore the party of the second part would consider it a dereliction of duty to, with malice of forethought, willfully cause mental distress to the party of the first part by inflicting upon said party of the first part undue, unnecessary, repetitive and redundant language of the type commonly referred to as "legalese", and in consideration of the deep affection held by the party of the second part for the aforementioned party of the first part, the party of the second part does hereby depose and say that hereinafter the party of the second part undertakes to foreswear utilization of all forms of "legalese" when corresponding, by means, written, electronic or verbal with the party of the first part.
