91 oct


1 Plain Language and "Any All": To Use Or To Not Use? to allow listener the for time to take in what So about "any and all"? Is it By S. Elder David speaker's point. the Third, where one really necessary, or can it be discarded the unfamiliar, be the of words might as and archaic redundant? by Death synonym served a I by recently as rough a given was time Finally, gloss. purposeful neglect continued or exis- two friends what about they described their distrusted lawyers to ability find tence by legal need, that is the question. pompous "the as verbiage that lawyers the right and word, therefore used a Webster's Collegiate New Ninth Dic- use verbal language." for scattergun said, instead of One them shot. of a "I rifle tionary (Merriam-Webster, 1984), p 93, you suppose lawyers refer to Dana's a result, As use still we phrases such gives the following as one definition classic as these: Years as Two to the Prior of "any": the word "2: one, some, or all The other Mast." added, you 'And prob- agree covenant and indiscriminately of whatever quantity: call ably poem popular that Kipling's of all singular and a: more-used or one to indicate 'In an Event the That."' Was there any an- undetermined swer make? I could number or amount." all any and -Williard, 49 ABA J (1963) 934 And reverse the is also One true. definition "any of "all" is whatever." Id., erhaps simple this anecdote says 71. p In other "any" words, is broad Reed Dickerson, in his Fundamentals it all. But does really? it enough to include and "all," can "all" Legal of Drafting ed, (2d Little, Brown, Lawyers, for as many years as mean any one. 1986), 208, p agrees the drafter that have there been lawyers, debated have Even more convincing is Black's Law should "any all" avoid and similar and plain the use of in their language speech Dictionary p ed), (6th 94, which de- one pairs which of includes the other. and work. written Is the "le- of use fines follows: "any" as The "should drafter use the broader or and galese" redundant phrases a self- narrower term as the substance re- protecting language that lawyers use "Some, out one of indefinite an many; Id. quires." to insulate themselves from the rest number. indiscriminately One of what- Still commentators other kind of have ever quantity ... '[Alny' called has a society? of lawyers Do use phrases diversity of meaning and may be em- the abandonment for of "any all." and such "hereby" as and "party of the indicate to ployed 'every' or 'all' well as In and Squires Mucklestone, A Simple first simply part" because these terms 'some' as and its or 'one' a meaning in "Simple" Wash 57 Will, 461 R L become (1982), have reflexive Pavlovian legal given depends statute context the upon the authors set forth a guide wills for language? subject and the matter of the statute. that is simple in form yet sophisticated And important, most may when fine is It often synonymous 'either,' with substance. in "The authors attempted distinctions in influence meaning the 'every,' or 'all."' (Citations omitted; to avoid both unneeded precision and outcome of case? a Certainly one of added.) emphasis vagueness and instead attempted to the greatest that fears a lawyer faces Authorities writing legal on have make statements general whenever is possibility the of an judg- adverse writers urged to avoid using "any and possible." p Id., 463. article This in- because ment of misusing or word a Bryan all." Garner's Elements Legal of a of cludes list phrases recurring that phrase. Style (Oxford University Press, 1991), consistently be can sim- or shortened pp convincingly 187-188, recommends: plified. And the list includes a phrase we that have know to come Language' quite "Plain well. regular a is of feature the "7.10. Using of Instead Doublets or Michigan Journal, Bar edited Joseph by Triplets, Single a Use Word. the for Kimble Bar Plain State English Com- Unrevised Phrases Among the lawyer's endearing least Assistant mittee. is editor Hathaway. George H. and Words Revised To string habits is to near-synonyms. out Through this column Committee the hopes to causes The are several. the First, lan- in of to, respect to use the promote plain English of law. the in guage law the of origins in has its the any and all all Want to contribute a plain English article? unhurried prose centuries of past. Sec- all part or any any Contact Prof. Thomas at Kimble Law Cooley ond, strong the oral tradition in Eng- in that the event if School, 13038, Box P.O. Lansing, MI 48901. inevitably led land surfeit a to of words aforesaid [omit or specify] 1991 JOURNALOCTOBER BAR MICHIGAN OCTOBER 1991 MICHIGAN BAR JOURNAL

2 PLAIN LANGUAGE conclusion follows legal not 'some,' the means Any' court.' circuit in 'any cery' Phrases Unrevised ,every,' 'each to retain entitled is defendant the that one of all."' To Revised and Words aris- commissions renewal earned the any such to make Su- Michigan the case, Gib- later with In a contract agency its from ing distribute to distributions for liable legally held of be the use cannot that and held son again Court preme if that provided "any" in an agency 287 at contract Gibson action," this in same meant "all." kind every of property opinion). court the trial (quoting 282 Co, Ins Life Agricultural v Gibson In property any character and [omit] (1937), 450 same NW 276 such, 284; said, 282, Mich has Appeals of Court Michigan The end expiration read: controversy in clause the as "any" word the interpreted similarly and "any advice, this of all Despite McGrath In statute. is and Michigan a in have, used shall Company The "14. speech, lawyers' into way its all" finds any com- upon lien first a given hereby NW2d 280 194; App Mich 89 Clark, v opinions, and briefs, memorandums, for security as renewals or missions de- accepted plaintiff the (1979), 480 and insurance into often most and to due become to or due claim any offer The judgment. of offer fendant's contracts. indemnification (Em- Agent." said from Company the inter- prejudgment about nothing said added.) seemed Court phasis Supreme Michigan The examined Court the statute est. The definitions dictionary our to approve 27A.6013: MSA 600.6013; MCL was not persuaded was court Gibson The Busi- Interstate v Harrington in "any" of the that insistence plaintiff's the by 327, 210 Mich Ass'n, Accident Men's ness money any on allowed be shall "Interest "all": than less meant "any" word action..." a civil quoted it in recovered when judgment (1920), 19 NW 178 330; 137 227; Mich 172 Sanders, v Hopkins oJ 14 paragraph of the wording "Giving is 'any' word "the that held Court The defined Court The (1912). 709 NW un- and plain its contract agency the "any" the so all-inclusive," considered like be to this: at arriving upon meaning, equivocable interest. to entitled were defendants conno- the sensible that conclusion the final 'arl'v covers it language, broad "In 197. at McGrath and 'all' implies any' word of the tation chan- in or law at suit 'any in decree' yourself, for judge & drive test a for us Call today. consultant Lexus your Call 1-800-552-2339 'UD,= t._9 RFqrHD 01=O drive. evaluation personal a for arrange to OCTOBER 1991 MICHIGAN BAR JOURNAL

3 PLAIN LANGUAGE Recently, the Court has again held doubtful, is It however, using that was preme Court by the asked United "any and all" instead of "any" would that "[alny means 'every,' 'each of one Court States of Appeals Sixth for the all,' have and affected unlimited is the outcome case. of in this its scope." Circuit certify to three questions of law. Parker v Nationwide Mutual Ins Co, 188 It would certainly not made have this the Among issues whether was leg- the Mich App 354, 356; 470 NW2d 416 particular more any clause specific. islature intended that MCL 600.2949; (1991) (quoting Harrington v Inter- 27A.2949 MSA negligence (comparative Moreover, the Court of Appeals Men's State Accident supra). Ass'n, statute) products to apply liability ac- seemed to change its mind Paquin in On the other hand, least at one panel tions sounding in warranty. implied v Proksch Construction Co, Mich 113 held has that "any" used as in an in- App 43; 317 NW2d 279 (1982). In "Section (1) 2949. all products In demnification contract was wanting for Paquin, contract the again rolled out the liability that ... the fact actions vagueness. In Geurink Herlihy v Mid- doublets: the con- plaintiff may have been guilty of Continent 5 Co, Mich 154, App 156- tributory negligence not shall re- bar a "The Contractor shall ... indemnify and 157; 146 NW2d 111 (1967), an indem- covery plaintiff by the or plaintiff's the hold harmless the Owner... from and nification contract contained the fol- legal representatives, damages but sus- any against claim and all or claims lowing language: tained by the shall plaintiff be dimin- arising the out oJ Work performed by ished in proportion to the amount of the Contractor or any subcontractor; "The subcontractor hereby waives and negligence attributed to the plaintiff" pay, shall Contractor the also, liquidate releases the general contractor from (Emphasis opinion.) in discharge and and any all claims or all liability for injuries persons to and "Section 2945. used As in sections 2946 demands bodily for injury.., alleged or damages and to loss of property which and 2949 to 5805, 'products section to have been caused by, grown claimed the subcontractor may suffer sustain or liability means action' an action based performance or of incidental to the out in performance of this subcontract, or any on legal or equitable theory of li- the of performed Work by the Contrac- in connection herewith; and the subcon- brought ability for on account or of tor subcontractor any or "Paquin ... at tractor hereby agrees and covenants to death injury to or property or person (Emphasis added.) 280. indemnify and harmless hold the gen- caused by resulting or manu- from the contractor eral all from liability, claims, facture, construction design, formula, An injury occurred to contractor's the demands, of causes action and judg- development of standards, preparation, employee when an owner's employee ments arising by reason oJ per- any processing, assembly, inspection, testing, negligently moved overhead an crane, sonal injuries or loss and damage to listing, certifying, warning, instructing, property suffered by or sustained by man's crushing fingers. the marketing, packaging, advertising, or any the of subcontractor's employ- The Paquin court noted: "The in- of labeling a product or a component of ees (Emphasis " ... added.) provisions demnity in the case at bar opinion.) in (Emphasis product." a make abundant use of the words 'any' The issue Court the faced was the lia- In both these statutes the legislature and 'all' and of the phrase and 'any bility of the general contractor its for chose not to use "any and all," but one in describing all' claims the which to own negligence. "The appellant [gen- or the other, to describe product lia- the provision applies." Paquin at 50. contractor] eral places great emphasis bility actions. holding In the for indemnified owner, the on broad language damage 'any' The Court stated: the Court chose to not follow Geurink, or injury suffered 'on' the site of the stating supra, that could there be no §2949, "In the operative language is work." Geurink at 158. 'all products liability broader classification than the word actions.' This lan- The Geurink court held that the "all," and that its in ordinary meaning, guage is defined in §2945 follows: as broad all-inclusive language used the in the "'products "all" word no room leaves liability action" for ex- means an ac- contract did insulate not general the based tion any on legal equitable or the- ceptions. Paquin, p 50 [quoting Pritts v contractor because it did specifi- not ory liability.' of It difficult is to imagine I J Co, Case 108 Mich App 22, 30; 310 cally mention the general contractor's any language more all-inclusive." Karl NW2d 261 (1981)1. liability for its own negligence. It was at 568. There's reason no to think "any that not clear that parties the agreed to this and all" made the difference. les- The And the Court held: type of indemnification. son of these two cases is not that "any "We believe that the Legislature's use of and all" has an advantage over "any," the words 'all' and 'any' require, without but that rare on occasions either word further interpretative inquiry, the con- may be too vague to convey the par- struction comparative that negligence ties' intentions. David Elder is a recent graduate Thomas of applies to all and any products liability One final example. Karl In v Bryant Cooley actions, Law including School. received those He sounding his in undergrad- im- Air Conditioning Co, 416 Mich 558; 331 plied warranty." Karl uate at 569. from (Empha- degree Ohio University. NW2d 456 (1982), the Michigan Su- in sis original.) 1991 OCtOBER JOURNAL BAR MICHIGAN OCTOBER 1991 MICHIGAN BAR JOURNAL

4 PLAIN LANGUAGE Supp), Cum (1991 and Phrases Words answer certified in its Court, the Thus, 23-27. pp "all" that concluded Circuit, Sixth to the that tell us authorities these all If enough. was word One "any." meant "any and all" is normally redundant, Karl in statutes both that Suppose "all" or "any" substitute not why then "any." used had both or "all," used had 1. Figure See requires? context the imagine as to hard It's difference? Any that step symbolic little is one This be. would there why dou- the reducing in take can lawyers "any" defined have courts state Other to continue that "all." and triplets and "every" blets with synonymous as writing. legal plague Board Zoning v Donohue in instance, For put best was 1967), argument the (Conn, 643 A2d Perhaps 235 Appeals, of look- while found a has author the "any" word a quote in the said court the else. em- be something for ing may and of meanings diversity as "every" or "all" indicate to ployed of list The or "one." "some" hindrance no is as well character of "Simplicity Viscount John intellect." of to subtlety is "any" of definition this using cases U (1903). Gladstone of Life Morley, 3A in found be may and exhaustive A7Q I I(MIDNIAI J~AP AAICUIfANI I1nn1I '/r"P/DLVD Iflol 107Q r~rT(~D~D NA~rir-~"AM InAV I IIPKIAI

Related documents