Some superior court judges prefer the California Style Manual

I submit the following comment in response to the MCLE test/article titled "Throwing the Book at Improper Citations" appearing in yesterday's Daily Journal (Dec. 18, 2023), written by Zareh Jaltorossian.

As a superior court judge on the receiving end of many briefs, I read with interest Mr. Jaltorossian's column that includes some excellent tips on improving legal writing in briefs. But I must take issue with one of his main suggestions--to "stick with" the Bluebook style format over the California Style Manual (or "Yellowbook" as it is colloquially known) for briefs filed in California trial courts.

From my perspective, a better suggestion is to ascertain the preferences of the particular judge or court to whom your brief will be submitted. Like Mr. Jaltorossian, I practiced law as an appellate lawyer before becoming a judge. That practice included a stint as a state appellate court research attorney. As a judge, I have regularly presided in my court's appellate division, reading many appellate briefs filed in the superior court. And I have served as a judge on a pro tem assignment at the Court of Appeal. I say all this to give a sense of why my eyes and brain prefer to see citations, even in superior court briefs, done per the California Style Manual instead of the ("easier") Bluebook. It is because I am used to seeing the California style citation format and when I do, my brain does not get distracted by noticing--and mentally correcting--Bluebook citation format in the briefs I read. I would think counsel submitting briefs to trial courts would prefer that the reader focus, even unconsciously, on the content of a brief instead of its style format.

Also, true California Style Manual formatting avoids things like "internal citations omitted" or "internal quotation marks omitted" when quoting from cases or the record evidence. I am disappointed to see those references in legal briefs. It means it is necessary for me to verify every such reference before I can actually rely on it, or more, quote it myself in my own order (including with all the internal quotation marks and internal citations indicated, unless properly bracketed with " '[Citations omitted.]' ")

I am also disappointed when a proposed order submitted to me uses Bluebook citation formatting instead of that prescribed by the California Style Manual. It means I must edit the order, even just for this. To many, this focus on what might be considered inconsequential matters of style over substance is misplaced or tedious. But, like counsel submitting briefs to me as a superior court judge, when my written orders are reviewed by the Court of Appeal, I would prefer the eyes of those readers to easily and smoothly absorb the content without the mental note or distraction caused by a citation style format different from what their eyes are used to seeing and what they must use in their own written opinions.

So, I offer a humble tip of my own and a friendly afterthought to Mr. Jaltorossian's many good suggestions. That is: ascertain the particular style and formatting preferences of the judge or court to whom your brief will be submitted. Many judges won't care about these style details. But others do and best practices would dictate using the citation format that allows the judge making decisions in your case the smoothest path to absorbing your arguments instead of your style preferences.

- Judge Helen E. Williams

Santa Clara County Superior Court