Drafting Manual

With the demands on a legislative drafter, it is easy to wonder where it is best to focus time and energy. Should a drafter focus efforts solely on substantive drafting, or worry about "style" issues? This debate has the familiar feel of "form over substance." In the literature of legislative drafting, the debate arguably is encompassed in a question of whether the goal of drafting is clarity or accuracy. m See, e.g., Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 9-12 (2005); Haggard, Legal Drafting in a Nutshell, p. 4-10 (2nd ed. 2003)("Although [accuracy] is more a function of substance than style, the two are inexorably linked."); Stark, The Art of the Statute, p. 1-5 (1996). However, the goal is achieving both clarity and accuracy. The joining of clarity and accuracy creates readability.

"A law is unreadable if it is needlessly hard to read, understand, or use. A law may be unreadable without otherwise being uncertain: A single unmistakable meaning may well be in there somewhere, but it can be arrived at only after painful and tedious effort. Because, in a legal sense, a law that is unreadable may still be perfectly effective, a drafter may not be too concerned with the plight of the reader. This is a mistake, and a disservice to the client." c Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide, p. 180 (2006).

If unreadable, a statute may be misinterpreted or fail to capture a necessary element. m Confucius is quoted as saying that "if language is not correct, then what is said is not what is meant; if what is said is not what is meant, then what ought to be done remains undone." Crabbe, The Legislative Sentence , 10 Statute L. Rev. 94 (1989) (quoting Sir Ernest Gowers, The Complete Plain Words, p. 159 (Pelican Books, 1983 reprint). In stating seven rules of legal writing, one author encourages a drafter not to "ignore even the limited possibilities of precision. The price of sloppy writing is misunderstanding and creative misinterpretation." Mellinkoff, Legal Writing: Sense and Nonsense, p. xviii (1982). "Words can be unreadable if archaic or rare. Sentences can be unreadable if long or complex. Style can be unreadable if stuffy or unfamiliar. Organization can be unreadable if counterintuitive." c Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide , p. 180 (2006).

"Clarity . . . is promoted by using the active voice, writing with verbs instead of nouns, keeping subject close to verb and verb close to direct object, making the elements of a sentence parallel in structure, being careful in word choice and usage, and punctuating correctly." c Haggard, Legal Drafting In a Nutshell , p. 7 (2nd ed. 2003).

The following discussion is designed to highlight common elements of legislative style that a legislative drafter should employ regardless of the substantive area in which the drafter drafts.

Once a legislative objective is given by the sponsor, an initial step is framing the basic structure of the legislative proposal. This generally requires creating relationships between the one or more actors, actions, conditions, and consequences.

"[M]ost statutes forbid, authorize or require, they may do so under certain stated conditions, and they may specify certain consequences that will follow from conforming or not conforming to the forbidding, authorizing or requiring. It follows that drafters must carefully and clearly identify the person who is, and the action that is forbidden, authorized or required, and must state accurately all relevant conditions and consequences and also accurately connect them to that person and that action." c Stark, The Art of the Statute , p. 65 (1996).

Effectively developing an organization or structure of a legislative proposal assists a legislative drafter in thinking through a policy objective. Effective legislative drafting requires a legislative drafter to see beyond the obvious to ensure that a draft is comprehensive. m "Drafts can be failures for two reasons: Some are failures of communication, while others are failures of imagination. Some who write about drafting focus only on failures of the first type. They reason that thinking and writing go hand in hand, so writing well also guides you into thinking well. That's fine as far as it goes, but it doesn't go far enough. . . . . When there is a failure to imagine, however, the draft is not adequate. The problem is not on the page and is invisible to the naked eye. The words look fine, but the thinking behind them is less than thorough. A failure to imagine cannot be cured by editing after the fact; it can be cured only by thinking through the policy." Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide, p. 111 (2006).

Considerations that may influence the structure of legislation include a desire for simplicity and limiting duplication, but competing with this is the ability of a court, regulator, practitioner, researcher, or citizen to find relevant law. c See Blackwell, Finally Adding Method to Madness: Applying Principles of Object-Oriented Analysis and Design to Legislative Drafting , 3 N.Y.U. J. Legis. & Pub. Pol'y 227 (1999/2000). Examples of tools that can be used to create a reasonable structure include an outline, sequential ordering, or a checklist.

The strength of an outline is that it creates a format or logical flow to the content of legislation. Without proper organization and arrangement, the major concepts of legislation may easily be lost. m Put another way by an experienced legislative drafter, "Nietzsche's remark that the most common cause of stupidity is forgetting one's goal certainly applies to drafters, and the second most common cause of drafting stupidity probably is never knowing one's goal." Stark, The Art of the Statute , p. 14 (1996). A good outline, if comprehensive, minimizes later editing and redrafting. In developing an outline, a drafter should consider provisions in the following areas.

• Short title
• Definitions
• Scope, applicability, exceptions, exclusions, if any
• Administrative and procedural provisions
• Substance - positive requirements in order of time, importance, or other logical sequence
• Prohibitions and penalties
• Uniformity of application and construction clause
• Relation to other laws
• Savings and transitional provisions, if any
• Severability, if needed
• Repeals, if needed
• Effective date, if needed. cSee National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 403 (2006 ed.)

An outline, at its best, assists a legislative drafter in both establishing a proper sequence to the provisions in legislation and determining whether necessary provisions to address the policy objectives of a legislative client are included in the legislation.

• importance;
• chronology;
• frequency of when a provision occurs;
• familiar before unfamiliar;
• rules before exceptions;
• what before how; and
• substance before procedure. mSee, e.g., Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide , p. 183-184 (2006) (while stating that "[i]n almost all cases, sequence should be based on importance," acknowledges that other arrangements such as chronological order may make sense); Haggard, Legal Drafting In a Nutshell , p. 245-249 (2nd ed. 2003); Stark, The Art of the Statute, p. 47-50 (1996).

A legislative drafter should choose the sequential order that best serves the legislative objectives.

Although not technically an organizational construct, a checklist is a tool that helps a drafter determine whether the necessary elements are included in a draft. c See, e.g., Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 19, 21 (2005). A checklist may be most helpful when working with an existing draft, because it is easy to overlook a necessary item when a draft appears complete. A checklist can serve as a type of reality check, a helpful tool to determine whether or not legislation meets a desired objective. m See, e.g., Stark, The Art of the Statute , p. 34-38 (1996) ("legislative drafters . . . will be more effective if they remember that work in the world of statutes, because it has real world consequences, should be subjected to a reality check."); Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide , p. 127-131 (2006). Dorsey highlights two ways to test legal rules: the actor-action model and the if-then model. "To test a rule with the Actor-Action model, identify the actor, the action, and the qualifiers. If you can't figure out who the actor is (or what the action is), you and the client have some more thinking to do. When a rule fails to identify the actor or the action directly, the courts may struggle to figure out what the legislature intended.. . . . There is a completely different root idea that you also need in thinking through the policy, and that is the notion (referred to here as the If-Then model) that every legal rule can be expressed as a condition and a result. . . . . The value of the If-Then model is that it makes you focus on consequences - when you use this model, you often realize that you and the client haven't adequately considered what the consequences should be." Id. Each area of the law may require its own checklist and over time a drafter can develop a checklist that best works for that drafter. An example of a checklist consists of a series of questions:

"1. How widely should the law apply? For instance, should it cover both individuals and corporations?

4. Who will administer the law? Will any changes to the law, such as the creation of positions or an appropriation, follow from that decision?

5. Are penalties or other enforcement mechanisms needed?" c Stark, The Art of the Statute, p. 14 (1996).

Click here for another example of a helpful checklist (a research checklist).

Sections similar in substance should be similarly arranged and outlined. Parallel structure improves accessibility and promotes consistency. Sentences should be arranged so that parallel ideas look parallel, especially in a list.

As with most writing, the core of a statutory unit is the sentence. A good guideline is to limit a sentence to a single idea or thought. c See, e.g., Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 61 (2005).

• identify the action, actor, and consequences before putting pen to paper; m In addition, one legislative drafter notes that the "most basic point about the subject of a legislative sentence is . . . if a legislative sentence forbids, authorizes or requires, then it should name the person who is being forbidden, authorized or required - its subject should be that person." Stark, The Art of the Statute , p. 65 (1996).
• not be formulaic in how you arrange the elements of a sentence, use your judgment; mSee also, Stark, The Art of the Statute , p. 73 (1996) ("Because the substances of sentences vary, there is no point in trying to identify the best sentence structure for every possible situation that will arise.").
• keep the actor near the action, and if the action has an object, keep the object near the action;
• use a sentence that is generally short or medium in length, e.g., 20-25 words; mSee also , Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 60-61 (2005); Singer, Statutes and Statutory Construction , 1A Sutherland Statutory Construction , 21:2 (6th ed. 2002 revision).
• convey one major point with a sentence and avoid a sentence that is compound or has complex clauses;
• if there are several or complex qualifiers, state the rule first and then the qualifiers in more than one sentence;
• draft a sentence in a manner that emphasizes the concept that is most important; and
• arrange words with care. cSee Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide , p. 187-188 (2006). See also Haggard, Legal Drafting in a Nutshell , p. 348-351 (2nd ed. 2003). See also National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 101 (2006 ed.).

A basic, but at times forgotten, rule of drafting is the creation of agreement between subject and verb and between pronoun and antecedent. A pronoun like a noun has four basic properties, i.e., number, person, gender, and case, and must agree with its antecedent in number, person, and gender. c See, e.g, The Chicago Manual of Style , 5.30 - 5.34 (16th ed. 2010).

One of the tasks of a legislative drafter is to aid a reader in processing the details of complex problems which could include multiple actors, actions, objects, or qualifiers. Including all the detail in a single sentence may make it more difficult to comprehend a statutory provision.

The exact manner of subdividing a sentence or paragraph differs from statute to statute, and requires careful thought by a legislative drafter. As one experienced legislative drafter explains:

"When to use smaller units is largely a matter of judgment. . . . What is important is that when you do subdivide, or don't, you do so for good reason. . . . In most cases, the reason to subdivide is simply to make the text easier to read. A series of smaller units is generally less taxing to read than a single block of undivided text. . . . Subdivisions create structure, and structure is used by courts to guide meaning." c Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide , p. 209 (2006).

When possible, a legislative drafter should follow a general guideline of not stringing more than two to three sentences together without subdividing. c See Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide , p. 209 (2006).

An effective legislative drafter uses familiar language that expresses the intended meaning according to common and approved usage.

A term used in drafting should be easily understood, with those few exceptions defined. A balance must be struck between excessive technical terms and inappropriate conversational tone. A technical term can be used if properly defined. A statute should not be overly simplistic or informal.

• Use short words, e.g., words of three syllables or less. cSee, e.g., National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 201 (2006 ed.).
• Omit a word if it can be omitted and the meaning retained.cSee, e.g. , National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 106 (2006 ed.).
• Do not use jargon, slang, technical language, "legalese," or foreign phrases, unless it is a term of art or its use is supported by substantial case law. cSee, e.g., National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 201 (2006 ed.); Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide , p. 185-186 (2006); Haggard, Legal Drafting In a Nutshell , p. 280-281, 351-360 (2nd ed. 2003); Stark, The Art of the Statute, p. 75-77 (1996).
• Do not use abstract words. Statutory language should be precise, using simple and concrete terms.

"If a statute is 'applicable to only two or three actors, they can be listed in a simple series (a county, city, or town may issue bonds). If, however, the list contains so many actors that the readability of the provisions will be adversely affected . . . an alternative to the simple listing should be adopted. The first alternative is to list a single word that would include each member of the series and then define the word to include all of the members. . . . Another alternative is to tabulate the series.'" c Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 41 (2005).

Consistent use of terminology is a hallmark of drafting. c See, e.g. , National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 105 (2006 ed.); Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide, p. 183-184 (2006); Haggard, Legal Drafting in a Nutshell, p. 309-311 (2nd ed. 2003).

"Consistency in this context means being repetitive, that is using the same word rather than a synonym. . . . In legal writing elegant variation is undesirable because of the construction problems it may create. In the drafting of [legislation], consistency in the use of language is an absolute necessity." c Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 59-60 (2005).

An experienced legislative drafter explains that:

"[A] court expects each word and meaning used in a law to be used consistently. If you use a word or meaning in any inconsistent way, the court will assume you meant to do so, and will create a distinction where none was intended. Being consistent is not simply a matter of being consistent within a particular law. . . . a court reads a law in the context of other laws on related subjects. If those other laws give a certain term a specific meaning, be careful when you use that term and when you try to capture that meaning." c Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook, p. 183 (2006).

• Do not use different words to denote the same meaning. The same word, especially if included in a definition section, should be used with the same meaning throughout a piece of legislation and throughout any related existing statutory provisions.

• attorney, lawyer, counsel;
• case, action, suit, proceeding;
• decide, determine, rule; and
• person, individual, party.

A legislative drafter should define a term carefully and then use the term consistently. Click here for further discussion on the drafting of definitions.

• draft in present tense;
• clearly express time relationships; and
• avoid terms like "now," "present," and "yet."

A statute continually "speaks" to the person reading the statute. c See, e.g., National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 103 (2006 ed.); Haggard, Legal Drafting in a Nutshell, p. 351 (2nd ed. 2003). Therefore, a statute should be in the present indicative, not in the subjunctive; and in the present perfect, not in the future perfect. c See, e.g., National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 101 (2006 ed.); Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide , p. 189 (2006); Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English, p. 47-48 (2005); Singer, Statutes and Statutory Construction, 1A Sutherland Statutory Construction, 21:10 (6th ed. 2002 revision).

Utah Code 68-3-12(1)(d) provides that a word used in the present tense includes the future tense. In general there is no need to draft in any tense other than the present tense. One exception to this rule occurs in expressing time relationships.

If a time relationship must be expressed, present facts may be used in conjunction with past facts. c See, e.g., Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide, p. 189 (2006); Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 47-48 (2005).

A person who has been convicted of a felony may not apply for a permit.

Combining present facts with future facts is generally not appropriate because the application of the law does not occur until the future fact, e.g., "A person who will commit a felony may not apply for a permit." This type of legislation has obvious difficulties.

Whenever possible, use the active voice rather than the passive voice. m See, e.g. , Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide , p. 188-189 (2006); National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 103 (2006 ed.); Haggard, Legal Drafting in a Nutshell, p. 345 (2nd ed. 2003); Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 44 (2005) ("The most important legislative drafting principle and the one upon which most of the others depend is the command to use the active voice."). A drafter's use of the active voice forces the drafter to name an actor as the subject of a sentence. c See, e.g., Singer, Statutes and Statutory Construction , 1A Sutherland Statutory Construction , 21:7 (6th ed., 2007-08 Supp., 2002 revision).

"With the active voice, the subject of the sentence is the one who acts ('The President submits the budget') with the passive voice, the subject of the sentence is the one being acted upon ('The budget is submitted by the President' or simply 'The budget is submitted'). There are several reasons to favor the active voice. Using the active voice forces you to name the actor, which is always useful and often essential. By naming the actor, you make known to the reader the person who is to receive the benefit or the burden of the law. The actor is put on notice (and so is the rest of the world). If the law imposes a command, you identify the person on whom it is imposed. As if that weren't reason enough, the active voice usually requires fewer words and is generally considered more readable, vivid, and interesting." c Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide , p. 188-189 (2006).

• no identified principal is involved; or
• the active voice is awkward.

• if you can visualize a person taking the action described by the verb, it probably works; if you cannot, it probably does not work;
• do not "'verb' a noun"; and
• do not "'noun' a verb." cSee Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide , p. 190 (2006). See also Haggard, Legal Drafting in a Nutshell, p. 343-345 (2nd ed. 2003).

In addition to drafting in active voice and using basic, concrete verbs, a legislative drafter should write positively. c S ee, e.g. , Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 50-51 (2005); Haggard, Legal Drafting in a Nutshell, p. 362 (2nd ed. 2003); Singer, Statutes and Statutory Construction, 1A Sutherland Statutory Construction , 21:9 (6th ed. 2002 revision). A drafter should avoid several negatives in one sentence.

A statute should be in the present indicative, not in the subjunctive; and in the present perfect, not in the future perfect. A common mistake in drafting legislation:

"is the use of 'shall' or 'shall not' to declare a legal result rather than to give a command. For example, . . . ' The record for judicial review shall consist exclusive of' . . . 'A Government employee shall have a right of action against the Government . . .' This usage is known as a false imperative because it does not give a command to someone to do something but rather declares a legal result. [Legislation] is self executing. If it says something 'is,' it is. Thus, if in a [statute] a word has a certain meaning, it is only necessary to say that the word 'means . . . .' This usage is the indicative mood. . . . In addition to the use of shall in these circumstances being technically incorrect, the use of the indicative mood has two other advantages. Most important, it allows the use of shall only in those instances when the imperative mood is appropriate, this is when a command is given. . . . Elimination of the unnecessary shall, of course, also reduces the number of words in the provision." m Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 47-48 (2005). One author explains: "the indicative mood is the mood used to indicate - that is, to make a statement of fact. Use it for a stipulation ('This Act applies after the date of the enactment of the Act') or a condition ('If the Secretary determines X, then the Secretary may Y'). Do not use the subjunctive mood ('If the Secretary were to determine X, then the Secretary may Y')." Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide , p. 190 (2006). See also, e.g. , National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 103 (2006 ed.); Haggard, Legal Drafting in a Nutshell, p. 281-282 (2nd ed. 2003).

Click below to see examples of how false imperatives can be changed to the indicative mood.

A certified copy of a contract shall be prima facie evidence

The report shall be subject to examination by the commissioner

A certified copy of a contract is prima facie evidence

The commissioner may examine a report

• not use the singular and the plural interchangeably; and
• use the singular even if the statute encompasses both the singular and the plural.

The importance of drafting in the singular is discussed frequently in literature about legislative drafting. Three examples follow:

One author writes:

"Use of the singular is important for several reasons. First, the singular makes the drafting process simpler because there is no need to worry about accidental shifting back and forth between the singular and plural in nouns, pronouns, or verbs. Second, the singular particularizes the effect of the provision being drafted on the individual rather than on the more anonymous group. Third, the singular makes it clear that the provision applies to each member of the class rather than only to the class as a separate group or body. Even though proponents of good legal writing have long advocated use of the singular, drafters of legislation and rules still use the plural to an astonishing degree." c Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 36 (2005).

Another author writes:

"Plurals can create ambiguity, especially when used with 'and' or 'or.' If a law provides that 'individuals may not enter buildings A and B without appropriate security clearances,' does it apply to a single individual entering a single building with a single clearance?" c Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide , p. 196 (2006).

Another author provides the following example as demonstrating the need to draft in the singular:

"'Employees with children qualifying for coverage must file affidavits of eligibility from persons listed below:' Does this apply only to employees with more than one child? Does it require more than one affidavit, presumably from all of the listed persons?" c Haggard, Legal Drafting in a Nutshell, p. 302 (2nd ed. 2003).

If the legislative intent is to have the statute only read in the singular, a legislative drafter should make that express in statutory language.

In a city of the first class, the mayor, a commissioner, the recorder, and the treasurer shall administer only one office under the city government, except that the offices of recorder and auditor may be held by one person.

Utah's construction statute provides that the singular includes the plural and the plural includes the singular. c See Utah Code 68-3-12(1)(b). A phrase like "person or persons" is unnecessary.

• use the third person, "person" or "individual"; and
• not use the first person "I," or the second person "you." cSee, e.g., Dorsey, Legislative Drafter's Deskbook: A Practical Guide , p. 195 (2006).

In the unusual case that a legislative drafter must use a compound word in its plural form, the drafter should follow the rule that the significant word takes the plural. c See, e.g., United States Government Printing Office, Style Manual, Rule 5.8 (2000).

In the Utah Code, a legislative drafter should use the term "attorney fees" and not "attorneys' fees," "attorney's fees," or "attorneys fees." m This pattern is consistent with how Utah courts and court rules cite to attorney fees. See, e.g., Utah Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 73, Attorney fees; Gardner v. Board of County Comm'nrs, 178 P.3d 893 (Utah 2008).

• placing qualifying language in a sentence if it is unclear who does what when;
• using modifiers in a sentence when it is unclear what is being modified; or
• using multiple actors, actions, objects, or qualifiers in a sentence without helping the reader wade through the detail.

A legislative drafter should avoid placing qualifying language between the actor and the action or the action and the object or complement, because this "separates the working words of the sentence making it difficult for the reader to see the relationship between the actor, the action, and the object or complement. " c Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English, p. 62 (2005).

A legislative drafter should be careful to only modify a word that is intended to be modified. This can arise when a provision includes multiple items only some of which are to be modified.

• A legislative drafter should avoid placing a modifier between two terms in a way that it could be interpreted to refer to either term. e.g. , "' persons, if they are more than 12 years old, may hunt ducks.' The age requirement probably was intended to refer to 'persons,' but it could be read to refer to 'ducks.'" c Stark, The Art of the Statute , p. 73 (1996). A legislative drafter should strive to know the relation between modifier and the term to which it refers. m See Stark, The Art of the Statute , p. 74 (1996). Stark goes on to say that understanding this relationship "is even more sensible for legislative drafting, because modifiers are frequently used to identify the entities to which the law applies." Id.
• A legislative drafter generally should avoid placing a modifier between "shall," "may," or "may not" and the accompanying verb.c Stark, The Art of the Statute , p. 74 (1996).
• A legislative drafter should be careful in using a modifier with terms in a series so that it is clear whether the modifier applies to all the terms in a series or only to one. , cSee Stark, The Art of the Statute, p. 74 (1996).
• A legislative drafter should be careful in the use of chains of adjectives , because it may be unclear whether the modifiers in combination describe the collective quality of the term or indicate that separate terms are involved, each possessing one of the qualities described, e.g., the distributor will supply red, white, and blue caps. cSee Haggard, Legal Drafting in a Nutshell , p. 287-288 (2nd. ed. 2003).
• A legislative drafter should avoid a dangling modifier. A modifier dangles if a reader cannot identify what the modifier refers to in the main clause of a sentence, e.g., "if alive but incompetent at the time of death, a child's guardian shall inherit the deceased parent's estate for his continued care and keeping." mSee Haggard, Legal Drafting in a Nutshell, p. 288 (2nd. ed. 2003). This principle is akin to avoiding a dangling participle. A participle phrase "dangles" if there is not a grammatical connection between the participle and the action denoted by the participle. The Chicago Manual of Style , 5.112 (16th ed. 2010). An example of an even more troubling dangling modifier is when a sentence is placed after an enumerated list, making it unclear whether the sentence modifies only the last item on the list or the entire list.
• A legislative drafter should avoid a squinting modifier. "A modifier squints if the reader cannot determine whether it modifies the preceding or the following phrase, e.g., If a buyer determines the goods are defective within 20 days the seller shall replace them." cSee Haggard, Legal Drafting in a Nutshell , p. 288 (2nd. ed. 2003).

A gender-based distinction is rarely appropriate and gender-neutral language should be used when possible. c See, e.g., United States Archives & Records Administration, Drafting Legal Documents, Principles of Clear Writing , Sec. 18, (2007); National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, Drafting Rules, Rule 104 (2006 ed.) ("Virtually all states draft legislation in a gender-neutral form."); Martineau and Salerno, Legal, Legislative, and Rule Drafting in Plain English , p. 39-41 (2005); The Chicago Manual of Style, 5.34, 5.41, 5.45, 5.222 (16th ed. 2010); Haggard, Legal Drafting in a Nutshell , p. 10, 366-373 (2nd ed. 2003); Alabama Legislative Reference Service, Drafting Style Manual, Rule 4 (DATE); Alaska Legislative Affairs Agency, Manual of Legislative Drafting, p. 63 (2003); Arizona Legislative Council, Arizona Legislative Bill Drafting Manual , p. 87 (2007); Arkansas Bureau of Legislative Research, Legislative Drafting Manual, p. 43-44 (2006); Colorado Office of Legislative Legal Services, Legislative Drafting Manual , p. 11-6 - 11-10 (2003); Connecticut Legislative Commissioners' Office, Guide to Drafting Legislation, p. 12 (DATE); Kentucky Legislative Research Commission, Bill Drafting Manual , p. 20-21 (2004); Maine Office of the Revisor of Statutes, Maine Legislative Drafting Manual, Part III, Ch. 1, Sec. 14 (1998); Massachusetts Counsel to the Senate, Massachusetts Senate Legislative Drafting and Legal Manual , p. X (3d ed. 2003); Minnesota Office of the Revisor of Statutes, Minnesota Bill Drafting Manual , Sec. 10.33 (2002); Montana Legislative Services Division, Bill Drafting Manual, Sec. 2-11 (2004); North Dakota Legislative Council, 2007 Legislative Drafting Manual, p. 96 (2007); South Dakota Legislative Research Council, Legislative Drafting Manual , p. 23 (DATE); Texas Legislative Council, Drafting Manual, p. 97-98 (2006); Washington Code Reviser's Office, Bill Drafting Guide 2007, Part II, (11)(g) (2007). But see, West Virginia House Clerk's Office, Legislative Services, Senate Clerk's Office, Bill Drafting Manual , p. 27 (2006). However, Utah Code 68-3-12 provides that words in one gender comprehend the other gender. m See Utah Code 68-3-12(1)(c). Section 68-3-12 provides further that "man" or "men," used either alone or with other syllables, includes "woman" and "women."
A drafter should draft using gender-neutral language, unless only one gender is intended (such as in a statute relating to abortion, adoption, or parental rights). This policy fulfills the goal of clearly expressing the Legislature's intent in an accurate, non-discriminatory manner. A drafter should remove improper uses of gender-specific terms in existing code, or change the terms to gender-neutral terms. Words such as "he," "she," "his," "hers," "him," "her," "himself," or "herself" may not be used unless application to only one gender is intended or, as a last resort, in a phrase that refers to both genders like "himself or herself." A drafter may use the following methods to avoid the improper use of gender-specific terms. Remember that our ultimate goal is to produce a clear, well-drafted statute. Choose the method that best accomplishes this goal.

Instead of using "chairman," use "chair."
Instead of using "policeman," use "officer," "law enforcement officer," "police officer," or "peace officer."