The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1916-04-21
LEGAL TECHNICALITIES.
New York Practice Glorifes Circum.
locutlon and Red Tape.

To THE EDITOR OF THE SrS-Sir: e.
J. connolly of East Orange ~ right I'm
his criticism of the idiotic ycrbosity of
tho New York legal document he was
called upon TO sign. But he should re-
member that our bar thriyes on i,-chni-
~calltles Justice R~odeuheck devises a
reasonably good method to simplify our
iractic" the intelligent committees of
me various bar associations all favor
this. but the bar does not. So the hand
s"n"ly bound hluc volumes OF reports
on the sinplitled practice are used as
door weights or 70 I'll in the recessed
ends OF law book cases.
Since lSIs there has not been pissed
a single act that sinrlifos our legal rro.
cedure. except those which cut useless
Nerbiage out OF deeds and mortgages
And the codes committees have ever
| since looked with horror on this. and
together with the judiciary committees
have str!Nen to Pat tc~Chu.catiti.s huck
into deeds and MORTGAGES. Does Mr..
Connolly not know that the grantees
address must he given. to protect sub
seqnout grantees. just as IL 4 crookol
grantee would not lie about his address
and an honest one be truthful, ~ * IN
r~rdctic" the case But thls is part nd
parcel Of protection by lcgiSlaf or. So
dear L. the reform.r and SO dear In ar
other s"nse 10 the reformed. or rather
Aaa' VI 'l4 on Nlitll lt.bl III % llilS NINA
Is pra"tiSed
Doesn't Mr.. Connolly know that New
York never lifts a finger to facilitate Tho
dealing In real estate? That to convey
a good title to-day is harder than in the
days of coke That no matter how
careful, he could not protect himself
az inst the claim Of dover ~ 4 VII"
unheard of AT the tine he took title and
who may turn mp ffty years later and
inva.idatc his title
Doesn't Nj Cuuno,ly know that some
years ago the codes committees In 4
moment OF forcetfulrces Of tcchujctlj-
ties and red tape amended tho code so as
to provide that when a Judge tries \
case without a jury lie might, in COM
mon parlance. decide thus 81 have
heard IN" evidence in this case. my
opinion Is that the dctcudlr' has su,-
'csstully mot the plt'n'In's evidence and
! give judgment for him In other
words he was permitted t. do Just what
a jury does. But ths was contrary to
years and wears of tcchu.calitic~ 10 had
been made impossible fov lawyOs to pro-
coed as follows For the p~lairtir to sub
NIT IL paragraphs 81 what he called
findings of fact ana sey"ntv-thrce para
graphs OF conclusions of law. Of which
as A matter OF fact tho only ones tn"
lawyer could charge for were the ones
IN which Judgment was given hls clrut
for damage and costs. contrariwisr the
~de'endantS attorney also Suh'il''l'i ."'
paragraphs OF what he called findings
of facts and l37 paragraphs Of couclu-
SONS OF law "t "n''h' - /" rs ne
TeaI.S was conceri!cu' Only the ohe as
missing IN" complaint WIN COSTS WAS
'hc important one 9,
nc pu"' 'u"s' ''' l" ''SH VII an
theS" ana II ny 'h'h'e ne i""'Id 2 WRONG
S't or MINOR I''tS or ,''s'r u sup 81. d"
sNhor"li'Nle question: OF Jaw no "'''''I
now Jus' ,he d'''S'"n - q W'"''' ne lh.Ett
h' ana "'trn was ''Ne'S'u' an" away "a
hahdS went '"t '""Ee cNP'hS'' "'''e ne
Jay more evidence h."tr "'uIhES nnl
more conclusions hut IN" ''yhhl'aI''y
or IN" Jaw was Nlhu''','u' IL WIS u
victory Toy ufliN ana l'l tti''