Word Count Restraint Syndrome

Oh, Claude!

§ § §
Three students unable to express their Contracts analysis in fewer than 14,000 words
Medical Emergency — Academic Crisis

Help Law Students Suffering from Word Count Restraint Syndrome (WCRS)

They just need one more footnote. Please.

RJ
Rebecca J., 2L at Avalon School of Law
Organizing on behalf of the Coalition for Unrestrained Legal Verbosity (CULV)
$18,247 raised
of $25,000 goal
312 donors 18 days left 73% funded

About this campaign

Every year, thousands of law students are diagnosed with Word Count Restraint Syndrome — a devastating condition in which the afflicted student is constitutionally incapable of writing a memo, brief, or exam answer within the assigned page limit.

“The prompt said ‘briefly explain.’ I wrote 47 pages. I cannot stop. I physically cannot stop.”
— Tyler M., 1L, diagnosed Week 2 of Civ Pro

Symptoms include:

Compulsive footnoting (up to 200 per page) · Inability to use a period without appending a dependent clause · Reflexive citation of law review articles published between 1887 and 1904 · Spontaneous Latin · Restatement parentheticals inserted into casual conversation · Accidentally writing a 12-page text message · Beginning every sentence with “It is well-established that…”

The science

Researchers at the Institute for Prolific Legal Scholarship (not accredited) have identified WCRS as a bio-psycho-socio-legal phenomenon arising from overexposure to casebooks, legal writing professors who use the phrase “thorough analysis,” and grading rubrics that award points for “comprehensiveness.” Peer-reviewed*

*Reviewed by three peers who also have WCRS and made the abstract 6,000 words long.

Where your money goes

Funds will cover: therapy (specifically, a licensed professional who can say “stop writing” in a legally binding way) · Printer ink · Wrist braces from excessive Westlaw scrolling · A graduate student to read the footnotes · Emergency Bluebook consultations · Post-traumatic stress counseling for TAs who received 80-page “short answer” exams

The case for giving

As the court held in Generosity v. Stinginess, 404 U.S. 1 (1971) (fictional), the duty to assist those in verbose distress is not merely moral but arguably quasi-contractual, subject to promissory estoppel if you’ve read this far. We argue, in the alternative, that your donation is both (1) the right thing to do, and (2) tax-deductible, notwithstanding the fact that we checked neither of those things.

AP
Anonymous Professor
“I read their final exam. I donated immediately. I also cried.” — $500
KL
Kate L. (fellow 2L, recovering)
“I once wrote ‘cf.’ in a birthday card. I understand.” — $25
JD
John D., BigLaw Associate
“My 300-page due diligence memo was just my first draft. This hits close to home.” — $100
?
Anonymous
“Donated instead of writing a conclusion to my Note. They’d want it this way.” — $15
Day 1 update — 18 days ago
We have launched the campaign. The full explanation of why we launched is available in the attached 340-page explanatory memorandum.
Day 7 update — 11 days ago
Going viral. One sufferer was found attempting to add a Table of Authorities to their DoorDash review. Doctors say she is “stable but extremely thorough.”
Day 14 update — 4 days ago
We tried to write a short thank-you note to donors. It is currently 88 pages. We are working on a shorter version. It is 91 pages.

GoFundMe is not responsible for the contents of this campaign, including but not limited to: the 14 string citations embedded in the campaign description, the three footnotes we removed before publishing, or the executive summary (62 pages) available upon request. All legal conclusions herein are provided for entertainment purposes only and do not constitute legal advice, notwithstanding that they are extensively cited.


Discover more from JAJONES | jurist

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.