Calibrated Specificity #32
Definition
Credibility technique
Being maximally specific about one's own situation (exact figures, document numbers, dates) and stating the opponent's failures plainly, as bare facts without elaboration. The drafter's specificity builds credibility. The bare statement of the opponent's omissions leaves the reader to weigh them without prompting. The judge fills in the significance of the opponent's conduct independently.
Example
- Movant's compliance: itemized — each demand served, with an exhibit and paragraph cite for the date and contents of each.
- Opponent's failures: "No response served. No objection filed."
Anti-pattern
Equal specificity on both sides. Or — worse — more detail about the opponent's failures than your own situation. The judge should know more about you than about them. The gap in detail is itself persuasive.
Requirements
- The movant's facts include specific numbers, dates, and document references
- The opponent's failures are stated flatly without elaboration, quantity, or timeline
- The asymmetry is consistent across the document