Writing That Works
More Than Red Ink: How Senior Attorneys Can Give Better Feedback to the Next Generation
One of the most enduring traditions in the legal profession is the rite of senior attorneys reviewing the written work of junior colleagues. Whether it’s a motion draft, a research memo, or a client letter, the process of revising and refining is foundational to good lawyering. But as the workplace evolves—especially with the arrival of Gen Z attorneys who value regular feedback—so must our approach to “mentoring through redlines.”
Today’s younger lawyers have come of age in a culture of instant responses and continuous improvement loops. They often crave more frequent and detailed feedback than previous generations; they want to learn and grow, and they want to do it quickly. But senior attorneys, who usually juggle many responsibilities—managing court calendars, meeting client demands, and attending to business development—may struggle to provide the volume or immediacy of feedback that newer lawyers expect. The challenge is not just about the frequency of feedback, but also the effectiveness of it.
Feedback is more than correction—it’s teaching. It should not merely “fix” a piece of writing; it should also build the junior attorney’s ability to write better the next time. And just as not all learners absorb lessons the same way, not all feedback styles are equally effective. Here are five best practices for giving and receiving feedback that supports, teaches, and respects both the giver’s time and the receiver’s development.
1. Set boundaries around feedback timing.
Younger attorneys may want feedback instantly, especially if they’re nervous about performance or eager to improve. But the reality of practice means that senior lawyers can’t—and shouldn’t be expected to—drop everything to give line-by-line edits on demand. It’s important for senior lawyers to be proactive in setting expectations: “I’ll review this by end of day tomorrow, and I’ll focus on the structure and clarity—expect some general comments, not line edits.” Teaching newer lawyers how to wait for thoughtful feedback is just as important as the feedback itself.
2. Customize the medium of feedback.
Some attorneys prefer the feel of a red pen on paper. Others are loyal to Word’s Track Changes or margin comments in PDFs. While you should use the method that suits your workflow, it’s helpful to check whether the recipient can digest feedback in that format. For example, younger attorneys often prefer electronic feedback for ease of revision and review, but some may benefit from sitting down to go over a draft in person or via Zoom. Because the goal is learning, not just correction, think of feedback as a conversation, not just a markup.
A former student shared with me an example of a method of feedback that did NOT work for him. Nicholas Tselepis, now a Michigan attorney and ADR specialist, recounted, “When I was a third-year associate, the sole named partner at my 80-attorney firm called me into his office and made me wait for fifteen minutes as he argued with an airline for a refund. Then he dictated a product far inferior to my draft and said, ‘See, that’s how you can get the task done in a .5.’” The only lesson Tselepis learned from that experience—which I wouldn’t even label as “feedback”—was that he would have to rely on his own judgment (which fortunately was good) in finalizing the written product for submission.
3. Don’t just edit—explain.
If I’ve learned anything over twenty-six years of teaching legal writing, it’s that giving effective feedback takes a lot of time and effort. While it’s tempting to simply strike through a sentence or insert a better phrase, I have trained myself to write comments that explain why something isn’t working. Senior attorneys should aim to include such explanations in their feedback on junior attorneys’ writing: “This paragraph is confusing because the case citation interrupts the point before it’s fully made. Consider moving the authority after the explanation.” These micro-lessons will accumulate and will eventually change how newer lawyers approach their writing.
Emily Jeske, Partner and Board-Certified Family Law Specialist at Bosquez Porter Family Law, explains her process for giving feedback to junior attorneys, which she considers a key part of mentoring. She emphasizes that “clarity is key. Clarity in expectations, clarity in communication, and clarity in revisions all help in developing new writers and making them stronger attorneys. My first step is to identify samples, go-bys, forms, or similar cases that I can refer an associate to as a starting point. Giving as much information on the front end as possible helps them create a more thoughtful, fleshed out draft. Once I have a draft, I prefer to track my changes and leave comments (or send an email, or have a conversation) about why I’m making changes to a draft. Sometimes, it’s a stylistic change that’s relatively minor; sometimes, it’s more substantive. Regardless of what the feedback is, the level of ‘severity’ should be clearly defined and stated—is this something that perhaps only exists in my mind in terms of a turn of phrase, style choice, or fact about the case that the associate could not have known? Is it a typo (which we all make)? Or is it something that should have been identified and addressed on their own? Feedback on all those things looks exactly the same on a redlined document, but they have drastically different implications for an attorney’s practice.”
4. Connect the dots to future writing.
The most powerful feedback links today’s draft to tomorrow’s assignment. When reviewing a memo, for instance, you might say, “This section was well organized. Use this same structure for the summary judgment brief next week.” Or, “You tend to use a lot of long, complex sentences. On future projects, try using shorter sentences and connecting their content with helpful transitions.”
Even pointing out repeated issues—like inconsistent citations or poor comma usage—gives the junior attorney something to consciously work on in future drafts. As Jeske says, “Getting edits without more explanation often causes more stress than progress and may ultimately lead to the exact same issues down the line. At the end of the day, developing a newer attorney’s writing pays exponential dividends if you’re willing to put in the time for thoughtful, constructive, and straightforward feedback.” Putting in that time is what makes feedback a form of long-term teaching, not just editing.
5. Encourage humility in receiving feedback.
Make space for discussion: “Let me know if any of my edits don’t make sense or if you want to walk through them together.” But also reinforce the idea that constructive criticism is not a judgment on the junior lawyer’s potential, but a tool for their growth. Some junior lawyers may need to be reminded that the goal of feedback is not perfection but progress. And sometimes, the best feedback is the hardest to hear.
Finally, it’s worth noting that giving feedback is only half the equation. Newer attorneys must also learn to receive it with humility and curiosity. This is especially important for Gen Z lawyers, who may come from educational backgrounds where feedback was frequent and often framed positively. Aaron Vodicka, Director of Contracting and Compliance at the North Carolina State Health Plan for Teachers and State Employees, encourages newer attorneys to avoid taking feedback, “whether heavily critical or minor, as a reflection of your personal success or character—it has nothing to do with you as an individual. Writing can always be improved, so there’s always feedback of some sort that can be given, and sometimes, the way you did it might not be wrong; the reviewing attorney just likes it to be done a certain way.”
Legal writing is not just a skill; it’s a craft handed down from one generation of attorneys to the next. By giving thoughtful, instructive, and well-framed feedback, experienced lawyers do more than fix documents—they shape future colleagues. It may take an extra ten minutes today, but that investment pays dividends when the junior attorney returns with a stronger, cleaner, more confident draft next time. In a profession that prizes precedent, perhaps there’s no better precedent to set than that of good feedback—offered with clarity, received with grace, and remembered long after the redlines have faded.
Laura Graham serves as Professor of Legal Writing and Director of Legal Analysis, Writing, and Research at Wake Forest University School of Law, where she has been teaching since 1999. She was the first recipient of the law school’s Graham Award for Excellence in Teaching Legal Research and Writing, which is named in her honor, and currently serves as immediate past president of the Association of Legal Writing Directors. Graham is a graduate of Wake Forest University and Wake Forest University School of Law.