Codes used in marking up essays

CIVIL PROCEDURE, PROFESSOR NATHENSON

GLOSSARY OF HANDWRITTEN CODES (v. 4.1)

The table below explains the meaning of common abbreviations used when scoring your essays. Don’t hesitate to ask for clarification.

CODE	MEANING
#	Insert space
<	Depending on context, means “less than” or “before” as in one thing precedes another.
=	Equals, typically in the sense that one thing is like another. In contrast, “DN =” means that “does not equal,” i.e., that one thing is not like another.
>	Means “more than.”
¶ or ¶¶	Either a lengthy paragraph that should be broken up, or a suggestion for a place to break for a new paragraph. Alternatively, it may mean that you should indent the first line of each new paragraph.
A right arrow or ¬	Indent the first line of a paragraph.
Adv.	Depending on context, either “advertising” or “adverb.” Regarding adverbs, avoid words like “clearly” or “definitely” in your essays. If you think the answer is clear, show the reader why your answer is correct. Unfortunately, “clearly” is usually used to explain why analysis is not provided.
AIC	Amount in Controversy
Am.	Amendment
Am. MOC	Amendment as a matter of course
Amb. or Ambig.	Ambiguous
Awk	Awkward
B/C	Because (in other words, the statement is conclusory)
Begs Q, Circular, or circle w/ arrows	Begging the question is when an argument assumes the correctness of a proposition, or the existence of a fact, that the writer is attempting to prove. Put differently, begging the question means assuming the thing to be proven. It might also refer to defining something in terms of itself: “Minimum contacts are satisfied when the defendant has sufficient contacts with the state to support personal jurisdiction.”
BF or B/F	But-for, which may refer to the “but-for” test in specific jurisdiction.
BFM	But for a mistake.
Br.	Justice Brennan
BSFW	Burden-shifting framework (of WWVW and Burger King)
BU or B/U	Break up a long sentence or paragraph.
C&C	Clear & convincing
C&P	Cut & Paste. This could mean that part of your essay has been copied & repeated in other parts of your essay. It could also be an observation that your rule statement is copied verbatim from the text of the rule. You do not need to state a rule more than once for a particular essay answer.
C&S	Continuous & systematic
C/A or Counter-arg.	Is the paper considering counterarguments? Is there an obvious counterargument that is missing?
C/S of FS	Citizen or subject of foreign state
C/S/EAH	Continuous, systematic, and essentially at home
CC	Counterclaim, or if PJ is at issue, “compelling case.” In rare cases, “commerce clause.”
CDR	Complete diversity rule
Check mark	A check mark means nothing in terms of points. It is simply something I sometimes do while reading through a paper.
Clearly, Generally, Adv., or Adverb	Avoid words like “clearly” or other adverbs that intensify your argument. “Clearly” is a crutch that is too-often used to boost underdeveloped arguments. With most adverbs: try removing them. If the argument works ok without the adverb, then your writing and argument will be much stronger for it. If your argument is no longer true without the adverb, then work on improving the argument. Or consider whether you need that argument at all.
COA	Depending on context, either Court of Appeals or cause of action.
CODS	Citizens of different states
COL	Choice of law, or conflict of law
Conc. or Concl.	Depending on context, either refers to argumentation that is conclusory or due to a lack of (or defect in a) conclusion.
COQ or COTQ	Call of the question
COS, CODS	Citizen(s) of a state, citizens of different states
CRC	Crossclaim
D or a Greek Delta	Defendant
DCT or Dist.	District Court or District
Div. or DOC	Diversity, Diversity of Citizenship
DN	Depending on context, “do not,” “does not,” or “domain name.”
DN = (or the “does not equal” sign)	Does not equal
DNF	Depending on context, “did not finish” or “does not follow.” Re “does not follow,” that likely means that one of your assertions does not follow from other assertions. Your analysis may include self-contradictions or non-sequiturs.
DP	Due Process
EAH	Essentially at home
EC	Extra credit
El. or “elements”	Reference to elements. Are you providing all elements, correctly?
EP	Equal protection, or as context demands, Erie prediction
EV	Evidence, such as in the evidence test in specific jurisdiction
F by F	Break analysis up factor by factor
F&FO	Full & fair opportunity
FC	Facts and conclusion, i.e., rather than providing analysis, you have given the facts accompanied by a conclusion.
FDR	Forum Defendant Rule (or possibly Franklin Delano Roosevelt)
FF&C	Full Faith & Credit
FL	Federal law
FP	Fact pattern
FQ	Federal question
Fr. or Frag	Sentence fragment
Frag.	Sentence fragment, not a full sentence.
FS or F/S	Forum state
GJ or G/J	General jurisdiction
GR	Depending on context, gives rise or grammatical error.
H/E	However
History, or H/L, or news story	Legal analysis is more than just reiterating the historical facts of the case as if one were telling a story of “what happened.” Supply legal analysis, namely, the application of law to facts.
IC	Interest and costs
I/S	International Shoe
IFF	This is a term in logic; it means “if and only if”
IP	Depending on context, could be: 1) personam jurisdiction; 2) intellectual property; 3) internet protocol address
IR/QIR	In rem/quasi-in rem
IRAC and similar abbreviations such as IRC, IC, IRFC, etc.	Obviously IRAC means Issue-Rule-Analysis-Conclusion. If I write down IRC or IC, I likely mean that you are providing incomplete discussion. IRC would be Issue-Rule-Conclusion without analysis. IC would be a jump from Issue to conclusion without rule or analysis. If I say something like IRFC, then you are supplying facts rather than analysis, i.e., Issue-Rule-Facts-Conclusion. Giving facts is simply telling a story; it’s not analysis.
J.D.	Judicial district
JJ	Judgment
K, M, or S	Depending on context, K is “contract” or “Kirk.” M refers to McCoy. Depending on context, S refers to Spock or Scotty.
LA or L/A	Long-arm (statute)
LC	Law and conclusion, but lacking analysis, or depending on context, “legal certainty”
LL	Laundry list
LPR	Lawful permanent resident
Maj.	Majority
Make arg. or M/A	To state that an argument exists or might be or could be made is not the same thing as making the argument and analyzing it. If an argument is sufficiently important that you think something could be argued, then make the argument and assess its merits.
MC or M/C	Minimum contacts (test)
MD or M/D	Minimal diversity
MOC	Matter of course
MTD	Motion to dismiss
MTR	Motion to remand
N but NS, or N but IS, and variants	Necessary but not sufficient, necessary but insufficient. What essay states is necessary but by itself insufficient to support conclusion.
N/S or Non-Seq	Non sequiter, Latin, means one thing does not follow from another. In other words, an error in logic.
NAP	No answer provided
NBI	Necessary but insufficient
Nec.	Necessary
NIF or not in facts	Not in facts (not in the fact pattern); essay makes a factual assertion that is neither contained in nor justified by the fact pattern.
NIS	Negative-issue spotting: it squanders valuable time on non-issues.
NOR	Notice of removal
Not PP	The argument is presented by the student as a public policy argument, but is not really public policy. Reasons may include stating or restating legal argumentation (such as describing rule) as a policy. Examples might include “The policy behind PJ is to prevent courts from permitting jurisdiction over a person lacking sufficient contacts with a state.” That’s nothing more than a vague reference to thelaw, i.e., the minimum contacts test.
O’C or OC, or O/C	Justice O’Connor, or depending on context, overall conclusion provided?
OI or O/I	Overall issue provided?
One or more question marks (?)	Means that there is a problem, such as: 1) an argument does not make sense; 2) I do not understand what the paper is trying to say; or 3) an argument is not coherent.
OR, O/R, or OAR	Overall rule provided?
Org.	Organization
OW or O/W	Otherwise
P or a Greek Pi	Plaintiff
PA or P/A	Purposeful availment
PJ	Personal jurisdiction
POPL	Principles of Public Law (from Pennoyer)
PP	Public policy
PPOB	Principal place of business
PvN	Pennoyer v. Neff
QP	Question presented (i.e., the issue presented)
R&A	Regular & anticipated (as in Brennan’s SOC standard)
R&AF	Regular & anticipated flow (of goods into the forum state through the stream of commerce)
R/B or RB	Relation back
R/O or run-on	Run-on sentence.
RA	Rule analysis, i.e., your application of the law to facts.
RD	Rule definition (the statement of law) is missing or flawed.
RDA	Rules of Decision Act
REA	Rules Enabling Act
Rel.	Relevant or relevance.
Req. or Req’d	Requires or required
RF	Reasonableness factors
RO or R/O	Run-on sentence.
RP	Real property
RQ or RQ DN = analysis	Paper is asking a rhetorical question rather than providing analysis of the issue. Your job as a scholar is to ask questions and to answer them. If the question is worth asking, then it is also worth trying to answer.
SC	Depending on context, either subconclusion needed, or a reference to the Supreme Court.
SC	Means sub-conclusion. Either an indication that I saw that you provided one, or a reminder that you did not provide one.
Scalia	Would you make this argument to Justice Scalia? (See also SF/Straight-face)
SCT	Supreme Court
Self-contr.	Discussion appears to contradict itself.
SF	Does this argument pass the “straight-face test?”
SL or S/L	State law
SJ or S/J	Specific jurisdiction
SMJ	Subject-matter jurisdiction
SOC	Stream of commerce
SP	Spelling error.
SPM	St. Paul Mercury
SSI/SSP	States’ shared interest in substantive social policy
SSP	Substantive social policy
St.	Depending on context, State or Justice Stevens
Story	Don’t tell a story. In other words, don’t repeat the facts. Provide analysis.
Straw man, SMA, or False Dichotomy	A straw man argument is a counter-position that is set up so that it can be refuted. Either further develop the counter-position as a plausible position even if you still reject it, or considering removing it entirely. The danger of straw man arguments is that they may be used as part of a “false dichotomy” fallacy, which sets up two arguments as the only positions available. By striking down the obviously “wrong” position (the straw man), the author sets up the proffered alternative as the “correct” position. However, straw man arguments, when combined with false dichotomies, typically ignore the possibility that other positions may be plausible and even preferable than the two discussed.
The “does not equal” sign	Means “does not equal” or “is not the same as.”
The congruence sign (a squiggle or similar signs)	This is the congruence sign in mathematics. I use it to mean “analogous.”
TNOFP	Traditional notions of fair play (and substantial justice)
TOC	Totality of circumstances
TP	Transient presence
TPC	Third party claim
U/E or UE	Unguided Erie
Ven.	Venue
Typing or Typing DN = RD	Merely copying or typing the rule verbatim or near-verbatim from the rule supplement is not providing a meaningful rule statement. You don’t get points merely for showing that you can see and type.
Vol.	Voluntary, voluntariness. Might be volume in context of Stevens’ stream of commerce test
VVH	Volume, value, hazardousness (Stevens’ stream of commerce test)
W/, w/in, w/o	With, within, without
W/? or W/__	With what?
WN	Would not

Updated Mar. 21, 2018 (v4.1)