The dash is one of the most misunderstood tools in writing. Used well, it adds clarity and emphasis. Used poorly, it creates ambiguity — or worse, invites misinterpretation. In legal writing, where precision is not negotiable, understanding when (and when not) to deploy a dash matters.
There are two main types: the en dash (–) and the em dash (—).
The en dash is primarily functional. It indicates ranges (pages 12–18), relationships (attorney–client privilege), or spans (2019–2021). Substituting a hyphen here is technically incorrect and signals carelessness — something you cannot afford in briefs or contracts.
The em dash, in contrast, does most of the heavy lifting in prose. It can set off a parenthetical thought more forcefully than commas and more flexibly than parentheses. For example: The defendant — despite repeated warnings — failed to comply. The interruption is clear, contained, and impossible to miss.
Em dashes are also useful for appositives, especially when the inserted phrase contains commas. Compare: The contract, executed in June, 2022, and amended twice, was void. That sentence wobbles. An em dash stabilizes it: The contract — executed in June 2022 and amended twice — was void.
But restraint is critical. In legal documents, em dashes should be rare and purposeful. Overuse makes writing feel informal or emotional, neither of which helps credibility. It should feel like a sidenote in a conversation. Judges expect clean structure. If a thought can be expressed with a period, use one.
What about hyphens? They join compound modifiers (well-settled law), not ideas. Confusing hyphens with dashes is common, but in legal writing, precision extends to punctuation.
Bottom line: dashes are tools, not decoration. Use the em dash sparingly to clarify complex sentences. Use the en dash correctly for ranges and relationships. And when in doubt, simplify.
writer @ law 