1. Page Layout

Before document creation, a solid page layout gives your document a clean starting point and helps it line up with the legal standards most courts expect.

Standard Page Size

Most filings use 8.5 x 11 inches, which remains the default paper size across U.S. courts. Some courts allow A4, though most still expect the standard size. So, unless the rules say otherwise, stick with that for templates and everyday filings.

A few older forms still reference legal size (8.5 x 14 inches), but modern templates and electronic filing systems typically expect the standard 8.5 x 11 layout. Sticking with this size keeps your documents consistent with what courts review every day.

Recommended Margins

One-inch margins on all sides are widely accepted. A few courts ask for a slightly larger left margin to allow space for binding, so a quick check of local rules is always worthwhile.

Line Spacing Rules

Courts often expect double line spacing in the main text to improve readability. Single spacing may be used for block quotes, footnotes, and tables, depending on the requirements.

Header and Footer Placement

Page numbers usually sit in the bottom center or bottom right. Some courts also want the case details in the header on every page, so it’s worth double-checking their court standards and formatting rules before you file.

Example

A compliant layout might include:

• 8.5″ x 11″ page
• 1″ margins
• Double line spacing
• Case caption in the header
• Page number in the bottom-right corner

Layouts following these basics usually meet filing expectations, but a quick look at your jurisdiction’s rules helps make sure that everything lines up.

2. Font and Text Standards

Clear text guidelines help your filings look consistent and easy to read, no matter the court or agency. The way you handle font choice, font size, and basic formatting styles plays a big role in keeping the document polished.

Approved Fonts for Legal Documents

• Traditional serif options like the Century Schoolbook and Times New Roman font remain widely accepted
• Many courts now permit sans-serif fonts such as Arial or Calibri for other legal documents
• Pick one font family and use it throughout the document

Font Size Rules for Body Text and Headings

• Body text usually appears in a 12-point font size
• Headings often use 12–14 points, depending on hierarchy
• Keep the same sizing structure across sections for consistency

Bold, Italic, and Underline Usage

• Use bold to emphasize key points sparingly
• Italics work well for case names, citations, and defined terms
• Underlining appears less often but remains acceptable if required by local rules

Rules for Capitalization

• Capitalize defined terms consistently
• Follow standard legal writing conventions for titles, sections, and parties
• Avoid over-capitalizing everyday words that don’t carry legal significance

These standards keep your formatting clean, predictable, and aligned with what courts expect.

3. Headings and Subheadings

Strong headings keep longer documents organized and easier to read. When the structure is clear, readers can follow the flow of information without effort. This is something that matters a lot in professional documents.

Use a clear document title at the top, then break the content into logical sections with consistent formatting. Headings should signal major topics, while subheadings divide those topics into smaller, focused points that improve readability.

A simple structure looks like this:

• Main heading (H1) – Defines the broad topic
• Section heading (H2) – Introduces major sections
• Subheading (H3) – Breaks down details within each section

Keep styles consistent throughout: the same font, size, spacing, and alignment. This gives your document a clean and predictable layout that helps readers move through the content without confusion.

4. Paragraph Formatting

Clear paragraph rules go a long way toward keeping documents clean and easy to review. That’s why many teams build these settings into their Microsoft Word templates to maintain consistency and avoid formatting errors.

Indentation Rules

• Standard practice uses a first-line indent of 0.5 inches
• Some courts require no indentation and rely on spacing instead
• Apply indentation through styles to keep paragraphs consistent and ensure compliance with court preferences

Block vs. Indented Paragraphs

• Block paragraphs use no indentation and include a blank line between paragraphs
• Indented paragraphs use a first-line indent with no extra spacing
• Choose one format and keep it consistent throughout the document

Spacing Between Sections

• Add clear spacing above headings and between major sections
• Avoid manual line breaks and rely on paragraph styles to prevent inconsistent gaps

Alignment Best Practices

• Left alignment is the standard for legal documents
• Fully justified text is allowed in some filings, but can create uneven spacing
• Keep alignment consistent to maintain a clean reading experience

5. Numbering and Lists

Organized lists help readers move through information quickly in legal briefs and other documents that follow a consistent legal style. Most tasks can be handled easily in a word processing program where styles keep lists clean and uniform.

When to Use Numbered vs. Bulleted Lists

• Use numbered lists for steps, arguments, or anything that follows a sequence
• Use bullet points for items that share equal weight and don’t require a specific order

Multi-Level Lists

• Helpful for outlining arguments or breaking complex points into smaller parts
• Apply built-in list styles rather than manual spacing
• Use clear hierarchy levels (1., a., i.) to maintain the structure readers expect in legal writing

Consistent Indentation for List Items

• Keep each level aligned the same way throughout the document
• Avoid manually dragging items; use styles to prevent spacing inconsistencies
• If your document uses select columns or narrow margins, review the layout to confirm that list items remain properly aligned

Example

1. Primary argument
         a.   Supporting detail
                      i.     Sub-point
2. Secondary argument

6. Citations and References

Accurate citations keep your writing clear and consistent with court requirements. They are particularly important in briefs, motions, and other formal documents.

Most law firms follow a standard citation style (often Bluebook or local court rules) to keep references predictable and easy to verify.

Citation Format

Use the citation style required by the court or governing body. Styles may vary between jurisdictions, so always confirm the expected structure before finalizing a document.

Placement of Citations

Inline citations work well for most filings, but footnotes are acceptable in documents that allow more narrative flow. Your word processor should handle footnote numbering automatically to prevent formatting mistakes.

Short Citation Box

Some courts ask for a short citation box on the first page of a filing. This quick-reference section summarizes the mandatory citation format or abbreviation rules so the reviewer can see them at a glance.

Footnotes vs. Endnotes

Footnotes are more common in legal writing because they keep sources close to the text. Endnotes may be used in longer filings if permitted, but they’re less typical in court submissions.

Cross-Referencing

When pointing readers to exhibits or earlier sections, keep labels consistent. Use automated cross-reference tools to avoid errors during edits.

7. Document Structure Requirements

A clear structure helps every legal file stay easy to read and consistent with the formatting elements courts expect.

Little formatting details can shape how quickly someone grasps the content. This matters even more when there are many sections or extra materials involved.

Most legal documents follow a predictable flow: a title page or caption, a table of contents for longer filings, well-defined sections, and exhibits or appendices at the end.

Keeping the same heading styles, spacing, and numbering throughout gives the document a clean, steady feel that reviewers appreciate.

This becomes even more important for teams handling repeat work. If you’re drafting similar filings over and over, document automation tools help you start with the right structure every time.

Instead of rebuilding the layout from scratch, you begin with margins, headings, signature blocks, and exhibit labels already in place. Apply consistency like this and you’ll reduce errors and cut down on back-and-forth formatting fixes.

For teams that want a faster, more reliable way to create structured filings, Autodoc offers ready-to-use layouts that stay aligned with court expectations.

Book a demo to see how it fits into your workflow.

8. File-Naming Conventions

Naming a file seems simple, but a predictable system saves time and avoids mix-ups, especially when multiple people review drafts, leave comments, or track changes.

A clear convention also keeps files organized across shared drives, email threads, and document management tools. This way, no one has to guess which version is current or what’s inside a file.

Required Naming Format

Most firms rely on a straightforward pattern with the matter name, document type, and date. This keeps folders tidy and makes searches faster.

Example for motion to compel document:

Smith_v_Jones_MotionToCompel_2025-03-12.docx

Version Control Rules

Version tags help everyone follow the document history. Update the tag each time a new draft is created.

Examples:

• …_v1, …_v2, …_v3
• …_PartnerReview, …_ClientReview

Avoid ambiguous titles like “final” or “final_final,” which usually lead to duplicates.

Confidential or Privileged Labels

Sensitive files should display their status clearly in the name. This reduces the risk of accidental sharing and supports firm-level policies.

Examples:

• CONFIDENTIAL
• ATTORNEY-CLIENT_PRIVILEGED
• ATTORNEY_WORK_PRODUCT

9. Page Numbering Requirements

Good page numbering makes a document easier to move through and helps reviewers locate information quickly. This is especially true in filings that include exhibits, charts, or an insert table section.

Courts expect consistent placement, so numbering should stay in the same spot on every page; most commonly, the bottom center or bottom right.

Introductory pages sometimes follow different rules. A court may ask for Roman numerals on the table of contents and switch to Arabic numbers once the main text begins.

Other courts prefer numbering to start on the very first page of the document. A quick check of local guidelines prevents unnecessary changes later.

For documents with exhibits, keep the numbering continuous unless a rule requires each exhibit to restart at page one. This helps anyone reviewing the file follow references easily, particularly when you mark citation references throughout the text.

It’s best to use your word processor’s automatic numbering tools rather than typing numbers manually. Automated numbering adjusts smoothly as sections are added, removed, or edited, and keeps the layout stable through final review.

10. Formatting for Exhibits

Exhibits should follow a clear structure so reviewers can scan, verify, and reference them without slowing down.

Each exhibit needs a label that’s easy to spot, typically placed at the top-right corner of the first page. Labels usually follow a simple pattern such as “Exhibit A,” “Exhibit B,” and so on. 

If your matter includes many attachments, adding brief descriptions can help, as long as they remain consistent.

Exhibit pages should maintain the same margins, fonts, and spacing used in the main document unless the source material can’t be altered. When referring to exhibits in the text, use the exact label so the reader can match the reference instantly.

Make sure each exhibit begins on a new page, and include a divider or header to mark the start of each section if the exhibits appear in a single combined PDF.

Example:

• Exhibit A – Email from John Smith dated March 4, 2025
• Exhibit B – Contract Agreement (signed)
• Exhibit C – Financial Summary Spreadsheet

11. Redaction Standards

Strong redaction practices protect sensitive information and reduce the risk of accidental disclosure. Most courts expect digital redactions to fully remove the underlying text, not just hide it visually.

Proper Digital Redaction

Use a true redaction tool and not drawing tools, black boxes, or highlights. A proper tool deletes the underlying text so it can’t be revealed through copying, searching, or adjusting the file.

Marking Redacted Sections

Redacted areas should be clearly identified. Many teams use a black bar paired with a brief label such as “Redacted – Confidential Information” or “Redacted – PII.” This helps reviewers understand why content was removed and keeps the document consistent.

Quality Checks Before Producing Documents

Always review the final file in a PDF reader to confirm that the text cannot be selected or recovered. Check for hidden metadata, comments, or tracked changes that may reveal information unintentionally.

If multiple exhibits or pages were redacted, verify each one before the document is produced or shared.

12. Metadata Requirements

Metadata often contains more information than the visible document, so managing it carefully is essential for compliance and confidentiality.

Courts and opposing parties may review metadata during the eDiscovery process. This means every saved change, author name, or hidden comment matters.

Documents should include only the metadata required for identification, authorship, and basic organization.

Before sharing or filing, remove unnecessary details such as internal comments, tracked edits, previous authors, and embedded file paths. This helps prevent accidental disclosure and keeps the document focused on what’s meant to be shared.

Use your word processor’s inspection tools to scan for hidden content that might otherwise go unnoticed. Many firms add this step to their review checklist to maximize consistency across matters.

Here are a few quick tips:

• Clear tracked changes before exporting to PDF
• Remove comments and internal notes
• Confirm the author and title fields are accurate
• Avoid embedding unrelated files or links

13. PDF Production Guidelines

A polished PDF makes sure the final version of your document is easy to read, search, and share across teams or with the court. Start by exporting directly from your word processor rather than printing to PDF, since exporting preserves formatting, bookmarks, and searchable text.

Make sure the file is fully OCR-enabled. If any pages originate from scans, run an OCR pass so reviewers can search, copy, and reference specific text without manual work. Courts often reject PDFs that aren’t searchable, so this step matters.

Check that headers, footers, and page numbers appear correctly throughout the file. Layout issues occasionally shift during export, especially when the document includes tables, exhibits, or images.

If the PDF includes confidential material, confirm that any redactions are permanent and that the underlying text is removed. You should also verify security settings match your needs; some teams lock editing while allowing printing, while others keep the file open for collaboration.

Your Legal Document Workflow Can Be Lighter With Briefpoint

Formatting rules look simple on paper, but keeping them straight across briefs, motions, discovery responses, and client-ready documents can feel like a lot to juggle.

You’re expected to follow court preferences, maintain consistency, and deliver clean files every time, often under tight deadlines. A steady system helps, but it’s still easy for spacing, numbering, or citation details to slip through when you’re working fast.

Briefpoint helps you handle that workload across motions, discovery requests, discovery responses, correspondence, and more.

If you’re dealing with the heavy lift of discovery, Autodoc takes the process even further. It turns productions and case files into ready-to-serve, Bates-cited discovery responses in minutes, not weeks.

You upload the RFPs and documents, Autodoc finds what’s responsive, generates Word-formatted responses, and produces a Bates-numbered package you can serve immediately.

Book a demo and get a closer look at how it fits into your practice!

What Is Everlaw?

Everlaw is a cloud-based eDiscovery software provider that helps legal teams search, organize, and review large sets of electronic documents in a single platform.

Source: G2

Essentially, it supports the full document review process and gives teams a way to move through big data collections without feeling buried in files.

Many users appreciate that Everlaw feels approachable, runs searches quickly, and offers a layout that doesn’t require weeks of training. In comparisons built on real user data, focused insights, and detailed feature ratings, it often stands out for ease of use and overall review speed.

What Is Relativity?

Relativity is one of the most widely known eDiscovery software platforms, often used for large or complex matters that call for advanced search, analytics, and review controls.

The platform gives legal teams a structured way to handle big data collections, run detailed searches, and manage document review from start to finish.

Source: G2

Many organizations rely on Relativity because it supports deep customization and integrates well with existing legal workflows. Reviews that measure user satisfaction often include multiple data points tied to performance, ease of use, and individual vendor capabilities.

Some industry reports even aggregate emotional response ratings to produce a net emotional footprint, which helps understand the overall contract experience created through real usage.

What Is Briefpoint?

Briefpoint is an AI-powered document automation platform built to help litigation teams draft and serve discovery way faster than traditional methods.

It covers the full workflow for propounding and responding to discovery and gives firms a way to surface key elements across large sets of case files without hours of manual review.

An important element of the platform is Autodoc, Briefpoint’s module that turns productions and case files into fully formatted, Bates-cited discovery responses in minutes. Autodoc handles the heavy lifting that many teams struggle with.

Upload the complaint, requests for production, and case files. Then, the system identifies responsive materials, maps them to each request, and generates Word-ready responses along with a Bates-numbered production package.

The trust-and-verify controls give reviewers clarity into where the tool searched and what it found, which allows teams to work through high-level metrics quickly while keeping full control before service.

Briefpoint as a whole goes beyond single-task automation. It propounds discovery from complaints, drafts objection-aware responses, supports client response collection, and offers a secure, structured workflow that many firms use as their central discovery hub.

Get a demo now.

Everlaw vs. Relativity vs. Briefpoint: The Key Differences You Should Know

Shopping for discovery tools can feel like a lot, especially when each platform claims to solve the same problems. This quick comparison gives you a clear view of what each one focuses on, so you can decide which direction makes the most sense for your workflow.

Main Purpose

Everlaw, Relativity, and Briefpoint each focus on a different part of the discovery process. That’s why it should be easier to see where they fit once you look at their core goals.

Everlaw centers on fast search, clear organization, and document review. Its main goal is to give legal professionals a way to sort through large data sets without feeling overloaded.

Relativity leans into customization. Teams that need flexible workflows or integrations often choose it because its particular product offerings can support complex, specialized projects.

Briefpoint focuses on drafting, responding, and producing discovery. Its document automation helps firms move from raw case files to finished work product quickly, which creates real business value for anyone who wants fewer manual steps and shorter turnaround times.

This approach saves hours (30+ per case) and produces cleaner deliverables.

Overall, each platform typically deliver­s benefits in different parts of the workflow, which gives you a straightforward way to decide which potential partners align with your priorities.

Best Features

Here’s a quick look at the strengths each platform brings to the table. This breakdown gives you a simple way to compare what matters most across the three lawyer tools.

Everlaw Best Features

• Fast search across large data sets: Runs quick queries across your entire database to help teams find what they need without delays.
• Visual review tools: Give reviewers a clear path through documents with timelines, notes, and simple navigation.
• Collaboration features: Let teams comment, tag, and share insights to keep everyone aligned.
• User-friendly layout: Designed to lower the learning curve for legal professionals who want clean, simple workflows.
• High-level metrics: Offers reporting that helps teams compare high-level metrics across matters.

Relativity Best Features

• Deep customization: Supports advanced workflows for teams that want to tailor features to case needs.
• Analytics and predictive coding: Helps prioritize legal documents and spot patterns early in review.
• Robust integrations: Works well with other systems used by large organizations.
• Detailed end-user information: Provides activity tracking and logs that support defensible processes.
• Proprietary evaluation methodology: Backed by industry reviews that measure overall user sentiment and long-term satisfaction.

Briefpoint Best Features

• Autodoc for drafting and production: Turns case files into Bates-cited Word responses and production packages in minutes.
• Objection-aware drafting: Generates clean, consistent discovery documents that reduce manual edits.
• Client response collection: Translates interrogatories into plain English so clients answer faster.
• Full eDiscovery workflow: Covers both propounding and responding, which offers more than strong features alone by removing entire steps.
• Significant impact on workload: Cuts hours of manual drafting, which strengthens the vendor-client relationship and simplifies conflict resolution created during busy cases.
• Plain-language client tools: Make client input faster, more accurate, and easier to manage across busy matters.
• Structured verification controls: Shows exactly where Autodoc searched, so teams keep full control before service.

Who It’s Best For

Everlaw works well for teams that want a simple user interface, fast search, and a review environment that feels easy to pick up.

It’s a good fit for firms that want an eDiscovery platform focused on organization and clarity rather than deep customization. If your priority is review efficiency and quick onboarding, Everlaw usually fits that profile.

On the other hand, Relativity suits teams that handle complex matters, need flexibility, or rely on workflows that involve multiple aspects of data management.

Larger firms and litigation groups often choose it because they want a comprehensive overview of case activity and a granular comparison of product effectiveness across different projects.

Basically, many organizations look at Relativity when software satisfaction depends on customization and structured controls.

Briefpoint is ideal for firms that want fast drafting, consistent responses, and a smoother path from raw documents to finished work product. The service experience created through Autodoc appeals to teams that need reliable turnaround times and fewer manual steps.

Briefpoint works especially well for practices that want legal automation across propounding, responding, and client response collection. 

If your goal is speed, accuracy, and a tool that completes the work most platforms leave to the user, Briefpoint is often the most practical choice.

Learning Curve and Onboarding

Getting a new platform into your workflow should feel manageable, not overwhelming, so it helps to understand how each tool handles those first few days.

Everlaw is usually the easiest starting point for most legal teams. The layout feels familiar, the core actions are clear, and users often move through the basics without formal training.

Relativity asks for more time and planning. The platform gives you a lot of control, which means onboarding becomes a deeper process. Teams usually benefit from guided setup or internal admins who can configure workspaces and permissions.

This style works best for firms that want power and flexibility and don’t mind a longer path before everything feels natural.

Meanwhile, Briefpoint focuses on quick adoption. Uploads, drafting steps, and Autodoc workflows follow a simple sequence, so new users usually build confidence within minutes.

Many teams describe the customer experience as smooth because they can test real cases almost immediately.

A comprehensive assessment of all three tools shows that onboarding influences user feelings in the early stages, and understanding prior team habits helps you choose a platform that aligns with your expectations for continuous improvement and overall software performance.

What Briefpoint Offers That Everlaw and Relativity Don’t

Each platform brings something different to the table, but the real question is which one actually solves the problems your team deals with every week.

Everlaw helps with straightforward review, and Relativity supports complex, highly customized projects, but neither finishes the legal drafting or production work that usually eats up the most time.

If your goal is faster turnaround, fewer manual steps, and clear work product from the start, Briefpoint stands out as the option that reshapes the entire experience.

Briefpoint handles the part of discovery most platforms leave behind: getting from raw documents to ready-to-serve responses.

Autodoc, objection-aware drafting, and client response tools give you immediate wins, and the service experience created across the workflow helps teams move faster with less stress.

So ask yourself: which tool gives you time back, not just more features to manage? For many teams, that makes the answer obvious.

Book a demo to see how Briefpoint can support your practice.