As I understand the terms are used to described opposing parties in court. When referring to opposing parties in a demand letter, they are not in court (yet) so I am not sure that this pair is the right label set.

That being said, what is the right label when referring to the parties in a demand letter?

  • Would they not simply be referred to by name? – Ron Beyer Sep 18 '18 at 3:56
  • The use of standardized terms to define roles increases communication efficacy – gatorback Sep 18 '18 at 4:40

There isn't really an equivalent naming convention at the demand stage. You could call them demandor/demandee, but it would sound ridiculous.

If you need generic terms, you would probably use names that describe the nature of the relationship: husband/wife, landlord/tenant, debtor/creditor, buyer/seller, etc.

In my experience, though, good demand letters, like any good legal writing, refer to everyone by name. People frequently identify parties by their role in the case, but mostly just because that's how everyone has done it for a long time, and lawyers are terrified of doing anything new, especially in writing. Courts and law schools are generally pushing people away from this convention, but many people are still hanging on.

  • This is helpful, though I would have thought the legal community would have an equivalent convention for the demand phase. It would be helpful to have a standard term that enable the judge to identify who is demandee. Thanks for the helpful comment. – gatorback Sep 18 '18 at 15:55
  • @bdb484, can you recommend a good book with clear examples for good demand letters, good object letters, good subpoenas to discover documents, etc. – jww Sep 19 '18 at 3:47

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.