Tools · open to all
Paste a draft. Three kinds of phrase that courts have struggled to pin down are marked, each with the reason and the usual fix.
Runs entirely in your browser. Nothing you paste is sent anywhere or kept.
What it looks for
For example: "in connection with", "relating to", "related to".
The problem. It admits degrees of connection, and no canon of construction can say how close the connection has to be.
The fix. Replace the relation with a definite term — say what the connection is, not that there is one.
See Lucey v. Kinnon, Mass. App. Ct., No. 24-P-968 (Dec. 15, 2025).
For example: "for the first time", "the first time", "initially".
The problem. It fixes one moment and says nothing about the times after it.
The fix. State the rule for every occasion the provision reaches — "on each occasion," or "only on the first occasion, and not thereafter."
See Cuticchia v. Andover, 95 Mass. App. Ct. 121 (2019).
For example: "notwithstanding any other provision of law", "notwithstanding any other provision", "notwithstanding any other law".
The problem. It leaves the relationship between this provision and some other one for a court to work out.
The fix. Name the other provision by chapter and section.
No known pattern — not no problem.
The check matches wording. It will miss the same problem phrased some other way, and it cannot tell whether a marked phrase is harmless where it sits. A time reference is left unmarked when the same sentence already says what happens on later occasions ("…or at any time thereafter").
Sometimes an open phrase is the right choice. To keep one on purpose, put [B4:intentional] on the
same line; the phrase is still listed but counted as kept, not as a problem.
This is the first pass of a full draft review, which goes on to check every term against the definitions already in the General Laws and puts each issue to the sponsor as a decision.
Educational. The output is a starting point for a lawyer's judgment, not a substitute for it.