Court cases, to me have too often drifted off excessively due to using too many words (and perhaps not enough thought) being thrown at a topic.
The importance of constraint with wording was recently recognised curially, in the USA.
A recently reported case of Pi-Net International and Dr Lakshmi v J P Morgan (see discussion in Managing Intellectual Property and report ) is a salutary lesson in the need to stick to the substance of the word limit rules.
The US Federal circuit Court, in context of a patented dispute, the respondent, JP Morgan, objected that the applicants opening brief’s word use exceeded the limit under the rules.. The applicant had, in an attempt to stay within the word limit, admitted “a” and “the” and collapsed some citations by deleting spaces and using fullstops to string words and references so as to be one word not a number.