**What are Ellipses?**
The ellipsis (plural form is "ellipses") is a punctuation mark that consists of three dots. Some people pronounce the word as "ell-lip-sees," while others say "ellipsis." Whether the "plural" version of the word is used is probably more a matter of individual preference than anything else.
In its entirety, the punctuation mark looks like this: "…"
The ellipsis can have a few different meanings depending upon where in a sentence it is placed and how it is used.
In a list, for example, the ellipses can be used at the end of the final item to mean that there are additional items that are omitted or untold, such as: "My favorite fruits are apples, pears, peaches, plums, grapes, cherries, strawberries…" In this case, the ellipses at the end of the list mean "etcetera."
Ellipses can also be used to indicate a pause in dialogue. They can mean that something is being omitted, or they can have the meaning of "more of the same." For example: "He said he wanted to get married next year, this year, next month, next week…" In this case, the ellipses mean "et cetera." An ellipsis can also mean "no more information about this," for example: "When telling your kids about the facts of life, mention the ‘birds and bees,’ the bees will be dogs, and the birds will be cats…" A final example: "I didn’t punch him, shoot him, stab him, choke him, poison him, drown him…"
In more formal writing, ellipses are used to omit parts of a quote. When quoting from another source, you typically omit some material in order to keep the quote short enough to fit into your context. To show where the omitted portion from the quote was, you would insert an ellipsis. For example: Stated differently, if the rest of the quote provided above were, "It was a dark and stormy night," then the completed quote would look like this: Note that when an omitted portion is the end of a sentence , the ellipsis is adjusted so that it does not have the final period (assuming the quote did have a period). For example: Ellipses can also be useful in this scenario: "Using an ellipsis with a quotation is very common. What is less known, however, is that italics should be used for one or both of the dots in the ellipsis . . . Most often, the middle dot of the ellipsis will be italicized, so that the ellipsis will always contrast with the italicized quotation . . ." Some writers choose to set all three of the dots in an ellipsis apart by a space, others do not. Both formats appear to be correct, so you are free to use whichever style you prefer. Ellipses can also be used in this way: "He went out to earn his daily bread . . .one way or another." In this case, the ellipses means "more of the same." This type of ellipsis should not be confused with the ellipsis shown earlier that is used to indicate omissions in quotations. Colloquially, ellipses can also mean "and then something else," or "for example." So, for example, you might say this: "I would like my steak rare . . . medium-rare is fine too, but no rarer than that." Ellipses can also mean "etc." and be used in the same way as in the first example above. So, you might say, for example, "I want to improve my writing skills, my career, my work/life balance, my family . . . etc." Another way to phrase the same ideas would be like this: "I want to improve my writing skills, my career, my work/life balance, my family . . . and etc." Note that in that last example, the "and" is used to mean "and etc." This is completely acceptable usage, although in formal writing, it is better to omit the "and." There are many other ways that you can use ellipses in your writing. These are just a few examples. The important take away is that ellipses can be used in many different ways, so make sure you understand how to use them in your writing.
**Ellipses in Legal Writing**
In legal documents, ellipses may connote omissions that can affect the merits of a case. For example, in Crowley v. DJO Global, Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7191 (E.D. Cal Jan. 21, 2015), the trial court denied the defendant DJO Global’s motion for judgment on the pleadings. The defendant DJO Global had filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings citing a portion of the plaintiff’s complaint, which the court reproduced with "…" inserted where DJO Global omitted clauses. The court calculated that using …’s results in a 50% difference between the defendant’s quoted distance and the actual distance. The two contested distances were two hundred feet versus four hundred feet. The defense closed by stating that this four-hundred-foot distance was "the only possible interpretation of the Plaintiff’s allegations." This four-hundred-foot distance was contained in the relevant portion of the complaint. The court, however, acknowledged that each party had its own version of events. It reasoned that the amended complaint alleges injury in fact and did not consider DJO Global’s omissions from the quoted language important.
In another district court case, Giuffre v. Maxwell, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9716 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 28, 2015), discussion turned to an intentional misuse of ellipses. Here, the court observed that the defendants appeared to have used ellipses to hide their argument that the Complaint was so devoid of merit that specifically did not add a legal argument toward concluding why the Complaint failed to state a claim. The court noted that the defendants omitted statements to the effect of "the Court should not dismiss the Complaint."
Thus, it seems that ellipses can also contain a legal significance: it gives notice and an opportunity to contest what facts are omitted.
**When to Use Ellipses**
Like the quotation mark, the ellipsis serves a connective function, linking thoughts between and among two or more authors. It is more than a connector, however: it is a signal for the reader as well. From quotation to quotation, the author of a document using quotations often states that he or she is omitting text from one or more of the quotations, and may indicate where in the quotation various omissions were made by inserting ellipses in the text of the quotation. The ellipsis helps the reader navigate the text through to its conclusion.
In the typical quotation sandwich, the ellipsis appears without parentheses and with a space both before and after the ellipsis. If a parenthetical citation follows the quotation, the ellipsis should appear with no space before it, since it is still part of the text. The space before the ellipsis is important to maintain the flow of the quotation. It signals to the reader that information has been omitted.
If the omitted material is a full sentence and is not complete on its own, then do not capitalize the letter following the ellipsis. But if the omitted material is a full sentence and is complete on its own, then do capitalize the omitted sentence, since it now stands alone. Finally, if the quotation ends in a question mark or an exclamation point, retain that at the end, even if the omitted material follows a period.
It is important to remember that, although you may be tempted to use ellipses to create a more coherent reading of the text, think carefully before you do. The ellipsis must accurately reflect what you are doing with the text. If you are not being completely honest with the quotation, then your lawyer may object. Be sure that the omission does not omit important aspects of the quotation.
**Common Errors with Ellipses**
The most common error of using too many ellipses can be boiled down to the "more is better" principal. Where the area between two periods is usually considered to be a void and not needed, some attorneys never met a string of three periods that they didn’t love to use.
Remember that punctuation is used: (1) to add clarity, and (2) to give cadence and flow to the language that we create in legal writing. When we find ourselves using what we think are clever combinations of ellipses, our points are lost and often the meaning is distorted. What we have to remind ourselves constantly when writing for legal purposes is that we are not trying to be creative, but rather practical.
Too many ellipses tend to put the reader into the garden of confusion. The reader has to stop, back track, and wonder how many ellipses should be defined as a "normal sentence" . Too many ellipses also make it difficult for the reader to know exactly when and where one point ends and another begins. They simply kill the rhythm of the written or spoken word.
Poor or improper spacing after ellipses is another common mistake. It is natural to want to space the next word with a blank space. To look natural, the space should occur after the last period – not before. This requires, however, an upshot of excess space in between the last period and the next word which causes you, again, to appear self-indulgent. Because extra space is such a subjective topic, and no style manual provides for the practice, style guides differ. As a matter of law office style, attorneys might consider using one or two spaces where normal typographical practice would dictate that extra space not be included.
**Interpreting Ellipses in Legal Writing**
While ellipses can be used for a variety of purposes in standard writing, their use in legal writing has almost wholly been reserved for one main purpose: quoting precedent. But the practice of truncating quoted material in a manner that might well change its original meaning is more common than you might think, and courts have not always taken a hard line on the practice. In the famous case of Marbury v. Madison, discussed in detail here, the Supreme Court of the United States noted that Chief Justice Marshall’s opinion did not quote the entirety of a particular previous ruling. Subsequent courts debating Marbury’s holding have pointed out that Justice Marshall’s modifications to the text of that earlier opinion went so far as to change its meaning in that instance. (See Hurst v. Clarke, 127 U.S. 78 (1888); Hubbard v. United States, 514 U.S. 1 (1995).) The Supreme Court did not appear to mind at the time that Marshall altered another judge’s opinion. But more recent cases might suggest that the opposing position might be the law of the land. In Tarkowski v. Mazda Motor Corp., 334 F.3d 124, 125 (2d Cir. 2003), the Second Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s judgment because the lower court had failed to consider a specific dissenting opinion within a case cited by the defendant. Without going into too much detail about the meaning of the original opinion, which was by the Delaware Chancery Court, an examination of the dissent in that case will show that it reads very differently when integrated into a sentence with ellipses in that fashion: In this case I would hold that a corporation in liquidating must set up reserves at least equal to its stated or anticipated liability in order to comply with the Delaware corporate statute requiring payment of debt before liquidation. . . . I would hold that a corporation in liquidation should set up reserves at least equal to its stated or anticipated liability in order to comply with the Delaware corporate statute requiring payment of debt before liquidation. . . . Essentially, the dissenting judge, Chancellor Allen, argued that the corporation should set up reserves to cover known liabilities (a distinct question from whether it should pay off those liabilities) before it paid dividend distributions to stockholders. If a later court were to remove the entire comment about the corporation liquidating and then leaving aside reserves (in addition to the possibility that it is, indeed, incorrect to quote other opinions like this), it might change what apparently is the meaning of the sentence. The dissent in question was itself in conflict as to whether or not there were any "anticipated" liabilities. The dissent was apparently unanimous as to the "stated" liabilities, and the majority of the court agreed. Taking the dissent out of context and changing the words in it might therefore affect the outcome of cases like Hurst. Cases such as the aforementioned Tarkowksi case indicate that courts may regard even small changes in words as important. Similarly, courts have noted in legal parsing that a change from past to present can affect the meaning of contractual agreements relating to insurance, such as changing "shall" into "should". See United States v. McKay, 501 F.2d 403 (5th Cir. 1974). If changing the word "shall" into "should" can make a difference, smaller legal changes might matter, too – and they could certainly affect the entire outcome of a case.
**Correcting and Proofreading Ellipses**
The work of editing and reviewing is the key in ensuring you use ellipses correctly and effectively. Every ellipsis must serve a purpose appreciable in the context of your sentence. I use the word "must" in this context, because any ellipsis that does not fulfill any of the previously-discussed objectives is superfluous. In other words, if you’re uncertain of the value of an ellipsis in your writing, it’s a good candidate for removal. Generally speaking, once you insert an ellipsis, the next step to determining its usefulness is to read forwards and backwards .
Reading forwards means reading your sentence starting from the first word in it and stopping at the final word. While reviewing, start with the first word of the sentence, stop at the first ellipsis, and then continue reading. After the sentence’s ellipsis/ellipses, repeat the review process as you did before. Reading backwards requires you to perform the previous exercise in the reverse. Start the review process from the last word of the sentence, work backwards to the first ellipses, then cease reading. Here’s how things will look: