Why do some judges and lawyers feel compelled to unnecessarily use Latin words when they write? Though some Latin words have becomes terms of art for which there is no good English substitute--prima facie, for examples, or habeas corpus--an English equivalent should be used if one exists.
Inter alia? Write "among others." Ex abundanti cautela? Write "out of abundant caution." In praesenti? Write "in the present."
There are a thousand such examples, and each makes the point: Latin words get in the way of comprehension and make the writer look like a jerk. That's why all right-thinking judges and lawyers should shun the unnecessary use of Latin in legal writing--except in those circumstances, of course, when a wannabe blog author is searching for a clever weblog title.
Concluding note: This post was written after encountering yet another unnecessary Latin word in a recent judicial opinion. Some of the examples used in this post are from Garner's entry on "Latinisms" in A Dictionary of Modern Legal Usage.