Talk:Encyclopaedia of Forms and Precedents

[Untitled]
The original version of this article was obviously written by LexisNexis advertising department; I have removed the claims that "it is considered essential by those in non-contentious legal practice", that it is "comprehensive" (it is obviously impossible for a general collection like this to be comprehensive in only 90 volumes) and that it is "authoritative". Perhaps the page should be flagged for deletion but (while dismissing the hyperbole) EFP can be described as a significant work. AQC