Many of you know that I’ve spent a considerable amount of time studying attorney negotiation ethics the past few years, and as a result, I’ve been speaking on the topic to both academic and practitioner audiences quite a bit.  One constant I’ve noticed is that almost everyone knows that puffing is a form of acceptable negotiation deceit, but the lack of understanding of what puffing is astounds me.  Anyone who wants to dissemble calls it puffing, even in cases of blatant fraudulent misrepresentations.  Boiled down to its core, puffery is self-aggrandizing speech about a product or service typically for promotional purposes, much along the lines of title to this post.  For a litigation example, try this – we’re going to win this case at trial, or witness Johnson’s testimony will kill your case.  Another tip, the more specific a claim is, the less likely it is to be puffery.

 A very good piece on the topic is The Best Puffery Article Ever by David Hoffman, whose title illustrates the phenomenon quite well in a number of contexts.  When mentioning the piece for the simple illustration the title provides, the idea becomes clear.  Spread the word and help to clear up the confusion.