By Roberta WoodsThe blog, Citing Legally, offers an interesting entry about online case law validation, i.e. Shepard’s, KeyCite, etc., in its article, “The Complex Relationship between Citations and Citators.” (http://citeblog.access-to-law.com/?p=300) According to the blog, citations to as yet unpublished decisions pose particular problems in the online environment since the cases typically don’t get solid book citations immediately. As of April 23 five “precedential” decisions in cases appealing a denial of benefits by the Social Security Administration had been released by the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals since the beginning of 2015. . . . Four of the five were written by Judge Richard Posner. Three of his decisions and one by Judge Daniel Manion reversed trial court decisions that had affirmed the agency’s benefit denial. Westlaw gives the case a “WL” citation. Lexis gives it a “LEXIS” citation. Bloomberg Law gives it a “BL” citation. When it finally gets a citation to the Federal Reporter (book), the parallel citations to the WL, LEXIS, and BL cites are not carried through. Researchers have to know to look at the predecessor cites for the proprietary databases to get the full picture. The article illustrates the problem for researchers using the example of Curvin v. Colvin, No. 13-3622 (7th Cir. Feb. 11, 2015). The decision was handed down on February 11, 2015 but did not receive its “778 F.3d 645” designation until a month and a half later. During the intervening weeks it was cited at least eight times by district courts within the Seventh Circuit. Perforce those citations identified the Seventh Circuit opinion by docket number and exact date or a proprietary database citation (“WL”). Most, but not all, used both in parallel, yielding citations in the following form: Curvin v. Colvin, No. 13-3622, 2015 WL 542847 (7th Cir. Feb. 11, 2015). A straight database search on “778 F.3d 645” will not retrieve those cases. A database search on “2015 WL 542847” will retrieve those using the Westlaw cite (but not those employing the LEXIS equivalent “2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 2170” or the “F.3d” cite). A search on “13-3622” and “Curvin” will retrieve those including Curvin’s docket number but not those relying solely on a proprietary database cite or the ultimate “F.3d” cite. Reliance on the publication of print volumes of the National Reporter System, once a boon to the legal researcher, creates a cascade of issues when researching in a digital environment. The author recommends that jurisdictions “attach official citations to decisions at the time of release” as they do in Oklahoma. The purpose of Citing Legally is “to draw attention to important differences in practice among jurisdictions and distinctive approaches – from the commendable to the lamentable, the new and novel to the archaic. Like the reference from which it springs the focus here will be on how judges and lawyers cite legal authority rather than law journal norms.”
0 Comments
Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply. |
William S. Richardson School of LawWSRSL is a collaborative, multicultural community preparing students for excellence in the practice of law and related careers that advance justice and the rule of law. Archives
November 2016
Categories
All
|