The Decline and Fall of the Dominant Paradigm: Trustworthiness of Case Reports in the Digital Age

The latest issue of the New York Law School Law Review just crossed my desk, with many interesting articles,  including this one by William R. Mills, associate librarian and professor of Legal Research:

New York Law School Law Review

Volume 53 2008/09

William R. Mills

The Decline and Fall of the Dominant Paradigm: Trustworthiness of Case Reports in the Digital Age

Professor Mills’s conclusion:

The foundation of trust that underpins our system of case law reporting has now been undermined. Cases posted to many mainstream Internet legal research sources, other than Lexis or Westlaw, appear with no strong guarantee of accuracy or authenticity. Scrupulous legal researchers who wish to independently verify the accuracy of the case reports they cite from Internet sources are met with the burden of comparing the electronic reports against print versions, which are the only ones that courts deem to be official. On a large scale, this burden can prove insurmountable. Furthermore, readers of modern legal literature, when encountering citations from the National Reporter System, have good reason to harbor doubt that the authors who wrote those citations actually consulted the editions that they cited. Moreover, if the authors did not actually consult the National Reporter System, or its established electronic counterparts Lexis or Westlaw, then there is no assurance that the sources they did consult were reliably accurate.

In the digital age, the foundation of trust in our case law reporting system, and in legal citation generally, must be rebuilt. Such a rebuilding effort cannot succeed by utilizing the technology of printed books. Today’s legal researchers are increasingly abandoning print sources in favor of their Internet-based counterparts. The rebuilding of trust in the case reporting system must take place in the realm of digital technology. It must focus on implementing digital safeguards within the process of dissemination of case law databases to better ensure the accuracy and security of information found in those databases.

While court systems and other government entities will obviously play major roles in this rebuilding effort, the legal profession would be naive to expect the government alone to accomplish this work. The government, after all, has never succeeded in creating an efficient case reporting system that served the needs of lawyers nationwide.  Rather, the rebuilding of the American case reporting system for the digital age must be an effort undertaken jointly by government, professional groups, and private enterprise.  The corporate proprietors of Westlaw and Lexis, as the inheritors of the West paradigm, ought not to resist this effort, but instead join in to facilitate its speedy success. Cooperation among all parties is essential, and private enterprise would be an ultimate beneficiary. The companies that market databases of case reports to lawyers have nothing to lose and much to gain from an improved system that bolsters the trustworthiness of these products.

Practitioners Beware…Research on Westlaw / Lexis is a Necessity in Texas?

Just happened across the recent St. Mary’s Law Journal (Vol. 40, #3, 2009) and the following article by Andrew T. Solomon caught my attention, “Practitioners Beware: Under Amended TRAP 47, “Unpublished” Memorandum Opinions in Civil Cases are Binding and Research on Westlaw and Lexis is a Necessity.”

Anything that states that using Westlaw and Lexis is a necessity is going grab a law librarian’s attention.

The article discusses the 2003 and 2008 amendments to the Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure (TRAP) 47, which deal with the citation and precedential weight of unpublished and memorandum opinions.  Solomon writes:

“The 2003 amendment was seemingly designed to make the law more readily available by prohibiting the issuance of unpublished opinions in civil cases and and authorizing memorandum opinions in place of unpublished opinions.  Despite this intention, the 2003 amendment has failed to make the law in civil cases more readily available because the newly created memorandum opinions are only available electronically via Westlaw, Lexis, and the court websites, even though these opinions are designated for publication.  Also, the 2008 amendment has now made memorandum opinions issued in civil cases since 2003 fully precedential.  As a result, to completely research binding law in civil cases, Texas attorneys must now have access to Westlaw or Lexis because the court websites lack sophisticated search engines necessary to conduct competent legal research.”

[ARGH!]

“The amendment is flawed because it makes memorandum opinions precedential even though those opinions are only readily available on Westlaw and Lexis.  This has occurred in an era when only 60% of attorneys use fee-based online research services (i.e., Westlaw or Lexis) for state case law research.”

Solomon makes a number of recommendations, including “making all opinions readily available on a sophisticated, widely available, and unified website for the Texas courts of appeals.”

As it goes in the state song of Texas, “boldest and grandest, withstanding ev’ry test,” so an accessible, complete website for the courts in Texas seems only right.

Digging up a discredited precedent

Intriguing item from the “national treasure” (called such by Rachel Maddow) SCOTUSblog:

Digging up a discredited precedent

Tuesday, June 9th, 2009 3:07 pm | Lyle Denniston |

Sometimes, it is a mystery how a prior Supreme Court decision – not well known except to real insiders - is dug up, perhaps by a law clerk, and given new notoriety.  Such has been the fate of U.S. v. Halper, a constitutional ruling that stood for less than nine years until it was largely cast aside as “ill considered” and had “proven unworkable.”

Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., used Halper in dissent on Monday to flay a majority for another ruling that he clearly deemed ill considered and unworkable.  Halper’s fate, he said, was “a cautionary tale,” and added: “I believe we will come to regret this decision as well.”  He was writing for the dissenters in Caperton v. A.T. Massey Co. (08-22), in which the majority sought to lay down a variable standard on when an elected judge is constitutionally obliged to disqualify from participating in a case involving a political benefactor.

The jurisprudential linkage between Halper and Caperton, however, was not obvious.  In fact, Halper is not mentioned in the briefs in Caperton.

Someone in the courthouse must have remembered it, though.  And it may well have been not a current law clerk, but a former one.  Indeed, it may well have been John G. Roberts, Jr., the onetime Rehnquist clerk and now, of course, the Chief Justice (and the main dissent’s author in Caperton).

. . .

You can read the rest of the post here.

Japanese Law Translation

Hap tip to Ben Jones for pointing out that these are unofficial translations.

Japan’s Ministry of Justice has a new Website that offers unofficial English translations of thousands of Japanese statutes and regulations. The site provides bilingual versions of the laws and regulations. It also includes lexicographic notes explaining the translation of difficult terms. Here is an example of Article 1 of the Copyright Act of 1970:

目的)

(Purpose)

第一条この法律は、著作物並びに実演、レコード、放送及び有線放送に関し著作者の権利及びこれに隣接する権利を定め、これらの文化的所産の公正な利用に留意しつつ、著作者等の権利の保護を図り、もつて文化の発展に寄与することを目的とする。

Article 1 The purpose of this Act is to provide for, and to secure protection of, the rights of authors, etc. and the rights neighboring thereto with respect [copyrightable] works as well as performances, phonograms, broadcasts and wire-broadcasts, while giving due regard to the fair exploitation of these cultural products, and by doing so, to contribute to the development of culture

The site’s bilingual dictionary is a wonderful resource that not only provides translations, but also links to statutes and regulations that use a specific term or phrase.

Japanese Law Translation

http://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/

French Government White Paper on Energy and Climate Change

The French Department of Ecology, Energy, Sustainable Development and Spatial Planning and the Ministry of Economy, Industry and Employment will organize a conference of experts conference (July 2-3, 2009) to study the implementation and economic impact of measures to combat climate change. In preparation for the conference, they have published a white paper on energy and climate change. Materials are available only in French. The Conference Website also includes a bibliography of online sources in multiple languages on climate change.

Livre Blanc en  Vue de la Conference  D’Experts Sur La Contribution Climat-Énergie

http://www.contributionclimatenergie.fr/docs/livreblanc.pdf

Conference of Experts on Climate and Energy http://www.contributionclimatenergie.fr/

Update to Rudovsky v. West Publishing Corp.

Here is an update to a case commented upon earlier here and here.

Law Professors Clear Hurdle in Suit Against West Publishing
Shannon P. Duffy
The Legal Intelligencer
June 10, 2009

A federal judge has refused to dismiss a defamation suit brought by two law professors who claim that West Publishing harmed their reputations when it falsely identified them as the authors of a poorly researched treatise update.

 

The June 4, 2009 Memorandum can be found here.

Google News May Add Wikipedia as a Source

Really?

According to ReadWriteWeb:

“Some users are being shown links to Wikipedia articles about current events clustered in the lists of sources on Google News, Google confirmed today. Those collaboratively written and edited pages will now sit side by side with professional news reporting.”

Marshall Kirkpatrick at ReadWriteWeb definitely takes an optimistic spin on the development:

“People used to say you couldn’t trust anything written on Wikipedia, but they used to say that about the whole Internet. While professional news organizations have professional editors and fact checkers, Wikipedia has far more eyes to mobilize in fact checking.”

The five W’s of journalism will now be six? (Who, what, where, when, why and Wikipedia)

Annotated List of Chinese Academic Law Libraries

The Institute of Law of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences has posted an annotated list of 100 Academic law libraries on the China Law Libraries Online Web site.  Information on collections, library services, staffing and physical facilities is available for many of the libraries. The article is in Chinese, but it does include links to the libraries. 

Overview of Law Libraries in China 国部分法律图书馆概况

Institute of Law of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences

http://tinyurl.com/kmfsdw

 

Main Site of ChinaLawLib.org  http://www.chinalawlib.org.cn/

 

Using Citation Analysis Techniques for Computer-Assisted Legal Research in Continental Jurisdictions

“Using Citation Analysis Techniques for Computer-Assisted Legal Research in Continental Jurisdictions”

ANTON GEIST, University of Edinburgh – School of Law, University of Vienna – Faculty of Law

The following research investigates the use of citation analysis techniques for relevance ranking in computer-assisted legal research systems. Overviews on information retrieval, legal research, computer-assisted legal research (CALR), and the role of citations in legal research enable the formulation of a proposition: Relevance ranking in contemporary CALR systems could profit from the use of citation analysis techniques. After examining potential previous work in the areas of Web search, legal network analysis, and legal citation analysis, the proposition is further developed into a testable hypothesis: A basic citation-based algorithm, despite all its shortcomings, could be used to significantly improve relevance ranking in computer-assisted legal research. By computing and analysing the distribution of 242,078 headnote citations across 80,195 opinions written by the Austrian Supreme Court of Justice between 1985 and 2008, proof for this hypothesis is presented.

Source: LSN Legal Education Vol. 6 No. 25,  06/09/2009

Article on the Caribbean Court of Justice

Caricom and Its Court of Justice

Derek O.Brien and S. Foadi

37 Common Law World Review 334 (2008)

Abstract:

The Caribbean Court of Justice, which was inaugurated in April 2005, is possessed of both an appellate and an original jurisdiction. In its original jurisdiction the Court is vested with a compulsory and exclusive power to interpret and apply the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas which establishes the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) Single Market and Economy. This paper explores the Court’s original jurisdiction and the role that it could play in promoting regional integration, taking account of the region’s history and institutional structure within which it will be expected to function.