Jamie -
Perhaps "people" have been talking about it, but it's not
what you've been talking about, and I have the e-mails to prove it, though
sometimes I do have a hard time keeping track. Are you just downplaying
the "free" database now that the DOJ has indicated they don't want to
spend the 50 million?
Anyway, you're missing my point. During the course of this
discussion, it appeared that one of two things were required
for implementation of a public domain citation to take place:
1) A central database of federal opinions maintained by the
government.
or
2) Different citations for each of the many circuit courts of
appeals and district courts.
I'm trying to figure out whether there is a way to get a public
domain citation system without either of these two options AND without
making it mandatory. Of course, I'm sure better minds than mine have
already thought this through, so I would guess there isn't, in which
case, a decision has to be made whether one of the options above would
be an improvement, or would ultimately make the whole situtation even
more difficult. I, of course, suspect the later.
By the way, the courts already assign a unique number to
each case. It's called a docket number, and it is unique within
that court, so perhaps the other option is to simply use the
cite now used for slip opinions, including the docket number,
and add the court assigned paragraph number. The courts could
start doing this tomorrow, if they were so inclined, and saw a
need. But, that does make the citation
confusing because of the different cites for each court, so the
bottomline would be that the Federal Reporter & Fed Supp. cites
would still be more convenient for the judges, so that's probably
what the lawyers would want to use. What's wrong with these lawyers?
They seem to want to use the easiest and most convenient method of
citation. I guess they just don't know what's good for them. :-)
-------------------------------------------------------------
Cindy Chick cchick@netcom.com
Los Angeles, CA 90017
-------------------------------------------------------------
On Fri, 16 Dec 1994, James Love wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Dec 1994, Cindy Chick wrote:
> > Now this is starting to make more sense. I'm probably missing something,
> > but wouldn't it be easy for the courts to just incorporate paragraph
> > numbers into their slip opinions? Then if people wanted to cite to the
> > paragraph number instead of the page number, they would have that
> > option? Something like 249 F2d 942 <19> ? Then you could use the page
> > number if you wanted to for the jump cite or use the paragraph number if
> > you wanted to?
>
> Cindy, this is exactly what people are asking for, paragraph numbers
> in the text of the opinions. And, if the courts would give a unique
> number to each opinion the two items would constitute a public domain
> citation. jamie
>
> >
> > What are the drawbacks to this method? (There are some, no doubt, so
> > this is not a rhetorical question.)
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------
> > Cindy Chick cchick@netcom.com
> > Los Angeles, CA 90017
> > -------------------------------------------------------------
> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 03/09/00 PST