On Sat, 24 Dec 1994, Fred Shapiro wrote:
>
> I believe that the Pagists have somewhat exaggerated the danger
> that the system of stare decisis will be fundamentally altered if
> paragraphs are numbered as the basis for a reformed citation system.
> However, I would like to point out two negatives of paragraph numbering
> that no one has explicitly focused on (unless I missed them).
>
> Judicial opinions typically contain some holding and some obiter dicta.
> The West system of headnote numbers accords the dignity of numbering
> primarily to holdings. A paragraph numbering system would tend to blur
> the distinction between holding and dicta by according equal dignity to
> both.
This is an interesting hypotheses ... but, it is hard to quantitize and
is highly subjective. But, the author has established the "dignity" of
the paragraph already and it should reflect something of the authors
thought, if the author writes well. But, I am having a difficult type
understanding how the placement of paragraph numbers in the margins, as
is being done in law reports in Canada by Carswell, have even the
potential of blurring the distinction between holding and dicta. The
paragaph number would convey not information, more or less, than the
order or sequencing of the paragraph.
>
> A related point is that, because every paragraph would equally be
> identified with a paragraph number, judges might be inhibited from
> literary flourishes and other elements of quirkiness which now
> occasionally enliven the reporters. As a compiler of legal quotations, I
> am particularly aware of this issue. Would Harry Blackmun have listed
> his favorite baseball players in Flood v. Kuhn if he knew that the list
> would receive a paragraph number?
I also have a problem with this line or reasoning as well, which I can
easily illustrate by posing the following questions.
"Would Harry Blackmun not have listed his favorite baseball players in
Flood v. Kuhn if the Reporter of the Supreme Court was placing discrete
paragraph numbers in the margin for each paragraph in the opinion?"
These are both interesting questions. Given the personality of Harry
Blackmun, what is the probable answer to these questions. In as sense,
the answer one gives depends upon the conclusion one wishes to reach.
It just seems to me that this type of hypothetical question does not
really provide guidance as to whether, assuming a court had decided to
establish a pin-point citation at the time the opinion is issued, should
the court use page numbers or paragraph numbers. This I think is the
question being posed.
There is of course examples of literature and legal opinions as well
begin paragraphed numbered. Examples that have been provided recently on
the internet include:
The bible.
Goethe
Versions of the classics.
The opinions of British Columbia.
I assume that someone can provide some purely anecdotal suggestions as to
problems with having these texts with numbered paragraphs. Perhaps one
could argue that literalist analysis of the bible is aided by paragraph
numbers, although similar analyis of literature by deconstructivists
where words and senteces are picked apart seems to be able to run amok
even without paragraph numbers.
In the end, it would seem to me best to focus on the practical aspects of
dealing with information.
My primary objection to page numbering is that it is more difficult to
implement when the same texts appears in different printed products, as
well as in electronic products
I for one have a hard time finding a virtue in a scheme that introduces
page breaks in the middle of sentences, words, and citations, which, when
one gets to subsequent versions where star*pagination occurs, merely
interrupts the flow of reading and understanding.
Alan Sugarman
sugarman@panix.com
HyperLaw
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 03/09/00 PST