On Tue, 15 Nov 1994, Dorothy Molstad wrote in response to my posting:
> On November 11, 1994, information was posted to this and other
> lists regarding the editorial procedure at West Publishing. I
> would like to clarify those statements with the following
> information.
>
> "Putnam v. U.S. on the slip opinion prepared by West, docket
> no. 93-4369, has the date September 9, 1994. When West
> published the case in 32 F.3d 911, the date was September 8,
> 1994. So, someone made a mistake at West..."
>
> This opinion was released to the court's bulletin board by the
> court with a date of September 9, 1994. There was a discrepancy
> with the stamped filed date. West verified that September 8 was
> the correct date. Both the slip opinion published by West and
> our report of the case at 32 F.3d 911 correctly show the date of
> September 8, 1994.
So, let me see if I understand this. Was the electronic version of the
slip opinion posted by the Court prepared by West on not prepared by West?
Is the Clerk of the Fifth Circuit then incorrect when he stated to me
that the versions posted on the bulletin board are prepared by West?
It seems to be that when a court contracts with a slip printer, then it
should make sure that the version posted on the bulletin board is the
electronic version the slip printer prepares in the course of complying
with the contract. Why should the public get anything less?
And, where did that opinion really come from -- West or the Court?
I note that the 9th Circuit now obtains an electronic version of its
opinions from its slip printer (Barclay's) and makes them available to
the public along with the synopsis prepared by Barclay's.
>
> "You will find that one of the West editorial enhancements
> is to delete the docket number of the district court below."
>
> For appellate cases, West collects lower court information
> including the name of the judge, the court and, when available,
> the docket number. Then, we search for, read and analyze cases
> to find the lower court case history references. West chooses to
> include the compiled lower court information and case citations
> in the synopsis where the procedural history can best be
> explained. It would be redundant to print the same information
> following the synopsis, in an appeal line. When a case does not
> contain a point of law and is published without a synopsis, West
> compiles and prints the appeal line.
>
> Dorothy Molstad
> West Publishing
That is a long answer. Sounds to me like West does in fact delete the
docket number of the district court (or agency) case below. Anybody can
check it out.
The point is important. West has stressed long and eloquently that any
new citation should be based upon the docket number ... but then they
take it out. I would think this is pretty important information.
Alan Sugarman
HyperLaw
sugarman@panix.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 03/09/00 PST