ZiefBrief

Has Roe v. Wade been Overruled? Editorial Judgment in Cite-Checking Tools

Has ZiefBrief gone off the rails? Are we entering the realm of contentious ideological debate? Well… no. But we do have a point about legal research.

The other day we were preparing a simple exercise in finding cases by citation, using Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), as an example. We noticed that Shepard's gave Roe a red stop-sign (indicating the most highly negative treatment), and we explored further. It turned out that, as the Shepard's editors see it,  Roe was "Overruled as stated in" Gonzales v. Carhart, 127 S. Ct. 1610 (2007) [PDF; 73 pages].

Curious to see what the competition said, we ran Roe through KeyCite on Westlaw. KeyCite gave Roe a yellow flag. A step down from the red flag, the yellow signals, in the views of the KeyCite editors: "Some negative history but not overruled". When it came to the effect of Carhart on Roe, KeyCite said: "Modification Recognized by Gonzales v. Carhart."

The lesson is that researchers ultimately need to read the citing cases (here, Carhart) and decide for themselves what effect they have on the case they are researching (here, Roe). Cite-checking tools at best give attorneys signals as to potential problems. It is the attorney's responsibility to follow up.

So has Roe been overruled? That's not for Shepard's or KeyCite to say. Their core purpose is to alert researchers to a possible change in status and point to the citing cases (such as Carhart). The legal community as a whole needs to read those cases and debate their meaning before we can begin to work out where Roe stands today.

New Edition of the Zief Law Library Newsletter

The newest edition of the Z-Flyer, the newsletter of the Dorraine Zief Law Library is available now. Featured articles include reports from librarians Lee Ryan and Shannon Burchard on their activities at the American Association of Law Libraries summer conference in New Orleans as well as a autobiographical essay from Jill Fukunaga, the newest member of the law library staff.

Click on this link to open a copy of the newsletter (requires Adobe Acrobat Reader or similar software that can open a .pdf file)

ACS Research Link: Connecting Law Students & Public Interest Lawyers

One of our colleagues at USC's law library has posted information about this interesting new resource, ACS Research Link.  We're busy this week, so we're just going to cut and paste the information about the new service below: 

ACS is pleased to announce the launch of ACS ResearchLink: Connecting Law Students and Lawyers Committed to Justice. 

ACS ResearchLink creates a valuable online resource for the legal community by collecting legal research topics submitted by practitioners for law students to explore in faculty-supervised writing projects for academic credit.  Practitioners will receive a copy of the resulting student papers, which ACS will post in a searchable online library.  Follow these links to search or browse currently available research topics.

By connecting law students and faculty with the research needs of public interest organizations and advocates, ACS ResearchLink supports the public interest by enhancing the relevance and influence of student scholarship.

ACS ResearchLink is an excellent source of real-world legal questions through which to increase the relevance of your academic work -- whether you are writing for a law review or journal, seminar, dissertation or independent study.  In addition to identifying potential research topics, participation may also offer an opportunity to build important relationships with practitioners.

Follow this link to the student home page. Research topics are currently available, with more to be added throughout the academic year: follow these links to search or browse available topics.

Additional information about ACS ResearchLink is available online, including answers to frequently asked questions.  Please contact ResearchLink@ACSLaw.org or ACS Associate Director Shahid Buttar at SButtar@ACSLaw.org with any additional questions.

ALR and Lexis Part Ways -- January 2008

We all knew that this day was approaching -- the day when American Law Reports content would be available exclusively on Westlaw.  (What is ALR, you ask?  Check out this handy Harvard Law Library research guide to learn all about ALR.)   

I learned last fall that ALR's days on Lexis were numbered, but hadn't yet heard of an actual date when ALR would be yanked from Lexis.  My esteemed colleague, Bonnie Shucha at WisBlawg, has posted an article from Information Today, informing legal researchers that ALR content will only be available on Westlaw as of January 2008. 

First-Year Survival Tips for the New Law School Year

Our colleagues at the Boley Law Library at Lewis and Clark Law School have posted their annual Tips for 1Ls From Around the Blogosphere. This year's collection ranges from general survival advice to tips on understanding legal terminology to the ever-popular advice from Professor Orin Kerr on how to read a case.

And here's a bonus tip from ZiefBrief: for a fund of great advice on how to study and learn, visit Lawsagna, where Anastasia give you "alternating layers of thoughts, tools, tricks, tips and other ingredients for a successful learning experience in law school and beyond."

Law Profs and Law Review Editors Rumble Again

It seems like Daniel Solove of Concurring Opinions feels compelled to pen at least one snarky post about student-run law reviews each semester (see our earlier post for another example), and his latest contribution is entitled "A Sample Law Review Submission Policy."  Here are some fun excerpts:

In considering your article, we use an objective point system for assessing scholarly quality. Articles receiving over 100 points are generally accepted. Here is how it works:

1. Are you from a highly-ranked law school?  If yes, add 20.

2. Have you published in highly-ranked law reviews?  If yes, add 30.

3. Is your name Cass Sunstein?  If yes, accept immediately.

4. Does your article have a nifty title?  If yes, add 10.

5. Is the introduction good?  If yes, add 40.

6. Do the footnotes need a lot of editing?  If yes, subtract 50.

7. Does your article have more than 6 parts?  If yes, subtract 10.

  Not to be outdone, a former editor returned fire in the comments with this list of questions:

Are you that insufferably self-important professor from our faculty who made our life miserable 2 years ago when we made the mistake of publishing his article? If yes, multiply by zero.

Does your article reflect that you think "empirical study" means "counting things"?  If yes, subtract 20.

Are you Jennifer Lopez with tenure and elbow patches? That is, will you constantly pester us with capricious requests? Will you ask us to speak to your research assistants, will you drop by the office, will you--instead of accepting or rejecting our proposed changes--want to discuss them all in excruciating detail? If so, and if we can detect it in time, subtract 15. Subtract only 5 if your article has any redeeming qualities.

Most entertaining!  And thank you, former editor, for also drawing attention to the overuse of the Humpty-Dumpty quote from Lewis Carroll's Through the Looking Glass.  A quick Westlaw search reveals 219 uses of this quotation in United States law review and journal articles, and that is just too many!

Atlanta Firm Bids Adieu to Billable Hours for First-Year Associates

If you're a member of the legal community, it's hard to miss the ongoing debate and teeth-gnashing over the billable hour.  Although everyone seems to agree that it is one of the reasons that so many law firm associates end up leaving firms after just a few years of practice, most law firms have been reluctant to give up billing in six-minute increments. 

Until now!  The National Law Journal is reporting that the brave partners at Atlanta labor and employment law firm Ford & Harrison have decided to eliminate billable hours requirements for their first-year associates.  The firm is also making a concerted effort to make associates' first year at the firm more like an apprenticeship -- according to the NLJ article, first-years will be "observing depositions and witness interviews and attending hearings and litigation strategy meetings." However, as a mid-sized firm, Ford & Harrison isn't paying its new associates as much as some of the bigger firms.  First-years receive a salary of $125,000, which is well below the starting salary of $160,000 at most large, multi-state firms. We'll be following this story to see if Ford & Harrison's popularity soars among job-seekers or if the lure of a bigger salary defeats the appeal of a billables-free life.

For a taste of the billable hours debate, be sure to read Scott Turow's take on the billable hour in the latest issue of the ABA Journal, "The Billable Hour Must Die."  Gee, tell us how you really feel, Scott! 

Original BAR/BRI Attorney Files Suit Again

The litigation surrounding BAR/BRI is threatening to achieve Jarndyce and Jarndyce-like proportions.  Eliot Disner, the attorney who filed the original class action suit against BAR/BRI that just settled, has regrouped following his dismissal from McGuireWoods and he's back again with a new lawsuit against BAR/BRI (more on Mr. Disner in this previous ZiefBrief post).  According to an article on Law.com, Disner is seeking an injunction that would "open the market to competitors."  The suit alleges that West Publishing's BAR/BRI has maintained its monopoly on bar review preparation by negotiating deals with or intimidating other bar review courses who attempt to compete with it.    Mr. Disner's suit is not to be confused with the complaint just filed in New York. Will BAR/BRI litigation ever end?  Or, to roughly paraphrase Dickens, will the litigation drone on for decades, "perenially hopeless"?  Stay tuned.

Law Professor Blogs Are Flourishing

Concurring Opinions has posted its 2007 Law Professor Blogger Census.  According to Professor Solove, there are now 307 blogging law professors, and the range of topics is quite impressive.  Law professors are blogging about aviation law, reproductive rights, poverty law, sports law, consumer law, .....well, you get the idea!  If you're interested in a particular practice area, these blogs are a great way to keep current on the latest developments and find paper topics that won't put you to sleep. 

New CALI Lessons for Upper-Level Students

If you're taking Evidence this fall and need some extra help with hearsay (and who doesn't?), check out these new CALI lessons:

The Definition of Hearsay and the Federal Rules:

• Part 1: Substantive Rules and Hearsay Dangers
• Part 2: Statements and What They Assert
• Part 3: Hearsay Arguments

You can also find a complete listing of CALI lessons by subject on the CALI website.