U.S. Supreme CourtWhen members of the legal community think about legal scholarship, what typically comes to mind is the concept of a print law journal (e.g., the Cornell Law Review, the Cornell Journal of Law & Public Policy, the Cornell International Law Journal, etc.).  These works undoubtedly serve a very important function, but I wanted to write a bit about another relevant legal journal sited at Cornell Law School: the LII Supreme Court Bulletin.  I am fairly familiar with this Web site, having served as an LII editor during the 2009-10 academic year (my now-outdated biography is viewable here).  The LII Supreme Court Bulletin (“Liibulletin”) contains previews of cases on the Supreme Court’s (“SCOTUS”) docket.  Because the previews are written with recourse to the relevant parties’ submitted briefs (the full versions of which are usually available here) and are published before the decisions are handed down, the previews generally reflect a balanced view of the legal issues unaffected by the bias of hindsight.

Liibulletin is a fantastic resource for people who are interested in keeping abreast of SCOTUS cases, but don’t have tons of free time to do so (e.g., law students who have more than enough assigned reading for courses).  But one of the really neat things about LII bulletin is that it is particularly comprehensible and may be utilized by people without legal educations or backgrounds.  In order to ensure that LII previews remain accessible to lay persons, all the previews contain hyperlinks to a free legal dictionary and encyclopedia called Wex.  You will also note, by the way, that this dictionary, although frequently embedded within Liibulletin, is its own free-standing resource.

Each preview contains the following sections:

(1) A few key subject areas and descriptive terms.  These lists of terms are useful since anyone can perform a subject-matter search in Liibulletin across SCOTUS terms.

(2) An executive summary.  This section, which is emailed to all Liibulletin subscribers, succinctly identifies the relevant facts, issues, and arguments of the case.  It also generally addresses the legal (and, if relevant, nonlegal) significance(s) of the case.

(3) Itemized questions presented. These are copied verbatim as provided on the Supreme Court’s case schedule.

(4) Itemized issues.  As I mentioned earlier, Liibulletin is published with the underlying goal of making the law accessible to the public.  In this way, this section can be thought of as a simplification of the questions presented section.

(5) Factual narrative.  Predictably, this section tells a balanced story of the case and discusses facts pertinent to the controversy before the Court.

(6) Discussion.  This is the section that focuses on the greater picture.  It calls into question the consequences of the case from largely a policy perspective.  This section more or less explains the importance of the case.

(7) Analysis.  The analysis section is a detailed and balanced analysis and explanation of the legal issues before the Court.  It typically goes beyond summarizing the parties’ briefs and actually synthesizes the lower courts’ opinions and the briefs submitted by amici curiae.

(8) Conclusion.  The conclusion essentially restates the executive summary by tying everything together.  Once in a while, LII editors will include their own opinions about how the Court should rule.

(9) Additional Sources.  Each preview concludes with a list of additional legal sources that discuss the case.

I absolutely encourage anyone (or better yet, everyone) with an interest in learning about the Supreme Court’s docket to peruse the previews. If you’d like to have the previews sent directly to your email address, you can subscribe to Liibulletin here.

Daniel Shatz, Cornell Law School 3L Student

Photo courtesy of dbking’s Flickr stream.

HeinOnline logoThe webinars on HeinOnline Searching have been rescheduled for this week on Thursday, March 3, at 10am & 2pm.

It’s not too late; you can still register for one of these sessions:

For more information about the webinar, click here.

CUL logoWe are in the thick of the spring semester, and you have papers and projects underway.  You may find that you could benefit from an hour or two of a workshop to gain some research skills or database finesse, for sources not strictly legal.  All across campus, workshops are offered by various libraries at Cornell.  Topics range from managing data sets to business research, from statistical databases to PowerPoint.

Click here to register and to see details on workshops offered:

You can also request a consultation with a research attorney for specialized legal research help by filling out this online form.

HeinOnline has earned its place as a comprehensive legal research tool.  You probably use it for finding pdfs of journal articles when you have the citation.  Over the last few years, it has developed its searching capabilities to be a first choice for searching journal articles.  Hein is offering a 45-minute webinar on Thursday, February 24 at 10:00 am and at 2:00 pm on search techniques for HeinOnline.  Sign up using the links below, and you can learn – right at your desktop — more strategies for improving your searches. To register for the 10:00 am session, click here. For the 2:00 pm session, click here.

HeinOnline Webinar

In October, the Law Library ran its annual Student Summer Research Survey for 2010.  Close to 100 upper-division students responded to the survey for which the Library is most grateful.  There are some interesting highlights that we’d like to share.  First, the split in employer types broke down roughly into fifths, with 22% at larger firms, 20% at smaller firms, 19% clerking for judges, and 23% working for government.  Twelve per cent of respondents worked in public interest.  Research was a major work duty with 59% spending at least half their work time on research.  A statistic 1Ls may want to ponder as they consider the skills they will need for their summer work.

Lexis and Westlaw were commonly available, but 15% of the respondents did not have employer-provided Wexis.  Other online resources used included Fastcase, BNA, CCH, HeinOnline, Google Scholar, PACER, and other government web sites.  Pay-as-you go pricing plans for Wexis are still common with 30% of Lexis users having transactional/hourly pricing and 43% of Westlaw users on such plans.  Almost 1/3 of respondents said their employers had a policy on minimizing research costs, including requiring approval to use online subscription sources, and specification of cost-saving techniques and low-cost sources to be used first.  While Wexis and other online sources dominate, print is not yet dead with an overall 22% of research work being done in hard copy sources.

Eighty-one per cent of 2Ls believed that the research component of Lawyering did help prepare them for summer work.  Of course, there were many useful comments on this point.  Overall, 91% of respondents said they were prepared for their research duties.  To the extent that they were not prepared, half said the Law Library should improve the research component of Lawyering and 20% said to offer more advanced/specialized research courses.

Again, the Law Library greatly appreciates all those who participated in the survey and congratulates the prize winners, Emily Pickering and Chris Wild.  As one can see, the information gleaned from the survey is useful in charting the course of research instruction at Cornell Law School.

Bloomberg Law logoIf you are a 2L or a 3L and want to have access to one of the premier databases for company information and news, in addition to legal information, stop by Alcove 43 in the Reading Room on Monday, Feb. 7 and meet with our Bloomberg representative.  Pamela Haahr will be handing out passwords and providing individual instruction on how to use Bloomberg Law.  2Ls will be able to take Bloomberg Law with them to their summer employment because their passwords will remain active over the summer, unlike Lexis and Westlaw passwords.  Pamela will also have “give-aways” for interested students.

Max Planck Encyclopedia logoThe Law Library has recently subscribed to the electronic version of the Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (MPEPIL).  The Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public and International Law, located in Heidelberg, Germany, is one of the foremost research centers for international law.  The Max Planck Encyclopedia, first published in paper between 1991 and 2001, is an essential resource for researching international law.  Now in an electronic format published by Oxford University Press, the MPEPIL offers a comprehensive, searchable database of frequently updated and new articles by highly regarded scholars from around the world.  Articles within the MPEPIL are fully cross referenced and linked to other articles in the database.  There are also links to other Oxford University Press databases to which the Law Library subscribes:

Access is by IP address, so you can access MPEPIL from any computer in the Law School or from http://uportal.cornell.edu.

Another recommended Oxford encyclopedia relating to international law is the Encyclopedia of Human Rights, also available online.

Lexis EnhancedIf you have signed on to Lexis recently, you’ve likely noticed a new look.  Like Westlaw, Lexis is currently in a period of change.  Later this year, Lexis will roll out a new platform to compete with WestlawNext.  But recently, Lexis has adjusted the interface of their current platform to make it more user-friendly and eye-appealing.  The interface uses crisper lines, fewer colors, and even more white space than the previous interface.  A change that many will appreciate is the reduction in the number of tabs running along the top of the page.  The most important tabs—Search, Get a Document, and Shepard’s—still appear; however, the many other available features are now tucked under a tab labeled “More.”  This is a great improvement.

Both the Recently Used Sources and Search by Topic or Headnote features have been moved to the right side in their own boxes.  This change achieves the dual goal of reducing clutter while making these features more prominent.  Also on the right side one sees Quick Tools, which allows users to quickly pull up documents, Shepardize, locate a source, or use the Lexis web with a single search box.  The right side also includes an Emerging Issues section highlighting articles posted by practitioners in an array of practice areas.  Overall, the changes Lexis has made are for the better.  In time, we will see what their answer is to WestlawNext.

Jim Bishop, 2L, has won an iPad from BNA!  He registered to receive BNA updates, along with thousands of other law students across the country.  And Jim was the winner!

If you want to receive BNA updates from US Law Week or on topics from banking to tax, labor law to mergers and acquisitions – go to http://library2.lawschool.cornell.edu/bna/subj/ and sign up for your choice of e-mail summaries.

Matthew Benner, a 3L, is the winner of the Halloween Research Competition!  Matthew’s prize is a $25 gift card for the Cornell Store.  Congratulations goes out to everyone who found the correct answer, Hayward v. Carraway, 180 So. 2d 758 (La. Ct. App. 1965).  And the moral of the case is…just because a house is abandoned and haunted, doesn’t mean you can break into it with impunity (shocking, I know)!

© 2020 InfoBrief Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha