Skip to main content
edited body
Source Link
ohwilleke
  • 240.2k
  • 15
  • 466
  • 828

Cases before this system was adopted are cited in the traditional way such as 456 P.#d2d 587, 600 (Colo. App. 1992), so most appellate court opinions and briefs by attorneys have a mix of different citation systems in them. The portion of a case citation with the names of the parties is unchanged.

Cases before this system was adopted are cited in the traditional way such as 456 P.#d 587, 600 (Colo. App. 1992), so most appellate court opinions and briefs by attorneys have a mix of different citation systems in them. The portion of a case citation with the names of the parties is unchanged.

Cases before this system was adopted are cited in the traditional way such as 456 P.2d 587, 600 (Colo. App. 1992), so most appellate court opinions and briefs by attorneys have a mix of different citation systems in them. The portion of a case citation with the names of the parties is unchanged.

added 395 characters in body
Source Link
ohwilleke
  • 240.2k
  • 15
  • 466
  • 828

These practices are generally adopted on a court system by court system basis, rather than by individual judges.

The United States is currently in a transitional stage with regard to this issue. This is a somewhat stylized recounting of how this came to be.

Australia has made a similar transition.

I don't know what other Anglo-sphere legal systems have done in this regard.

The United States is currently in a transitional stage with regard to this issue. This is a somewhat stylized recounting of how this came to be.

Australia has made a similar transition.

These practices are generally adopted on a court system by court system basis, rather than by individual judges.

The United States is currently in a transitional stage with regard to this issue. This is a somewhat stylized recounting of how this came to be.

Australia has made a similar transition.

I don't know what other Anglo-sphere legal systems have done in this regard.

added 395 characters in body
Source Link
ohwilleke
  • 240.2k
  • 15
  • 466
  • 828

Eventually state appellate courts started to adopt a publisher and media agnostic"media neutral citation system." Colorado's system illustrates how these work.

About halfMany U.S. states and a small number of U.S. statesfederal courts have adopted this system for cases decided on or after the year the system was adopted in that state, and this is slowly growing. In some states, judges and lawyers must use the new citation system to refer to new cases in legal documents, while in other states, it is optional and the historical methods of case citation may be used instead. As explained at the link in this paragraph (which is a slightly outdated since I believe that more courts have adopted the system since this was written in 2021):

In 1996, the American Bar Association approved a resolution recommending that courts adopt a uniform public domain citation system "equally effective for printed case reports and for case reports electronically published on computer disks or network services" and laying out the essential components of such a medium-neutral system (see § 1-500). The American Association of Law Libraries had previously gone on record for "vendor and media neutral" citation and has since issued a Universal Citation Guide that details an approach consistent with that urged by the ABA. An increasing number of jurisdictions have adopted citation schemes embodying some or all of the elements recommended by these national bodies. North Dakota is representative. Its court rules state in relevant part:

When available, initial citations must include the volume and initial page number of the North Western Reporter in which the opinion is published. The initial citation of any published opinion of the Supreme Court released on or after January 1, 1997, contained in a brief, memorandum, or other document filed with any trial or appellate court and the citation in the table of cases in a brief must also include a reference to the calendar year in which the decision was filed, followed by the court designation of "ND", followed by a sequential number assigned by the Clerk of the Supreme Court. A paragraph citation should be placed immediately following the sequential number assigned to the case. Subsequent citations within the brief, memorandum or other document must include the paragraph number and sufficient references to identify the initial citation.

N.D. R. Ct. 11.6(b).

The Rule supplies examples, e.g.:

Smith v. Jones, 1997 ND 15, 600 N.W.2d 900 (fictional). Smith v. Jones, 1996 ND 15, ¶ 21, 600 N.W.2d 900 (fictional). For decisions of the North Dakota Court of Appeals, the formula is the same with the substitution of "ND App" for "ND". In jurisdictions adopting such a vendor- and medium-neutral citation scheme, that scheme should be used, together with one or more parallel reporter citations as may, indeed, be required by court rule or local practice.

While the formats and other details vary slightly, several other jurisdictions have implemented case citation schemes employing the same basic structure—case name, year, court, sequential number, and (within the opinion) paragraph number or numbers. In addition to North Dakota these include Colorado, Maine, Montana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. North Carolina has adopted this scheme, effective as of the beginning of 2021. In 2009 Arkansas began to designate its appellate decisions in this way, while retaining page numbers within the court-released pdf file as the means for pinpoint cites. Four other states, Louisiana, Mississippi, Ohio, and, most recently, Illinois, have adopted medium-neutral citation systems, but along the significantly different lines noted below. At the federal level, the progress has, to date, been minimal. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit began to apply medium-neutral file names to its own decisions in 1994, but it has never directed attorneys to use them nor employed them itself in referring to prior decisions that have appeared in the Federal Reporter series. Among district courts, the District of New Hampshire stands alone. Since 2000 some, although unfortunately not all, of its substantive opinions have carried case designations in the format "2020 DNH 081". The court's judges use these citations in decisions, and local citation rules call upon lawyers to employ them as well.

Ohio's case numbering approach operates across the entire state court system rather than court by court, with the result that successive decisions of the state supreme court may be numbered 3957 and 3995. (These system-wide numbers are assigned by the state's reporter of decisions.) Illinois, Louisiana, and Mississippi use the docket number as the case ID rather than generating a new one based on year and decision sequence. In addition, Louisiana, like Arkansas, uses slip opinion page numbers rather than paragraph numbers for pinpoint citation. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit does the same.

Most jurisdictions adopting a medium-neutral system have done so prospectively only. Citations to cases that pre-date the change must still employ reporter volume and page numbers. Two states, however, have retrofitted all past reported decisions with neutral citations and paragraph numbers. The court rules of one of them, Oklahoma, strongly encourage the use of the print-independent citations for those older cases, and the state’s appellate courts model the practice. In New Mexico the neutral citation system has, since 2013, been required for citations to opinions dating all the way back to 1852.

A few jurisdictions have moved to official electronic publication of case reports without altering traditional volume and page number citation. Putnam v. Scherbring, decided by the Nebraska Supreme Court in September 2017, has been "297 Neb. 868" from the moment of its release. The citation refers to the decision's volume and page number in a book that will never be printed. Official publication of the Nebraska Reports has moved online. Its volumes are now virtual. Each decision begins a fresh page. When the page count climbs to 1,000 or so, the next nominal volume is begun.

Cases before this system was adopted are cited in the traditional way such as 456 P.#d 587, 600 (Colo. App. 1992), so most appellate court opinions and briefs by attorneys have a mix of different citation systems in them. The portion of a case citation with the names of the parties is unchanged.

Australia has made a similar transition.

Eventually state appellate courts started to adopt a publisher and media agnostic system. Colorado's system illustrates how these work.

About half of U.S. states have adopted this system for cases decided on or after the year the system was adopted in that state, and this is slowly growing. Cases before this system was adopted are cited in the traditional way such as 456 P.#d 587, 600 (Colo. App. 1992), so most appellate court opinions and briefs by attorneys have a mix of different citation systems in them. The portion of a case citation with the names of the parties is unchanged.

Eventually state appellate courts started to adopt a publisher and "media neutral citation system." Colorado's system illustrates how these work.

Many U.S. states and a small number of U.S. federal courts have adopted this system for cases decided on or after the year the system was adopted in that state, and this is slowly growing. In some states, judges and lawyers must use the new citation system to refer to new cases in legal documents, while in other states, it is optional and the historical methods of case citation may be used instead. As explained at the link in this paragraph (which is a slightly outdated since I believe that more courts have adopted the system since this was written in 2021):

In 1996, the American Bar Association approved a resolution recommending that courts adopt a uniform public domain citation system "equally effective for printed case reports and for case reports electronically published on computer disks or network services" and laying out the essential components of such a medium-neutral system (see § 1-500). The American Association of Law Libraries had previously gone on record for "vendor and media neutral" citation and has since issued a Universal Citation Guide that details an approach consistent with that urged by the ABA. An increasing number of jurisdictions have adopted citation schemes embodying some or all of the elements recommended by these national bodies. North Dakota is representative. Its court rules state in relevant part:

When available, initial citations must include the volume and initial page number of the North Western Reporter in which the opinion is published. The initial citation of any published opinion of the Supreme Court released on or after January 1, 1997, contained in a brief, memorandum, or other document filed with any trial or appellate court and the citation in the table of cases in a brief must also include a reference to the calendar year in which the decision was filed, followed by the court designation of "ND", followed by a sequential number assigned by the Clerk of the Supreme Court. A paragraph citation should be placed immediately following the sequential number assigned to the case. Subsequent citations within the brief, memorandum or other document must include the paragraph number and sufficient references to identify the initial citation.

N.D. R. Ct. 11.6(b).

The Rule supplies examples, e.g.:

Smith v. Jones, 1997 ND 15, 600 N.W.2d 900 (fictional). Smith v. Jones, 1996 ND 15, ¶ 21, 600 N.W.2d 900 (fictional). For decisions of the North Dakota Court of Appeals, the formula is the same with the substitution of "ND App" for "ND". In jurisdictions adopting such a vendor- and medium-neutral citation scheme, that scheme should be used, together with one or more parallel reporter citations as may, indeed, be required by court rule or local practice.

While the formats and other details vary slightly, several other jurisdictions have implemented case citation schemes employing the same basic structure—case name, year, court, sequential number, and (within the opinion) paragraph number or numbers. In addition to North Dakota these include Colorado, Maine, Montana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. North Carolina has adopted this scheme, effective as of the beginning of 2021. In 2009 Arkansas began to designate its appellate decisions in this way, while retaining page numbers within the court-released pdf file as the means for pinpoint cites. Four other states, Louisiana, Mississippi, Ohio, and, most recently, Illinois, have adopted medium-neutral citation systems, but along the significantly different lines noted below. At the federal level, the progress has, to date, been minimal. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit began to apply medium-neutral file names to its own decisions in 1994, but it has never directed attorneys to use them nor employed them itself in referring to prior decisions that have appeared in the Federal Reporter series. Among district courts, the District of New Hampshire stands alone. Since 2000 some, although unfortunately not all, of its substantive opinions have carried case designations in the format "2020 DNH 081". The court's judges use these citations in decisions, and local citation rules call upon lawyers to employ them as well.

Ohio's case numbering approach operates across the entire state court system rather than court by court, with the result that successive decisions of the state supreme court may be numbered 3957 and 3995. (These system-wide numbers are assigned by the state's reporter of decisions.) Illinois, Louisiana, and Mississippi use the docket number as the case ID rather than generating a new one based on year and decision sequence. In addition, Louisiana, like Arkansas, uses slip opinion page numbers rather than paragraph numbers for pinpoint citation. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit does the same.

Most jurisdictions adopting a medium-neutral system have done so prospectively only. Citations to cases that pre-date the change must still employ reporter volume and page numbers. Two states, however, have retrofitted all past reported decisions with neutral citations and paragraph numbers. The court rules of one of them, Oklahoma, strongly encourage the use of the print-independent citations for those older cases, and the state’s appellate courts model the practice. In New Mexico the neutral citation system has, since 2013, been required for citations to opinions dating all the way back to 1852.

A few jurisdictions have moved to official electronic publication of case reports without altering traditional volume and page number citation. Putnam v. Scherbring, decided by the Nebraska Supreme Court in September 2017, has been "297 Neb. 868" from the moment of its release. The citation refers to the decision's volume and page number in a book that will never be printed. Official publication of the Nebraska Reports has moved online. Its volumes are now virtual. Each decision begins a fresh page. When the page count climbs to 1,000 or so, the next nominal volume is begun.

Cases before this system was adopted are cited in the traditional way such as 456 P.#d 587, 600 (Colo. App. 1992), so most appellate court opinions and briefs by attorneys have a mix of different citation systems in them. The portion of a case citation with the names of the parties is unchanged.

Australia has made a similar transition.

Source Link
ohwilleke
  • 240.2k
  • 15
  • 466
  • 828
Loading