For those of you who don't get the SF Daily Journal, I'm posting a
story in Jan. 23 paper about the CA Supreme Court asking for comment
about creating a format-neutral citation style.
Also posted to net-lawyers.
Jim Evans
SF Daily Journal
San Francisco Daily Journal
Jan. 23, 1996
By James Evans
The California Supreme Court apparently has reversed its position
regarding electronic legal citations and now is prepared to support a
citation format that could be applied to all legal opinions, whether
issued in digital or printed form.
On Jan. 19 the high court's California Advisory Committee on
Publication of the Official Reports invited comment on adoption of a
``neutral-format'' citation style for state appellate opinions.
The committee will determine if a neutral-format system would be
advantageous to the state and the public, and will recommend a citation
style to the Supreme Court and publishers that print the court's
Official Reports.
Last October the court invited comment on a proposal to ban all
citations to opinions until they had been given an official citation in
print form. The proposal attracted little support among lawyers.
At that time, a court employee, who requested anonymity, said the
justices were floating a trial balloon, and probably didn't intend to
be so broad in the prohibition. Yet the employee acknowledged that
certain justices favored defining ``published'' as appearing only in
print at a time when court opinions and other legal information
increasingly are digitized.
The comment notice suggested that rulings appearing in electronic
form, including from the state Judicial Council's own computer bulletin
board, or printed in specialty publications like the Daily Journal and
other newspaper appellate reports, should not be citable.
Opinions normally are printed by a variety of officially
sanctioned legal publishers about three weeks after they are issued.
The latest plan appears to recognize the rapid emergence of
on-line services, and the ability to retrieve court opinions from the
Internet and other sources. However, the problem with getting rulings
online is that citation styles are still geared to the printed page.
Pressure has been growing for the legal profession to develop a
citation system that could be used regardless of format. Several states
are experimenting with such a system, and the American Association of
Law Libraries (AALL) has endorsed such format-neutral styles.
The AALL called for the courts to adopt a universal system based
on year, court, sequential numbering of decisions, and paragraph
numbers. The system, which would replace traditional book-based
citations, is based on models currently used in Wisconsin and South
Dakota, and a modified version employed in the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the 6th Circuit.
The American Bar Association, concerned about the potential for
chaos if more jurisdictions began creating their own citation systems,
appointed a special committee to look into the issue.
The committee heard testimony Dec. 8, and will consider written
comments until May. In June it is supposed to submit a report for
comment, and then in August the ABA's Board of Governors is expected to
act on the recommendations.
``This definitely grows out of the Wisconsin situation and the
AALL proposal, and the whole electronic citation movement,'' said
Edward Jessen, the reporter of decisions for the Supreme Court and the
Courts of Appeal. ``We thought we would be remiss if we didn't do
anything.''
Jessen said the court was aware that many citations were issued
for opinions right after they appeared, which is when most people
wanted to see them. ``There's at least a dozen ways to cite opinions
when they're first issued,'' he said.
If a format-neutral system is adopted, it will be by Oct. 31 of
this year, Jessen added, because that's when the contract ends between
the court and the official publisher of reports.
``It's a fabulous idea to have a format-neutral citation
system,'' said Susan Brandt Hawley, a leading environmental lawyer in
Sonoma County. ``It makes a lot of sense because the style would be
simple and opinions immediately would usable. It's a very practical
idea.''
The court will accept public comment until March 15.
Submit comments to:
Edward Jessen
Reporter of Decisions
California Supreme Court
303 Second Street, South Tower
San Francisco, CA 94017
FAX: 415/396-9554
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 14 2007 - 20:49:09 PST