Andrew,
You're right, it couldn't be predicted that the cases were short, but it
could be easily ascertained by the expenditure of the 30 seconds I spent
pulling them off the shelf and looking at them.
Bob Ryan, Esquire (ret.)
Hill Farrer Burrill
Los Angeles
-----Original Message-----
From: andrew johnson [mailto:tysonandrewjohnson@juno.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 17, 1999 9:32 PM
To: RRyan@HFBLLP.COM
Cc: law-lib@ucdavis.edu;
PRIVATELAWLIB-L@lawlib.wuacc.edu; SLA-LAW@listserv.uh.edu
Subject: Re: A Summer Associate Story
I wanted to comment on the Associate's rationale.
Rewgarding using
Wexis, it is convenient to use your search terms as you read
the case,
because the terms you use are in bold. Therefore, all you
have to do is
to skim the text of the case, find the bold words, to see
what that case
says about your search terms. Although the two cases he was
looking for
TURNED OUT TO BE SHORT, this could not have been predicted,
and would
have saved the client billable time had the cases turned out
to be long.
On the other hand, here's where you lose by NOT using the
books. There
is only one part of a case that is binding...it's called,
"holding." The
search terms the associate finds may be buried in either
dicta, opinion,
reasoning, or factual analysis of the case. Here's where he
had better
not get confused...None of these things are binding. Most
lawyers,
including myself, readily point out when an opponent has
cited dicta as
if it were the holding of the court. It is easy to make
this mistake if
you are simply skimming the case for your bold search terms.
Andrew Johnson, Esquire
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 14 2007 - 20:50:07 PST