Legal Reasearch Analysis and Writing

Legal Research,
Analysis, and Writing

Third Edition
DELMAR CENGAGE Learning
Options.
O v e r 3 0 0 p ro d u c ts in e v e r y a re a o f th e law ; te x tb o o k s , o n lin e c o u rs e s . C D - R O M s , r e f e re n c e b o o ks, c o m p a n io n
w e b s ite s , a n d m o re h e lp in g y o u su c c e e d in t h e c la s s ro o m a n d o n t h e job.
Support.
VVe o ffe i u n p a ra lle le d , p ra c tic a l s u p p o rt: ro b u s t in s tr u c to r a n d s tu d e n t s u p p le m e n ts to e n s u re t h e b e s t le a rn in g
e x p e rie n c e , c u s to m p u b lis h in g to m e et y o u r u n iq u e needs, a n d o t h e r b e n e fits such as D e lm a r C e n g a g e L e a rn in g 's
S tu d e n t A c h ie v e m e n t A w a rd . A n d o u r sales r e p re s e n ta tiv e s a re a lw a ys re a d y to p ro v id e y o u w it h d e p e n d a b le se rvice.
Feedback.
A., drvvays. vve w a n t to hiear fro m yo u ! Y o u r fe e d b a c k is o u r b e st re s o u rc e fo r im p r o v in g t h e q u a lit y o f o u r p ro d u c ts .
C o n ta c t y o u r sa les r e p r e s e n t a tiv e o r w r it e us at th e a d d re s s b e lo w if y o u h a ve a n y c o m m e n ts a b o u t o u r m a te ria ls
o r if yoi.i h a ve a p ro d u i t p ro p o sa l.
A l r r'u iM in g a n d Finane. 1.1 fof t iie i .iw O ff ic e • A d m in i^ *' •' iv-'' i .)V. • A lt e r n a t iv e D is p u te R e s o lu tio n • B a n k ru p tc y
O rg a fn / a tio iis / C o rp o ra tio ;; '. • C a re e rs a rid E m p lo y m e n t • C iv il t.itig a tio n a n d P ro c e d u re • C L A Exam
P re p a ia tii'in • I'fjrn p u ttM A p p lic a tio n s m th e La w O f^ ^ e • C o n s tit u tio n a l La w • C o n tra c t La w • C o u rt R e p o rtin g
( ■I : ( ii'l f’ :-. ' :U P ’ C'p.aia' ■

■• Lav. • E n viro n m c t^ t.a i Lavv • L th ic s
L v id t ' r u r [a w • h a n ily Law • H e a lth C a re Law • Im m ig r a tio n La w • In t e lle c tu a l P r o p e r ty • In te rn s h ip s
In t e r v ie w in g a n d In v e ^ tig a ti'in • in tio t lu c U o n to La w • In t r o d u c t io n to P a ra le g a lis m • J u v e n ile L a w • L a w O ffic e
M a n a g e m e n t • la w O f f i t e P ro c e d u re s • Le g a l N u rs e C o n s u ltin g • le g a l R e se a rc h . W r it in g , a n d A n a ly s is • Legal
T e r m in o lo g y • Legal T ia n s c r ip t io n • M e d ia and E n t e r t a in m e n t Law • M e d ic a l M a lp r a c t ic e La w
P ro d u c t L ia b ilit y • R eal E sta te Law • R e f e re n c e M a t e r ia ls • S o c ia l S e c u r it y • S p o rts Law • T o rts and
P e rs o n a l In ju r y Law • W ills . T ru s ts , and E s ta te A d m in is t r a t io n • W o rk e rs ’ C o m p e n s a t io n La w
DELMAR CENGAGE Learning

S M a x w e ll D r iv e
C lif to n Park, N e w Y o rk 12065-2919
DELIMAR
F o r a d d itio n a l in fo rm a tio n , f in d us o n lin e at:
w w w . d e lm a r . c e n g a g e . c o m
1% C E N G A G E Learning-
LEGAL RESEARCH,
ANALYSIS, AND
WRITING
lird Edition
WILLIAM H. P U T M A N
JENNIFER R. ALBRIGHT
DELM AR
CENGAGE Learning
A u s t r a lia • B r a z il • Ja p a n • K o re a • M e x ic o * S in g a p o r e • S p ain • U n ited K in g d o m • U n ite d S ta te s
DELMAR
CE N G A G t Learning
Le g a l R e s e a rc h , A n a ly s is , and W ritin g , €) 2014, 2010, 2 0 0 4 Deimar, Cengage Learning

T h ird E d itio n
ALL R IG H TS RESERVED. N o part of th is w o rk covered by the c o p y rig h t h ere in
W illia m H. P utm a n and J e n n ife r R. A lb rig h t
may be reproduced, tra n sm itte d , stored or used in any form o r by a n y means
Vice President. C areers & C om puting: graphic, electronic, o r mechanical, in clud in g but not lim ite d to photo co p ying ,
Dave Garza recording, scanning, d ig itizin g , taping. W eb d is trib u tio n , in fo rm a tio n n e tw orks,
o r in fo rm a tio n storage and re trie v a l systems, except as p e rm itte d u n d e r
D ire c to r o f Learning S olutions: Sandy C lark
Section 107 o r 108 of the 1975 U n ite d States C o p yrig h t Act. w ith o u t th e p rio r
Senior A cq u isitio n s Editor: S h e lle y Esposito w ritte n perm ission o f the publisher.
Director, D evelopm ent-C areer and C om puting:
M a ra h Beliegarde For p ro d u c t in fo rm a tio n a n d te c h n o lo g y a s s is ta n c e , c o n ta c t u s at
M a n a gin g Editor: La rry M a in Cengage Learning Custom er & Sales Support, 1-800-354-9706
For p e rm is s io n to u se m a te ria l fro m th is te xt o r p ro d u c t,
Senior Product M anager: M elissa Riveglia
s u b m it all re q u e s ts o n lin e at ww w.cengage.com /perm issions
Editoria l Assistant: Diane C h ry s le r Fu rth e r p e r m is s io n s q u e s tio n s c a n be e m a ile d to
Brand M anager: K ris tin M c N a ry perm issionrequestiScengage.com
M a rk e t D e velo p m e n t M anager: Erin Brennan
Senior P ro d uction D irec to r: W e n d y T roeger Lib ra ry of Congress C o n tro l N um ber: 2012940893
P ro d uctio n M anager: M a rk Bernard ISBN-13: 978-M3B-59190-0
Senior C o n te n t P roject M anager: ISBN-10: M33-59190-6

B e tty L. Dickson
A rt D irec to r: Riezebos H o lzb aur G ro u p

D e im a r
Senior Technology P roject M anager: Joe Piiss E xecutive W oods
M edia Editor: Deborah Bordeaux 5 M a xw e ll D rive
C lifto n Park. N Y 12065
USA
Cengage Learning is a leading p ro vid er of custom ized learning so lu tio n s w ith

office locations around the globe, includ ing Singapore, the U nited Kingdom,
Australia, Mexico, Brazil, and Japan. Locate yo u r local office at
w w w .c e n g a g e .c o m /g lo b a l
Cengage Learning products are represented in Canada by Nelson Education, Ltd.
To learn m ore about Deimar, v is it w w w .c e n g a g e .c o m / d e lm a r
Purchase any of o u r products at yo u r local bookstore o r at o u r p re fe rre d o n lin e

store w w w .c e n g a g e b ra in .c o m
N otice to the Reader

P u b lis h e r d o e s n o t w .iff j n t o r g u a r a n t e e a n y o f th e p r o d u c t', d e s c r ib e d h e re in o r p e r f o r m a n y in d e p e r u le n i
a n a ly s is tn co n n e « tio n w ith a n y o f tfie p r o d u c t in fo r m a t io n c o n t a in e d h e re in . P u b lis h e r d o e s n o t a s s u m e ,
a n d e x p r e s s ly d is c la im s , a n y o b lig a t io n to o b t a in a n d in c lu d e in fo r m a t io n o t h e r th a n t h a t p r o v id e d t o it b y
tfie m a n u fa c tu re r. I h e re a d e r is e x p r e s s ly w a r n e d t o c o n s id e r a n d a d o p t a ll s a f e t y p r e c a u t io n s t h a t m ig h t be
in d i( a te d b y t lie a c t iv it ie s d e s c r ib e d h e re in a n d to a v o id a ll p o t e n t ia l h a z a r d s . B y fo U o v ^ in g t h e in s t r u c t io n s
c o n t a in e d tie re in . th e re a d e r w illin g ly a s s u m e s all r is k s m c o n n e c t io n w ith s u c h in s t r u c t io n s . T h e p u b lis h e r
m a k e s n o r e p r e s e n t a t io n s or w a r r a n t ie s o f a n y k in d , i n c lu d in g b u t n o t lim ite d to , th e w a r r a n t ie s o f f it n e s s fo r
p a r t ic u la r p u r p o s e or m e re h a n ta b ih ty . n o r a re a n y s u c h r e p r e s e n t a t io n s im p lie d w ith r e s p e c t t o t h e m a t e r ia l se t
fo rth h e re in , a n d th e p u b lis h e r t a k e s n o r e s p o n s th ih ty w ith r e s p e c t to s u c h m a te ria l T h e p u b lis h e r s h a ll n o t be
lia b le fo r a n y s p e c ia l, c o n s e q u e n t ia l, o r e x e m p la r y d a m a g e s r e s u lt in g , m w h o le or p a r t, fr o m t h e r e a d e r s ' lis e o f.
o r r e lia n c e u p o n , t h is m a te ria l.
I’rintocI in the I'liilcd States o f .Aincrica

2 ,"i 6 7 S 16 15 14 1."^
D E D IC A T IO N
This book is dedicated to P.Y, luhose love,

inspiration, and guidance made this text possible.
Thank you.
This boofe is dedicated to Dai Nguyen and Bill Putman
for their part in a serendipitous opportunity.
PART I I N T R O D U C T I O N T O RESEARCH, ANAI.Y I ICAL
PRINCIPLES, A N D T H E LEGAL PROCESS 1
CHAPTER 1 Introduction to Legal Principles and A u th orities 2

CHAPTER 2 Introduction to Legal Research an d A n alysis 25
PARÍ II LEGAL RESEARCH 53
CHAPTER 3 C o n stitu tio n s, S tatu tes, A d m in istra tiv e Law,

and Court R ules— Research a n d A n a ly sis 54
CHAPTER 4 C ase Law— Research and Briefing 103
CHAPTER 5 S eco n d a ry A uthority and O ther Research
S o u r ces— E ncyclopedias, Treatises, American
Law Reports, D igests, Shepard’s 140
CHAPTER 6 S econ d a ry A uthority— Periodicals, Restatements,
U n iform Laws, D ictionaries, Legislative History,
and Other S econ d ary A u th orities 191
CHAPTER 7 C om p u ter s and Legal Research 223
CHAPTER 8 Legal Citation 260
PART III T H E SPECTLICS OE LECiAL ANALYSIS 303
CHAPTER 9 Legal A n a ly s is — Key Facts 305

CHAPTER 10 Legal A n a ly sis— Issue Id en tifica tio n —S p o ttin g the Issue 325
CHAPTER 11 Legal A n a ly s is — Stating th e Issue 351
CHAPTER 12 C ase Law A n a ly s is — Is a Case on Point? 371
CHAPTER 13 C ou n tera n a ly sis 391
PART IV LEGAL WRITINC: 413
CHAPTER 14 F u n d a m e n ta ls o f W riting 414

CHAPTER 15 T he W riting Process for Effective Legal W riting 457
CHAPTER 16 Office Legal M em ora n d u m : Issu e s and Facts 481
CHAPTER 17 Office Legal M em ora n d u m : A n a ly sis to C o n clu sio n 504
CHAPTER 18 External M em oranda: Court Briefs 534
CHAPTER 19 C o r resp o n d en ce 563
APPENDIX A Court O p in ion s Referred to in th e Text 585

APPENDIX B A p p ellate Court Brief 637
APPENDIX C Web Sites 663
GLOSSARY 666
INDEX 671
vi
Table of Cases XIV
Preface XV
( ' h a p l o r I ' o a l u R' s / \vi

Su p p o r t Material / wiii
Acknowledgments XXI
About the Author xxii
PART I INTRODUCTION TO RESEARCH,

ANALYTICAL PRINCIPLES, AND
THE LEGAL PROCESS 1
CHAPTER 1 In tro d u c tio n to Legal Principles a n d A u th o rities 2

liitri)dui. ' tii )n '' 3 \'. Kc \ I’o i i i t s 1 1u' i . kl i st : l-cîil I'r iiiiip lc s
S d i u v c s ol l a w / 3 ¡intl A u l h o r i l i c ^ , 19
A. l'iKKti.'il I , a w / I \' I. Application / 19
H. ( ’oni MKi n 1 a w o r ( ' a s L ‘ I a w S u m i i i a r \ - , 21
1l i c r a r i . I n lit t i l l ' I a w / 12 C^)uii.k RLicroiiLL' s / 22
Aiilh(irit\ ; 13 lnti. ' rrKl R c s o i u x c s ' 23
A. 1\ p o s (it Ai i t l i o r i t v 13 1'xlTi.isi' s ; 23
B. Rcilf I'l Ai i t l i or i t x I3
CHAPTER 2 In tro d u c tio n to Legal R esearch a n d A nalysis 25

1, I n t n K l i K t i o i i / 2(1 \'. Ke \ I’o i n t s C h e c k l i s t : / U i' s f i i n l i
II. l e ga l A i i a K s i s I H i i i i c d / 26 anil A n a lviis ! 13
111. Le ga l R e s e a r c h a n d t h e . \ n a h s i s P r o c e s s / 2 6 \'l. . Ap p l i c a t i o n / 13
A. l a c t s a n d Ke \ ler ni s ; 27 B at t er ) ’ Issue ! 14
B. I’r e l i n i i n a r \ R e s e a r c h / 30 B. I n t e n t i o n a l I n l l i c t i o n ol I . m o t i o n a l D i s t r e s s
C. I R A C A n a l y s i s / 31) Issue / 16
l\'. ( leneral ( Considerations 38 Suiiiniar\ 18
A. l o c u s / 3.H (ûick References / 19
B. I ' lhi c s— Intellectual I l o n e s l \ / 39 Internet Res ources / 19
W h e n to S l o p R e s e a r c h n i g ' 10 I' . xercises / 3 0
PART II LEGAL RESEARCH 53
CHAPTER 3 C o n stitu tio n s, S ta tu te s, A d m in istra tiv e Law,

a n d C ourt Rules—R esearch a n d A nalysis 54
1. Introduction 33 i'.. P u r p o s e ( d a u s e / 6 2
11. . \ n a t o i n \ ol a S t a t u t e I). S c o p e / 62
. \. N i u i i b e r s 62 Pelinitions / 63
B. S h o r t Title ' 6 2 I. Su bs t an ti \' e Prinisi on.s 63
vii
( 1. ( )th(.T Pi ' dxi s i oi i s ' 63 C. St e p 3: . AppK t h e S t a t u t e t o t h e L e g a l P r o h l e m
II. . \ m u ) t a t l ( i n s K o l c R ’i Ki . ' l i i r o r i i i a t i i i n 6.1 o r I s s ue / 8 (S
111. S t n t i H o r \ Ri' M-arvh L o c a ti ng Statutes 61 P . S u m m a r y o t t h e S t a t u t o r y A n a l y s i s I’r o c e s s / 9 0
,\. I-ode rai l a w / 64 \'ll. Cieneral (C o n si de r at i on s . 90
B. St a t e S t a t u t o r y l a w a n d C o d e s / 73 .A. Le g i s l a t i v e H i s t o r y / 91
T h e R es ear ch P r o c e s s — I' echniques B. C ' a n o n s ol ( ^ i n s t r u c t i o n / 91
a n d Strategies “ ■) \ ' 1 I L K e \ P o i n t s C h e c k l i s t : W o r k i n g w i t h S t i i l u t c s / 92
IX ( A i n i p u t e r - . A i d e d R e s e a r c h ' 76 IX. . Ap p l i c a t i o n ! 93
1'. I ' t h i c s — C’o n i p e t e n c e a n d D i H g e n c e / 76 ■A. CChapter H y p o t h e t i c a l / 93
I \ ’. . Ad i i i i n i s t r a t i \ e l . a w / 76 B. Wi l l R e \ ' o c a t i o n S t a t u t e / 95
.\. I e d e r a l . Ad mi n i s t r a t i v e I . aw / 76 S u m m a r x ' / 97
B. St a t e . \ d n i n i i s t r a t i \ e l . a w ; ,SI Q u i c k R e f e r e n c e s / 9(S
\'. C o u r t Rules ,S1 I n te r ne t R e s o ur ce s / 98
\'I. . Anal ysi s - The I ' r o c e s s (S3 S t a t ut or y C i t a t i o n / 99
■A. S t e p I: D e t e r m i n e it t h e S t a t u t e . Appl i es / (S3 H.xercises ' 100
B. S t e p 2: . A n a l w e t h e S t a t u t e / (S3
CHAPTER 4 Case Law—R esearch a n d Briefing 103

I. Introduction / 10-t \' 1I . K e y P o i n t s ( Checkl ist: ¡.oaU iiig, R e a d i n g ,
II. C o u r t O p i n i o n s — In ( i e n e r a l / 101 a m i B r i e f i n g (A Hirt O p i n i o n i 130
III. ('ourt Opinions Importance ' 104 \ 111. . Ap p l i c a t i o n ! 131
l\' . Court O pinio ns— hlements 106 ■A. L o c a t i n g Ki u7 V. (Ciii/i'/iii / 131
■A. In ( i e n e r a l 106 B. \U k-i o i R a c I V. Cadcna ! 131
B. L' l e ni e nt s ol a R e p o r t e d ( ' a s e 106 (C. ( C o m m e n t s o n t h e (Case Br i e l / 132
\'. Court Opinions Researching ' 112 IX Bri el ol S t e r l in g ( A ) n i p u l e r S y s l e i n s ol Tc.xus,
•A. P u b l i c a t i o n ol ( j i u r t O p i n i o n s 113 Inc. r. I'exa i 1‘ipc l i c n i l i n g C . o t n p a n y / 132
H. Researching ( 'ourt O p in io n s LC. ( C o m m e n t s o n t h e (Case Bri el — P r o c e d u r a l
L o c a t i n g ( Case L a w / 121 \ er s ii s Suh s ta n ti xe Issues / 133
\ l. ( Cour t O p i n i o n — B r i e l i n g ((Case U r i e l ) 123 Summary / 133
.A. I n t r o d u c t i o n / 123 (ûi ik Relerences / 136
B. I m p o r t a n c e ot Brieling 123 Internet Resources ' 137
( . H o w t o R e a d a (Case 12-1 (Case l a w (Ci t a t i on l.'7

n . (Case B r i e i L. l e me n t s ' 12.5 LCxercises 13(S
LC. (Case B r i e ! I pdating 131)
CHAPTER 5 Seco n dary A uth o rity a n d O th e r R esearch S ources—

Encyclopedias, Treatises, A m erican Law Reports,
Digests, S h e p a rd ’s 140
I. Introduction , 141 \ I. U p d a t i n g a n d X’a l i d a t i n g R e s e a r c h / 172
II. Le ga l LCnc yc l opedi a s ./ 142 .A. L' s i n g ,S7u’piii(/C< i n P r i n t / 172
.A. N a t i o n a l L n c v c l o p e d i a s ' 143 ii. ( C o m p u t e r i z e d U p d a t i n g U s i n g S h e p a r d s’
B. St a l e LCnc yc l opedi a s / 149 O nline / 177
III. Ireatises , 130 (C. O t h e r Le xi s \ ' a l i d a t i o n P r o d u c t s ' 181
.A. L\ p e s a n d L e a t u r e s ol ' IVeatises / 15(1 D. U s i n g W e s t l a w ’s Key(Cite / 181
B. R e s e a r c h L' si iig T r e a t i s e s / 152 \'ll. R e s e a r c h U s i n g (Ci t at ors / 184
1\C A n i c r i c a n L a w R e p o r l s ! 153 •A. R e s e a r c h U s i n g ^S'/it’/Juri/Ci C i t a t i o n s / 184
.A. . \/.W ( C o m p o n e n t s ! 154 B. R e s e a r c h L.’s i n g Key(Cite / 185
B. R e s e a r c h L' si iig . \ / . K , 160 \ ' I I I . Ke y P o i n t s ( Checkl i st : . S V a ) / i i / i i r v ,/ 186
\C D i g e s t s / 161 IX. . Ap p l i c a t i o n / 186
.A. We s t ' s Ke v X i i m h e r D i g e s t Si . Hi i mar y 187
System / 163 (>iic k Relerences / 188
B. ( C o m p o n e n t s ol We s t ' s D i g e s t s / 165 In t e r n e t Resotirces / 188
( C. L\ p e s ol D i g e s t s / 166 ( Ci t at i on / 188
D. R e s e a r c h I ' s i n g D i g e s t s / 170 LC.xercises / 189
CHAPTER 6 S e c o n d a r y A u th o r ity — P e rio d ic a ls , R e sta te m e n ts,
U n if o rm L aw s, D ic tio n a r ie s , L e g is la tiv e H isto ry ,
a n d O th e r S e c o n d a r y A u th o r itie s 191
1. I i i l r o i l u t tidii 192 \ II. Ki r\ I n s l r i i i t i o n s - ' d l h e r R e s e a r c h

II. Le ga l IVrioi.lii.aK / 1S)2 Sources 216
I v p o s ot l e ga l IVri(n,iii.als ' 143 A. l u r y l n s t r u c t i o n s 216
1!. Re s e a i v l i I ' s i i i g 1 e ga l I’e r i o d l e a l s . 193 B. Pr ac ti ce a n d Lor ni B('oks , 216
III. R e s t a t e n i e n l . s ()l t h e L a w / 199 (!. L o o s e - L e a l S e r v i c e s 21(i
A. KestaleiiieiU.v L e a l u r e s 200 D. P r e s i d e n t i a l . Ma t e r i a l s 2I.S
B. R c ^ c m x h i ' s i n i i ¡•icsl<ili’/i u ’nl.< of l/u' l.ii w ' 201 1;. . M a r t i n d a l e - l l u b b e l l L a w 1 ) i r e c t o r \ / 21S
I\'. L ' n i Ui r ni l a w s a n d .\l(Hiel .'Vets / 2 0 3 \lll. K e \ P o i n t s ( checkl i st : Rcsliitcnicnls.
,\. 1 e a t i i r e s ol L' i i i t i ) n n l a w s a n d . Model L'n ifo r iu ¡.¡uvs. D i i l i o i m r i c s . 1 C i; ifh n i\ v l l i s l o r v .
A .t s . 203 ilih l ( SciO iuldry ,\uthoritii< 2 1>S
B. R e s e a r i . h I s i n g L ' n i l o n n a n d . Model l aw s 206 I.\. •\ p p l i c a t i o n ' 219
\'. n ie ti on arl es a n d W ords a n d Phrases 20S Suniniarx 219
l e ga l D i c t i o n a r i e s 20S ( ) i n c k R el e r e n c e s / 220
H. W o r d s a n d I’h r a s e s ' 209 Internet Resources 220
\I. Le g i s l a t i v e 1 l i s t o r \ 210 Citation ' 221
.\. l e d e r a l Le g i s l a t i v e 1 l i s t o r v S o t i r e e s ' 210 L. s er ci s es 222
B. R es e a r c h i n g l e d er al l.egislati\e Historx 211
State 1 egislatixe llistor\- / 213
CHAPTER 7 C o m p u t e r s a n d L egal R e s e a rc h 223

1. Inlrodiietion 224 L. Lederal ( io\ e r n n i e n t S ou r ce s 246
. \. I n C i e n e r a l 221 1. StateSouri.es 2 19
B. S e a r c h l e r n i s ' 224 (i . S e c o n d a r v . -\ ul hori l \ - a n d Spe c i a l l v
II. ( ! o m n i e r c i a l In te r ne t R es e ar ch / 223 Areas 249
, \. W e s t l a w 22(1 I I I istscr\'s 233
IÎ. We s t l , i w N e . \ t ' 2,^3 1. Organi/atlons 234
( 1 e\isN'e\is ' 2' . S 1. C D RO. M 234
I). O t h e i ' ( j i n i n i e r c i a l I n t e r n e t K. W i r e l e s s A p p l i c a l i o n s 233
R e s e a r c h S o u r c e s / 212 I\. Ke \ P o i n t s C h e c k l l s l : ( i i oi / i k / i T s
III. X o n l e e Bas et l L a w Kel al ei l W e b Sit es a n d O l h e r iin d I ' 233
( xinipiil er lîased R e s o i n c e s / 243 \'. .\pplii.ation < 233
A. i : t h i c s / 243 Suniniarx’ ' 236
B. L i m i t at io ns / 243 (^)uick R e l e r e n c e s 23"
C, X o n L e e - B a s e d l a w R e l a t e d W e b Si t es / 244 ('italion ■ 237
n . Legal S e a r c h l - n g i n e s ' 244 L. xerci ses 23S
CHAPTER 8 L egal C ita tio n 260

I. l nt r o c . ki c t i on 261 1). R u l e s ol K\ i d e n c e a i u l P r o c e d u r e Bluebook
,\. i n C i c n e r a l 261 R I2. S. 3: A I . W D - 1 " ■' 2 76
B. 1 h e liliii'lhiok a n i l t h e M . W D CiUilioii 1, .\(.hiiinistrali\e 1 aw B l u e i i o o k R 14;
Miiniial / 261 A lW D 19 ' 2 7 6
II. P r i n i a r v . Ai ithoritx / 262 III. Secondary ,\uthoril\ , 277
(' as e Law B l u e b o o k R- I O, B2, B3; ,\. . A n n o t a t e d L a w R e p o r t s Bhiebook
ALWD-12 , 263 R 16. 6.3; ALW D - 2 4 . 2~“
B. ( ^ o n s t i l u t i o i i s B l u e b o o k R - 1 1; B. Le ga l D i c t i o n a r y — B l u e b o o k R 13.7;
A 1.W D M 3 / 2 7 2 A I . W D - 2 3 / 27H
(!. S t a t u t o r v L a w - B l u e b o o k RM 2, B-6; Le ga l L , n c \ c l o p e d i a - B l u e b o o k R 13.7;
ALW D M 4 ; 2 " 3 ALWD-26 , 27.S
I). I’c r i o d i c a K l a w Rc vi c xv/ l c ui r na l ( ' i t a t i c m s - II. S t r i n g ( s t a t i o n s - B k i e b o o k R - 1 . 1, R - 1.2;
BllU' bciok k-K-.; A l , \ \ ' l ) - : 3 ; 279 Al\VD-43.3(a) / 292
I'.. licsli iU 'iii cii li— B l u e b o o k 1^-12.83; 1. S h o r t C' i t a t i on T o r n i s {Id., Siiprci. a n d
\k\V n-2" ' 2,SO I l i 'n ' iiu if lc r ) B k i e b o o k R-4, B- 3. 2, B- 6. 2,
I'. rivatiM.' s ' li(U)ks B i u c ' b o o k R-15; B 8. 2, B-9. 2, B 10.3; A l \ V | ) 1 1.2 l o
A k W I ) 22 ' 2.S0 A T W O - 11.4 , 292
1\'. CicMcral R u l e s (il ( ' i t a t i o i i 281 I. I n t e r n a l Cj ' o s s - R e l e r e n e e s { S u p n i a n d ln tr ,i )
A. T v p c l a c e - B l u c b o o k R-2, B2; B k i e b o o k R - 3 . 3; A I A V D - 1 0 , 2 9 3
A kW n-l.l / 281 K. S i g n a l s - B k i e b o o k R - 1.2 t o R-1. 3;
B. It al i cs a n d L ' l u i c r s c o r e s — B k i e b i x i k B-2; A l AV D- 44 to A l . \ V n - 4 h , 293
A I A V n - 1 . 3 / 281 I . S e c t i o n s ( ^ ) a n d P a r a g r a p h s (« l — B k i e h o o k
c:. C i l a t i o n PlaccnKMit in S c n t c n c o s R- 3. 4; A l A \ I ) - 6 296
a m i C l a u s c s - B l u c b o o k B- 2; A I A V D - 4 3 . 1 / 28 3 .\1. T I e c t r o n i c S o u r c e s — B k i e b o o k R- 18;
I). A b b r e v i a t i o n s - B l u L ' b o o k R-6, A T \ V n - 3 8 to A L \ V n - 4 2 / 297
Tables T.3 t o 1.16, B-' T.l. B-T. 2; A T \ V | ) - 2 , \'. Ke \ P o i n t s C h e c k l i s t : / . l y i i / I 298
. A p p e n d i x 3 t o . Ap p e n d i x 5 / 2 8 4 \'l. . Ap p l i c a t i o n / 2 9 9
T.. C a p i t a l i / a t i o n — B l u e b o o k R-8, B- 10. 6; Su n i n i a r x ' / 2 9 9
AIA\ n - 3 / 2S3 ( ) i i i c k R e t e r e n c e s / 30 0
I. ( ) u o t a t i o n s - B k i e b o o k R-3; A I A \ D - 4 7 I n t e rn e t R e s o u r c e s / 300
t o A I A V D - 4 9 ./ 2 8 6 I' . xercises / 3 0 0
(i. P a g e N u m b e r s ( P i n p o i n t ( ’i t a l i o n s ) - - B k i e b o o k
R 3. 3, R 3. 4, R 3.3; A T W H 3.2, A T W H 3.3,
A T W I ) 3. 4 / 291
PART III THE SPECIFICS OF LEGAL ANALYSIS 303
CHAPTER 9 Legal A nalysis—Key Facts 305

I. Introduction 306 D. S t e p 4: D e t e r m i n e W h i c h Ta c t s .Appl\-
311
IT Ta c t s in ( i e n e r a l Delinition .' 3 0 “ T.. . Mul t i pl e I s s ue s 31 3
111. I m p o r t a n c e o l T.icts 30 7 \ ll. Ke \ T a i l s I d e n l i l i c a l i o n ('asel.aw i|'
1\ . I\ p e s ol Ta c t s in ( i e n e r a l 308 .A. S t e p I : R e a d t h e T n t i r e C a s e 31“
.A. I r r e l e \ a n l Ta c t s ,< 3 0 9 B. S t e p 2: T o o k t o t h e I l o k l i n g . 3 1 '
B. B a c k g r o u n d Tact s ; 3 0 9 C. S t e p 3: I d e n t i l ) t h e K e \ Ta c t s / 3 1 7
C Ke \ Ta e l s < 3 10 1). M u l t i p l e I s s u e s <' 3 1 8
\. Ke \ Ta e l s P e l i ni ti o ii a n d T\ pes / 310 \ 111. Ke \ P o i n t s C h e c k l i s t : K'c V/ ' ( k is ' 3 1 9
.A. n e l i n i t i o n / 31(1 1\. . Ap pl i c a t i on / 3 1 9
B. Tx p e s ot Ke \ Ta c t s .' 311 ■A. ( ' l i e n t ’s Tact S i t u a t i o n , 3 1 9
\ 1. Ke \ Ta c t s I d e n l i t ' i c a t i o n — C l i e n t ’s C a s e / 3 1 2 B. Court Opinion / 321
.A. S t e p 1: l d e n t i t \ T!ach C a u s e ol . Act i on / 3 1 3 Summary / 323
B. S t e p 2: D e t e r m i n e t h e H l e n i e n t s ol l i a c h C) ui e k R e l e r e n c e s / 323
( ' a u s e ol . Act i on 313 In te rn et R e s o ur c e s / 323
C. S t e p 3: I isl All Ta e l s R e l a t e d t o l - xe r c i s e s / 3 2 4
t h e T. l e me n i s / 3 1 3
CHAPTER 10 Legal Analysis: Issue Id entification —Spotting the Issue 325

I. Introduction ' 326 l\' . I s s ue I d e n l i T i c a l i o n - C l i e n t ' s ( Ai s e / 3 3 0
II. D e l i n i t i o n a n d Txpes ' 326 ,A. S t e p I: Ide nl i Ty T.ach Type o t C.'ause
111. T. l eni ent s / 3 2 7 oT . Act i on / 3 3 0
A. . App l i c a bl e l a w 327 B. S t e p 2: D e l e r n i i n e t h e H l e m e n i s o f 1-ach C a u s e
B. l e gal Q u e s t i o n / 327 ol . Act i on / 331
C. Ke y Ta c t s / 3 2 « C. S t e p 3: D e t e r m i n e t h e K e \ ' T a c t s / 3 3 2
1). T. xani pl es / 3 2 8 D. S t e p 4: A s s e m b l e t h e I s s u e / 3 3 3
I . S L i mn i a i \ ol l l u' 1 o u r - S l c p I’ r o c c s s 333 \'l. Ke y P o i n t s (Cheekl i st : //;i'/.s.'.Ki- / ?•?>'■)
I-. M u ltip le Issuer ■
' '3 I \'IL Application / 3 (0
Ksiii.'Iiicntilication- (C.i'.c l a w / 333 A. OHei it' s 1 a c t S i t u a t i o n / 3 4 0
A. Mo p 1: (iL 'iiL 'r a l C^)Licslion 336 B. ( Coiu't O p i n i o n / 341
B. St op 2; I (Hik t o t h e I lolciiiig 337 S u n i n i a r v / 343
( 7 St e p 3: A s s o n i b l c t h e I s s ue ' 338 Q ui c k Reterenccs / 343
P, O t h e r Auls ( Case l aw I s s ue I nt ei riet R e s o u r c e s / 343
klentilieation ' 3 38 l.xercises / 346
I',. M i i h i p l e I s s ue s / 3 3 9
CHAPTER 11 Legal A nalysis: S ta tin g t h e Issu e 351
I. Introduction ' '32 \' III. ( ie n e r a l ( Co ns ider at i on s ' 364

II. S h o r t h a n d o r B r o a d S t a t e n i e n t ol t h e . \. N a m e I 3 6 4
Issue 332 B. . Ap p r o a c h / 3 6 4
III. (Coniprehensixe or N a rro w Statenient (C. M u l t i p l e i s s u e s / 3 65
o t t h e I s s u e ■ 3.33 I.\. K e \ ' P o i n t s (Checkl i st ; / / ; e / . v' i i e ' 365
l\' . Issue I a w { ' . o n i p o n e n t / 33 5 .\. . Ap p l i c a t i o n / 3 6 5
.A. l s s u e B a s e d o n C C a s e I . a u ' 356 .A. ( C h a p t e r i i \ p o t l i e t i c a l / 365
B. i s s ue B a s e d o n ICnact ed l . a w ' 356 B. I al s e I m p r i s o n m e n t . 366
(C. l o r n i a t ot t h e I a w ( C o n i p o n e n t 35 9 S u m m a r y / 367
\C Issue - Q u e s t i o n (Co ni p o n en t 360 (^)uick R e l e r e n c e s / 3 6 8
\ I. I s s u e - S i g n i l i c a n t o r Ke\' l a c t s ( C o n i p o n e n t 361 Internet Resources 368
\ ll. I tliics O h i e c t i \ e I \ S t a t i i m t h e I s s ue / 3 6 2 I x e r c i s e s / 3fi8
CHAPTER 12 C a s e L a w A n a l y s i s — Is a C a s e o n P o i n t ? 371
I, Introduction : 372 B. S t e p 2: .Are t h e Ru l e s o r P r i n c i p l e s ol I aw
II I )erinilion ( ) n Poi nl ■ 372 SulïicieiitK Similar ? / 380
III, O n Poi nt I m p o r t a n c e / 372 \C Ke \ P o i n t s (Checkl i st : Is ii ( ' u s e tin
A. P r é c é d e n t 372 ' 385
B. . Ma nd at or \ Preêtlent / 373 \'l. . Ap p l i c a t i o n 385
( l’cv-u.\s\vc l’v.\cvk’nl C ,'"3 A (Ch.\pK'v U y p o t h c U c a l ' .^SC^

I ). St a r e I ) e e i s i s 373 B, IihelCase / 386
I-. rhe Riileol Précédent < 3“ 4 Sui i i i i i a r ) ' / 3 8 ~
I\C 1 ) e t e r m i n i i i g if a ( a s e Is o n P o i n t / 374 (^)iiii,k R e l e r e n c e s 388
.A St e p I: A r e t h e Ke \ I a e t s Sul ï i ci e i i t K' I n t e r n e t R e s o u r c e s ! .^88
SmiilarC' / 3 7 5 ICxercises ! 38 8
CHAPTER 13 C ounteranalysis 391

I. Introduction / 392 I.\. Ke \ P o i n t s (Checkl i st : (.'oi/iiii'niiiii/iM,'. / 4 0 6
II. ( Co u n t e r a n . i K' s i s Detmition ! 392 .\. . Ap p l i c a t i o n / 4 0 6
III. ( C o u i i t e r a n a K s i s -W h y ? 392 .A. ( C h a p t e r i i \ p o t l i e t i c a l / 407
l\C (CounteranaK' sis -W'heiiC' / 39 3 B. (Coi i i i t er ai i al ys i s Reliance o n
\C (Couiitei a n a l v s i s R e s e a r c h S o u r c e s / 39 1 L e g i s l a t i w A c t ,/ 4 0 7
\ I. (CouiiteranaKsis r ccl i ni e| i i es / 3 9 5 (C. ( C o u n t e r a i i a l y s i s Rel iance Oil (Cour t
A III ( I e n e r a l ; 395 Opinion 408
B. ICiiacted I . aw / 395 S u n i n i a r v / 408
(C. (Case L a w 400 Q u ic k Relerences / 409
\'II. ( Cou i Ue r a na l v s i s l e c l i n i q u e s — ( C o n i m e n t s . 104 In te rn et R e s o u r c e s / 409
N'lII. C o u n t e i a n a K s i s W h e r e ? / 404 ICxercises 409
.A. (Court Br i el 404
B. Iiiterollice Res ear ch . M e m o r a n d u m ; 405
PART IV LEGAL WRLriNG 413
CHAPTER 14 F u n d a m e n ta ls of W riting 414

I. Si . n t c n i ; c s 113 \', Punctiiation 437
A. Sli u c t u i v o r I’. i l k ' r n / 113 ,A. C o m m a (,) 437
B. H.isiL Ri i k' s in S L ' n l c n c L ' W i l l i n g U3 B. S e m i c o l o n (;) 439
II. I’a r a g i . i p l i s , 4 1 8 C. C o l o n (:) ' 440
,\. i o p i c Sc nt c nL' c ol a I’a r a g i a p h ' 119 I). . A p o s t r o p h e (') / 441
B. I’a r a g i a p h B( k 1\' / 119 I-:, ( f l o t a t i o n . Ma r ks ( “ ") / 4 4 2
( Cl os i ng ScnlL'iiL'L'1)1 a P a r a g r a p h 119 I' l . l l i ps es ( t h r e e s p a c e d d o t s : . . .) / 4 4 4
I). I r a n s i l i o n . Scnlcncc.s / 4 1 9 t i . B r a c k e t s (| |) / 4 4 3
h. P a r a g r a p h l. cngih 420 II. P a r e n t h e s e s ( ) / 4 4 3
111. W o r d S e l e c t i o n a n d L' sagc ! 120 I. H y p h e n (-) , 4 4 3
I . \ c c s s i \ ' i ’ o r R e d u n d a n t W o r d s , 421 I. Dash ( - ) / 44(1
H. N o i i n A e r b S t r i n g s / 421 K. Sl a s h ( / ) / 4 4 6
C.. N ' o m i n a l i / a t i o n s / 421 I . P e r i o d (.) / 4 4 6
1). L e g a l e s e / 4 2 2 ,\1. Q u e s t i o n . Mark (?) / 44.S
I'. . Ar c ha i c r e r n i s / 42 2 \. K x c l a m a t i o n P o i n t (!) / 4 18
1-, Se x i s t l a n g u a g e / 4 2 3 \'l. Cieneral ( C o n s i d e r at i o n s / 449
(i. Speci li c W o r d s P r o b l e m . Areas ! 42 4 A. S p e l l i n g / 4 4 9
\\. ( I r a n i m a r /' 4 2 7 B. Numbers / 449
,A. S u b j e c t \ ' e r b .Agreement / 127 ( 7 I ' o r m a l W r i t i n g ( C o n v e n t i o n s / 431
li. \'erb lense 429 \'ll. Kev Poi nt s (Checklist; / Hiii/iii/zoj/ii/.' -( ) / ; 132
C. P a r a l l e l C o n s t r u c t i o n / 429 \ ' l l l . . Ap p l i c a t i o n < 432
n. Superniioiis \e r b s / 430 Summary ‘ 433
17 . Mo d i l i e r s a n d I n l i n i t i v e s I 431 C.)iiick R e l e r e n c e s / 4 3 3
I. Xoim P r o n o i m . Agreement 433 Int er ne t R e s o u r c e s / 434
C . . At l ver bs, . Adj ect i ves, a n d l\en.ises 43!
( ^ o n ji mc l io n s / 43 1 I' or I u r t h e r R e a d i n g 436
CHAPTER 15 The W ritin g Process for Effective Legal W ritin g 457

I. Inlriuluction 13cS \'ll. , Appl i i . at i on / 4 ' 3
II. I n i p o i l a n c e ol W r i t i n g Skil ls / 438 ,A. P r e w r i t i n g St a g e 173
111. ( i o a l ol I e g a l W r i t i n g / 43H B. W r i t i n g S t a g e / 4 7 7
l\. I, egal W r i t i n g P r o c e s s / 439 (C. P o s t w r i l i n g S t a g e / 47C
.A. P r e w r i t m g S t a g e / 4 6 0 Summary / 477
B. W r i t i n g St a g e / 471 (.}uick R e l e r e n c e s ; 4 7 8
(C. P o s t w r i l i n g St a g e / 4 7 2 In te rn et R e s o u r c e s / 478
\'. ( j ene ra l Res e ar c h Su gg e st io n s / 473 ICxercises / 4 7 9
\'k K e y P o i n t s (Checkl i st : /Vie W'riling
I ’n h C i s / 4 7 4
CHAPTER 16 Office Legal M e m o r a n d u m ; Is s u e s a n d Facts 481

I, Introduction / 482 (C. I s s u e / 4 9 0
II. Delinition / 483 1). B r i e f A n s w e r / 4 9 3
III. P u r p o s e s , Us e s , a n d I m p o r t a n c e / 483 IC. S t a t e m e n t ot l a c t s / 4 9 4
i\'. P r e w r i t i n g St a g e / 4 8 4 \ ’l. Ke\' P o i n t s (Checkl i st : O f f u c l egal
,A. N a t u r e ol t h e A s s i g n m e n t / 483 M i ' n i o n u u l i i n i — Is su es a n d Fa cts / 4 9 8
B. ( C o n s t r a i n t s o n t h e A s s i g n m e n t / 486 \ ’ll. Ap p li c at io n / 499
(C. O r g a n i z a t i o n o f t h e A s s i g n m e n t / 486 Summary / 302
Sec tions o f the Office M e m o r a n d u m / 489 (. Jui ck R e l e r e n c e s / 3 0 3
A. H e a d i n g / 4 8 9 I n te r ne t R e s o u r c e s / 503
B. S t a t e m e n t o f A s s i g n m e n t / 4 9 0 ICxercise / 3 0 3
CHAPTER 17 O ffic e Legal M e m o r a n d u m : A n a l y s i s to C o n c l u s i o n 504
InlniduLtion ' 30? 1). P a r a g r a p h s 317
A n a K' s i s S o c t i o n 303 I . Pe rs ua sive P r e c e d e n t 317
A. A n a l y s i s T o r n i a t ' 303 I-. C o n c l u s i o n s / 318
1Î. A n a h s is Pa r t A: R u l e ol l a w ; 3 0 7 (i. R e v i s i o n s a n d D r a t t s / 31<S
c;. A n a l \ sis Pa r t H: R u l e ol l a w II. . \ d d i l i o n a l . Au t h o r i t y ! 3KS
Interpretation tCase l a w / 3 0 9 \ 1. Ke \ P o i n t s C h e c k l i s t : O j j i i c
1). A n a l y s i s Pa r t C: A p p l i c a t i o n ot Rul e M c i n o n i i i i l i i n i — .\iuilv<l< lo (' i n w l i i s i o / i 319
ol l a w t o (.' lienl' s C a s e / 312 \ 11. A p p h c a t i o n / 319
I. A n a l y s i s Pa r t 1■>:(C o i i n t e r a n a h ' s i s / 313 .A. l : \ a n i p l e 1 ' 319
Conclusion ' 314 K. l - . \ a mp l e 2 / 321
i\'. Reconiniendations 313 C. C o n i m e n t . s o n H x a m p i e s / 324
( i e n e r a l C o n s i d e r a t i o n s , 31(i S u m m a r y ./ 3 2 4
A. H e a d i n g 31(i ( ) u i c k R el e r e n c es / 325
H. lntroductor\'Sentences ' 3 Ki internet Resources ' 323
I’r a n s i t i o n S e n t e n c e s 317 I xercises 323
CHAPTER 18 E x te r n a l M e m o r a n d a : C o u rt B riefs 534

I. Introduction . 3.V3 B. C ' o n s t r a i n t s , 331
II. (ieneral Considerations 333 C. T o r m a t o r ( ’o n t e n t / 331
.A. S i m i l a r i t i e s C o u r t Br i e l s a n d O l l i c e Ke\ Poi nt s C h e c kl i s t : l.xlcnuil
.Memoranda 333 M i ' ni o i ' ( t nt i t i — ( A ) i i r t H r i c l i i 3 3 3
B. Dissimi lar ities C o L i r t Br i e l s a n d O t l i c e \i. A p p l i c a t i o n / 334
.Memoranda 33(i .A. IVk\l Bri el / 333
III. Trial ( ' o u r t l i r i el s 314 B. Comments , 337
.\. Audience 343 Suniniarv - 337
B. C o n s t r a i n t s 343 (Jiiick R el e re nc e s 338
C. T o r m a t o r C o n t e n t 3.|3 Internet Resources ' 338
1\' . Api ' ellate C o u r l Br i e l s 330 T xercises ! 339
.\ - Aud i e nc e 331
CHAPTER 19 Coiiespondence 563

Introduction . 3(i4 N. < i e n e r a l C o n s i d e r a t i o n s
Bas i c ( O m p o n e n t s • 3(' l All C o r r e s p o n d e n c e / 3 6 9
A. L e t t e r h e a d 3(i4 111. 1v p e s ot C o r r e s p o n d e n c e / 3 6 9
B. Date ' 3ii3 .\. I n T o i i n a t i o n L e t t e r ! 3 7 0
C. . Me t h o d ot De l i v e r v 363 P.. O p i n i o n L e t t e r / 371
1). R e c i p i e n t ’s . Addr es s B l o c k ' 363 (:. D e m a n d o r . Ad v o c a c y L e t t e r / 3 7 3
T. Relerence ( R e') 1 ine ! 366 I\'. K e \ P o i n t s C h e c k l i s t : ( A i n r s p o i u i c i i i c ■'
T. Salutation ' 366 • App l i c a t i on / 3 7 7
(i. l i o d v / 3 6 6 A. T. x a mp l e I n l o r m a t i o n 1 e t t e r ' 37:
11. C l o s i n g ' 36“ P>. T . x a m p l e — O p i n i o n I e t t e r / 3 7 9
1. S i g n a t u r e a n d Title 36,S C. ( C o m m e n t s o n K x a m p l e s ' 380
|. I ni t i al s ol D i a l l e r ' 36,S Summarv / 381
K. T. ncl osi i re N o t a t i o n / 36iS ( j u i c k R e l e r e n c e s ; 381
T. ( Ot he r s Recei v i n g C o p i e s ! 36.S I nt er ne t R e s o u r c e s / 382
.M. T o r m a t St yl e / 3 6 8 T. xercises / 3 8 2
APPENDIX A COURT OPINIONS REFERRED TO IN THE TEXT 585
APPENDIX B APPELLATE COURT BRIEF 637
APPENDIX C WEB SITES 663
GLOSSARY 666
INDEX 671
Aciiiiti M u t u a l liiiurancc Life C'ompuiiy r. Auu'ricau Ciciicnil Life Iiisuraiicc ('.ompany
Alhtiilic Bi'ach (Aiiino, Inc. r. M u rcu zo u i
H auniârducr r. S tuckcy (C.ourscMatc C.haplcr 17. Assiîuiicnt 5)
Beam 1 '. ('ulletl
III re Bratz ((. '.ourscMate C hapter 10, Aiiiiiuiiient 4)
Britton I’. Britton
('aliforuia r. Greeuw ood (('our.<eMale C.hapterlH Aiiîîiiiieut I)
( ' a r d w l l r. d w a lt n e y
(Antiinonwealth r. DeMiehel
(An)iino}i\vealtli v. Shea
(AMper A u stin
(Airdovii r. W'olfel
Dean r. Diekey
hi re listate oJ K u szniaut
¡■'lowers 1 ' Campbell
lleihlersoii r. Bowden (CA)iirseMate C hapter 17, Assi^miieiit 2)
Ilershley r. Brown ((AnirseMate C.hapter I, A ssignm ent ,îj
loues 1 '. hleiselihaeker (C ourseM ate C.hapter ¡7, Assi^m iient J J
in re Kiirth Raiieh ((AturseMate (.'hapterlS, .Assignment 2)
.\leC4ain r. .-\iLims
Melia I'. Dillon ( 'ompanies, lue. (C.ourse.Mate i '.hapter i, Assigiiiiient I)
.Metropolitan I.ile liiiiiranee C oinpiiny i'. S vntek riiuiuee ('orporatioii
.Moi'iâii r. Creenwaldt
I’appiis Hnterprises, hie. r CAunmeree a n d Industry Insurance C o m p a n y
People 1 ’ Sanders
Rael r. Ca u Iena
Stanley v. Illiiiois
State I'. Benner
Stiite r. Muijijddin
State I'. W'oiiÿ ICAHirse.Mate C.hapter I ,A ssig nm en t 6)
Sterling C o m p u te r Systems of Te.xas, Inc. r. Texas Pipe B ending C o m p a n y
L'nited States r. Halper ((AHirseMate C.hapter IS,A a ssig m u ent 2)
United States r. Hedrick (ÎA)urseMate C hap ter IS, A ssig n m e n t I )
United States r. H o w a rd (C.ourscMatc C h ap ter 17, A ssig n m en t 6)
United States i’. lanes
United States r. Kutas (C ourseM ate C.hapter I, A ssig nm ent 10)
United States r. Leon
United States r. .M artincz-lim ene:

xiv
Wolcott V. Wolcott
I\irale^ ais a n d law c k 'rk s a rc iiicrcasingk callcd u p o n to pcrk)i'ni s u b s t a n t i v e legal reseatx ii,
a nalysis, a n d w r i t i n g tasks. I h ese ta s k s r a n g e fVotii d r a l ’tin g intercitiice legal m e n i o r a n d a s u m -
ir.ariz ing th e r e s e a rc h a n d a n a n sis ot issues i i u 'o h 'e d in a clien t s case to p r e p a r i n g d r a f ts ol
ap p ellate c o u r t briefs. Ih is text pi'ON'ides th e s t u d e n t w ith in d e p t h k n o w l e d g e o t ' t h e f'ltnda-
tr.etitals ot'legal r e s e a r c h , atiaU sis, a n d w rititig.
'1 he i m p e t u s to r th is b o o k c a m e t r o m s t u d e n t r e q u e s ts t o r c o tn p r ehetisix e i n t o r m a t i o n
fc g a rd itig mail}' o t’ th e difficult a r e a s of'leg al r e s e a r c h , a n a h s i s , a n d w r it in g , s u c h as:
H o w to c o n d u c t sta tu to r\- r e s e a rc h a n d an aly s is
1low to c o n d u c t c ase law r e s e a rc h
H o w to r e s e a ic h s e c o n d a r v a u t h o r i t y
H ow to c o n d u c t e le c tro tiic r e s e a rc h
1low to cite a u t h o r i t y
1lo w to brief cases
I low to idetitil\- th e issue
i low to state th e issue
1low to d e t e r m i n e it a c a s e is oti p o in t
1low to idetitify th e key facts itn a case
I low to c o n d u c t c o u iU eran aK 'sis
1 low to p r e p a r e ati in teroffice m e m o r a n d u m a n d c o u r t brief
Die te.xt is d e sig tie d lo r u se in re s e a r c h a n d w r i t i n g classes. It c a n be u se lu l in s c h o o l s

tl at h a \ e s e p a r a t e r e s e a rc h a n d w r i t i n g c o u r s e s , w h e r e th e first c o u r s e fo c u s e s p r i m a r i K o n
r i s e a r d i w ith an i n t r o d u c t i o n to w r it in g , a n d th e s e c o n d c o u r s e fo c u s e s o n w r i t m g w ith re
sta rc h as a s e c o n d a r y c o m p o n e n t , f o r th e re s e a rc h c o u rs e , th e itis tr u c t o r w o u ld use ( ' h a p t e r s 1
11 r o u g h 13. f'o r th e w r it in g c o u i se, instt u c t o r s w o u l d use ( Cha|itet s 9 tl i r o u g h 19. W h e r e b o t h
r i s e a r c h i n g a n d w r i t i n g a r e c o m b i n e d in o n e c o u r s e , i n s t r u c t o r s c a n select th e c h a p t e r s
a p p r o p r i a t e fo r st.ich a c o m b i n e d c o u rs e .
'1 he text is d e s i g n e d to c o v e r th e to p ic s o f legal re s e a rc h , an alysis, a tid w rititig in g e n e ra l.
It is o r g a n i z e d to p r o \ ide s t u d e n t s w ith c o m p r e h e n s i v e i n t o r m a t i o n a b o u t diflicult a r e a s ol
a : a l \ s i s atid w ritin g . Ih e text is d i v i d e d in t o th e lo llo w itig foiu' p arts.
Part I: In tro d u c tio n to R e se a rc h , A n a ly tic a l P rin c ip le s, a n d th e L egal P ro c ess.

P u t I is c o m p o s e d o f tw o i n t r o d u c t o r y c h a p te r s . 'I h e first c h a p t e r p r e s e n t s an o v e r v i e w o t’the
le;al sv st e m a n d th e legal p ro c e s s , as well as a s u m m a r y of th e b asic legal p r i n c i p l e s u iv o lv e d
it th e p ro ce ss, stich as a u th o r it y , p r e c e d e n t , s t a re decisis, a n d so o n . Ih e s e c o n d c h a p t e r
i r t r o d u c e s legal a n a ly s is a n d th e 1RA(; a n a ly tic a l p ro c e s s.
P irt II: L egal R e se a rc h . P art I! cotisists of six c h a p t e r s th at p r o v i d e in-(.iepth c o v e r a g e

o legal re s e a rc h a n d th e re s e a r c h p ro c e s s . It b e g in s w ith tw o c h a p t e r s o n p r i m a r y a u t h o r i t y ;
fla t is, c h a p te r s o n s t a t u t o r y a n d case law. N e x t a re tw o c h a p t e r s o n s e c o n d a r y a u th o rit)'.
. ' c h a p t e r on c o m p u t e r s a n d legal re s e a rc h fo llo w ed bv a c h a p t e r o n legal c it a ti o n c o m p l e t e
Pu-t 11.
P irt III: T he Specifics o f Legal A n a ly sis. P art 111 covers m a tte rs essential to th e analysis
(' a legal p r o b l e m . It b e g in s w ith a c h a p t e r o n a p r i n c ip a l c o m p o n e n t of a legal q u e s t i o n
XV
(legal issue), t h e key laets, w h ic h a re tacts c ritic a l to th e o u t c o m e ot t h e e ase. N ex t are
c lia p te r s o n i d e n t i l \ in g a n d w r i ti n g legal issues:
k i e n t i t \ 'i n g t h e i s s u e - - i h e id e n t il ie a t io n ot th e legal issi.:e p r e s e n t e d by a laet

s i tu a t io n
S ta tin g t h e i s s u e — How to p r e s e n t t h e issue
F a rt 111 c o n c l u d e s w ith tw'o c h a p t e r s o n t o p i c s t u n d a n i e n t a l to legal an alysis:
Clase law- a p p l i c a t i o n - - ' l h e a n a h tical p r o c e s s u s e d to d e t e r m i n e if a c o i u t o p i n i o n

a p p lie s to a legal q u e s t i o n
( C o u n te r a n a ly s is — I h e p r o c e s s o t ' d i s c o x e r i n g a n d c o n s i d e r i n g t h e c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t
to a legal p o s i t i o n o r a r g i m i e n t.
P a r t IV: L e g a l W r i t i n g . Ih e Io c lis ot' P art I \ ' is o n legal w r i t i n g a n d t h e legal w r it in g

p ro ces s. It c o \ e r s th e a p p l i c a t i o n ot t h e p r i n c i p l e s p r e s e n t e d in t h e p r e \ io u s c h a p t e r s to th e
d r a f t i n g o f legal r e s e a r c h m e m o r a n d a , c o u r t bi'iels, a n d legal c o r r e s p o n d e n c e , w i t h c lia p te r s
o n tlie ft)llow ing topics:
I’u n d a m e n t a l s ot w r i t i n g
I h e legal w r i t i n g p r o c e s s in g e n e ra l
O tli c e legal m e m o r a n d a ( t w o c h a p t e r s )
(Court briefs
(C orrespondence
CHAPTER FEATURES
ICach c h a p t e r is d e s i g n e d to h e lp s t u d e n t s c o m p l e t e K u n d e r s t a n d a n d ap p K ' t h e c o n c e p t s
p r e s e n t e d in t h e c h a p te r. (Chapters i n c l u d e th e lo l l o w i n g lea tu res .
H yp o thetica l
ICach c h a p t e r b e g i n s w ith a h \ ' p o t h e t i c a l th a t r a ise s a c ju es tio n o r c ju e s tio n s i n \ ' o l \ i n g th e
s u b ject m a t t e r o f th e c h a p te r, l-’o l l o w i n g th e h \ p o t h e t i c a l is a p r e s e n t a t i o n o t t h e pi inciples,
c o n c e p t s , g u id e l in e s , a n d i n t o r m a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g t h e s u b je c t m a tte r . A lte r t h e d i s c u s s i o n
o f fhe s u b je c t m a tte r , t h e p r i n c i p l e s a n d i n f o r m a t i o n d i s c u s s e d in fhe c h a p t e r a re a p p li e d fo
a n s w e r fhe cju esfion o r c]uestions ra is e d in th e h \ p o t h e t i c a l .
I h e u se o f t h e h y p o t h e t i c a l at th e b e g i n n i n g o f t h e c h a p t e r c re a t e s s t u d e n t i n t e r e s t in the
su bie cf m a t t e r o f th e c h a p t e r . I h e a n s w e r to th e h \ ’p o t h e t i c a l t o w a r d th e e n d ot th e c li a p te r
allo w s t h e s t u d e n t to see h o w t h e s u b je c t m a t t e r tics t o g e t h e r a n d is a p p li e d .
Key Points C hecklist

ICach c h a p t e r h as a list o f key p o i n t s th a t m a y b e u s e d as a cjuick re f e r e n c e a n d c h e c k l is t w h e n
appK in g t h e c o n c e p t s p r e s e n t e d in t h e c h a p te r. Ih is c h e c k l is t a llo w s b o t h t h e i n s t r u c t o r a n d
th e s t u d e n t to m a k e s u r e n o t h i n g is m i s s e d w h e n r e v i e w i n g o r a p p l y i n g t h e p r i n c i p l e s p r e
s e n t e d in t h e c h a p te r.
In-Depth Coverage of Topics

I h e g re a t e s t a d \ a n t a g e o f t h i s text, for b o t h te a c h e r s a n d s t u d e n t s , is its c o m p r e h e n s i \ e a n d
i n - d e p t h c o \ e r a g e o t to p ic s n o t t h o r o u g h h ' c o v e r e d in m o s t texts. I h e s e to p i c s in c lu d e :
Issue s ta ti n g
Issue id e n t if ic a t io n ( issu e s p o t t i n g )
(Case law a n a k s i s ( w h e t h e r a c ase is “o n p o i n t ” )

( CoUlltCI'.HUlh'SIS
S t a t u t o r y atiaU sis
O lli c c legal iiK'iiKiranda p ro p a r .itio n
Examples
.\ fiiajor aiiv aiilaijc ol t h e text is th a t e \ c r \ p r i n c ip l e , c o n c e p t , atid so oti is lolloweci b\' ati e \ -
otiv.’le th a t illu s tr a t e s it. O n e ol tiiy s t u d e n t s r e q u e s t e d th a t th e r e h e “plent\- ol e x a n ip le s .” Ihi.s
te \; h a s p le n t y ot e x a m p l e s . Ih e s e e x a m p l e s h e lp t h e i t i s t r u c t o r te a c h p r i n c i p l e s a n d c o n c e p t s
.;iH. h e lp th e sHideiit u n d e r s t a n d th e m .
ln :e rn e t Resources
l.acli c h a p t e r c o n t a i n s a list o f W e b sites re la te d to th e c h a p t e r to pic . Ih is allo w s a c c e ss to
iid citio nal i n l o r m a t i o n o n c h a p t e r to p ic s f r o m th e I n t e r n e t .
A ssignm ents
I h i f e a re a s s i g n m e n t s at th e eiiti ol e a c h c h a p t e r th a t ra n g e in d if iic u h w I h e a s s i g n m e n t s
iei|-iire s t u d e n t s to a p p ly tlie p r i n c i p l e s a n d t e c h n i q u e s p r e s e n t e d in th e text, l-'or e x a m p l e ,
am m g o t h e r a s s i g n m e n t s , th e r e a re eig h t case b r i e f a s s i g n m e n t s in C h a p t e r 4 ( t h e ca se s a re
p r e - e n te d in .A p pen dix A) aiu l n i n e otfice legal m e m o r a n d a a s s i g n m e n t s in (C hapter 1 ( b a s e d
o n he facts a n d law p r e s e n t e d in t h e a s s i g n m e n t a n d t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n s in .A p p en d ix .A). I h e
a n s \ e r s to all th e a s s i g n m e n t s are p r e s e n t e d in t h e I n s t r u c t o r ’s M a n u a l .
Appenciices
II h text h as t h r e e a p p e i u i i c e s a n d a g lo s s a r\' o f t e r m s . .A pp end ix .A c o n s i s ts t)l c o u r t o p i n i o n s
th a a r e n e i e s s a r y lo r th e c h a p t e r a s s i g n m e n t s . A p p e n d i x B p r e s e n t s th e briel ol t h e a p p e ll e e
in c c a s e tiled in th e L’n it e d States (Court o f .Appeals for th e T e n th (Circuit. I h e legal r e s e a r c h ,
leg,I a n a h sis, a m i in itia l ilra lts o f th is b r i e f w e r e p e r f o r m e d by a p a r a l e g a l w h o w o r k s in
th eC C rim inal Div ision o f th e l ' n i t e d S tates .A tto rn e y ’s olftce to r th e D is t ric t ol X e w .Mexico.
.Ap.’e iu iix (C is a list o f th e W e b sites | i r e s e n t e d in th e text.
Readability
Iht lex! is w r i t t e n in a m a n n e r th a t a lav pei'so n ca n u n d e r s t a n d . 'I h e text av tiid s legalese,
illu 'tra te s concefM s w ith e x a m p l e s , a n d p r e s e n t s t h e s u b j e c t m a t t e r s i m p l y a n d clearlv.
New Features in T h is E d ition

Ihi m a j o r c h a n g e s in th is e d i t i o n a re to th e legal re s e a r c h chaiMers ot th e t e x t — (C hap ters 3
I h r n i g h 7. (C hapters 3 t h r o u g h 6 a re u p d a t e d in r e g a r d to th e i n c r e a s e d u se o f o n l i n e a n d
I’l e i tf o n ic s o u r c e s in legal re s e a rc h . (C hapter 5 (o n sec on darv - a n d o t h e r re s e a r c h s o u r c e s ) is
tip u tte ii to r e l i e d th e u se n ( Slicpu nl'f o n l i n e a n d W e s t l a w ’s Key(Cite to u p d a t e a n d v a li d a te
re s ;a rc h . (C ha pter 7, o n c o m p u t e r - a s s i s t e d legal r e s e a r c h , is r e w r i t t e n to re llec t c h a n g e s to
W e tlaw, to c u s i n g on W estla w N e x t; it in c lu d e s i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t th e n e w l.e.xisXexis in te rla c e .
In a d d itio n , n e w a s s i g n m e n t s are a d d e d to (C hapters 3, 4, a n d 3.
I ’n li k e o t h e r a r e a s o l t h e law , s u c h as c r i m i n a l a n d c o n s t i t u t i o n a l , w h e r e t h e r e a r e
t o i t i n u o u s c h a n g e s in th.e ca se a n d s t a tu t o r v ’ law, t h e p ro c e s s o f legal a n a ly s is a n d w r i t i n g
r e n a i n s essentiallv t h e s a m e o v e r tim e . I h e r e f o r e , t h e r e a r e few s u b s t a n t i v e c h a n g e s in t h e
legd analv sis a n d legal w r i t i n g s e c t io n s o t th is text.
I lo w e v e r, th e r e a r e a d d i t i o n s . (C hap ter 17 i n c l u d e s tw o m e m o a s s i g n m e n t s . X e w a s s ig n -
n i e i t s a ls o a r e a d il e d to (C ha pter 9 (o n ke\' la c ts), (C ha pter 10 ( o n issue i d e n t i l i c a t i o n ) , a n d
(C h ;p ter 19 (o n c o i 'r e s p o n d e n c e ) . In r e s p o n s e to r e q u e s t s for a d d i t i o n a l m a t e r i a l, t h e r e a r e
a d u t i o n s to th e " W o r d S e le c tio n ," " ( i r a n i m a r , ” a n d “ P u n c t u a t i o n ” s e c t io n s o f (C h ap ter 14
(o t thi,' l u n d a m e n t a l s ol w r it in g ) . In a di.htion, (C hap ter 8 ( o n legal c i t a t i o n ) is u p d a t e d u s i n g
tlic 2 0 1 0 \ ci si o n ol I h e Bliicbook: V u i j o r m S v il c iu of ( j t a t i o i i , 19th e d i t i o n , aiui tlie 2010
v e rs io n ol t h e A I . W 'D
C i i a i i o n M a n i u tl : Pi'ofcifioniil S v il c n i o f C i h i t i o i i , 4tli e d it io n .
S U P P O R T M A T E R IA L
I h e tex t is a c c o m p a n i e d b\' tlie f o llo w in g s u p p o r t m a t e r i a l s d e s i g n e d to a ssist s t u d e n t s in
l e a r n i n g a n d i n s t r u c t o r s in te a c h in g .
C ou rseM ate
Paralegal C ourseM ate

lA'gal Rcsciircli, A n tilysis a n d Writing, 'I h i r d E d it io n , h a s a Paralegal ( ' o u r s e M a t e available.
P a ra le g a l C o u r s e M a t e in c lu d e s:
a n i n t e r a c t i \ 'e e B o o k , w ith h ig h l i g h t i n g , n o t e - t a k i n g , a n d s e a r c h c a p a b ilitie s
i n t e r a c t i v e t e a c h i n g a n d l e a r n i n g too ls, in c lu d in g :
Q u izz in g
C a se stu d ies
( ' h a p t e r o b je c t iv e s
A ssig n m en ts
Flashcards
W e b lin k s
( ' r o s s w o r d p u z z le s
P o w e r P o in t’ presen tatio n s
A n d m ore!
E n g a g e m e n t Tracker, a l i r s t - o f - it s - k i n d tool th a t m o n i t o r s sti,:dent e n g a g e m e n t in

th e c o u rs e
I'o le a r n m o r e a b o u t th i s re s o u r c e a n d a cc ess tree d e m o (C o u rseM a te r e s o u r c e s , go to www

.cengagebrain.com, a n d s e a r c h b\' th is b o o k ’s ISBN (9781 1 3 3 5 9 1900), l b a c c e ss C o u r s e M a t e
m a t e r i a ls t h a t y o u h a v e p u r c h a s e d , go to l o g i n . c e n g a g e b r a i n , c o m , e n t e r y o u r a c c e ss c o d e , a n d
c re a te a n a c c o u n t o r lo g in to y om ' e x is ti n g a c c o im t.
In s tru c to r’s M a n u a l
F a c h c l i a p t e r h a s s e v e r a l e x e r c i s e s r a n g i n g in difficulty. 'I h e I n s t r u c t o r ’s M a n u a l p r o \ 'i d e s
c o m p l e t e a n s w e r s to e a c h exercise, g e n e r a l g u i d e s for i n s t r u c t o r s , a n d s u g g e s te d a d d i t i o n a l
a s s i g n m e n t s . A m o n g o t h e r th i n g s , th e m a n u a l i n c l u d e s 1 1 e x a m p l e s o f b rie fs o f co iu't o p i n
ions, 14 e x a m p l e s o f office legal r e s e a r c h m e m o r a n d a , a n d 2 e x a m p l e s o f a p p e ll a te briefs. Ih e
m a n u a l a ls o p r o v i d e s a test b a n k o f tr u e /f a ls e a n d m u l t i p l e - c h o i c e q u e s t i o n s fo r ea c h c h a p te r,
A test b a n k a n s w e r k e v is a lso in c lu d e d .
INSTRUCTOR
RESOURCES
In s tru c to r Resources
S p e n d less t i m e p l a n n i n g a n d m o r e t i m e te a c h in g . W i t h D e l m a r C e n g a g e L e a r n i n g ’s I n s t r u c
to r R e s o u r c e s to A c c o m p a n \ ' Legal R e s e a rc h , A n a ly s is a n d W ri ti n g , p r e p a r i n g for class a n d
e v a l u a t i n g s t u d e n t s h a v e n e v e r b e e n easier!
Iliis ii n 'a lu a b le i n s t r u c t o r ( ' l ) - K O M a llo w s NOLI ' ' a n \ \ \ i u T c , an xtiiiK '” a c cess til all 1)1
\ ( u r rc s o u rc c s.
I he I n s t r u c t o r ’s M a n u a l c o n ta i n s \ arioLis rcsource.s to r cacli LỈiaptcr ot tiu ’ b o o k .
Ih e C o m p i i t e r i z e t l I 'e s t b a n k ill m a k e s g e n e r a t i n g tests a n d q u i / / c s

a snap . W it h iiKinx’ q u e s t i o n s a m i tiilfciciit st\ los to c h o o s e tr o m , \'t)u c a n c re a te
CListoniized ii>sc'ssiiionts till' N'our stu ilo u ts w illi t h e click o f a b u t t o n . A d d \ ()ur o w n
u n i q u e q u e s t i o n s a n d p r i n t r a t io n a l e s lo r easv class p r e p a r a t i o n .
( A is to m i/a b lc P o w e r P o i n t P r e s e n t a t i o n s lo c u s o n k c \ ’ p o i n t s to r e a c h cliiiptcr.
( I’n w c i i ’ciint is a re g is te r e d tradciiK irk ol t h e M i c r o s o t t ( ^ i r p o r a t i o n . )
l o acccss a d d i t i o n a l c o u r s c m a t e r i a l s (in c ii u li n g CoLirsoMalL'), p le a s e go to lo g in .c o n g a g c .

c o m , tiu'ii u se \'()ur s s o (sing le sign o n ) login to a c cess th e m a te ria ls.
Web
WebTlitorTM
llie W ebT iitor su p p le iiien t allow s you, as th e iiistru ctof, to take loarniiig be \ otul th e c la s sfo o in .
liiis on litio c o u r s e w a r e is d c sig iictl to c o in p l c tn e i it th e text aiul b e n e fit s t u d e ti ts a n d i n s t r u c
t o r s alike b\' he lpitig to b e t t e r n ia tia g e \ o u r tim e , p r e p a r e lo r e x a m s , o r g a t i i / e y o u r n o te s , a n d
tn o re . W 'e b 'lu to r allo w s yo u to e x t e n d x'our re a c h b e y o tid th e c la s s r o o m .
WebP ag e
CConie v isit o u r w e b site at h t t p : / " w w w . p a r a l e g a l . d e l m a r . c e n g a g e . c o t n / , w h e r e v o u will fin d
v a lu a b le i n f o r m a t i o n su c h as h o t links a n d s a m p le m a t e r i a ls to d o w n l o a d , as well as o t h e r
1) e l m a r ( A'ligage L e a r n i n g p r o d u c t s .
S U P P L E M E N T S A T -A -G L A N C E
SUPP LE ME NT : W H A T IT IS: W H A T ' S IN IT:
Paralegal ('o u r s c M a te O iiliiu’ intciactix c te a ch in g and interactive tcacliing a n d

learning tools a n d an interactive le a rn in g tools, including:
CourseMate el5ook. ( i o to login.ee iig ag c.e oni

to access.
Quizzing
('ase studies
(Chapter Obiectives
Assignments
I'laslicards
W'eblinks
C r o s s w o r d puzzles
i\)werl\)ints* presentations
interactive ciiook
i - n g a g e n i e n t iVacker
O n lin e In s tr u c t o r l U ' s o u r c e s t o r tile i n s t r u c t o r i n s t r u c t o r ’s M a n u a l w i t h

C o m p a n i o n Site a c c e s s i b l e \ ia C e n g a g e S i n g l e a n s w e r s t o t e xt q u e s t i o n s ,
Sign O n CCour se Mate a s s i g n m e n t s ,
a n d test b a n k a n d a n s w e r k ey
C o m p u t e r i z e d I ' e s t b a n k in
i Cxa mV' i e w, w i t h m a n y q u e s
t i o n s a n d styles to c h o o s e
trom to create c ustom ized
a s s e s s m e n t s tor y o u r s tu de n t s
i’o w e r i \ ) i i i t “ p r e s e n t a t i o n s
I n s tr u c t o r Resources R esources tor the instructor, i n s t r u c t o r ’s M a n u a l w i t h

C l) ROM a\ailaiile on ( d ) - K O M a n s w e r s t o t e xt q u e s t i o n s ,
CCour seMate a s s i g n m e n t s ,
a n d test b a n k a n d a n s w e r key
C o m p u t e r i z e d i ' es tb a nk in
l ' . x a n i \ ' i e w , w i t h m a n y (.|ues-
INSTRUCTOR
RESOURCES tioiis a n d s t \ i e s t o c h o o s e
t ro m to create custom ized
a s s e s s m e n ts tor y o u r s tu de nt s
P o w e rP o in t’ presentations
Web Tutor ' W'eb'i'l' i'Qii supplemental Automatic and immediate

c o u r s e w a r e is t h e b e s t w a y t o u s e feedback from quizzes a nd
t h e i n t e r n e t l o t i u ii e v e r y o n e in exams
V^ÛTO R \(HU- c l a s s i n t o a t ' r o n l - r o w s t u O n l i n e exercises that r e i n
d e n t . h c o m p l e m e n t s ( Cengage force w h a t s tu d e n t s h a v e
L e a r n i n g paralegal te x tb o o k s by le arned
proN’i d i n g i n t e r a c t i v e r e i n f o r c e
i-iashcards
m e n t that helps s tudents grasp
(ireater interaction a nd
c om plex concepts.
involvem ent th ro u g h online
W' e b ' I ' L ’ i ' Q R a ll o w s y o u to
di.scussion f o r u m s
k n o w quickly what concepts
yoLU' s t u d e n t s a r e o r a r e n ' t
grasping.
Please note that all I n t er net r esour ce s are o f a time-sensitive nat ure; URL addr esses ma y
often c h ange or be deleted.
m
I wish U) gratcluli}’ a c kn o wl ed ge a n d express niv deep appreciation to a n u m b e r ol iiulividuals

w h o took time a nd efVoi't to assist in the d e v e l o p m e n t o f this book. WithoLit their expertise,
suggestions, and SLipport, this text w o u ld n ot have been iemotel\- possible. I a m particularly
i nde bt ed to the toll owi ng i ndi \ iduals:
P a me la .A. l . a m b e r t , Ksquire, w h o r eviewed t h e text tor intellectual a n d legal c o n
tent and consistencN'. H e r legal expertise, anaU tical skills, a n d i n p u t were iin aluable. Pam' s
e n c o u r a g e m e n t a n d positi\ e a t t it u d e hel ped m e t h n u i g h the r ou gh spots.
Kale Arsenaul t, w h o re\ ie\ved the text tor general readability. Kate’s patient suppor t
a n d encoLu'agement hel ped e n s u r e that the text woLild be compl et ed.
Hon. l ohn I. Mitchel, w h o p r o \ ided inv aluable assistance on the appellate briel chapter.
Leigh A n n e C^havez, F.squire, for as sistance with se\’eral h ypo th et i c al s a n d ideas in
general.
Robert f. Reeback, lisquire, tor the ski resort hvpothetical.
Dai NgLiven, Ksquire, for h er e n c o u r a g e m e n t a n d assistance w ith In potheticals.
Katii}' (Campbell, paralegal, t’t>r h e r assistance with otlice me mos .
Sheila McCilothlin, a paralegal, lor her s uppor t in the overall d e v e l o p me n t ol the text.
Shelley lisposito, Melissa Ri\eglia, D i a n e (^hi yslei', a n d all the indiv iduals at Delmai'
(êngage Learning w h o helped with the dev e l opme nt o f the third edition. I heir en c our agement,
suggestions, patience, a n d suppt)rt were essential to its compl et ion.
I h o m s o n Reuters, I'or p er m i s s i on to publish all the cases in this text.
Linallv, I w o ul d like to t h a n k the reviev\ers who proviiled verv v akiable c o m m e n t s and
suggestions t'oi- the text:
M i r i a m Joan A l l e n Hart Reg i na D o w l i n g

Pak' mai' ( A)mmi.mitv CCollege I'niv ersilv ol I lartloi tl
San ,\hircos, ( 'A W est 1 lartloi'd, ( Cl
Ma n n a h Ha rnl i o r n ( i e o r g e W . Kent
Dayton Area ( ' a m p u s -- Na t i on al (.College Keiser L'niversity ecollege
Kettering, O H
xxi
W i l l i a m P u t m a n received his luris Doctcir degr e e troin t he L'nix ersity (it New Mexico SchodI
ot Law a n d has been a m e m b e r ot the Xew Me xi co Bar since 1975, For HI years he was an
i n s t ru c t o r in the Paralegal Studies P r o g r a m at (Central N e w Me xi co ( ^ o m n u m i t y (College
in Albu quer que , Ne w Mexico, a n d the Paralegal Studies P r o g r a m at Santa Fe Cômmunit)'
(College, in Santa F'e, Ne w Mexico.
1ie is the a u t h o r ot'the Pockct Chiiiic to l.cgcil W riting, the Ihickct G u i d e to Legal Rcsciuxh,
a n d the textbooks Legal Rescitreli, A iuilysis a n d W riting; I.egtil A n u l y i i i a n d W ritin g; and I.egal
Reicureh. 1le also aut hor e d the legal writing c o l u mn in Legal A i s i s t a n t L o d a y (lames Publishing
C'o.) lor two \ ears, a n d published several articles on legal a n a k s i s a n d wri ting in the maga/i ne.
lei ii ii fer A l b r i g h t was the Director ol the Paralegal Studies a n d ludicial Studies progi a m s at
Central New Mexico C'ommunit\- (College lor six \ears. She was a f ull-time i nst ruc t or in both
programs for nine \ ears. (Airrenth- she is an adjunct facult\- m e m b e r in I.egal Assistant Studies
at Pho eni x ('ollege. le nni t e r received he r luris D o c t o r d e g r e e f rom t he S o u t h e r n Illinois
l ' n i \ ersit\' School o f l.aw.
xxii
PART I
In tro d u ctio n
TO R e s e a r c h ,
A n a ly tic a l
■I ■>
PRiNCirLES, a n d
■i THE L e g a l P r o c e s s
OVERVIEW
Part I presents two introductory chapters designed to
provide a review of basic information fundamental to legal
research, analysis, and writing. Chapter 1 is an o ve rvie w of

Y the legal system and the legal process, including a summary
of basic legal principles and authorities involved in the
process. Chapter 2 introduces legal research, analysis,
and the research and analytical process.

Introduction to Legal Principles
and Authorities
Outline iU'iU' c worl<s in a c l e r i c a l p o s i t i o n at t i i e A d d i s o n l a w f i r m , i. ast fail s h e e n t e r e d t h e p a r a l e g a l
p r o g r a m o l i c r e d h y tlic l oc a l c o n i n u i n i t y c ol l e ge . R e n e e is a n e x c e l l e n t e m p l o y e e . Ti i e i i r ni , in
I. Introduction s u p p o r t ol h e r c o n t i i n i e d e d u c a t i o n , p a y s h e r t u i t i o n a n d a l l o w s h e r t o l e a v e w o r k e a r l y s o t h a t
II. Sources ot l.aw s h e c a n a t t e n d a l at e a f t e r n o o n class, i h e f i r m r e c e n t h ' r e a s s i g n e d l i e n e e t o w o r k in t h e p a r a l e g a l
III. Hierarchy of the l aw d i v i s i o n a n d d i r e c t e d t h a t s h e b e a s s i g n e d s o m e s u b s t a n t i v e l egal r e s e a r c h a n d a n a l y s i s t asks.

Two w e e k s a go, R e n e e s t a r t e d w o r k i n g o n a g e n d e r d i s c r i i i i i n a l i o n c a s e , hi thît c as e ,
IV. Authority
t h e c l i e n t , M a r y S t o n e , w o r k e d t o r a c o m p a n y f o r 11 y e a r s . S h e a l w a y s r e c e i v e d e x c e l l e n i j o b
V. Key Points Checklist: Legal
p e r l o r m a n c e e v a l u a t i o n s . H e r c o w o r k e r , Tom, a s k e d h e r o n s e v e r a l o c c a s i o n s t o g o o u t w i t h
Principles and Authorities
liini. M s . S t o n e a l w a y s r e f u s e d liis i n v i t a t i o n s . I h e last t i m e h e a s k e d h e r o u t w a s a b o u t a y e a r
VI. Application ago. A l t e r s h e r e t u s e d , h e t o l d h er , “ I’ll ge t e v e n w i t h \' ou." N i n e m o n t l i s ago, Toni w a s p r o m o t e d
t o t h e p o s i t i o n ol d e p a r t m e n t s u p e r v i s o r . A f t e r h i s p r o m o t i o n , h e d i d n o t a s k M s . S t o n e o u t
a g a i n . O n h e r e v a l u a t i o n t h r e e m o n t h s a go, h e r a t e d h e r j o b p e r f o r m a n c e a s “ p o o r ” a n d s t a t e d
Learning Objectives t h a t s h e w a s u n c o o p e r a t i v e a n d a b r a s i v e . H e r e c o n u i i e n d e d t h a t s h e b e d e m o t e d o r t i r ed.

Ms . S t o n e l eel s t h a t s h e h a s b e e n d i s c r i n i i n a t e i l a g a i n s t , a n d s h e w a n t s t h e " p o o r ” e v a l u a t i o n
After completing this chapter, you r e m o v e d I r o m h e r tile.
should understand: R e n e e ' s a s s i g n m e n t is t o l o c a t e t h e p e r t i n e n t s t a t e a n d f e d e r a l l a w g o v e r n i n g g e n d e r
• Ihe main sources and types of law’ d i s c r i m i n a t i o n a n d a n y o t h e r relevant i n f o r m a t i o n o n t h e s ubject a n d p r e p a r e a m e m o s u m -

m a r i / i n g h e r r e s e a r c h a n d h o w it a p p l i e s t o t h e c as e . R e n e e l o c a t e d a l e d e r a l a n d a s l a t e s t a t u t e
• Ihe basic structure of the state
p r o h i b i t i n g d i s c r i m i n a t i o n i n e m p l o y m e n t o n t h e b a s i s ol g e n d e r , a l e d e r a l a n d a s t a t e c o u r t
and federal court systems
c a s e w i t h l a c t s s i m i l a r t o t h o s e in .\ls. S t o n e s c a s e , a n d t w o l a w rev i e w a r t i c l e s d i s i . u s s i n g t h e
• Ihe hierarchy of the various t y p e ol g e n d e r d i s c r i m i n a t i o n e n c o u n t e r e d b v Ms . . Slone.
sources of law W' h i l e a n a l v / i n g t h e l a w a n d p r e p a r i n g h e r m e m o , R e n e e r e a l i z e s i h a t s h e m u s t d e t e r
• Ihe types of legal authority m i n e w h a t p a r t o f h e r r e s e a r c h a p p l i e s a n d how. S h e a s k s h e r s e l f , " I n w h i c h c o u r t s h o u l i l t h e

c l a i m b e filed, l e d e r a l o r s t a l e ? If a c o m p l a i n i is lileil in s l a t e c o u r t , w h i c h s t a t u t e s a n d c o u r t
• Wh e n and how legal authority
o p i n i o n s m u s t t h e s t a t e c o u r t l o l l o w? W h y ? ” Iliis c h a p t e r p r e s e n t s g e n e r a l g u i d e h n e s t h a t assist
applies
in d e t e r m i n i n g w h e n a n d h o w legal a u t h o r i t i e s a ppl y. I h e . ' Xppl i cat i on s e c t i o n at t h e e m l ol t hi s
c h a p t e r p r e s e n t s g u i d e h n e s t o a n s w e r Re n e e ' s q u e s t i o n s .
C H A P T E R 1 I N T R O D U C T I O N TO L E G A L P R I N C I P L E S A N D A U T H O R I T I E S
I. I N T R O D U C T I O N
As t h e y beconic m o r e aware ot' the capabilities ot’ paralegals and legal researchers, attorne\' s
i ncreasi ngl )- assign t h e m su b st an t i v e legal research, a n a b ’sis, a nd w r i t i n g tasks. Le g a l
re sea rch is the process o f finding the law that applies to a client’s problem. Lega l a n a lysis
is t h e process o f d e t e r m i n i n g how the law applies to the pr oblem. Ihe goal o f this text is to
proN’ide c ompr e he n s i ve coverage ot the legal research, analysis, a nd writing process. Hmphasis
is o n i n - d e p t h coverage of m a n y difhcult areas o f legal research, analysis, a n d writing, such as:
Issue a nd key fact identification

Issue st a t e ment ( ho w to write the issue)
Location o f statutor\' a nd case law
Location o f secondar\- aut hori ty
Statutory a n d case law analysis
Count er anal ysi s
Ho w to ertectively c o n du c t legal research a n d analysis
Before c o n s i d e r i n g these areas in subsec]uent ch a pt e r s o f the text, it is nec es sar y to

h a v e a general u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the law a n d the legal system a nd s o m e o f the basic do ct ri nes
a n d princi ples that a p p k to legal analysis. 'Ihis is essential because legal a n a h ’sis involves a
d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f h o w the law applies to a cl ient’s facts, which in tu r n requires a k nowl ed ge
ol w hat the law is, h o w to find it, a nd the general principles that gover n its application, 'ihis
c h a p t e r pr esents an overview o f t he legal system a nd f un d a me n t a l principles that g ui d e its
o p e r a t i o n . 'Ihe definitions, concept s, doct ri nes, a n d principles add r e ssed are referred to and
a p p l i e d in the s u b s e q u e n t c h a p t e rs o f the text. .A familiarity with t h e m is essential w h e n
stuciying those chapters.
I he te rm ¡¡iw has v'arious definitions, d e p e n d i n g on the phi l os ophy a nd po i n t o f view of
the indix idual def i ni ng it. Law can be defined f rom a political, moral, or ethical perspective.
For t h e p u r p o s e s o f this text, law is the bod\- o f enforceable rules that gover n indi\'idual and
grc' up C(Mnluct in a societ\' the law establishes s ta nda r ds of cc ' nd uc t . the p r o c e du r es u,o\ ern
iiig t h e con du c t , a n d the r eme d i es available when the rules o f c o n d uc t are not obeyed, 'fhe
purpiose o f the law is to establish s t a nd a r d s that allow indivitluals to interact with the greatest
efficiency a nd the least a m o u n t of conflict. W'hen conflicts or disput es occur, law pr ovi des a
m e c h a n i s m for a resolut ion that is pr edictable a n d peaceful,
Ihe following sections focus on the various sources of law a n d the principles a nd c o n
c e pt s that affect the analysis o f these sources.
II. S O U R C E S O F L A W
'Ihe legal s\ stem o f the United States, like the legal systems of most count ri es, is based u p o n
hi st o r y a n d has evolved over time. W h e n .America was settled, English law g ove r ne d mo st of
the colonies. As a result, the f oun dat i on of the Ame r i c an legal system is the English model,
with influences f r o m ot he r l-Airopean countries.
In England, after the N o r m a n c; onquest u n d e r Wi lliam the C' onquer or in 1066, a b o d y
of law called the c o m m o n la w de\-eloped. I he c o m m o n law consisted o f the law created by the
c o u r t s established by the king. W'hen col onization o f Amer i c a t oo k place, the law o f En gl a n d
c o ns is t e d p r i mari l y o f the c o m m o n law a nd the laws enact ed b\- I’arli ament. At the t i m e of
the Revoluti on, the English model was a d op t e d a n d f i r m k established in the colonies.
P A R T I I N T R O D U C T I O N TO R E S E A R C H , A N A L Y T I C A L P R I N C I P L E S , A N D T H E L E G A L P R O C E S S
After the Revolution, the legal s\'steiii o f t h e colonies r emained largeK' intact and r emains
so to t he pr ese nt time. It consists o f two ma i n categoi'ies of law:
1. Hnacted law
2. C o m m o n law/case law
A. Enacted Law
As used in this text, t he t e r m enacted law m e a n s t he bod\' ot law a d o p t e d b\' t h e people or
legislative bodies. It includes:
C o n s t i t u t i o n s — ad o pt e d b\’ the people
Statutes, o r d i n a n c e s — laws passed b\- legislati\ e bodies
Regu l a t i o ns— actions o f administ rati\' e bodi es that ha\ e the force o f law
Laws established b\' two g o\ ’e r n i n g aut hori ties go\' ern society in t he L'nited States: the
federal g o v e r n m e n t a n d the state g o\ ' er nme n t s. I.ocal go\ e r n m e n t s are a compi i i i ent o f slate
g o v e r n m e n t s a nd ha\'e the a ut h o r i ty to go\ ern local affairs. Lach g c n e r n i n g authorit\- has the
po w e r to ena ct legislation affecting the rights a n d duties ot m e m b e r s ot societ}’. It is necessar\-
to keep this in m i n d w he n a n a h / i n g a p r obl e m, because the p r o b l em ma\' be g o \ e r n e d by
m o r e t ha n o n e law. The categories o f ena ct ed law are a dd r essed in the following subsections.
1. C onstitutions
co n stitution is a g over ni ng d o c u m e n t ad o p t e d b\' the people. It establishes the Irame-
w or k for the o per at i o n o f g o v e r n me nt , defines the power s of g i n e r n m e n t , a nd g u ar ant ee s the
f u n d a me n t a l rights o f t h e people. Both the federal a n d state g o s e r n m e n t s have constitutions.
U u i t e d S t a t e s C o n s t i t u t i o n . Ihe L'nited States (Constitution:
Establishes an d defines the power s ot the three br anc hes ol federal g o \ e r n m e n t :
executive (president), legislati\'c (C'ongress), a n d iudicial (courts)
Kstablishes the b r oa d power s ol the federal and state g o \ e r n m e n t s an d defines the
relation be t we en the tederal an d state g o \ e r n m e n t s
Defines in br oad te rms the rights lif the m e m b e r s of’societx'
S t a t e C o n s t i t u t i o n s . liach state has a d op t e d a c on s t i t ut ion that establishes t he str uct ure
o f t h e state g ov e r n me n t . In addi t i on, each state c o ns t i t ut io n defines the p owe r s a n d limits of
the a u t h o r i t ) ’ o f t h e state g o v e r n m e n t a n d the f u n d a m e n t a l rights of t he citizens of the state.
2. Statutes
Laws passed by legislative bodi es are called statutes. Statutes declare rights a nd duties, or
c o m m a n d or pr ohibit certain con duc t . As used here, s t a tu t e includes any law passed b\' an\-
legislative bod\': federal, state, or local. Such laws are referred to b\' var ious terms, such as
acts, codes, sta tutes, or ordinances. The t e r m o rd in a n c e usually refers to a law passed b\- a local
go v e r nme nt . Statutory law has a s s u me d an increasing role in the United States, as m a n y m a t
ters o nc e g over ne d b}' the c o m m o n law are n ow g over ne d by statutory law.
For Example Criminal law was once governed almost exclusively by the common law.
Now statutory law governs a large part of the criminal law, such as the
definition of crimes.
Ik'Ciiuse s ta t ut e s ar e iisualK' d e s ign e d to cox'er a b r o a d r an ge o f pr ese nt a n d f uture

sit uati ons, tiie\' ar e wri t t en in general terms.
For Example Section 335-1-4 of a state's Uniform Owner Resident Relations Act
provides, "If a court, as a matter of law, finds that any provision of a rental
agreement was inequitable when made, the court may limit the application of such in
equitable provision to avoid an inequitable result." The statute is written in general terms
SO that it covers a broad range of landlord-tenant rental situations and provisions. It is
designed to coverall provisions of all rental agreements that may proveto be inequitable.
The genera I terms of the statute allow a court a great deal of flexibility when addressing
an issue involving an alleged inequitable lease provision. The court "may limit the
application .. .to avoid an equitable result." How and to what degree the court limits the
application of the lease provision is leftto the courtto decide.
Administrative Law
•\ third t \ p e o f enact ed law is adm inistrative law. l.egislative bodies are invoh'ed in d e t e r m in
ing wliat the law sh ou l d be and ena ct ing the appr opr iat e legislation. I h e y do not ha\ o the time
a n d are not e qu i p p e d to oversee the da)'-to-day r u n ni ng of the go ve r nme nt and impl ementation
( l i t h e laws, l.egislatures delegate the task o f a dmi n i s t er ing the laws to administratis' e agencies.
Ihe agencies are usualh' L in d e r the super\' ision ot the executi\'e b r an c h ot the g over nme nt .
W h e n a law is passed, t he legislature includes e na bl i ng legislation that establishes and
aut hori zes admi ni st rat i \ ' e agencies to carr\’ out the intent o f the legislature. Ihis enabling legis-
Lition us u a lh includes a gr ant o f authorit\- allowing the agency to create rules a nd reguhitions
necessar\ to c a r r \ ’ o u t the law. Ihese rules anti regulations have the authorit)' ot law. The bod\'
o f law that lesults is called ii d m i ii is tn it iv c liiw. It is c o m p o s e d o f the rules, regulations, orders,
a n d (.iecisions p r o m u l g a t e d by the admini,strati\ e agencies when c a r ryi ng out their duties.
. \ dni i ni s t ra t i \ 'e law is usualh' m o r e specific t han statutor\- law because it deals with the
details ot i m p l e m e n t i n g the law.
For Example The Environmental Protection Agency, in order to implement the Clean
Air Act, adopted various regulations setting air quality standards. Many
of these regulations establish specific numerical standards for the amount of pollutants
that may be emitted by manufacturing plants. The Clean Air Act is written in broad terms,
but the regulations enforcing it are specific. For example, the regulations define the exact
amount of pollutants a new automobile may emit.
i'.nacted law covers a b r oa d s p e c t r u m o f the law. t he process o f analyzing en a ct ed law

is covered in detail in (Chapter 3.
B. C o m in o n Law or Case Law

I n a n ar r o w sense, co m m o n law is law created by c our ts in t h e abs enc e of ena ct ed law.
recbnicalK', t h e t e r m includes only the bod)' o f law' created by c ou r t s w h e n the legislative
authorits' lias not acted.
For Example The courts have created most of the law of torts. Tort law allows a victim
to obtain compensation from the perpetrator for harm suffered as a result
of the perpetrator's wrongful conduct. From the days of early England to the present,
legislative bodies have not passed legislation establishing or defining most torts. In the
absence of legislation, the courts have created and defined mosttorts and the rules and
principles governing tort law.
P A RT I I N T R O D U C T I O N TO R E S E A R C H , A N A L Y T I C A L P R I N C I P L E S , A N D T H E L E G A L P R O C E S S
C a se law cncnmpas.scs a b r o a d e r range ol’ law t h a n c o m m o n law, ( ' as e law incUides

not onl\- the law created b\- cour t s in t he abs ence o i e n a c t e d law, but also the law cr eated when
cour t s in te rp re t tir a p p ly ena ct ed law.
Oft en the t e r m l o iiid io ii Iciw is used in a b r o a d sense to e n c o m p a s s all law o t he r than
enact ed law (i,e., law ena ct ed by legislattires or a d o p t e d by the people), Ihis text uses the term
c o n u n o u h u r in the broadest sense to include case law (often called j ud ge - m a d e law). Ihrough-
out the r e m a i n d e r of this text, the term ciiic h n v is used p r i m a r i k instead ot the t e rm s c o n in io n
h iw or itid iic-n iaü c la w a n d sho ul d be i nt e r pr e t ed to i nc l ud e all law o t h e r t h a n e na ct e d law.
As m e n t io n e d , the case law system in the Un i t e d States is based on t he Hnglish c o m
m o n law, a n d m u c h o f the Hnglish c o m m o n law has been a d o p t e d b\- t he states. W'illiam the
C o n q u e r o r establ ished a king's coui t (Ckn'ia Regia) to unify t he countr\- t h r o u g h t he e s t a b
lishment o f a Linitbrm set o f rules a n d pr inciples to g o \ ’e r n social c o n d u c t t h r o u g h o u t the
count ry, Ihe courts, in dealing witii specitk' disputes, d e \ ’el oped legal pr inci ples that coul d
appl\' to all similar disputes.
Wi t h the passage o f time, these legal princi ples c a m e to e mbod\ - t he case law. ’t he case
law process c o n t i n u e s to the pr ese nt da\- in bo th E n g l a nd a n d the U ni t e d States, with new
rules, doct ri nes, a n d princi ples co nt in ua l K’ bei ng de\ 'e l oped b\- the courts.
For Example One hundred and fifty years ago, there was no remedy in tort law for strict
products liability (liability of manufacturers and sellers for harmful or dan
gerous defective products). The tort was developed by the courts in the 20th century to
address the needs of a modern industrial society.
Ihe abilits' to research a n d analyze case law is an essential skill tor a legal r esearcher.
I he l esearcher Lisually needs cour t o p i n i on s to d e t e r m i n e h o w a law has been i n t e rp r e te d a n d
how it might a pp h ' to specilic fact sit uati ons a nd p r o b l em s such as tliose o f the c l i e n t’s case,
1. Role ol the Courts

Uisputes in o u r societv arise t r om specilic lact sitUiitions. Ihe cotu'ts are d es i g n e d to r esoKe
these tlis|Hiles, W h e n a ilispute is before a court, it is called a ease. Ihe role of t he c our t is to
lesoKe the di sput e in a peaceful m a n n e r t h r o u g h the appl ication of the law to the facts ol the
case, fo accomplish this resolution, the coiu't must i dentih' the law that cont rol s the resolution
of the di sput e a n d apply that law to the facts of the case.
W h e n t he re is no en a ct ed or case law g o \ ’e r n i n g a disput e, the c ou r t m a y be calleil u p o n
to create new law. If the m e a n i n g or appl ication o f an exi sting law is uncl ea r or a m b i g u o u s ,
it mav be necessary for the c ou r t to inter pret the law. In i n t e r pr e t i ng a n d ap p l y i ng existing
law, cour ts often a n n o u n c e ne w legal rules a n d principles, i he cr eat i o n of new law a n d the
inte r pr e t at ion a n d appl i cat i on o f existing law b e c o m e law itself
'1he result reached hy a court is usually called a iiccision. '1he c ou r t ’s written decision, which
includes h ow it ruled in a case a nd the reasons for the decision, is called an opinion, 'llie case
law is c o m p o s e d of the general legal rules, doctrines, an d principles cont ai n e d in court opinions,
2. Court SysttMiis
basic u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f cour t systems is necessary for an\ 'o ne analyzing a legal pr o b l em . Ihe
approach to a problem and the direction of research may d e p e n d up on w he t he r relief is available
in lederal or state cour t or both, Ihis section presents a b r i ef over view o f t he c ou r t systems,
lliere are two parallel c(unl systems, the federal c o ur t s)’stem a n d the state c o u r t system.
A factor c o m m o n to bot h s\' stems is the co nc ept o f jur isdiction. An u n d e r s t a n d i n g of this
concept is essential to u n d e r s t a n d i n g the o p e r a t i o n o f b o t h s\’stems.
a. jurisdiction
Ihe tN'piesot'cases that can conic bcloic a court in either s\'steiii are det er mined b\' the jurisdiction
ot the court. Ju risdictio n is thee.xtent ol’a court's authorit\- to hear and resoK e specific disputes.
A c o u r t ’s jLirisdiction is usualK' limited to two main areas:
1. 0\ - er pe r son s b\- geogr aphic area - per sonal jurisdiction
2. C)\'er subject matter b\' t\ pes ot cases— subject ma t t e r jurisdiction
(1) P erso n a l J u risd ictio n Personal jurisdiction is the aut hori tv o f t h e cour t over the
parties to resolve a legal dispute i i n o K i n g the parties. Ihe jurisdiction of state cour t s is limited
to the geographic b oundar i e s o f t h e state or to matters that h a \ e some c onne ct ion with the state.
For Example New Yorl< state courts do not have authority to decide matters that take
place in the state of Ohio. Their authority is limited to the geographic bound
aries of the state of New York. State courts in New York have jurisdiction over an Ohio
resident if the resident is involved in an automobile accident in New York State.
In aildition, personal jurisdiction requires that bo t h the plaintitl a n d tlie d e f e n d a n t be

pi iperly before the court. A s su m i n g t he correct cour t is chosen, a plaintitf pr oper l\' c o m e s
b t t o r e the cour t by filing t he pleading that starts the lawsuit (the c om pl a i n t in a civil case or
ar i ndi c t me n t , i nf or mat i on , or c o m p l a i n t ill a ci iminal case). .A d e f en da n t is propei' h' before
th:' c o u r t when the defeiulant is notified ot the lawsLiit, that is, correctl\' s c r \ e d with a copy
ol the co m p la i n t (service o f process).
( 2 ) S ii h jc c t M a t t e r liir is i ii c ti o ii S u b je ct m atter jurisdiction is tlie c o u r t ’s au t hori tv

o\.'r the tvpes a nd kinds of cases it ma\- hear aiul decitle. In regard to subịect ma t t e r ịurisdic
tiiii, t here are basicalK’ two t\ pes ot c o u r t s in both the tederal a nd state c o ur t sNstenis:
1. (Courts o f general iurisdictioii
2. c. ourts ot limiteii iLinsdiction

(Courts ol general juristliction have the aut hori t\' to hea r and decide a n \ m a t te r br ouglit
bitore t hem, with s o me limitations. Ihe l ' n i t e d States Disti’ict (Courts are the cour ts ot general
ju isdiction in the federal svstem. 'Ihe\' have the authorit\- to hear and decide all ma t t e rs posing
feJeral q ues t i on s (invoh' i ng the Uniteti States (Constitution or federal law) o r cases in which
tbi parti es are citizens o f different states a n d the a m o u n t in c o n t r o w r s v exceeds S73,()()().
Al states have state co ur ts o f g e n e ra l jurisdiction that h a \ e authoritv o \ e r state matters. Ihe
Cdirts o f general jurisdiction are the m a i n trial c ou r ts in bot h sN stems.
(.'ouris ot l imited jurisdiction are limited in the t\ pes ot cases thc\- caii hea r a n d decide.
' He r e are cour ts of limited jurisdiction in both the federal a nd state court s\ stems.
for Exạmpl« 1. The authority of the United States Tax Court is limited to matters
involving federal tax law.
2. Most state court systems have courts whose authority is limited by dollar amount.
Such courts are limited to hearing and deciding matters where the amount in con
troversy does not exceed a certain amount, such as SlO,000. These courts are called
by various names: small claims, magistrate, and so on. Some state courts are lim
ited to hearing specific types of cases, such as matters involving domestic relations
or probate.
PART I I N T R O D U C T I O N TO R E S E A R C H , A N A L Y T I C A L P R I N C I P L E S , A N D T HE L E G A L P R O C E S S
f 3j C o n c u r r e n t J i i r i s ii ic t io n C on cu rrent jurisd ictio n exists wh e n m o r e t h an ('iic

cour t has the aut ho r i ty to deal witli the s a me subject matter, hi sucli cases, the phiiiititi nia\
clioose tlie c our t in wiiicli to tile t he case.
For Example 1, In diversity of citizenship cases (disputes between citizens of differ

ent states) in which the amount in controversy exceeds 575,000, the mat
ter may be tried in eitherfederal court orthe state court of general jurisdiction. Both
the federal and state courts have authority to try the case; they have concurrent
jurisdiction,
2. A state court of limited jurisdiction, such as a county court, may have authority to
try cases where the amount in controversy does not exceed $10,000. Such cases
may also be tried in the state's court of general jurisdiction, such as a district court,
which has authority to try a claim of any dollar amount. These courts have concur
rent jurisdiction over claims that do not exceed 510,000; that is, the matters may be
tried in either court.
jur isdiction is a c o m p l e x subiect. An e x h a u s t i \ e a n d detailed t r ea t me nt ot' j u r isdi c t i o n

is the subiect ot m a i i \ ’ texts a n d is p r o p e r l \ ’ a dd r es s ed in a separate coLirse ot stuck', Ihe briel
discussion here is d es igned to acc]uaint the s tu de n t with the f undame n t al s,
b. Federal Court System

Ihe federal cour t system is c o m p o s e d ot three basic le\’els ot courts,
( 1) Ir ia l C o u r ts Ihe trial court is the court w her e the ma t t e r is bear d a n d decided.

Ihe testinion)' is taken, o the r ev idence is presented, a nd the decision is reached, Ihe role oi the
trial cour t is to d e t e r m i n e what the tacts are a n d h ow the law applies to t hose tacts. A trial is
presided over b\- a iLidge a nd niav' include a jury. It the trial is condi ict ed bet'ore a j u dg e a n d a
jury, the judge decides q u e stio n s of law such as what the law is oi' ho w it applies, Ihe iurv
dci-ides q u estio n s of fact su^h as whethei a p e r so n peiioi nied a certain atl. It the I nal is
c o nd u c t e d without a iui v, the iudge decides bot h ques t i ons ot law a nd tact,
Ihe United States D istrict Court is the main trial court in the lederal system, Ihis court
has jur isdiction over cases involving tederal questions, Ihis includes ma t t e r s involvi ng the
Uni t e d States (Constitution, fecleral laws, treaties o f the U ni t e d States, a n d so on, Ihe Un i t e d
States Pistr ict CCourt also has the authoritv' to try diversitv’ cases, Ihese are cases involv ing
disput es bet ween citizens ot'ditferent states wher e the a m o u n t in controv ersy exceeds $75,()()0,
I'CacIi slate has at least o n e U ni t e d States District (Court (see F.xhibit 1- 1).
In ad di ti on to the U ni t e d States District (Court are o t he r tederal c our ts w h o s e au t h o ri t y
is limited to specific matters, such as the Uni t e d Stales l ax (Ct)url, the Un i t e d States (CoiuM
ol I nt er na t i on a l Trade, the U n i t e d Stales (Court ot Tederal CClainis, a n d the U n i t e d Stales
I kuikrupl cy Cour t,
( 2 ) C o u r t o f A p p e a l s A partv’ aggr ieved by t he decisi on ot a trial c o u r t h as a right

to appeal the dec i si on to a cou rt of ap p e a ls (also referred to as an a p p c ila tc c o u r t ) . Ihe
primarv' f u n c t i o n o f a c o u r l o f appeal s is to review t he dec i si on of a trial c our l lo d e t e r m i n e
and cor r ect any e r r o r that ma y have b ee n ma de. A c o u r l o f appe al s oiilv- reviews w hat t ook
place in the trial cour t, ll d o e s not hea r n e w testimony, relrv’ t he case, or r e c o n s i d e r the
evidence, A c ou r l o f appe al s reviews the record o f the lower c ou r t a n d takes a p p r o p r i a t e
action to correct anv' er ror s ma de , such as o r d e r i n g a ne w trial o r reversi ng a dec i s i on of
the trial cour l, Ihe c o u r l of appe al s in the tederal svsteni is called the Uni t e d Stales (Courl
o f Appeals, ' Ihese c o u r t s are also called circuit cou rts. I her e are 1,3 tederal c o u r t s ot appe al s
(see TCxhibil 1-1).
E x h ib it 1-1 United States Circuit Courts o f Appeals and United States District
C ourts. Source /nrp/Anwv,i/scour's gov/counjocator ¿isp\
M T
N D ■
;
{
^ ^ M N .
-
__ 1 Wesietn ;■ ^
W Y
\
wi; \
•fdSterry
^ Northern [
NE
UT
jn
CO
Tceotral
IL -
0 I Western
I
•<5
----- r - .-J
Northefn L
.---I
M O ;
I Western '*
i,
i
¿J
^ r
.
V - J Wesietn
J i
1
O K , ! XN
N M
.- .Easiern j ' *^R / |
’ .i /Nonhe<n •'Northern
- '■ — 4 .W
■■ s LA Southern i ^ ^
jSoulhcr«
,^-Eastern^
HI
M R GU
( 3 j U iiiti’ii S t a t e s S u p r e m e ('.o u rt Ih c L 'n ited States S u p r e m e (Court is tlie final c o u r t

ol a p p e a l s in th e l e d e r a l s \ s t e m . It is tlie liig h e s t c o u r t m t h e la n u . W i t h few e x c e p t i o n s ,
a n i n d i \ i d u a l d o e s n o t h a \ ’e a n a b s o l u t e rig h t to h a v e a m a t t e r r e v i e w e d b\' t h e S u p r e m e
C o u r t . A p a r t y w h o d is a g r e e s w ith th e d e c is io n of a c o u r t o f 'a p p e a l s m u s t r e q u e s t ( p e t i t i o n )
th e S u p r e m e C o u r t to rev iew it. I h e r e q u e s t is ca lle d a petition for w rit of certiorari. 'Ih e
S u p r e m e (Court h a s d i s c r e t i o n to re \'ie w o r n o t re\ iew a d e c is io n ol a c o u r t of a p p e a l s . If th e
(Court d e n i e s th e p e ti ti o n , th e d e c is io n of t h e c o u r t of a p p e a l s sta n d s. If'the C o u r t b e lie v e s th a t
th e m a t t e r i n \ o l \ e s i m p o r t a n t c o n s t i t u t i o n a l issues, if 'th e c h a ll e n g e d d e c is io n c o n f l ic t s w ith
fed eral c o u r t d e c is io n s , o r if t h e r e is a co n flic t b e t w e e n th e o p i n i o n s o f t h e c o u r t s o f a p p e a ls ,
th e n th e S u p r e m e (CCourl m a y g r a n t th e p e t i t i o n a n d re v ie w th e d e c is io n o f t h e l o w e r c o u r t .
Ih e o r g a n i z a t i o n o f tiie fe d e ra l c o u r t s y s te m a n d th e v a r i o u s fed eral c o u r t s is p r e s e n t e d
in E x h ib i t 1-2.
c. State Court System

E very s ta le h a s its o w n state c o u r t s\'ste m , a n d e a c h h a s u n i q u e f e a tu re s a n d v a r i a ti o n s . 'Ih e
n a m e s o f t h e c o u r t s v a r y f r o m state to state.
For Example The highest court in many states is called the supreme court. In New York,
however, the highest court is called the court of appeals.
B e c a u s e o f t h e u n i q u e f e a t u r e s o f e a c h s t a te s y s t e m , it is e s s e n tia l t h a t \ ’o u b e c o m e
f a m il ia r w i t h th e c o u r t s \ 's te m in \ o u r state. Like t h e fed eral c o u r t sy s te m , m o s t s ta te c o u r t
s \ s t e m s a r e c o m p o s e d o f t h r e e b a sic le\ els o t c o u r t s .
P A R T I I N T R O D U C T I O N TO R E S E A R C H , A N A L Y T I C A L P R I N C I P L E S , A N D T HE L E G A L P R O C E S S
E x h ib it 1-2 Organization o f the Federal Court System .
H IG H ES T C O U R l
SLi | i i vnH' ( !()urt o l t h e

Unitc'c.! , S i a t e s
APPEALS CO URL
C.'ourl ot' A p p c;ils o f th e

( o i n t ol A j i p e a l s
U n i t e d S t a t e s a n d tiie
l o r t h e L'edeial C i r c u i t
D is t r ic t o f C o l u m b i a
LRIAL C O U R T S
U n ite d S tates Uniteti States United States

Unitetl States United States
D ep artm en ts, U n i t e d St a t e s C'ouit C ' o u r t s ol
BankrnptcN' I)istiict
A g e n c ie s, a n d la,\ ( ' o u r t ol Leileial Intel n a ti o n a l
C^)urts (\uirts
O ffic e rs ( daims Liade
( 1) T ria l C .o u rts All states ha\'e trial c o u r t s w h e r e th e ev id e n c e is pre seiiteil, te s ti m o n \ -

ta k e n , a n d a d e c is io n re a c h e d , L'sualK' t h e r e a re trial c o u r t s ol g e n e r a l jin is d ic l io n a n d ti ial
c o u r t s ol li m i t e d j u r i s d i c ti o n , Ih e c o u r t o f g e n e r a l j u r i s d i c t i o n is o fte n ca lle d a itiilric! coiirl.
' t h e r e a re v a r i o u s c o u r t s o f li m i te d j u r i s d i c t i o n , s u c h as p r o b a t e c o u r t s , sm all c la i m s c o u r t s ,
d o m e s t i c r e l a ti o n s c o u r t s , m a g i s t r a t e c o u r t s , a m i c o u n t} ' c o in ts,
( 2 ) C o m Is o f A p p e a l s M a n y state s h a v e i n t e r m e d i a t e c o u r t s o f a p p e a l s th a t f u n c t i o n
in th e s a m e m a n n e r a n d play th e s a m e role in th e state c o u r t s v s te m as th e fed eral c o u r t ol
a p p e a l s dt>es in th e fed eral sv stem ,
( 3 ) S t a t e S t i p r e i ii e C o u r t E v ery state h as a h ig h e s t a p p e ll a te c o u r t , u s u a l ly calle d th e

s u p r e m e c o u r t , t h i s c o u r t is th e h ig h e s t c o u r t in th e state, a n d its d e c i s i o n s a r e final o n all
cju estio n s in v o l v in g state law. In sta te s th at h a v e i n t e r m e d i a t e c o ti r t s o f a p p e a ls , th e state su
p r e m e c o u r t o ft e n o p e r a t e s like th e L 'n ited S ta tes S u p r e m e ( ^ ) u r t in th a t t h e r e is n o a u t o m a t i c
rig h t o f a p p e a l . Like th e fe d e ra l S u p r e m e (^ o u r t, th e state s u p r e m e c o u r t g r a n t s leave to a p p e a l
o n ly in c a s e s p r e s e n t i n g i m p o r t a n t q u e s t i o n s o f s ta te law. In t h o s e sta tes w h e r e t h e r e is n o
i n t e r m e d i a t e c o u r t o f a p p e a ls , a p a r t y w h o d is a g r e e s w ith a trial c o u rt's d e c is io n h a s a rig h t to
a p p e a l to t h e h ig h e s t c o u r t . In e i t h e r sy s te m , sta te o r le d e r a l, all i n d i \ id u a ls h a v e at least o n e
o p p o r t u n i t y to a p p e a l th e d e c is io n o f a trial ccnirt to a h i g h e r c o u r t .
3. Precedent and Stare Decisis

It is a p p a r e n t , w h e n y o u c o n s i d e r th e n u m b e r o f c o u r t s in th e state a n d fed eral c o u r t sy s te m s ,
th a t th e c o u r t s a d d r e s s a n i m m e n s e n u m b e r o f legal q u e s t i o n s a n d p r o b l e m s . O f t e n , s i m i l a r
legal q u e s t i o n s a n d fact s i t u a t i o n s a rise in t h e s a m e co in 1 s y s te m o r in d il i e r e n t c o u r t s\’s te m s .
If a c o u r t in a n e a rlie r case h as d e \'e l o p e d a legal d o c t r i n e , p ri n c ip l e , o r ru le th a t h e lp s reso lv e a
legal q u e s t i o n , t h e n la te r c o u r t s a d d r e s s i n g th e s a m e o r a s u b s t a n t i a i k s i m i l a r q u e s t i o n s h o u l d
b e ab le to lo o k to th e e a rlie r d e c is io n for g u i d a n c e . W 'hy s h o u l d a c o u r t go t h r o u g h th e p r o c e s s
o f d e t e r m i n i n g h o w a m a t t e r s h o u l d b e d e c i d e d if a n e a r l ie r c o u r t h a s a lr e a d y g o n e t h r o u g h
10
the process a nd d e \ ’el oped a principle or rule that applies? Ihe efficiency of’the court s\ stem
is I.tirealh' e n h a n c e d because cour t s do not h a \ e to “r ei i ne n t the wheel” in e\-er\' case— t h e \' ’
i n a \ ’ rel\' on legal doct ri nes, principles, or rules dev e l op e d over time in prev ious cases.
Reliance on doct ri nes, principles, or rules to guide the resolut ion o f similar di sput es
in t h e future also ma kes the legal sv’stem m o r e stable, predictable, a n d consistent. If the law-
g o ve r n i n g a specific subject or legal q ues ti o n is established in an earlier case, then i nd iv i du'
als can relv on a cour t a dd r essi ng the s a me or a similar q ues ti o n to base its decision o n the
pr i nci pl es established in the earlier case. O u t c o m e s can be pr ed i c t ed to so me extent, a n d
stabilitv a n d consistencv can b e c o m e part ol the c ou r t system.
I'wo compl ement a r v ' doct ri nes have deve l ope d tii p r ovi de stabilitv, predictability, and
Lonsistencv to the case law. Ihese d oct ri nes are p r ec ed en t a nd stare decisis.
a. Precedent
Precedent is an earlier court decision on an issue that applies to govern or guide a subsequent
i.oin1 in its d et e r m i n a t io n of an identical or similar issue based u p o n identical or similar facts.
For Example The state's highest court, in the case of State i/. Ahrens, held that bail
must be set in all criminal cases except when a court determines that
the defendant poses a clear and present threat to the public at large or to an individual
member or members of the public. If a case before a subsequent court involves a situa
tion in which the defendant has made threats against the life of a witness, /4/7rei7S applies
as precedent and can serve as a guide for the court's determination of the question of
whether bail must be set.
A case that is p r ec ed en t is often called “on point. " Cdiapter 12 discusses fhe process and
steps to follow w h e n d e t e r m i n i n g if a cour t o p i n i o n ma y a p p k o r be relied on as pr ecedent .
b. Stare Deci.sis
\ h c doi^lrine ol Stare dec'isis i s a hasii. piinciplc ol llic ».ase lavs syslcni iVial lOqunes a ^;ouit
to follow a pr evious decision of that cour t or a higher court wh en the cui'rent decision involves
issues a nd facts similar to t hose involved in the pr evious decision. In othei' words, similar
cases will be dec i de d in similar wav s. U n d e r the d oct ri ne, w h e n the cour t has established a
princi ple that governs a par t i cul a r set ot tacts or a specific legal question, the cour t will lollow
that principle a nd appiv it in all future cases with similar lacts and legal questions. In essence,
stare decisis is the d o c t r i n e proviiiing that pr ec edent shoul d be followed.
For Example A statute of state X prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of gender.
In the case of Ellen 1/, Employer, Inc., an employee was fired because the
employee was homosexual. The supreme court of state X interpreted "discrimination on
the basis of gender" as used in the statute to include discrimination based on an indi
vidual's sexual preference. The doctrine of stare decisis requires that in subsequent cases,
the supreme court of state X and all the lower courts of state X follow the interpretation
of the statute given in Ellen 1/. Employer, Inc. In other words, the lower courts must follow
the precedent set in Ellen y. Employer, Inc.
Ihe d oc t ri ne ol stare decisis, however, does iK)t r equi r e rigid a d h e r e n c e fo fhe rules or
p r inci ples established in pr ior decisions. Ihe d o c t ri n e does not a p p k if the re is a g ood reason
n o t to follow if. S o me of these r ea sons include:
1. Ihe earlier decision has b e c o m e o ut d a t ed because of c h a n ged cond i ti ons or
policies.
11
P A R T I I N T R O D U C T I O N TO R E S E A R C H , A N A L Y T I C A L P R I N C I P L E S , A N D THE L E G A L P R O C E S S
For Example In Plessy u. Ferguson, 163 U,S, 537, 16 S, Ct, 1138, 41 L, Ed, 256
(1896), the court adopted the "separate but equal doctrine"
that allowed segregation on the basis of race. In Brown v. Board of Education
of Topeka, 347 U,S, 483, 74 S, Ct, 686, 98 L, Ed, 873 (1954), the Supreme Court
refused to follow P/ess/and overruled it, holding that separate educational
facilities were inherently unequal and denied equal protection of the law,
2, Ihe lcs’i,slature has cna ct ed legislation that has, in effect, o \ e r r u l e d t he decisi on t'l
an eai lier court.
For Example The state supreme court, in Stevens v. Soro, Inc., ruled thatthe
phrase "on the job" in the Workers' Compensation Act means
that an employee is "on the job" from the moment the employee leaves for
work until he or she arrives home. After the decision, the state legislature
amended the act, defining "on the job" to include only the time the employee
IS on the premises of the employer. The amendment in effect overrules the
prior court decision, so courts are not required to follow that decision in
subsequent cases,
V Ihe earlier decision was poorly r easoned or has p r o d uc e d u ndes ir a bl e results.
For Example Review the gender discrimination example presented in the

beginning of this subsection. Suppose the supreme court of
state X, in a later case, decides that the reasoning in the court's decision in
Ellen \j. Employer, Inc.,w as incorrect and thatthe term gender discrimination
should not be interpreted to include discrimination on the basis of sexual pref
erence, The court can overrule Ellen and is not bound to follow it thereafter
(nor are lower courts of state X),
W h e n a court lollows the do ct ri nes ol precedent a n d stare decisis, the cour t c a n be relied
o n to leach the same decision on an issue as an earlier co ur t w h en the cases are sufficiently
similar. W i t h o u t these doct ri nes, a similar case coul d be decided in an entirely different niaii-
ne r based u p o n the Luiique beliefs ot' the indi\ idual j ud ge a n d jin\-. Ihe result w o u l d be little
o r no consistency in the case law, a n d chaos woul d reign. Later in this cha pt e r , we tlisciiss
w h e n a decision of an earlier cour t ina\' o r must be relied on by a sub se qu e n t c o u r t (see the
sections add r essi ng aut hority).
III. H I E R A R C H Y O F T H E L A W
A hierarchy o f ai.uhority e.xists bet we en the two primar\- soiu'ces of law: e na ct ed law an d case
law. W h e n a question arises c o n c er n i n g which sour ce applies in a case o r there is a conflict
b et we en sources, a hierarchy g over ns which source will apph'.
In general, within each jiu'isdiction, the c o ns ti t u ti o n is t he highest au t h or i ty , followed
by the o t h e r ena ct ed law (legislative a n d a d mi ni s t ra t i xe law), then the c o m m o n Dr case law,
Ihis me a n s that legislative acts a n d c our t decisions m u s t not conflict with the p r o \ ’isions ot
t h e constituticiii, A cour t decision ma\- inter pret a legislative act, but it c an n o t o ve r r u l e an act
unless it is d e t e r m i n e d that the act \ iolates the cons t i t ut ion.
Ihe United States ( x)iistitution separates the p o w e r s to gover n bet ween the fetieral a n d
state g o \ e r n m e n t s . Ihis separ ati on o f power s is called federalism , 'Ihe su p re m a cy cla u se
of the ( ;onst i t ut i on (Article \ ' I) p r o \ i d e s that bet ween federal a nd state law, federal law is
s u pr eme . If an ena ct ed law o r co ur t decision o f a state conflicts with a federal law or c o u r t
12
decision, then the sUite law o r decision is in\’aiici to the extent it conl hct s with the lederal law
o r decision.
For Example A state passes a law declaring that it is illegal to burn the American flag.
The state supreme court upholds the statute. Both the state statute and the
state supreme court decisions are invalid because they conflict with the Constitution of
the United States. The United States Supreme Court has ruled that the freedom-of-speech
provisions ofthe Constitution include the right to burn the flag. The federal law is supreme,
and the state law is invalid to the extent it conflicts with federal law.
IV. A U TH O R IT Y
To analyze the law, in addi ti o n to k n o w i n g the sources o f law, you must b e c o m e familiar
with t h e c o n c e p t o f authorit)' , pr inci ples r elating to authorit}', a n d the \ a ri o us t\' pes o f
aut hori ty. A u th o rity ma\' be d e f m e d as a n x t h i n g a coiu't ma \ ' r e h ’ iin wiien d e c i d i n g
an issue. It includes not on h' the law but also any ot he r nonlaw source that a cour t nuu' look
to in r ea chi ng a decision.
This section discusses the two t\ pes ot aut hori t\' an d the t wo roles that authorit}’ pla\'s
in tlie d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g process. The two t\-pes o f authorit}' are;
1. P r i ma r }’ authorit}' — the law itsell
2. Secondar}' authorit}'—-nonhus' sources on which a cou r t ma}' I'eK'
The t wo possible roles that aut hori t\' ma}' pla}' are;
1. Mandator}' aLithorit\' the authorit}' a cour t must rel\ on and lollow w h en d e c i d
ing an issue
2. l>ersuasi\e au t hor i t\ - t h e authorit}' a coLU't ma}' rel\' on and tollow, but is not
b o u n d to rel\' on or lollow
Ihe following subsecti ons first address the two t}'pes of authorit}' (primar}' a n d s e cond
arv), then discuss tlie role ot a u t h o r i t w that is, the \ a l u e or weight a court must o r nia\' gi\ e
t o a u t h o r i t \ ' ( m a n d a t o r } ' a n d persLiasive authorit}'). See L.xliibit I
A. Types of A uthority
1. Primary Authority
Prim ary authority is the law itself. It is c o m p o s e d o f t h e two main categories o f law, ena ct ed
law a nd c o m m o n law.
For Example Primary authority includes but is not limited to constitutions, statutes,
ordinances, regulations, and court opinions.
(Courts refer to a n d reh' on p r ima ry authorit}' first when resoK'ing legal problems.
2. Secondary Authority
S e co n d a ry a uth ority is any source a co ur t ma y rely on that is not the law, that is, not
p r. ma ry authorit}'. Secondar}' authorit} consists ot legal resources that s umm a r i ze , compile,
explain, c o m m e n t on, interpret, or in s ome o t he r wa}' address the law.
S ec on d a r y authorit}' can be used in several wa}'s:
To obtain a backgr ound or overall under standing of a specific area ot the la\s'. i.egal
encyclopedias, treatises, and periodicals are useful for this purpose. See (Chapters 3 a nd 6.
13
P A RT I I N T R O D U C T I O N TO R E S E A R C H , A N A L Y T I C A L P R I N C I P L E S , A N D T H E L E G A L P R O C E S S
E x h ib it 1-3 Types and Role o f Authority.

Types of Authority
Primary The law itself, such as constitutions, statutes, ordinances,

Authority adnninistrative agency rules and regulations, and court
opinions
Secondary A source a court may rely on that is not the law, such as
Authority legal encyclopedias, American Law Reports (ALR), Restatements
of the Law, treatises, and law review articles
Role of Authority
M andatory A source of law a court must rely on when reaching a

Authority decision, such as an enacted law (statute, ordinance,
etc.) that governs the legal question being addressed,
or an opinion of a higher court in the jurisdiction that
addressed the same or a sim ilar legal question and
facts
Persuasive Any authority a court is not bound to consider or follow
Authority but may consider or follow when reaching a decision,
such as an opinion of a court in another state on the
same or a similar issue, or a secondary authority source
(encyclopedia article, legal dictionary definition, etc.)
For Example If the researcher is unfamiliar with a specific area of law, such as defa
mation, then a treatise on tort law will provide an overview of the area.
The treatise will also include references to key court cases and enacted law (primary
authority) concerning defamation.
lo locate’ priiiiar\-aLithoi it\- (the law) on a question lieiiig researched. .Aiiicriciin i n n '
R eports (A I.R ), legal enc\clopedia,s, and IrcaHics can he used lor this p u r po s e . See
C.'hapter 3. All secondai x’ authoi it\- sources include I'elerences to p r i ma r y authority.
To he relied on hy the cour t when r eaching a ilecision, which usually oc c ur s only
w he n there is no p r i ma r y aut hori ty gov er ni n g a legal question or it is uncl ea r how
the primar\- aLithority applies to the qLiestion. I'reatises, law re\'iews, a n d restate
me nt s o f the law are relied on for this purpose.
Iher e ar e literalh' h u n d r e d s o f secondar\- sources. An i n - d e p t h d i s c us s i on o f all ot
t h e m is b ey on d the scope ot this te.xt; therefore, only s ome o f the m a i or secondar\- sources
are s u m m a r i z e d here.
a. A n n o t a t i o n s
.Aim otiUioiti are notes a nd c o m m e n t s on the la\s'. ,A wel l -known a n n o t a t i o n is the A m e r i c a n

L a w R ep o rts (A I.R ). The A L R is a series of b ooks that cont ai n the c o mp le t e te.xt o f selected
court opinions, al ong with schokirly c o m m e n t a r i es expl aini ng an d di sc ussi ng issues raised
ill the case. Ihe c o m m e n t a r i es also include an o\'er\ iew of ho w the issues are t reated nation-
al h’, focusing on the majoritx' a nd minorit }’ \ iews, a n d a list ol cases t r o m o t he r jurisdictions
dealing with the sa me issues. 'Ihe A L R is usefi.il tor ob t a i n i ng an iii-depth o \ e r \ i e w ot the
c ou r t s’ t r ea t me n t o f specitic questions a nd issues. 'Ihese a n n o t a t i on s are also useful as an aid
in locating cou r t decisions dealing with specific issues.
14
b. Law D ictionaries
Legal dictimi aries inclutie definitions of legal terms ( and usualK' a citation to the aut hor i ty tor
t h e definition) a nd guides to p r onunci a t i on. Ihe two maior legal dictionaries are B la c k ’s L a w
D i c t i o n a r y (West Publishing) a nd Ballciitiiic's I.egal l'>ictioiiary ( D ei mar Publishing).
c. Law Reviews
I.a w revie w s are scholarK- publications ustialK' published b\’ law schools. Ihey cont ain articles
w r i t t e n b\’ professors, judges, a n d practitioners and include c o m me n t a r i e s w ritten b\' law s t u
dents. The articles usualK' discuss specific topics and legal questions in great d e p t h a n d include
references to key cases on the subjects. Ihese rex’iews are useful as a source o f co m p r e he n si v e
i n t o r m a t i o n o n spiecific topics.
d. Legal E ncyclopedias
A leâl encyclopedia is a mult ixolume set o f bo o ks that pr o\ i de s a summar\- o f t h e law. 'Ihe topics
are a r ra n g ed in alphabetical order, and the set includes an inde.x and cross-references. 'Ihe two
m a j o r legal enc\' clopedias are C.orpus ju r is S e c u n d u iii ( a nd A m e r i c a n lu r is p r u d e n c e ( n o w
A m e r i c a n lu r is p r u d e n c e S eco n d ) { A m . ¡nr. or A m . lur. 2d), b ot h published b\' W'est Ciroup. An
e n c y cl opedi a is a valuable source w he n seeking an overview o f a legal topic.
e. R estatem ents o f the Law

P u bl i s he d by t h e A m e r i c a n Law Institute, the R e stiite m e n ts of th e L a w present a variety of
topics a n d discuss what the kn\' is on each topic, or what it should he. f ol l owi ng a pr esentat ion
of the law is a “c ; o m m e n t ” that explains the rule o f l a w presented, discusses why the rule was
adopted, and gi\'es examples ol how the rule applies. '1 he Restatctnents are dratted by autln)rities
a nd e x p e r t s in specific areas a nd are often relied on a n d ado p te d b\' legislatures a nd courts.
t. Treatises
A treatise is a single- or mvilti\'olume w('rk written by ,\n expert in an area that cox'ers that entire
area of law. A treatise is a valuable rescuirce because it p n n ides a c o m p re h en s i \ e t r ea t me nt ot a
specific area of law, reference to statutes and ke\' cases in the area, and comment ar ies on the law.
B. Role of A uthority
After t h e types ot a u t h o r i t \ ’ have been identified, it is i mp o r t a n t to untlerstanil the role these
s our ce s play in t h e d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g process. Not all aut ho r i ty referred to or relied o n by a
ci'urt w he n deciding an issue is gi\ en ec]ual \s-eight. Authority is di\’ided into two categories—
m a n d a t o r y au t h o r i t y a n d persuasi\'e a u t h o r i ty — tor the p u r p o s e ot d e t e r m i n i n g its a u t h o r i t a
tive value, or the ext ent to which it mu s t be relied on or followed by a co ur t (see lixhibit 1-3).
1. M andatory Authority
M andatory auth ority is an\' source that a co ur t must rely on or follow w he n r ea chi ng a
decision (e.g., a decisi on of a higher co ur t in the jurisdiction on the s a me or a similar issue).
P r i m a r y au t h o r i t y can be mandator \- authorit}- because cour ts are r equired to follow t he law
itself As discussed earlier, primar}' authorit}- is c o m p o s e d of enacted law and case law. S e c o n d
ary au t h o r i t y can never be m a n d a t o r y authorit}-. A cour t is never b o u n d to tolk)w s e co n d a ry
authorit}- b ecaus e it is not the law.
N o t all primar}' authority, however, is mandator}- authorit}-. Priman- authorit}- bec ome s
mandator}- aut hori ty onlv when it gov erns the legal question or issue being decided b}- the court.
15
P ART I I N T R O D U C T I O N TO R E S E A R C H , A N A L Y T I C A L P R I N C I P L E S , A N D T HE L E G A L P R O C E S S
Ihc factors ins'olved in dccidiiig when onactcd law a n d ease law ai e iii andalory autliorilN' are
briell)’ discussed here.
a. Enacted Law
CChapler 3 details the process for d e t e r m i n i n g w h e t h e r an ena ct ed law applies to go v e r n a
legal ques t i o n or issue before a court. Ihe th r ee - s t ep process p r e s e nt e d in that ch a pt e r Ls
s u m m a r i z e d here.
STEP 1: Identify all the laws that may govern the question. Ihis requires locating all
statutes o r laws that might possibly govern the legal question.
For Example Soine legal questions and fact situations, such as gender discrimination,
are governed by both state and federal law and on occasion by more than
one state or federal law.
O n c e you identity the laws that may go\ ern the question, d e t e r m i n e whi ch of'these laws
applies to the specific legal area in\ ' ol \ ed in the dispute. Ihis requires an analysis ol the law.
For Example In the preceding example, an analysis of the law may reveal that even
though both federal and state law govern the question of gender discrimina
tion, the federal law requires that the matter be tried in state court before being pursued
in federal court. The federal law, therefore, does not apply until the remedies available
under state law have been pursued in the state courts.
STEP 2: Identify the elements ofthe law or statute. O n c e noli d e t e r m i n e the specific
law o r laws that g o \ e r n the question, identify the el eme nt s of the law o r statute, that is,
the specific r equi r eme n t s that must be met for the law o r statute to apply. It is necessar\'
to identity the el ements before mov i n g on to step 3, w hich is d e t e r m i n i n g w h et he r the
r equ i r ement s of the law o r statute are met b\' the facts of'the case.
For Example Mary bought a toaster at a local store. It did not work when she plugged
in. The store owner refused to replace the toaster or give her a refund
It
when she returned it. The legal question is whether Mary can get a new toaster or her
money back. Assume that, after performing the first step of the analysis, you determine
that article 2 of the state's commercial code is mandatory authority because article 2
applies to the sale of goods and a toaster is considered goods. Article 2 provides that a
warranty is created if:
1. The transaction involves the sale of goods.
2. The seller of the goods is a merchant.
These are the elements of the statute. These elements must be identified to determine
what the section requires for the warranty to exist. It is necessary to identify these
requirements before it can be determined how the section applies to the client's facts.
The statute further provides thatthe seller must replace the item or refund the purchase
price if the item doesn't work.
STEP 3: Apply the facts ofthe case to the elements. I he final step is to appK the facts
o f t h e client’s case to the el ements to d e t e r m i n e h o w the law o r statute applies. If the
el ements ma t ch the facts raised by the legal issue, th e n the law applies an d gover ns the
out c ome. K\’en if s o m e ot the el ements are not met, the law still applies, biit the o u t c o m e
ma v be different.
16
For Example Referring to tfie previous example, the warranty exists if the two elements
are met. In this case, the first element is met because a toaster is consid-
e'ed goods. The second element is met because the store owner is considered a merchant
because he routinely sells toasters. The elements are met and Mary is entitled to a new
toaster or a refund.
If the transaction does not involve the sale of goods, such as the sale of land, orthe
seller is not a merchant (the toaster was purchased at a yard sale), the elements of article 2
a '■e not met, there is no warranty, and Mary is not entitled to a new toaster or a refund.
.Alter \ i)u d e t e r m i n e that an enact ed law g i u e r n s a legal question, the law is m a n d a t o r y

a u t h o ri t w and a c our t m u s t apply the law unless the cour t rules that the law is unconstitutional.
h. C'asc I.aw
I'or a coLu t o p i n i o n to be mandator}- aut hori ty (otiei-| referred to as m a n d a t o r y p r a c i k u t )

th a t binds a n o t h e r c our t to follow the rule or prn-iciple ot law established in the opinion, two
c o n di t i o n s must be i-not;
1. Ihe c our t opiiiittn must be on poii-it.
2. Ihe coin-f opinioi-| must ha\'e been issued b\- a higher cour t in that iLirisdiction.
For Example If the highest court in state A defines malice as used in the
state's murder statute, then all the lower courts in state A (inter
mediary and trial courts) are bound to follow the highest court and apply the
highest court's interpretation of the term in cases involving the statute.
L
In regard to this e.\an-iple, is the highest coiu-f in state A, in latei- cases, b o u n d ti) follow its
(iwn eai lier def ini tion ot malice? \ ' o . the highest cour t is alwa\'s tree to oxertui n the op i ni on
a n d ch a ng e the detiiiitioii. I he court will follow its earlier decision LUiless it o\ e r t ur n s it o r in
s o n ic \v,\\ am er.ds it. Ihc lower covwh do not h.we this o p tio n .
Wha t it'the decisi on o f the highest state cour t is different t r om the decision ol'a tederal
coLnt? II a state c our t decision conflicts with the (Constitution or tederal law, t hen the state
c o ur t must follow the dictates o f the tederal law. State cour t s usually ha\ e the fuial sa\- o\-er
interpretat iori s ol state law. If a lederal court is addressii-ig an issue ii-|\'olving state law, then
t h e letieral c our t usualK' follows the i nt e r pretat ion of the state law r ende re d b\ the state’s
h i gh e st court.
(.'hapter 12 pr esents an in- dept h discussion o f case law a n a k si s and the process inx'olved
111 liet e r mi ni ng w h e t h e r a case is on point.
2. P ersuasive A u th o rity
Pe rsu a sive auth ority is an\- aut hori ty a cour t is not b o u n d to consider or follow but ma\-
t o nsi d e r or lollow w h e n r eaching a decision. W h e n mandator \- autliorit\- exists, persuasi\'e
a u t h o r i ty is not necessar\-, altl'iougli its use is ni)t prohibited. Persuasi\’c authorit)- consists of
b o t h primar)- authorit)- a n d secondar\- authorit)-.
a. Primary Authority as Persuasive Authority

(, )n occasion, c o ur t s look to enact ed law as persuasive authorit}-.
17
PART I I N T R O D U C T I O N TO R E S E A R C H , A N A L Y T I C A L P R I N C I P L E S , A N D T H E L E G A L P R O C E S S
For Example A court, when interpreting a term not defined in an act, may apply the
definition ofthe term that is given in another act. Suppose the term gender
discrimination is not defined in the state's fair housing act but is defined in the state's
fair loan act. The fair loan act is not mandatory authority for questions involving the fair
housing act because it does not govern housing. It can, however, be persuasive authority.
The court may follow or be persuaded to apply the definition given in the fair loan act.
I’rimars a u t h o r i ty r ep r es e nt e d by case law is otten used as per sua si ve a u th or i ty (often

referred to as pcrsiiiisivc prcLCiicnl). Hven t h o u g h case law is p r i m a r y aut ho r i ty , it ma y not
be m a n d a t o r y authoi' ity in a specific sit uati on if'it d oes no t appl y to g over n the situati on.
Ihe court is not r eq u ir ed to f'ollow such aut hori ty. A c o i n t may, ho\ve\'er, be gu i d e d by a n d
pe r sua ded to a d o p t the rule o r pr i nci pl e establ ished in a n o t h e r c ou r t opi n i on .
For Example 1. The courts in state A have not addressed a legal issue. Therefore,
there is no mandatory authority that state A courts must follow.
State A courts may consider and adopt the rules and reasoning of federal or other
state courts that have addressed the issue. It is not mandatory that state A follow
the primary authority of the other federal or state courts, but state A may be per
suaded to adopt the primary authority of these courts.
2. Neither the legislature nor the courts of state A have adopted strict liability as a
cause of action in tort. State A’s highest court can look to and adopt the case law of
another state that has adopted this tort.
3. A trial court in state A has written an opinion on a legal issue. A higher court in state
A is not bound by the lower court opinion (it is not mandatory authority), but it may
consider and adopt the rule and reasoning of the lower court.
W hen there is no m a n d a t o r \ ’ authoi'it\' that a court is b o u n d to follow, as in the preceiliii g

ex.imples, the cour t max' look to a n d rel\' on I'tber p r i m a r \ ' aLilhorit\' as persLiasi\ e authorit''-.
b. S e c o n d a r y A u t h o r i t y a s I’e r s u a s i v e A u t h o r i t y
■As discussed earlier, s e c o n d a r y authority' is not the law and, therefore, can n e \ e r be m a n d a -
tor\' authorit). W h e n ma ndator y' aut horit)' on an issue exists, it is not necessar y to s up por t it
with secondar)' authority', a l t ho u g h it is per mi ssible to d o so. S ec o n d a r y aut h or i ty shoul d n('t
be relied upo n w h e n t here is m a n d a t o r y authority. In such situations, the m a n d a t o r y a u t h o r
ity go\'erns. It the re is no ma ndat or y' authorit)' but t here is per suasive p r i m a r y authority, th e
s e conda ry aut horit\' may be use d in s u p p o r t of the p r i m a r y authority.
For Example The courts in state A have never addressed a certain issue. The courts
in state B have addressed the issue. The rule of law established by the
state B courts can be persuasive primary authority for state A courts. Secondary sources,
such as /4I/?commentaries and law review articles, may be submitted to a state A court
in support of the persuasive primary authority from state B. Secondary authority also
may be submitted to the court for the purpose of opposing the adoption ofthe persuasive
j authority from state B.
Secondar\' authority' has its greatest value in situations in which there is no prin'iar)' aut ho r
ity, either mandatory' or persuasis'e. 'Ihis situation is rare, however. Few matters have never b e e n
addressed b\' either s o me legislature cir s o me court. As n oted earlier, secondary' aut hori ty is alsio
valuable becaLise it is useful in locating primary' authority'. S o me secoiidary' authorit)' is givem
18 greater weight or cons i der ed to lia\ e greater authoritati\' e value than ot he r s e conda ry authorit)V.
For Example A court will more likely rely on and give greater weight to a Restatements of
the ¿aM/drai1ed by experts in the field than to a law review article written
by a local practitioner in the field.
A lw a y s locate t he available p r i ma r y au t h o ri t y anct ex ha ust all a\'eiuies o í re.search in this

di rection before t u r n i n g to the location o f secondar\- a u t h o r i t ) . 'Ihei e are two reasons for this:
1. Côurts will look to an d con.sider primal'}’ authorit}' before coi'isidering secondai }
authorit}’.
2. Primar \' aut hor i ty will otien lead to k e\ ’ se ct ) ndar \ ’ aut hoi it\’ source.s.
For Example 1. A court opinion addressing an issue may include references to key
secondary sources such as 41/? citations.
2. State statutes are often annotated, and the annotations usually include references
to ALR and legal encyclopedia citations that address the area of law covered in the
statute. The annotations also include references to law review articles that address
specific issues related to the statute.
V. K E Y P O I N T S C H E C K L I S T : Legal Principles and Authorities

/ W h e n ana K’/.ing a legal ciuestioii or issue, alwavs identit} the primar}’ authorit}'
(the law) that go\' erns the question. I'irst c on s i de r primar} atithorit}', tiien look to
secondar}' authorit}'. As a general rule, co ur ts will rel}' on primar}’ authorit}' before
cons ider ing s e conda rv’ aut hori tv’.
/ W h e n \'ou are se ar chi ng tor the law' that gov'erns a topic, alvvavs consider ali the
possible sources of law :
1. h na c te d law —con s t i t ut ions, statutes, o r d i na n ce s , regulations, and so on
2. C.'ase law
/ Re ni e mb er that there are two cou r t s}'stems o pe r a t in g in ever}' juristliction: state
and federal. A legal p r o b l e m I'na}’ be go\ ' er ned ii}’ ei ther letlei al or state law or both.
Both sources o f l a w a n d b ot h cour t s\'stems must be consider ed when a na lv / i ng a
problem.
/ Keep in n ii nd the hi e ra rc h\ ot p ri ma r\ ' authorit\'. ( ' ons t it u t i on s are the highest
authorit}', followed b}' o t h e r e n a ct ed law’, t he n b}’ case law. W h e n there is a conflict
bet ween federal a nd state law, federal law gox erns.
/ Ihe d oc t ri n e s o f stare decisis a n d p rec eden t prox’ide that doctrines, rules, or prin
ciples established in earlier cour t decisi ons s h o u ld be followed b}’ later cour ts in
the sau'ie c ou r t svstem w h e n a d dr es s i n g similar issues a nd tacts. 1hei'efoi'e, w h e n
researching a question, a l wa \ s look for a nd co ns i d e r earlier cases that are on point.
/ C o u r t s are requir ed to follow' mandator }' aut hori t}; therefore, alwa}s at tempt to
locate ma ndat or }' authorit}' before s e ar chi ng for persuasive authoritv'.
/ Do not reh' on persuasiv'e authoritv' it t here is mandator }' authorit}'. N'o ma t t e r
ho w str ong the persuasiv e authorit}’, the c o ur t w ill appK' mandator}' authorit}' before
persuasive authorit}. Secondar}' authorit}’ is nev’er m a n d at o r } ’ authoril}’.
VI . A P P L I C A T I O N
'fhe following e x ampl e illustrates principles di scussed in this chapter. Ihe example addresses
the questions raised in the hypothetical p r ese nt ed at the b eg i n n i n g o f t h e chapter.
P A R T I I N T R O D U C T I O N TO R E S E A R C H , A N A L Y T I C A L P R I N C I P L E S , A N D T HE L E G A L P R O C E S S
l ienee’s research on the subject o f f e n d e r discrinijnation ideiitjt'ied tlie I'ollowiii” autlioritv

tliat mi g ht apply ti) the issues raised in the client's case:
1. Title \ ' II nt' the CCix il Rights Act ot' 1964, which pr ohibits e mp lo \ nient d i s c r i m i n a
tion on the basis ol ge n de r
2. Section 39-9-4 o f the state statutes, which prohibits e m p l o y me n t discri niinatioi'
on the basis ol g en d er
3. i'.rik r. Coll. Iiu., a federal c ou r t case with tacts al most identical to Ms. St one’s
which held that the co n du c t ot the eni pl o\ ’er cons t i t ut ed g en d e r d i s c ri n i i n a t io r
in violation o f Title \ ' II
4. A lb e r t C o n r a d Supplies, a state s u p r e me court case with lacts a l mo s t idéntica,
to t hose pr esented in Ms. Stone’s case, which held that the e m p l o y e r ’s co nd u c :
\ iolated the state statute
3. Two law re\'iew articles addr essi ng g e n d e r di sc r i mi na t i on, which c o n c l u d e d tha;
the t\'pe of c o nd u c t en c o u n t e r e d b\- Ms. Stone constitut ed g en d er d i s c ri m i n a t i o n
O n e article add r essed the ques t i on in the context of Title \ ’1I, a n d o n e articlc
l ocused on the q ues tion in the context o f the state statute.
R e n ee ’s a s s i gnme nt is to p re p ar e a m e m o that includes a s i m i m a r y ot her r esear ch an d
an anah' sis o f h o w the law applies to the c l i e n t ’s case. She realizes that she m u s t or gani z e
a n d analyze her researcli bet öre she can dralt the m e m o . Alter re\ iewing the p r i nc i pl e s an d
conc ep t s pr ese nt ed in this chapter, she p r oc e ed s with the loll owi ng steps.
STEP 1: Identify and separate primary authority and secondary authority. Ihis step is
imp o r t a n t because t he cour t will r e k on an d cons i der priniar\' aut hori ty before ref er ri ng t('
s e c on da ry authority.
1. Fri ni ar \ authorit}':
Tjiacted law - Title \ ’ll an d Section 39-9-4 ol the state statutes
(Case l a w - /'./'/I ('oil. Inc. a n d A lb e rt v, C,oiiriid S up plies
2. S e conda r y authority; the two law re\ iew articles
STEP 2: Organize the presentation of the primary authority. Because the highest a u t h o r
it\' in the hierai'cli}' o f primar} aut hoi it} is the ena ct ed law, I'ollowed b}' the case law. Renee
organizes her s umni ai }' of the law with a pr esentat ion o f the ena ct ed law first. (She did not
locate applicable constitut ional law.)
I. U na cted ¡.iuv. In regard to the e na ct ed law, Renee d e t er m i n e s whi ch law applies
to goxer n the situation. It is possible that bot h the state a n d federal laws a p p h
and that a potential cause o f action exists in botii lederal and state court. It is
also possible that the tederal law requires that the state r emedies be exh a ust e d
before a claim in federal court can be p ui s u e d . Ihis m e an s that t he lederal law
requires that an\' reined}' available u n d e r state law be complet ely p u r s u e d before a
claim can be br oug ht u n d e r lederal law. It is possible that the tederal act does not
appl}' to the specific legal ques tion raised b\- the facts o f the dispute, o r t he federal
act nia}' apph' exclusix'eh' and t here may be no possible cause o f action u n d e r
the state law. .All ot these possibilities must be con s i der ed w he n she ana h' zes the
ena ct ed law.
O n c e Renee conc l ude s this part o f the a n a k s i s , she must identil}' the ele
me nt s or r eq ui r e m e n t s ot the law or laws that do apply. She then applies the ele
me nt s to the facts of the client’s case to d e t e r m i n e how the laws a p p k an d what
remedies are available. In her m e m o , she will include a suniniar}' o f t he law a n d
her anah'sis. (Chapter 3 prov ides g ui de hne s to t'ollow w he n a n a k z i n g en a ct e d law.
20
2. ( aisc I a i w . Renee next addresses the relevant case law. She Iirst d e t er m i n e s w h e t h e r
t he cases are on point. A case is on point if there is a sufficient siinilarit\- b e t we en
t he key facts and legal issue a ddr essed in the cour t opi ni on and the client’s case
for the court op i n i o n to appl\- as precedent . If a case is on point, it provides the
present cour t with g ui d a n ce in r e s o h i n g a legal question or issue.
If the ena ct ed law is clear an d t here is no question about h o w the e n a ct ed law
applies to the facts of the client’s case, t hen there is u s u a l h ’ no need to refer to
case law.
For Example A client is ticketed for driving 90 mph in a 60-mph zone. The statute estab
lishing the speed limit at 60 mph is clear, and there is no need for case law
to interpret the statute. A speed of 90 mph is clearly in violation of the statute.
I_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
K\’en if there ap pe ar s to be no q ues tion a bo u t h o w the statute applies, always be sur e to

c h e ck the case law for possible inte r pr e t at ion s ot the statute.
It Renee conc l u de s that federal law exclusi\-ely gover ns the area, t he n the state case,
A lb e r t r. CAUirail Su pp lies, does not a p p k . If she co nc l u de s that on h' state law applies, t hen
t h e federal case does not apply.
(Once Renee has analw.ed the case law, she includes in the m e m o a s u m m a r y o f h e r case
analvsis, di scussing w h e t h e r each case applies a nd how.
STEP 3: Organize the presentation ofthe secondary authority. Ihe s e c o n d ar ) aut hor i t) is
s u m m a r i z e d last in the m e m o because it has the least authoritati\' e \’alue. In the client’s case,
there is p r i m a r y authorit)-, so the secoiidar) authorit)- will he used, if at all, in s u p po r t o f or
oppositioii to ar gunients based on the primar\- authoritv-. Renee includes a s u n m i a r y o f each
law re\-iew article, em p ha s i z i ng those aspects o f t h e articles that focus on ques t i on s a n d issues
similar to t hose in the client's case. l Aen if the articles will not he used iii cour t as secondar\-
authorit)-, a sunm-iar)- is included in the men-io because it n-ia)' prov ide Renee’s supervis ing
attoriie)- with i nf or mat i on that proves helpful in the case.
Renee s Lmderstandnig ol the pi n-nar)' a nd secondarv- sources of law, and the h i e r a rc hy
ot the sources, is an essential aitl in her oi ga ni za t i on of the research, analv-sis ot the issues,
and p r ep a ra t i on of the m e mo . (Chapter 13 t h r o u g h (Chapter f7 provii.le useful i n f o r ma t i on
c o nc er ni ng the actual p r e p a ra ti o n o f legal m e m o r a n d a .
Sum m ary
T i e process of legal analv sis a n d legal wri ting requires a d et er ni i na t i on ot vs-hat law applies to
a egal ques tion a nd ho w it applies. To engage iii the process, )-ou must have an u n d e r s t a n d i n g
o: t he law a nd the basic do ct ri nes and principles that gover n a n d guide the analysis o f t h e law.
Ihe t wo primar)- sour ces of law in the L’nited States are:
1. Fnact ed law
2. (Case law
Enacted law, as used in this text, consists o f cons titut ions, laws passed by legislative
b.'dies, a n d regulations a d o p t e d bv- adiiiinistrativ-e bodies to aid in the e n f o r c e m e n t a n d ap-
pj c a ti o n o f legislative niandates. (Case law- is co i np os e d o f t h e law created b)- the c o ur t s in
tvo situations:
1. W h e n there is no law go\-erniiig a topic
2. I h r o u g h interpretatioii of e n a ct ed law w h e r e the m e a n i n g or appl ication o f the
ena ct ed law is unclear
21
PART I INTRODUCTION TO RESEARCH, ANALYTICAL PRINCIPLES, AND THE LEGAL^ROCESS
Ihcrc arc two cour t systems in the L'nited States: the lederal coiu t swstem and the state
c ou r t system. A l t h o ug h there are d iti er ences in ea ch svstem, they l uu’e basic similarities.
Both systems h a \ e trial c our t s wh e r e ma tt e rs are initially heard, trials held, a n d iudgnients
r en de r e d , a n d bo th have c our t s o f appeals wher e the iLidgments ot'trial c t nu’ts are re\ iew ed
and possible er ro r s corrected.
I'o pr o\ ide consistenc}' a n d stabiHt}' to the case law, two doct ri nes h a \ e e\’ol\ ed:
1. Precedent
2. Stare decisis
P recedent is an earlier cour t decisi on on an issue that applies to gt ) \ e r n or giiide a sub-

se qu en t cou r t in its d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f identical o r similar issues based o n icfentical or similar
facts. 'Ihe d oc t ri ne o f stare decisis pr ovides that a co ur t must follow a pr e\' ious decision o f a
higher cour t in the jur isdiction w he n the c ur rent decision i n \ ’ol\ es issues a n d tacts similai' to
t hose in\'olved in the pr evious decision.
Ihe two sources o f l a w , en a ct ed a n d case law, are called p r i m a r y aut hori ty. P r i ma r \
a u t ho r i ty is the law itself. Any o t h e r aut hori tati xe sou r ce a court ma y rel\- on in reaching a
decision is called s e co nd a r y aut hori t}’. S e c o n d a r \ ’ a u t h o r i t \ ’ is not the law but consists ot a u
t horitative sources that interpret, anal}’/e, or com p i l e the law, such as legal eiic}’ckipedias and
treatises. Co u r t s always r e h ’ on a n d look to primar}' aut hori t}’ fu'st when resolving legal issues.
It pr i ni ary authoritv’ g o\ ’er ns the r esolution ot a legal question, it m u s t be followed b\
the court, Ihis t}’pe o f priniar}’ aut hori t}’ is called n i andat or }’ authorit}’. Secondar }’ aut hoi it}
can ne\-er be m a n d at or } ’ aut hori t}’. . \n}’ authorit}’ the coiu t is not b o u n d to folk)w but that it
ma v follow or co ns ider w he n r ea chi ng a decision is called persLiasi\ e aut hori t} ’. Both pi iniar\
a u t ho r i ty a n d secondar}' aut hori t}’ can be persuasi\ e a u t h o r i t \ ’.
'Ihe r eni ai ni ng c ha pt e r s of this text atldiess the a pph c at ion o f t h e basic conc ept s and
principles pr ese nt ed in this chapter. Llach coiicept a n d principle p k u s a critical role iii legal
analysis a nd writing.
Quick References
A d n i i n is t ra t i \ e law Opinion
A ut ho r it y 1,^ Personal jurisdiction
Case law 6 P er suas i \e aut hori tv’
(Concurrent jurisdiction 8 Petition for writ of certiorai i
C o n s t i t ut i on ■4 Precedent
C o u r t o f appeals <S P r i m a r \ ’ a u t hor i t\ 13
District cour t 8 S e c o n d ar \ ’ a ut ho ri t\
Enacted law Stare decisis
jurisdiction Statutes
Law Subject ma t t e r j u r isdiction
M a n d a t o r \ ' a u t h o r i t\ ’ i'rial court

I n t e r n e t Resources
ti 11p : // w \\ \\. ti lu i I a\v. CO111
Ihis site is co n sid ered o n e ol tlie best sites lor finding legal resources in general,
h 11p :// w u \v. II S C O II r t s. g o \
lliis site olfers in f o rm a tio n a b o u t tederal c o u rt justices, statutes, state laws, an d links to
o t h e r sites.
h ttp ://\v \v \v .ia \v .iiK iia n a .e ilu
In d ia n a L 'ni\ersity l.aw School Library
h tt p :/ /\ v w \ v .la \ v .c ( ) r n e ll.e d u
(Cornell L 'ni\ersity Law School Library
lutp://\v w \v .la\v .v i!lan o \a.ed ii
Ihis site is a state coiu't locator.
h tt p : / / \ v \ v \ v .a c c e s s . g p o . g o \
Iliis is the olticial site to r the ( i o \ ’e rn n i e n t P rin tin g Oltice.
h ttp ://g su law .g sii.ed u
th is site proN'ides an inde.x to legal sites o n the Web, in clu d in g links.
1 in k s to d o c u m e n t s th at h e lp y ou e \ a l i i a t e W e b sites:
''LC\ a l u a t i o n o f In f o r m a t i o n S o u r c e s / i n t e r n e t ”
l i t t p : / / w \ v \ v . v u w . a c .n z / s ta H 7 a la s ta i r _ s m i t h / e \ a l n / e v a l n . h t n i
' l . \ a l u a t i n g I n t e r n e t R e so u rc e s : .A S electixe Bibliographv'"
Ihe X'irtual (Chase

h t t p : / / w \ v u .v i r t u a l c h a s e . c o m
Exercises
A d d itio m il n iv (iviiilaltlc on the ( 'o iiifcM ntc. ,V S tate H’s U n i t o r m ( C o m m e rc ia l CCCode A ct
4. A fed eral s t a t u t e — ( C o n s u m e r (Credit Act

ASSIGNMENT 1
\ \ ’hat is th e n a m e o l tl ie c o u i t ol g e n e ia l ju risd ic tio n in \'oui' 3. l i o n r. S u p p l y (Co.— a d e c i s i o n o f th e h ig h e s t c o u r t in
state? W 'hat is th e n a m e o f a l i n i i t e d - ju r i s d ic t it in ccuirt in s t a te A
} o u r state? W 'hat is th e s u b j e c t m a t t e r ju r is d i c ti o n o f th is 6 . M i l k V. licit Huy, In c .— a d e c is io n o f th e h ig h e s t c o u r t

I.ou rt? Ih is i n t o r m a t i o n is a v a ila b le in y o u r s ta te statu te s. in sta te B
7. C.ontrol (,0. v. M a r t i n — a d e c is io n ot a n i n t e r m e d i a r y
ASSIGNM ENT 2
c o u r t ot a p p e a l s in s t a te A
D e s c r i b e th e d i t te r e n c e s b e t w e e n a trial c o u r t a n d a c o u r t
( ' f a p p e a ls . 8 . I . c i lc y V. K a r l (.’o . — a d e c i s i o n o f a t r i a l c o u r t in
state A
ASSIGNM ENTS 9. Iren e r. C it y C o . ~ a fed eral c a se i n \ ’o l v i n g th e fed eral
W h e n is a c o u r t o p i n i o n c o n s i d e r e d p re c e d e n t ? CCoiisLimer (Credit A ct
ASSIGNMENT 4 10. R e g u l a t i o n s a d o p t e d b y s t a te A ’s C o r p o r a t i o n C o m
m i s s i o n th a t appl}' to c o n s u m e r c r e d i t a n d t h e sale
l-acts: Ilie r e s e a r c h e r is a n a l y z i n g a p r o b l e m i n \ ’ol\-ing th e
of goods
sale o f g o o d s o n c re d it in s t a te .A.
11. R c i t a t e i n c n t i of th e Lnw d efin in g sales,
A u t h o r i t y : Ih e fo llo w in g au th o rit}- h a s b e e n lo c a t e d c o n - c o n s u m e r c r e d i t , a n d t> ther t e r m s r e l a t e d to t h e
t e r n i i i g th e p r o b l e m : problem
1. S ta t e A 's U n i f o r m ( C o m m e rc ia l (Code Act 12. A n A L R r e l e r e n c e t h a t d i r e c tl y a d d r e s s e s t h e issu es
2. S ta t e A ’s ( C o n s u m e r (Credit A ct in th e case
A s s u m e tliat all t h e c a s e s a r e o n p o i n t , th a t is, the\' 3. M c r ric k i’. V'ny/or— a 1 9 9 0 d e c is io n of t h e c o u r t of a p
a re su tficientl\- s i m i l a r to t h e ta e ts a n d issues i n \ ' o l \ e d in pe als o f s ta te A. i h e c o u r t of a p p e a l s is a lo w e r c o u r t
t h e p r o b l e m to a p p l y as p r e c e d e n t . t h a n th e s t a t e ’s h i g h e s t c o u r t . Ih e c o u r t h eld t h a t
th e t e r m i n l c u ti o u a L w ith in t h e m e a n i n g ot th e 1 989
Questions s t a tu t e , in c l u d e s e i t h e r th e i n t e n t i o n a l d e s t r u c t i o n
a. W h i c h a u t h o r i t y is p r i m a i x' a u t h o r i t y , a n d w h ic h is o f r e c o r d s o r th e d e s t r u c t i o n ot r e c o r d s as a re s u lt o t
seco n d ar\’ au th o rit\ ? g ro s s n e g lig e n c e .
b. W h ic h a u th o r ity can be m a n d a to ry au tho rity ? W h \ ? 4. I^ iv c c s I'. CoiitiíU t o r — a d e c is io n ot th e h igh est c o u r t
W h a t w o u l d b e r e q u i r e d t o r a n \' ol th e s o u r c e s to be o f sta te B i n t e r p r e t i n g a sta te B s t a tu t e id e n tic a l t o
m a n d a to i'} ' a u t h o r i t ) ? th e 1989 s tate A sta tu te . 'Ih e c o u r t h e ld th a t th e t e r m
c. W h ic h a u th o rit)' can be p ersu asi\ e au th o rit) ? W h ) ? iiitciitioiuil, i\s u se d in t h e sta tu te , in c l u d e s g ross n e g
lig e n c e o n l y w h e n t h e g ro s s n e g li g e n c e is a c c o m p a
d. .A ssu m in g th a t all t h e p r i m a r y a u th o r it)- a p p lie s to
n ie d by a “ re c k le ss a n d w a n t o n ” d i s r e g a r d fo r t h e
t h e is s u e s r a i s e d b )’ t h e ta c ts ot t h e c lie n t's case, list
p r e s e r \ 'a t i o n o f t h e b u s in e s s r e c o r d s .
th e a u t h o r i t ) ' in t h e h i e r a r c h i c a l o r d e r ot its \ a lu e as
p r e c e d e n t ; th a t is, a u t h o r i t ) ' w ith g re a te s t a u t h o r i t a 3. A 1991 fede ral s t a t u t e — the s t a t u t e is id e n tic a l to t h e
tive \ alu e w ill b e listed first, tollo w ed b\' o t h e r a u t h o r - 1989 state s ta tu t e b u t applies o n h ' to c o n t r a c t o r s wit n
it\ ill t h e o r d e r it will b e lo o k e d to b)' th e c o u rt . fed eral c o n tr a c ts .

6. All A I.R reference— addre'ses specific questioiis simi -
ASSIGNM ENTS lar to those raised in the client’s case.
Facts; 'l o u r client is th e plaintifl' in a w o rk e rs ’ c o m p e n s a Questions
tio n case. She w as in j u r e d in 199.3 in state A. In 1993, her
a. W h i c h a u t h o r i t ) ' is p rim ;.r\' a u t h o r i t y , a n d w h ic h i s
e n ip lo v e r d e s t n n e d all th e b u s i n e s s reco rd s relating to th e
s e c o n d a r ) ’ a u t h o r it ) '? W h \ ?
client. 'I h e d e s t r u c t i o n o f tiie recoi'ds was a pp ai'en th ' ac c i
d en tal, n o t in t e n ti o n a l. 'I h e \ ' w e re d e stro ) ed, how ever, w hile b. W h i c h aut hori ty can be i r a n da tor y aut hori ty? W h ) ?
th e c lie n t’s w o r k e r s ’ c o m p e n s a t i o n claini was p e n d in g . W'hat would be requir ed ' oraii)' ot the sour ces to b'C
ma nda t or )' authorit)'?
Auti i ori ty; 'I'ou has e lo c a te il t h e follow in g a u th o rit)', all of c. W h i c h a u t h o r i t ) ' caii be p e r s u a s i v e a u t h o r i t y ?
w h ic h is t l ir e c th ' re la te d to t h e issues raised b)' th e lacts of W hy?
th e c l i e n t’s case:
d. Ca n lilh' r. (.'//y (,'o. be au horily al all; Wl iy or wh y
1. Idle V. ( '(). — a 19<S0 d e c is io n b \ ' t h e h ig h e s t c o u r t not?
o f s ta te , \ in w h ic h t h e c o u r t c r e a t e d a c a u s e o f ac
e. If liih' 1 '. ( j'/y (,'(). is a u th c r it v , to w h a t e x t e n t ?
tio n in to r t for t h e \s i'o n g lu l destru ctio i'i ol b u s i n e s s
re c o r d s . I h e c o u r t riiletl th a t a c a u s e of’actioi'i exists I. D isc u s s th e in'ipacl of M r r i c k v. T a y lo r in rega rtl tio
if t h e r e c o r d s w e r e d e s t r o ) e d in a n t i c i p a t i o n of O r t h e 1989 s ta te .A sta tu te .
w h ile a w o r k e r s ’ c o m p e n s a t i i m claiii'i w as p e n d i n g . g. D iscu ss th e au th o ritatv e va lu e of Davccs v.

Ih e c o u r t also h e ld t h a t a c a u s e o f a c ti o n ex ists if th e C.oiilractor.
d e s t r u c t i o n w a s i n t e n t i o n a l o r neg lig en t. h. A s s u m i n g th a t all th e p n i i a r y a u t h o r i t ) a p p li e s Ito
2. .A 1989 s t a te A s t a t u t e — a law' p a s s e d b)' th e leg isla th e issues raise d b)' th e f;cl5 o f t h e c l i e n t ’s case, lis;t
tu r e o f s t a te ,-\ th a t c r e a t e d a c a u s e o f 'a c t i o n in to rt th e a u t h o r i t y in th e h ie r a chicai o r d e r o f its v a lu e a:s
to r th e i n t e n t i o n a l d e s t r u c t i o n of b u s i n e s s re c o rd s. p re c e d e n t; tha t is, a u th o r il w~.th g reatest a u th o r it a ti v 'e
I h e s t a t u t e p r o v i d e s th a t a c a u s e of a c ti o n exists if \ a l u e will b e li sted first, oilow'ed b y o t h e r a u t h o r
th e d e s t r u c t i o n o c c u r s iii a n t i c i p a t i o n o f ' o r w h ile a ity in th e o r d e r it will b c ooK.ed to a n d r e l ie d o n b'y
w o r k e r s ' c o n i p e n s a t i o n c la in i is p e n d i n g . th e c o u rt.
^ The available CourseMate for this text has an interactive eBiokand interactive learnimg
0^ ^ tools, including flash cards, quizzes, and more. To learn more abiutthis resource and acces.'s
CourseMate free demo CourseMate resources, goto www.cengagebrain.cim and search forthis book<.
To access CourseMate materialsthatyou have purchased, go o l9gin.cengagebrain.comi.
Introduction to Legal Research and Analysis
M a r i a n h a s w o r k e d a s R o b e r t W' dker ' s p a r a k - g a l t o r t h e p a s t l o u r vear s. S h e e o i i d i i c t s i ni t i al eh-
O utline
e n t i n t e r v i e w s , m a n a g e s t h e c a s i tiles, a n d p e r t i i r m s b a s i c r e s e a r c h . R o b e r t , a s o l o p r a c t i l i o n e r ,
a l w a y s d e t e r m i n e s t h e m e r i t s o l a c a s e a n d p e r t o r m s t h e s u b s t a n t i w r e s e a r c h . . Ma r i a n s t a r t e d I. Introduction
l a w s c h o o l last tall a n d n o w w o i \ s oi i K p a r t t i m e at t h e law h r m . II. I.egal .Anahsis Defnied
R o b e r t c a l l e d M a r i a n int hi s o t h c e o n e m o r n i n g . ' ' . Marian, " h e s ai d, "I m g o i n g to h i r e III. I.egal Research and the Anahsis
a n o t h e r p a r a l e g a l t o d o y o u r a s s g n m e n t s . " R o b e r t c o n t i n u e d , " N o w t h a t voii a r e in law s c h o o l . Process
1w a n t y o u t o t a k e o \ e r s o m e ol t i e m o r e s u b s t a n t i v e legal w o r k , 1 w a n t y o u t o s t a r t p e r l o r m m g
1\’. Cleiieral CConsideratioiis
t h e legal a n a l y s i s ot s o m e ol t h e l e w c a s e s a n d d e t e r m i n e w h a t , it a n \ , p o s s i b l e c a u s e s ol a c t i o n
\'. Key Points (Checklist: I.egal
e xi st . ' I' our n e w r e s p o n s i b i h t i e s cill b e lo s l u d v t h e c a s e s a n d p i xn i d e m e w i t h m e m o r a n d a ol
Research and .Anahsis
l a w i d e n t i l y i n g t h e l e g a l i s s u e s .lul a n a k / i n g h o w t h e law a p p l i e s t o t h e i ssues. I h i s will l i ve
m e t o c o n c e n t r a t e m o r e o n t ri a w o r k . St ar t w i t h ,Mr. 1 ietel's case,'
VI. .Application
M a r i a n r e m e m b e r e d t h e ni t i al i n l e r \ iew w i t h .Mr. l.ielel. | e r r \ l ielel h a s a h o i t e m p e r .
H e g o t i n t o a n a r g u m e n t wi t h h ‘. n e i g h b o r , l o m Spear. .Mr. 1.ietel's t e m p e r got t h e best ol h i m .
H e p u n c h e d l o m , a n d a h g h t e n uetl. St e ve Spear, t h e l a t h e r ol T o m a n d a r e t i r e d d e p u t \ s h e n l l ,
Learning Objectives
c a m e o u t ol t h e h o u s e a n d a n n o i n c c d t ha t h e w a s p l a c i n g . Mr l ielel u n d e r c i l i / e n ’s .irrest, , \ l t e r
a s h o r t s t r u g g l e , Stev e Spe . i r s i i hi ued a n d h a i u l c u t l e d .Mr. 1 ietel. .Kller .Mr. l ielel wa s h a i u k ul l e d •After completing this chapter, \'oii
a n d h a d c e a s c d r e s i s t i n g , S l w i s p e a r k i c k e d h i m a b o u t six t i m e s , c r a c k i n g o n e o i h i s ribs. should understand:
M r . 1,iet el i n c u r r e d m e d i i a l >iill ,,inl lost t w o d a v s ol w o r k . S i n c e t h e i n c i d e n t , ,Mr I ietel ha s • Ihe delmition of legal anah sis
h a d a lot ol t n ) ubl e s l e e p i n g , aiv h e is t a k i n g s l e e p i n g pills o n h i s d o c t o r s , ul\ ice. I le is l e a r l u l
I.egal research and the elements of
ot S t e v e S p e a r w h e n e v e r h c ' e e h i m,
legal ,\n;\lys\s
l e r r v a c i mi l s t h a t h e p u n l e d I ' om vvi t houl p r o v o c a t i o n aiitl t ha t t h e c i l i / e n' s a r i e s i w as
p r o b a b l v i u s t i t i e d , b u t h e w a n t ' o s ue l o r hi s m e d i c a l bills a i ul i h e l oss o t w o r k , I low the elements of legal analysis
M a r i a n r e a l i z e s t h a t I'lis lei lirsl a n a l y s i s a s s i g n m e n i , is \ e r \ i m p o r l a n t : t h e (.lualitv ot appl\- in specific situations
h e r p r o d u c t w ill d e t e r m i n e ' »' l u h e r s h e c o n t i n u e s l o b e a s s i g n e d t hi s t\ p e ol s u b s t a n t i \ e legal • Ihe importance ot focus and
w o r k . S h e a s k s h e r s e l f , “ Wh. i t ' s ne he s l wa y t o a p p r o a c h a legal p r o b l e m ' ' \ \ hat is a s y s t e i n a t k intellectual honesty
w a y t o a n a l v z t ’ a c l i e n t ' s p r o Me i t hat w ill p r o d u c e t h e b e s t restill in t h e l east a m o u n t ol l i m e '
Whe n and how legal authorit}’
I h e A p p l i c a t i o n s e c t i o n al n e ¿id ol t hi s c h a p l e r p r e s e n t s a n a n a h sis ol .Mr. I ietel's c a s e a n d
applies
t h e a n s w e r s t o M a r i a n ’s q u e - t i i ' s .
25
P A R T I I N T R O D U C T I O N TO R E S E A R C H , A N A L Y T I C A L P R I N C I P L E S , A N D T H E L E G A L P R O C E S S
I. INTRODUCTION
•As di scussed in the preface, the focus o f this text is on the process o f a n a h z i i i g legal t]ueslioiis
raised by the facts o f a client’s case, legal research, a n d the process o f c o n i ni i ni i ca t i ng research
a n d anaK sis in w ritten torni. liiis chapter presents an o\ervie\s- t>t the process ot legal a n a h sis
a n d s o m e conc ept s an d cons i der at io ns in\-ol\'ed in that process.
Mos t cases begin like the l.ietel case. A client relates a set o f factual e\ ent s that the client
percei\'es entitle h i m o r her to legal relief Ihe client seeks a solution to what h e o r she belie\os
is a legal p r obl e m. ' Ihe p r ob le m ma\- be as simple as the need tor a p o w e r ot a t t or ne y o r as
c om p le x as a t]uestion i n v o k i n g mult iple parties a n d se\er al legal issues. ' Ihe p r o b l e m nia\'
be o n e tor which there is no legal r e m e d \ \ o r it ma\' not be a legal p r o b l e m at all.
For Example An individual is fired in retaliation for disclosing a defect in the employer's
product. The state where this occurs does not have a statute prohibiting
retaliatory discharge, nor have the state courts adopted a cause of action in tort for re
taliatory discharge. Therefore, it may be that no legal retnedy for this type of discharge is
available under state law. It is possible that the client's only recourse is political; that is,
the client may have to attemptto get legislation passed prohibiting retaliatory discharge,
or to exert social pressure through the media.
The pLupose o f legal analysis a nd legal research is to analyze the tactual e \ e n t p r esent ed
by the client a nd det er mi ne :
1. The legal issue ( questi on) or issues raised by the tactual event
2. The law that go\ ’er ns the legal issue
3. I low the law that gcne r ns the legal issue applies to the (actual event, i ncluding
what, if aiu', legal r eme dy is available
O n c e this is accomplished, the client can be ads isetl ol the \ a r i o u s rights, duties, an d o p t i o ns
axailable.
II. LEGAL ANALYSIS DEFINED

Before addr essi ng the steps in\'ol\ ed in the legal anaU sis process, it is necessar\' to u n de r s ta nd
w hat is m e a n t b\- Icgiil iiiiiilysis. The term has different meanings, d e p e n d i n g o n t he context ol
its usage (the t\ pe of legal analysis bei ng per f o rmed) .
For Example The term legal analysis can refer to, among others, statutory analysis
(discussed in Chapter 3), case law analysis (Chapter 12), and counter
analysis (Chapter 13).
In this chapter, legal a n a ly sis is used in a b r oa d sense to refer to t he pr ocess o f i d e n

tifying t he issue or issues p r es e nt e d by a cl ient ’s lacts a n d d e t e r m i n i n g w ha t law applies an d
h o w it applies. S i mpk' put, legal analysis is the process o f a p p k i n g the law ft) t he facts ot the
c l ie nt ’s case. It is an e xpl ora t i on o f h ow a nd wh y a specific law does or d oe s not apply. Legal
r esearch is the part of the legal a n a k s i s process that i i n o k e s f inding the law that applies to
t he legal qu es t i o n raised b\- the facts o f a cl ient ’s case.
III. LEGAL RESEARCH AND THE ANALYSIS PROCESS

A legal a n a ly sis p ro cess is a s \s te ma ti c a p p ro a ch to legal research a n d a n a h ’sis. It is an
o r ga ni z ed a p pr oa ch that helps you d e \ ’elop research skills. It makes legal resear ch easier, s a\es
time, a n d helps develop research skills.
26
CHAPTER 2 INTRODUCTION TO LEGAL RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS
I he mo st c o m m o n approacli to Icâl anal\ sis in\’ol\ cs a tour -s t cp process:
STEP1: Issue. Ihc idcntihcation ol the issue (legal question) or issues raised b\' tl>e
tacts ot tlie client’s case
STEP 2: Rule. liie identitication ot the law that g o \ e r n s the issue

STEP 3: Analysis/Application. A det e r mi na t i on o t ' h o w the rule o f law applies to the
issue
STEP 4: Conclusion. s u m m a r \ ' ot' the results ot' the legal a n a h s i s
An a c r o n y m c o m m o n l y used in reterence to the anaK tical process is IRAC. It is c o m

posed ot t h e first letter ot the descriptive t e rm for each step o f t h e legal analysis process. 'Ihe
use o f t h e a c r o n \ n i is an easy w a\ ’ to r eniemlier the foiu'-step legal analysis pr oc e s s — issue,
rule, mialysis/application, a nd coiiclusion.
'Ihe r es e ar c h c o m p o n e n t o f this p r oce ss involves steps I a n d 2. Steps 3 a n d 4 o f t h e
pr oc e s s i n v ol ve t h e a n a h s i s ol the r es e ar ch result s o n c e t h e r es e ar ch is c o m p l e t e . I he
s u b s e q u e n t se ct i ons o f this c h a p t e r a ddr es s steps I a n d 2 in detail. Steps 3 a n d 4 ar e s u m
m a r i z e d in this c h a p t e r a n d t h e n d i s c us s e d in detail in (Chapter 13 in t he legal w ri t i n g
secti on o f t h e text.
Before the legal analysis o f a case can pr op er h' begin, however, the following pr eli minar y
p r e p ar a t i on m u s t take place:
1. All t h e facts a nd i nf or mat i on relevant to the case should be gathered.

2. Preliniinar)- legal research should be c o n du c t e d to gain a basic familiarit\- with
the area ot'law involved in tlie case.
A. Facts a n d Key Terms

1. Facts
It is i m p o r t a n t to keep in m i n d the crucial lole the facts pla\' in the a n a h t i c a l process.
Ihe loui steps ol the a n a Ks i s p u K c s s involve llic Saels ol Uic eliciU's âsc, aiKi i h c facts
plav' a ma j or role in each step:
1. Issue. Ihe key facts arc inckuled in the issue. Ihe issLie is the ¡irecise ques t i on
raised bv' the specific fni Is o f t h e client’s case. A properly stateil issue requires i n
clusion o f t h e key facts, ihis is discussed in tlefail in (Cliapters 10 and 1 f.
For Example Under the provisions ofthe state battery law, is a battery com
mitted by an individual, present at the scene of a battery, who
encourages others to commit the battery but does not actively participate in
the actual battering ofthe victim? Jh e key facts of this issue are italicized.
2. R u le . Ihe d et er ni i na t i on of which law governs the issue is based on the appl icabil
ity o f t h e law to the facts of the client’s case.
For Example If the issue involves oppressive acts by a majority shareholder

against the interests of minority shareholders in a closely held
corporation, then the facts govern the determination of which corporation
statutes apply. Only those statutes that address acts by majority shareholders
can apply. In most states, this is limited to a few statutes.
27
PART I INTRODUCTION TO RESEARCH, ANALYTICAL PRINCIPLES, AND THE LEGAL PROCESS
A ii a l y s i s / A p p l i c a t i o n . Ihc analysis/application stop is iho process o \ iipi>ly

iiig the rule of h tw to th e jiiets. it ob\ iousl\- c a nn ot take placc wi t ho ut t he tacts
Wi t ho u t the tacts, the kiw stands in a v a c uum.
For Example The client was ticketed for driving 65 mph in a 55-mph zone.
The client believes that the speed limit was actually 65 mph
and that the officer made a mistake, A determination of whether the client
violated the law requires the application of the rule of law to the facts of
the client's case. Was the speed limit where the ticket was given 65 mph or
55 mph? The facts are essentialxo the process. Without the facts, one cannot
make a determination of how the law applies.
4. C o n c lu s i o n . Ihe conclusion is a s u m m a t i o n of h ow t he law a pphe s to t he facts,

a recap o f t h e first three steps. It too requires the facts.
In every case, the analytical process i n vo h es a d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f h o w the law a p p h e s to

the facts. In cou r t opi ni o ns , cou r ts d e t e r m i n e h o w the law applies to t he facts p r e s e nt e d to
the court. \ ' e r y often s tu de n t s pa\' too little a t te n ti o n to the facts, f ocusing on w h at t h e law is
and what it requires. lhe\' ignore the c r u c i a l k i m p o r t a n t role the facts pla\'.
In a sense, cases are tact driven — the facts d e t e r m i n e the o u t c o m e o f t h e case. Often, il
a single fact is c ha n ged , the o u t c o m e is different. I he appl ication o f t h e law results in a dif
ferent c onclusi on.
For Example In a murder case, the degree of the offense can depend on a single fact.
First-degree murder requires specific intent. It requires not only that the
defendant intended to shoot the victim but also thatthe defendant intended the shooting
to kill the victim. If the facts of the case show that the defendant intended to shoot but
not kill the victim, the offense is not first-degree murder. The defendant's intent is a fact,
and changing this single fact changes the outcome ofthe case. The application ofthe law
results in a different conclusion. The offense is not first-degree murder but a lesser offense.
Wi t h this in mi n d , the a n a h s i s process s houl d begin with a co ns id e r at io n o f t h e tacts

o f t h e client's case. I d e n t if y u n d re v ie w the focts at th e outset. 'Ihis p r el i mi n ar y step shoul d
include t he following:
1. Be sure v’ou have all the facts. Ask vourself if you ha\’e all the interviews, files,
statements, a n d o t h e r pieces ot i nf or ma t i on that have been gat her ed c o n c e r n i n g
t he case. Are the tiles complet e? Are facts or i n fo r ma t i on missing? As discussed
in the m u r d e r case example, a single fact can d e t e r m i n e the o u t c o m e o f a case. It
key facts are missing, \'oui' a n a h s i s may result in an erronec)us legal conclusion.
2. Stud}’ the available facts to see if addi tional i n f or ma t i on s houl d be gat her ed b e
fore legal analysis can p r t t p e r k begin.
3. O r ga n i z e the facts, ( i r o u p all related tacts. Place t he facts in a logical order, such
as in the s e quenc e in which they o c c u r re d (chronological or der ) or accor di ng to
topic (topical),
4. W'eigh the facts. ' Ihe value o f s o m e factual inf or mat i on, such as hearsay, may be
questionable.
5. Identify the key facts. D e t e r m i n e which facts a p p e a r to be critical to t he o u t c ome
o f t h e case. (Chapter 9 discusses the i m p o r t a n c e o f key facts a n d the proce.ss t'or
identif} ing key lacts.
28
2. Key T erm s
Moit legal research sources, sucli as statutor\- codes, legal encNclopetlias, legal treatises, an d
tligi'st s, co nt ai n one or m o r e indexes. Ihese indexes are a list o f t erms that help to locate in-
ior na tion. To etfectiveh' use an index, \'ou must identity the rele\'ant terms in the client’s case.
Ihise key terms help guide the researcher in the area being researched. If\(iu are researching
eleUri.inicalK', such as t h r ou g h the Internet, searches are c on d u c t e d using key terms.
Ke\' t e rms are identified by re\i e\ving the case file a nd listing all the t e r ms rele\-ant to
t b e l e^ a l ques t i ons raised b\' the tacts ot the case. W'hen p r ep a r i ng this list, keep in m i n d t he
toll )u ing:
Parties in\’olved (e.g., pri\'ate citizen, c or por at i on , public otlicial)

Place (e.g., public or p r i \ a te property)
■Actions or omi s si ons that form the basis of the case (e.g., negligence, intentional
acts)
Uctenses a\ailable (e.g., self-defense)
Relief sought (e.g., m o n e \ ’, injunction)
Key t e rms ma\- be b roa d t e rms \'ou use as a gLiide to pert'orm p r el i mi nar y research to
g a i i a lamiliarity with the area o f law g ov e r ni ng the client's case, or n a r r o w t e r m s if )’ou are
alrtach' t a nnliar with the area ot law and want to tocus vom' research on a specific aspect.
For Example The client's case involves a question about child custody and the researcher
is unfamiliar with this area of law. The researcher decides to read about
tfe topic in a legal encyclopedia The first step is to list all the terms that the subject
":hild custody" might be indexed under, such as divorce, marriage, custody, parent and
c ’lild, child custody, children, and domestic relations. By listing the terms, you focus the
seaich in the index and avoid having to scan the entire index. The topic will be under at
least one of the search terms.
Because the ke\' t e rm ina\' not be indexed in the wa\' vou t hink it sboiikl be, it is i m
p or ta nt to think ol all the te rms or categories that ma y ap|-ily. O n e role ol legal ed u c at i on is
t o -.each key t erms a n d the categories wher e the\- fit.
For Example A legal education teaches that, in general, unintentional harmful acts are
categorized under tort law as negligence, the act of striking someone is
categorized under both civil and criminal law as battery, and child support is under the
umtrella of domestic relations.
Key t e r ms ma\- i nclude key facts f r o m t he c l i e n t ’s case. This ofien o cc ur s w h e n the

iresea-cber is familiar with the general area o f law a nd is seeking the specific law that g over ns
t;hc cl.ent’s fact situation.
For Example The assignment is to locate the federal law the client may be charged with
breaking. The client placed a bomb made of nitroglycerin under a bridge.
Ass ime these are the key facts. The researcher, based on her legal education and previ-
ousexperience, knows thatthe general research topic is "federal criminal law" and the
sub opic is "explosives." By identifying the key search terms nitroglycerin and bridges,
the esearcher is guided to the specific law within the general area of "federal criminal
law' and "explosives."
29
It is r e c o m m e n d e d tliat a list o f key t e r ms be deve l op e d while you are rev iew ing the
case and identifying the ke\’ tacts. I f \ o u are u nf ami liar with the area o f law, use a list ol tern.s
related to the general topic o f t h e case to p er f or m general r esearch a n d b e c o m e t'amiliar wit i
the area ol law (see the p rec ed i ng child custodv' example). O n c e v o u are taniiliar with the ari.i
ot law, identity the key facts a n d the legal issue before c o n d u c t i n g research.
B. Preliminary Research
Before c o nd u c t in g any research, check the o t i k e research files for previous m e m o s or researcii
that may have add r e ssed the issue(s) you are researching. TItis m a y obviate the need for fur
t h e r research.
It may, howe\' er, be necessarv' to c o n d u c t s o m e basic research in the area(s) o f law that
gin ern the issue or issues in the case. You ma y be u nf ami li a r with the area o f law in general in'
with the specific aspect o f t h e area that applies in t he client's case. You m a y obtain a general
over view o f t h e law by reference to a legal encycl opedia or a si n gl e- vo lu me treatise. If the
specific q ues t i on o r area is k n o w n at the outset, use o f an A L R reference or a nuilt ivolume
treatise ma\- be appr opr iat e.
C. IRAC Analysis
O n c e the facts have been gathered and reviewed, follow the four steps o f t h e IRACC legal analysis
process (see Hxhibit 2-1). It is i m p o r t a n t to keep the following co n si d er at io ns in m i n d when
p e r f o rm i n g these steps.
E x h ib it 2-1 Steps in the IRAC Legal Analysis Process. S o u rc e : hup://www u s c o u n s goW

c o u n j o c a t o r a sp x
STEPl: Issue Identify the issue (legal question) or issues raised by

the facts of the client's case.
STEP 2; Rule Identify the law that governs the issue.
STEP 3: Analjrsis/ Determine how the rule of law applies to the issue.
Application
STEP 4: Conclusion Summarize the results of the legal analysis.
1. Issue
Id e n t if y the issue (legal q u e s tio n ) or issues raised b y th e facts o f t h e client's case. Ihe issue is the
precise legal question raised by the facts o f t h e dispute. I he first a n d pr obably most i mp o r t a n t
step in the anah'tical process is to identify t he issue. You mu s t identify the pr ob le m before you
can solve it. The issue is the start ing point. If it is misidentified, each sub se qu en t step in the
process is a step in the wr o n g direction. T ime is wasted, a nd malpr act icc ma y result.
For Example A client complains thatthe individual who sold and installed the tile in his
bathroom installed it in a defective manner After a few months, the tile
began to fall off the wall. The person who installed the tile gave no oral or written war
ranty covering the quality of the installation or the quality of the tile.
The researcher assumes, without conducting research, thatthe entire transaction
is a sale of goods covered by state statutes governing the sale of goods. The researcher
makes this assumption because the transaction involved the sale of goods—the tiles.
Underthe sale of goods statutes is a section creating an implied warranty that goods are
merchantable when sold, which in this case means the tiles will not fall apart.
30
CHAPTER 2 INTRODUCTION TO LEGAL RESEARCH AND A NALYSIS
The statute as interpreted by the state courts, however, does not apply to the service
portion of such transactions, which, in the client's case, is the installation of the tile. Based
on an incorrect assumption, the researcher identifies the issue as a question of whether
the implied warranty of merchantability was breached. The identification ofthe issue is
incorrect because of the erroneous assumption. The question is not about the quality of
the tile but about the quality of the installation. Research on the existence of an implied
warranty of merchantability is misdirected.
The case may be lost because the issue is incorrectly identified. The laws governing
the sale of a service are different from those governing the sale of goods. A lawsuit claim
ing breach of an implied warranty of merchantability will probably not prevail because
the implied warranty of merchantability statute does not apply.
Tlie clicnt dc)cs not pa}' to have the w r o n g qu es ti on ans wered. Ihe subjects o f issue
identiti cation a n d pr esentat ion are ol' such i m p o r t a n c e that (Chapters 11) a nd 11 are d e \ ’oted
to them. S o m e i mp o r t a n t cons ider at ions ii noK ing issL:es are discussed brietl\- iiere.
a. M u l t i p l e Issue.s
Ihe cl ient’s fact situation may raise multiple legal issues and i n v o k e ma ny a\'enues o f relief.
Ilie i mpl ied warrant\- example iinolves on e issue, but there ma\' he se\eral issues in a case,
't’ou sIk h i Ii I be aware ot a nd keep in m i n d that o ne set ot tacts ina\' raise multiple issues a nd
include' mult iple causes ot action.
For Example Mr Elvan rear-ended the client's car at a stoplight. After the impact,
Mr Elvan exited his car, approached the client's car, and started yelling at
the client, threatening to hit the client. He grabbed the client's arm but never struck him.
As a result of the incident, the client's car was damaged. The client suffered whiplash
from the collision and a bruise on his arm from being grabbed, and since the wreck, he
has been upset and has had trouble sleeping.
The diem may have several causes ot action against Mr. Elvan: a claim of negli
gence arising from the rear-end collision, civil assaultfor his conduct of approaching the
client in a threatening manner, battery for grabbing the client, and intentional infliction
ot emotional distress for his conduct after the collision. Each of these potential causes
of action may raise legal issues or questions that must be addressed. This example is
referred to in this chapter as the rear-end collision example.
h. S e p a r a t e t h e I s s u e s
■Analy/.e a nd research each issue separately and thoroughU'. If you t r \ ’ to research and analyze
se\eral issues at once, it is easy to get conl used and trustrated. It you h nd inl o r ma t i on relevant
to .imither issue, m a ke a reference note a nd place it in a separate research tile.
t . l o c u s o n th e Issu es o t the C ase
Keep y our t'ocus on the issues raised b\- the facts o f t h e client’s case or on those issues that \ o u
lia\e b e e n assigned to research.
For Example In the rear-end collision example, assume that there was a passenger in
the vehicle with the client and thatthe passenger is represented by another
law firm. Although there may be many interesting issues involving potential legal claims
available to the passenger, the passenger is not the client. The focus should be on the
issues in the client's case. The issues involving the passenger are outside the scope of
tl'e problem and should not be allowed to become a distraction.
31
.Avoid getting sidctrackcd an d wa.sting time on intere.sting aspects o r issues o f a ease

\ oii were not assigned to address.
For Example Suppose that, in the rear-end collision example, you are assigned to re
search the assault issue. Do not research the other issues or clutter your
analysis with issues you were not assigned to address. Stick to the assignment, if you
come across useful information that is relevantto another issue, note it and give itto the
person assigned to address that issue.
2. R u le
Id e n t it y the law that g o v e rn s the issue (legal research). Ihe second step in the IRACC a n a h ti
cal process is to identity the rule of law that applies to the issue; that is, to soK’e the client’s
p r ob l em you must tind the law that applies to the problem. Ihis is the legal research c o m p o
nent ol'legal anaKsis. the t hr ee -pa rt process presented in Hxhibit 2-2 is r e c o m m e n d e d t'or
c o n d u c t i n g legal research.
E x h ib it 2 -2 Three Parts of Step 2: Rule.

PARTI Locate the general law that governs the issue —usually statu
tory or case law.
PART 2 Locate the law that interprets how the general law applies to
the specific fact situation of the issue —usually case law. Refer
ence to secondary authority is necessary if there is no primary
authority that applies or if additional authority is needed to
help interpret the primary authority.
PART 3 Update research to ensure that the source you are reading has
not been amended, repealed, revoked, overruled, modified, or
otherwise changed.
Ihe iH'st part is locating the general law, such as a statute, that gover ns the question.
I be second part is locating the law, such as a cour t opini o n, that i nter prets how the general
law applies to the specific fact sit uati on o f the issue. Ihe third part is to up da t e t he research
sources.
For Example The client is a divorced parent who does not have custody of her child.
The father, the custodial parent, was recently convicted of possession
of a small amount of cocaine. The client wants to obtain custody of the child due to the
father's drug conviction. The issue is: "Underthe state's child custody law, may a change
of custody be obtained due to a custodial parent's conviction for possession of cocaine?"
The first step of the legal research component of the legal analysis process requires
locating the state statute that governs the modification of child custody Assume thatthe
statute provides that custody will not be changed unless there has been a substantial
change in circumstances that affects the welfare of the child. The statute does not define
or give examples of a "substantial change in circumstances " The second step requires
locating a court opinion (case law) that answers the question of whether a custodial
parent's conviction of possession of drugs is a "substantial change in circumstances"
within the meaning of the statute. The third part is to update the research sources to
ensure that the source is current law.
32
C C h a p t e r t h r i ) u g l i (Chapter 7 presL-nt detailed i nst ructions on ho w to research specific

types ot p r i n ia rv a n d se c o n d ar y authorities, such as statutor\' law, case hiw, a n d treatises.
A s u m n i a r } ’ ot' the tliree-part research process I'ollows.
a. P a r t 1: L o c a t e t h e G e n e r a l L a w l l i a t G o v e r n s t h e Lssue
itiis r equir es the identification o t' te r ms that \'ou will use to search tor the law that gover ns t he
issue. Ask yourself, “\Mi at t \ p e ot law applies to the ques tion raised h\- the facts o f t h e case?”
i hi s may be e na ct ed law or case law.
( I) E n a c t e d L a w 'Ihe legal issue ma\- bego\-erned by enacted law, such as a constitutional

provision, statute, or di nanc e, or regulation. Ask \ourself, “W'hat te rms will I use to search a
s t a t u t o r )’ i nde x or c o m p u t e r d at abase to locate the law that applies to this issue?” List all the
possible t e r ms that might enc omp a ss the rele\ ant law. Search the enacted law index or dat abase
using t he search t e rms \'ou ha\-e identified.
Review the an no t a t i on s to the statute for cases that interpret the statute in fact sit uati ons
similar to y o u r case. Also, check the a n n ot a ti o n s tor secondars' sources such as encyclopetlias,
A L R a n n o t a t i o n s , a n d law re% ie\v articles that discuss the statute. I'o avoid havi ng to look u p
the law' m o r e t ha n once, save t he relevant research c o n c e r n i n g the rule o f law as \-ou go along.
Ihis s h o u ld i n clude the p r o p e r statutor\' citation, a c o p \ ’ o f t h e relevant p o rt i o ns o f law, case
citations (if anv), a n d references to secondarx' sources.
For Example In the child custody example, think of all the tertns for the laws govern
ing child custody. Laws involving child custody could be indexed under
"family law," "domestic relations," "divorce," "marriage," "child custody," "custody,"
or "parent and child." The laws governing changes in custody should be indexed under
one of these terms.
(2) C a s e L a w Rules or principles es t abh sh e d b\- the cour ts may goxern t he issue. In
such cases, t he r e may he no statutorx’ la\s that applies. As with searching tor e na ct ed law, ask
yoursell, "W'hat t e rms will 1 use to search a case law digest or c o m p u t e r dat aba se to locate
the law that applies to this issue?" l.ist all the possible te rms u n d e r which tlie c o ur t o p i n i o n s
g ov er ni ng the issue may be categorized.
For Example An individual, while not paying attention, runs a stop sign and hits the
client's vehicle. The client is suing for the damage caused to her vehicle.
Lawsuits between individuals arising out of accidents are governed by tort law. Mosttort
claims are based on case law, that is, the law defined by the courts in court opinions.
Think of all the terms under which the court opinions governing automobile collisions may
be categorized. The opinions may be listed under "negligence," "automobile collisions,"
end other topics.
Sear c h t he case law digests o r c o m p u t e r d at ab a ses using the search t e r m s you h a \ e

identified. (Chapter 4 addresses the research o f issues g i n e r n e d b\' case law. ("hapt er 7 pr esents
t e ch ni qu e s for c o n d u c t i n g research using co m p u te r s.
b. P a r t 2; L o c a t e t h e L a w I h a t I n t e r p r e t s L lo w t h e ( i e n e r a l L a w A p p l i e s
t o t h e S p e c i f i c F a ct S i t u a t i o n o f t h e Lssue
'Ihe r ul e o f law that gox’er ns t he issue ma\- be wri tten in such br oad t e rms that it is necessar y
to loiik to a n o t h e r source, such as case law or secondar\- aut hori tw to d e t e r m i n e h o w t he law
33
applic.s to the specific fact situation ol the issue. Ask \'ourselt, “W’liat t e r ms will 1 use to search
a case law digest or compLitcr dat abase to locate the co ur t o p i ni on that interprets h o w the
general law applies to the specific fact situation raised by the issue?”
For Example In the child custody example presented at the beginning of this subsection,
it is necessary to find case law that addresses the question of whether
a drug conviction is a "substantial change in circumstances" within the meaning of
the statute. Think of all the terms or phrases that may help locate cases that interpret
the statute in this fact situation. These terms may be child custody, custodial parent
and drug convictions, change of custody and drug convictions, or change of custody
and parental misconduct.
(Chapter 12 addresses h o w to d e t e r m i n e wh en a cour t o p i n i o n applies to a specific fact

situation,
W'hen l ooking for primar\- authorit)-, be sure to c o n d u c t Ci)unteranalysis. That is, always
look for a u tho r i ty that ma y pr esent a c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t in r es po ns e to y ou r analysis ot an
issue. If \’ou find a case on point in s u pp o r t o f A o u r position, look for o th e r cases that have
a different holding.
R o le o f S e c o n d a r y A u t h o r i t y .Although it is essential to locate the primar}' authorit}'
that gover ns an issue, he sure to n ote i m p o r t a n t s econ da r y authorit}' as well. TTie co ur t ma}'
rely on seco nda r y authorit}' if there is in) primar}' authorit}' o r if it is uncl ear h o w the p r i m a r y
authorit}' applies. Sources such as A I.R a nn ot at i ons , legal encyck)pectias, a nd treatises otien
discuss a n d list the statutes a nd cases related to a topic. Reference to such sources erisures that
you have f o u nd all the law related ft) the issue bei ng researched. Also, s e con da r y authorits'
sources such as A I .R a n n o t a ti o n s are helpful iii locating c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t s w h e n p e r f o r m i n g
counteranalysis,
c. P a rt 3: U p d a t e R e s e a r c h
Update all research to ensLue that soiu'ccs ai e current. Statutes must he checked to d e t e r m i n e
if the}' ha\ e been repealed or a m e n d e d , cases checked to e ns ur e the}' have not been reversed
or modified b}' later cases, a n d secondar} soiuces checked tor a dd i ti ons a nd a m e n d m e n t s .
W'hen c o n d u c t i n g research, follow a research sequence, first, locate the p ri ma r} ’
aut hor i ty that gover ns the issue. As m e n t i o n e d in (Chapter 1, the c ou r ts refer to a n d rely on
p r i ma ry authorit}- first when r esoh ing legal problems.
W'hen researching prin-:ar}' aut hority, look first for the en a ct ed law, that is, the C(institu-
tional provisions, statutes, a nd so forth that g o \ e r n the issue. I her e are two reasons for this.
One, the constitut ional or s tatutor y pro\-ision ma y a n swe r the c]uestit)n, so t hat reference to
case law is not required.
For Example The issue is, "How often must stockholder meetings for a corporation be
held?" The statute provides that meetings must be held at least once an
nually. The statute answers the question; there is no need to find case law interpreting
the statute.
Two, the a n n o t a t i o n s (sunimar}' o f coLU't o p i n i o n s a n d o t h e r references that i nt e r pre t

the law) that follow the const i t ut io nal or statLitory pro\'ision m a y include ari opinit)n or a
s e co nd a ry au t h o r i t y sour ce that inter prets the law in a fact si t uat i on similar to the facts of
}'our issue. Iherefore, }'ou will not need to s pe n d t ime r ese ar ch i ng o t h e r s our ce s for relevant
case law-.
34
For Example The issue is, "Does a majority shareholder of a corporation engage in op
pressive conduct when he or she refuses to issue dividends?" The corpora
tion statute prohibits oppressive conduct but does not define what constitutes oppressive
conduct. The annotations that follow the statute make reference to a court opinion in
which the court held thatthe refusal to issue dividends was oppressive conduct. The
researcher does not have to research other sources for a case that interprets the statute.
ihe s c co n d part in the research sec|uence is looking to se co nda r) aut hori ty, it t h e re is
no p r i m a r y aut hori t)' that applies o r it add i ti ona l au t h o r i ty is n ee ded to hel p i nt e r pr e t the
primar)- authorit}' (see Hxhibit 2-3).
E x h ib it 2 - 3 Sequence for Conducting Research:.

First—Locate the Step 1: Locate the constitutional or statutory law.
primary authority The constitutional or statutory provision may
that governs the issue answer the question raised by the issue, making
reference to case law unnecessary. Also, the
annotations (summary of court opinions and other
references that interpret the law) that follow the
constitutional or statutory provision may include
an opinion or secondary source that applies that
law to a fact situation similar to the facts of
the issue.
Step 2: Locate the case law.This is necessary
when there is no constitutional or statutory law or
when the law must be interpreted. In this situation
the case law rules or principles established by the
courts govern the issue.
Second—Locate Refcrencc to secondary authority is necessary if

secondary authority there is no primary authority that applies or if
additional authority is needed to help
interpret the primary authority.
See (Chapter 13 tor an additional s i un n i a r y ot t he research process.
3. A n a ly s is/A p p lic a tio n

D c . c n n i n c h o w the rule o f law iipplies to th e issue. (Once )'ou have located the rule ot law, you
nu.st analyze the law to d e t e r mi ne how it applies to the tacts ot the client’s ca.se. In o the r w'ords,
}’0 L a p p h ' t he law to the legal issue. This is a t h r ee -p a rt process (see Hxhibit 2-4).
E x h ib it 2 -4 Three Parts of Step 3 — Analysis/Application.

Identify the component parts (elements) of the rule of law.
PART 2 Apply the elements (the component parts) of the law to the
facts of the client's case.
PART 3 Consider the possible counterarguments to the analysis of the

issue, i.e., conduct a counteranalysis of the analysis.
35
An in-depth discussion of this step in regard to statutor\- law and case hnv is presented
in (Chapter 3 and (Chapter 12, respecti\'ei\-. Ihe role of the ke\' facts is addressed in (Chapter 9.
(Counteranaksis is discussed in (Chapter 13. Iherelore, only a briel s ummar\ ’ ot this step is
included here.
a. P art 1: I d e n t i f y t h e C o m p o n e n t P a r t s ( E l e m e n t s ) o f t h e R u l e o f L aw
for the rule of law to apply to a fact situation, certain conditions established b\- the rule must
be met. Ihese conditions or component parts are called the elements. You must identity the
rec]uirements (elements) of the rule of law before you can apply the rule to the issue raised b\’
the facts of the client’s case.
For Example Section 93-85A of the state statute governing the execution of a will
provides: "The execution of a will must be by the signature of the testator
and of at least two witnesses as follows:
1. The testator, in the presence of two or more witnesses:
a. signifies to the witnesses that the instrument is the testator's will, and
b. signs the will or has someone else sign the testator's name at the testator's
specific direction.
2. The attesting witnesses must sign in the presence of the testator and each other."
To determine how the statute applies to a client's facts, first identify the elements of the
statute. The elements of the statute follow:
1. The testator must indicate to two or more witnesses that the instrument is the
testator's will.
2. The testator must sign the will or have someone sign it at the testator's specific
direction.
3. The witnesses must sign.
4. Steps 1 through 3 must be done in the presence of the witnesses and the testator.
Ihis example is referred to in this chapter as the wills example.
b. P art 2; A p p l y t h e F a c t s o f t h e C l i e n t ’s C a s e t o t h e C o m p o n e n t P a r t s
Once you have identified the elements of the rule of law, match or apph' the tacts ot the client s
case to the elements and determine how the rule applies.
For Example If the client's case involves a question ofwhether a will was validly executed
in accordance with the statute presented in the wills example, match the
facts of the client's case with the elements of the statute to determine if the execution
was valid. Assume the will was signed by someone other than the testator, and not at his
specific direction. The testator never specifically directed the person to sign the will, but
was aware of what was happening and did not object. When this fact is matched to the
element of the statute requiring that a will be signed by the testator or someone at the
testator's specific direction, the requirement of the element may not be met.
Once the facts of the client’s case have been matched to the elements of the rule ot law .
\'ou may determine how the rule applies in the client’s case.
36
For Example In the preceding example, one could reach a conclusion that the element
allowing a signature by "someone else" atthe testator's specific direction
was not met. Although the testator was present, he did not specifically direct the other
person to sign the will. One could also conclude that additional research is necessary to
determine how the courts have interpreted "specific direction" as used m the statute.
in some cases, the w;n' the rule applies is clear from the face ofthe rule, and there is no
question how the rule applies. All that is required is the application ol the elements o ft h e
rule oflaw to the tacts to determine how the hus applies in the case.
For Example An 18-year-old client wants to know if she is eligible to run for the position
of probate judge Section 34-214 of the election code provides that the
minimum age for candidates for the position of probate judge is 21 years. It is clear from
Section 34-214 that the client is not eligible to run.
In man\- cases, it is not clear li'om the rule ot law how an element applies in a specific
fact situation. In such instances, it may be necessary to refer to court opinion where the court,
m a similar fact situation, iiiterpi eted how the law applies.
For Example The rule of law defines slander as the "publication of a false statement of
fact concerning the plaintiff that causes damages." In the client's case,
the client's neighbor orally communicated to another neighbor a false statement of fact
concerning the client. While visiting her neighbor's house, she falsely stated thatthe
client was a thief. The statement damaged the client.
The answer to the question of whether an oral communication to one person con
stitutes "publication" within the meaning ofthe statute is not clearfrom a mere reading of
the statute You must refer to case law to determine how the courts have interpreted the
term publication. You must then apply the courts' interpretation ofthe term to the client's
case. If the courts have defined publication as "communication to any third person," then
the communication to the neighbor is slander
Ihis example is referred to in this chapter as the slander example.
c. P art 3: C o n s i d e r t h e P o s s i b l e C o u n t e r a r g u m e n t s t o t h e A n a l y s i s o f t h e I s s u e
(C o n d u c t a C o u n te r a n a ly s is o f th e A n a ly sis)
Orce \()u complete the anaKsis and application ol the rule ot law, consider an\’ potential
co.mterarguments to the anal\ sis or application. Ihis in\'oK'es the antieipation and eonsider-
ati )ii ol any argument an opponent is likeK’ to raise in response to the anah sis. ((Chapter 13
ad.lresses coimteranaK sis.)
Refer to the wills example in which the testator did not specifically direct a
third party to sign the will, but was aware ofthe signing and did not object.
I: can be concluded that the element of the statute allowing a third party to sign the will
ctthe testator's specific direction was not met. Although the testator was present, he did
rot specifically direct the other person to sign the will.
The counterargument is that this element ofthe statute is met because the equiva
lent of "specific direction" took place. The testator was aware that the third person was
37
S i g n i n g on his behalf and did not object. The failure to object is evidence thatthe signing
took place at his specific direction.
Undertake research to determine if this counterargument has support in the case
law. You should consider and address the counterargument in this step of the analysis
process.
4. C o n c lu s io n
Siiiunuirizc the results ofthe legal iiiiiilysis. The final step in the analytical process is the conclu
sion, the result ol the anah sis. .As discussed in step 3, part of the anah sis/application proccs>
is a dctennination of'how the rule of'law applies to the client's facts. 'Ihis deterniination is, in
effect, a conclusion. 'Iherefore, the conclusion step in the analytical process is a summing-up
and commentary that may include:
a. A recap ofthe determination reached in the analysis/application step.

b. A consideration or weighing, based on the analysis, o! what action a court ma\
take or how a court may rule upon the issue.
c. Ihe identification of additional facts or other information that ma\' be necessarx
because of questions raised during anaksis ofthe problem.
d. Ihe identification ot further research that ma\' be necessarx' in regard to the issue.
I'urther research max' be required because the necessary research sources arc not
readily ax ailable, because the analysis is preliminai y owing to time constraints, oi'
because the factual inxestigation of the case has not been completed.
e. '1he identification of related issues or concerns that became apparent as a result ol
the research and analx'sis.
IV. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

Ihc process of aiialy/ing a leâl pmblem can at limes be ditlicuU, especially iov a beginner. In
addition to the steps adtlresseil in the prex ious section, the following general considerations
and guidelines will proxe helpful when researching and analyzing a legal issue.
A. Focus
Focus is critical when performing the steps of the analytical process, focus has several
meanings, depending on what part of the process is being performed. At the broadest Icx el, it
means to concentrate on the specific task assigned, to analxv.e onlx’ the issue or issues assigned.
For Example Referring to the rear-end collision example, if the assignment is to analyze
the question of whether a cause of action for civil assault is present, stay
focused on that issue. Answer only that question. If you come across information relevant
to another issue, note it, but do not pursue it. When you have a break or at the end ofthe
day, give your notes to the person assigned to analyze that issue. Valuable time may be
lost, and work may be duplicated, if you research and analyze the other issue or interrupt
your work to discuss the information with the other person.
When identifying the issue, focus on the facts oft he client's case. Ask yourself, “What
must be decided about which oft he facts oft he client’s case?”
When identifying the rule of law, focus on the facts ol the case and the elements of the
rule of iaxx'. 'Ihis xxill help xou quicklx' eliminate rules of law that do neU applx'.
38
For Example The fact situation involves a credit purchase by the client. There may be
several rules of law that govern the transaction, such as the state's usury
laws, the state sale of goods statutes, and the federal truth-in-lendmg laws.
The interest charged in the transaction in question was 1 percent and the usury
statute provides that interest rates in excess of 20 percent are void. If you keep this fact
in mind when locating the laws that might possibly apply to the transaction, you can im
mediately eliminate the usury statute from consideration. The interest charged does not
violate the usury statute, so that statute clearly does not apply. It does not have to be
considered when analyzing the problem in step 3.
W'hen analyzing and apph iiig the rule ot'law in step 3, t'ocus on the client’s tacts and the
issue or cjuestion being analyzed. It is easy to get sidetracked, especialk when reading case law.
Interesting issues mav be addressed in a court opinion that are close but not directK’ related to
the issues in the client’s case. Stay t'ocused. Ask yourself, “Is the issue being addressed in this
opinion really related to the issue in my case? Is it on point?” Ihe guidelines and principles
addressed in Chapter 12 are helpl'ul in this regard.
If you do not sta\’ t'ocused, alter you ha\ e completed \ our research, you may have several
cases in front ot'\ou that are only marginalK’ related to the specitic isûe \'ou are analyzing.
A ot of time can be wasted reading cases that are not really on point.
Focus on the work. Avt)idance and procrastination are deadly. W'hen \('u are stuck or
having a dilhcull time analyzing or researching an issue, it is sometimes eas\- tt) procrastinate,
to avoid working on the problem. '\'ou ma\ lind excuses tor not working on the problem,
su:h as working on an easier project. Ihe way to o\ercome this is to itiirl. Do not put it off’.
If ’ou are at the research stage, itdrt rciciircliiiig. It’you are at the writing stage, itnrt writing.
Do not be discouraged if the results seem poor at lirst. Focus on the problem and begin. Often
th;’ barrier is beginning.
B Ethics— Intellectual Honesty

Rule 1.1 of the American Bar Association's Model Rules of Professional (Conduct rec]uires
thit a client be represented competcntk. Ihis means that it is yotir ethical duty to possess
ard exercise that degree ot'know ledge and skill ordinarily possessed b\ olhers in the profes-
si(n. One aspect of competence requires that a legal problem be researched with intellectual
hcnest\. Intellectual honesty includes researching and analyzing a problem objectively.
D') not let emotions, preconceived notions, personal \iews, or stubbornness interfere with an
otiectiN'e anaksis of the client’s case. Do not assume \'ou know the law. (Check your resources.
fU)t because )'ou “teel” a certain outcome should occur, do not let tliat teeling prevent you
frmi objectively researching and anakzing the issue.
F>r Example The person who interviews clients in a law office has a personal history
of domestic violence. When he was a child, there was domestic violence
n the home. He thus has a strong aversion to domestic violence and harbors a prejudice
¡gainst perpetrators of domestic violence. He interviews a client who complains that,
ne night before the interview, her husband hit her in the face with his fist. She states
nat he has beaten her frequently and savagely throughout their 10-year marriage. The
client appears to have been severely beaten. She has two black eyes, and her face is
.'wollen around the eyes.
The interviewer is outraged and upset by what happened to the client. As a
lesult of his outrage, he fails to conduct a thorough and objective interview. He does
rot ask questions to elicit the details of the events of the previous night. He assumes
39
the battery was unprovoked and does not ask questions concerning the reasons the
client’s husband hit her. His emotions and personal feelings cause him to focus on
punishing the husband.
The interviewer knows that in addition to the remedies available under the criminal
law, a civil cause of action for domestic battery is available under the state's recently
passed domestic violence statute. He recommends that the supervising attorney file a
civil complaint for domestic battery under the domestic violence statute. Relying on the
paralegal's record for thoroughness, the supervising attorney directs that a complaint
be drafted and filed,
Afewweeks later, the husband's counsel, a friend ofthe supervising attorney, calls
concerning the case, "Why did you file this complaint?" she asks. "My client was acting
in self-defense. He hit his wife after she stabbed him." As it turns out, the client decided
to kill her husband rather than face a future of continued beatings. She took a kitchen
knife and stabbed him in the chest. In self-defense, he hit her once, and the blow caught
her between the eyes, causing the two black eyes and facial swelling.
Had the interviewer not lost his objectivity, he would have conducted a thorough
interview. Probing questions concerning the events of the night in question would have
revealed all the facts, and the lawsuit might not have been filed.
Ihis is an extreme example, but loss ol'objeeti\it\’ occurs in \ arying ttegrees. Personal
prejudices, perst)iial beliefs, or s\mpathy for the client can combine to aliect objecti\ ity, which
may lead to a failure to conduct an objectixe, critical analysis oft he case, to in)t vigorousK'
pursue potential opposing arguments, or to discount opposing authorit)'.
Remember, the client nia\' not be telling the whole truth. Ihis ma\' not be intentional.
It may be the result of forgetfulness or a personal tendenc)- to discount or downplay the im
portance of ad\ erse facts. In this example, the client ma)' have been so focused upon the \ears
ol abuse, and the desire to escape Irom kirther abuse, that she truK' considered the stabbing
insignificant wiien weighed against her past experiences.
Pursue the analysis of all Icâl issues with iiUellectual Imncsty. Identify all the ta^ls
alfecting the case, l ocate all legal authorit)' concerning the issues, including an)' authorit)-
that may negativel)- alfect the client’s position, ignorii-:g ad\erse authorit)- w ill not niake it
go away. It must be addressed, Ihe iniportance of counterargument and counteranalysis is
detailed in Chapter 13,
i-or aciditional rules ot ethics, reler to the National Association ot Legal Assistants
(N.Al.A) Code of Fthics aiid Professional Responsibility and the Model Standards and Ciuide-
lines for Utilization of Paralegals, available at http://ww-w.nala.org; and the National Federation
ot Paralegal Associations (NI-'PA) Model Code ot Fthics and Professional Responsibility and
(iiiidelines for Fnforcement, available at http://ww w-.paralegals.org.
C. W h e n to Stop Researching
One ofthe more dilficult problems is to determine w h e n to s t o p researching, 'ihis occurs in
two situations, the first is when to quit researching a specific source if you find nothing, 'ihe
second, and more common, situation is when to stop researching after finding several legal
sources that address the research topic. In other words, when is your research complete? Both
of these situations are discussed in this section.
1. W h e n to Stop R ese a rch in g I f You Find N o t h i n g
One oft he more dilficult problems is when to stop looking if your research fails to produce
any results.
40
For Example The assignment is to locate law identifying elements of the tort of emotional
distress. The first step is to locate the statute governing emotional distress.
Ir many jurisdictions, torts such as this are not governed by statutory law, but by case
law. How do you know when to quit looking in the state statutes for the statutory law?
Ihero are several ditierent apprciache.s to take in this situation,
a. L o o k t o A n o t h e r S o u r c e o f L aw
In the previous example, there may simpl\' be no statutor\- law that go\erns the question. Then,
once \’ou hax’e conducted research using all the possible terms the statute ma\- be categorized
under, it is time to look to another source, such as case law. It ma\' be that tlie subject is covered
by federal rather than state law. If vou have exhausted all possible avenues of research under
a specific source, look lo another source.
h. R e c o n s i d e r t h e Lssue a n d S e a r c h T e r m s
It may be that your issue or search terms are stated so broadly or narrowlv that your search
turns up nothing.
For Example The issue is stated as: "Is a will valid when the testator wrote 'invalid' on
the title page of the will?" The researcher finds nothing when looking in
the statutory index under wills, testator, and validity. A simple rephrasing ofthe issue to,
"Is a will validly revoked when the testator wrote 'invalid' on the title page of the will?"
might improve the research results. Expanding the search terms to include revoked or
revocation may lead to the answer.
In this regard, it ma\- be necessars' to consult the person who ga\e \ ou the assignment
ti>r guidance or to make sure the assignment is clear. In addition, reterence to a secondar}'
source such as a treatise ma\' help \ ou retrame the issue or identih' additional search terms.
c. R e c o n s i d e r t h e I.eg al I h e o r y
It may be that you iiave incorrectly analyzed the question and are searching in the wrong area
of law'. Re\'iew the question to see if another area of law may be in\'ol\'ed. It nun be necessary
to consult a secondary source such as a legal enc}'clopedia lor an overview o f t h e law that
compiles all the ways a topic ma}' be addressed.
For Example The client runs a small business and a competitor induced a customer of
the clientto breach a contract with the client. Because the matter involves
breach of contract, the researcher looks to state contract law for remedies that may be
available against the competitor and finds nothing. The matter, however, is governed by
the state's tort law: the tort of interference with contractual relations. Reference to con
tract law in a legal encyclopedia will reveal that third-party interference with a contract
is often governed by tort law.
d . M a t t e r s o f F ir st I m p r e s s i o n
It nia\' be that the issue }'ou are researching has not been addressed in }our state. That is, it is
a matter of first iiiipression with no law on the subject in your jurisdiction. It this is so, refer
to a secondar}' source such as a legal encyclopedia, treatise, or ALR annotation to identit}'
41
liow other jurisdictions ha\'e answered the c]uestion. Ihe resuhs ol’s'our research sliould net
simpK' inlorm tlie super\ising attorney that the state has not decided the matter. It sh(HilJ
include the \-arious w'ays in which other states ha\e addressed the t[uestion.
2. W h e n to Stop R e search in g after F in d in g Several Legal S ources

A more difficult problem is to know when to stop researching after finding several source^.
Ihere may be an endless \’ariety of'sources that address a specific question you are research
ing. Ihere may be a statute, case law, encyclopedia reterences, ALR annotations, law re\ ie\''
articles, and so on. Ihere is no simple answer to the question of'when to stop. Learning when
to stop becomes intuiti\ e with experience. The following considerations ma\- help you detei -
mine when to stop.
a. S t o p W 'h en Y o u H a v e F o u n d t h e A n s w e r
Ihe first research step is to find the primary authority that answers the question. If the authoritv
clearly answers the question, then stop researching, as the answer is simple.
For Example If the question is, "What is the statute of Ijmitations for filing a claim for
breach of a written contract?" the statute will clearly provide the answer.
Reference to case law or secondary authority is not necessary. The only task remaining
is to update and Shepardize the statute to determine if it has been amended or repealed.
Ihere may be case law directly on point that answers the question being researched.
If this is the situation, then \ ou nuist Shepardize the case to determine if it is good law and
identify any cases that may criticize or affect its application. In addition, check the appropriate
digest I'or other cases that may anahze the issue different!}-. .Also, check a secondar}' source
sLich as an AI.R annotation on the topic for authorit}' that ma}' prox ide a different anah s i s .
Include any cases that are on point in the resear^.li.
b. W h e n Y ou F i n d S e v e r a l A u t h o r i t i e s o n t h e R e s e a r c h l o p i c
Keep the following factors in mind if }'ou locate several authorities that address the research
issue.
( 1) Primary Authority {Constitutions, Statutes, Cases) Always tr}' to find a mandator}

primar}' authority source(s) for each issue. If }'ou have several cases that address the topic, use
the mandatory authority cases. If \'ou have case law that is mandator}- authority, you do not
need persuasive authority such as cases from other jurisdictions.
If you ha\'e several mandatory- authorit}- cases, select the case that is most on point, that
niost clearl}- analyzes the law, and is most recent. (Courts, or the person reading your research,
do not have time to read through numerous cases addressing the same legal arguments. Select
only the lead case or cases.
(2) Secondary Authority Vou do not need to include secondary sources in }'our r e
search if the primary authority clearh- provides the answer to the issue. How ever, you may
wish to include secondary authority sources to support your research if they specifically
address the research topic. A reference to an AlJi annotation or law review article on the
issue allows the reader to review a comprehensive analysis of the topic if additional reler
ence is desired.
If there is no primary authority on a topic, then reference to secondary authority is
necessary. Ihe more specific the secondary authority source, the better.
42
F«r Example If you have a legal encyclopedia citation that generally addresses the ques
tion bemg researched and an 4/./? annotation that specifically addresses
the question, the ALR annotation is preferable.
( Idurts often refer to Rcstiitciuciili of the Law, AI.R annotations, law re\ iew articles, and
Ireatises when reiving on seeondars' authorits .
c. O t h e r T a c t o r s C i o v e r n i n g W h e n t o S t o p
l ime and economic lactors nia\’ goxern how thorough vour research should be and when
\-oLi shoLild stop. Ihe assignment ma\' be gow'rned b\- a short time constraint, or vou may be
informed to not spend too much time on the project because the potential claim is small. 'Ihe
assignment may be to draft a three-page legal memorandum. F.acii of these situations limits
the amount of research to be performed.
W hen this occurs, Iirst locate the primarx' authorit\’ that answers or addresses the ques-
lion, that is, the enacted law (statute, etc.) that applies and the case law that is on point. Follow
the research sequence presented earher in this chapter until \ ou run out ot’time.
Discuss the amount i)t research time \'ou should spend on the project when it is as
signed. II you find that you are running out ot'time or the project is more complex than \'ou
anticipated, consult \'oui' super\ isor.
V. KEY POINTS CHECKLIST: le g a l Research and Analysis
.Always pa\ attention to the tacts. Keep them in mind when perlorming each step
ot the analytical process. Ihe analysis process in\’ol\es determining how the law ap
plies to the hicts. Make sure \ ou iia\e all the /ik/,' at the outset.
Before beginning the IR,A(' process, pertorm preliminary research to become famil
iar with the area of law iinoKed in the case.
Rcmciv.bev IRAr. ,\\i c.\sv w.\y lo vettH'tuber the l e p l process and what
to look lor when reading a court opinion is to use the acroin ni IR.AiC: issue, rule,
(inalysis/applicatioii, aiul conclusion.
W'hen conducting research, locate tlie pirimar}' authority that governs the issue first.
If'there is no |iriniary authorit)' that applies or additional authorit)' is needed to help
interpret the primar)' authorit\', then look to secondar)' authorit)'.
When conducting legal anahsis, address one issue at a tinie. If'the assignment in-
\'ol\ es se\ eral issues, consider each issue separatel)'. (Complete the anah sis of one
issue before proceeding to the next issue. 1^)' doing so, \'ou will be iTiore efficient and
a\'oid confusion.
Reniember counteranaK sis. Always look lor authorit)' or argunients counter to \'Our
position.
Sta)' focused. (Concentrate on the specific issue )'ou are assigned to anah'ze and the
tacts of the client's case, and keep asking )'ourself, “What must be decided about the
lacts of'this case?”
Maintain intellectual honesty Do not lose )'our objecti\'it)'. Do not let personal be
liefs or feelings interfere with a thorough legal anahsis.
VI. APPLICATION
Ihe steps oft he anah'tical process are illustrated here through their application to the hypo
thetical presented at the beginning oft he chapter.
43
,\hii'ian s new a.ssignment requires her to anah /e the l ietel ease, identity tlie issues, and
determine it Mr, Lietel has an\' cause ol action against Ste\ e Spear, Marian realizes that she
must lirst familiarize herselfWith all the ¡nformation concerning the facts of the case. She
rex iews the case hie and all inter\ iews that have been conducted. Next, she re\’iews the notes
fi'om tlie legal research and anah sis course she took when she was stud\ ing for her paralegal
degree. She notes a four-step approach for anah zing a case:
STEP1: Issue. Identify the issue (legal question) or issues raised by the tacts of' the
client’s case,
STEP 2: Rule. Identify the law that governs the issue.
STEP 3; Analysis/Application. Determine how the rule ot law applies to the issue.
STEP 4: Conclusion. Summarize the results ofthe legal analysis.
A. Battery Issue
Step 1. Id en tify th e Issue(s)
Assume tor the purposes ot'this problem that there is no question concerning the lawfulness
ot'the citizen’s arrest b\- Ste\e Spear. He had authority to make a citizen’s arrest.
Marian, based upon her education and experience as a paralegal, qui ckk identifies
two possible ci\'il causes of action that Mr. Lietel may lia\e against Mr. Spear:
1. Battery
2. Intentional infliction of'emotional distress
I rom her training, Marian knows that the best approach to legal anah sis is tc) address
and completek analyze one issue before proceeding to the next one. She decides to begin
with the battery issue.
Marian knows that the issue is the legal question raised by the tacts ot’the client’s case;
therefore, the statement of the issue must include reference to the law and the tacts. She iilenti
ties the issue as lollows: I'lider the state’s tort law, does a civil batter\ o t \ u r when an indi\ idual
encounters I'csistance while making a lawful arrest, uses force to overcome the resistance, and
kicks the pei son being arrested several times after the resistance ceases?
Step 2. Id en tify the Rule o f Law

Ihe second step is to identif} the rule oflaw governing battery. Marian first looks for an\
state statute that defines ci\’il battery. Based upon her familiarity with tort law, she is fairly
certain that cixil batter)’ is defined in the case law, and there is no applicable statutor\' law.
She researches the statutes, however, to be sure that the state legislatiu’e has not enacted
any legislation concerning ci\il batter)-. Her research re\'eals that there is no statute. She
finds that the case law definition o\ haltcry adopted b)' the state’s highest court is: “A civil
batter)' is the unpri\ ileged, intentional, and harmful or ofiensix'e contact with the person
of another,”
Step 3. A n a ly s is /A p p lic a tio n

Ihe third step is a determination of how the rule oflaw applies to the facts ofthe client’s case,
'Ihis is a three-part process:
Part 1: Identif)' the component parts (elements) oft he rule oflaw.
Part 2: Apply the facts ot the client’s case to the component parts.
Part 3: Consider the possible counterarguments to the analysis of an issue (i,e., con
duct a counteranah’sis of the analysis).
44
a. P a rt 1: I d e n t i f y t h e C o m p o n e n t s ( H l e m c n t s ) o t t h e R u le o t L aw
Alter re\ ic\ving the dehnitii)ii dl'batter}-, Xhirian ¡dci-itities the iDllow ing eh-nients that are
r eq ui r ed to be present tor a batter}- to occLir:
1. Ur-iprivileged
2. hitentional
3. Harn-iful or otfensi\-e
4. Cont ac t
b. P a r t 2: A p p l y t h e F a c t s o f t h e C l i e n t ’s C a s e t o t h e C o m p o n e n t P a r t s
If the e l eme nt s o f the case law are met or established b} the facts of the case, t he n a cause of
action exists. Elements 2, 3, an d 4 a p pe a r to be clearlv established b\ tbe tacts ot t he case.
Mr. S pe ar ’s actions of kicking Mr. l.ietel were c l e a r k intentional a n d harniful a nd did cont act
Mr. Lietel’s body. Adn-iittedh’, Mr. Spear was niaking a lawful citizen’s arrest, a n d he di d e n
co u n te r resistance. Did the continLied use of force after resistance ceased constitut e a battery?
V\ .is t he c o n t i n u ed use o f force unprivileged?
' Ihe case law definition o f batter)' does not pro\'ide suflicient g ui d a nce for a d e t e r m i n a -
ticii o f w h e t h e r the c o n d uc t was unprivileged. Marian niust, thereftire, refer to addi tional case
law to d et e r n i i n e what cons t i t ut es “u n p r i \ ileged” contact. She looks tor a cour t o p i n i o n that
is on p o i n t — an o p i n i o n with facts siniilar to the cl ient ’s facts in which the cour t a ddr essed
t hi q u es t i o n o f t he use o f force in m a k i ng a lawlul arrest.
A s s u me that she finds the case of.4/-/ v. Kelly. In this case, an off-duty police officer, while
n u k i n g a citizen’s arrest, cont ii ui c d ti) use force after the arrest had o cc ur r e d a nd resistance
hcd ceased. ' Ihe cour t held that w he n e ve r a lawful arrest is ma de, either b}' a citizen o r a law
e n fo rc e me n t ofhcer, the priv ilege to use force in c o n d u c t i n g the arrest ceases w he n resistance
ce.ises. All)- c o n t i n u e d use o f force is a civ il batter)-.
Applying the rule from A rt r. Kelly to tiie tacts ol the case, Marian concludes that the require-
m-.“nts ol the first element are met. Although Mr. Spear ma} have been privileged to use force to
overcome resistance when niaking the citizen's arrest, the cont inued use ol'f'orce afier resistance
ceised constituted a batterv- u nd e r the rule a n n ou n c e d in .Art r. Kelly. Marian concludes that a
caase o f action exists for civil battery. Mr. Spear’s actii'iis of kicking Nh'. l.ietel after Mr. l.ietel had
ceised resisting constituted unprivileged, intentional, harmfiil contact with Mr. l.ietel.
c. P a rt 3: C o n d u c t a C o u n t e r a n a h sis
Before pr oce edi ng , Marian shoLild c on du c t a c o u n t e r a n a h sis, identifying a n d a ddr es s i ng any

c c u n t e r a r g u m e n t s to the analysis.
For Example Suppose Marian found a court decision involving an arrest by law enforce
ment officers holding that some continued use of force after resistance
.•eases is permissible if the situation is extremely heated. The court reasoned that law
enforcement officers are not perfect, and if the situation is extremely heated, the brief con-
inued use of force is privileged. In Marian's analysis, she would have to include the case in
ler memorandum and discuss how it does or does not apply to the facts of the client's case.
Step 4. C o n c lu s io n
' Re fmal step in t he analysis o f t he batter}- issue is a conclusion. W h e n a p p k i n g the rule o f law
tc t he facts o f the case in step 3, Marian reaches a conclusi on that t here is a cause o f action for
ci'il batter)' in Mr. Lietel’s case. Law firms var)- with regard to what s houl d be i nc l uded in the
C(nclusion. Ma ri a n’s conclusion coul d include, a m o n g ot he r things, any or all of the following:
• A s u m m a r v of the analvsis
45
For Example "The case law defines battery as the nonprivileged, intentional,
harmful, or offensive contact with the person of another. In the
court opinion of Art v. Kelly, the court stated that when a lawful arrest is be
ing made, the continued use of force after resistance ceases is unprivileged.
Mr. Spear's actions of kicking Mr. Lietel after Mr. Lietel had ceased resisting
constituted unprivileged, intentional, harmful contact with Mr. Lietel. Therefore,
a cause of action for civil battery is available in this case."
A weighi ng o r eoiisideration, ba.sed on the a n a h ’si.s, (if the me ri ts o f tiie cause of

action.
For Example "There is strong support for a battery claim in this case. The
testimony of the witnesses supports Mr. Lietel's statements that
Mr. Spear kicked him after he was subdued. All the elements of the cause of
action are established by the facts of the case. Under the rule of Art v. Kelly,
Mr. Spear's continued use of force was clearly unprivileged."
An identitication o t ' addi ti o na l facts or i nf or mat i on that n i a \ ’ he necessary. In this

case, the stat e ment s of addi tional witnesses or ot he r i n f o r m a ti o n ma\' be required.
' ihe identitication ot f u r t h e r research that may be r equir ed. I ' ur th e r research ma\'
be iiecessar\- because part ot the research coul d not be p e r f o r m e d d ue to t ime c o n
straints (the m e m o was due) or the research sources were not r e a d i k a\'ailable.
'Ihe identitication ot ot he r issues or causes of action that b e c a m e a p pa re n t d u r i n g the
analysis ot the case, which is not necessary in this e.xaniple b ecaus e Ma ri a n ’s a s s i g n
ment is to identify all possible causes of action and issues. S upp os e .Marian’s superx i-
sory a tt or ne \ ’ b el ie\ ed that only a battery claini was present in this case a nd M a r i a n ’s
as signment was to atldress that issue. If her a n a h s i s o f t h e batter\- issue revealed o t h e r
lie causes of action, she should me nt i o n those possibilities in h e r conclusion.
B. In t e n t io n a l In f lic tio n o f E m o tio n a l D is tre s s Is s u e

W'hen p e r t o r m i n g step 1, Marian identified intentional infliction o f e m o t i o n a l distress as a
possible cause of action. After c on c lud i n g her analysis o f t h e bat ter y claini, she follows the
s a me steps in analyzing the possibility of an intentional infliction o f e m o t i o n a l distress claim.
Step 1. Id en tify the Issue

As with the battery issue, .Marian kn ows that this issue is the legal q u e s t i o n raised by the facts
o f t h e client’s case; therefore, the s tatement o f t h e issue must include reference to the law a nd
the facts. She identifies t he issue as t'ollows; U n d er the state’s tort law, d o e s intentional inflic
tion o f e mot i ona l distress o c c ur w he n an indixidual, w h o e n c o u n t e r s resistance while m a k i n g
a lawful arrest, kicks the part\' bei ng arrested six times after the resistance has ceased, causing
the part)' to ha\ e trouble sleeping and be fearful w hene \ ' er he sees t he individual?
Step 2. Rule o f Law

Ma ri a n ’s research reveals that there is no statutor)' cause o f action for int e nt i ona l infliction o f
e mot i on a l distress. 'Ihe state case law does establish a cause o f ac t i on for int e nt i ona l infliction
of e mot i o na l distress, t he r e is no cause o f action for negligent infliction o f e m o t i o n a l distress.
Intentional infliction ot e mot i ona l distress is defined in the case law as intentionallv causing
severe e mo t i on a l distress by an act o f ex t r e me or out r age ous co n d u ct .
46
S t e p 3. A n a ly s is /A p p lic a tio n
a. P a r t 1: I d e n t i f y t h e C o m p o n e n t s ( F l e m e n t s ) o f t h e R u l e o f L aw
M a r i a n ’s review ol the case law reveals four elements:
1. Hxt r eme or o ut r age o us c onduc t

2. Intent to cause severe emot i ona l distress
3. Severe e mo t i o n a l distress is sutiered
4. Ilie c o n d u c t causes the distress
b. P a r t 2: A p p l y t h e E l e m e n t s to t h e F a c ts o f t h e C l i e n t ’s C a s e
M a r i a n ’s appl ication o f t h e el ements to the facts o f Mr. l.ietel’s raises se\'eral ques tions about
w h e t h e r the r e q u i r e m e n t s o f intentional inthction ot e mo t i o na l distress are met in this case:
1. Was Mr. S pe ar ’s c ond uc t “ext re me or o u tr ag e ou s ”?

2. Mr. Spear obx'iously i nt e n ded to kick Mr. I.ietel, but did he i nt e n d to cause se\'ere
e m o t io n a l distress?
3. Was t he h a r m suffered by Mr. 1.ietel “severe emo t i on a l distress”?
'Ihe a n s w e r s to these ques tions are not a p p a r e n t f r om a r eadi ng o f t h e defini tion of

m t e n t i o n a l infliction o f em o t i o na l distress. M a ri a n t ur ns to addi tional case law for g ui da n c e
a n d locates the case A d d i k r. (¡aray, which app e ar s to a n s we r her questions. In the case,
Mr . ( i ar ay a n d Mr. . \ d d i k got into a light at a part\-. ( i ar ay k no c k e d Ad di k d o w n and, while
■Addik was d o w n , kicked h i m mult iple times \'elling, “I’m not g o n n a kill you, but y o u ’ll r e
m e m b e r m e in \'o l u ' d r ea m s . Yo u’ll ne\'er forget this.” Ad(.lik was so afiected b \’ the incident
t hat he had a n e r \ o u s b r ea k d o w n a n d was out of w or k for two mo nt hs .
Ihe court, add r essi ng .Addik’s claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress, ruled
tha t public h u m i l i a t io n , suc h as that sufieied b\- .Addik, constitiUes “e xt re me a n d o u tr a g e o u s
c o n d u c t . ” Rul ing that t he requisite intent was present, the cour t held that there must be s o m e
spi'ciju' c o n d u c t i nd i c at ing an intent to cause em o t i o na l distress. ' Ihe m e re i ntentional act ot
ki cki ng was not sufficient to e\ idence an intent to cause e mot i ona l dislress, but Mr. ( i a r a y ’s
s t a te m e n t s while kicking Mr. Addik were specific c o n d u c t indicating an intent to cause e m o
tional distress. I he c o u r t went on to rule that the e m o ti on a l distress suffered mu st be severe:
I he me r e loss of sleep is not sufficient. Instead, severe h ar m , such as loss of w or k or medical
expenses, mu s t result.
App l y i n g t he g ind e li n e s pr es e nt e d in A d d i k v. Cuiray, Ma ri a n c o nc l u d e s that t h e re is
p r o b a h k not a ca us e of action for i nte nt i on a l infiiction of e m o t io n a l distress in Mr. l.ietel’s
case. Mr. S p e a r ’s c o n d u c t ot kicking Mr. I.ietel in public is sufficiently e x t r e me a n d o u t r a
geous. It is q u es t i o n a b l e , however, \vhether the r e q u i r e m e n t s o f e l eme nt s 2 a n d 3, i nt e nt
a n d severe e m o t i o n a l distress, are met b\- t he facts o f t h e case. ' Ihere was no c o n d u c t by
.Mr. Spear e\’i d e n ci n g a specific intent to cause e m o t i o n a l distress. 'Ihe act of ki cki ng al one
was not sufficient ev i de n ce o f such intent, a c c o r d i n g to A d d i k v. ( h t n i y . If Mr. I ietel’s loss
o f w o r k a n d me di ca l ex p e ns e s resulted f ro m the bat ter y a n d were not related t(i t he e m o
tional distress, t h e n t h e r e is no e \ i d e n c e that Mr. I.ietel sufiered severe h a r m as r eq ui r ed b \ ’
A d d i k r. G iiruy. Fear f ul nes s and loss o f sleep are p r o ba b ly not suf hcienth' severe to meet
t he (I'iinn’ s t a nd ar d s .
c. P a r t 3: C o u n t e r a n a l y s i s
In this part, M a ri a n wo u l d i de nt i h ’ a n d addr ess an\' aLithorit}' or c o u n t e r a r g i u n e n t s to her

a n a h s i s . We will a s s u m e that she did not identif\’ an\' c o u nt e r a r g u m e n t to her analysis o f t h e
e m o t i o n a l distress issue.
47
Step 4. C o n c lu s io n
As with the batter\- issue, Ma ri a n begi ns her eoneiusi on witli a sumni ar\- ot ' the a n a h ’si'-
For Example The case law definition of intentional infliction of emotional distress\s\.he
intentional causing of severe emotional distress by an act of extreme or
outrageous conduct. In the case of Addik i/. Garay, the court ruled that:
1. Public humiliation by kicking constitutes outrageous conduct.
2. The act of kicking alone is not sufficient evidence of intent— there must be addi
tional conduct evidencing an intent to cause severe emotional distress.
3. Severe harm must result from the severe emotional distress.
In Mr. Lietel's case, there is no evidence ofthe required intent, and it is questionable
whether there was severe harm. Therefore, a cause of action for intentional infliction of
emotional distress does not appear to be present.
Ahirian ma y i nc l ude s o m e o t h e r items in her con c l us i on similar to t hose p r es e n te d in

the conc l usi on to t he batter)' issue.
For Example Marian may identify additional information that is needed. She may note
thatthe client and witnesses should be reinterviewed to determine whether
Mr. Spear said anything while he was kicking Mr. Lietel.
S u m m a ry
.Most clients e n t er t he law ot hc e with a p r o b l e m that mus t be a n a h ' z e d a n d solved. Legal
a n a h s i s o t ' t he pr ob l em in\'oh'es the identitication ot the legal issues in the client’s case anti
a del evmi nat i on o f what law applies a nd hcnv it applies. The c o m n io n ly used legal analysis
lormat iii\'ol\ es t'our steps:
1. Identitication ot ' the legal issue or issLies

2. Identitication ot the rule ot' law that gover ns the issue
3. Anah' sis a n d appl ication ot' t he rule ot' law to t he facts ot the case, ' this step is
c o m p o s e d of thr ee parts:
a. A d e t e r m i n a t i o n ot ' the el eme n t s or r e q u i r e m e n t s o f t h e rule ot'law
b. A ma t ch i n g o f t h e facts of the client’s case to the elenients and a d e t e r m i n a t i o n
o f 'h ow t he rule o f l a w applies to t he facts
c. A count er ana l ysi s that addresses any c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t s to t he analysis
4. .A conclusi on that s um m a r i z e s the p r e \ i o u s steps. 'Ihe conclusi on ma y also in
elude a wei ghi ng o f t h e merits o f t h e case a n d an identification o f o t h e r i nf orni a
tion or avenues o f research that should be p ur sued.
' Ihe four steps o f t h e analysis process can be easih' referred to a n d r e m e m b e r e d by t he

a c r o n\ ' m IRAC: /ssue, rule, imalysis/application, a n d conclusion.
It is i m p o r t a n t to keep t hr ee general c on s i d e r at i on s in m i n d w h e n e ng a gi ng in legal
research a n d analysis:
1. Focus
2. Intellectual hones t y
3. W'hen to stop resear ching
48
Sta\ lociiscd oil the t.isk. I o l u s on the lacts ol the cl ient’s case, anti analvze o n l \ ’ the
issue or issues raised hy those facts. . \\(iid being tlistracted h \ interesti ng or related issues
that need not be addressed.
P er lorni a n a h s i s with intellectual honestv. .Always look tor the correct answer, even
t h ou g h that a n s we r iiia\' not he in the cl ient’s ia\'or or in ac cor da n c e with \ ( uir beliefs. Do
ii()t let preferences, prejudices, or politics intertere with y our dut\- to objecti\ el\ a n d honestly
analyze the legal questit)ii. Base the conclusi on on an objecti\-e a n a h s i s o f all the facts a n d law
and include bot h the s u p p o r t in g a n d o p p os i n g positions.
Quick R eferences
•Ar.aK'sis/application 28 Issue 30
(C('nclusion 2S Ke}' t erms 29
Fa:ts •>“ Legal a n a h sis 26
Focus 38 Research sequence 34
ln:ellectual honest}' 39 Rule o f law 32
IRVC ")7 W'hen to stop 40
In te r n e t R esources
11'.' lollo\\ ing sites mav pr o\ ii.le uselul su ppo r t inlo r n i a t i o n to paralegals engaged in legal
,uiilysis.
ht:p: / w w u . n a l a . o r g
Ihis is the site tor the National .Association lor I.egal .Assistants (NAl .A). Ihe N.ALA site
pio\ ides ,\ wealth ot intorniatK'n. ratiiMiiv, trom articles on the j'r<'lessiiMi to education and
certification [irogranis lor paraleg.ils. ll includes inlorniation on court decisions allecting
p.iialegals aiul links to oilier related sites,
ht p: / WWW.paralegals.org
Ihis is the Web page lor the National l ederation ol Paralegal .Associations (Nl-P.A), a n
other national paralegal organization. Ihe W’eb page provides links to a wide range of sites
ol interest to paralegals: research sources, publications, products, and so iortli.
ht p: Vw W W . par al eg a l t o da y. c oni
¡’{¡rdlcgal loiiay is a magazine geared toward the needs of paralegals. It olten includes
helpful articles on legal anah sis and writing.
U.'iny http: // www. go og l e . c o m as a search e ng i n e a n d “IRACC legal a n a h s i s " as a topic can

id.ntil\ several h u n d r e d Web sites (too nian\- to list here) related to the topic “legal anaK’sis
an.i t h e 1RA(C process.”
Exercises
A dditioiiiil assigiiiiiciili itrc nviiHublc on ihc (.'ouric.\hitc. or gani zat i on m e m b e r s b u r n a large replica o f t h e Koran
wh il e s i ng i n g a n t i - l s l a m i c songs. ' Ih e or gani/ atic' in’s
ASSIGNMENT 1
l etterhead a n d literatuie are e m b o s s e d with a picture of
Des c r i be in detail tbe steps o f t h e IRACC legal a n a h s i s
a b u r n i n g Koran being st e pped on b}' a spiked boot. Ihe
process.
local librar}' has book s b\' m e m b e r s ot the .American Nazi
ASSIGNMENT 2 I’arty, the Ame r ic an C o m m u n i s t Part}’, and the Ku Klux
C.hcul's ¡-acts: I he client t oi md a check written out to cash Klan. ' Ihe librar}- refuses to include the organization's lit
in the a m o u n t o f S730. I he chcck was complet ely m a d e e r ature a m o n g its materials. Ihe client claims this \ iolates
out wh en he f oimd it. He t oo k it to the bank, signed it on t he organization's constitut ional rights.
the back as in st ruc t ed by the teller, an d cashed it. He was Ihe law firm handl es cases iin o h ing the \ iolation o f
subsei]uentl\’ arrested and charged with k)rger\’. constitut ional rights.
R u le of Law: .Scction 30-236 o f t h e state penal code

A s s i g n m e n t : Ihe researcher is assigned the task o f identi-
defines forgery as “falsely m a k i n g o r altering an\- signature
tying a nd analyzing the possible causes o f action that the
to, o r an\' part ol, any wri ting p u r p o r t i n g to ha\ e any legal
client ma}- have against the city librar}-.
efiicac)- with intent to injure or defraud."
a. Discuss an d describe in detail the steps }'ou should
Section 43 3 - 109d ot the state c omme r ci al code pro-
lollow w hen c o n d u c t i n g the legal a n a h sis.
\ ides that wh en a negotiable i nst rument is ma de out to cash
it is a “bear er i n s t r u m e n t . ” ' Ihe section goes on to p ro \ ide: b. A s s u me there are possible causes o f action based on
“A bearer i n s t ru me nt refers to an i nst rument that is pa\ able t r ee do m ol speech u n d e r the I'irst A ni endmei i t an d
to a n y o n e possessing the i n s t r u m e n t a n d is negotiable b\' equal pr otection u n d e r the Fo ur t e en t h A m e n d m e n t ,
t r ansl er alone, it is the s a me as cash." Note: A check is a f o r each issue, d es cr i be in det ail each step o f t h e
negotiable i ns t r u me nt . a n a h tical process.
c. Discuss lactors that ma}- p o s s i b k alfect a researcher's
A s s i g n m e n t : Based on the inf ormati on presented in the
objecti\'it}' and how those factors could alfect the legal
problem, p r e p ar e a c omp l et e and detailed analysis ot the
anal} sis ot the pr obl em.
question ol w h e t h e r there is sulficient e\ iilence to suppor t
a charge o f forgerv. ASSIGNMENTS
(.//c'/i/s Ihe client was cited tor passing in a n o - p a s s
ASSIGNMENTS
ing zone, f rustrated b} a slow nio\ iiig \ ehicle on a two
C'hent'i l-'iicl.c I he client is charged with burglar}'. 1le broke a
lane highwa}-, the client a dm i t s that he passed the vehicle
window, ent er ed his neighbor's garage, and took three cases
entirel}- in a no passing z o n e — that he began and ende d the
ol b e e r i h e garage is a separate buildi ng located about six
passing m a n e u \ e r in an area wher e t he center o f t h e road
teet from the neighbor' s house.
was ma rked w ith two solid stripes. Ihere was no o n c o m i n g
R u le o f Sect ion 2397 o f t he state penal c ode
tralfic, and he niade the m a n e u v e r safely.
defines b u r g l a r y the br ea ki ng and ent er in g o f t h e dw e l l
R u le ol l.aw: I he s t a te ’s m o t o r \ e h ic l e code. S e c
ing hou s e o f a n o t h e r with the intent to c o m m i t a crime.
tion 293- 301, provides that it is a violation o f state law to
('u se L aw : In the case ot S la te r. S c ls o u , the cour t
pass a \e hi cl e in a no- pas s i ng zone. In the statute, a n o
ruled that “a dwell ing includes outbui l di ng s close to but
passing zone is def me d as that p or t i on o f t h e road ma rk e d
not ph}-sicall}' c o n n e c t e d with a dwell ing house, if such
by two solid lines pai nted in the ce n t e r o f t h e road. Passing
buildings are capabl e o f bei ng fenced in.”
zones are indicated b}- single, ei ght-foot stripes d o w n the
c e nt e r of the road.
A s s i g n m e n t : Based on the inf or mat i on presented in the
C.ase Law: I he only relevant case on the subject is
pr obl em, p r ep a re a c o mp l et e and detailed a n a h s i s o f t h e
S ta l e r. R oth. In that case, Mr. Roth was cited for i mp r o p e r
question o f w h e t h e r there is sulficient e\ idence to suppor t
passing. 1le began the passing i iianeu\ er in the last 30 feet
a charge o f burglary.
ot a no- passi ng zone a n d c o m p l e t e d it in a passing zone,
ASSIGNMENT 4 i h e r e wer e n o o n c o m i i i g \ ’ehicles. H \ i d e n ce p r es e n t e d
(dicnt's Facli: I he client is the president o f an ext remist to the trial c our t es t abl i shed that t h e last 30 feet o f t h e
gr ou p that believes that the followers of Islam should be lui-passing zone sho ul d have been n i a r k e d as part o f t h e
d e p o r t e d to Islamic c o unt ri es . At their ce r emo ni e s , the passing zone. Mr. Roth appeal ed his convi ct i on in the trial
co u r t. COn appeal, t he st a t e’s higliesl cour t heki that the a n d c o m p l e t e d it in a pas si ng zone. ' Ihe r e was no
p u r p o s e ot the state m o t o r \ ehicle code is to e ns ur e satety o n c o m i n g traffic, a n d the client c o m p l e t ed t he nia-
o n tiie pi:biic iiiginvays. t he court ruied tiiat ,\ir. i<otii s n e u \ er safely.
p a s si n g m a n e u v e r wa s cieariy m a d e sately, a n d in ligiit Repeat a s si gn me nt a, a s s u m i n g the following facts:
ot’ tile evidence tiiat tiie no- passi ng / o n e was iniproperiy ' the client began t he passing m a n e u v e r in a passing
marl\ed, a strict r e a di n g ot tiie statute was not appr opr iat e. zone, bt:! c o m p l e t e d it in a no- passi ng zone.
Mr. iôtii’s con\ ' i ction was set aside.
d. W'hat additional i nformation, if anv, mav be necessar\'
A s s i g n m e n t : iiie r esear cher is assigned tiie tasi< ot’anaiy/- tor a c o m pl e t e analysis o f t h e p re c ed i n g pr oblems?
ing the lilêiihood that tiie ciient’s ticl<.et can be set aside. ASSIGNMENTS
a. leased upttn the i n t or m a t io n pr ese n t ed in tiie prob- W'hat shoul d \'ou d o w h e n you d o not find a ny t h in g while
ieni, c o n d u c t an anai\ sis ot the chent' s case a n d p r e r esearching a specific source? Afier f inding se\’eral legal
pare a coni piet e and detailed anai\ sis ol tiie problem. sour ces that a d d r e s s t he resear ch topic, w h a t c o n s i d e r
b. Repeat a s s i g n m e n t a, a s s u mi n g the following facts: ations s houl d \()u keep in m i n d c o nc er ni ng w he n to stop
' Ihe client b e g a n the p a s si n g n i a n e u \ e r a p p r o x i - researching?
n i a te h ’ 20 feet t r o m t he e nd o f t h e no passing / o n e
^ Tiie available CourseMate for this text has an interactive eBook and interactive learning
” tools, including flash cards, quizzes, and more. To learn more about this resource and access
CourseMate free demo CourseMate resources, go to www.cengagebrain.com, and search forthis book.
To access CourseMate materials that you have purchased, go to login.cengagebrain.com.
PART II
Legal Research
OVERVIEW
Legal research is the process of locating tlie law that
applies to the question raised by the facts of the case. Legal
research and analysis are interrelated, and performing legal
research usually involves the use of analysis principles. It is
helpful, however, to have an understanding of legal research
sources atid the legal research process before studying the
legal analysis process.
Part II covers legal research and the research
process. It begins w ith two chapters on primary authority,
specifically statutory and case law, followed by two
chapters on secondary authority. It concludes w ith a chapter
on computers and legal research, and a chapter on legal
citation.
53
Constitutions, Statutes, Administrative Law,
and Court Rules—Research and Analysis
O utline . M an a t t e n d e d o n e \ c a r (it p a r a l e g a l c l a s s e s b e f o r e b e i n g a d m i t t e d to l a w s c h o o l . .-Xfter h i s lirst
\ e a r , h e o b t a i n e d a p a r t - t i m e j o b w i t h a l a w f i r m . Init ia ll y, .-Man's a s s i g n m e n t s h a d b e e n t h e
I. Introduction p r e p a r a t i o n o f d e p o s i t i o n d ig e s t s . H e is g o o d at p r e p a r i n g d e p o s i t i o n d i g e s t s b u t w a n t s t o h e
II. ,AiuUoni\’ o í a Statute i n \ ’o l \ e d in p r o i e e t s in t h e e .ir lv s t a g e s o t t h e l i t i g a t i o n p r o c e s s . .At h i s r e q u e s t , h e w a s a s s i g n e d
III. Statutory Research — Locating to w o r k e .\ c lu s i\'e l\' w i t h .\ls. 1 i lto n , w h o is a l i t i g a t i o n a t t o r n e y s p e c i a l i z i n g in c o r p o r a t i o n

Statutes a n d c o n t r a c t law.
I l i s li r st a s s i g n m e n t I r o m M s . Tilton is t o d e t e r m i n e it M r s . l a c k s o n h a s a c a u s e o f a c
I\'. Administrative Law
t i o n a g a i n s t Heautx' (Care B e a u t y S a l o n l o r b r e a c h o t w a r r a n t y u n d e r t h e s a le s p r o v i s i o n s o l t h e
\ ’. CAHM't Rules
s t a t e s c o m m e r c i a l c o d e . .Mrs. l a c k s o n w e n t to h e r h a i r d r e s s e r , B c a u t \ C a r e B e a u t \ ' S a l o n , to
\'I. Analysis—'1 he Process get t h e i r " s p e c i a l l o n g - t e r m h o l d ” p e r m a n e n t . Oi-ice a y e a r f o r t h e p a s t t h r e e y e a r s , s h e a s k e d
\'II. (ieneral C,\)nsiderations l o r t h e “s p e c i a l ” p e r m a n e n t . B e a u t y (Care m a d e n o w a r r a n t i e s a b o u t t h e p e r m a n e n t . It d i d n o t
\'III. Ke\' Points (Checklist: Working p r o \ ' i d e , \lrs . l a c k s o n , e i t h e r o r a l l y o r in w r i t i n g , a n y s t a t e m e n t s c o n c e r n i n g t h e q u a l i t y o f t h e
with Statutes p e r m a n e n t . I h e re c e i p t s h e r e c e i v e d l o r t h e p e r m a n e n t li s te d a S 2 0 c h a r g e l o r t h e p e r m . u i e n t
IX. Application kit a n d o t h e r p r o d u c t s , a n d a n SHO c h a r g e fo r t h e s e r v i c e s o f t h e b e a u t i c i a n .

I h i s \ e a r , t h i e e d a y s a l t e r ,\Irs. l a c k s o n w a s g i \ e n t h e p e r m a n e n t , h e r h a ir , w h i c h h a d
b e e n b l o n d e , t u r n e d a lig ht g r e e n . I ive d a y s la te r it b r o k e o t f a p p r o x i m a t e h 1 i n c h f r o m t h e
scalp n o t a g o o d re s u lt .
Learning O bjectives .-Man, b a s e d o n his p a r a l e g a l a n d f u s t - \ e a r la w s c h o o l c o u r s e s , is awar-e t h a t M r s , l a c k s o n
Alter completing this chapter, you has .1 p o s s i b l e t o r t n e g l i g e n c e c l a i m a n d o t h e r p o s s i b l e c a u s e s ol a c t i o n a g a i n s t B e a u t y t^ a re .

I li s a s s i g n m e n t , h o w e x e r . is to d e t e r m i n e il t h e r e is a l s o a p o s s i b l e b r e a c h ol w a r r a n t v c l a i m
should understand:
u n d e r t h e s t a l e ’s c o n n n e r c i a l coc.le.
Ihe meaning o f statutory law
■Alan h a s n o t w o r k e d w i t h s t a t u t e s s i n c c h e t o o k a p a r a l e g a l r e s e a r c h c o u r s e . S e v e r a l
• Ihe component s of a statute (, |u e sti o n s o c c u r to h i m : "I l o w d o I f m d t h e c o m m e r c i a l c o d e s t a t u t e s ? I ) o e s t h e ( C o m m e r c i a l
C o d e Sa le s .Act a p p h ? Is t h i s a s ale o l g o o d s w i t h i n t h e m e a n i n g ol t h e a c t ? II t h i s is a s a le ot
How to find constitutional,
statutory, and administrative law g o o d s , w h ic h w a r r a n lv applies? I low d o vou a n a h v e a statute?"
and court rules

• How to analyze a statute and
apply it to specific problems
• Lhe role of legislative history and
canons of construction
54
CHAPTER 3 CONSTITUTIONS, STATUTES, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, AND COURT RU LES— RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS
'1 l is cliapter focuses on lnn\ to I'cscarch and cinah zc cnact ed law and t rules. As discussed
inCliapter I , enacted law includes constitutions (goN crnini; d o cu m e n t s adiiptcd bv the people),
la'vs passed b\- lcgislali\'e bodies, and the rules an d regulations a do pt ed by ;uiminist rati\’e
aeencics.
Laws passed b\- (ônuross o r st.ite legislatures arc gencralh' called ticts or statiitcs. 'Ihis
b r d y o f l a w is C()inni(inl\' retcrred to as statutory law. Ordinance' s are laws usually piassed
b\ local iôN’c r n i n g bodies, such as cit\’ Lduncils an d cc)unt\’ commi s s i ons . Ad mi ni s t ra t i ve
agencies, u n d e r t he autiiority g r ant ed bv legislatix'C bodies, ad o pt rules iuul régulations tliat
h;.ve tlie torcc of law. Côurts ad opt rules that regulate the c o n d u c t o f ma tters b r ou gh t bet bre
t hí court. I'or the sake o f clnritN', t h n i u g h d u t this ch a pt e r tlu' discussion and examples t'ocus
Uj'on laws passed b\' legislative bodies, that is, statutor\- law. Ndte, liow'CN’cr, that the principles
pu' scnt ed in the chiipter also apply to the anal\ sis o f cdiistitLitions, statutes, a d mi ni s t ra t i ve
la v, a n d court riiles.
StatLitor\- law is a ma j or sourcc Dt'law tliat a rcsoarchcr mu s t becoiiic familiar with wh e n
reêarchiiii; a n d analyzing the law. Statut(ir\- law has a s s u me d an ever-increasi ng role in the
Ư litcd States, Wi th the passage o f time, the bod\' c)fstatutor\- law has e x p an d e d greatl}'. Mail)'
mUtors o nce goN’c r nc d b\- case law arc now u;o\-crned b\- statutor y law.
For Example Criminal law was once exclusively established and regulated by tlie
common law; today, most criminal law is governed by statutory law.
('onscquL-ntiy, willi the growlii ol’ statutory law , m o r e a n d m o r e legal p r o b le m s a n d

is'Ues are g over ne d hy it. Beeaiise an e \ e r - i ne r e a si ng n u m b e r ol legal p r ob le m s a n d is.sues
re.]uire the i nt e r pre t at ion and application ot’statutor y law, researchers are m o r e t r e q u e n t h ’
Cl.led u p o n to engage in statutoi \' a n a h sis. Statutory analysis is the process ot d e t e r m i n
ing it a statute applies, how it applies, and the etlect ol' that application.
Because most statutes are designed to co\ er a br oad range o f present an d t utur e situ-
a t o n s , tlie\' are written in general tei iiis. As a result, a researclier is requireil to eiigage in
sti tutor y a n a h sis to d e t e r m i n e wiiether and h o w a statLite apph e s in a specilic lact situation.
t he locus ot this ch ap t e r is tlie process ol statutorx’ research an d anal\sis. It begins with
a i r esentation ot’tlie anat onn- ol’a statute, follows witli a discussion ol tlie process ot statutor\'
rtsearch and a n a h ’sis, a n d e nd s \s itli general con s i der at ion s ¡n\'ol\ ir]g statutor y c o n st r u c t i on
ar d anal\sis.
II A N A T O M Y O F A S T A T U T E
Bd’o r e you can a n a h v e a statute, \ o u must be familiar with the basic st r uct ure of st a t ut or y
lav, t he c o m p o n e n t parts. Assume, lor the pu r po s e s of illustration, that \'ou are interested in
w'lether a cont ract for tlie sale ot goods must be in writing, a n d the go\’e r ni ng law is the In-
d a n a t lode. Hxhibit 3-1 shows selected p or ti ons o f t h e Indi ana (]ode c o n c er n i ng c o mme r ci a l
lav. Hxhibit 3-2 presents tlie section o f t h e L'nited S t a t a C'ode A n n o t a t e d (L ’S l ' A ) c o n c e r n i n g
raisoni monev. To the left of sections o f t h e codes (in the margi ns) are terms that descr ibe the
c c mp on e n t s o f t h e codes. ' Ihe following text discusses each des cr ipt i \ e t erm and that p o r t io n
of t he statutes referred to b\' the term.
No t all o f t h e statutorx’ c o m p o n e n t s i ncluded in the discussion tollowing the I ndi an a
C) de a n d the C'.S'(,',4 are inc l uded in e\ er\- statute. S ome statutes, for example, ma\' not have a
difmitions section. It is i mp or ta nt , howev er, to discuss the c o m p o n e n t s so \'ou will be familiar
w t h t h e m it vou e n c o u n t e r t he m in o t he r statutes.
55
PART II LEGAL RESEARCH
E x h ib it 3-1 Indiana Code— Commercial Law. M iclv e. B u m s Indiana S L ik : ; e s A n n o ta te d H 9 9 0 i c ite d m atenai

IS from T’tle 26. 1992 .-epiacem en! pam p.hiet R e p 'm te d u ;'.” the p e rm is s io n o f L e \ s N e \ is
T IT L E 26
N u m b er o f title CO M M ERCIAL LAW
A R T IC L E A J IT IC L E
1 UNIFORM COM M ERCIAL CODE, chs 3 W AREHOUSES, chs. 1-7

N u m b er o f 1-10
2 COMMERCIAL TRANSACTIONS, chs
article 1- 6 .
ARTICLE 1
UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE
CHAPTER.
G eneral P r o v is io n s , 26-1-1-101 — 6 B ulk T ra n sfers. 26-1-6-101 —
26-1-1-208. 26-1-6-110
2. S a l e s , 26-1-2-101 - 26-1-2-725 7 ( W a r e h o u s e R e c e i p t s , B il l s o f L a d i n g
N um ber of 21 L e a s e s , 26-1-2 1-101 — 26-1-2 1-532 AND O t h e r ] D o c u m e n t s o f T i t l e ,
3 C o m m e r c ia l P a per , 26-1-3-101 — 26-1-7-101 — 26-1-7-603.
ch ap te r 26-1-3-805 8 Investm ent S e c u r i t i e s , 26-1-8-101 —
B ank D e p o s it s and CoLLEm oN S. 26-1-8-408
26-1-4-101 — 26-1-4-504 9 S e c l t ie d T r a n s a c t i o n s , 26-1-9-101 —
4 1 Fvnd Tr a n sfer s, 26-1-4.1-101 — 26-1-9-507
26-1-4.1-507. 10 E f f e c t iv e D a t e , R e p e a l , S a v in g P r o
Le t te r s of C r e d it , 26-1-5-101 — v i s i o n , 26 -M O -lO l — 26-1-10-106.
26-1-5-117
CHAPTER 1
GENERAL PROVISIONS
P art 1 S h o r t T it l e , C o n s t r u c t io n , s e c t io n
A p p l ic a t io n a n d S u b je c t - 26-1-1-109 [R epealed]
M a tter o f th e A ct
P art 2 G e n e r a l D e f in t t io n s a n d
S e c t io n P r in c ip l e s o f I n t e r p r e t a t io n
26-1-1-101 Short title
Purposes — Rules of construc 26-1-1-201. G eneral definitions
N um ber o 26-1-1-102.
26-1-1-202 P n m a facie evidence by th ird
tion — V a n a tio n by ag ree
section m ent party docum ents.
26-11-103 S upplem entary general princi 26-1-1-203 O bligation of good faith
ples of law applicable. 26-1-1-204 T im e — R easonable tim e —
26-1-1-104 C onstruction a g a in st implicit "S easonably "
repeal 26-1-1-205 Course of d ealin g and usage of
26-1-1-105 T e rrito n a l application of th e act tra d e
— P a rtie s’ power to choose 26-1-1-206 S ta tu te of frauds for kinds of
applicable law. personal property not o th e r
26-1-1-106 Remedies to be liberally ad m in wise covered
istered 26-1-1-207 P erform ance or acceptance u n
26-1-1-107 W aiver or renunciation of claim der reserv atio n of rig h ts
or rig h t a fte r breach 26-1-1-208. Option to accelerate a t will.
N um ber of 26-1-1-108 S everability
section
P art 1. S hort T it l e , C o n s t r u c t io n , A p p l ic a t io n a n d S u b je c t
M atter of th e A ct
2 6 - 1 - 1 - 1 0 1 . S h o r t t i t l e . — IC 26-1 s h a l l b e k n o w n a n d m a y b e c i t e d a s
U n i f o r m C o m m e r c i a l C o d e . ( A c t s 1 9 6 3, c h 3 1 7 . § 1 - 1 0 1 , p. 5 3 9 ; P L 1,52-
Short title 1986, § 110 ]
56
CHAPTER 3 CONSTITUTIONS, STATUTES, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, AND COURT RULES - RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS
E x h ib it 3 - 1 (Continued)
Purpose clause 26 1-1-102. Purposes — R u les of c o n stru ctio n — V a ria tio n by

a g r e e m e n t . — i l ' IC 26-1 s h a l l b e l i b e r a l l y c o n s t r u e d a n d a p p l i e d to
p r o m o t e it.s u n d e r l y i n g p u r p o s e s a n d po li cie s.
(2i U n d e r l y i n g p u r p o s e s a n d p o l i c i e s o f IC 26-1 a r e :
(a l T o s i m p l i f y , c l a r i f y , a n d m o d e r n i z e t h e l a w g o v e r n i n g c o m m e r c i a l
transactions:
(bl T o p e r m i t t h e c o n t i n u e d e x p a n s i o n o f c o m m e r c i a l p r a c t i c e s t h r o u g h
custom , usage, a n d a g re e m e n t of th e p arties;
(c) T o m a k e u n i f o r m t h e l a w a m o n g t h e v a r i o u s j u r i s d i c t i o n s .
CHAPTER 2
SALES
P a st 1 S h o r t T rru E . G e n e r a l
C o n s t r u c t io n a .v d "Between m erch an ts” — "F i
S i 'B j e c t - M a t t e r nancing agency.”
26-1-2-105 D efinitions — T ransferability
S E C T IO N - — "Goods" — "F u tu re" goods
2 6 -1 -2 -1 0 1 S hort title — "Lot" — 'Com m ercial
2 6 -1 -2 -1 0 2 Scope — C e rtain security and unit."
o th er tran sactio n s excluded 26-1-2-106, Definitions — "C ontract" —
from th is ch ap ter "A greem ent” contract — 'T e r
2 6 -1 -2 -1 0 3 D efinitions and index of defini- m ination" — "C ancellation."
tions- 26-1-2-107 Goods to be severed from realty
2 6 -1 -2 -1 0 4 . D efinitions — "M erchant" — — Recording
P a r t 2 . F o r m . F o r m a t io n and S E C T IO N .
R f a l u u s -t m e n t o f C o .v t r a c t rival" — W arranty of condi

tion on arrival.
S E C T IO N .
N u m b e r of 26-1-2-201 Form al requirem ents - S tatu te
26-1-2-322 Delivery "ex-ship "
26-1-2-323 Form of bill of lading required
of frauds
section in overseas shipm ent —
F art 1. S hort T itle, G en er a l Construction
AND S u bject M atter
Short title - 26-1-2-101. Short title. — IC 26-1-2 shal l be k n o w n a n d m a y be ci t e d a.s

U n i f o r m C o m m e r c i a l Code— Sales. (Acts 1963. ch. .317, !? 2-101, p. 539;
P.L. 152-1986, § 119 ]
Cro9.s R e fe re n c e s . C onstruction agam st Negligence, Economic Lose, and the

im plicit repeal, IC 26-1 1-104 U C C,. 61 Ind L.J 593 (1986i.
Rules of construction, IC 26-1-1-102 I n d ia n a l ^ w R eview . The Flam m able
Supplementar>- general principles of law Fabrics Act and S trict L iability in Tort. 9
applicable. IC 26-1-1-103 Ind, I. Kev 395.
I n d i a n a l ^ w J o u r n a l . The L’niform Com Surv’ey of Recent Developm ents in B usi
m ercial Code and Real E state Law Problems ness and Com m ercial Law— Vertical P rivity
for Both the Real E state Lawyer and the and Damages for Breach of Im plied W arranty
C h attel Security Lawyer, 38 Ind L.J. 535. under the U C C. I t’s Tim e for Indiana lo
Scope 26-1-2-102. S cop e — Certain secu rity and other tran saction s
exclu d ed from this chapter. — U n l e s s t h e c o n t e x t o t h e r w i s e r e q u i r e s , IC
26-1-2 a ppl i es to t r a n s a c t i o n s in goods. It does not a p p l y to a n y t r a n s a c t i o n
w h i c h a l t h o u g h in t h e form of a n u n c o n d i t i o n a l c o n t r a c t to sell or p r e s e n t
s a l e is i n t e n d e d to o p e r a t e o nl y a s a s e c u r i t y t r a n s a c t i o n , no r d o e s IC 26-1-2
i m p a i r or r e p e a l a n y s t a t u t e r e g u l a t i n g sa l es to c o n s u m e r s , f a r m e r s , or
o t h e r specified c l a s s e s of b u y e r s . IC 26-1-2 does n o t i m p a i r or r e p e a l IC
n 1 4 h 1 1QC O Q 17
9-14, TIC O
'9-17, or iIC r ’ Q OO C
9-22-5. i[Acts
A
1963, ch. 317, K O I nO
§ 2-102, ^p. 539; ilOQ.
F L. 152-1986, S 120; P. L. 2-1991, § 86.
(Continued)
57
26-1-1-201. G e n e r a l d e f i n i t i o n s . — Subj ect to a d d i t i o n a l d e fi n i t i o n s

c o n t a i n e d in IC 26-1-2 t h r o u g h 1C 26-1-10 wh i c h a r e app l i ca b l e to specific
p r ovi si ons , a n d u n l e s s t h e c o n t e x t o t h e r w i s e r e q u i r e s , in IC 26-1:
(1) ".Action" in t h e s e n s e of a j ud i ci a l p r oc e e d i ng i n c l u d e s r e c o u p m e n t ,
Definitions ------- c o u n t e r c l a i m , setoff, s u i t in eq u i t y, a n d a n y o t h e r p r o c e e d i ng s in wh i c h
rights are determined
(2l " A g g r i ev e d p a r t y ” m e a n s a p a r t y e n t i t l e d to r e s o r t to a r e m e d y
(3) " A g r e e m e n t ” m e a n s t h e b a r g a i n of t h e p a r t i e s in fact a s f ound in
t h e i r l a n g u a g e or by i mp l i c at i on from o t h e r c i r c u m s t a n c e s i n c l u d i n g
c o u r s e of d e a l i n g or u s a g e of t r a d e or cours e of p e r f o r m a n c e a s provi ded
in IC 26-1-1-205 a n d IC 26-1-2-208 W h e t h e r a n a g r e e m e n t h a s legal
P a rt 2. F o rm . F o rm a tio n and E Ie a d ju s tm e n t o f C o n tra c t
26-1-2-201. Formal requirem ents — Statute o f frauds. — <1) E xcept

as o t h e r wi se provi ded in this section, a cont r act for t h e s a l e of goods for t he
price of five h u n d r e d doll ars ($500) or more is not e nf or c e a bl e by w a y of
action or def e ns e unl es s t h e r e is some wr i t i n g suffici ent to i n d i c a t e t h a t a
contr act for s a l e h a s been m a d e be t we e n the p a r t i e s a n d s i gn e d by the
pa r t y a g a i n s t wh o m e n f o r c e me n t is so u g h t or by h i s a u t h o r i z e d a g e n t or
broker. A w r i t i n g is not insutTicient because it omi t s o r i nc or rec t l y s t a t e s a
t e r m ag re e d upon, b u t t h e contr act is not enforceable u n d e r t hi s p a r a g r a p h
beyond t h e q u a n t i t y of goods s hown in such writ ing.
i2) B e t w e e n me r c h a n t s , if wi t h i n a r e as onabl e t i m e a w r i t i n g m
c onf i r ma t i on o f t he c o n t r ac t a n d sufficiently a g a i n s t t he s e n d e r is received
a n d the p a r t y recei ving it h a s reason to know its c o n t e n t s , it sat i sf i es the
Substantive r e q u i r e m e n t s of subsection ( I t a g a i n s t such part y u n l e s s w r i t t e n noti ce of
objection to its c o n t e n t s is g i v en wi t hi n t en (10) d a y s a f t e r it is received.
provisions (3) A c o n t r a c t which does not satisfy the requi rement i i of s u b s e ct i on i l l
b u t whi ch is valid in o t he r r espects is enforceable:
(a) I f t h e goods a r e to be specially m a n u f a c t u r e d for t h e b u y e r a n d are
not s u i t a b l e for sal e to o t h e r s in the or d i n a r y co u r s e of t h e seller' s
b u s i ne s s a n d t h e seller, before notice of r e p u d i a t i o n is recei ved and
u n d e r c i r c u ms t a n c e s which reas onabl y md i ca t e t h a t the goods a r e for
t h e buye r , h a s ma d e e i t h e r a .substantial b e g i n n i n g of t h e i r m a n u f a c
t u r e or c o m m i t m e n t s for t h e i r pr ocur ement ; or
fbi I f t h e p a rt y a g a m s t whom enfor cement is s o u g h t a d m i t s in his
p l ea di ng, tes t i mony, or ot her wi se in court t h a t a c o n t r a c t for sal e was
ma d e , b u t t h e c o n t r a c t is n o t enforceable u n d e r t hi s pr ovi sion beyond
t h e q u a n t i t y of goods ad mi t t e d ; or
ic) W i t h res pect to goods for which p a y m e n t h a s been m a d e and
\ accept ed or whi ch h a v e be e n received an d a c ce pt e d iIC 26-1-2-606).
\ [Acts 1963, ch, 317, § 2-201. p. 539; P.L 152-1986, 5 125.1
C r o s s R e f e r c n c « . Action dcfm ition. iC mcrchanU. dermilion. IC

Reference 26 I 2-104
A d d itio n a l t«rm i> in a c c e p ta n c e o r cocifir Buyer and seller, dcilnm on. 1C 2 5 -l-‘J*l03
inform ation m atJD n. IC 2 6 - 1 -2-207 Contract, definition. IC 261-1-201
58
26-1-2-315. Im p lie d w a r r a n ty — F itn e ss fo r p a r t ic u l a r p u rp o s e . —

Where the seller at the tim e of contracting has reason to know any
particular purpose of which the goods are required and th at the buyer is
Substantive relying on the se lle r ’s sk ill or judg^nent to select or furnish su ita b le goods,
provisions there is, u n less excluded or modified under 1C 26-1-2-316, an im plied
warranty that the good sh all be fit for such purpose. (A cts 1963. ch. 317,
§ 2-315," p. 539; P.L. 152-1986, § 136,]
C r o s s R e fe re n c e « . B u y er an d seller, d efi an d D am ag es for B rea ch of Im p lied W a rra n ty

n itio n . 1C 26-1-2-103 u n d e r th e U C C It's T im e for I n d ia n a to
C u m u la tio n a n d co n flict of w a rra n tie s . IC A bandon th e C ita d e l, 21 In d L, Rev. 23
26-1-2-317. 1988)
E xclusion or m o d ificatio n of w a rra n tie s , IC N o tr e D a m e 1-aw R e v ie w . E conom ic I n
26-1-2-316 s titu tio n s an d V alu e S u rv e y — W’a r r a n ty
Goods, d e fin itio n . IC 26-1-2-105 R ep re sen tatio n an d D is c la im e rs , 8 N o tre
Im plied w a r ra n ty o f m e rc h a n ta b ilitv . 1C D am e Law 602
26-1-2-314 M e rc h a n ta b ility an d th e S ta t u te o f L im ita
P ro d u ct lia b ility ac tio n s. IC 33-1-1.5-1 — tio n s. 50 N o tre D am e L aw 321
33-1-1,5-8. U tiiity "Services*’ u n d e r th e U n ifo rm C o m
I n d ia n a L a w J o u r n a l . Im p lied an d Cx m ercial Code A re P u b lic L H ilities in for a
press W a rra n tie s a n d D iscla im e rs U n d e r th e Shock"’ , 56 N o tre D am e Law 89,
U niform C o m m ercial C ode, 38 Ind L.J 648
Lions & L ionesses, T ig e rs & T ig resse s.
T he P riv a te Law T r e a tm e n t of D efective
B ears & O th e r A n im a ls: S e lle rs L iab ility
P ro d u cts in S ales S itu a tio n s . 49 Ind L.J 8
for D an g ero u s .^ n lm ais. 5 8 N o tre D am e L
C o n su m er W a rra n ty o r In s u ra n c e C o n
Rev 537
tra c t'’ A View T o w ard s a R ationaJ S ta te
V a lp a r a is o U n iv e r s it y L a w R e v ie w . An
R eg u lato ry Policy. 51 Ind L .J 1103.
E m erg in g C oncept C o n s u m e r P ro te c tio n in
In d ia n a ’s Im plied W 'arran ty o f F itn e s s for
H a b ita tio n L im ited P ro tec tio n for U sed S ta tu to r y R eg u latio n , iV o d u cts L ia b ility an d
H om e B uyers. 57 In d L.J 479 th e S ale of N ew H om es. 11 V al U .L Rev
N egligence, Econom ic Loss, an d the 335.
U.C C.. 61 Ind L J . 593 (1986.*. R isk of Econom ic Ix)ss a n d Im p lied W ar
I n d i a n a L a w R e v ie w . L an d lo rd -T en a n t ra n tv L iab ility in T n p a r tit e F in a n c e L eases
Law In d ia n a a t th e C ro ssro a d s, 10 Ind L 22 V al U L Rev 593 '1 9 8 8 )
Rev 591.
Reference
N O T E S TO D E C IS IO N S
inform ation
been dim in ish ed H olm es v R u sh v ille Prod
Cn>du A.ss n, 170 Ind. App 509. .353 N E.2d
In general 509, 54 Ind Dec 395 H 976), vacat4?d. 170
Basis for ac celeratio n ind .App 517, 3.55 N E 2d 417. r e i n s t a ll ! .
E ncum brance 170 [nd \ p p ,509, 357 N E 2d 734. 55 Ind
Dec 4h8 19?Ti. tra n s fe r d en ied , 267 Ind
Crood faith 454. .371 N E 2d 379. 60 Ind Dec 4 1 3 (1 9 7 8 .
• E rroneous d e te rm in a tio n of in secu rity
(rtK>d F aith .
In G e n era l.
W here b an k had c o n tin u in g problem of
A cceleration pro v isio n s a re valid an d e n
collecting from p u rc h a se r o f m obile hom e and
forceable in In d ia n a . S m ith v U nion S tate such p u rch aser w as d e lin q u e n t on c u rre n t
B ank. 452 N E 2d 1059 Ind A pp 1983). pay m en t due and h ad b een a rre s te d and
B a sis fo r A c c e le ra tio n . placed in j a il and mobile hom e p ark h ad lien
on mobile hom e for re n t d u e. it could not be
— E n cu m b ran ce. said th a t bank did not ac t in good faith m
The a tta c h m e n t of a s u p e n o r !ien ag a in st ac celeratin g p ay m en t V an B ibber v, N o m s.
property .subject to secu rity ag reem en t 419 N E 2d 115 iln d 1981).
am ounted to an en c u m b ra n c e and w as a basis A gfxxi faith b elief u n d e r th is section
for ac celeratio n u n d e r secu rity ag ree m en t m eans a l le ast honesty in fact in th e conduct
which provided for ac cele ratio n in case of or tra n sa ctio n concerned. S m ith v. U nion
encum brance. V an B ibber v N o m s . 419 S ta te B ank. 452 N E 2d 1059 'In d . App
N E.2d 115 (Ind 1981). 1983).
E v id e n c e . — E rrn n e o u s D eterm in atio n of In s e cu

W here th e m a k e r o f th e n o te h ad in cu rred rity.
o th e r fin a n cial o b lig atio n s, had tra n sferre d A ssum ing a b an k w as n o t in secu re, even
c o llateral, an d secu red e q u ip m e n t in w hich an erro n eo u s d e te rm in a tio n o f in sec u rity was
the holder of th e note h ad no su p e n o r secu not n ecessarily u n reaso n ab le o r in bad faith.
rity in te re s t, th e h o ld er could honestly have S m ith V U nion S ta le B ank, 452 N E 2d 1059
believed th a t its ch a n ces of p ay m en t had 'In d App 1983»
59
E x h ib it 3 - 2 18 U.S.C.A. § 1202 and Accompanying Annotations. R e p m t e d from W e st Group. U r n e d S ta te s C o d e A n ro i.ite d ,

IS U S C A 1201 i2 000> p p G6 - 6 S. p e :''n s s io n o f T h o m so n R e u te rs
Title
Ch. KII)\AI>l>IN(i
¡5 12(12. Ransom moiic_\

(a) W'liocNcr ivcL'ivcs. iiossessos, or (.lis|ioscs of an\ nioiies or other property, or any por- :
tiiMi thorcoí. uh i c h has at an\ liiiic been delivered as ransom or reward in conncetion with a '
Section \ iolation ol section 1201 of this title, know ing the same lo be money or pro(ieriy w hich has been :
number at any rime deli\ereil as such ransom or reward, shall he lined inuler this tille or imprisi)iied not
more than ten years, or both. '
ibi ,'\ person who transports, transmits, or transfers in interstate or foreign commerce any ¡
proceeds of a kidnapping ]iunishable under Slate law by imprisonment for more than 1 year, or ¡
receives, possesses, conceals, or elisposes of any stich proceeds after they ha\ e crossed a .Slate i
or I'niled Stales botmdary. knowing the proceetls lo have been unlawfully obtained, shall be i
imprisiineil noi more than 10 yeais. lined under this tide, or both.
(c) l-'or pui'poses of ihis section, lhe term '■Slate” has the meaning set forth in section 24.Sid) ¡
of this tille.
(.lune 2.5. IM4S. c. 64.-S. 62 Slat. 760; .Sept. I .v IW4. Puh.L. IO,^-.^22. Title .XXXII.
Í ,'!206()l(b). Tille XXXIII. 5 .v'0016( I Kl.). IOS Slat. 21 l.'S. 2147.)
History and H IST O R IC A L A M ) STATl TOR Y NOTKS
official Re\isi(»n Notes iiiul l Reports I‘J94 .A m endm ents. Subsec, la). Pub I..
comments 1948 Ai-t.s. leased on Title IS. I'.S.C.. IO.V.i22. S .’'2()601(b)( I ). designated existing
| y 4 0 e d . . S 40SC-I (.hme22. I'J.^2. c. 27 I . S 4. provisions as subsec. (a).
as added .Ian. 24. 1 c. 2M. 49 Slat. Pub.L. 10,V,^22. § , \ ^ 0 0 I 6 ) I )(!.). sub-
Woitls "in the pcnilenliary" after im- siiluicd "under this title” for "not more than
prisoneil" were omilictl in view of section SIO.OOO".
40S2 of ihis liile commuting prisoners to the Suhsccs. (b). (c). Pub.l.. 102-,^22
cusUuly ol the .Attorney (ieneral. (Sec revis v; ,’0 ()6() 1(b)(2). addeel subsecs, (b) ;uid (c).
er's mile under section I itfihis title.)
.Minor changes were made in
|ihrascology.
19‘) 4 . \ i' t s . House Keporl Nos. IO,i-,i24
and I0.'-4S'-). aiul House Conference Report
No. I0.U7I 1. sec I9‘M U.S. Code Cong, and
Adm. New s. p. I SOI.
A n u iu ln i e n t s
1 KDI R A I. SKNTKNC INC; ( ¡ I ID K L IN K S
See I'ederal Sentencing Ciuidelines § 2.A4.2. IS USC.A.
A M K R I C A N \.\ \ \ R K P O R T S
W'hat consiituies violation of IS L'SC.A 1202. prohibiting receipt, possession, or disposition of

ransom monev. .^1 .\I.R I cil 916.
60
CHAPTER 3 CONSTITUTIONS, STATUTES, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, AND COURT R U L E S - RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS
I.IHRAKN Kl I I KKNC KS
Library
' Xmcr ican Diiicst S\sicm
references/ Kidnap|iing I,
research guides F-jK-xclopcdias
Kkinaiipiny. sec ('..I.S. Si 1.2.
I'e.xls and T realises
Characler ev idence noi admissihle. see W right & Cirahani: idenee § 323! et seq.
WKSTI.AW KI K d KOMC RKSKARCH

See \\'H,ST'i.,\\\' guitle lullowing tlie E:\planatiuii pages oLthis Noiiiiiie.
N otes o f D ecisions
l) eii\er> I demanding ransom money and charging

Topics covered Iiulictnu'iit or i n f o n n a t io n 3 receising. possessing and disposing of ran
in notes to — Instriietions 4 som mones charged separate t)ffenses and was
Interstate c o m i m r e e 2 not duplicitous, .'\msler \'. U. .S.. C. A.9 (Cal.)
decisions
1%7. 381 K2d 37.
1. I ) e li\ e r \
VS'licic delciidant picked up ni(inc\ 4. I n s t r u c t i o n s
uh i c h was intended as kidna|i ransom hut In prosecution for possession of ran
had been Iclt in w rong place aiuL alter le;irn- som mone_\ aiul making false statements lo
ing that it was ¡niendeti to he ransom mon e v grand jur\. trial court did not err in refusing
Case Summary conliiuied to keep it. i.lelendant was guilt_\ oL to charge that tlelendant could be acquitted if
jiossession of ransom mone\, notw ithstaiuiing he had relied upon ad\ ice of Federal Bureau
contention tiiat there had been no ■'deh\er\." ol linestigalion agents in attempting to return
in purview ol this section which delined oL- money anonymously, where such advice o c
lense as possession ol nionev. "which has at curred a week alter defendant had made his
an\ time been delixered as ransom." LL .S. lalse statements to grand jury and no attempt
Ortega. C'.A.,' (N..I.I l ‘)75. 517 (■.2d IDOii. was ever matle to return ni(nie\ in manner
suggested. V’. S. Ortega. C..\..’i (N.J.) 1975.
2. Intcrstati' eom n u 'ree
517 t-.2d 100(1.
To establish \iolation oL this section
hi |irosecuiion under former section
piohibiting possession of lansom mones
40Xc-l ol this title accused could not c o m
there was no reqinremeiit that detentlant be
plain ol instruction that receipt of ransom
connected with interstate commerce element
money v\as criminal offense, wher e court in-
ol priniaiN kitinapping olTense under section
structci.! as to what consiituled a conspiracy,
1201 oLthis title, r . ,S. V. Ortega. C.A..^ ( N . . L I
and that unless Jury found accused became
1975. 517 L.2d 1()()6.
part of conspiracy there should be acquittal,
3. Inciicliiient or in fo rm a tio n and that it accuseil entered conspiracy jury
Indictment charging in se\eral counts should further lint! that accused accepted
conspiracy to commit offenses under this sec ransom mones knowing it was such, or ai d
tion and sectiotis S75 and 1202 ol this title ed owners in exchangi ng it. l.aska \. U.S..
and charging substantive olTense ol kidnap C.C.A.IO (Okla.) iM36. 82 F.2d 672, certio
ping aiul three separate offenses of tiansmit- rari denied 56 .S.Ct. 957. 298 U„S. 689. 80
tiiiii communications in interstate commerce l..Hd. 1407.
L-
61
A. N u m b ers
I'.ach statute has n u m b e r s assigned tor eaeli part ot'tlie statute. l - \ery legislati\’c authorit} -—
local, state, a n d federal — follows a different n u m b e r i n g system. Iherefore, it is not practical
to discuss separateK' each n u m b e r i n g s\ stem. ' Ihere are s o m e general similarities, h o w e \ ’er,
that can be addressed.
.Most laws are usualh' div ided into br(wd categories, each of which is assigned a number.
Ihose b r oa d categories are div ided into topics o r smaller categories that are also assigned a
n u m b e r. Ihe topics are f u r t he r divided into subtopi cs a n d assigned a n u m b e r , a n d so on.
Ihe n u m b e r ot categories a n d divisions d e p e n d s on the s t a t ut or y s c he m e o f t h e particular
legislative authoritv-.
For Example The laws of Indiana are divided into broad categories called titles. Com
mercial law is assigned the number 26. (See "Number of Title" at the top
ofthe first page of Exhibit 3-1.) Each title is divided into areas called articles. Commercial
law in the Indiana Code is divided into three articles numbered 1, 2, and 3. The Uniform
Commercial Code article, that governs commercial transactions, is assigned the number 1.
The three articles are listed under "Commercial Law." (See "Number of Article" atthe
top ofthe first page of Exhibit 3-1.) Article 1, the Uniform Commercial Code, is divided into
10 chapters. They are listed under "Uniform Commercial Code." (See "Number of Chapter"
on the first page of Exhibit 3-1.) The chapter governing the sale of goods is Chapter 2,
Sales. Each chapter is divided into sections and each section is assigned a number (see
"Number of Section" in Exhibit 3-1). Each section contains the actual law that governs
a subject. The section of Chapter 2 (Sales) that establishes when a contract must be in
writing is assigned the number 201. This section is called Formal Requirements— Statute
of Frauds (see § 26-1-2-201 in Exhibit 3-1).
Therefore, if you wantto read the law in the Indiana Code governing when a contract
must be written, you refer to Title 26 (Commercial Law), Article 1 (Uniform Commercial
Code), Chapter 2 (Sales), Section 201 (Statute of Frauds). This is usually referred to
numerically as § 26-1-2-201, Statute of Frauds.
B. Short Title
Ihe s h o r t t i t l e is the n a m e bv which the statute is k no w n . It is a n a m e that is easy to ise
w hen referring to the statute. Included in the example are two s h or t titles: the short title of
.■\rticle 1 o f t h e Indiana Cod e , Uni f or m ( "ommer cial C'ode (§ 26-1-1-101) a nd the short t il e
of (Chapter 2, Uni f orm ('.ommercial Côde— Sales (§ 26-1 -2-101). (See “Short Title” on the fi'st
a nd s econd pages o f hxhibit 3-1.)
C. Purpose Clause
Ihe p u r p o s e c l a u s e includes the p ur p o s e the legislative b o dy i n t e n d ed to accomplish wh^n
drafting the statute. It is helpful in d e t e r m i n i n g the legislative intent. (See “ P u r po s e C^lauie”
in hxhibit 3 - 1, § 2 6 - 1-1 -102.)
D. Scope
S ome statutes have sections that state specifically what is co ver ed a n d not cover ed by t i e
statute. Ihese are called S C O p e sections. A researcher sh o ul d first review this section \vh?n
analv'zing a statute, because a review o f this section mav' allow a d e t e r mi n a t io n at the out;et
w h e t he r the statute applies. (See “Scope” in I'.xhibit 3-1.)
62
CHAPTER 3 CONSTITUTIONS, STATUTES, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, AND COURT RULES RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS
For Example You are researching a question under Indiana law involving a contractthat
grants a security interest in goods that are being sold. The scope section
of the Uniform Commercial Code (§ 26-1-2-102) provides thatthe section does notapplyto
such transactions. You know at the outset that the state Uniform Commercial Code does
not apply and need not be considered further.
E. Definitions
Si'iiic statutc.s hiuo definitions sections that detine t e rms used in the statute, lhe definitions
are helptui in d e t e r mi ni ng the parties and situations co\'ered b\- the provisions o f t h e statute.
Detinitions also help in d et e r m i ni ng if the legislature gave specitic m e an in g to t e r ms within
statutes. (See “Detinitions” ni Hxhibit 3-1, 26 -1-1 -301.)
F. S u b s ta n tiv e P ro vis io n s
lhe substantive sections set torth the subst ance ot the law. (See “Substantive Provisions” in
Hxhibit 3 -1.) 'lhe\- establish the rights and duties o f those gover ned b\' the statute: that which
is rcc]uired, prohibited, or allowed. A SLibstantive section o f t h e Indiana (ôde addresses the
question po se d at the beg i nni ng ot this section, “W h e n must a contract lor the sale ot go od s
be in wri t i ng?” (See § 2 6 - 1-2 -2 0 1 in Hxhibit 3 - 1.)
lhe subst antive sections may incluile sci.tions tliat provide remedies, such as tines o r
i m p r i s o n m e n t in criminal cases. Ihere ma\' be sections go ver ni n g procetlure, such as which
coui t has jurisdiction o\ er the matters covered by the statute, lhe substantiv e pr ovisions are
what you usually refer to when addr essing the client's legal problem.
G. O t h e r P ro vis io n s
Not included in tlie example in I xhibit 3 1 are otiier tvpes ol statutorv sections that vou mav
encounter.
For Example There may be statutory provisions that:

State which administrative agency is responsible for administering the act
Incorporate by reference sections of other statutes
Limit the application of the statute through exceptions
Establish when the statute takes effect
Repeal other statutes
State that the statute is cumulative to the case law and that other remedies still
exist
M. A n n o ta tio n s./R e fe re n c e In fo rm a tio n

Hollowing each section ot a statute, in small print, are reterences to various sources of i n t o r m a
tion related to the section. Ihis reference information, usualh- referred to as a n n o ta t io n s ,
includes:
• ' lhe history ot the section, including dates o f a m e n d m e n t , ll mav- also include s u m
maries ol the a m e n d m e n t s and prev ious statutorv- n u m b e r s il the section n u m b e r
has changed due to a recodilication (see the fust page ot lixhibit 3-2)
• Ofhcial c o m m e n t s on the section (see the lirst page of H'xhibit 3-2)
63
• ( ' r oss- i cl cr cnc cs to o the r related st.itiites {see the la.st page ol lixhibit 3-1)
• Library ret'erences/researcii g ui de s — relerences to o th e r sources that ma\- be uselul
wlien aiiah / i n ” the statute, sucli as hooks, digest ke\’ n u m b e r s (see t d i a pt e r 5), law
re\'iew and o th e r articles, A L R cites, and legal e nc \ c l o pe d i a cites ((J/.S. A m . lur. 2 d,
etc.) that discuss the section (see the last page o f l-'xhibit 3-1 and the tirst page of
Hxhibit 3-2)
• Notes to decisions- the n ame, citation, a n d s u m m a r i es o f key court decisi ons that
have discussed, a n a h zed, o r i nterpreted the statute. W h e n a statute lias b ee n i nt e r
preted or referred to in a large n u m b e r of cases, the cases are indexed acco r di n g to
subject and each categors' assigned a numbe r . If )’ou ha\'c a q ues tion c o n c er n i n g the
interpretat ion o f a statute, b\' s c an ni ng the notes \'ou ma\- i m m e d i a t e h ’ locate a case
on point. This often sa\ es time in locating a case t h r ou g h o t he r m e a n s (see the last
pages o f Hxhibit 3-1 a n d i-'xhibit 3-2)
.Annotations are sources ol i n l or ma t i on a n d are not part ot the statute. lhe\' are not tlie
law a n d do not ha\'e legal authority.
It is easier to work with statutes after \<ui have b e c o me familiar with their c o m p o n e n t
parts. The material pr esented here will help \'ou gain that familiarity, but the greatest f ami liar
ity come s with practice, (,'hoose a subject of interest a n d read the statute in \ ' our jurisdiction
that go\ er ns the area.
III. S T A T U T O R Y R E S E A R C H — L O C A T IN G S T A T U T E S
Statutory research is the process of finding the statutory law that applies to a pr oblem. The
first two parts ot this section discuss statutorx’ research sources, that is, wher e st a t u t o r \ law
can be found. The third part presents research strategies or techniqLies, tliat is, ho w to c onduc t
statutor)' research. Locating uniloi ni laws and mode l acts is covered in ( Ti apter 3. Not e that
the United States Const i t ut i on is included with the I 'nitcd S tu lc i C.odc .Aiiiiotiitcd ( U S C A i And
the l ' n i t e d Stiitci Godc Scrvicc (L'.S('S), the ma i n research sources lor tederal law, a n d most
state constitut ions are incluiled with the state statutes. The research t echn i q ue s a n d strategies
that apply to statutorv- reseaich also apply to constitutional research.
A. Federal Law
1. P u b lication
Hach law passed by ( ' on gr ess is assigned a public law number. The n u m b e r rellects the o r der
in which the law was passed and the session of (Congress. I'or example, Pubhc Law No. 107-35
was the 35th law passed bv' the 107th session o f Cxingress. The full text o f each law is published
separately by the United States ( i o v e r n m e n t Print ing Otfice a n d is referred to as a s l i p la w .
Slip laws are available at most law libraries and man\' public libraries. The L 'nited States Cknle
C.ongresiional a n d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e NVir.s (L'SC'X'.AX). publisiied hy West ( i ro up, presents the
complet e text o f all public laws passed b\' Congress. It is available bv' subscri ption a nd t hr ough
Westiaw. hi addi tion, slip laws may be pur cha sed f rom the United States ( i o v e r n m e n t P ri n t
ing Office (phone: 1- 866-512 - hSOO; Web site: www. gpo. gov) or t h r o u g h vour congressional
r e pr es e nt a t i\ e (s ) . The ( i o v e r n m e n t P ri nt ing (')ffice We b site is p r ov id ed in the “ I nter net
Resources” section of this chapter. Not e that each session o f ( 'o ngr es s lasts o n e year. Because
there is a new (Congress everv’ two years with the election o f t h e Hou s e o f Representatives,
there are two sessions lor each ( 'ongress.
At the en d o f each session o f ('ongi'ess, the slip laws are placed in chr onol ogi cal oi der
( accor ding to the dat e the law was passed) a n d published in vol ume s titled the L 'n ited States
S ta t u te s a t Large. Because the laws are placed in chr onologi cal order, it is difficult, if not ini-
possible, to c on d u c t research using the S ta t u te s at Large. For example, it v'ou were assigned
the task (il loeating tlie hiws relating to the distrihutioii ot drugs, \ o u would h a \ e to search
e \ e r \ x'olunie o t' t h e m o r e tha n 100 \'olumes. t ur the r i m p e d i m e n t to research is that each
\ o l u m e has a separate index, t he re is no single index that woul d intorni you which volumes
(.ontain laws relating to the dist ribut ion o f d r u g s .
In 1923, Côngress a ut hori zed the pr epa ra t i on o f t h e L'liitcil Stulcs C od e (L'S('). Here the
l.iws cont ai n e d in the Stiiliilci ¡it Liirge are or gani zed (codified) b\- subject into 30 categories
called titles, with each title c o \ e r i n g a dilierent aiea of law. A citation to a L'S (' statute refers
to the title n u m b e r, the n a m e of the code, the section, a n d the yeai'. Not e that the year is the
Lopx’iight date a n d not the \ e a r the statute was enacted.
For Example 18 U.S.C. § 1115 (2000)

Title Code Section Symbol Section No. Year
,\ new edition is published e \ e r \ six years, a n d cumulativ e s u p p l e m e n t s called p o c k e l

p iirli are published for each x'olume d ur i ng interx'ening \'ears, Ihe i'SC. is the otiicial code
of ' t he laws o f t h e L'nited States. A publication o f a code o f laws is cons i der ed ofhcial wh en
the goN'ernment itself publishes the cc'de or ar r anges lor or directs a c omme r ci al publisher
to publish the code.
,\ dr awbac k o f t h e T.SC is that it is u na n n o t a t e d ; it merely recites the federal statutes. It
does not prin ide the researcher with the valuable i n l o r ma t io n inckided in the a nnot at i ons ,
such as library references an d notes to court decisions that ha\ e i nter preted the statutes.
t he two p r i \ a t el \ published a nn o t a t e d codes are the L'SC'A, published b\' W'est ( i r o u p
aiul also available on Westlaw; a n d the L'S('S, published b\' LexisN'exis, a division ot Reed
1 Isexier, Inc. (referred to in the r em a i n d e r of this text as LexisXexis), Ihese codes are con
sidered unofficial codes; that is, the\- are not published at the direction ot the g o \ e r n m e n t .
.\ discussion 1)1 these an n o t a t e d codes follows.
2. U n ile d Slates C o iic A iin o la leil

Ihe ( \ consists of approximateK' 200 \'olumes and includes the Cieneral Index. In the tront
ol each \ ol ume is a list o f t h e 30 titles o f t h e L'.S(’ (see I'.xhibit 3-3). bach \' olunie has a table of
cont ents listing the chapters and features in the v ol ume and a cite page listing the citation to
use f’o r the \ ol um e . t he lirst \-olumes contain the L'nited States ( ' onst ituti on w ith annot ati ons.
I he subsequent \ o l u m e s include the entire text ot the 30 titles ot the L'.SC,', ar ranged a c cor ding
to the 30 titles of the L'.SC. Most titles include a title index as well as ap pe n di x material, and
each \’olunie is p e r i o d i c a l k sup p le me nt e d with pocket parts that upd at e the main text. Ihe
app en d i x material ma y include pre\'ious sections ot the ( A i d e of Federal Regiiliilioiis an d o t he r
materials such as international con\’entions. (See lixhibit 3-2 tor an example of a (_'.S(,',4 section.)
a. Cieneral Index
Ihe Cieneral Index is a sof tbound, mul t i \ ' ol ume set that is updat ed annualh'. It consists ot
des cr i pt i \ ’c words o r phrases, ar ran ge d alphabeticalK', with headings a n d subheadings. I-'ol-
lowing each su b h ea d i ng is the title and section niimber (s) o f t h e rele\ant statutor\- pro\'ision.
W'hen the reference to a section n u m b e r is followed by the abbreviation et sci/., it me a ns that
the reference is to a gr oup o f sections b egi nni ng with that section. (See Lxhibit 3-4 tor an
exa mp l e of an index page.)
b. Pocket Farts a n d S up pl emen tar y Pamphl et s

' the har dco\ei' vol ume s o f t h e (.'SC.'A are u p dat ed with ptickef parts that are placed in a pocket
at t he back o f each volume, ' the pocket parts include an\' re\'isions to a statute an d addi tional
65
E x h ib it 3 - 3 Titles of United States Code and United States Code Annotated. R e p rin te d from W e s t G roup. U rv te c Sta tf's
C o d e A nnotcitea : ■' T:ties o ' U n it e j S ta te s C o d e a n d U n ite d S ta te s C o d e A nnotated. 2 0 0 0 . from Title 18 U S C A p. I I . w ith p e r m is s io n o f
T h o m so n R e n t e 's
TITLES OF UNITED STATES CODE

AND LNITED STATES CODE ANNOTATED
(ieneral Provisions 27. intoNieating Liquors
I'hc Congress 2S. .ludiciarv and .judicial f’roccdLire
1he Presitlciit 29. Labor
Mag and Seal. Scat ol (iovciiinicnl. and the States 30. Mineral Land and Mining
(iovciiinicnt Orgaiii/alion and Hniployees 31. Monev and T'inance
Siirctv Honds {Sec Title .'/. M on ex diid Findiice) 32. National (iiiaril
.Agiicniliirc
-1-) Navigation aiK.1 Navigable waters
.Aliens anc.1 .\ationalitv 34. Nav V (.S'i'i' ////(' 10. , \ n n e d F o n cs)
.Arhitraiion 35. Patents
•Arnied f orccs 36. Patriotic Societies anti National Observances.
Baiikiiipicv Ccrenu)iiies. and Organizations
B;iiiks anti Hanking 37. Pay and .Allowances o f t h e L'liit'ormed Services
Census 3S. Veterans' Bcnelits
Coast (iuard 39. i'ostal SCI Vice
Coninicicc and Trade 40. I’tiblic Bttiklings. Pi'opertv. and

Works
Conservation
41. Public contracts
Copv rights
42. The Public Mealtli and VVellare
Crimes and Criniinal I’roceiliMC
43. Ptiblic Lands
Customs Dtitics
44. Public Printing and Docunieiiis
TduciiUoti
4,5. Rai Iroails
Tootl and 1)i tigs
46. Shipping
Torcign Relations aiKl Intcrciuirse
47. Telegraphs. Telephones, aiul Ratliotelegrajilis
1lighw av s
4S. Territories and Insular Possessions
1los|-)itals and ,Asv Itmis
49. I'ransportation
Indians
50. War and National Defense
Internal Reveiuie Cotlc
a n n o t a t i o n s , s u c h as r cc e n t c a se s i n t e r p r e t i n g tlie st atut e. It'a s t a t u t o r y s e c t i o n is n o t i n c l u d e d

in t he p o c k e t p a r t , t h e s ec t i o n h a s n o t b e e n a m e n d e d a n d t h e r e a r e in) n e w a n n o t a t i o n s , l h e
p o c k e t p a r t s are c u m u l a t i v e — the\- u p d a t e t h e v o l u m e f r o m t h e d a l e of t h e v o l u m e ’s p u b l i c a
tion. I'or e x a m p l e , it’t h e h a r d b o u n d v o l u m e was p u b l i s h e d in 2 004, t h e n t h e 2 0 0 9 p o c k e t p a r t
will i n c l u d e all t h e c h a n g e s , u p d a t e s , a n d n e w c ases c o n s t r u i n g t h e s t a t u t e s c o n t a i n e d in t h e
v o l u m e d u r i n g 2 003, 2006, 20 0 7, a n d 2008.
II t h e p o c k e t p a r t is t o o l ar ge to tit in t h e b a c k lU a v o l u m e , t h e p u b l i s h e r will p r o d u c e a
s ol t - boLmd s u p p l e m e n t t h a t sits next to t h e v o l u m e . O c c a s i o n a l l y , a n e w h a r d b o u n d v o l u m e
is p r i n t e d t hat i n c l u d e s t h e i n f o r m a t i o n c o n t a i n e d in t h e p o c k e t p a r t o r s u p p l e m e n t s . W h e n
this o c c u r s , t h e p u b l i s h e r p lac e s in t h e p o c k e t t h e noti ce: “' i h i s \ ' o k i m e C o n t a i n s N o Po c ke t
Pai t.” II t h e r e is nci p o c k e t p a rt a n d n o n o t i c e t h a t t h e v o l u m e d o e s n o t c o n t a i n a p o c k e t part ,
a s s u m e t h a t t h e p o c k e t p a r t is m i s s i n g a n d c h e c k wi t h t h e l i br a r i an . (See E x h i b i t 3-3 for a n
e x a m p l e o f a p o r t i o n o f a p o c k e t part . )
66
CHAPTER 3 CONSTITUTIONS. STATUTES, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, AND COURT RULES - RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS
E x h ib it 3 - 4 xcerpt from the U S.C.A. General Index.

: R e p o r t e d f i o ' iV e s t G roup. U n ite d S ta te s C o d e A n n o ta ted , G e n e ra l
In d e x 120001. p 737
K K R O SK N K K li)\A IM > l\(; -C o m d

l-iaiiks a n d b a n k i n g , r o b b e r v . 18 !j 21 1.^
C ab in et deparliiicnts. head s an d d eputies.
k l :r ( ) s i ; m -: com d I n t e r c e p t i o n o l vv ire. o r a l , o r e l e c t r o n i c
S u m m e r l ill a iu l I iic l l-iik lg c lin u I’lo y n im s . c o m m u n i c a t i o n s . IS § 2 , s | 6
42 5 62.S.1 K id n a p p in g , attem p ts, ciinspiracv. p en alties
Reference to k i ; r r - \ i i i . i . s .a c t a n d l o r l e i u i r e s . 18 S .'<51
Title 7 Section 51 5 N k ' d k ' a l . A s s i s t a n c e , ü o i u ’ i a l l x . i h i s i i u l c v C h i e f . lu s tic e o t S u p r e m e C o u r t , k i d n a p p i n g ,
- K I R R S M L L Í I T O B A C O O C ' O N R T O I , .A( T a lle m p ls. c o n sp ira c y , tines, p e n a ltie s a n d
and the Sections ~ ( i c n c r a l l x . 7 I c l s e q . l o r t e i l u r e s . IS i; 1
that follow K i:r ( ) H i-.\iii) ( ) M : C h i l d r e n a n d M i n o r s , th i s i n d e x
( ' ( i n l i o l l e i l S i i h s i a n e e . ü e iU M a il N , t h i s i n d e x (T .A . d i r e c t o r , d e p u t v d i r e c t o r , t i n e s p e n a l t i e s a n d
K i : r n . i : R i\i-.R I’o r l e i l u r e s . 1S § .^.5 1
W ik l a iu l s c e n ic rive rs. 16 1276 C o n g re s s , th is index
K L r n . i iio i.ii.s C on sp iracy .
le e .Age N a t i o n a l S e i e n l i l i c R e s e r v e , g e n e r a l l v , .Aga in st r i g h t o f i n h a b i t a n t s , t i n e s , p e n a l t i e s
this in d e x a n d l o r t e i l u r e s . IS § 2 4 1
K i \ \ i ;i :n . \ \ \ n a t io n a i . iiis t o r k a i . p a r k I' ii ie s. p e n a l t i e s a n d l o r t e i l u r e s . 18 § 1201
(le n e rallv . 16 S 4 I O v \ e l sec.|. I ' o r e i g n c o u n t r i e s . IS !} 9 5 6
K L . V I. A R d O C O R A I . R l d d - I’ R t i . S l R \ L D e p r i v a t i o n o f r i g h t s u n d e r c o l o r o f law. fin e s .
(le n a ra llv. 16 S 461. il l. I ’ N p e n a l t i e s a n d f o r f e i t u r e s . 18 S 2 4 2
K I Y I.,A R ( ¡() N A IT O N .A L .\I.A R I.\T . D o m e s t i c Vio l e i i c e . p a r e n t a l k i d n a p p i n g , r e p o r t s .
S .W C n .\R V 28 S 17."^8A nt
D e si^ iia liiin . 16 14.^.^ iil l : n i p l ( i > e e R e t i r e m e n t I n c o m e .S ecu ritv P r o g r a m ,
Reference KL:^■s p r o t e c t i o n o f e m p l o y e e b e i i e l i l rig h t s ,
to Title and D e l e n s e D e p a n m e i i l . .S eei ir itv . i h e l l . ti d u e i a r v r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . 2 9 S I I I 1
Section I d i g e r v . l i n e s . | X - n a l l i e s a n d L d ii e i t i i r e s . l:v i d e n c e . c o n g r e s s , c a b i n e t d e p a r t m e n t h e a d s .
IS H k n o w l e d g e . 1S S 3-^ I
I n l e n ia l R e v e i u ie .S ervic e, p m p r ie t o r s o l d i s i i l l e J l air h o u s in g , sale o r ren tal, in tim id a tio n .
spnils p l a n t s to l u m i s h l o S e c r e t a r v . i n i e r f e r e n c e . p e n a l t i e s . 4 2 S ,Vi.^l
26 S .^211.' 1 Bl d a ta b ase , c rim e s against ch ild re n .
K I I M I R R l in B l.iC registration. 4 2 5 14072
K a m p iii.h e a . ;je n e ra llv . this m d e x l e d e r a l ol' lic i a ls . l i n e s , p e n a l t i e s a n d f o r f e i t u r e s .
K I . W . A l l W II l ) I . R \ i , S S 18 S 1201
( le n e ra llv . 16 í I 1.^2 iii l e d e r a l l y p r o t e c t e d act iv ities. i n t i i i i i d a t i o n , in le r-
K IC K HACK R .X C K I I ACI lereiice. lines, p e n alties a n d fo rfe itu re s.
(le n e ra llv . 4(1 S 27(ic 18 S 2 4 5
I’lih lie l i i i i k l i i i ' ; . I’ro pertv. a n d W o r k s , g e n e ra llv . l i n e s , p e n a l t i e s a iu l l o r f e i t u r e s . 18 S I 2 0 1
this in d e x h u l i a n l a n d s a n d r e s e r v a t i o n s . 18 !j 115.^
K l( K H .A C K S R a n s o m iiio n e v . IS !; 1 2 0 2
.A m i K i c k h a e k . g e ii e r a llv . ih i s iiu le x H e a lt h in s iir- T r a n s p o r t a t i o n , in t e r s t a t e c i i m n i e r c e . 18 !j 1201
a iu e lo r aged and d isa b le d . l-’o r e i g n c o i i n t r i e s .
42 S 2 7
l . ' (l ' a - h C h i k l r e n a n d m i n o r s . 4 2 ij I 1 6 0 8 a
In c o m e la v . d e iliie tio n s . 26 !j 162 C o n s p i r a c y , 18 § 9 5 6
M e d i c a l a s s i s t a n c e p r o g r a m s , g r a n t s l o S l a t e s lo r . r . S . c iti/e n s , 22 § 2 7 1 5 a
c r iiiiin a l p e n a llv . 42 S 2 7
l. > ( ) a - h I ' o r e i g n D i p l o m a t i c a n d C o n s u l a r O f l i c e r s . th is
I’ r e s i d e i i l i a l I T e c t i o n C a m p a i g n l i i i i d . index
2 6 S ')(II2 l o rfeitu re s. I'ines. p e n alties a n d forfeitu res.
Presid en tial p rim a rv m a tc h in g p a v m e iil ae e o iin l. g enerallv. ante
26 vj 91142 h u l i a n s . th i s i n d e x
I’n b lic w o r k s . l.H !; <S74 In te rc e p tio n o f w ire . oral, or e le c tr o n ic
R e a l I ’s i a t e S e i t l e m e n t P r o c e d u r e s . c o m m u n ic a tio n s. President, c o n g ress.
ih is iiu le x S e n t e n c e anti p u n is h m e n t . I 8 § 2 5 16
IS I'S S C ; S 2B 4.1 Intern atio n al C h ild A b d u c tio n R e m e d ie s .
K IC K .A P O O IN n i.A N S g e n erallv . this index
I n d ia n s , this in d e x I n t e r s t a t e a n d F-'oreign C o m m e r c e , th is i n d e x
K ID .S .A P P IN C l I n v o l u n t a r y serv i t u d e , i n t e n t to s e ll . 18 ¡5 158^1
(le n e ra llv . IS S 1201 e l se q . .lurisdiction.
, \ i r c r a l ' t . j i i r i s d i c l i o n . 1S S 1201 I n d i a n l . a n d s a n d r e s e r v a t i o n s . IS § .^242
, \ l l e i i i p t s . I S i:; 1201 in te rn a tio n a lly p ro tecte d p e rs o n s, v ictim s.
.A llo n ie v ( I e n e r a l . th is in d e x 18 S 1201
67
E x h ib it 3 - 5 Pocket Part Update for 17 U .S.C.A § 511. R e p n n ’e d from I' l' e s f G roup. U n ite d S ta te s C o ơ e A nn o tated , 2C01
C u m u líìtiv e A n n u a l Pocfêr, T'tie Ì7 ị 5 Ì I. p 27. U'/i'/j p e im is s io n o f T h o m so n R e u te rs
ÿ 5 1 l . I,iahilil\ o r st ai os. iiistrumcmalitics of States, and State (it'licial tor ÌMlriiiiicmeiit of C('P>-
riiiht
(a) 111 (ÌL-Iicial.— Ain Stale, am iiistruiiicntalit\ ot' a Slates, and an\ ol’ticer for employee
(il a States or insirimicnlalils ol’ a Slate actiiii: in his or her ot'ticial ca|iacil\. shall not bc immune,
Amendment uiulci' ihc l:lc\ L’niii AnioiKlniciit ol'ilic C'onsiitutioii ol'thc riiilcci Slates or uiulci' aiiN other doctrino
to law (it so\erci> 2ii imniunit\. IriHii suit ill I'LxIcral cdLiri by aii\ peiscin. iiiclialiiii: an\ iZ(i\emmental or
Iioiimn emmental enl ii \ . ĩdi' a \ iolalion of anv lit’ the cxclusix e riiiliis of a C()|\\ rit;ht owner pro\'iJei,i
h\ section 106 thi'oiiLih 121. lor iiiiporiiiii: copies (if phomirccortls in \ iolaii('M of section 602. or tor
an\ otliL'i' \ iolalioii Iiiulcr lliis tille.
¡Sec Iiiiiiii Vdltinie for Ic’\ t of i h ) l
I As innciidcd Puh L. 106-14. s lii:)(6i. Aui;. 5. 1999. I 13 Stut. 222.)
m s r O K K AI. A M ) s T A T I O R ^ N O I KS
Aiiicndiiicnls
1999 AnieiKliiicnts. Siihscc. (a). I'uh.l..
106-44. s i(ii)(6). subsiiiiiiL\l ■■121" for - | I9."
I.II5RAK\ K K F K R K N C K S
T e x t ;i i k I T r e a t i s e s 7A f'L'il I'ldc I, liil. C(ip_\rÌLĩhts § 18:

lỈL isiiicss a n il C 'o i n m c i v i a l I .I l i n a l i o n
in l- L 't ic ra l C o u r t s ÿ ÿ b 5 .2 . 6 ? . 3 . 6 ? . 4 .
(i5.10, (i5.15 ( Robert I-, Hai” Cii. ) ( W'csl
CiiDLip & ABA I99SI
N o n s o i DKCISIONS
New annotations
C'oiisiiiutmnalil\ I 2 (Texi IWS.I.'SV 1 ..h ! 2S2. reheaniii: yranled. \a-
linmiiniiN 2 caled I7S I ..'h ! U.,S.P,Q.2d 2(KW.
Wai\cr3 r i i i \ e r s i t \ employee ulio allegedly au-
ihon/eil pnnlini; of copies ol author's book
I 2. ( onslilLiliiinalilN ill \iolalion ol C'o|i\rii;hl .Act u a s enlilleil lo
SlatL ilc p u rp o rlm y lo a b ro g alc slates' qualilied iniiminil\. where coiilractual priv
sin crciu n m im iin iiv in c (ip _ \r iL ih l in tr in g L '- \ision relalini; lo tiuralion of unisersity' s
niL'iil s i i i i s w. a s n o l L’liaclL ’tl p i ir s L ia ii l l o a \ alici |iublishin;j license u a s ambiguous aiui was
C N c r c is L ' o l coiiL iicssional p o u e r l o L'nl’o r c c susceptible of inlerpretatii'ii that permitted
lliL- g iia r a n k 'c s of iho I'oLirlL'L'nth ,\in o n d - employee' s actions, ( have/ \. Arte Publico
m c M l ' s cIlic p i ' o c c s s c la iis L ' a n d t h u s diti not
\a litll\ \ \ a i \ c s la t e s ' iiiH m iiiii). R o ilrii;u e / \. U.S.i>.Q.2d IWW.\ acaied I I 6 S.C 1. 1667,517
I 'e x a s C o i n ' n o n th e A r ts . C '.A .5 ( T e x . ) 2()()(). V .S . 1IS4. LU L.[-:d..\l 772. on remand 139
I W F..\l 279, r.,S.I>.g.2d F-..\l .504, 46 U.,S.P.Q.2d 15 4 1, on remand 157
r . . \ l 282. certiorari denied 116 S.Ct. 1672.
2 . Iin n iu n it)
517. U..S. 1 1X7. \}4 l,.r-;.d.2d 776.
P r o v i s i o n s o l ' C ' o p \ r iy l il . \ n a i u l l . a n h a n i
,Aet t h a t p u i p o i l e d l o r e q u i r e s t a l e s t o s u b m i t ,^.\V ai \er
l o s u i t in leilera! e o u ii lor \io la iio n o f ih o se l ' ni \ e rs it \ \ \ a i \ e d its Elesenth A m e n d
statu tes exceeded C 'o n y re s s 's con stitu lio n al ment immunilN from suit for copyright
pow ers. C h a \ e / \. .A rle P u b l i c o I’r e s s . ( ' . . A . ? infriii'jement . . .
Pockel parts are published onl\- once a \'car. T o en.sure that tiie i n f or mat i on c on t a i ne d
ill the U S C A is cur r enl, .suppleiiiental pamphlet s, titled “Statutor}' S up p le me nt s, ” are p u b
lished every three to four m o n t h s following the publicat ion o f t h e pocket part. Like pocket
parts, the}- include an}- re\-isions to a statute an d addi tional a n no t at i on s . Ihese p a m p h l e t s
are not cumulat ive; each on e co\-ers a specific time period. Ihis m e a n s that }-ou mu s t check
68
CHAPTER 3 CONSTITUTIONS, STATUTES, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, AND COURT RULES — RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS
eacli s u p p l e me n t \siien u pda t ing your rescareh. Ihosc supplcnicntal pamphlet s are usualh'
Icicated at the end (if the L S(.'A set. Vo/i iiiiisl d lw dV i chcck the [nu kct ¡uirtí a m i <iipplc>uciitdl
p iin ip lilcts to c iiiu r c tluit y o u r rcsciircli is ciirrciil ¡iiiíl lluil ¡here linvc not been chdiigcs in th e
l a w subscíjiieiit lo ih e p u b li e a ti o n of the tu d in '¡'oliime.
c. P o p u l a r N a m e l a b l e
Statutes are often referred to hv a p opu l a r name, such as the .Americans with Disabilities
Act or the F r e ed o m of liiloriiiatioii .Act. 11'you k n o w a statute's po pul a r n am e but do not
k n o w the citation, a qui c k way to locate tiie statute is t h r o u gh the po p u la r name table f oun d
in the last v ol ume of the (ieneral Index, lhe table pro\ ides \'ou with the public law n u m b e r,
tiie S tdtiites dt Large citation, a nd the title and section numbe rs. (See F.xhibit 3-6 for a page
fVoni the table.)
d. C o n v e r s i o n T a b le s
It you kno w t he Stiitntes at I.arge citation, the public law luimbcr, or the \ car and cha pt e r of
a law, you can use the conversion tables to fmd wher e the law is classified in the L'S C A . l he
C(in\ ersion tables are located in the tables \ olumes. Ihev are published amiualK', and updat es
are located at the e nd ol each n o n c u m u l a t i \ e supplement. (See l^xhibit 3 7 tor an exa mpl e ot
a cotiN'ersion table page.)
3. U n ite d States C o d e Service

l.cxisNe.xis pi.iblishes the L'S(,'S. It consists ot appr oximately 130 \ oUmics and c ont ai ns the
w o r d i n g o f t h e federal statutes published in the Sla lu ie s al ¡.urge, lhe C.Sí.'.S and L’S C A arc
c o n i p e t i t i \ e sets, p u b l i s h e d by diflercnt publisher s to accomplish the same basic task: to
publish the federal laws a nd provide the inf or mat i on necessai\' for researchers to inter pret
a n d an s we r ques ti ons c o n c er n i n g federal law. Sample pages from the (',S(,'.S are pr ese n t ed
in Fxhibit 3-(S.
lhe sets are similar in most respects; tlierelorc, most rescarcheis do iiol use bot h sets.
W h i c h set you use is often based on a\ailabilit\ or personal prelercn<.e. lhe sniiilarities and
diflerences bet ween the sets are presented here.
Similarities befwceti the two sets arc;
1. lhe\' are organi'/'cd in the same way. lhe or gani / at i on is based on the 30 titles of
the L'SC'. For example, I'itlc 42 Section 1983 will be found at 42 U.S.(7.A. § 19(S3
a n d 42 U.S.C.S. « I9S3.
2. lhe\' ha\ e general itidexes, po(Hilar n am e tables, and conversion tables.
3. Ihey are annot ated. In both sets, the anno t at i on s priwidc information on the his-
tor\' of the statute, direct yoti to ot he r research sources, a nd brietl\' s u m m a r i z e
cases that ha\'c cons t ru e d the statLitc.
4. ihe\' are s i m i l a r k updated. Both sets are updat ed annua l h' with pocket par ts for
each v ol ume and supplemental pamphlets.
Differences bet we en the two sets arc:
1. l h e i ' S C A includes mor e court decisions in the “Notes of De c is i on s ’ section ot

the annot at i ons, lhe I'SC.S tends to be mo r e selecti\ e and reference only the m o r e
significant cases.
2. l h e “Research (iuide" section o f t h e i'SC'.S annot ati ons is more coni prehensi \'e
t han t he “Library Reference’’ sectioti o f t h e I'SC.A. in that it includes mo r e refer
ences to research sources.
69
E x h ib it 3 - 6 U.S.C.A. Popular Name Table Page. R e p rrte cl l/Vesf G.-oi/p. U m ted S ta te s C o d e A nn o tated . Po p u la r r :a m e
Table 120001, p 787 w ith p e rm is s io n o f T h o m so n R e u te rs
I’OP I T . AK NAMl r\l{l,l

[■rccdiini ot liirorniatioii Ai.1 il-’()IAl
I’ub.L. S9-4S7. Jul\ 4. I9(i6. SO Sun. 250 (Sec 5 S 552)
Piib.L. 90-23. § 1. June 5. 1967. SI ,Slal, 54 (5 ÿ 552)
Pub.L. 93-502, I lo 3. N o \ . 21. 1974. SS Siai. 1561 (5 ÿ 552)
Frccdom of Informalion Reform ,Acl of I9S6
Pub.L. 99-570. Title I. Siibiiile N. Ocl. 27. I9S6, 100 .Slat. 3204-4S (5 Sÿ 552. 552 notes)
I RHHDOM Support Act
See Freedom for Russia and Faiiertiing luirasiaii Deiiioeraeies and Open Markels
Support .Act of 1992
Freedom lo F>i-ile .Aetw
Puh.L. 106-222. .lune 20. 2000. 1 14 Slat. 353 (7 ÿÿ 6901 note. 7031 lo 7035)
Freedom to Farm l.aw
See Emergenc\ Farm Financial Relief.Aci U S C A Citation
f ’rench Sptilialion Claims .Act
Jan. 20. ISS5. ch. 25. 23 Slat 2S3
Public law I-fesh Cut Flowers ;ukI t-resli Cut (irecns I’romotioii and informalion . \ ( \ of 1993
number “ - Puh.L. 103-190. Dec. 14. 1993. 107 Slat. 2266 (7 ÿÿ 6S01. 6S01 mile. 6S02 lo 6SI4)
FRI ENDSHI P Act
See Act [-or Reform In Fnierging New DeiiK)cT>u;K's aiul Support and Help for
Improsed i’arincrship w ith Russia. Lkraiiic. and i>h<r New Indepentlent States
" Fckvai u.f.. . . . . . . . . . „( I ow,, A„ ^ ^ S t o f u f e s Ot Large

FRKAPA citation
See F-'orest and Rangeland Renewable Rcsotirces Planning .Act of 1974
FRRRRA
See Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resource Research .Act of I97S
FRSA
See Federal Railroad Salct\ .Act of 1970
F r \ e .Acts
See Shipping .Acts
F’SC Rcpe;il aiul L\lraicrrilorial Income F.xcltision .Act of 200 (Foreign Sales Corporation
Repeal and FAtraterritorial Income F.xcltision .Act of 2000)
Pub I. 106-519. No\ . 15. 2000. I 14 Stal. 2423 (see Tables for classilication)
I S IA
See Foreign So\erei gn linnuiniiies .Acl of 1976
See Fx'dcral Scr\ ice Labour-.Shmagcmeni Relations Acl

FSP A
See LMiifornied Services [•ormer Spouses Protection .Act
FTCA
See Federal Tori C l a i m s .Act
FTCPNLA
See Federal Timber Contract Pa\nicni Modilication Acl
Fuel F)isirihulion Acl
.Sept. 22. 1922. ch. 413. 42 Slat. 1025
Fugitive f-'elon Acl
.lune 22. 1932. ch. 27 I. S 1. 47 Stal. 326
.\Uiy IS. 19.^4. ch. 301. 4S Stat. 301 (See IS ÿ 1073)
Fugitive Slave l.avvs
Sept. IS. 18,50. ch. 61). 9 Slat. 462
June 28. 1864. ch. 166. 13 Stat. 200
70
E x h ib it 3 -7 U.S.C.A. Excerpt from Conversion Table. R e p n n te d from iv e s r C ro u p . U m tpd C o d e A n n o ta ted .

C.'inve^îon Table l2 0 0 0 r 1542. ivith p e m v s s io n o f Th onisoi^ R e u te rs
106-546
I06-.546. 1 14 Sta .............. .............. 4^ S I 37(11
1 14 Sla 2 7 2 6 .............. .............. 42 ÿ 141 ;v5
1 14 Sla ^ 7 ^ 8 ............ ............ 4^ s Ul.vSa
1 14 Sla 27 Ỉ0 .............. 42 í 14135b
1 14 Sta ^ 7 3 1 .............. .............. 10 s l?(-i5
i1
1 14 Sta 2 7 ^ 2 ............ .............. 1Oproc. 1561 I!
1 14 ,Sta ’’7 V , ............ .............. IOS 1565 nt I
1
1 14 ,Sta 27 V. , 1
1 14 .Sta ’’7 3 3 .............. .............. ’’S s .S3 1 nt
1 14 ,Sta 2 7 3 3 .............. .............. 4^ s 14132
1 14 ,Sla V } } .............. .............. 42 s 1413'’ i
1 14 Sta 2733 .............. .............. 42 s 14132
1 14 ,Sla ............ .............. 42 s I4i:i2
1 14 Sta 2 7 ; a ............ .............. IS s -'56.Ỉ
1 14 ,Sta " 7 . U .............. .............. IS s 3563
s 7(;i)(3). 1 14 Sla ^ 7 3 4 .............. .............. 1s s 356,1
§ 7 (bl, . . 1 14 Sla ^ 7 , U .............. .............. IS s 4209
Pub ic aw s 7(c) . . . 1 14 Sl;i .............. .............. 4-’ s I 4 I:v^ l'
S to fu fe s 1
s 7(d) . . . 1 14 St;i ^734 .............. .............. 4^ s 14I3X-
number s S(a) . . , 1 14 Sla 2 7 3 4 .............. .............. 42 s 3733
^ a f Large '
s S(b) . . . 1 14 ,Sta '’7 ’0 .............. .............. 42 s 3 7 Í M V 2 c i t a t i o n

ÿ S(C) . , , 1 14 .Sla .............. ..............
s ........... 1 14 .Sta 2 1 } 5 .............. I4l3.5d
1 14 .Sta 2 1 } S .............. . 4^ s I4I3SC
1 14 ,Sta "735 , .............. s I4I.V5 lit
1 14 ,Sia "73S , . .............. IS s 700 Ml
1 14 .Sia 2 7 3 S .............. .............. IS s 1036 \ U .S .C .A ..
1 14 ,Sla 2 7 . > s .............. .............. ISpivc. lOOl Citation 1
1 14 ,Sui 21 .............. .............. IS S7I6
Ỉ 14 ,S!a ■-TTO.............. .............. 1,Spree. 700
l()6-54S, i 14 Sla " 7 4 1 .............. ............ s .......... .......... L'nd.
106-549. 1 14 Sill 2 7 4 , ^ ............ ............ - s — .............. ............L'ncl.
l()6-.55(). ÿI . 1 14 Sta ^ 7 4 5 .............. .............. .VipiVL'. 10 i 1
s 2 . 1 14 Sta 2 7 4 ? .............. .............. .Viprec. 10! 1
S3 , 1 14 Sta 274( 1.............. .............. 3{)prec. 101 1
s 4 . 1 14 ,Sla 2 7 4 6 .............. .............. ,^6prcc. 101 1
s . 1 14 .Sta 2747 .............. .............. 36prcc, 101 1
s 6 . 1 14 ,Sta 2 7 4 S .............. .............. .Viprcc. t oi l
s 7 . 1 14 ,Sta ■’7 4 9 .............. .............. .Vipivc. 101 1
s s . 1 14 ,Sla 2 7 4 9 .............. .............. 36pivc. 101 1
s 9 . 1 14 Sta ■’7 5 0 .............. .............. .Viprcc. iOl 1
s 10 1 14 Sl;i ■’7 5 0 .............. .............. 36prcc. 101 1
s 11 1 14 Sta ^ 7 5 1 .............. .............. .Viprcc. 101 1
s 12 1 I4.SUI 27.-SI .............. .............. 3fiproc. 101 1
fXv, 20, :0()(l 106^331. s 1 . 1 14 .Sta ’7 5 " .............. .............. 42 s 201 nt
1 14 ,Sta ............ .............. 42 ÿ 2S7a-3a
1 14 Sta ^ 7 5 9 ............ .............. 42 s 2S7-,â 1 t
71
E x h ib it 3 -8 Title 18 U.S.C.S 1202. Lawyers C o o p e ra tiv e Pobhshtng. U n ite d S ta te s C e d e S e 'v ic e . Title

I S C lin i c s & C i n vn a l P ro c e d u ie i 1202 i!9 9 4 l. p 2 0 0 0 R e p n n te d w ith p e rm is s io n o f L e \ is N e \ s
IX I S C S ¡5 1201. \ 64 C K I M K S & C R I M I N A L P R ( ) ( ' K I ) l RK
64 . Ap pt ' ll at e rt'\ ic\> him. 'I’rafford \ Yellow Cab Co. ( 1961. CA.^
In prosecution imdci' preilcccssor to Pa) 29.1 \-2d 4.V
l(S L'SCS S 1201. objcclioii that IcUci' which
65. H a b e a s c o r p u s pn)cetcliiif;s
coi.lorcn(.lanl hiid taken from kidnapped \ ic-
W hether defendant was memher of con-
tim and which was hiier foiniil b\ police in
spirac> and did conspire in \iolation of law
defentlant's apartment was obtained b\ illegal
l aiseil issue of fact, and w here that issue w as re-
search could not he raised for lirst time on a|v
so h e d against him in trial court, it could not he
peal from coiniclion. liaker \ L'nited States
relitigated in habeas ci'tpus proceeding. Hud
( l^.v-S. C'A.IOC'olol 76 [-^d 267.
speth V .McDonald (1941. CAIO Kan) 120 R d
Detendant who had been convicted of
962. cert den (1941) 314 CS 617. S6 1. Hd 496.
interstate transportation of person who had
62 S Ct 110. reh den (1945) 325 L'S ,S92. 89 L
been inilawfullv kidnapped could not h_\ writ
[•;d 2004. 65 S C t I 181.
of habeas corpus applietl lor in L’nited States
.Motion to \acate sentence for kidnap
District C'ouit for W'esteiii District ol O k l a h o
ping coi niction of 30 \ e a r s will be denied
ma affect his sentence lor such unlaw ful inter
when petitioner was adequately made aware
state transportation rendered in L'nited States
of charge against him and vshere bis plea of
District Court for Northern District ol Texas,
guilt) was \oluntaril> entered into without
noi' cause his trial foi' kiilnapping offense in
fear of death penalts . W ilson \ l ’nited States
Western District of Okkihoma. wherein no
(1969. W'D V a ) 3 0 3 F S u p p I I .W.
charge I'oi s l i cI i offense was petuling against
S 1202. R a n so m n io n e \
Whoever recei\es. possesses, or disposes of ans mone\ or other property, or any |iortion thereol.
which has at an\ time been deli\erei.l as ransom oi' rewaril in connection v\itli a \ iolation of sec
tion 1201 of this title, knowing the same to he iiionex or property which has been at an\ time
tleli\eix\l as such lansoin or rew artl. shall he linetl not more than S 10.000 oi' imprisoned not more
than ten \ears. or both,
l.lunc 25, 19 l S . c l i 6 4 5 , 5 1. 62 Slat. 76(1.)
I I I S ^ ( ) R ^ : A \ ( II.I.A R ^ LAW S A M ) DIRKCTIN K.S
Prior law and rex ision:

This section is based on ,\ct .lune 22. 1932. ch 271. vj 4, as atlded Jan. 24, 1936. ch 29. 49
Stat. 1099 d or m e r I 8 I'.S.C. M 0 8 c - 1 ).
i he woals "in the penitenliarx " after "imiirisoneil" were omitteil in \ iew of 18 L'SC'S S 40S2
committing prisoners to the custody o f t h e .-\ttorne_\ (ieneral.
Minor charges in phraseology were made.
C R O S S RKI KRF.NC KS
Sentencing guidelines. Statutory Index. Sentencing (iuiilelines for L’.S. Courts. IS L’SCS
.Appendix.
R K S K A R C H ( i l IDK
.Annotations:
W'hat constitutes \ ii)lation of 18 USCS 1202, Prohibiting receipt, possession, or disposition
of ransom niones. 31 .ALk Fed 916.
in t k r p r k t im ; n o t k s a n d d k c isio n s
1. (¡enerall\ 4. Conspiracy
2. Relationship w ith other law s 5. .lurisdiction
3. l)el i\er\ of ransom 6. Indictment
72
E x h ib it 3 - 8 [Continued)
( KIMI S 18 I S C S S 1203
1. ( i e i i t ral i v enl> pl a c e d ransoni at w r o n g kicat ion d o c s

18 L^SC'S S 1202 was imoiHlcd lo e x not \ itiate " d c l i \ e r \ " for p ur p o s e s o f ÍÍ 1202;
tend tederal jurisdiction to persons liaxing thus. \ iolation t h e r e o f o c c ur r e d v\ he r e de-
only indirect connection with actual kidnap feiulant found aiul a p p ro p r i a t ed r a n s o m niis-
ping and to (.lisccnirage an_\ co-operation with takenlv d e l i \ e r e d and c o i u e a l c d fact after
those priniaril_\ responsihle. L'nitcd States lear ning that it was r a n s o m L'nited Stat es \
\ Orteiia (197?, C.A.i N.l) 517 F2d 10(16, 31 O r t e g a (1975. C A 3 N.l) 517 F2d 1006. 31
,.\I.R Fell 909. AI. R Fed 909.
2. R e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h o t i u r l a w s 4. C o n s p i r a o
18 L^SC'S S 1202 is not separate, de ConspiracN ti> \ lolate predecessor to IS
tached \ iolation w ith regard to priniarx fed L’SCS S 1202 began w ith plan to abduct and
eral kidnapping statute ( I 8 USC'S S 1201) and ciuietl when ransom mo n e \ was changed into
ii 1202 is directed to onl\ portion of larger of tinmarked iiione>. Laska \ United Stales (1936,
fense w hich includes nuniher ol components. C A K l Okla) 82 F'2d 672. ceil den (1936) 298
United States \ Ortega ( 1975. N,l) 517 US 689. 80 L Hd 1407. 56 S Cl 957.
j-2d 1006. 31 .AI.R l-ed 909. 5 . .lu risd ic tio n
Estahlishing \ iolation of 18 I'SC'S i 18 u s e s Í 1202 being prohi bit ion of
1202 rec|uircs proof of mone\ or propert> integral part o f kitlnappiiig s c h e m e which
v^hich was deli\erei.l as ransom or reward, el e o n c e d e d l \ is w ithin teileral iuriseliction. \ io-
ements that are clearl> not i(.lentical to an\ ot latiiin o f prohi bit ion is withi n federal j u r i s d i c
elements olT.iSCS S 1201 kidnap|iiiig offense, tion e \ e n if interstate c o m m e r c e is not (,lirectl\
atul thcrelore trial court was correct in retiis- i i u i i Ke d . Uniteil States \ Or t e g a ( 1975. C.A3
ing to mstriict that S 1201. Dtirns s I'nitetl N.I) 517 F2d 1006. 31 AI. R Fed 909.
States (1977. CAS ,\lo) 562 l'2d 542. 2 (-ed
Rules ti\nl SeiA 462, cert den ( 1977) 4 U I S 6. h u l i c t n u n t
959. 54 1, Hd 2d ,il9. 98 S Cl 490. hul i ct ment c har gi ng defendant with
three separate ol lenses o f t r a nsmi tt ing coni-
i>V ra n so m ii’ivii’iicaUvins \\\ imcvs\alc cvimuwicc denvanJ
F'or ransom lo have heen ' \leli\crcil" ing r a n s o m ni one\ u n d e r IS U S CS S 875(a)
w ithin meaning ot S 1202 ilocs not require and w ith r ec e i \ i ng . poss essi ng aiul thsposiiig
transfer of ¡losscssion to kitinappers; all that of ran s o m m o n e \ in \ iolation o f 18 l.KSCS
is neetled is lor transleii'r to h a \ e placed S I 202. is not d u p l i e a t i \ e as each co u n t c h a r g
tansom at place specified h\ kidnappers, es separate otfeiise. .Anisler \ Uni t ed States
ami tact that transferor ina\ h a \ e mistak- (1967. C A 9 Cal) 381 F2d 37.
3. l h e s u p p l e m e n t s to t h e USCS, call ed t h e ('.uniiiliitivc l.atcr C a se a iu l S t a t u t o r y

Scrvicc, a re c u m u l a t i x e . I h e r e f o r e, y o u n e e d c h e c k o n l y t h e latest s u p p l e m e n t , ' l h e
USC'.S a lso p u b l i sh e s a m o n t h h - p a m p h l e t call ed ( '.S.('.S. A i l v a iu c , w h i c h i n c l u d e s
n e w pub l i c laws, p re s i d e n ti a l p r o c l a m a t i o n s , a n d e x e c u t i \ ’e o r d e r s .
4. In t h e L'SC.'A, the t o p i cs c o \ e r e d in t h e “ N o t e s to t h e D e c i s i o n s ” are a r r a n g e d

a l p h a b e t i c a l h ' ; in t h e U SCS, t h e “ I n t e r p r e t i v e N o t e s a n d D e c i s i o n s ” a re a r r a n g e d
a c c o r d i n g to t opi c (see Hxhibit 3-2 a n d Hxh.ibit 3-8).
B. State S tatuto ry Law an d Co(ies

'llie e n a c t m e n t a n d p u b l i c a t i o n o f st ate legi sl ati on vari es in detai l f r o m st ate to state, b u t t h e y
are s i m i h i r in m a n y r e s p e c t s to t h e federal s y s t e m. M o s t states initially p u b l i s h t h e i r l aws in
p a m p h l e t s s i m i l a r to t h e federal slip laws. W h e n t h e legislatix'c ses si on is o \ e r , t h e l aws are
p u b l i s h e d in b o o k s oft en r e f e r r e d to as session Ian s. ' Ih e s e are s i m i l a r t o t h e S ta tu te s a t Large
in t h a t t h e laws are p r e s e n t e d in t h e o r d e r in w h i c h t h e y w e r e p a ss e d .
73
State laws arc then organized a c cor di ng to topic (codified) an d fniblislied with a n n o t a
tions similar to those in the L'S('A and L'SC.S. Most state codes are .similar to the L 'S i'A and
(.'.S'C'.S' in the following wa\s:
hach set has a general index, and s o me sets h a \ e a separate index following each
title.
Some statutes have popul a r na m e tables a n d c on \ e r s io n tables that allow to
locate statutes that ha\ e been r en u m b e re d o r repealed.
The statutes are organized b\' subject, with each subject title bei ng s u b d i \ i d e d into
chapters a n d so on. (See Exhibit 3-1 a n d section II.A in this chapter.)
The state constitut ion with an no t at i on s is included in the code.
State codes arc u s u a l k u pd a t ed annualK’ by s o me form of 'suppl ement. These tnay be
pocket parts inserted in the statutory \ ’o l u m e o r separate pamphlet s.
State statutes are annot ated. The a n n o t a t i o n s include the hi st o r \ ’ of the section,
cross-references to ot h e r statutes, research guides, and notes to cou r t decisions (see
lixhibit 3-1).
C. T h e R esearch Process— T e c h n iq u e s and S tra te g ie s
1. Locate the Statute

I na s muc h as tederal and state codifications share similar features, the process for locating a n d
r esearching federal an d state constitutional and statutor}' law is essentially the same, a n d thus
are discussed together here.
The begiiining step ot all research, including statutor}' research, is to identify what \'ou
are looking lor as preciseK' an d iiarrowK' as possible. Det me yoiu" research question as spe-
cilicall}', ami iii as concise terms, as possible. I ime spent itarrowing the focus o f yoLir search
will s a \e a great deal o f research time later. .A tighth' focused identificatioii o f t h e research
t]iiestioii sa\'es time because the researcher is immediatel}' directed to the specific area of the
law Ml question an d does not waste time searching nuiltiple stattUes.
For Example The question involves the issue of whether a shareholtjer of a corporation
must attend a meeting in person to vote on an issue. If a researcherthinks,
"Oh, this is a corporation question" and immediately looks at corporations in the index
to the statutes, the researcher will waste time looking through the entire corporation
section. It the research is conducted electronically and the search term is simply cor
porations, all the corporation statutes will come up. If, however, the research is focused
to corporations, shareholders, meetings of corporations, shareholders, and voting, the
search is narrowed at the outset and the statute is located more quickly, whether the
research is manual or electronic.
Oonsult (Ti apter 10 for g ui d a nc e on h o w to n a r r o w the focus o f y o u r search by nar-

rowK' identifying the issue. See ( ' h a p t e r 2, section I I I . f o r help in identifying search terms.
After }'ou have defined }'our search as specifically an d concisel}' as possible, you have
t hr ee main ways to a p p r o a ch locating a statute, as discussed here.
a. C i e n e r a l I n d e x
The iiiost c o m m o n a ppr oach to locating statutes is to use the (icneral Index. WTien using this
appr oa ch, identif y as specifically as possible the wor ds that describe the pr oblem. If the t er m
\'ou initialh' use is not the tern'i used iti the index, the index often will refer \'ou to the correct
74
Icrni. l or example, il' sou are looking ioi' staliites eoncerniii g trailers, the index u n d e r trailers
m a y read, “See Ma nu f ac t ur ed Homes.” (See I xhihil 3-4 for an example of an index page.)
After yoLi h a \ ’e found the correct index entry, the index will list the ap pr op ri at e title a n d
se.'tion. Wi th that inf ormat i on, you can locate statutes in the app r opr ia t e statutor y volume.
Mo s t statutes are a rr ang e d b\' title a n d the titles co\'ered in each \ ' olume are indicated on the
spine. I'or example, the spine ma\' read “Titles 5- 7," t hus i ndicating that Titles 3 t h r o u gh 7 of
t h e code are included in that \-olume. He suie to check the index pocket part if you c a n n o t find
a t e r m in the ma in index \'olume. It ma\- be that the term has been recently ad de d to the index.
b. Title lable of C on te nt s
Most statutor}- codifications include a table o f conterits at the beg i nni ng of each title that lists
t h e n a m e and nun-iber o f t h e chapters w-ithin the title. At the begi nni ng of each chapter, a table
of cont ents typicall}- lists the statutor\- section iiuniber an d na m e of each section. If you k n o w
the iuuiiber ot the title \'ou are lookii-|g for, \-ou can go directh' to the \oku-i-ie a n d scan the
table to t]uickl}- locate a statute. It is not necessar}- to consult the (jeneral Index.
For Example You want to locate the statutory definition of a term in the Indiana Com
mercial Code and you know from experience thatthe commercial code is
Title 26. You can go directly to Title 26 and scan the table of contents to Chapter 1 and
immediately locate the appropriate section, "26-1-1-201 General Definitions." (See the
first page of Exhibit 3-1.)
Beginning researchers should be awaie that s ome subiects are cin ered by nior e than o ne
set of laws. Iherefore, referring to a specific title requires that the researcher be sufiicientl}-
familiar with the law to k n o w that the search topic is c o \ e r e d o n k by tliat title.
For Example The question being researched involves identifying the statutes that govern
a loan. Several statutes may cover loans: the commercial paper chapter
of the commercial law title of the code, the state's small loan act, and the federal truth-
in-lending statutes.
Alwa}-s cons i d t the ( i en e r a l Index a n d identif}- all the possible titles that c o \ e r t he
research topic.
c. Pop ul ar N ame
Ma n y law-s are commonl}- k n o w n b\- their po pul a r name, such as the ( i o o d Sama ri tan Act or
the T rut h in L end i ng Act. Man\- state statutes an d the I ’S i ' A and L’SC.S lia\-e pcipular n a m e
tables listing in alphabetical ordei' the p opu l a r na me s and citation. The tables are usualh- l o
cated w ith the table o f contents \-olume(s) or as a separate \ o l u m e . Shcpani's A c ts a n d C.ascs
by P o p u la r X ain c: Federal a m i Stale also lists the po pul a r na me s and citations of federal a n d
state lau s. It you k n o w die po pu l a r n a m e ot the act }ou are looking for, considt the p o p u l a r
n a m e table, a nd }ou will be directed to the app r opr iat e section o f t h e statutes.
2. U p d a te Your Research
Alter vou locate a statute, check the pocket parts and supp l e ni e n t ar \ pamphl et s to e ns ure that
the statute publ i s hed in the ma i n \-olume has not been a m e n d e d or repealed. .Also check the
aiintViations to locate new case \a w that ma}- affect the interpretation o f t h e statute. S h e p a r d s’
(/.ta tio n s pr o\ ides u p d at e s to state an d federal statutes a n d is publ i s hed m o r e f re quent l y
than state a n d federal pocket parts a n d sLipplementar}- pamphlets. The process t)f u pd at i ng
75
r e s e a r c h t h r o u g h tlie use oi Slwpiini'i ( j i a t i o i i i is call ed " S h e p a r d i z i n g . ” S l t c p a n l’s is d i s c u s s e d

in C h a p t e r 5,
D. C o m p u te r- A id e d R esearch
You m a y res e a r c h state a n d federal st at ut es o n l i n e by u s i n g Westlavv a n d LexisNexis. In a d
d i t i o n , yo u ma\- access m o s t federal a n d state l aws w i t h o u t a tee t h r o u g h v ar i ou s sites o n t h e
I nt e r n e t . You m a y l ocat e m a n y t h r o u g h state a n d t eder al g o v e r n m e n t W e b sites, college a n d
universitx' We b sites, a n d h t t p: / / w ww . t i nd l a w . c o m. S o m e ot t he s e sites are locat ed in the “I nt er net
R e s o u r c e s ” s e c t i o n o f t h i s chapter. Also, man\ - a n n o t a t e d st at u t es are available o n C D - R O M
t h r o u g h t h e p u bl i sh er . C o m p u t e r - a i d e d st atut or}' r e s e a r c h u s i n g West iaw, Lexi sNexi s , a n d
o t h e r s is discus.sed in C h a p t e r 7.
E. E th ic s — C o m p e te n c e and D ilig e n c e
I h e r e ar e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s ol ethics to k e e p in m i n d w' hen c o n d u c t i n g a n y t y p e o t res ear ch,
w h e t h e r it be o n e n a c t e d law, c a se law, o r s e c o n d a r } ’ a u t h o r i t y . Ru l e 1.1 o t ' t h e A m e r i c a n Bar
A s s o c i a t i o n ’s M o d e l Rules ot ' Fr ot ess i onal C o n d u c t r e q u i r es t h a t a cli ent be p r o v i d e d c o m p e t e n t
r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . Rule 1.3 prox ides t h a t a client b e r e p r e s e n t e d w i t h d i l i g e n c e a n d p r o m p t n e s s .
' I h e s e r ul es m e a n t h a t a r e s e a r c h e r m u s t p o s s e s s sut fici ent k n o w l e d g e o f t h e law' a n d legal r e
s e a r c h to r es e a r c h compl etel }' t h e issues r ai sed by t h e facts o f t h e c l i e n t ’s case, t h e y alst) m e a n
t h a t all a v e n u e s o f r e s e a r c h n i us t be p u r s u e d p r o m p t l y a n d e x p l o r e d thoroughl}' .
IV. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

As d i s c u s s e d in C h a p t e r 1, feder al a n d state l egi sl atures d e l e g a t e t h e t a s k o f a d m i n i s t e r i n g
l aws t o a d m i n i s t r a t i v e agcnci es. I h e l egi sl atures pass e n a b l i n g legi sl ati on t h a t a u t h o r i z e s ad-
n i i n i s t r a t i \ ' e age n c i es to carr}- o u t t h e int ent o f t h e legislature. I h i s e n a b l i n g legi sl ati on usual ly
i n c l u d e s a g r a n t o f aut hor i t }' to cr e a t e t h e r ul es a n d r e g u l a t i o n s necessar}' to c a r r y o u t t h e law’.
T h e s e r u l e s a n d r e g u l a ti o n s ha\' e t h e a uthor it }' o f law; the}' a r e p r i m a r y a ut hor i t y. T h e b o d y
ot law t hat results f r o m t h e r ul e s a n d regul at i oi i s a n d t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n s i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e m is
c al l e d administrative law. T he t e n i i s n il c i a n d reg ulations are o f t en u s e d i n t e r c h a n g e a b h '
w h e n d i s c u s s i n g a d n i i n i s t r a l i \ e law. l b a\' oid r e p e t i t i on , t h e t e r m regulation, w h e n u s e d in
t hi s s e c t i o n , i n c l ud e s b o t h ad n ' ii n i st r a t i \ ’e rul es a n d regulatior'is.
O n t)ccasi on y o u m a y be call ed u p o n to r e s e a r c h i s sues i n v o l v i n g t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o r
a p p l i c a t i o n o f a n a d n i i n i s t r a t i \ e agenc}' re g u l at i on .
For Example The client's business is fined by the Occupational Safety and Health Admin
istration (OSHA) for failure to have fire extinguishers located in the proper
places in the business. The client challenges OSHA's interpretation ofthe agency's regula
tion governing fire extinguishers. Research would be necessary to locate the regulation
and the court opinions that have addressed the regulation.
A. F e d era l A d m in is tra tiv e La w

Th i s s e c t i o n d i s c u s s e s r e s e a r c h ¡n\'ol\ i ng t h e l o c a t i o n a n d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f feder al a d m i n i s
t r at i ve regul a t i ons,
1. P u b lica tio n
A d m i n i s t r a t i v e r e g u l a t i o n s are p u b l i s h e d in tw'o so u r c e s, t h e Federal Register d n d t h e (ôde o f
Federal Regulations.
76
a. Federal Register
l h e h'l’d c n il Register is [ui hli shed d a i h ’ hy t h e L' nited States CioN'eniiiicnt P r i n t i n g Oflice. All
p r o p o s e d n e w r e gu l a t i o n s , a m e n d e d re g u l at i on s , i n t e r i m a n d final rc g u h i t i on s are p u b l i s h e d
in t h e i'ederal Register It also c o n t a i n s s u m m a r i e s ot r e g u l at i o n s , effective dates, n o ti c e s of
h ea r i n g s on p r o p o s e d regul at i ons, a n d p e r s o n s to c o n t a c t for f u r t h e r i n f o r m a t i o n . P r e s i d en t i a l
d o c u m e n t s , such as e xecut i\' e o r d e r s , a r e i n c l u d e d in t h e ie d e r a l Register.
l h e Federal Register i n c l u d e s a t a hl e o f c o n t e n t s in t h e f r o n t o f e a c h issue, a r r a n g e d
h\' a g e n c y (see Exhibi t 3-9). .At t h e e n d o f e a c h issue is a s ec t i o n call ed “ R e a d e r A i d s ” t h a t
i n c l u d e s \-aluable i n f o r m a t i o n s u c h as a list o f t e l e p h o n e n u m b e r s to o b t a i n i n f o r m a t i o n , a n d
a t abl e o f “Cf-'R P ar t s .Affected” t h a t lists p a rt s a n d s e c t i o n s o f t h e C.'ot/c of Federal Regidiitioiis
alt ected. l h e p a g i n a t i o n o f t h e F ed eral Register is c o n t i n u o u s , b e g i n n i n g witii t h e first issue
ot a year a n d e n d i n g wi t h t h e last. ' I h e r e f o r e , t h e first p a g e o f t h e first issue o f t h e \ e a r will be
p.ige I a n d t he last issue o f t h e y e a r will e n d w i t h a p a g e n u m b e r s o m e w h e r e a r o u n d 90,()()().
' Ihe issues ar e n o t c u mu l a t i \ ' e ; t h u s , u s i n g t h e Federal Register ' s a r e s e a r c h s o u r c e is difliculf.
In a d d i t i o n , a c u m u l a t i v e F ed era l Register Inde.x is p u b l i s h e d at t h e e n d o f ea c h m o n t h .
Ihi s i n d ex , w h i c h is a r r a n g e d b)' a g e n c } ’, r e f e r e n c e s all t h e i n f o r m a t i o n p u b l i s h e d in t h e
p r e v i o u s m o n t h s o f t h e year.
b. Code o f Federal Regulations

ll is m u c h e a s i er to c o n d u c t r e g u l a t o r y r e s e a r c h u s i n g t h e (k id e of Federal R e g u la tio n s {C'.i'R)
for r e g u l a t i o n s that w e r e p u b l i s h e d a y e a r o r m o r e ago. ' Ih c r e g u l a t i o n s o f a d m i n i s f rat i xc
E x h ib it 3 - 9 Screenshot of Electronic Table of Contents of Federal Register S o u r c e n ttp / A v w iv g p o g o v/fd sys/

s -.'a iJv g e tfit o c action
TaDI« o tC o n t* n is
«(*1 Voi / 6. Iui«Wv •«ovfrrCff Ml*
AGftCUirURe OePARTUCMT
«9ercr Irlotnubo« Cotecton PrccoMC CoWctor. "f

CeMttuinr* ot *r lrier.-«v'M ûoptemei't» r<utn»o(i Pr?gi*>r p •jc*’,
CWtwmrjtior»
-#gi! 7W--.’;-?4TKOO«rOll-W6-4:
AKJfOiJCE OEPARTMEin
NOTICES
Ptopo»« v-oMecltor. Cof^mert Bwhi«5I
-»iei jwsi
C6NTCRS fON OtSeASe CONTROL AM) PREVENTION
MboniJ Hcilhf Progisir. informjl<on v’.'etxn,

'764":-6iiyRDOC*20if-'}O6i9:
CENTERS FOR MEDiCAftE I MEUCAIO SERVICES
I Propoieo •CoHcbon :r«T*nenlRMge»t
RULES
□rawbndpr Operstioni:
0*»xDr>)g« O o e iffo n S iu g u f Rr.et L ;i'n ¿nd Re.etc *'
■; f r i> ? c * : o ' i-w ^ ro :
'ety Zcrfx
.'one MV D f.-- CROCKf TT CstumD« R.-ef
■•■-'ITFR DOC* .'D n. 3069'^
COMMERCE O tP A R T ie N T
OTtCES
77
a g c n c i c s arc c o d i i i e d in tliis iiuiltis iilunie, sot ' tbcuind set o f b o o k s . I h c r e g u l a t i o n s a r c p u b

l i s h e d in 50 titles, e a c h ol w h i c h r e p r e s e n t s a d i f f e r e n t s u b j e c t area. I h e title n i n i i b e r s ol t en ,
b u t n o t a lways, c o r r e s p o n d to t h e titles a s s i g n e d in t h e L’liitcd S ta lc i C'.Oilc. I h e titles are
s u b d i v i d e d i nt o c h a p t e r s , a n d e a c h c h a p t e r u s u a l k c i n e r s t h e r e g u l a t i o n s ot an i n d i \ idual
agenc)' . I h e c h a p t e r s a r e d i \ i d e d i n t o p a r t s t ha t c o n s i st o f r e g u l a t i o n s g o \ ' o r n i n g a specific
to p i c. I h e p a r t s a r e d i \ i d e d i n t o s e c t i o n s t h a t a r e t h e s peci fi c r e g u l a t i o n s ( see k x h i b i t ,^-10).
i h e c o d e is r e p r i n t e d a n n u a l l y o n a q u a r t e r k basis; t ha t is, o n e - t o u r t h ot t h e c o d e is r e
p r i n t e d e a c h q u a r t e r . T i t l es 1 t h r o u g h 16 a r e i s s u e d e a c h l a n u a r y ; I'itles 17 t h r o u g h 27 are
i s s u e d e a c h .-\pril 1; T i t l e s 28 t h r o u g h 41 a r e i s s u e d e a c h kil\' 1; a n d f i l e s 42 t h r o u g h 30 ai'e
i s s u e d e a c h O c t o b e r 1.
' i h e r e is a t abl e o f c o n t e n t s for e a c h title, c h a p t e r , a n d part . At t h e e n d o f e a c h title is
a n i n d e x . In a d d i t i o n , t h e r e is a n i n d e x \-okini e {Cl-R Iiuic.x a n d I-'inding A id s) t h r o u g h w h i c h
r e g u l a t i o n s nia\' be l o c a t e d b y s u b j e ct m a t t e r o r a g e n c y (see H x h i b i t 1 1 ). I h e i n d e x i n c l u d e s
a paral lel tabl e t ha t a l l ows \' ou to l ocat e t h e C'.FR title if \ ' ou k n o w t h e c i t a t i on o f t h e
s t a t u t e t h a t e s t a b li s h e d t h e agenc\-. ' Ih e i n d e x also i n c l u d e s a list o f t h e a g e n c i e s a n d 30 titles,
c h a p t e r s , a n d part s.
2. R esearch in g Federal A d m in istra tiv e Law

D u e to its o r g a n i z a t i o n , it is ea si e r to locat e federal r ul es a n d r e g u l a t i o n s t h r o u g h t h e C.oilc
of l-cdcral R eg ula tion s t h a n t h e l-cdcial Rcgislci \ t h er e f o r e , t h e fol l o wi n g g u i d e s f ocus o n r e
s e a r c h i n g t h e CFR.
a. Indexes and Table of Contents

You m a y locat e r e g u l a t i o n s in t h e C.I R by subj e c t m a t t e r o r a g e n c y b\' c o n s u l t i n g t he Cd R
liiih'x a n d I'in din g A id s \-olume. If yo u k n o w t h e n u m b e r o f t h e L'.S'C,' e n a b l i n g statute, \(>u
m a y l ocat e t h e c o d e title in t h e Parallel Table ol A iilh o rities cuul Rules in t h e in d ex v o l u m e
o r t h e e l e c t r o n i c \ ’e r s i o n ol t h e parallel tabl e at w w w . g p o . g o \ 7 h e l p / p a r a l l e L t a b l e . p d t . II \' ou
a l r e a d \ ’ k n o w t h e c o d e title o r s e ct i o n , \' ou nia\' go d i r e c t h ’ to t h e c o d e v o l u m e a n d s can t he
la bl e ol c o n t e n t s lor t h e title to locat e t h e a p p r i i p r i a t e s e ct i o n . You m a \ also c o n s u l t t he i nd e x
t o l l o w i n g t h e title.
'I'ou m a y also l oc a t e r e g u l a t i o n s t h r o u g h tlie I n d e x In th e ( 'o d e o f Federal R egidalions.
' Ibi s c o m m e r c i a l p u b l i c a t i o n hy t h e C o n g r e s s i o n a l I n f o r m a t i o n Servi ce i n d e x e s t h e ( d R b\'
s u b j ec t a n d g e o g r a p h i c i n f o r m a t i o n . A n o t h e r p r i n t i n d e x is W est's ( 'o d e o f Federal R e g u la
tions, d e n e n d Ind ex. Thi s i n d e x p r o \ ides access to t h e ( M .R. b\- subj e c t m a t t e r o r g e o g r a p h i c
l oc a t i o n . Bot h a r e u s u a l l y avai l abl e at a law library.
b. Other Sources for Locating Rules and Regulations

^ b u nia\' be d i r e c t e d to specific ( d ' R s e c t i o n s b\- o t h e r p u b l i c a t i o n s . If \' ou k n o w t h e s t at ut e
t ha t e s t a b l i s h e d t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i x e agency, th e a n n o t a t i o n s f o l l o w i n g t h e s t at u t e in t h e U S ('A
o r U S ('S nia\' i nc l ud e c ro s s - r e f e r e n c e s to specific ( d ' R sec t i ons. O t h e r s e c o n d a r y sour ces, s uc h
as law r e v i ew art icl es a n d A I.R a n n o t a t i o n s , ma \ ' r e f er e n c e speci fic C.FR se c t i ons.
c. Federal Register
I n a s m u c h as t h e CFR is u p d a t e d a n n u a l K ' a n d i s s u e d in p a r t s , it will be n e c e s s a r y to refer to
t h e Federal Register to loc a t e r ul e s a n d r e g u l a ti o n s p u b l i s h e d s i n ce t h e last t i m e t h e Cd'R v o l
u m e s we r e issued. (Consult t h e latest Federal Register In dex, is sued m o n t h b ' , to l ocat e rul es a n d
r e g u l a t i o n s p r o m u l g a t e d a ft er t h e i s s u a n c e o f t h e latest ( ' . IR v o l u m e s . Hntri es in t h e Federal
R egister I n d e x are a l p h a b e t i c a l by agenc\-. ' Ihe r e is al s o a s e c t i o n call ed “R e a d e r A i d s ” at t he
e n d o f e a c h dail\- Federal R egister t h a t lists s e c t i o n s o f t h e ( ' f ' R affected, r e m i n d e r s o f e t f e c t i \e
d a t e s , a n d o t h e r helpful i n f o r m a t i o n .
78
E x h ib it 3 -1 0 Page front tfie Code of Federal Regulations IC.F.R.I. C o d e o f F e d e ra l R e g u la tio n s. Title w . Pa rt WOO to End.
C c n m e r a a ! P ra c tice s i2 0 0 h . p 7. tâtiorai A rc h iv e s a n d R e c o ra s A d m in stration. W a shin gto n , D C
Subchapter- SUBCHAPTER A— GENERAL

Part --------- PAKI lO O O - C O M M I S S I O N of the Consumer Product Safet\ Act (Pub. F,. 92-
; A M Z A T I ( ) N A M ) F I NC T IO N S 573. 86 Stat. 1207. as amended ( 1.5 L^S.C. 205 I . el
seq.)I. Tlie purposes of the Commissi on under the
Section
TTic ('iiiiiiiiissioii. CF’SA are:
Law s atlmiiiiMcrcd. ( 1) To protect the public against unreasonable
Hdtlinc. risixs of injury associated w ith consumer products;
Commission address. (2) To assist consumers in exaluating the
Petitions. comparati'. e safety of consumer products;
Commission decisions and records. (3) To dcselop uniform safety standards for
.-\(.l\ isoiy opinions and interpivtalidiis consumer products and to mininii/e contlicling
of reyulalioiis. State and local regulations; and
lOOO.S Meetings and heal ings; public notice. (4) To promote research and in\estigation into
looo.y {^)uorLini. the causes and pre\ ention of product-related deaths,
l(KK).l() I'he Chairman and Vice Chairman. illnesses, and injuries.
lOOO.I I Delegation ol' functions. (b) The Commission is composed of live
I()()(),I2 Organi/alionai strLictiire. members appointed by the President, by and with
I ()()(). 13 Direclises system. tile ad\ ice and consent ot' the Senate, for terms of
11)00.14 Oltice of the Cieneral Counsel. se\ en y ears.
1000.1.-S Ot tice of Congressional Relations.
S 1()()().2 L aw s a d m in ist e r e d .
I ()()(). I 6 Ol tice of tlie Secretai N.
T he C'ommission administers li\ e acts;
lOOO. 17 Oflicc of the Inspector (jencral.
(a) T he Consumer Product Safety .Act (Fûb. F,.
1000. IS Ol'fice of l Ainal Lmploymeni Opjiortu-
92-573. 86 Stat. 1207. as amended (15 I'.S.C. 2051.
nil\ ;iiul .\1inoril\ Finterprise.
et seq.)).
1000.19 Oltice o f t he F-Aecutive Director.
(bl The FTammabie F-abrics ,-\ct (F’ub. F..
io( )().:() Oflice of the Fiudget.
M0-IS9. 67 Slat. I 1 i. as amended (15 L’.S.C. 1191.
1000.21 Oflice of l la/ard identilication and
el seq.)).
Reduction.
l O T h c I'edcral lk\/ ar dous Subs',aivcs .\c\
IO(K).22 Ollice ol I'ianning ami i;\aiu;ilion.
( 15 L'.S.C. 1261. et seq.).
1000.23 Ol'lice ol IniornKition and Public ,\ff;iirs.
(d) T he Poison Prevention Paclsaging .Act ol'
1000.24 Ollice o! C'oni|iiiance,
1970 (I’uh. I.. 91-601. 84 Stat. 1670. as amended
I0(K).2.t Ol'lice of Human Resources Management.
(15 I'.S.C, 1471. et seq.)).
1000.2(1 Oflice of Inlormation Ser\ ices.
(e) Tiie Rel'rigeralor Safety ,\ct of 1956 (Pub.
1000.27 Directorate for Fipidemiolog\.
L. 84-9,"iO. 70 Stat. 953. (15 C.S.C. 121 1. et seq.)).
|()00.2S Direcloiiiie for Healtii Sciences.
1000.29 Direciorate for F£conomic Anai\sis S 1000.3 Hotlin e.
1000.30 Directorate for Fingiiieering Sciences. (a) Tile Commission operates a loii-free tele
l(KK).3l Directorate for LahoratoiA Sciences, phone F-lotiine hy wiiich tiie public can c o m m u n i
1000.32 liirectorale for Ailniinistration. cate witii tiie Commission. The number I'or use in
1000.33 Directorate for F-’ield Operations. ail 50 states is I-S()0-63S-CI’SC ( I-800-638-2772).
(b) Tiie Cominission also operates a toll-free
, \ r I IK )Ki 1v: 5 U.S.C, 552(a).
Hotline by wiiich hearing or speech-impaired per
.Soi l« I : 5(1 F'R .^049(1, .iuiy 3. 1991. unless otiier- sons can communicate by teletypewriter with the
wise noted. Commission. The teletypewriter number for use in
ail states is I-80()-638-827().
SIOOO.l I he C o m in issio n .
(c) The Commission also makes inl'ormation
(;i) TTie Consmiier Product Salety Co mmi s
available to tlie public product recall inl'ormation. its
sion is an independent regulatoiA agency wiiicli
public calendar, and other information througii its
was formed on Ma\ 14. 1973. under liie pro\isiiins
79
E x h ib it 3-11 C.F.R. Index and Finding Aids Page. C o d e o f F e d e ra l R e g u la tio n s. in d e \ a n d F in d in g s A id s i2 0 0 ii. o 186 Natm na'
A rc h iv e s a n d R e c o r d s A d m in istra tio n , W ast^lngton, D C
l-mergcm'v m edical services ( I K Index
Teachers. Chrisia McAulilTc l-cllowsliip Proyiani. Planning anil execution. 47 CFR 202
34 CFR, 237 Proceilincs for obtaining international
I ' pwar d bcHind prograni. 34 C'FR 64.S t elecommunication serv ice for use during
Vocational and applied technolog\ education w art Ime cmcr gcnc v, 47 CFR 2 I 2
Demonstiatioii projects for inteiiration of vocational
Kniurêiic\ S teel ( i u a r a n t e c l.o a n Hoard
and academic learniiij: program. 34 CFR 42,5
Subject State-administered tech-|irep education program,
[jiiergency Steel Cjuaranlee Loan Program.
13 C'FR 400
34 CFR 406
Slate programs. 34 CFR 403 K m p lo y e e henefil p la n s
.Sec d is o pensions
Kmeri>enc> m ed ical services
,-\ge Discrimination in [imploynient ,\ct. 29
C'argo air carriers, special aiuhori/aiion for
CFR 1625
emergency transportation. 14 CFR 206
liona lidc prolit-sharing plans or trusts. rci|uirements
Medicare, conditions for pa\ iiient. 42 CFR 424
uniler Fair Labor Standards .Act. 29 CFR 549
Priv ate land mobile radio ser\ ices. 47 CFR 90
Bona tide thrift or savings plans, requirements
Public safety oflicers' death anti disability bcnelits.
under Fair Labor Standards ,Act. 29 CI R 5-i7
rescue squad or ambulance crew members.
Consoliilateil Rail Corporation, certain standards
28 CFR 32
relating to Corporati on's employee stock
Special nuclear material, ilomestic licensing.
ownership jilan. attainment determination.
10 CFR 70
49 CFR 49
Surface coal mines :md surface work areas ol
Convicted persons. applicali(Mis lor certilicates
untlerground coal muies. safety sianiiartis,
of exemption from certain laws. 28 CFR 4
30 CFR 77
Employee Retirement Income Security ,Act of 1974
r n d e r g r ou n d coal mines, manilalory safety
.\dminisiration and enlorcement. 29 CFR 25('0
standards. 30 CFR 75
,Administrative delinitions, 29 CI'R 2510
I'!I ll e r ^ e n c \ 111 0 h i Ii /.a t i () II Civil |ienahies ailjustmenl und er 'I ’ltic I,
See Ci\ il delense 29 C'l R 2575
Fiduciary responsibilities, 29 CI R 2550
Knier};eiK\v Oil and ( i a s (iu araiileed Loan Hoard
(iroup health |ilans. health insurance portabililv
FmergencN Oil and Cias (iuaranteeil Foan Program.
and lenewabilitv . 29 CFR 2590
13 CFR 500
Interpretive bulletins. 29 CFR 2509
K m erg eiicy p o w ers I’rocedtiral regulations. 29 CFR 2570
FmploN iiient of military resources in ev ent o f civ il Reporting and disclosure. 29 CF'R 2520
disturbance 32 Cl R 2 15 Temporary bonding rules. 29 CI'R 2580
Passport requirement anil e.xceptions. 22 CFR53 Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993.
Procedures for use and coordination of radio spectrum 29 CFR 825
during vvatlime emergency. 47 CI'R 214 Form and content ol and requirements for liiiancial
Telecommunications emergency preparedness statements. Securities ,Act ol 1933. Securities
Emergency restoration priority procedures for F^xchange Act ot 1934. iîhlic I'tility Molding
lelecommunicalions services. 47 CFR 21 I Comp an y .Act of 1935. Investment Company
Executive policy. 47 CFR 201 Act of 1940. Investment .Advisers .Act of 1940,
Government and public correspondence and Energy Policy anil Conservation ,Act ol
telecomnuinications precedence system. 1975. 17 CFR 210
47 CFR 213 Income taxes
80
CHAPTER 3 C O N S T IT U T IO N S , STATUTES, A D M I N I S T R A T IV E LAW, A ND COURT RULES RESEARCH A N D A N A L Y S IS
d Comjiiiter-Aided Research
'l!e(,7-'W a n d tlic /•c’í/t’ríi/Kt’tj/.'.'ít’/ ' a r e i n a i l a b I c e l e c t n i n i c a l h ' o n W' est l awa nd LcxisNexis. f-ederal
ac n i i ni s t r a t i \ ' c r ul es a n d r e g u l a t i o n s m a y b e r c s e a i e h e d t h r o u g h t h e ( i o v e r n m e n t P r i n t i n g
tVlice’s l-'ederal Di g e st S y s t em (1- Ds\ s) site, i ' r o p o s e d a n d (inal rul es are also ax’ailable at t h e
g( v e r n m e n t W e b site “ r e gu l at i on s , go \ - ” (see th e “ I n t e r n e t R e s o u r c e s ” se c t i o n at t h e e n d o t ' t h i s
cl apt er ) . Vou al s o m a \ ’ o b t a i n i n l o r m a t i o n I r o m i n d i \ ' i d u a l a g en c \ ' W e b sites,
e.Court and Administrative Decisions

Y(ur r e s e a r c h m a y r e q u i r e y ou to c o n s u l t a d m i n i s t r a t i \ e a g e n c y o r c o u r t d e c i s i o n s fo r a n
ir e r p r e t a t i o n o f a r u l e o r r e g u l a t i o n . . Agency d e c i s i o n s m a y be a \ a i l a b l e t h r o u g h t h e G o v e r n
ment P r i n t i n g Offi ce a n d c o m m e r c i a l p u b l i s h e r s s u c h as C o m m e r c e C l e a r i n g H o u s e ( C C H )
a i d t h e B m e a u t)f N a t i o n a l Atfai rs (BN’A). . A d mi n i s t r a t i ve a n d c o u r t d e c i s i o n s c a n a l s o b e
accessed t h r o u g h W e st l a w a n d LexisN'exis.
Slicpiird's l ' n i t e d S tn t e i A d n i i n i i t n i t i v e C .itntion i a n d Sliepiird'i C'oile o f Federal R eg u la -
ti.'HS ( j t a t i o i i i inclucie c i t a t i o n s to a d m i n i s t r a t i \ c a g e n c y a n d c o m n d e ci s i o n s , UV.s'i’s F ederal
P a e ti e e Digest will d ir ec t \ ’o u t o fe der a l c a ses a n d secoi u1ar\ ' s o u r c e s t h a t ha\ ' e i n t e r p r e t e d
feieral r e g u l at i on s .
f. Updating Administrative Law Research

'1 ;e C.ode ol Federal R e gtdatioiti is u p d a t e d b\' c o n s u l t i n g t h e H i t ol (^FR Sections A fleeted (I.S A )
(,ve F-.xhibit 3-12). I h i s s o l i c o \ e r , m o n t h k p u b l i c a t i o n lists c h a n g e s to a n \ C.I R r e g u l at i on . It
i s c u m u l a t i v e ; t h er e f o r e , \’o u n e e d o n l y c h e c k t h e m o s t r e c e n t issue. I h e c o \ e r i nd i ca t e s t h e
t i n e p e r i o d a d d r e s s e d in t h e p a m p h l e t . I h e /..S.4 is o r g a n i z e d b\' title a n d part ; i nd i ca t e s t h e
n ; t ur e t)l t he c h a n g e , s u c h as “r e \ ’i sed" o r “r e m o \ e d ”; a n d i n c k i de s a r ef er e n c e to t h e p a g e
l u m b e r in t he Federal Register w h e r e t h e rev ised s e c t i o n is p u b l i sh e d .
f o l ocat e c h a n g e s t h a t h a \ ’e o c c u r r e d s i nc e t h e last L SA p u b l i c a t i o n , c h e c k t h e “ R e a d e r
.Ads" at t h e e n d of t h e m o s t r ec e n t i c i le r a l Register. I h e “ R e a d e r Ai d s" i n c l u d e s a t abl e o t
"I I R P a r t s .Alfected" that lists p a r t s a n d s e c t i o n s o f t h e ( a u Ic of I'cilerid R e g u la tio n s aff ected,
h e ( , r i \ ^ a n h e u p d a t e d l o t h e <; un c n l d a l e i h i o u g h vcieven^c lo i h c ¡.S.\ and “ ll cadcv A i d s . ”
Ihe C.FR can also be u p d a t e d t h r o u g h W e s t l a w a n d LexisN'exis. If you are u p d a t i n g t h r o u g h
tie (¡ox e r n m e n t P r i n t i n g Olfi ce a ccess W e b site, c o n s u l t b o t h t h e LSA a n d t h e “ R e a d e r .Aids. ’
. Ad mi n i s t r a t i ve agenc}' a n d c o u r t d e c i s i o n s c a n b e u p d a t e d t h r o u g h S h e p a rd 's U n i t e d
S a te s .A d n u n is t r a t iv e C ita tio n s a n d S h c p a n i ' s Ca u Ic o f Federcd R e g id a tio n s C.itations.
E. S ta te A d m in is t ra t iv e L a w
' li e p u b l i ca t i on of st ate rul es a n d r e g u l a t i o n s \ ari es I r o m state to state, a n d it w o u l d r e q u i r e
a-i eparat e text to c o v e r e a c h state. I h e p u b l i c a t i o n a n d r e s e a r c h ol state a d mi n i s t r a t i v e law,
h)we\' er, oft en f ol l ows in s' ar yi ng d e g r e e s t h a t o f fe d e r a l a d m i n i s t r a t i \ ' c law. ' Ih e r e f o r e , a n
u i d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e federal a d m i n i s t r a t i \ ’e law d i s c L i s s e d in t h e p r e \ ' ious t w o s u b s e c t i o n s will
h'lp \'ou \s hen r e s e a r c h i n g state a d mi n i s t r a t i x e law. S o m e states publi sh a ge nc y rules a n d regul a-
tiins in a single c o d e like t h e ('PR. In s o m e st ates tlie r e g u l a t i o n s are p u b l i s h e d b\- th e s e p a r a t e
a; enc\ . P r o b a bl y t h e q ui c k e s t w a \ ’ ft) locat e w h e r e a n a g e n c y ’s r e g u l at i on s a n d a d m i n i s t r a t i v e
d c i s i ons are p u b l i s h e d is to c o n t a c t t h e i n d i \ idual a g e n c \ . O f t e n in d i v i d u a l ag e n c i e s ha v e W e b
sies, a n d the i n f o r m a t i o n m a y be av ailable t h r o u g h t h e a g e n c \ ' o r state g o \ - e r n m e n t W e b site.
V. COURT RULES
Court rules r e g u l a t e t h e c o n d u c t ol m a t t e r s b r o u g h t b e f o r e t h e c o u r t . Ihe\' r a n g e in t h e s u b
jects the\- cov e r f r o m t h e t e c h n i ca l , sLich as t h e f o r m a t o f p l e a d i n g s, ft) t h e substanti \-e, su c h as
g o u n d s for d i s m i s s a l o r w h e n an a p p e a l m u s t b e filed. Us u a l l y t h e rul es are div i de d i n t o t w o
c.tegories: rules of civil p r o c e d u r e a n d r u l es ol c r i m i n a l p r o c e d u r e . Hach i u r i s d i c t i o n h a s t h e g-j
E x h ib it 3 -1 2 Page from Electronic List of CFR Sections Affected (LSA). S o u rc e : hU D://-w .w

g p o .g 0 v/fd sys/p k g /LSA - 2 O U -IO /p d f/L S A - 2 O V - W p d f
OCTOBER 2011
CHANGES JANUARY 3, 2011 THROUGH OCTOBER 31, 2011
TITLE 1— GENERAL PROVISIONS TITLE 3— THE PRESIDENT

Chapter I—Administrative C o m Presidential Documents
mittee of the Federal Register Proclamations
(Parts 1—49) 6641 5ec> P r o c. 8682................................... 30499
9 R e v i s e d ............................................................... 6312 6867 See N o t i c e of Feb. 24. 2011
11.4 R e v i s e d ......................................................... 6313
............................................................... 11073
12.3 R e m o v e d ...................................................... 6313
7463 See N o t i c e of Sep. 9. 2011............. 56633
7747 See P r o c. 8682................................... 30499
7757 See N o t i c e of Feb. 24. 2011
Chapter III—Administrative C o n ............................................................... 11073
ference of the United States 8097 See P r o c. 8682................................... 30499
(Parts 300—399) 8214 See P r o c. 8682................................... 30499
8271 See N o t i c e of J u n . 23. 2011
304 A d d e d ............................................................ 18636 ............................................................... 37237
8405 See P ro c, 8682................................... 30499
Proposed Rules: 8522 S u p e r s e d e d b.y Proc. 8681 ............30497
304 .1542
8536 .9«' P roc. 8682................................... 30499
862 2................................................................ 2241
862 3 ................................................................3817
TITLE 2— GRANTS AND 862 4 ................................................................3819
862 5 ................................................................6305
AGREEMENTS 862 6 ................................................................6307
862 7................................................................ 6521
Chapter VII—Agency for Inter 8628 .................................................................11927
national Development (Parts 8629 ................................................................ 11929
700—799) 8630 .................................................................11931
8631 ................................................................ 11933
C h a p t e r V I I E s t a l ) l i s h e d ...........................34114 8632 ................................................................ 11935
780 A d d e d ..............................................................34144 8633 ................................................................ 12265
782 A d d e d ..............................................................34574 8634 ................................................................ 12817
8635 ................................................................ 12919
Chapter XXIV—Department of 8636 .................................................................12921
Housing and Urban Develop 8637 ................................................................ 15209
8638 ................................................................ 16523
ment (Parts 2400—2499) 8639 ................................................................ 17327
2429 A d d e d ...........................................................45166 8640 ................................................................ 17329
8641 ................................................................ 18629
Chapter XXX—Department of 8642 ................................................................ 18631
8643 ................................................................ 18633
Homeland Security (Parts 8644 ................................................................ 19259
3000—3099) 8645 ................................................................ 19261
3001 A d d e d ........................................................... 10207 8646 ................................................................ 19263
8647 ................................................................ 19265
Proposed Rules: 8648 ................................................................ 19899
8649 ................................................................ 20215
300— 399 ( C h . I l l ) ............................................. 20568 8650 ................................................................ 20829
400— 499 ( C h . I V ) ...............................................22058 8651 ................................................................ 20831
6 0 0 - 6 9 9 ( C h . V I ) ...............................................26651 8652 ................................................................ 20833
1100— 1199 ( C h , X I ) .......................... 16700. 32330 8653 ................................................................ 21221
1 4 0 0 - 1 4 9 9 ( C h . X I V ) ....................... 10526. 40645 8654 ................................................................ 21223
1800— 1899 ( C h . X V I I I ) ................................. 31884 8655 ................................................................ 21999
2400— 2499 ( C h . X X I V ) ...................11395. 31884 8656 ................................................................ 22001
2800— 2899 ( C h . X X V I I I ) ............ 11163. 34003 8657 ................................................................ 23685
3000— 3099 ( C h . X X X ) .................................... 20568 8658 ................................................................ 24785
82
a i i t h o i ity to p r o n i u l g a t c its o w n sot o f r ul es, a l t h o u g l i m a n y st ates follow in s u b s t a n t i al pai t

ttie I' ederal Rul es ot ( J \ il a n d C. rini inal P r o c e d u r e .
O n o c c a s i o n yo u m a y n e e d t o r e s e a r c h m a t t e r s inN'oK i n g the rul es tt) d e t e r m i n e wh a t
a r ul e r e q i n r e s o r h o w a rul e h a s b e e n i n t e r p r e t e d .
For Example Rule 60B of the Federal Rules of Civil and Criminal Procedure provides
that a judgment may be set aside on the grounds of "excusable neglect."
It may be necessary to research the case lawto determine how the courts have defined
"excusable neglect."
l h e Federal Rules o f (axi l a n d (Criminal P r o c e d u r e a r e i n c l u d e d in the L'nitcd States ('.ode.

By c o n s u l t i n g t h e USC'.A o r USCS, y o u will f i nd a n n o t a t i o n s t h a t d i r ect \' ou to s u m m a r i e s ot
ca s e s a n d s e c o n d a r y s o u r c e s , s u c h as legal e n c y c l o p e d i a s e c t i o n s a n d A L R a n n o t a t i o n s , t h at
ba s e i n t e r p r e t e d t h e rules. Like t h e f e d e r a l rul es, st at e c o u r t r ul es are u sua l l y p u b l i s h e d with
t h e st at e st at ut es . L oc a t i ng t h e r ul e s in t h e a n n o t a t e d s t a t u t e s is u s u a l K’ t h e s t a r t i n g p o i n t
w h e n r e s e a r c h i n g c o u r t rules.
I h e s t a t e a n d t e d e r a l r ul e s a r e a v a i l a b l e e l e c t r o n i c a l l y o n W e s t l a w a n d I.exisN’exis,
t h r o u g h h t t p : / / w w w . f m d l a w . c o m , a n d o n t h e st a t e o r i n d i s i d u a l c o u r t W e b site. In a d d i t i o n ,
n i u l t i v o l u m e tr eat i se s, s u c h as W’c-sr.s l-ed era l P raetiee a n d Procedure, p r o v i d e e. xhaust ive
a n a k s i s o f t h e federal rules.
In a d d i t i o n to t h e rules g o v e r n i n g civil a n d c r i m i n a l p ro c e d u r e , tederal c o u r t s a n d m a n y
st ate co u r t s h a v e so-called local rules, ’»'ou s h o u l d c o n su l t t hes e rules befor e filing an\- plead
ing o r o t h e r d o c u m e n t with t h e co u r t . I h e s e rules a r e specific to t he court a n d general ly gov ern
a d mi n i s t r a t i v e ma t t e r s such as t h e size o f p a p e r s ac c e p t ed , t h e n u m b e r o f copies o f p l e a di ngs that
m u s t be filed with the original, a n d h o w to hie by facsimile transmi ssi on. If the coui't has a W e b site,
the local rules ma\ ' be available there. If not, local rules a r e a\'ailable t h r o u g h the clerk ol the court.
VI. ANALYSIS—THE PROCESS

l h e ;\n.\lysis o f e n a c t e d law a n d c o u r t r u l e s is t h e p r t ' c e s s o f d e t e r m i n i n t ; if a law appli es,
h o w it appli es, a n d t h e effect o f t h a t a p p l i c a t i o n to a s p e c i h c fact si tuat ion. W h e n a n a l y z i n g a
legal p r o b l e m o r a d d r e s s i n g a n issue g o v e r n e d b y c o n s t i t u t i o n a l , st atut ory, o r at l ni i ni s fra t i vc
law p r o v i si o n , o r a c o u r t rule, it is h e l p t ui to h a v e a n a p p r o a c h - an analysis process. Ihis
pr o c e s s s h o u l d all ow you to a p p r o a c h t h e m a t t e r in a w a \ ’ that eflicientlv solves t h e p r o b l e m in
t h e least a m o i m t of t i m e wi t h t h e least c t x i f u s i o n a n d gre a t es t accuracy', f o r th e sake o f claritv,
t h r o u g h t ) u f t hi s sectit)n t h e d i s c u s s i o n a n d e x a m p l e s f o c u s u p o n laws p a s s e d b\ legislative
bo d i e s , o r st at ut orv law. Note, ho w e v e r , t ha t t h e p r i n c i p l e s p r e s e n t e d h e r e a p p k to the a n a h sis
ot c o n s t i t u t i o n s , statLites, a d m i n i s t r a t i v e law, a n d c o u r t rules.
It is r e c o m m e n d e d t h a t y o u f ol l ow t h e t h r e e - s t e p a p p r o a c h p r e s e n t e d in F x h i b i t . V I 3
w h e n a d d r e s s i n g a legal p r o b l e m o r issue g o v e r n e d b y s t a t u t o r y law. Th e s e s t e p s arc a h e l p
fill a p p r o a c h to s t a t u t o r y a n a l y s i s, a l t h o u g h in s o m e i n s t a n c e s a st ep m a y be u n n e c es s a r v '
(I'or e x a m p l e , st ep 1 is u n n e c e s s a r y if y o u a l r e a d y k n o w t h a t t h e s t at u t e a ppl i es) a n d in o t h e r
i n s t a nc e s , a d i f f e r e n t a p p r o a c h mav' b e r e q u i r e d . E a c h s t e p in t hi s r e c o m m e n d e d a p p r o a c h is
d i s c u s s e d s e p a r a t e k in t h e f o l l o w i n g se c t i o n s .
A. Step 1: D e te rm in e i f th e S ta tu te A p p lie s
l h e first st ep in t h e p r o c e s s is to d e t e r m i n e w h i c h law, if any, c over s t h e legal issue r a i se d bv’
t h e c l i e nt ’s fact si t ua t i o n , l h e first task, t h e n , is to d e t e r m i n e w h i c h st a t ut e o r s t at ut es g o v e r n
t h e q u es t io n .
' Ihi s s t ep invol ves t w o part s:
1. Lo c a t e all poss i bl e a p p l i c a b l e st atut es.
2. D e t e r m i n e w h i c h s t a t u t es a p p k . 83
E x h ib it 3 -1 3 Statutory Analysis Three-Step Approach.

STEPl Determine if the statute applies.
Part 1: Locate all possible applicable statutes.
Part 2: Determine which statutes apply.
STEP 2 Analyze the statute.
Part 1: Read the statute.
Part 2: Identify the statutory elements —What does the
statute specifically declare, require, or prohibit?
STEP 3 Apply the statute to the legal problem or issue.
Chart format
Narrative format
1. Locate All P ossib le A p p lica b le Statutes

Bctbre you can d e t e r m in e if a par ti cular statute applies, \ o u tirst must locate all statutes that
possibly apply. The location ol o ne applicable statute does not me an you should stop your
search. Make sure your research is t h o r o ug h a n d complete. C o n t i n u e researching until \’ou
are confident that you ha\’c expl ored all areas o f l a w that might govern the p r oblem a n d h a \ e
located all potential applicable statutes. Some matters are c i n e r e d b\ m o r e than o n e statute.
For Example The client's case may involve the validity and enforceability of a small loan
contract. Several statutes may govern the enforcement of such contracts:
the federal Truth in Lending Act, the state's Small Loan Act, and the state’s Usury Act.
2. D e te r m in e W h ic h Statutes A pply
D e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r each statute applies by asking \durselt', “Does the general area ot law
s i n e r e d by this statute apply to the issue or quesliini raised by the lacts ot my client’s e a s e ' ”
^’ou can usually ans wer this ques tion b\' reterring to the scope ot the statute, the definitions
section, or case law.
Reterence to the scope section ol the statute olten ans wers the ques tion of w h e t h e r the
statute applies.
For Example The problem involves the validity of a contract for the sale of a security
interest in a car. The scope section ofthe Commercial Code— Sales statute
provides, "This chapter applies to the sale of goods, it does not apply to any transaction
which ... is a sale of a security interest or intended to operate only as a security transac
tion. ..." Reference to this section clearly indicates that this statute does not cover such
transactions. If the facts involved the sale of the car, rather than the sale of a security
interest in the car, the statute might apply.
Ofi en reference to the definitions section of'a statute will help \ o u d e t er m i n e w h e t h e r

a statute applies.
For Example The legal problem involves the sale of a farm. The question of whether this
sale is governed by the provisions ofthe Commercial Code— Sales statute
is answered by reference to the definitions section of the statute. In that section, goods
are defined as "all things that are movable at the time of the contract for sale...." The
statute clearly does not apply to the sale of a farm.
84
CHAPTER 3 CONSTITUTIONS, STATUTES, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, AND COURT R U L E S - R E S E A R C H AND ANALYSIS
111 sonic in.staiicos. rcIcrcncL' to ease law iiia\' bc iicccssar\- to d e t e r m i n e if a statute

go ver ns a situation.
For Example The client's case involves the lease of goods, and neither the scope nor
the definitions sections of the Commercial Code— Sales statute indicates
whether the term sale includes a lease of goods. Reference to case law may be neces
sary, Court decisions often define terms not defined in a statute.
N ot e that vou ma y often locate the relevant case law by looking to the reference i n f o r
ma ti o n following the section o f t h e statute. It may be that t wo law.s appiv a n d gover n a legal
question. In this event, t wo causes o f action ma y be available.
For Example A small loan may violate provisions of both the federal Truth in Lending
Act and the state usury law. In this case, there may be a cause of action
under the federal law and a cause of action under the state law. If this occurs, steps 2
and 3 would be followed in regard to each statute.
W'hon d e t e r m i ni ng if a statute apjilies, alwavs check the elfective date o f t h e statute to

be sure that the statute is in elfect. Ihis is usually f ou n d in the statute itself o r in the h i s t o r i
cal notes o r c o m m e n t s in the relereiice sections lollowing the statute. Also, iilw uy s check the
sLipplements to tiie statute to make sure that the statute v'ou are researching is the latest version.
•Supplementarv' material publishetl after the pLiblication o f t h e ma i n te.xt is often located i m
mediately following the statute or in a separate section or pamphlet . Ihe s up pl e me nt s include
anv' iha i i ge s in the statute or relereiice material that have occ ur re d since the publicat ion o f
the book c o n t a i n i n g the statute,
B, Step 2: A n a ly z e th e S ta tu te
,\Uev you dclcvminc Uv.U a sValulL' Ap\''Ucs, you must c.wcfully rc;\d aiid An;\ly;o il U' determine
Ik ' w it apphes. .Some statutes are lengthy and dilficult to und er st a nd, 'i’ou mav need to check
the library references to locate o t he r librarv sources that explain and interpret the statute. It
ni.iy be necessary to ma ke a chart to assist vou in u n d e r s t a n d i n g the specific pr ovisions and
oper ation of a statute.
Step 2 involves two parts:
1. Read the statute.

2, Identify the statutorv’ elements: W'hat does the statute speciticallv' declare, require,
o r prohibit?
1. Read th e Statute
Keep the following points in m i n d wh en reading statutorv' law:
1. Read the statute carefullv’ several times.

2. Does the statute set a standar d, or nierelv' provide lactors that must be consider ed?
Does the statute set out mo re than one rule or test? .Are o th e r rules or tests avail
able? Arc there exceptions to the rule or test?
■I. All the words and pu n c t u a t i on have meaning, Alvvavs check the detiniti ons se c
tion for the mo an i n g ot a term. If there is no det initions section, consult case law,
a legal dictionarv', or W o n is a n d Phrases. Do not a s su me you k n ow what a t e rm
means. Your a s s u mp ti on mav' be wrong, A legal t e r m may have several meani ngs ,
so me of w hi ch mav be u n k n o w n to vou.
85
For Example The word publication in tort law means more than presentation
in the print or visual media. It means communication to a third
party by any means. Under this definition, two neighbors gossiping over a
backyard fence can constitute publication.
All p u n c t u a t i o n counl.s. If y o u c a n n o t u n d c r s t a i u i h o w lo r o a d a s t a l u t c , con.sull a

s e c o n d a r y .source, s u c h as a t r eat i se o r legal e n c y c l o p e d i a .
5. Re\'ie\v l h e e n t i r e sl at u l e (all se c t i o n s ) lo d e l e r m i n e it o l h e r s e c t i o n s in s o m e \N'a\'

aft'ect o r relate lo t h e se c t i o n y o u a r e r e s e a r c h i n g .
For Example Section 611-9 ofthe statute provides:
a. A will that does not comply with Section 611-8 is valid as a holographic
will if the signature and the material provisions are in the handwriting of
the testator.
b. If a holographic will does not contain a statement as to the date of its
execution and it is established that the testator lacked testamentary ca
pacity at any time during which the will might have been executed, the
will is invalid unless it is established that it was executed at a time when
the testator had testamentary capacity.
c. Any statement of testamentary intent contained in a holographic will
may be set forth either in the testator’s own handwriting or as part of a
commercially printed form will.
Note that a holographic will ls a will written entirely by the testator in his
or her own handwriting and not witnessed. Subsection (a) sets the standard for
when a holographic will is valid. Subsection (b), however, addresses a situation
that affects the validity of a holographic will even if the requirements of subsection
(a) are met. Subsection (c) establishes howtestamentary intent may be set forth.
I h e p r e c e d i n g e x a m p l e il lustrat es a p o i n t i h a t c a n n o t be o v e r e m p h a s i / . o d : Read a n d
c o n s i d e r all p a rts ot' a sl atul e. S u p p o s e the legal q u e s t i o n is, “W h a t is r e q u i r e d for a h o l o gr a p h i c
will to b e vali d?" If y o u s t o p p e d r e a d i n g t h e s l a t u l e al s u b s e c t i o n (a) b e c a u s e it a p p e a r e d lo
a n s w e r y o u r q u e s t i o n , y o u w o u l d mi ss t h e o l h e r p r o v i s i o n s t hat also aiTecl t h e a n s w e r lo t he
q u e s t i o n . Al wa y s r e ad t h e e n t i r e st al ut e. Also, if t h e s t a t u t e refers lo a n o t h e r s ec t i o n , read
that o l h e r s ec t i o n to d e t e r m i n e h o w it aflects t h e st atut e.
6. C e r t a i n c o m m o n t e r m i n o l o g y m u s t be u n d e r s t o o d . Be a w a r e ot t h e m e a n i n g o f
t h e c o m m o n l y u s e d t e r ms , s u c h as shall, m a y , a n d , a n d or.
lhe term shall m a k e s t h e d u t y i m p o s e d m a n d a t o r y — il m u s t b e d o n e . T h e t e r m may

leaves t h e d u t y o p t i o n a l . If and is u se d, all t h e c o n d i t i o n s o r listed i t e m s a r e r e q u i r e d . If t he
term or is u s e d , o n l y o n e ot t h e c o n d i t i o n s o r listed i t e ms is r e q u i r e d .
For Example Section 24-6-7-9 provides "A person is concerned in the com
mission of a crime if he:
a. directly commits the crime;
b. intentionally causes some other person to commit the crime; or
c. intentionally aids or abets in the commission of the crime."
86
CHAPTER 3 CONSTITUTIONS, STATUTES, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, AND COURT RULES— RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS
Ihe use o f o r me ans tlial a pei'son is eoxereil by tlie statute il’lie or she doe.s iiiiy o n e ot
llie h.steci act.s.
For Example Section 50-9-1 provides that holographic wills are valid if they are:
\ a. Entirely in the handwriting of the testator, and

I
I b. Signed by the testator
llie use o i iiiiil me ans that bot h coiuiitions mu st be met tor the will to be valid.
7. Keep in m i n d the canons ot co ns t r uc t i on when reading. These are pr esented in

section \ il ot this chapter.
2. Id en tify th e S tatu tory E lem en ts

Atter \()u carefully read the statute, the next pait of step 2 is to anah/. e the section o f t h e st a t
ute ill question, \ \ hat does the statute speciticalK declare, require, or prohibit? How does the
statute apply? Ask \ourself, “WTiat specilic r equi r ement s must be met tiir the statute to appl\'?
WTiat are the el eme nt s ? ” For a statute to apply, certain condi tions established b\- the statute
must be met. These condi tions or c o m p o n e n t s o f t h e statute are called Statutory elements,
■Alter the el ements are identiiied, \'ou can d e t er m in e how the statute applies,
,-\tfer \’ou h a \ ’c a sutHcient u n d e r s t a n d i n g ol the statute, begin this part of' st ep 2 by
br eaki ng the statute d o w n into its elements. Itlentily and list the el ements tliat must be met
lor the statute to apph' . This is iiecessarx because \ o u must know w hat the statutory el eme nt s
are belore \'ou can proceed to step 3 a nd appl\' t h e m to the legal p r oblem or issue raised b\ ’
the cl ient’s tacts.
Identity the el eme nt s by reading the entire statute, a n a l w i n g each sentence w o r d by
word, and hsti ng e\'erytliing required. This inckuies listing all the \ arious co n di t i o ns a nd
except ions c o n t a i ne d in the subsections ol the statute in question a n d the c ond i ti ons and
except ions i ncluded m ot h e r statutes that ma\' attect the statute in i|uestion.
For Example Consider Section 2-2-315 of the Commercial Code— Sales Act of
state X:
Where the seller at the time of contracting has reason to know any particular purpose
for which the goods are required and that the buyer is relying on the seller's skill or
judgment to select or furnish suitable goods, there is an implied warranty that the
goods shall be fit for such purpose.
Read the statute in the preceding exa mp l e a n d d et e r mi ne the elements. I'or the impl ied
w ar rant y of § 2-2-3 15 to apply, the tollowing r eq ui r e m e n ts must be met:
1, ll tc p c r i o n intisl he a seller o f goods. I low do sou know “of g o o d s ” is required? Sec
tion 2-2-313 quot e d pre\ iously does not read ‘'seller of g ood s ”; it only states “the
seller,” 'ibu k n ow “ot g oo d s” is required because in step 1, in o rd e r to d e t e r m i n e it
the statute applied to the issue in the client's case, you re\ iewed the scope section
ot' the act, U p r o\ i de s that the act applies only to the sale of goods.
Ho w is the term goo ds defined? .Assume the term is d e h n e d in the d ehn i ti ons
section o f t h e Cômniercial ( ôde—Sales Act as: “.All things mo\'able at the t ime of
sale.” 'Ihe statute also requires the indi\ idual to be a seller. Ho w is ,H’//cr defined in
the definitions section o f t h e act? .Assume the term is defined as anyone w h o sells
goods.
87
P A R T II LEGAL RES EAR C H
2. Ihc seller has rciison to know the purpose for which the goods are required. For the
act to applx', tlio seller must ha\'C reason to know the purpose tor which the buyer
wants the goods. Ihe statute does not require actual knowledge on the part ot the
seller. It uses the phrase, "has reason to know.” You may need to refer to case law
to tietermine what “reason to know” means or requires,
3. 'Ihe seller has reason lo know the buyer is relying on the seller's skill or judgnienl.
Ihis is usually established b\’ the words or actions ot the buyer that indicate t<' the
seller the bu\'er’s reliance on the seller’s skill or judgment.
4, Ihc buyer nuist actually rely on the seller's skill or judgment in furnishing suitable
goods. Ihis is required because the statute provides that “the seller. . . has reason
to know . . . that the buv'er is rehing.”
5, Ihe seller must have known of ihc purpose for which the goods were required and
Ihc buyer's reliance on the seller's skill or judgment in furnishing the goods at the
time the sale was taking place, not later llTis is required because the statute pro-
\ ides, “the seller at the time of contracting.. . . ”
Be sure to complete both parts of step 2 before proceeding to step 3.
C. Step 3: A p p ly th e S ta tu te to th e Legal P ro b le m o r Iss u e

After you have identified the elements, which are the conditions necessary for the statute to
apph’, then apply the elements to the legal problem or issue raised by the client’s fact situation.
'Iliis entails apphing or matching the facts oft he client’s case to the elements oft he statute,
which nuu’ be accomplished in several wa\ s. One wa\' is to chart the elements ot the statute,
.N'e.xt to the elements, list the facts Irom the client’s case that match or establish each ot the
elements or requirements ofthe statute. Another wa\- is to prepare a narrative summary ol the
elements and how the tacts i)f the case apph’ to match or establish the elements. 'Ihe following
exaniples ilkistrate the pertormance of step 3 in both chart and narrative summary format.
1. Chart Formal
In the lollowing example, a chart form at is used.
For Example Tom goes to the local h a r d w a r e store and informs the s a l es pe r s o n t h a t he
n e eds to grind met al wi th a p o w e r metal grinder. He tells t he s al es pe rs o n
that he needs goggles to protect his eyes. The salesperson, after looking t hrough his stock,
hands Tom a pair of goggl es and tells him, " The s e are w h a t you ne ed. " Tom p ur c h a se s
the goggles, and w h e n he uses them, a pi ece of met al pi er ce s the lens of th e goggl es
and d a m a g e s Tom's eye.
('an I'om state a claim under the pro\-isions ofthe implied warranty statute, § 2-2-315,
presented in the pre\ious example? How does the statute apply?
STATU rORY ELEMENTS FACTS OF C L IE N T ’S CASE
1. Seller of goods 'Ihe seller was a salesperstin at the local hardware
store, a seller within the meaning oft he statute.
Ihe item sold, goggles, meets the definition of goods
(the goggles are “things movable at the time of sale”).
2. Has reason to know the Foni explicith’ told the seller the purpose for buying
buyer’s purpose in purchasing the goggles.
the goods
88
C H A P T E R 3 C O N S T I T U T I O N S , STATUTES, A D M I N I S T R A T I V E LAW , A N D CO U RT RULES - R E SE AR C H A N D A N A L Y S I S
V Has reason to know ot biner’s Ihis is implied trom I'om’s conduct ol allowing the
reliance on seller’s indgment seller to select the goods without any input trom I'om.
4. Reliance by buver on seller’s Tom relied on the salesperson’s judgnient. I le indi
skill or iudgment cated the purpose and accepted, without independent
judgment or act, what the seller sclcctcd.
At the time ol contracting 'lhe seller knew at the time ot'thc sale, not later, ol
I'om’s purpose and reliance.
.After the elements ot the statute have been identified and the lacts oft he client’s case
compared and matched with the rec]uired elements of th e statute, \ou can determine how
the statute applies. In this example, \'ou can conch.ide that the statute covers the conduct of
the salesperson and that an implied warranty was created. ,A1I the required elements of th e
statute are established by the facts in Tom’s case:
1. lhe salesperson was a seller within the meaning ofthe statute, and the item sold
meets the definition ot goods.
2. .At the time oft he sale, the buyer informed the seller oft he specitic purpose I'or
which the goods were being purchased.
.'. lhe seller knew ofthe buyer’s reliance on his skill and judgment.
4. lhe buyer relied on the expertise and judgment ot the seller.
3. lhe seller knew at the time of sale, not later.
2. Narrative Summary
In the I'ollowing example, a narrative su m m ary is used rather than a chart I'ormat.
For Example Section 56-6-1 o f t h e Open M e e t i n g s A c t provides that "all meeti ngs of t w o
or more memb er s of any board . . . at whi c h any public business is discussed
or at w h i c h any action may be ta ke n or is t a ke n are d e cl ar ed to he public m e e t i ngs ope n
to the public." The section further provides:
a. Such mee t i ngs shall be held only after full and ti mely public notice.
b. This secti on does not apply to c h a n c e m e e t i ngs or social gatheri ngs at w h i c h di s
cussion of public business is not the central purpose.
Ida and Dan are m e m b er s of a t h r ee - pe r s o n state board. T h e y run into e ac h ot her
at a Chri st mas party and discuss board business.
Is this meeting an open meeting gtnerned b\’ § 56-6-1 ? lhe application of step 2 re\eals
the statute requires an open meeting when the followingelements are present:
1. Two or more board members

2. Meet at other than a chance or social gathering where discussion of public busi
ness is not the central purpose, and
3. Public business is discussed or action may be or is taken.
.A narrative summary of the elements and the application of the stati.ite to the tacts
illustrates step 3:
1. Two or tiiorc board tiictnhers. Ihis element is met. Both Dan and Ida are board
members.
2. Meet at other than a chance or social gathering where disctissio)t of public busi
ness is not the central purpose. It appears that this element is iu)t met b\- the facts.
89
P A R T II LEGAL RESEARCH
This was a social gathering and also possibly a chance meeting. The gathering was
a (Tiristmas part)'. It does not appear that the discussion ot'public business was
the central purpose. It it is discoxered that the sole reason they went to the party
was to discuss public business, the exclusion in subsection (b) ot the statute prob
ably does not appK' and the meeting ma\- be co\ered b\' the act.
3. Public business is discussed or action may be or is taken. This element is met.
Public business was discussed.
After performing step 3, it appears that this was not a public meeting within the meaning
o f t h e act. Although the rec|uirements of the first and third elements are met (two or more
board members met and discussed public business), the rec]uirements ofthe second element
are not met.
When performing step 3, remember to match the client’s facts with the required ele
ments of a statute. WTien this is accomplished, you can determine how the statute applies.
In the example concerning the purchase of goggles, all the required statutor)’ elements were
met by the facts ofthe client’s case and an implied warrant}- was created. In the public meet
ings example, the facts did not meet the requirements oft he second element oft he statute;
therefore, the meeting was not a public meeting within the meaning oft he statute.
D. S u m m a ry o f th e S ta tu to ry A n a ly s is Process
The three steps presented in this section are a useful approach to statutory anahsis. These
steps may be summarized as iollows;
• Step 1: Determine it the statute applies in an}' way to the legal problem or issue.
• Step 2: Cârefull}' read the statute and identity the required elements.
• Step 3: C;ompare or match the required elements to the lacts of the problem and
determine how the statute applies.
In addition to this three-step approach, there are other general considerations to keep
in mind when analyzing slalutory law. These considerations are presented in tlie t\illowing
section.
VII. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

Alwa}'s keep in mind two major considerations and guidelines when engaged in statutor)'
anahsis:
1, I.egislati\e histor)'
2. Canons of construction
These considerations come into pla}', and are ofthe greatest importance, when the mean
ing ofthe statute is unclear and the meaning has not been determined by a court.
WTien required to interpret a statute, a court will first look to the plain meaning i)f
the language ofthe statute. This is called the plain m eaning rule. The rule niandates that
a statute be interpreted according to its plain meaning; that is, words will be interpreted
according to their common meanings. The court will render an interpretation that reflects
the plain meaning oft he language and is consistent with the meaning of all other sections
o f t h e act. If the meaning is clear on its face, then no additional inquiries concerning the
meaning ot a statute are allowed. It there is still an anibiguit\' in the meaning ot a statutory
sectii)ii, the court will then look to the legislati\e history o ft he statute and apply canons of
construction.
WTien engaging in statutor}' analysis, be mindful of th e considerations that the court
applies when interpreting the meaning of a statute. The reason for this is obvious: Vou want
90
C H A PTER 3 CO NSTITUTIONS. STATUTES, A D M IN IS T R A T IV E LAW, A N D COURT R U L E S - RESEARCH A N D A N A LY S IS
\(uir iiUcrprctation ot tlic meaning ol a statute and how it will be applietl to coincide with
that o ft he coiu't. l-ach of these considerations is addressed in this section.
A. L e g is la tiv e H is to ry
I'o determine the meaning of a statute, a court ma\' look to the legislative histor\- ofthe statute
to discover what the legislature intended it to mean. Le g isla tiv e history is the record of
tlie legislation during the enactment process before it became law. It consists ot committee
reports, transcripts of hearings, statements of legislators concerning the legislation, and an\'
other material published for legislati\'e use in regard to the legislation.
I.cgislatix’c history ma\' be of assistance in several ways when interpreting a statute,
lhe history nia\' identity wii\' an ambiguous term was used and what meaning the legislature
intended, what the legislature intended the statute to accomplish, the general purpose of the
legislation, and so on. Researching legislatix e history is discussed in ('hapter 6.
B. C a n o n s o f C o n s tru c tio n
C a n o n s of construction are rules and guidelines the courts use when interpreting statutes.
A fundamental rule of construction that determines when canons of construction are applied
by a court is the plain meaning rule, which gow'ins when the canons of construction apply. If
tbe meaning is clear on its lace, there is no room tor interpretation and a court will not apph'
tbe canons of constrLiction.
The canons of construction are too numerous to be addressed individualh' in this te.xt.
.Some well-known canons are presented here.
1. Exprt\ssio Unius
lhe entire l.atin phrase is c\pn's<io iiiiim csl c.Xiiiisio ¡iltcriiii, which translates as “the expres
sion ol one excludes all others." 11 the statute contains a list ot what is co\ered, e'.er\'thing
else is excluded.
For Example If a statute gover ni ng artists lists potters, glass b l ower s , painters, poets,
wr i t er s, and scul ptors, but do e s not i ncl ude w e a v e r s , w e a v e r s a re not
c o ve r ed by the statute. Only the o c cu p at i o n s listed are c ov e r ed , all ot her oc c u p at i o n s
are not covered.
Note, however, that a statute often is written to state that a list is not exclusive. W'hen
so written, this canon of construction does not apply, and the statute is not limited to the
items listed.
For Example "A 'Building' as used in this .statute m e a n s a structur e on private or c o m

mer ci al propert y and i ncl udes b u t is n o t lim ited to a dwel l ing, an offi ce of
fixed l o c a t i o n . . . . "
2. Ejusdem Generis
The l.atin term ciiii^dciii gciicrii means “oft he same genus or class." .As a canon of construc
tion, it means that whenever a statute contains a specitic list followed by a general term,
the general term is interpreted to be limited to other things ot the same class or kind as
those in the list.
91
For Example A s t at u t e re g u l at i ng s e l f - p r o p e l l e d v e h i c l e s lists " b i c y c l e s , t r i c y c l e s ,

uni cycl es, and ot her de v i c e s ." H e r e "ot her d e vi c e s " is limited to m e a n
devi ces o f t h e s am e class or kind as bicycles, tricycles, and unicycles. Mo t o r i z e d vehi cl es
a r e not " o t he r de v i c e s " wi t hi n the m e a n i n g of the statute.
3. Pari Materia
Ihe Latin lerni part materia tran.slates as “on the same subject matter." Ibis cancin means that
statutes dealing with the same subject should be interpreted consistently.
For Example A state's Fair Housi ng A c t prohibits di scri mi nat i on agai ns t an individual on
the basis of " g e nd e r pr ef erence. " The state's Fair Empl oyment A ct also uses
the t erm g e n d e r p re fe re n c e . The t er m should be i nt erpret ed consi stentl y in both stat utes
unless e a c h statute has a definitions secti on that gives a c l ear l y di ff ere nt mea ni ng.
4. Last A ntecedent Rule

'Ihe last antecedent rule states: Qualifying words and phrases apply to the words or phrase
immediately preceding and do not extend to other more remote words or phrases.
For Example A D W I statute provides that "driver m e a n s eve ry person w h o drives or is in

a ctual physi cal control of a motor v ehi cl e upon a h i g h w a y ___ " T he p h r as e
'upon a h i g h w a y " modi fi es the t er m m o to r vehicle. It does not modi fy the t er m drives.
5. Intended Remedy
Intended remed\- means that statutes are to be interpreted in a manner that furthers the in
tended legislative remedy.
6. Elntire Context
Ihe words, phrases, and subsections ot'a statute are to be interpreted in the context ot'the
entire statute.
7. C onstitutionality
Statutes are assumed to be constitLitional and should be construed in a manner that preserves
their constitutionality, if possible.
8. Criminal Statutes
Criminal statutes are to be narrowly interpreted.
It is important to remember tiiat, as with all matters in\'ol\'ing case law, when a court
interprets a statute, the principle ot'stare decisis applies. A court will t'ollow the interpretation
previously adopted unless the pre\'ious interpretation is in erruled and a new interpretation
is adopted.
VIII. KEY POINTS CHECKLIST: Workmg w it h S t a t u t e s

Keep the tollowing ke\’ points in mind when working with statutes:
W'hen conducting research, identit'\- the question or research terms as narrowly and
concisely as possible.
Always update \'our research—check the pocket parts and supplements to make sure
92
that the statute has not been changed or repealed.
C H A P T E R 3 C O N S T I T U T I O N S , STATUTES, A D M I N I S T R A T I V E LAW , A N D C OURT RULES RESEARCH A N D A N ALY SIS
/ W'lien rt’searching ledfial rcguLuory law, il is easier to use the ( ahIc of Federal Regu
lations than the Federal Register.
/ W'hen reviewing a statute, do not limit \ our focus to a specific section. Remember,
a section is one part ol an entire act that usual!}' contains se\eral statutor}' sections.
Read a section in the context oft he entire act. Be sure }'ou are familiar with all the
sections oft he act; there ma}' be another section, such as a definitions section, that
affects the interpretation ot the statute }'ou are reading.
W'hen }'ou find a statute that appears to appl}', do not stop }'our research. In many
instances, more than one statute or legislative act applies to a specific question or
fact situation.
Read statutes carefulK' and slowK'. Se\'cral readings ma}' be necessary. You ma}' have
to make a chart or diagram of'tiie \ arious sections and subsections of a statute ft)
gain an understanding ofthe operation oft he statute.
/ All the words of a statute base meaning. If a word does not seem necessary or ap
pears repetitix'C, }'ou ma}' ha\e niisread the statute. Read it again, Cxinsult a second
ary source that contains a discussion or interpretation of the statute.
Do not assume }ou know the meaning of a woril, Man}' statutor}' words are terms of
art, loaded with meaning. CTieck the definitions section of the statute, case law, or a
legal dictionar}' to ensure }'ou gi\e the correct meaning to a term.
Ihe plain meaning of a st.itute goxerns its statutor\' interpretaticin. It the nieaning is
clear, the statute is not subiect to interjiretation.
/ It the statute is unclear or ambiguous, look to other sources for guidance, such as
legislative histor}- or applicable canons of construction. .Are there court opinions
that interpret the statute? .Are there secondar} sources, such as law re\'iew articles or
enc}'clopedia sections, that discuss the statute?
IX. APPLICATION
T he application ol the principles ol statutor} anaKsis is illustrated in the following
examples.
A. C h a p te r H y p o th e tic a l
In the hypothetical situation presented at the beginning of'the chapten Alan’s assignment
is to determine if Mrs. Jackson has a cause of action against Beaut}- (âre Beauty Sak'ii for
breach of warrant}- under the sales pro\isions o f t h e state’s comn-iercial code, 'Ihe scope
of his research has been narrowed greatk b}- the assignment. He needs tolocate the sales
pro\isions oft he commercial code, then identil}- the statutes that address warranties, Alan
can look for \'arious terms in the index oft he statutes, such as .<ale<, eonnnereial code, war-
rantici. and contracts. I le ma\- k)ok to the popular name table for conimercial code, or sales
of goods. If !ie is conducting research electronicall}-, he may begin w ith the terms contracts,
sales, and warranties.
His research turns up five sections oft he state’s Commercial Côde Sales Act that may
apply;
Section 29-2-102 prov ides that the act applies to the sale ol'goods onh'; ser\'ices are
specifically excluded b}' the act.
Section 29-2-105 defines as "all things which are mo\-able at the tinie of the
contract ktr sale."
Section 29-2-313 prov ides that an express warrant}- is created b}- aseller’s afhrma-
tion of fact or promise that relates to the qualit} ofthe goods.
Section 29-2-311 states tliat “a warranty that the goods shall be merchantable is implied
in a contract tor their sale it’the seller is a merchant with respect to goods of that kind.”
Section 29-2-315 pro\'ides: “Where the seller at the time ol ct>ntracting has reason to
know an\ particular pLU'pose t’or which the goods are required and that the buyer is
relying on the seller's skill or judgment to select or furnish suitable goods, there is a
warrant\' that the goods shall be fit for such purpose.”
Alter conducting research on how to analyze statutory law, Alan applies the steps rec
ommended in this chapter.
STEP 1. Determine If the Statute Applies

W'hen re\ iewing t h e s t a t u t e s , Alan n o t e s that § 29-2-102 provides that t h e Commercial Code
Sales Act oiik applies to the sale ot goods. It this transaction is in)t a sale of goods, then neither
t h e S t a t L i t e nor t h e warrant)' prcn'isions o f t h e act appk.
Section 29-2-105 defines goods as “all things which are movable. . . . ” Ihis definition is
of no help. Is a permanent hair treatment movable within the meaning of the act? hi this ca.se,
both goods and services are invok ed. Ihe service portion, the beautician applying the perma
nent, does not appear to be goods within the meaning ofthe statute, but is clearly a ser\’ice.
Ihe invoice, howe\-er, shows that Mrs. lackson paid S20 for a perm kit. Ihe perm kit is clearly
goods under the act. ihe transaction is a nii.xed transaction in\’olving both sen-ices and goods.
Alan’s review of the statute indicates that there is no section addressing mixed transactions.
Because the statute does not gi\'e guidance concerning nii.xed transactions, Alan must
refer to case law. In the case oililic i'. American Saloon, the court prcnides guidance for deter
mining when a mixed transaction is a sale ot goods covered b\' the Côniniercial Code Sales Act.
In lUie, the court adopted what it called the predominant factor test. Under this test, the
nature ofthe contract will be determined b\- what predominates. If the transaction involves
primarih’a ser\ice, it is a ser\ice contract and not covered by the act. If the transaction involves
priniarih' the sale ot goods, it is a sale ot goods and is co\'ered by the act. In its discussion «1
the application ot the test, the court stated that the bill or receipt should be examined. If the
largest portion ofthe bill applies to the cost ofthe goods sold, the transaction is predominately
a sale of goods and the act a|iplies. If the majority ofthe bill applies to the services provided,
the transaction is a serv ice transaction, not covered by the act.
Applying this test to Mrs. lackson’s tacts, the bill clearly indicates that the largest portion
ot the transaction applied to the ser\’ice of giving the permanent. Ihe salon charged $29 for
the perm kit (goods) and S80 tor giv ing the permanent (serv ices). Alan concludes that under
the predominant factor test, the service predominates the transaction; thus, this appears to
be a service contract not covered b\- the act. After performing step 1, Alan concludes that no
warrant)- relief is available against Beauty Care Beaut)' Salon because the Commercial Code
Sales Act does not apply to the transaction.
Alan’s conclusion is based on his interpretation of the law. Because he is new at statu
tory analysis, however, Alan knows his analysis could be wrong. To be on the safe side, he
continues his analysis in order to provide his supervisory attorney a complete review of the
law. Alan proceeds to steps 2 and 3.
STEP 2. Analyze the Statute

If the act does apply—that is, if the conclusion is that the transaction is a sale of goods
rather than a service—which of the warranty remedies, if any, would be available to
Mrs. lackson? Alan carefully reads the statute and determines that the three warranties in
cluded in § 29-2-313, § 29-2-314, and § 29-2-315 are the only possible warranties available
in the act. W'hich of these would apply?
(Hearlv § 29-2-313 and § 29-2-313 would not apph'. Section 29-2-313 requires same
affirmation or promise by the seller relating to the quality o f t h e goods. In Mrs. J a c b o n’s
94
case, there was no statement by the beautician, either oral or written, concerning the qu.Uity
CHAPTER 3 CON STITU TIONS, STATUTES, A D M IN IS T R A T IV E LAW, A N D COURT RULES RESEARCH A N D ANALYSIS
o ft h e permanent. Seetiiin 29-2 313 also would not apply, as Mrs, lackson tlitl not comnui-
nicate any particular purpose tor which the goods were required. Also, there are no lacts to
indicate that she in any wav relied on the beautician’s expertise in selecting the permanent,
although it could be argued that this is implicit in getting a permanent. I'o be on the sate side,
Alan reviews the courts’ interpretation ot'the term particularpitrpoic. lhe case law indicates
that the term refers to a unique and specific purpose for which the goods are required that is
clearh’ and specificalh' communicated b\’ the bu\'er to the seller, lhe facts in Mrs. lackson’s
case show there was no specific communication.
.Alan’s last hope is § 29-2-314. He reads the statute and identihes the following as the
elements of an implied warrantv of merchantabilit)’:
1. 'Ihe transaction must be a contract for the sale of goods.
2. The seller must be a merchant of those goods.
On the face of it, it appears that this statute would apply. Alan proceeds to step 3.
STEP 3. Apply the Statute to the Legal Problem or Issue

Alan applies the statute to the problem thrt)ugh the use ot a chart.
STATUTORY ELEMENTS FACTS OF CLIENT’S CASE

1. Contract for sale of goods. .Assuming that the predominant tactor test led to the
conclusion that this transaction is a sale ot goods, not
services, then this is a sale-of-goods transaction.
2. Seller is a merchant of The act defines merchant as a person who deals in goods
those goods. ofthe kind sold. If the beaut\' salon and the beautician
routinely sell perm kits, then the seller is a “merchant.”
In Mrs. lackson’s case, the salon routineh sells perm
kits when it charges for them as part ot'a permanent.
Iherefore, the seller is a “merchant.”
Atfer performing this step, Alan can reach a conclusion as tii whether tbe statute applies
and wTiclhcv Mvs. )asks()n has a âuso oi ioibvcadt oi wavi wnu under § i*-) 2 31 i.
Assuming that the transaction is a sale of goods, which is doubttui in light oj the coiicluiioii
reached in step /, it appears that the statute would apply: 'Ihere was a contract lor the sale ot
goods b\' a merchant of those goods.
Under § 29-2-314, the seller warrants that the goods are merchantable, which is detinetl
in case law as meaning “lit tor the ordinary purposes tor which such goods are used. ” In Mi s.
lackson’s case, the goods ob\ iously were not ht tor their ordinar\- purpose. 11er hair changed
color and broke otL If § 29-2 -314 applies, Mrs. lackson clearly has a claim tor breach ol
warranty. Remember, however, the conclusion in step 1 was that § 29-2-314 does not apph'
because the transaction was probably a sale ot a service, not goods. Note: Alan went through
steps 2 and 3 because he is new at statutory analysis and wanted to make sure his anah sis was
correct. An experienced researcher would stop at step 1.
B. W i ll R e vo c a tio n S ta tu te
Section 30-3 ofthe state statutes is the applicable statute in this example. It provides as follows:
No will in writing, nor any part thereof, shall be revoked unless, with the intent tt)
revoke, the testator:
a. executes a subsequent will or codicil,
b. prepares a writing declaring an intention to revoke the same which is executed
in a manner in which a will is required to be executed, or
c. the testator or some person in the testator’s presence and by the testator's direc
tion . . . cancels, or destroys the same with the intent to revoke. gg
Ihc tollowing facts apph' in this example. Before Marv (llenn died, she directed her
brother, Tom (ilenn, to cancel her will. Because she was too weak to write, she directed her
brother to cancel the will by writing across the ñrst page, “I hereb\- revoke this will. It is m\'
intent that this will be no longer \ alid. I direct m\' brother to do this because 1 can no longer
write.” Tom took the will lo Mar\’’s kitchen, a room adiacent to her bedroom, and wrote what
Mar\- had requested on the first page oft he will and added, “This was done at the request of
Marv Glenn by me, T'om (ilenn.”
Was the will \-ahdl\- re\(iked under the terms oft he statute?
STEP 1. Determine If the Statute Applies

The statute appears on its face to a p pk to this fact situation. The statute governs will revoca
tions, and this is an attempted re\’ocation.
STEP 2. Read and Analyze the Statute

After a careful reading, the statute can be analyzed and the required elements identified. The
statute pro\ ides three ways in which a written will can be revoked:
1. B\’ a subsequent will or codicil e.xecuted b\' the testator, with the intent to re\ oke
the prior will
2. B\' a writing intended to re\oke the will, executed in the same manner as a will is
reqLiired to be execLited
B\’ the testator or some person in the testator’s presence and b\’ the testator’s d i
rection canceling or destroying the will with the intent to ie\’oke
STEP 3. Apply the Statute to the Legal Problem or Issue

WTien the statute is applied to the lact situation, it appears that subsections (a) and (b) clearK'
do not apply. Subsection (a) requires a subsequent will or codicil, neither of which is pres
ent in Mar\' (ilenn’s case. Subsection (b) requires a writing resoking the will, executed in a
manner in which a will must be executed. Assimie that research re\eals that the state statutes
require a will to be witnessed b\- two witnesses. There were no witnesses in this case. The
requirements of this subsection are not met because the writing by Tom was not executed in
the required mannei'.
If there is a \’alid rex'ocation undei' the statute, it can h a\ e occurred onh' under the
cancellation provisions ot SLibsection (c). I'or a revocation to occur under subsection (c), the
following elements must be met:
1. The testator or some person
a. In the presence of the testator, and
b. B\' the testator’s direction
2. C'ancels or destroys the will
3. W'ith the intent to re\'oke
In this example, the required elements of the statute will be applied to the facts o ft he
case in a different wa\' than in the previous example. In the previous example, a chart was
used; here a narrati\ e summary is used:
1. Testator or sonic person. Ihe requirements of this element are met. Ihe testator
did not cancel the will but “some person,” her brother, did.
a. In the presence ofthe testator. It is questionable wTiether this element is met.
Does “in the testator’s presence” mean actual pln-sical presence in the same
room? If the person canceling the will is in an adjacent room, is that “in the
96
C H A P T E R 3 CO N STITU TION S , STATUTES, A D M IN IS T R A T IV E LAW, A N D COURT RULES - RESEARCH A N D AN A LY S IS
testator's presence"? 11 the statute does ncit define the term prcscncc. case law
must be consulted. It the courts have not interpreted the term, the legislatise
histor\- ot'the act ma\- shed some light,
b. By the direction of the tcstutor. Ihis element is met. Marv (ilenn directed her
brother to revoke the will.
2. Cniiccls or destroys the will. Ihis element appears to be met. 'Ihe language clearK’
re\'okes the will and appears on the will itself. 'Ihe statute does not reo,uire that
the revocation language appear on a specific page ofthe will such as the signature
page. C;ase law should be consulted to see if the courts ha\'e established where the
re\’ocation language must be placed.
With the intent to revoke. Ihis element is met. Ihe intent to re'.'oke is clearly indi
cated in the language Mar\- (ilenn chose.
Ihe conclusion is that the statute applies, and the will has been re\'oked if the presence
requirement is met and if cancellation language is eff'ecti\'e when placed on the first page of
a will. By t'ollowing the three steps recommended, sub.sections (a) and (b) ofthe statute were
eliminated from consideration, and subsection (c), which could possibly apph', was identi
fied. Ihe application analysis helps t'ocus the attention on what research is needed to reach
a final conclusion. Note that the final conclusion cannot be reached in step 3 until research
is conducted to determine what “in the testator’s presence” requires under the statute. 'Ihe
research should begin with a re\’iew of the case annotatiiMis tollowing the statute to determine
if a court has interpreted “in the testator’s presence.”
Sum m ary
Ihis chapter focuses on how to research and anal\/e enacted law and court rules. 'Ihe prin
ciples presented in the chapter apph' to the research and anah’sis of constitutions, statutor}'
law, admiiiistiative law, and coLU't rules.
•\n iiicreasingh' expanding source i>t law in the Ihiited States is statuti'r\' law, Ihis
bod\- ol law assumes a greater role because iiian\' matters once covered b}' the case law
are now addressed b\' state and federal legislative bodies, .-\s a result ot this growth, re
searchers are more frequenth' engaged in anah'zing legal problems and issues governed
h}' statutor}' law.
StatLitoi'}' research is the process of findiiig the statutor}' law that applies to a problem.
Most federal and state laws are orgaiii'/.ed according to topic (codified) and published with
annotations, Ihe beginning step of all research, including statutor}' research, is to identify
what }'ou are looking for as precisely and na r rowk as possible. Most statutes are located
through use of the general index, although the}' also niay be found through use of the table
ot contents or the popular name table.
■Administrative law is the body oflaw consistii'ig ofthe rules and regulations of adniin-
istrative agencies and the court opiiiions interpreting them. The main research source for
locatiiig federal adniinistrati\ e law is the ( '.ode of Federal Regulations, ('ourt rules regulate
the conduct of matters brought before the court.
Ihe analysis ot enacted law and court rules is the process of determining if a law a p
plies, how it applies, and the effect of that application. For the sake of'clarit}', the chapter
discussion and examples focus upon the anah'sis of laws passed b}' legislati\'e bodies, called
statutor}' law. A prerequisite to analyzing a law is a faniiliant}' with the parts or components
of the law.
Ihe niost efiicierit wav to address a problem inx'oh'ing a statute is to ha\'e a process for
or an approach to statutor}' analysis. Ihis chapter presents a three-step approach.
97
ihc first step is to determine whether tiie statute governs the situation in any way. liiis
step involves locating all the possible statutes that may apply, then deciding which apph' to
the facts raised by the legal prt)blcm.
lhe second step is to carefulK' read the statute and identity what is rec]uired tor the
statute to apply. 'Ihese requirements are usualh’ referred to as the elements of the statute.
A carelul analysis may require several readings o ft h e statute and reference to interpreta
tive sources such as court opinions, or secondary sources such as treatises and law review’
articles.
lhe third step is to apph' tiie elenients to the facts o f t h e legal probleni. 'Ihis iiivolves
matching the elenients ofthe statute to the facts ofthe case and determining how the statute
applies.
When engaging in statutorv’ analysis, it is important to be mindful of certain guide
lines. i\h)st of these come into play w hen the meaning of a statute is unclear or ambi gu
ous. In addition to court opinions, w hich give guidance to the interpretation of a statute,
legislativ’e history and canons of construction may be consuUed. Legislative historx’ is
composed of all the legislative material and records concerning a statute before it became
law. (' anons of construction are guidelines developed b\’ courts for use in interpreting
ambiguous statutes, 'lliese scuirces should not be used if the meaning ot the statute is
clear on its face.
lhe ease w’ith which \’ou aie able to locate and analy/c statutes increases w ith practice,
lhe more you read and analyze statutes, the easier it becomes, lhe exercises at the end of this
chapter may prove helpful in this regard.
Quick References
Administrative law 76 Or 86
Anah'sis process .S3 Plain meaning rule 90
And S6 Purpose clause 62
(Canons ot construction 91 Refcrencc intormation (^}
(;hart format s.s Scope 62
Court rules ,S1 Shall 86
Definitions [statutoryl 6.^ Short title 62
Lthics 76 Slip law 64
I.egislativ’e history 91 Statutorv’ anah sis 35
Local rules 83 Statutorv’ elements 87
May 86 Statutorv- law
Narrative summary 89 Statut(irv’ research 6-1
Number 62
In t e r n e t Resources
h ttp ://w w w .la w .c o r n e ll.e d u
Ihrough this site, maintained by Clornell l.aw School, \’ou may obtain the ('ode of Federal
Rcgidations, the federal Rules of ( j \ ’il and ('rhninal Procedure, and other court rules, lhe
L'liiled Stales C.ode is also available at this site.
h tt p :// WWW. fi n d Iaw. co m
l indl.aw is an excellent source for locating state statutes. Simply type in the name of the
state you are researching, ('ourt rules and some state administrative regulations ma}’ also
be found at this site,
h 11p :/ / W'w w. Ia w so n Ii IIe.c o m
This site provides links to state and lederal law sources.
http://wvvw.gpo.gov
This Go\ernment Printing Otfice site provides access to the L'nited States (,'odc, the (,'odc
of Federal Regulations, the Federal Register, and luniierous other docimients.
h 11p :/ / w w w. h o u se.go
This site is the home page tor the L'nited States House ot Representati\'es.
http:// w'ww. se nate. go v
This site is the home page for the L'nited States Senate.
http://www.copy right.gov
This is the site lor the Librar\’ ot (Congress,
http:// u'Avw. reg u la t io n s.go\-
Ihis is an online source tor L'.S. goxei nment regulations from nearly .^00 federal agencies.
S t a t u to r y Citation
Ihe Bluebook and .4/.U'/) ('ilation .Mainial rules goxerning statutor)' citation are discussed
in ('Tiapter 8. If'the document \’ou are working on may be tiled in a court, such as a state su
preme court, check the cinu't rules I'oi'an\' citationrule that ma\- differ from the Bluehook or
the AI.WD. Ihe following are examples ol tederal and state citations.
A. Cônstitiitions
U.S. Const. Art. I\' «

N.M. (j)nst. Art. 1\' ^ 1
U. I cilcral Citation
18 L.'.S.C. § f 1 12 (1994) United States Code
S U.S.C..-\. § 1 112 (West 1996) i'inted States Code Annotated
18 U.S.C^S. § II 12 (l.awNcrs (ô-op. 1994) United States ('ode Service
C. S ta te S ta tu te s
Ind. Code Ann. § 26 1-2-313 (Midiie 1992)
Cal. Com. Code § 2314 (West 1964)
(ôlo. Rev Stat. Ann. 19-2-919 (West 1999)
I). A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Law
7 C.L'.R. pt. 213 (2001)

66 Fed. Reg. 34636 (2001)
E. C o u r t R u les
Ihe rules are cited according to Bltiebook format, see Chapter 8 for additional information
on citing rules.
Fed. R. Civ P 4
Fed. R. O i m . P. 18
100 PART II LEGAL RESEARCH
Exercises
Additional assignments are available ou the CourseMate. Q u estio n s
ASSIGNMENT 1 a. W'hat arc the required elements of'arson?

Mar\ and Ibm have hved together tor eight years in the b. Tom breaks into a neighbor's barn, sets otl 20 sticks of
state, but they have never married. Ihey are buying a dvnamite, and blows up the barn, lhe barn docs not
h ome together and they share a checking and savings catcii fire, but it is blown to small bits and complctch’
account. Do the laws ot'your state recognize common destroN'cd. Has Tom committed arson? W'h\'?
law marriage? If so, do Tom and Mary have a common c. Lois breaks into a house intending to steal cash and
law marriage? jewclrv'. She lights a match to locate a safe. She drops
the match, it tails in a trashcan, and the house catches
ASSIGNM ENT 2
fire. Has Lois committed arson? W'h\ ?
Irene has good credit and a good job. She believes that a
landlord refused to rent her an apartment because she is a d. Dai's Diner is losing mone\' and about to go out ot
single woman. Refer to either the i ’SCA or the L'SCS, and business. Dai and Steve own the building where the
identify the federal law that governs this. diner is located. One evening Dai sets the building on
fire in order to collect the insurance on the building.
ASSIGNM ENTS 1las Dai committed arson? W’h\ ?
Refer to the USCA. W'hat is the delinition of a “digital audio
ASSIGNM ENTS
recording device” under the copv'right law?
Answer the questions in assignment (S using your state law
ASSIGNMENT 4 governing arson.
Refer to the USCS. Cite the title and section ofthe code that
ASSIGNMENT 10
addresses equal opportunity in contract solicitation, hous
ing, and community dcvek)pment b\' the I'ederal Home W'hat, if an\, federal regulation applies to environmental
Loan Mortgage Corporation. impact statements for activities in .Antarctica?
ASSIGNM ENTS ASSIGNMENT 11

W'hat is the authorized term of imprisonment for a Refer to the iederid Register for 200f. On what page ofthe
Class A felony imder I'itle IS ol the L'nited Slates ('i)iic? / Vilcrui Regisler is the Drug Lntiuccnicnt .\diiunislratiinVs
Cite the title and section. proposed rule lor schctlules of controlled substances (.lis
tributed bv electronic commerce?
ASSIGNM ENTS
ASSIGNMENT 12
Refer to the Fifth Amendment to the United States (Con
stitution in the USCA. CCite a 1967 United States Supreme Statute: Section 30-1-6, Nuncupative Wills
CCourt decision addressing the applicability ofthe privilege A. A nuncupative will may be made only b\- a person
against self-incrimination in the case ol juveniles. in imminent peril of death and shall be valid only if
the testator died as a result of the impending pei il,
ASSIGNM ENT?
and must be:
Look up a statute in your state and identify the component
parts. You may find it on the Web at http://www.findlaw. 1. Declared to be his last will by the testator before
com (from the home page, locate “Learn More About” two disinterested witnesses;
and click on “State Laws”) or look up the statute at a local 2. Reduced to writing b\' or under the direction of
law or public library (most public libraries ha\e the state one of the witnesses within 30 days after such
statutes). declaratii)n; and
'lhe following exercises present a statute followed by ques 3. Submitted tor probate within six months attei' the
tions concerning the statute. death oft he testator.
ASSIGNM ENTS B. 'Ihe nuncupative will ma\' dispose of personal prop-

ert\' t)nh' and to an aggregate value not exceeding
Statute: Criminal Code Section 20-4-102, Arson
SLOOO.
A person who knowingly sets tire to, burns, causes to
be burned, or by use of any e.xplosive, damages or destrov's, C. A nuncupative will does not revoke an existing
or causes to be damaged or destroyed, an\- property of written will. Such written will is changed onlv to the
another without his consent commits arson. extent necessary to give effect to the nuncupative will.
Xotc. A nuncupiiti\ e is an oral will, a will that is not c. Mar\’ orally contracts to buy 10 car tires at S70 each.
written. The seller prepares a contract and gi\-es it to Mar\-.
Neither part\- signs the contract.
Q u e stio n s
1. W’ho can enforce the contract under the pro\ i-
a, To what type ot will docs this statute apph ? sions ofthe statute?
b, W’hat reqLiirenients must he met for a nuncupative 2. .Assume that only Mary signs the contract. Who
will to be valid, that is, what are the elements? can enforce the contract?
c, Mr, Lang, on his deathbed, writes his will on a piece L’ S
of notepaper, signs it, and deli\'ers it to his sister for written contract incorreclK pro\ides tor 9 tires
safekeeping. Does the statute govern the validity of at S70 each. Is the contract enforceable under the
this will? statute? If so, to what extent is it enforceable?
d, l.arry, on his deathbed, declares that it is his will 4. .Assume both parties sign the contract and it
and that ali his property should go to his girlfriend, reads 15 tires at S70 each. Is the contract enforce
Beth. Ihree witnesses are present: Beth, l.arr\’s sister able under the statute? If so, to what e.xtent is it
Mar\’, and the next-doiir neighbor, Tom. Tom is in enforceable?
an adjoining room. Ihe door to the adjoining room
5. Assume there is no written contract, 'ihe seller
is open. I'om hears what Larr\’ is sa\ ing. Assume tor
hands Mary a slip of paper upon which he has
the purposes ot this example that the will is reduced
written, “This is to confirm our oral agreement. ”
to writing w ithin 30 da\'s and is submitted for prt)bate
He and Mar\' both sign the paper. Is there an
within (-1 months.
enforceable contract under the pro\'isions o ft he
1. Is this a valid will imder this statute? W'hat ad statute? If so, to what extent is it enforceable?
ditional intormation ma\ ’ be necessar\'?
A SSIG N M EN TS
2. Assume this is a valid will, and also that Larry had
a pre\ ioLis valid written will, W'hat impact does Stdlutc: Section 33-1-4, Pri\'ileged ( ' o m m u n i c a t i o n s —
the nuncupati\-e will ha\-e on the written will? Husband and Wile
W'hat is disposed of by the nuncupative will? In all actions, husband and wife ma\' testif\- for or
against each other, pro\ ided that neither nia\' testily as to
ASSIGNM ENT 13 an\’ communication or admission made b\' either ol them
SocUun 2 2U\, SUUulc of I'lwads lo Vhc olhci duiing ihc niai viagc, cxccpt in actions:
1 he tollowing statute is a section ot the (Commercial a. between such husband and wife, and,
(Code Sales Act adopted b\' the state legislature,
b. where the custod}', support, health or wellare ol their
A contract lor the sale of goods for the price of five children or children in either spouse’s custody or
hundred dollars or more is not enforceable by way control is directh' in issue.
ot action or dctense unless there is some writing
sutficieiit to indicate that a contract lor sale has Q u estio n s
been made between the parties and signed b\- the a. Prepare an outline ot the statutor)’ elements.
party against whom enforcement is sought or by b. When can a husband or wife testify against each
the party’s aLithorized agent or broker, A writ other? When are the\- prohibited from testifying
ing is not insuHicient because it omits or incor- against each other?
rectk states a term agreed upon, but the contract
c. fiusband, while dri\ ing under the intluence ot al
is not enlorceable un(ter this paragraph beyond
cohol, ran a stop sign, and his vehicle collided with
the quantit)’ of goods shown in such writing.
a \ehicle driven by Mr. Smith. Hu s b a n d ’s spouse
Assume that the act applies to the sales of goods, (Wife) and two children were passengers in the car.
(.¡oods are detined in § 2-100 as "those things mo\'able’' Ihe day after the wreck, Llusband told Wife that he
and do not include real property. knew he ran the stop sign because he was drunk.
Mr. Smith sues Husband tor negligence. Whe n
Q u estio n s answering the following questions, identify any a d
a. Does the statute a p p k to the lease ot goods? ditional information that may be necessary to full)’
b. W’hat are the required elements o f t h e statute? In answer the question.
other words, tor a contract tor the sale ol goods ol I. Can Wife be compelled to testif\- concerning her
S500 or more to be enlorceable, what is required? conversation with Husband? Whv or w'hv not?
2. C'an W'ilc \oluntarily testity cdncerning the coii' Q u estio n s
\ ei satioii? Wh\' or wh\- not? a. What is the term of imprisonment for this oflense?
.V It Husband and Wile arc legally separated, can b. How is “domestic assault” defined in this statute?
Wite N'oluntarik testit\’concerning the con\ ersa-
tion? Why or why not? ASSIGNMENT 16
), Is the coinersation admissible il'they are dix’orced Using www.gpo.go\7fdsys, link to the Coiic of Federal Regu
at the time ot the lawsuit? Wh\' or whv not? lations. Select the title “Parks, Forests, and Public Property,”
select the chapter for “Forest Service, Department of Agri
3. Husband and Wife ha\’c li\ed together as hus
culture,” select the part for “Travel Management,” and then
band and wite tor the past 20 years. Thev have
the subpart tor “Designation of Roads, Trails and Areas for
ne\'cr been loi'nially married, ('an Wife testify
Motor Vehicle Use.”
against Husband concerning the con\'ersatioii?
Wh\- or why not? Q u estio n s
6. Is the conversation admissible in a di\’orce action a. What section covers public involvement in decisions?
between Husband and Wife? Why or why not? b. W'hat does that section say about the right of the
ASSIGNMENT 15 public to be involved in determining the use of trails
(io to www.gpo.gov/fdsys/ and link to the United States and roads?
( akIc. Select the year 2010 and locate the statute regarding c. When is absence of public involvement authorized?
the crime ot domestic assault bv a habitual offender.
^ The available Cours eMa t e for this text has an interactive eBook and interactive learning
0 tools, including flash cards, quizzes, and more. To learn more about this resource and access
To access CourseMate mat er i a l st hat you have purchased, g o t o login.cengagebrain.com.
Case Law —Research and Briefing
A f t e r o b t a i n i n g i ii i a s s c K i a t o ’s d e g r e e in p a r a le g a l s t u d ie s , \ a n e s s a t o o k t im e o t i to h e w it h lo s h ,
t h e n e w e s t a d d i t i o n l o h e r t a n iily . lo s h w a s h o r n t h r e e d a \ s a t te r \ a n e s s a s la s t f in a l e .\ a n iin a
Outline
t i o n . S h e vva,s g la d h e w a it e d u n t i l f in a ls w e r e o v e r , \ a n e s s a d e c i d e d it w a s i m p o r t a n t to g i \ e I. Introduction
l o s h h e r l u l l a t t e n t io n f o r a s lo n g a s s h e e o u ld . S h e w a s l i n a n e i a l K in a p o s i t i o n to t a k e a \ e a r II, (ôiirt Opinions—In (¡eneral
o ti frt)m w o r k .
111. Côiirt Opinions - Importance
.•\fter t h e y e a r h a d p a s s e d , a l a r g e law f ir m h ir e d \ 'a n e s s a a n d a s s i g n e d h e r to t h e t o r t s
1\', C'ourt Opinions—ITements
s e c t io n o f t h e p a r a le g a l d e p a r t m e n t . H e r tir s t a s s i g n m e n t w a s to lo c a t e a n d h r ie f a e a s e th a t
c o u l d b e u s e d in a r e s p o n s e t o a m o t i o n to d i s m i s s . I h e e lie iit f ile d a h a t t e r v c o m p la in t a g a in s t a

\', Cxuirt Opinions -Researching
b y s t a n d e r w h o e n c o u r a g e d t h e p e r p e t r a t o r in a f ig h i to h it th e c lie n t , la g g e d o n b y th e b \ s ia n d e r , \T. ('ourt Opinions—Briefing
t h e p e r p e t r a t o r a t t a c k e d t h e c li e n t . I h e h x s t a n d e r 's o n l v a c t i o n in t h e f ig h t w a s to s t r o n g h (C;ase Briefing)
e n c o u r a g e th e p e rp e t ra to r. I h e b v s t a n d e r s a t t o r n e x ' f ile d a m o t i o n to d i s m i s s , c l a i m i n g th a t \TI. Key Points (Tu'cklist: Locating,
a p e r s o n w h o o n l\ ' e n c o u r a g e s a h a t t e r \ , h u l d o e s n o l o t h e r w is e p a r t ic ip a t e , c a n n o t b e lia b le Reading, and Briefing (loiirt
fo r b a tte ry Opinion
V a n e s s a k n e w it w a s i m p o r t a n t l o d o a g o o d lo b o n h e r Iir s t a s s i g n m e n t . S h e r e a liz e d \T1I, Application
s h e n e e d e d to r e f r e s h h e r n i e m o r \ o n h o w to lo c a t e a n d b r ie f a c a s e . If h a t i h e e n a l o n g t im e
s in c e s h e h a d r e s e a r c h e d a n d b r ie f e d c a s e s . S h e t h o u g h t fo h e r s e lf , "I lo w d o I f in d a c a s e l h a l
s u p p o r t s o u r p o s it io n ? I lo w d o I b r ie f th e c a s e ''" ( T h e e a s e \ 'a n e s s a lo c a t e d is p r e s e n t e d in s e e f io n
l \ ' o f t h is c h a p t e r ; a ls o se e 1 -A h ib it t - 1. H e r m e ih o d o f l o c a t i n g a n d b r i e l i n g il is p r e s e n le d m Learning Objectives

s e c t io n \ 111 o f t h is c h a p t e r .I
Alter completing this chapter, you
should understand'.
• The role and importance of court
opinions
• The elements of a court opinion
• How to find court opinions
• The role and importance of a case
brief
• The elements of a case brief
• How to brief a case
103
llic tocus ot this chaptcr is on court opinions—their elements, where the\' are publi:shed,
how to tmd them, and how to read and hriet them, lhe chapter addresses the same cjucs.tiiuis
X'anessa taced when undertaking her assignment; that is, what are the elements I't i.'ourt
opinions, where arc opinions published, how to find them, and how to brief them. Ihrouighout
this chapter, a court opinion will be referred to as a court ciisc and a brief of a court op inion
w ill be referred to as a disc brief. Chapter 12 discusses case law analysis, ('ase law anah sis is
the process \ou engage in to determine if a court opinion gov erns or applies to a client’s case,
that is, if a case is on point.
II. C O U R T O P I N I O N S — I N G E N E R A L
As discussed in Clhapter 1, the two major sources of law are enacted law (e.g., constitutions,
laws enacted bv legislative bodies, administratix'c regulations) and case law. C a se law is the
body of law on a particular subject created by court opinions and is commonly referred to
as co m m on law or jiidgc-iinuic law. ('ase law is the most commonh' used term and w ill be
used throughout this chapter, ('ase law is found in the written opinions of the courts.
(Case law consists ofthe law made b\’ courts when the\' interpret existing law or create
new law. It is composed of th e legal rules, doctrines, and principles adopted b\' the courts.
(Courts otfcii announce rules ol law when interpreting statutorv' or constitutional provisions
or create new law when there is no statutorv' or constitutional law governing a legal dispute.
For Example Statutory Interpretation:

A s ta t ut e uses t he t e r m p u b l i c a t i o n but fails to de f i ne it. T h e cour t ,
a ddre ss i ng the issue of w h a t const i tut es publ i cati on, a n n o u n c e s a rule of l a w t h at trie
t e r m p u b lic atio n as used in the stat ute m e a n s " c o m m u n i c a t i o n to a third party."
For Example Creating Law:

A state has not e n a c t e d legi sl ati on r ecog ni zi ng strict liability as a c a u s e of
acti on in tort. The highest court in the state, in a c a s e be fo r e it, a n n o u n c e s a rule of l a w
adopti ng strict liability as a c au s e of act i on in t he state.
A court opinion is the court s written statement explaining its decision in a case. It is
the court’s resolution oft he legal dispute before the court and the reasons in support of its
resolution. It usuallv includes a statement of facts, points or rules of law, and rationale.
Often the terms courl opinion, ease, and decisiou arc used interchangeabh' to refer to a
court's resolution of an issue or a decision in a dispute. In this chapter, the terms courl opinion
and case are used to refer to the written opinion of a court.
For Example "The c as e stands for t he pri nci pl e t h a t . . . "

"The cour t opi ni on hol ds t h a t f l ag - bu rn i n g is p r o t e c te d u n d e r t he
f r e e d o m of s p e e c h provisions of the First A m e n d m e n t . "
III. C O U R T O P I N I O N S — I M P O R T A N C E
o t the two major sources ot law, enacteci law and case (common) law, case law constitutes the
largest bodv' of law, far larger in volume than constitutional or statutory law. It is essential to
acquire a general familiaritv' with this body of law, as it represents such a large portion ofthe
104 law. Also, vou must studv' case law because so manv' areas of law are governed bv' it.
C H A PTER 4 CASE L A W - R E S E A R C H A N D BRIEFING
Ihere are nuiiier<uis additional reascins \vh\ reading and analy zing ccnirt opinions and
studying case law are important. Overall, the major reasons are as lollows:
1. To learn the caic liiw. Much o ft he law is court made. To determine the elements
ot a cause ot action tor a court-made law, you must refer to case law'. Case law
may govern your client’s fact situation, and to determine what law applies and the
probable outcome, you must analyze case law.
For Example In most states, the c ause of action for civil battery is a creation of
c as e law, not stat utory law. To identify the e l e m en t s n e c e s s a r y
to state a battery claim, the c a s e l a w must be r e se ar c h e d.
2. To interpret constitutional or statutory law. Court opinions often announce rules

ofl aw that govern how a statutory or constitutional term or provision is inter
preted or applied. ’Iherefore, you must consult case law to understand how to
interpret and apply statutes and constitutional provisions.
For Example T he Uni ted St a te s S u p r e m e Court has i ssued m a n y opinions

on t he t y p e s of s p e e c h p r o t e c t e d by t h e First A m e n d m e n t .
To d e t e r mi n e if an individual w h o burns a state flag in front o f t h e state capital
is protected b y t h e First A m e n d m e n t ' s fr e e d o m of s p ee ch provisions. Su p r eme
Court opinions interpreti ng f r e e d o m of s p e e c h must be consult ed.
To understand the litigiition process. (Court opinions often address legal questions
that arise in the context o f t h e lifigatitMi process—either before, during, or after
trial. (Court opinions give insight into the process by explaining what conduct is
appropriate, which arguments are successful, where errors arc made, how proce-
dtiral rules apply, how trials and motion hearings should proceed, and so on.
To gain insight into legal aiuilysis. In a coiu't opinion, the court often analyzes the
law. 'Ihe ciHirt discusses what law applies, how it applies, the reasons for its ap
plication, and how the reasons operate to go\ ern the application of the law to the
tacts ot the case. B\' studying court opinions, vou learn how to assemble a legal ar
gument, how to determine if a law applies, and how to support a legal argument.
To develop legal writing skills, fudges are usually experienced in legal writing, and
most opinions are w'ell written. You may read opinions with an eye to how sen
tences and paragraphs are structured, how case law and statutory kuv are referred
to and incorporated into legal writing, and how transitions are accomplished. If
\’0 u have a problem putting some aspect of \x)ur research into writing, look at an
opinion to see how a court handled a similar matter.
For Example You are prepari ng a r ese ar ch m em o r a n d um . T h e r e is no case

l a w in your jurisdiction governing the issue; howev er , t here is
strong persuasive p r e c e d e n t fr om a not he r jurisdiction. You are unsure about
h o w t o introduce t he persuasi ve p r e c e d e n t in your m e m o r a n d um. By reading a
court opinion in w h i c h the court relied on persuasive precedent, you can study
the l anguage the court used to i ntr oduce the persuasive p r e ce de nt and use the
court's language as a guide after w h i c h to model your introduction.
105
For Example In Sm ith 1/. J o n es , the court stat ed, " T h e r e is no c a s e l a w in

this j uri sdicti on i nt erpret i ng the t e r m ' publ i cat i on' as used in
§ 5 5- 5 -6 7A . T h e state of Texas, h o w e v e r , has an identi cal stat ute, and the
S u p r e m e Court of Texas, in the cas e of Frank v. Inex, m t e rpr e te d 'publi cation'
to m e a n c o m m u n i c a t i o n to a third party." You c an use this l a n g u a g e as a
gui de in y o u r i nt r oduct i on of p e r su as iv e p r e c e d e n t .
l-'or these reasons and nian\- otliers, the stutly ot'case law is important. Ihe skill ot being
able to correctly locate, anahv.e, and a pp k case law is essential to legal anah sis.
IV. C O U R T O P I N I O N S — E L E M E N T S
A. In G e n e ra l
The first reciuirement tor proper anaKsis ol a court opinion is lo be familiar with ihe
elements of an opinion. A court opinion usualK' includes some or all ol the tollowing
components;
1. 'Ihe facts that gave rise lo the legal dispute bek)re the court
2. 'Ihe procedural history and postuie o ft h e case—that is, uhat happeneil in the
lower court or courts, w ho appealed the decision, and wh\
3. Ihe issue or issues addressed and resoKed by the court
4. Ihe rule ot law that go\’erns the dispute
5. 'Ihe application ofthe rule oflaw to the facts—in other words, the holding
6. Ihe reason or reasons supporting the coLu't’s application ot the rule ot law to the
facts, that is, why the court decided as il ditl
7. Ihe relief granted ordenieil (e.g., “ 1he jiulgmenl of the trial cmn't is upheld.")
B. E le m e n ts o f a R e p o rte d Case
West, a Ihomson Reuters biisiness that publishes the regional reporters aiul most ol the
lederal reporters, Iollows a unilorm lormal when publishing court opimons. I.exisNexis
follows a similar format in its publication o{ Siiprciiic C,oiirt Reports —Ltin’vcr'i Fditiott.
Because the majoritv ol court opinions are published by West, an example ol an opinion
published by West is presented in I'xhibit 1-1. Ihe case, Rad r. (Auiciia, is published in
the New Mexico Reports and the Pacific Reporter. Note that the components of the case
are identified in the left margin next to each section ot the opinion. Ihese components are
summarized in the following text.
1. Citation
Ihe citation refers to the volume number, page number, and the name ofthe reportei' where the
case may be found. Ihe citation kir Rael r. (Atdeiia is 93 X.M. 684, 604 R2d 822. 'Ihat means the
printed opinion of this case is published and maybe found in two reporters; \olume93 ofthe \e w
Mexico Reports at page 684, and \-okime 604 ol the Pacific Reporter, second series, at page 822.
(See “Citation” in Exhibit 4-1.) When an opinion may be found in more than one set ol books,
tbe citations are referred to as parallel citations.
CAiurt decisions are increasingly available t hrough court W'eb sites or other
publications. I'hus, public domai n citations, also referred to as neutral citations or
vendor-neutral citations, are often included. I herefore, an additional citation n umber
may be present.
106
CH APTER 4 CASE L A W — RESEARCH A N D BRIEFING
E x h i b i t 4 - 1 Court Opinion — Rael V. Cadena. R epnnted fror^ 604 P a a h c Reporter 2d 822. H979). with
p e r-n ii,sio n from Thom son Reuters.
604 !>A( IFK I U: rORl 1,11, 2d Sl,-Rir,S S22

CITATION
V 'i \ ,\1, f , S )
E iU lic R A t , L , l ’ la ln t if i- A | ip ( .‘ lk - c ,
CAPTION \*,
t n i i l i o C A D l ’ N .X a iu l M a n u e l C a d c i i a ,
I )<.’ t i ‘ n d a i U s - , \ | i | ) c l l a i i l s ,
N o , '3 9 2 I ,
( o u n o l ,\ | i| K 'a ls o l N e w ,\lL '\ii.'o ,
( K l, ;r î,
I ) c ' t c iu l a i u in a c t i o n to r h a t U 'iA ' a iip ^ 'a U x i t r o i ii ¡ u tl^ -
i i u n l ot t l k ' l ) i s l i ii.I t o u n , V a i f i K ' i a ( o u n [ \ , ( ic 'o n ^ f 11,
I ’r r i v , I,, l i o k l i n i ; l i i n i j o i n i K ' in l ia h k - x \ 'illi l l u ' , K a i \ r |iar-
l ii , i| i a n l , I I l f ( o u n o l , \ p p i, a ls , l . o [ X v , |,, lu -lc l l l i a t d i ’t c ii -
lia n i w h o w lk 'd c ix o u r a ^ i'm c n t to t h e a s s a il a n t w h il e t h e

SYLLABUS
l a t t e r w a s h L 'a t in i; th e \ i t t i i t t w a s j o i i u K ' l ia b le w it h th e
a s s a ila n t l o r t h e h a lli'iN ',
,\t I i l i i i e i l
KEY
NUMBERS A s s a u lt a n d B a lt e r v IS
( i \ i l lia b ilit N l o r a s s a u lt a n d h a t le r x is tio t l i i n i l i \ l l o
t h e d ir e e l [ H a 'p e ir a lo i h u t e x t e n d s to a n \ p t,-rso n w h o Iw
an\ m e a n s , iid s o r e n e o u r a i;e s th e a e l
HEADNOTES ► , \ s s a v iU .v\\d U a l U ' i v IS

,\ llli( ) in ^ h li;ib i! ii\ ' i . i ii n o l 1h’ p r c J i i u p o n h k t i ' [‘»li's-
I ’lU 'c .ll .1 b a l l i ' i x , W 'lh a l r iu n i i i a ^ i , 'n u ' n i a l llu - s(.'i-iu-
i s r to t ia liililN ’; (.Ir U 'iu ia n l w h o \ r l ! i ' i i r i u ( )u i'a \ ^ r n u ’n l l o l l u ‘
a s s a ila n t w h il i' i h r l a l U T w a s b r a l i n i ; l l u ' \ i c l i n i w a s j o i n i K '
[ ia l) lc w it h l l u ‘ a s s a ila n t lo i t h e h a l l i ‘r\-.
^ i. A s s a u lt a n il U a lt e r \ - i5
l e s l i m o n \ h\- \ i e l i i n th a t h is a s s a il a n t 's it n e le \ e l l e i l to
lh e a s s a il a n t , in S p a n i s h , ' K i l l h i m ' " a n t i " M il h in t m o r e ! "
\\ a s s n l l i e i e n i to s u s t a in t i n d in » ih a t th e u n e le \ e r h a l l\ '
e n e o u r a j^ e c l t h e a s s a ila n t to h e .it i h e \ i e t i m a n d t o im p o s e
lia h ilit \ - o n t h e it n e le l o r th e h a t t e r x ;
|<ihn ,\ , liu d .a i;h e r , .\ lliu i| u e t i| u e . lo t

ATTORNEYS d i 'l e n d a t u s - . i p p e l l . u u s ,
Icol I , S t i a n i l , .\ lh u (| u e i(,| u e , l o r p la in t i ll - a p p e ll e e ,
(CoitliiniCii)
107
E x h i b i t 4 - 1 {Continued)
()l’l\l( )N |l'](ii harm ivsullini; Ki a thiril |H'rsim Imiii llu- lor-

JUDGE L O I ’I / ,
iKius cdikIui I of anotlicr, iini' is suhjci'l lo iialiilil\' il lu-
I ) r lc iu la n i L i n i l i n ( a ik - n a . a i ic in - a c . ii\ c p a i l i t ip a n i
in llu - h a lt i 'i A <il p l a i i i l i l l l . i l i l i i ' R a i'i. a p | H 'a K t lu ' jiu li; - ih ) know s th a t th e o t h e r 's e o n d i ie l e o n s t iiu ie s a
n u ’i il o l i Ik ' i i i a l t .o iir i liiu iin v ^ l i i i i i . a lo n i^ w it h t h e a L 't iw h r e a e h o l d iH \ ' a n d ,i;i\ e s s ii h s t a n t ia ! a s s i s ia n e e o r e n e o iir -

BODY OF
a ,i;e m e m t o t h e o t h e r s o t n e o n d u e l h i m s e l l. * * *
THE p a r i il i p a n t . j o i n l K a i u l s i ' w r a l K ' iia b li- l o r i h i ' h a lt c r v . W V
OPINION a llir m . R e sta te m e n t (S e c o n d ) o l liir is S 7 A I I '.• 7')).
I h i- is M k ' o n a p p i- a l is w iu ' t h i T a p e r s o n p r e s e n t a l a |2| , \ l t l i o i i i ; h lia b ilit \ eannot be p r e d ie a l e d upon

b a t le iN w h o \ e r h a l l\ e iu o n r a ^ e s t iie a s s a iL in t . h i ll lio i 's m e r e p r e s e n c e a t a b a t t e r v . D i i h ' , \ n ¡ n d : (i .A m .lt ir ., '-upni.
n o l p h v s iia lK a s s is t h in t , is i . i \ i l l \ ‘ lia b le l o r t h e h a lt e r v . \ e r b a l e n c o u r a g e m e n t a l t h e s c e n e ,i;i\e s r is e to lia h ilit \ ',
( )n a \ i s i i in I ' l i i i l i o ( a i l e n a 's h o m e , l . i k i i e R a e l w a s I l i i n ; i y '.iipni: .4 i'iv; s i i p n i : t h in k, ^ u p n i.
s e \ 'e r e l\ ' h i 'a le n on ih e h e a il a iu l to rso h \' lim ilio 's |,\| p e r s o n n ia \ ' b e h e ld lia b le lo r t h e to r t o l a s s a u lt
n e p h e w , M a i u i e l ( a i l e n a . ,\ s a r e s t ili o l t h e h e a l ii u ; , h e a n d b a t le r \ il h e cit(vuiiii;til o r in c it e d hy n'lvv/s t h e a c t o l th e
s t i l l e n ’il a I r a c t i i r e i l r ih a n d w a s h o s p ita li/ e c .1 . i:i.U lie K .ie l d ir e c t p e r [ie t r a t o r . * * * ( l i m p l i a s i s a d d e d . )
l e s t i l i e i l t h a t o i u e t h e a l t a i' k h a il s i a r t e J , l . m i l i o \ e l l e i l to
Í) A m . l i i r . . siiprii at I O S . B e c a u s e h e \ e lle d e n c o u r a i;e -
M a n u e l in S p . m i s h . " K i l l h im ! " a n j " I lit h im m o r e l" 1he
m ent lo h is n e p h e w w h ile t h e la t t e r w a s b e a l ii ii ; l . d il ie
tr ia l K H in s it lin i; w it h o u t a j ii r x lo iiiu l t h .it la it ilio
R a e l. E m i l i o ( a t le t ia is j o in t h ' lia b le w it h h is n e p h e w lo r
e n e o ii r a ^ e il . \ l. m i ie l w h ile , \ l a n i ie l w as h e a t in i; L d ilie .
t h e b ,itte r\'.
l i . i s e i l o n t h i s l i i u l i n i ; . th e e o u n h e ld tlu - ( a d e n a s j o i n l K
|3| ( ! o i il r a d i c t o r \ ' e\ iiie n c e w a s o lle r e t l a s to w h e t h e i
.'in d si,’\ 'e r .ill\ ' l ia b le l o r i h e h a li i' r w
I ' m i l i o ( a d e n a d i il \ e l l a n \ t h i n i ; d t i r in i ; t h e b e a lin i; . I r i d i e
l - i n i l i o iiii;e s t h .ii in o iile i lo r ih e tr ia l e o iir t lo h a \ e h e ld
Rael c la im e d th a t la n ilio u r i;e d .M a n u e l to beat h im ;
h im j o i n lK ' li.ih le lo i th e h a lt i'i \, il h a d l o t iiu l e it h e r i h a i h e
l . m i l i o t k 'u i e il th .it h e s a id a n \ t h i n ^ ; a i u l .M a n u e l te s iitie i.1
,m d .M .iiu ie l a i le il in e o n e e r t , o r th a t M anuel h e a l a iu l
th a t h e n e \ t 'i h e a r d l . m il io , 1 l o w e \ e i . t h e t r ia l c o u r t l o i i i i d
in it ir e d I d t lie a s a re su lt o l l i ii il io 's i.'n e iiu r a j;e m e n t, I h is is a
th a t l . m i l i o d id v i-r b a lU e i u o u i a ^ e .M a n iu T l o hi-.at i .d d ie .
m is s i.it e m e n t i >1 I h e law.
.M ih o u y h t h e e\ id e n c e w a s in ( . o n l l i i i . l l u ‘ t d v ir l l o u l d l o i i -
I 1 ] I h is is , 111 is s u e o l lir s t im p r e s s io n in N e w ,\ K -\ ie o . c k k le tro m l l u ‘ t e s t iiiio n \ * ot l.d d ii' Rael th a t l.m ilio
11 is t le .il. h o w e\ 11 , I h a t in t h e I n it e d S l.iU 's , i i \ il li;t h ilit \ ( a d e n a \ e r b a lK e n c o u r a ,i;e il h is n e p h e w lo a t t a ik I h is
Im .is s a u ll . i iu l l i. i t t e i \ is n o l l im il e d l o th e iliie e t p e r p e - t e s t in u in \ , it b e lie \ e i.l, is s u b s t a n t ia l e \ i il e i u \ - to s u p p o r t
11 .it o i. I n i l I'M e n d s to .m \ p e l s o n w h o h \ .tn \ m i'.iiis .u d s ot llu - t r ia l c o n n ' s l i i u l i n i ; . It is n o t t h e t u n c l i o n o l t h e .ip p e l-
e iie o u i. n ; e s t h e a e t. I ii ii v i\ r l l i i i i i i i . l! ! l l ,\ i k . )l)2 . i2 'í la te c o u r t t o w c ii;h t h e c \ i d e i n .i - o r it s c i e d i b i l i t \ , o l l o s u b -
s W '. ü d 'M 7 I r i “) ' > l ; . li'iv I- l i i ’hiiht'ii. W i'i ( .li. .A p p .lid 4 2 4 , s l i i u i e it s j u d j ; m e n l l o r th a t o l t h e t r ia l c o u r t . S o k m i; ,ts
1 2 'i I ’ L’d 1 l ( i I I ' H . S ) ; ( iiiilh tdi i r. Ciiiillh'iiii. Viii S o ,2 d i i) 4 t h e l i i u l i i u ; s a r e s u p p o r t e d b\' s u b s t a n t ia l e \ i il e n c e . llie \ '
I k . i. , \ p p , I 7 ( > I; D ii k i' I Iih l n ii i ii . 2 4 ") .M d . 1 ) 1 , 2 2 i i .\ . 2 d w ill s t a n d - ( h I: r. L i p d t i i l i l f l.ifi' .■\s\iii\ .Sue, ol i '.S.. 'M l \ . M .
i 1") I I ' i ( i 7 ) ; liri iik r. I' lin i. H. U>2 ,M ie h . 1 4 7 . 1 2 7 \ . \ V . 4 2 2 I >>5. 3 b 1 l ’ 2 d 4 6 ,S , a-rl. .icnicd. 4 4 4 L ’ .S . ,S’i 4 . ‘ i S S .C t
I I ' M 11); (i ,\ m , | u i,2 d . \ " ( / » / / i i i t d I h i t l t ' i r I 2 S I I '* (> '5 1. (i.\ 1 2 1 . 3 4 L . L d . 2 d ‘r , ( | ' i7 7 ) .
( I . S . A^^ iii ill iiiiil H i i t h r y ^ I i ( I '»7 ) ) ; .\ n n o t . , 7 2 . \ , l . . K . 2 d
1 h e jt n lt ;m e n l o l t h e I r i a l c o u r t is a l Y i r m e i k
1 2 2 '* I I ' H i l l i , , \ e e o i d in ^ l o th e R e s i. it e m e n i:
1 1 IS S O O R D L R t l ) .
SL I i\ a n d . \ \ l ) R k \ V S . ||.. c o n c u r .
108
CHAPTER 4 CASE L A W RESEARCH A N D BRIEFING
For Example State y. Foster, 1998 N M C A - 1 6 3 , 126 N . M . 177,976 P.2d 8 5 2 . 1 9 9 8 - N M C A - 1 6 3

is the public doma i n or v en do r - ne ut r al citation. T h e y e a r published is 1998.
N M C A is the c ourt— the N e w M e x i c o Court of Appea l s. The last number, 163, is the c a s e
n u m b e r In this e x a mpl e t here are t hree parallel citations.
The format for nciitral citatioii.s is discLisscd in greater detail in (Tiapter 8.
2. Caption
The cap tio n includes the names oft he parties to the lawsuit and their court status. Hddie
Rael was the plaintiff at the trial court le\el, and he is the appellee on appeal. (The iippcllcc
is the person against whom the appeal is I'lled, the perscMi who won at the trial court le\el.)
Emilio Cadena was the defendant at the trial court le\-el and is the appellant on appeal. (The
appellant is the person who lost at the trial court level and who tiled the appeal.) Manuel
Cadena is listed as a detendant-appellant, but he is not inx’oh ed in the appeal. The caption of
the case used on appeal is usuaik the same as the caption used in the trial court. The caption
o ft he case in the trial court includes both (ladenas as defendants, and therefore, tlie caption
on appeal is the same. Note that the plaintiff’s and the defendant’s last names are printed in
all capitals. (See “('aption” in Exhibit 4 1.) Often when referring to oi' citing the case, o n k the
names in all capitals are used. Howe\er, \'ou should alwa\s consult the appropriate citation
manual to determine which names to present in a citation.
For Example W h e n citing this case, the citation should read: R a e l \/. C ad e n a , 93 N . M .
684, 604 P.2d 822 (Ct. App. 1979).
Note that below the caption is “No. .^921." This is the docket number ot the case as
signed by the court ol appeals. IkTow the docket number is the name ot’the court that decided
the case and the date oft he decision. This is indicated in tiie citation as: (Ct. .App. 1979). If
the decision had been rendered bv the liii;liest court in the iurisdictii'n such as the supreme
court ot New Mexico, only the \eai- ot the decision would appear in the p.irentheses: (1979).
It the citation does not include a state reporter citation, a reterence to the slate is included
in the parentheses.
1 Sm ith V. Jones, 292 S. W. 2d 425 (Tex. 1980).
3. Syllabus
I he syllab u s is a brief summary of the opinion. It is an editoiial enhancement written b\ West,
not the court, and cannot be relied upon as the holding of the court. It is presented as a useful
aid in providing the reader with a brief’o\er\iew ofthe opinion. (See “S\ llabus” in Exhibit 4 1.)
4. H eadnotes
The headnotes are summaries ofthe points oflaw discussed in the case. 1leadnotes follow, in
sequential order, the rele\’ant paragraphs ofthe opinion. The numbe!' to the lelt ofthe headnote
corresponds to the bracketed number in the body of t!ie opinion. (See'T leadnotes’’ in ¡-xhibit 4-1.)
For Example In R a e l y. C a d e n a , h e a d n o t e 1 c on t a i ns a s u m m a r y of the poi nt of l a w

di scussed in the body of the opinion b e t w e e n [1] and [2]. H e a d no t e 2 is a
s u m m a r y of the point of l a w di scussed in the opinion b e t w e e n [2] and [3]. H e a d n o t e 3 is
a s u m m a r y of the l a w di scussed in the opinion b e t w e e n [3] and t he end of the opinion.
Note that hcadimtcs arc prepared by West and arc not part ol the case. I he\- arc prepared
tor the con\ciiicncc ol nulividi.ials researching the case and are useful in prov iding a quick
o\cr\ icw til'the law and legal principles addressed in the opinion. 'Ihe\- are not the opinion
ol the court and ha\e no authorit\' ol law. .Am' relerence to or quote trom an opinion must
be taken from the opinion itself, not trom the headnotes.
5. Key N um bers
In bold print nc.xt to the hcadnotc number are a tew words indicating tiie area ot law ad
dressed in the hcadnote. Next to this bold-print description ol the area ol law is a small kc\'
SN'mbol and a number. (See “Key Nimibers” in Hxhibit 4-1.) West has di\ idcd all areas of
.American law into \arious topics and subtopics. Fach area is identilied by a topic name (the
bold print), and each specific topic or subtopic is assigned a key num ber. West publishes
separate \-olumcs called ¡iigcits that contain summaries of court opinions organized by topic
and subtopic.
For Example N e x t to h e a d n o t e 1 in R a e l v. C a d e n a is " A ss au l t and Bat ter y, " f o l l o w e d

by a key symbol and the n u m b e r 18. T he key symbol and t h e n u m b e r 18
r e f e r to a speci fi c s ubtopic of a ss aul t and battery. Th e s u b j ec t of this subtopic c an be
d e t e r m i n e d by consult ing the index to "a ss aul t and bat t ery" in the di gest (the use of a
d i g e s t í s d i sc us se d in C h a p t e r 5). In the body o f t h e opinion b e t w e e n [1] and [2], t h e a re a
of l a w c o v e r e d is a ss aul t and ba ttery in ge ner al . A r e f e r e n c e to the di gest r e ve al s t h a t
key n u m b e r 18 is the speci fi c s ubtopic of a ss aul t and ba t t e r y c o n c e r n i n g the liability
of p e rs o ns w h o aid or e n c o u r a g e an a ss aul t or battery. If you w a n t to read o t her c ourt
opi ni ons in w h i c h liability for battery w a s based upon the c o n d u c t of aiding or e n c o u r a g
ing a ba t te r e r at the s c e n e of a battery, re f e r to the v o l u me of the di gest c ont a i ni ng the
t opi c " a s s au l t and battery. " Look to the s ubtopic key n u m b e r 18. U n d e r that key n u m b e r
is a s u m m a r y of all c our t opi ni ons t h at ha ve a d d r e s s e d this subtopic and the cit at ions
of t h o s e opinions.
Ihrough this svstem, you luue cas\' access to all court opinions dealing with the
question \ o u are considering, lhe ke\- number system is an imaluable research tool.
6. Attorneys
Ibis section pnni des the names and cities oft he attorne\s in the case and the parties the\'
represent. (See “Attorney.s" in Fxhibit 4 - 1.)
7. Judge
At the beginning o f t h e opinion is the name o f t h e ividge who wrote it. (Sec "Iudge” in
Hxhibit 4-1.)
8. Bod y o f the O pinion

The bo dy of the opinion usualk includes tbe facts oft he case, the prior proceedings, the
issue or issues addressed b\' the court, the rule or rules ol law governing the dispute, the hold
ing, the reasoning in support ofthe holding, and the reliefgranted. (See “Bod\’ol the Opinion”
in Hxhibit 4-1.) There are no hard-and-fast rules dictating what must be contained in a court
opinion, and olten one or more ot the components listed here ma\' be missing. Hach oft he
components ofthe bod\’ arc discussed scparateh' here.
110
C HA PTER 4 CASE L A W - RESEARCH A N D BRIEFING
a. F a c ts
Opinions usually include the tacts that ga\e rise to the legal dispute. Often the opinion may
include \ery tew tacts or more facts than appear rele\ aiit to the matter decided,
b. P r i o r P r o c e e d i n g s
In this part o f t h e opinion, the court presents a SLnnniar\' of what happened in the lower
court and who appealed. This ma\’ he a \er\' brief sumniar\\ as in Rael v. Cadena, or it may
be extensive and detailed.
c. I s s u e o r I s s u e s
The iisiie is tbe legal question addressed by the court in the opinion. The court may present
the issue narrowlv in the context ofthe facts.
For Example U n d e r N e w M e x i c o tort law, d o e s a b a tt e ry o c c u r w h e n an individual,

pre se nt at a battery, verbally e nc o u r a g e s the assailant by yelling, "Kill him!"
and "Hit him m o r e !" but doe s not in any ot her w a y parti ci pate in the battery?
The court may state the issue broadly, merely phrasing the issue in the context oft he
area oflaw.
For Example Did t he d e f e n d a n t c o m m i t a civil battery?
In main' instances, a case addresses more than one legal issLie, Also, the court may not
present a statement of the issue or issues at all, and it ma\' be difficult to determine wTiat thev are.
Identifying and understanding the issue make up tbe most important task of reading
an opinion. If the issue is not understood, then the rule oflaw applied b\’ the court may not
be understood, and the ('pinion consequently may be misanah’zed anil misapplied,
d. R u le o f L a w
The rule ot law is the law that go\ erns the issue. It may be a statutor}' or constitutional provi
sion or a case law doctrine, rule, principle, and so on. In Rael v, (Aidena, case law governs the
law of civil assault and battery.
e. H o l d i n g
The holding is the court’s application ofthe rule oflaw to the facts ofthe case. It is the court’s
answer to the issue(s) in the case. The holding is usualh presented immediately after the rule
ot law in the opinion or after the reasoiiing at the end oft he opinion,
f. R e a s o n i n g
The re a so n in g is the court’s explanation of how or wh\' the rule of law' applies to the dis
pute, On occasion, the reasoning is difficult to follow'. Often, it is helpful to read the holding
first and determine how' the court ruled, then read the reasoning. By tirst understanding
wTiat decision was reached, }-ou ma\' be better able to understand the reasoning in support
o ft h e decision.
111
g. D is p o s it i o n /R e li e f G ran ted
llic relief granted is usuall\’ a one-scntencc statement h\’ tiie coLirt tliat includes tlie order of
the court as a result ot'the holding.
For Example In R a e l y. C adena, next to the last s e n t e n c e w h e r e the c our t states, "The
j ui jgment o f t h e trial court is affirmed," the court presents the relief granted.
A court has several options when granting relief:

It ma\' agree with the trial court and affinn the trial court’s decision.
It may disagree with the trial court and reverse the trial court’s decision. If'it reverses
the decision, it will renianii that is, send the case hack to the trial court. W'hen a case
is remanded, the appellate court may order the trial court to:
1. Enter a judgment or order in accordancc with the appellate court decision
2. Retry the case (conduct a new trial)
3. Conduct further proceedings in accordance with the appellate court decision
It there are se\'eral issues, it may alhrni the trial court on some of the issues and
reverse the trial court on other issues.
h. C o n c u r r in g O p in io n
In some instances, a judge nia\' agree with the maioritx' holding hut for diflercnt or additional
I ' e a s o n s than those p r e s e n t e d hy the majority, lhe judge may then set o u t hi s or iier reason^
in support ot'the majorit\- in what is called a eoiieiirriiig opinion. Ihere may be more than one
concurring opinion it other i u d g e s a l s o a g r e e w i t h t h e majority conclusion but tor d i t f e r c n t
or additional r e as o ns .
i. D i s s e n t i n g O p i n i o n
If a judge disagrees with the niaiorit\’ ilecision, the iudge ma\' present his or her reasons in w hat
is called a dissenting opinion, because a dissenting opinion does not agree with the maiority
view, it does not have the force of law. It is \aluable, liowe\er, because it nia\' help a leader
understand the majority opinion.
For Example The di ssent ma y s um ma r i z e w h a t the c o u r t stated in the maj orit y opinion.
Note, how e v er , t h at b e c a u se the di ssent di s a g r e es wi th t he maj ority view,
it m a y m i s c ha r a c t e r i ze t he maj ority opinion.
'lhe dissenting opinion is also important because it nia\' become the majoritx' \'iew in
the future when the composition of’the court changes or there is a shift in the court's position.
Ihe dissent may pro\'ide the basis for future arguments in support of overruling outdated
precedent. Remember, at one time the L'nited .States Supreme Court ruled that segregation
on the basis of race was legal, Plessey r. I'ergnson, 163 U.S. 537, 16 S. CCt. I 138, 41 L. ICd. 256
(1896). Now, segregation on the basis of race is illegal. Brown r. Board of I'.ducation of l'opeka,
347 U.S. 483, 74 S. Ct. 686, 98 L. Hd. 873 ( 19;54).
V. C O U R T O P I N I O N S — R E S E A R C H I N G
Researching case law is the process of finding a court opinion that answers a question being
researched. Usualh' the search is for case law that go\'erns or guides the resolution of an
issue in a client’s case. Such a court opinion is often referred to as being on point. (Chapter I 2
112
CHA PTER 4 CASE L A W RESEARCH A N D BRIEFING
indiccitcs how lo dcteiiiiine whether a ease is on point, ihis section locuses on how to lind
court opinions. The first part of tliis section discLisses case law research soui'ces, that is, where
federal and state coin't opinions are piihhslied. The second part presents research strategies or
teciiniques, tiiat is, how to conduct case h\w research.
A. P u b lic a tio n o f C o u rt O p in io n s
1. In General
Not all court opinions are published in the national or state reporters as discussed later in this
section (see subsection A.3). Most tederal and state trial court decisions are nol published,
as they are generally (inly persuasive authority and not binding precedent. Due to the large
number of'cases, man\' but not all federal and state appellate court decisions are published.
Sometimes an appellate court will choose not lo publish a decision because the decision does
not have value as precedent. 'Ihe opinion ma\- address a question already well settled in the
law, or it ma\- merely reflect the court’s correction of’a trial court error. Publication is hmited
primarik to cases establishing a new rule ot law or changing existing law, criticizing existing
law, in\'ol\ ing matters of public interest, or resolving conflicts of authorit}-.
Do not assume that because a decision is not published that it is not a\ailable. All
cases are public records, imless a case is sealed, such as tor national securit} reasons or to
p r o t e c t a minor. By virtue of b e i n g a p u b l i c r e c o r d , all I ' e c o r d s within a liie a r e a c c e s s i b l e
at the courthouse, including the opinion o f t h e Ci ) i ut. CAHirl opinions not designated for
publication are often referred to as iiiipiihliilied decisions. Prior to the widespread use ot
court W’eb sites, unpublished court opinions could be obtained only b\' going to the court
house, reqiiesting the tile, and cop}ing the opinion. 'I'oda}’, man}- com'ls produce opinions
not nieai-it for publication in the hardbound \-olumes of reporters either b\- makii-ig then-i
a\ ailable oi-i the court Web site or b\- releasii-ig them to online resources such as Westiaw and
1.exis. in addition, West created the I ciicnil Appendix, a reporter that collects unpublished
lederal circuit court decisi(uis.
In the past, unpublished opinions could nol be used as precedent or cited; ho\\-e\ er, there
IS an increasing trend toward allow-ing unpublished cases to be used in this manner. Research
ers should consult their local rules of appellate procedure and the federal rules of appellate
procedure to determine whether use of and citation to unpublished cases are allowed in a
particular jurisdiction. l-!\ en when use of LinpLiblished cases is permitted, be aware that the}-
are often regarded only as beiiig persuasive and ha\-e little or no binding precedential effect.
lust as there are so-called official and unoflicial publications of statutor}- law, there are
ofiicial and unofficial publications of case law as well. Ihe oflicial publications of case law are
those published al the direction o f t he go\ernment. C;ourt opiiiions that are not published
at the direction o f t he governmei-il are considered unoflicial publications. Both official and
unofficial publications include, at a minimum, the full text of court iipinions.
2. Forms o f Publication
Most court opinions are published three times in three formats; slip opinions, ad\ ance sheets,
and bound \-olumes called reports or reporters.
a. Slip O pi n i o n
Most court decisions are first published by the court in the form of a slip opinion. Where
there is a court Web site, the opinions n-iay also be pubhshed on that site. The slip opinion
is usuall}- in the form of a pamphlet that contains the full text ofthe court’s opinion in a single
case. It includes aii}- concurring or dissenting opinion in the case. It is indix iduall}- paginated
and includes the case nanie, date ofthe decision, and attorne}s’ names. It a slate has adopted
pubhc domain or \-endor-neutral citation, that citation nia\' also be included.
113
Slip opinions do not usiu\ll\- include a s\ llahus (synopsis or summary ot'the tacts, issues,
and holding ot a case), nor do the\’ include headnotes. Ihey are not organized by legal topic.
All slip opinions are distributed to the parties insohed in the lawsuit. In some jurisdictions
they are also available by subscription.
b. Advance Sheets
Ihe permanent hardbound volumes of court decisions are published when there are a large
number ofcourt decisions sutiicient to fill an entire volume. Therefore, many opinions may not
appear in a bound volinne until up to a year after the decision is rendered. A d va n ce sheets
are temporar\- pamphlets (ofien softcin'er bt>oks) that contain the full text of a number of
recent court decisions. The\' are designed to pro\ide quick access to recent court decisions. The
publishers o ft he permanent \'olumes publish advance sheets frequently, often weekly. They
are placed next to the last hardbound volume and are discarded when a permanent volume
is published that contains the opinions printed in the advance sheets.
The decisions are presented chronologicalK’ and are sequentially paginated; that is,
the N'olume and page number in the advance sheet will be the same as the page and \'olume
nLunberofthe bound \'olume when the bound volume is published.
For Example An opinion that a p p e a r s in vol u me 525, page 756 o f t h e a d v a n c e s h e e t will

a p p e a r in v ol um e 525, pa ge 756 o f t h e p e r m a n e n t bound vol ume.
The advance sheets usually contain a case synopsis and headnotes for each case and an
index and tables that appear in the permanent volume. They include a Key Number Digest
section that arranges the cases by digest topic and subtopic.
c. R epo rt er
Court opinions are permanenth' published in hardbound volumes usualh' referred to as a
reporter or a report. reporter \'olume is published when there are a sulficient number of
ad\ ance sheets to till a bound \'olume. The cases are presented chronologically and paginated
with the same page numbers as the advance sheets. Hach bound volume usually includes a
subject index and an alphabetical list ofthe opinions reported in the volume. The volumes are
numbered consecuti\ely so that the highest numbered volume w'ill contain the most recent
cases. Often, when there are a large number of volumes in a series, a second or even third
series will be started. The new series will begin at volume 1.
For Example We s t' s P a c ific fl e p o r f e r publ i shes the state court opi ni ons f o r t he w e s t e r n
states. W h e n the n u m b e r of v o l um e s of the P a c ific R e p o r te r {c\\.e6 as P.)
r e a c h e d 300, a s e c on d series. P a c ific Reporter, S e c o n d S e r ie s {c\\ed as P.2d), begi nni ng
a t v o l u m e 1, w a s started. W h e n the s e c o n d seri es r e a c h e d 999 v o l u m e s , t h e P a c ific
R ep o rte r, Third S e r ie s (cited as P.3d), begi nni ng at v o l u m e 1, w a s star te d. T h e seri es
n u m b e r is i ndi cated in the citation. T h e R2d in the citation "662 R2d 646" i nd i ca t e s that
the deci sion is found in P a c ific Reporter, S e c o n d Series. T he vol u me n u m b e r is 662, and
t he pa ge n u m b e r is 646.
3. National Reporter System

Most court decisions, both federal and state, are published by West in multivolume sets called
reporters. These sets are a\ailable from the publisher in hardbound volumes and many are
available on (CIO-ROM.
114
CHAPTER 4 CASELAW RESEARCH A N D BRIEFING
For Example T he deci si ons of the Uni ted S t a t e s S u p r e m e Court are publ i shed in t h e
S u p r e m e C o u rt R e p o rte r, t h e d e c i s io n s of t h e Uni ted S t a t e s Court s of
A p p e a l s are publ i shed in the F e d e r a l Reporters, and the deci sions of the vari ous state
a p p e l l at e courts a r e published in regi onal or st at e- spe c i f ic reporters.
lhe tollowiiig sections discuss the \arious reporters, lhe leatures ciiiiinioii lo all these
reporters are presented here rather than repealed in the discussion ol'eacli I'eporter. ,\h)sl
reporter Nolumes inchide:
A lable of’ cases, which lists in alphabetical order the opinions presented in the
N'olunie. Most sets ha\e an additional table of'cases in which the cases are ari'anged
by state or b\’ circuit.
For Example Each volume o f t h e F e d e r a l R e p o r te r h a s a tabl e of c a s es listing all

the cas es alphabeti cal l y and a tabl e that a rranges the c ases a l p h a
betically by circuit. All the cases from the First Circuit, Second Circuit, and so on are
a r r a n ge d alphabeti cal ly by circuit. The S outh W e s te rn R ep o r t er incl udes a tabl e
of c a s es t h at lists the c as es alphabeti cal ly and a tabl e that a r r an ge s the c a s e s
a l phabet i cal ly by state so that all the c a se s from e a c h state are listed separat el y.
A table ot statutes listing the \arious statutes, constitutional pro\ isioiis, and often
rules interpreted or reviewed, and listing the relevant court opinions.
For Example If you are resear chi ng c as es that have interpreted the First A m e n d
m e n t to the United St at es Constitution, the tabl e will di rect you to
all t he c a s e s in the v ol u me that ha ve i nterpreted the First A m e n d m e n t .
A table of' words aiul phrases listing alphabeticalh words and phrases judicially
defined and iiuiicatiiig fhe page nunibei' in the voluiiie where fhe\' are ilelined.
A Key Number Digest in the back of each \'olume, which proxides a summary of
each case in the volume arranged b\' topic and ke\’ number,
A case svilabus (a s\iiopsis case .sumniar\ ), headnotes, and ke\- numbers, which
are located at the beginning of each case presented in the \olume. Ihis allows a
researcher c]uick access to all related cases through West’s Digest S\stem. (See the
first page of H.xhibit 4-1.)
4. P u b lic a tio n o f F ed eral C o u r t D e c is io n s
a. U n i t e d S t a t e s S u p r e i i i c C o u r t
'Ihtee dirt’e rent sets publish file decisions oft he United States Supieme (Court: L'nitcd Sliiti's
Reports, Siiprcnic (. '.ourt Reporter, and L'nited States Supiviiic ('ain't Rcporlỉ, Líiwvcrí Fihtion.
( 1) UiiitCii States Reports 'I he United States Reports (cited as L'.s.) is the official reporter
for the Supreme tCourt of the L'nited States. If is published b\ the L'nited States (lovernment
Printing Oflice and contains the full text of all the decisions ol the Supreme (Court, 'lhe
decisions are initialh’ published as slip opinions, followed b\- ads ance sheets and then, finalh',
hardbound \'olumes. lhe reports are indexed but do not jnclude headnotes or kev numbers.
(2) Supreme Court Reporter ihc SnprcDie ('ourt Reporter {cih'd as s. (4.) is an unoHiáal
publication ot'the decisions of’ the United States Supreme (Court published h\' West and is
115
part of West's N ational Reporter Syste m . It iiKiudes the deeisums ofthe Supreme (.Court
since lcS82. U is pubhslied more quickU' than the L'nited Stales Reports. Ad\ance slieets are
puhhshed at least twice a month.
Ihe headnotes with links to the key numbers make the Supreme C'ourt Reporter a
valuable research tool. The key numbeis, through theii' link tc) West's Digest System, allow
a researcher to research a point oflaw discussed in a Supreme (Court opinion in all reported
decisions—both federal and state (see l-Cxhibit 4-2),
E x h i b i t 4 - 2 Opinion from S upreme Court Reporter, Reprinted from in R e Kennedv^ 525 U S 153, iw
S.Ct. 635, 142 L .E d 2d 573 119991, with p erm issio n from Thom son Reuters.
525 U„S, 154 IN KIC KKNM CI)\ 655

C u e a'. I l ‘) ,S,('|, 6,',^ I
525 U,S. 153. 142 l.,Hd,2d 573 rari nor petitions lor extraorilinar) writs from Ken
li.Tn re ,\1ichael KENNEDY ned) in noneriminal matters unless he pa)s the
No, 9S-6y45. ilocketing lee rei|uireil b) Rule 38 and submits his
Decided ,lan. 1 1. IW9 petition in compliance with Rule 33,1.
Pro se petitioner sinight extraordinar\ urit in Kenned) has abused this Court's certiorari ami
noncriniinal matter. On petitioner's motion to pro extraorilinar) writ processes. In October 1998. we
ceed in forma pauperis, the Siipieme Court lieki iiuoked Rule 39,8 to den) Kenned) in funna ¡nni-
that, because petition was petitioner's twellth lri\d- pcris status. See In rc Kennedy. 525 L',S, 807. I 19
lous filing with Supreme Coinl in a noneriminal S,Ct, 38. 142 k.lCd.2d .^0 (1998). At this time. Ken
matter, he wouki nol he allowed to jiroceed in forma ned) hail nieil lour petitions lor extraorilinar) w rits
pauperis, and would be barreil prospecti\ lT\ from and six petitions lor certiorari, all of which were
bringing I'mlher petitions for certiorari oi' for both |iatentl) lri\ olous and had been denied w ithout
exiraordinars writs in noneriminal matters without leeorded ilissent. T he instant petition lor an extraor-
paNiiig lee anil eomplving with rule go\erning iliiiar) writ thus constitutes Kenned)'s 12th lri\o-
document preparation. loLis filing w I t h this Court.
So ordered. We enter the order barring prospective liliitgs
.lusiicc Stevens dissL'iiled with siatement. lor the reasons discussed m .Marlin r. I)i.\iri( i of
Cohtnihia Conn ||,,"/ ■ k I k^ S.
I'cderal Couits 453
('1. 397. 121 l..fCd.2d 305 ( 1992 ) iper curiam ). Ken
Because pro se |ietitioner's petition I'orextraoi- ned) s abuse of the writ of certiorari and of the
dinary writ was his twellth frnolous filing with extraorilinar) writ has been in noneriminal cases,
Supreme Court in a nonciiminal matter, he would and so we limit our sanction accorilingl). The order
not be allowed lo proceed in forma pauperis, and iherelore w ill not |ire\ent KenneiK from petitioning
woLikl be barred prospecli\ely from bringing fur to challenge criminal sanctions which might he
ther petitions for certiorari or petitions for extraor imposed on him. The order, however, will allow
dinary w rits in noncriminal matters w iihout pas ing this Court lo ilevote its limiteil resources to the
docketing fee anil compl\ing with rule ginerning claims of pelilioners w ho have not abused our pro
document preparation. U.S.Sup.Ct.Rules 33.1. 3S. cess.
39. 39.S. 28 U,S,C,A.
Il is VO ordered.
I>[-CR CURIAM, .lustiee ST'EVkCNS. dissenting.

Pro petitioner Kenned) seeks lease to pro I-or reasons prev iousl) stated, see .Marlin v, Dis-
ceed in forma pauperis under Rule 39 of this coLirt, iri(i/>fColumhiaCiiurii>f.\ppeals.?<i)h'V.S. 1.4. 113
\Ve deny this rei|uest Pursuant to Rule 39,8. Ken S.Ct, }<-)!. 121 k,l-Cd,2d .305 (1992) (.STEVkCNS. .1,.
ned) is allowed until F-'ebruary 1. 1999. within dissenting), and cases cited. I respectfull) dissent.
which to pa) the docketing fee required b) Rule 38
and to submit his petition in compliance with this
Court's Rule 33,1, We also direct the Clerk of the
Court not to accept any I'urther petitions I'oi' eertio-
116
CHAPTER 4 CASE L A W - RESEARCH A N D BRIEFING
(3) United States Supreme Court Reports, Lawyers’ Edition Ihc United States Supreme
Court Reports, Lawyers' Edition (cited as I,, lid. or 1.. Kd. 2d tor volumes since 1956) is an
unotlicial publication of tbe decisions ot tbe United States Supreme (ôiirt published by
LexisNe.xis. It includes all the decisions ofthe Supreme ('ourt since 1789. Ad\-ance sheets are
published at least twice a month.
Like the Supreme ('ourt Reporter, a summary oft he case and headnotes precedes each
opinion. Hach headnote is assigned a topic and section ninnber (see Fxhibit 4-3). I h e topics
are printed in United States Supreme (A)urt Digest, Lawyers' Edition. 'Ihis allows researchers
to locate other cases addressing the same topic. In additicm, there are sunmiaries ofthe briefs
of counsel and, for some cases, annotations that anab'ze important points oflaw covered in
the cases are presented.
E x h i b i t 4 - 3 Page Sh ow ing Headnote from Opinion Published in United States S upreme Court
Reports, Lawyers' Edition. G e is s a lv M oore M edical Corp., 524 U.S. 74. 118 S.Ct. 1869, 141 L .E d .2 d 64 U998I, page 65.
Reprinted with the perm ission o f LexisN e \is.
C.HISSAL V MOORE MEDIC AL. CORF.

l l W S ) 5 2 4 I S 74,141 L I-:d 2d 64.1 IX S Ct 1S69
defendants (I) had \iolateLl COBRA by renouncing an obligation to prinide continuing coverage, and
(2) were estopped to deny him COBR.A continuation coverage. The parties agreed to ha\e a magistrate judge
conduct all proceedings. The iiuli\ idual ( I ) inoxed for partial summary judgment on the first two counts, and
(2) included an argument that the ilefendants' reliance upon S I I62(2lll))(il to deny him continuation cover
age was misplaced, as he had first been covered under his wile's plan before he had elected continuation
coverage. While the motion was pending, the intliv idual died and his wife, who was also the personal repre
sentative of his est;ite. replaced him as plaintil'L The magistrate judge granted partial summary judgment
in faviir of the defendants on the two counts, as the magistrate judge expressed the view that under
S 1 162( 2)(I))( I), an employ ee with coverage under another group health plan as of the date on which the
employee elected COBRA continuation coverage was ineligible lor such coverage (927 E Supp 3.52. 1996
E'S Dist [JiXLS 7145). On appeal, the United States Court ot ,Ap|ieals tor the Eighth Circuit, in affirming,
expressed the v iew that ( I 1 uiulei' S I 162(2)iD)(i), it was within the defendants' rights to cancel the indi-
vitlual's COBR.A benefits unless there was a ■'signil'icaiU i-'ap" between the coverage afforded under the
corporation's plan and that afforded uiuler his wile's plan; and (2) the wife had tailed to carry her burden i)f
showing that such a significant gap existed (114 E'3d 14.58. 1997 US App LF-..X1S 13589).
On certiorari, the United Stales Supreme Cinirl vacated the Court of .Appeals' judgment and remanded
the case I'or t'urther proceedings. In an opinion by SOUTER. .1., expressing the uniniimous view ofthe court,
it was held that § I 162(2)(D)(i) did nol allow an emiiloyer to deny COBRA continuation coverage to a
qualified benet'ieiary w ho was covered under another group health plan at ihe time that the beneficiary made
a COBRA election, as ( I ) under the plain meaning of 1 l62(2)(D)(i) as it read at the time pertinent to the
ease at haml. the medical corporation eould not cut off the indivitiual's COBRA continuation coverage,
where Ihe indiv idual (a) was eoverett under his wife's plan belore he made his COBRA election, anil (b) so
did not first become covered under his wife's plan alter the dale of election; and (2) there was no justil'ieation
tor disparaging the clarity of S 1162(2)(D)(i).
HKADNOTK
r i a s s i l ' i c d l o L 'n i t e d S t a le s S u p r e m e C o u r t D i g e s t , l . a w y e r s ' E d i t i o n
Pen.sions a n d K etircin cnt F u n d s § 1— K m p lo y cc beneficiary ot' an employer's group health plan to

R e t ir e m e n t Incom e S e c u r it y A ct— group obtain continued coverage under the plan w hen the
h ea lth p la n — c o n tin u a tio n c o v e ra g e beneficiary might otherwise lose that benefit for
Eor purposes of some prov isions (29 U.SCS SS certain reasons, such as the termination of employ-
1161 et seq.) ofthe Employee Relirement Income ment-29 USCS S I 162(2)(D)(i) (later amended)
Security .Act of 1974 as amended by the Consoli does not allow an employer to deny COBRA con
dated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act ot' 1985 tinuation coverage to qualified beneficiary who is
(COBRA)-which provisions authorize a i|ualified covered
117
Note tliat the publisher )irepares the ease siuiiniaries, headnotes, and so on presented
in both the Supreme C'.ourt Reporter and the L'nited Shites Supreme C.ourt Reports, l awyers'
Edition; they are not part ot'the actual court opinion. Ihey are \aluable research tools, but
the)' are not the law. An\' ret'ereiice or quote in ieseai'i.h should be lo the colu I opinion itsell
and not to the material prepared hy tiie publisher.
(4) Loose-Leaf Services and Newspapers '1here are various sources to obtain quick access
to the decisions ofthe Supreme Court ofthe L'nited Stales. 1he L’nited States l.aw Week, published
b\' the Bureau of National Affairs, is a loose-leaf ser\ice that publishes weekh' decisions ofthe
Supreme Court. ITie ser\'ice includes additional information, such as summaries c>f cases pending
before the court and reports on oral arguments. Olten, law lirni.s and law libraries subscribe to legal
newspapers that print the decisions ot the L'nited States Supreme (Court and other federal courts.
(5) Computer ami Internet Resources Note that access to most federal court opinions
is a\-ailable through W'estlaw and LexisN'exis. In addition, court opinions are often ax ailable
through the official court Web site and other Internet resources (see Internet Resources at the
end of this chapter). Man\' federal reporters are also available from the puhlisiier on (CD-RO.M.
Chapter 7 covers computer-aided research in detail.
b. U n i t e d S t a t e s C o u r t s o f A p p e a l s
West publishes the decisions o f t h e United States Circuit (Coiuls ol .Appeals in the lederal
Reporter (cited as F.), the Federal Reporter, Second Series (cited as F.2d), and the l ederal Reporter,
Ihird Series (cited as F.3d). Like the Suprenu' i '.ourt Reporter, it is part of West's National
Reporter S\ stem. 'Ihe cases are initialh' published in ad\ ance sheets, which are later compiled
in hardbound x'olunies. lhe Federal Reporter is an unollicial reporter, but it is lhe o n k reporter
that publishes the decisions ofthe L'nited States Circuit ('.(un'ts ol .Appeals. Iherefore, there
are no parallel citations for these decisions.
Over the years, the Federal Reporter lias included decisions of coui ts other than the
United States (Circuit (Courts of .Appeals, such as decisions ol the United States 1)isti'ict (Coui ts
up lo 1932 and the L'niled Slates (Courl ol (Claims li'om 19(il) lo 19S2. As mentioned al the
beginning of this section, due to the lai'ge nimiber of cases, not all decisions are published.
c. U n i t e d S t a t e s D i s t r i c t C o u r t s
West publishes selected decisions ol tiie United States District (Courts since 1932 in the l ederal
Supplement (cited as F. Supp.). Ihis reporter set includes the decisions ol the United States (Court
of International Tradesince 1936aiid the ludicial Panel on Multidistricl l.itigatioii since 1932.
I, ike the Federal Reporter, it is an unollicial repoi ter, but it is the only leporter that publishes
the decisions ofthe United States District (Courts. '1herefore, there are no parallel citations for
these decisions. It is part ofthe National Reporter System. Like the other reporters, the cases
are initialh' published in ad\'ance sheets, which are later compiled in hardbound \'olunies.
d . W e s t ’s O t h e r F e d e r a l R e p o r t e r s
West publishes the following specialized federal reporter sets.
( I ) Federal Rules Decisions (cited as F.R.D.) liiis set includes selected opinions ofthe
United States District Courts concernintiOtiie Federal Rules of (Ci\ il and (Criminal Procedure. Some
cases iiiN'olving court rules will appear in the Federal Supplement. I Iowever, it a decision is publisiied
in one set, such as the Federal Rules Decisions, it general!)' will not be published in the olher set.
(2) West’s Bankruptcy Reporter \h\s reporter publishes selected decisions ofthe United
States Bankruplc)' Courts and District (Courts in\'oh ing bankruptc\'. It inciudes bankruptcy
opinions from the United States Supreme (Courl and the (Courts of .Appeals.
118
CHA PTER 4 CASE L A W - RESEARCH A N D BRIEFING
(3) Utiiti’d States Claims Court Reporter \h\s set publishes selected trial court decisions
ot the Claims Côurt and rele\ aiit opinions troni the Supreme C'ourt and the C'ourts of Appeals.
(4) West’s Military Justice Reporter [h\s set includes the decisions from the L'nited
States c;<)urt ot'Mihtar\- Appeals and C.ourts of Militarx' Re\'iew.
(5j Veterans Appeals Reporter \h\s leporter publishes decisions ofthe United
States C'ourt of Veterans Appeals.
5. Publication o f State Court Decisions

a. R e g i o n a l R e p o r t e r s
In addition to tbe reporters that publish the federal court decisions (discussed in the previous
subsection), West’s National Reporter Sv’stem includes sets of reports and reporters that
publish selecteci decisions o f t h e state appellate courts. Kach reporter volume includes the
features discussed in section \ ’.B, such as a table of cases reported and words and phrases
defmed. The National Reporter Sv'stem publishes state court decisions bv geographic region
in reporters called region al reporters. These reporters are: Pucifw Reporter, North Western
Reporter, South Western Reporter, North F.usleni Reporter, Atlantic Reporter, South Eastern
Reporter, and Southern Reporter. W’est created the geographic grouping of regions, and there
is no particular significance to the organization ofthe regions. The map in bxhibit 4-4 shows
the reporter regions and tbe states in each region.
Due to the large number of cases from Cialifornia, New York, and Illinois, West created
separate reporters for these states. The California Reporter publishes the decisions ot the C'ali-
tornia Supreme Côurt and appellate courts. 1he Supreme Ciourl decisions are published in both
the Pacific Reporter imd the (Ailifornia Reporter, the appellate court decisions are publisheci in
E x h i b i t 4 - 4 West's National Reporter System Map. Repnnted fiom l-V e s t Group, copyright 2002. Repnnted with p e rrvissio n
of Thom son R euters
Pacific Southern
[ __] Northwestern South Eastern
[ _ ] Soutfi Western Aflantic
i I North Eastern
119
the C.alitornia Reporter on\y. The .Wiv York Supplement publishes the decisions ot'the New York
(Court ot Appeals and the interinediate appellate decisions, 'ihe New York Court of .Appeals
decisions are also printed in the \ ’ortli luisteni Reporter, the intermediate appellate decisions
are not pi'inted in the Xortli Eastern Reporter. 'Ihe Illinois Decisions publishes decisions of
the Illinois Supreme (Court and appellate courts.
West also publishes indi\ idual reporters for many states that are limited to the supreme
and appellate court decisions ofthe state. Ihese reporters are designed for attorneys who are
niostU' interested in the decisions ot the state in wTiich thev practice. These decisions are also
pLiblished in the regional reporter.
For Example A pr a ct it i one r in N e w M e x i c o m a y n e ed r e ad y a c c e s s to N e w M e x i c o

c as e l a w for 90 p e r c e n t of her w o r k and only oc ca si ona l ly n e e d a c c e s s to
c as e l a w fr om ot her states. It m ay be w o r t h w h i l e to p u r c h a se a set of t he N e w M e x i c o
Reports, w h i c h consists of less th an 175 volumes, w h e r e a s it may be c o s t prohibiti ve to
p u r c ha se the P a c ific Reporter, w h i c h consists of sev era l hundred v ol umes .
,'\d\ ance sheets are published for each regional reporter and the advance sheets include
the I'eatures discussed previously in section \'.A.2.b.
.\lan\- states have discontinued the othcial publication ot state appellate court decisions.
In those states, the court decisions are published o n k in the regional reporter, and the o n k
citation is to the regional reporter.
For Example Col orado di sc ont inued its official publ i cati on of c as es in 1980. T h e only
citation to Col orado deci sions is to the P a c ific R e p o r te r cite, for e xa mp l e,
I P e o p le V. J.D., 989 P.2d 762 (Colo. 1999).
Some states have an otiicial publicatioii as well as a public domain citation (also referred
to as ineiliiiin iieiitrul eitntions or venilor-neiitrdl eitutions). WTien this is the case three cita
tion nunibers will be required.
For Example S ta te V. Foster, 1 9 9 8 - N M C A - 1 6 3 , 126 N . M . 177, 976 P.2d 852. T h e public

d o m a i n cit at ion is 1 9 9 8 - N M C A - 1 6 3 . T h e official p u b l i c a ti o n ci t at ion is
I 126 N . M . 177 (vol ume 126 of the N e w M e x i c o Reports). T he unofficial P a c ific R e p o r te r
! citation is 976 P2d 852. In this i nst ance, t h e r e are th r e e parallel citations, a nd the opinion
\ m a y be found in t h r ee publications.
b. C o m p u t e r a n d I n t e r n e t R e s o u r c e s
Note that access tt) most state court opinions is available through Westlaw and LexisNexis.
In addition, court opinions are increasingly available through the official court W'eb site and
other Internet sites (see Internet Resources at the end of this chapter). Many state and regional
reporters are alsci a\’ailable from the publisher on (CD-R(OM.
6. Attorney General O pin ions

Ihe chief attorne\- for the federal or state government is usually referred to as the attorney
general. Upon the request of legislators or other government officials, an attorney general ma\-
issue a written opinion interpreting how the law applies. 'Ihis usually occurs when there is no
court opinion interpreting how a specific kuv applies or there are conflicting court opinions.
120
CHAPTERS CASELAW RESEARCH A N D BRIEFING
Ihese opinions are se co n d a ry authority; they are not enacted law or the opinion ot'a
court. Ihey are not primary authorit}' and do not ha\e to be I'ollowed b\' a coiu t. Xe\erlheless,
because they are writtei'i b\ the attorne\' general, the\' are often relied on ¡i'l the abseiice ol a
law or court opinion addressing a spiecilic question.
Attorne\' general opii'iioiis are asailable through W’estlaw and LexisN’exis. In addition,
they are often available throLigh lederal or state government W'eb sites and other Iiitei net
resources. 'Ihe opinions are also indi\'iduali\ a\ailable, in slip lorm, through the atton-iex
general’s office. Bound volun'ies ol all the opinions are usualh' ax ailable at law libraries.
B. R e s e a rc h in g C o u rt O p in io n s — L o c a tin g Case La w
After you know where the \ arious court opinions are published, the next step is to become
familiar with the many research soLirces and techniques for locating cases (see lixhibit 4-5).
Whenever you conduct case law research, rciiiciiibt'r lo check the (¡íIvíIucc sheets, pocket purls,
or whatever is used to update the source you are researching to ensure that you lociUe the most
recent court decision that answcr.<: your tjueslion. Where and how \'oli conduct reseai'ch depend
on the amount and t\'pe ol inlormation \'ou ha\e at the outset, lhe niain wa\s to locale case
law are discussed here.
E x h i b i t 4 - 5 Research Sources and Techniques for Locating Cases.
Statutory If y o u r r e s e a r c h i n v o l v e s a s i t u a t i o n t h a t r e q u i r e s t h e
A n notations in te rp re ta tio n o f a statute, read th e s tatute a n d look to
th e case a n n o ta ti o n s fo ll o w i n g th e statute.
D igest If t h e q u e s t i o n b e i n g r e s e a r c h e d d o e s n o t i n v o l v e a s t a t
u t e o r t h e a n n o t a t i o n s d o n o t d i r e c t yoLi t o a r e l e v a n t
case, look to a digest.
Other Casei’ If y o u n e e d to l o c a t e a d d i t i o n a l c o u r t o p i n i o n s , t h e n
Law Research u s e o t h e r r e s e a r c h s o u r c e s S L ic h as leqal e n c y c l o p e d i a s ,
Sources t r e a t i s e s , ALfis, a n d l a w r e v i e w a r t i cl e s .
Shepard’s If y o u k n o w t h e c i t a t i o n o f a c a s e a n d y o u a r e l o o k i n g
Citations and f o r o t h e r c a s e s t h a t h a v e r e f e r r e d t o t h e c a s e o r if y o u
Updating w a n t to k n o w w h e t h e r th e case has b e e n r e v e rs e d or
Research m o d i f i e d , r e f e r t o t h e a p p r o p r i a t e Shepard's c i t a t o r .
Com puter-Aided Research sources and court opinions m a y be located

Research th ro u g h W e s tla w and LexisNexis.
1. Statutory A n notation s
It your research in\'olves a situation that requires the interpretation of a statute, the Urst step is
to read the statute and look to the case annotations following the stiitute. Often the annotations
to the ke\' court decisions following the statute will include a case that is on point. Ihis sa\-es
time spent using another research source such as a digest.
For Example The client robbed a bank wi t h a toy ha nd g u n th at looked e xa ct ly like a real
handgun. The client is charged wi th bank robbery with a da ngerous w e a p o n
unde r 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) & (d). The questi on is w h e t h e r a toy h a ndgun is a d a n g e r o u s
w e a p o n u n d e r t h e statute. Referring to the a nnot a t i ons to the statute in the U n ite d S ta te s
121
C o d e A n n o t a t e d or the U n ite d S ta te s C ode S ervic e, you will find c as es th at a d dr e s s the

q uest i on of w h e t h e r a toy gun is c on s i d e r e d a d a n g e r o us w e a p o n . Other t han c h ec ki n g
to d e t e r m i n e if the c a s e has be en r e ve r s ed or modi fi ed or th er e are no r e c e n t c a s es also
on pomt, no f urt he r s e a r c h m a y be ne ce ss ar y. A di gest doe s not ne ed to be c onsult ed.
If flic ca.se located is not e.xacfly the case \'ou are looking for, that is, it is not c]uife on
point, the opinion nia\’ reference other cases that are on point or prov ide you with a ke\'
number that will lead \'ou to the proper case. Always read the statute first, because the answer
may be in the statute itself or in the annotations.
2. Digest
It'the cjuestion being researched does not invoKe a statute or the annotatit>ns do not direct
you to a relevant case, the next step is to look to a digest. W’est publishes sets of volumes called
digests tor the various reporters. Ihere is a digest lor each regional and state reporter, such as
the Pacific Digest for the Piicific Reporter, and a Pedenil Piiicticc Digest. As discussed previoush-
in scction I\'.B.3, West has divided the areas oflaw into various topics and subtopics. Hach
area is identified b\- a topic name, such as “Assault and Batterv',’’ and each topic is div ided into
subtopics and assigned a kev- number. Ihe digests contain summaries of all the court opinions
under each kev- nuniber subtopic.
If v-()u know a case nan-ie, v-ou can quickk locate it in a digest s table of cases. If you d o n ’t
have a particular case in niind but are looking for a case that addresses the question v-ou are
researching, scan the topic area, locate the relev ant kev- nuniber, and scan the case summaries
to locate the case on point. II there is no case under a particular kev' number, the digest will
refer v-ou to other research sources, such as to a legal encyclopedia cite.
3. C om puter-A ided Research

(^)urt opinions may be located through W'estlaw and I.exisN'exis. Also, court opinions are
olten found through other Internet sources, including the court's otlicial W'eb site.
4. O ther Case Law Research Sources

'\'ou mav- also locate court opinions through other research sources, such as legal encvclopedias,
treatises, .AI.Rs, and law rev iew articles. Ihese and other secondary authority research sources
for locating case law are discussed in Chapters 5 and 6. Csuallv-, however, there are quicker
ways of locating cases than through these sources.
For Example The question you are re se ar chi ng is similar to the questi on raised in R ae lv .
C a d e n a ( p r e s en t e d in Exhibit 4-1): W h e n m ay a person p r e s e nt a t a battery
be liable for a battery w h e n the person does not physi cal l y part i ci pat e in the battery? You
c a n look u nde r "a ss aul t and battery" in an e nc y cl o pe d i a and e ventual ly find a s ecti on
t hat a dd r e ss e s this quest i on and be di re ct ed to speci fi c cas es . You may, h o w e v e r , spend
a lot of ti me readi ng before you l ocate the speci fi c topic you are looking for and spend
e v e n mor e time c hec ki ng the n um e r o u s c a s e s listed before you find the c a s e on point.
T h r o u g h the use of a di gest or W e s t i a w or Lexi sNexi s, your s ea r ch is mor e f o c u s e d and
you will usually find c a s es quicker.
If there is an ALR annotation on the question v’ou are researching, it will provide an in-
depth analysis t)f a specific question and reference to kev- cases addressing the question. IMrst,
however, follow the steps mentioned earlier in this section in B.l and B.2, because if you find
1 22
CHAPTER 4 CASE L A W -RESEARCH A N D BRIEFING
a case on point yt)u may not need the in-depth anai\sis, or the case \'ou tind may mention a
relevant AI.R annotation and sa\e \’ou the time locating it.
5. Shepard’s Citations and Updating Research

It you know the citation of a case and you are looking tor other cases that have referred to
the case, or if you want to know whether the case has been rex ersed or modified, refer to the
appropriate Sh e p a rd 's cWdUn in print, Shcpani's online, or (if you are using Westlaw online)
refer to Westlaw KeyCite. The use oi Shcpani's and Westlaw’s KeyCTte is discussed in (Chapter 5.
You must always check to determine if the case \’ou ha\ e located is good law, that is,
whether the court opinion or part o f t h e opinion \-ou are relying on has been reversed or
modified by a subsec]uent court decision. This may be accomplished through the use oft he
appropriate Shepard's in print or electronicalh' through W'estlaw or LexisNexis. Increasingly,
public and school kuv libraries are discontinuing their subscription to Shepard's citator in
print and instead providing at least one computer with public access to Shepard's online.
VI. COURT OPINIONS— BRIEFING (CASE BRIEF)

A. In t ro d u c tio n
,\s a researcher, you may be assigned the task of reading and brieting court opinions. A court
opinion is usualh' called a case, and a brief of a court opinion is usually called a case brief or
a case ¡d>stract. A case brief is a written summarx- identitving the essential components ot
a court opinion.
B. Im p o rta n c e o f B rie fin g

The process of briefing a case serves the following purposes and lunctions:
1. Analysis/learning. W'riting a summary ot the essential elements ot an opinion in
an organized format leads to better understanding ot the case and the reasoning
o f t h e court. Opinions are often complex, and the reasoning is hard lo identify,
difficult to follow, or spread throughout the opinion. The preparation of a case
brief ret]uires stud)’ of tlie opinion, identification of \-chat is essential, and elimina
tion ot the nonessential. This process ot stud) ing a case and anah zing it helps the
reader gain a better understanding of it. The anah tical process of focusing on the
structure o f t he case helps you gain an understanding oft he reasoning, thereby
assisting your analysis oft he law.
2. Research/reference. A case brief is a timesaxing research tool. It provides a
summary ofthe essentials of a case that can be quickly referred to when reviewing
the case. This saves the time that would be spent rereading and reanalyzing
the entire case in order to remember what the court decided and why. When
working on a complex legal problem iiuolx ing several court opinions, or wTien
time has passed since a case was read, the ax’ailability of case briefs can result
in a considerable saving of time, because it is ot'len difticult to remember which
opinion said what.
A case brief is a \ aluable tool for the attorne)’ assigned to the case. The at
torney may not need to read all the cases related to an issue. The attorney can read
the case briefs prepared bs' the researcher and quickly weed out those cases that
are not key and identity and focus on the cases that should be read.
3. Writing. The process of briefing a case is a xaluable xvriting tool, it provides you
with an exercise in which )’ou learn to sift through a court opinion, identify the
essential elements, and assemble xour analx'.îs into a concise written summarv.
12 3
P A R T II LEGAL R ESEA RCH
C. H o w to Read a Case
Bctbro you can briel'a ease, \'ou must first read it carefully. Sometimes it is necessary to read
the entire opinion or parts of it sew'ral times tt) gain an understanding ofthe decision and the
court s reasoning. 'i’oLi cannot e.\pect to skim or quickh' read an opinion and hope to under
stand it. It cannot he read like a newspaper or ncnel for se\'eral reasons:
I. Iudges write opinions with the assumption that the reader has an understanding
ol the law, legal terminology, and the legal SN'stem. If you are a beginner, you are
slowed by ha\ ing to look up the meaning of legal terms and become familiar with
the st\ le ot legal writing.
For Example In the first s en t en c e of R a e l v. C adena, court uses the phrase

"jointly and s ev er a l l y liable." W i t h o u t a legal b a c k gr o u n d , a
novi ce wo u l d ha ve to stop readi ng and look up t h e s e t e r m s before continuing
to re ad the case.
Do not get discouraged it at first it takes a long time to read and understand case law.
It is normal to “crawl tiirough" ct)urt opinions when \-ou are a novice at reading them. As \’ou
become familiar with the terminology and st\ie of legal opinions, you will read them faster
and with greater imderstanding. lhe process, howe\'er, is gradual and usualh' takes months
rather than days to learn. \ o matter your skill le\'el, \'ou must read cases carefulh' to acquire
a lull understanding.
2. Some opinions are dillicult to read and take time because they invoh'e complex,
abstract, or unfamiliar subiects with multiple issues. In such instances, you ma\'
ha\ e to read the entire case or portions ot it several times. '\'ou may ha\'e to prepare
outlines or charts as you read to help you lollow and imderstand the court’s
reasoning. N'ou may have to refer to a treatise, encyclopedia, or other research
tool to obtain an understanding ofthe area of law in\'ohed in tlie case.
.V Some opinions are diliicult t(' read because thev are poorh’ written. Not all judges
are great writers. Ihe reasoning mav he scattered throughout tiie case or not
completeh' presented.
1. Some opinions are diliicult to read and understand because the court may have
incorrectly interpreted or applied the law. '^'ou may be surprised when \ou read
the holding that the ctnut reached a conclusion that is the opposite ofthe outcome
\ ( ) U expected. Remember that some decisions are overruled because a higher or
subsequent coin t determined that the earlier opinion was incorrect. 'Iherefore, it
is iitiportdnt to raid cacli cüíc with a critical eye.
lhe difficulty in reading and tmderstanding an opinion nia\' have nothing to do with
your abilitv' to read the case.
Ihe purpose of reading a court opinion is to obtain an understanding o f t h e law or
principle addressed b\- the court. To gain this understanding, cases imist be read and analyzed
with cloic icriitiiiy. Ihe abilit\' to read cases with greater understanding and speed conies with
experience.
Se\eral chapters in this text present specific guidelines to assist the reader in reading,
interpreting, and analyzing court opinions:
1. Identification ot the key facts of a court opinion is discussed in (Chapter 9, section \'ll.
2. Identification ot the isstie in a court opinion is addressed in (Chapter 10, section V.
,v How to determine if a coLU't opinion is on point and nia\' be used as precedent is
coN'ered in (Chapter 12, section l\'.
124 1. (Coimteranalysis in case law is discussed in (Chapter 13, section \'1.C.
D. Case B rie f— E le m e n ts
lliere is no standard tonn tor a briel ol a court opinion, nor are there any hard-and-last rules
governing format. Some texts recommend that case briels ciintain as lew as rt\'e parts, some
as man\- as sixteen, 'ihe style ot a case brief may var\- from individual to individual and otfice
to office. Be prepared to adapt to dilferent st\Tes.
Ihe goal ol a good case brief is a concise summary ot tbe essentials ol the court opinion
that may be used as a quick reference in the future. Iherefore, the brief should be concise.
It certainh' should not be as long or longer than the case. Do not fill the brief with excessive
quotes from the case or long simimaries. Spend more time thinking than writing. Reduce the
opinion to its essence.
A recommended outline for a case-brief format is presented in Exhibit 4-6. 'Ihis format
should be viewed as a basic outline oft he essential parts of a case brief. It can be adapted as
necessary to meet vour needs. A discussion of each section ofthe outline follows.
E x h ib it 4 - 6 C a s e -B rie f F o rm a t.
N a m e o f c a s e a n d w h e r e it c a n b e f o u n d
N a m e s and legal status of th e parties
Facts: A s u m m a r y of th o s e facts th a t d e s c rib e th e history of

e v e n ts that c a u s e d th e parties t o b e in c o u r t ( b a c k g r o u n d
facts) and th o s e facts to w h ic h the law applies and are e s
sential to th e de cis ion re ac h ed by th e court (k ey facts)
Prior W h a t h a p p e n e d in t h e l o w e r c o u r t o r c o u r t s
Proceedings:
Issue: T h e specific q u e s tio n (s ) a d d r e s s e d a n d a n s w e r e d by th e

c ourt (S tate th e issue as n a r r o w l y a n d c o n c r e te ly as p o s
s i b l e i n t h e c o n t e x t o f t h e c a s e f a c t s T h e isscie s t a t e m e n t
s h o u l d in c l u d e t h e rule of l a w a n d t h e k e y facts.)
Holding: T h e court's a n s w e r to th e issue
Reasoning: W h y t h e c o u r t r u l e d a s it d i d ; t h e c o u r t ' s a p p l i c a t i o n o f
t h e c a s e o r s t a t u t o r y l a w t o t h e f a c t s o f t h e c a s e . It s h o u l d
include:
a. T h e r u l e o f l a w t h a t a p p l i e s
b. H o w t h e c o u r t a p p l i e d t h e r u l e o f l a w t o t h e f a c t s
Disposition; W h a t o rd e r w a s e n t e r e d as a result of th e h o ld in g
( e . g . , " T h e j u d g m e n t o f t h e t r i a l c o u r t is r e v e r s e d . " )
Com m ents: O bservations concerning the opinion
1. Citation
'Ihe citation includes the name o ft h e parties, where the case can be found, the court that
issued the opinion, and the year ofthe opinion.
125
For Example In R a e l i/. C adena, the citation is R a e l m. C adena, 93 N . M . 684, 604 P.2d 822
(Ct. App. 1979).
Rael V. C a d e n a — n a m e of the case
93 N .M. 684, 604 P.2d 822— the volume and page numbers of the books w h e r e the
c ase can be found. This case can be found in volume 93 o f t h e N e w M e x ic o Reports
at page 684 and in volume 604 o f t h e Pacific Reporter, s econd series, at page 822.
(Ct. App. 1979)— The court th at r e nd e re d the opinion and t he y e a r of the opinion.
The N e w M e x i c o Court of A p p e a l s r e n de r ed the opi ni on in 1979. If the date
a lone a p p e a r s in p a re n t h e s e s — (1979)— the hi ghest co u r t o f t h e state w r o t e the
opinion. If t h e r e is no r e f e r en c e to a state reporter, a r e f e r e n c e to the state w o u l d
also be i ncl uded wi th the date: ( N . M . Ct. App. 1979).
2. Parties
The caption at the beginning ofthe opinion gives the full name and legal status of each party.
For Example Eddie Rael, Pl ai nt if f- Appel l ee

Emilio C a d e na , D ef e nd a n t - A p p e l l a n t
M a n u e l Cad e na , D e f e n d a nt - A p p e l l a n t
The legal status refers to the litigation status o ft he parties. This includes the status at
the trial and appellate court levels. The status is usually indicated in the caption. The plaiutiff
is the person who brought the lawsuit, and the defendant is the party against whom the suit
is brought. Often terminology other than plaintiff and defendant is used.
For Example P e titio n e r an6 r e s p o n d e n t a te often used in d i vo rc e cases. T h e peti ti oner

is the party w h o filed the di vorce petition, and the r e sp o nd e n t is the person
agai nst w h o m the di vorce petition is filed.
The appeal status ofthe parties immediately t'ollows the trial court status in the caption.
For Example In R ael I'. Cadena, Eddie Rael w a s the plaintiff attrial (he filed the lawsuit), and
he is the party against w h o m the appeal w a s filed (he w o n a t t h e trial level).
3. Facts
The facts section of a case brief includes a summary of those facts that describe the history ofthe
events gi\ ing rise to the litigation. Tlie facts section should include key and background facts.
a. Key Facts
Ihe ke\- facts are those facts in the opinion to which the law applies and that are essential to
the decision reached by the court. They are those facts upon wTiich the outcome ofthe case is
determined. If the key facts were different, the outcome ofthe case would probably be different.
b. Back gr oun d Facts

Background facts are those facts that put the key facts in context. They are facts necessary to
make sense ofthe story and thereby provide the reader with an overall context within which
the key facts occur, an overall picture ofthe events oft he case.
126
CHAPTER 4 C A S E L A W - RESEARCH A N D BRIEFING
For Example In an automobi l e collision case, w h e r e the i m p a c t t o o k pl ace on a c ount r y

road, the f act th at the collision took pl ace on a c ount r y road m ay not be a
key fact, but its inclusion in the f a ct section of the brief helps provide the r e a d e r wi th an
o v e r v i e w of the context and s c e n e of the collision.
In some tc.xt.s, lhe casc-bi-icf iornuil pi'c.sent.s lhe prior proceeding.s before the facts.
11 is reconuiiended that the tacts section precede the prior proceedings section ot the briet.
Since the facts ot the case are the e\ enls that led to the litigation and, therefore, occurred
prior to the litigation, it is logical that in the case-brief format the\' should precede the
court e\'ents (the prior proceedings). .Also, it is easier, from a briefing standpoint, to
identit}' what happened before the matter went to the trial court, then identify what
happened in court.
4. Prior Proceedings/Procedural History

Prior p ro cee d in gs are those e\ ents that occurred in each coiul before the case reached the
court whose opinion \'ou arc briefing. Most opinions are not written hy trial courts; the\' are
written by courts of appeals rev iewing the decision(s) of a trial coLu t—either:
An interniediar\' coui t of appeals, such as the L'nited States (.'ourt ot Appeals, or
lhe highest court of'the ¡urisdiction, such as the L'nited Stales Supreme (Court
Iherefore, there are usLialh prior proceedings. lt'\'ou are briefing an opinion ol'a trial court,
there may be no prior proceedings because the trial courl was the first court to hear the case,
lhe prior proceedings should include:
1. lhe part}- initialing the proceetling aiul the cause of action
2. lhe coLirl before which the proceetling was bi'OLight
,L lhe lesLilt ol the proceeding
4. lhe parly appealing aiul whal is being appealed
For Example "The plaintiff sued the d e f en d a n t claiming med i c al mal pr ac t i ce . The trial
court granted the defendant's motion to dismiss, ruling that the statute of
limitations had run. The plaintiff a ppeal ed the trial court's ruling t h a t t h e statute had run."
5. Issue(s)
fhe is s u e is the legal question addressed and answered b\ the court, ll is the precise legal
(.juestion raised by the specific tacts ofthe case. The issue should be staled as narrowh- and
concisely as possible in the conle.xl ol the tacts of the case. A courl opinion nia\' address
se\ eral issues. Identify each issue separateh' in the case brief unless you are instructed to
brief onl\ one issue.
In an opinion involving an aut omobi l e collision c as e, the court a d d r e ss e s

several issues, s ome involving i nsu r an ce , s ome involving e v i d e nc e , s ome
involving ne gl ig enc e, and s ome involving battery. The attor ney w o r k i n g on a client's case
is i nt e re st ed only in the court's resolution of an evi de nt i ar y questi on raised by t he f act s
in the court case. The client's c a s e involves an evi de nt i ar y questi on and f a c t situation
simi l ar to th at a d d r e s s ed in the court opinion. T h e r e f o r e , a r e s e a r c h e r m a y b e i nst ructed
to provi de a c a s e brief of only the portion of the opinion that a d d r e s s e s the evi de nt i ar y
quest i on. Al t hough the opinion involves sev era l issues, the c a s e brief will a dd r e s s only
one issue.
1 27
6. H olding
Ihc h o l d i n g is tlic court’s resolution ot the issue. It is the decision ot the court, the answer
to the issue. There should he a separate holding lor each issue identiiied in the issue section
ol the case briet. In some briel lormats the holding is a simple, one word, \es-or-no resptmse
to the issue. The holding should be presented as a complete response to the issue, which
means that the presentation ot'the holding should include all the elements ot'the issue and
should be in the form ot'a statement.
For Example T h e i ssue in t he c a s e is, " U n d e r h i d i an a' s p r o b a t e c o d e , Ind. Code

§ 29-1-5-2, IS a will valid if the w i t n e s s e s ar e brothers of the test at or?" If
the court ruled t h a t t h e will w a s valid, the holding should be pr e se nt ed as follows; " U n d e r
I ndi ana's probat e code, Ind. Code § 29-1-5-2, a will is valid if the w i t n e s s e s are brothers
of t he test at or as long as th e r e is no e v i d e n c e of undu e i nfl uence. "
7. Reasoning
L'sualK' the largest part ot an opinion is the court's presentation ot the reasons in support ot
the holding, lust as lor each issue there is a holding, tor each holding there should be reasons
e.xplaining \\ h\- the holding was reached.
The reasoning portion ol an opinion usualK consists ol two parts:
1. Ihe rule ol law that go\erns the tacts ot the dispute (it may be constitiitional, leg-
islati\’e, or case law, and it may consist of any legal principle, doctrine, or rule of
law that applies to the issue in the case).
2. The court’s application ol the rule lo the lacts oft he case.
For Example The issue in the c a s e is, " U n de r state tort law, does a battery o c c u r w h e n
l a w e n f o r c e m e n t offi cers, w h il e mak i ng a l awf ul arrest, e n c o u n t e r r e
si s ta nc e , use f o r c e to o v e r c o m e th at re s i s t an ce , and c ont i nue to use f orce a ft e r :he
re s i s t an ce c ea se s? "
The reasoni ng pre se nt ed in the opinion is as follows:
Rule of l a w — "In Sm ith v. J ones , the S u p r e m e Court ruled th at a civil battery
oc cu r s w h e n e v e r unaut hori zed harmful c on t a c t o c cu r s "
Appl icat i on of this rule to the fact s of the c a s e "The de f e n d a n ts a r g u e that i n
a sm uc h as t hey w e r e maki ng a l awful arrest, t hey w e r e a uthor ized to u s e f o r : e ;
t h er e f or e, thei r c o nd u c t w a s not unaut hori zed wi thi n t he m e a ni ng of Smith
\j. J ones. In this case, h o wev er , a l t hough the officers w e r e maki ng a lawful
arrest, thei r c o n du c t c e a s e d to be l awful w h e n they c ont i nue d to use f o x e
a gai nst plaintiff after plaintiff c e a s e d resisting. L a w e n f o r c e m e n t of fi cers are
a uthor ized to use the a m o u n t of fo r c e n e ce s s a r y to o v e r c o m e r e si stance. Af
t er r e si st an ce c e a se s, a ny c ont i nue d use of f o r c e is unaut hori zed wi t hi n 'he
m e a ni n g of S m ith v. J o n e s and const i tut es a civil battery."
In some instances, it is diliicult to identif)' the reasoning in a court opinion becau.e it is

scattered throughout the opinion. A helpkil approach is to work backward from the iKuhng.
Look to the holding first, and keep it in mind while reading the case. It may be easier o see
how the court assembled the reasons in support ol the holding il you know the holdng or
outcome while reading the case.
128
C H A PTER 4 CASE L A W -RESEARCH A N D BRIEFING
Also, the rule ot law or legal principle go\eriiiiig the issue is usualh' clearly stated by
the court and is easy to identity. The reasons tor the application ot the rule or principle to the
tacts ot the case usually t'ollow the presentation ot the go\ erning law. I heretore, identification
ot the governing law may also help you locate the reasoning.
The reasoning section ot'the case brief should include the rule oflaw and a summary
ot the court’s application ot the rule ot law to the tacts—how the rule of law applies to the
lacts t)f the case. I.engthy quotes from the case should be av'oided. The reasoning should be
summarized.
For Example In the e x c e s si ve f o r c e situation p r e se nt ed in the previ ous e xa mp l e, t he

re as oni ng secti on of the c as e brief is as follows: "A civil battery o c c u r s
w h e n e v e r unauthorized harmful cont a ct occurs. Smith i/. Jones. L a w e n f o r c e me n t officers
ar e a uthor ized to o v e r c o m e resi stance. Af t e r resi st ance c e a se s, any c ont i nue d use of
f o r c e is unaut hori zed and consti tutes a civil b a t t e r y "
Also included in the reasoning section is a sumniar\ oft he reasoning of an\- concur
ring opinion.
8. D isp osition
The d isp o sitio n includes the relief granted b\' the court, which is the order entered by the
court. This section is usualh' located at the veiy end ofthe opinion.
For Example T he j u dg me n t o f t h e trial court w a s affirmed.
9. C om m en ts
Include' in this section ofthe case bvief any obsciv,\t\ons y^û nvAV Uavc concerning the court
opinion. Ihis could include any ot the following:
1. Why you agree or disagree with the decision.
2. A summary of any dissenting opinions. Does the dissenting opinion contain in
formation that is useful in understanding the majority opinion? Hoes the dis
senting opinion contain valuable legal arguments that may be useful in arguing
against use of the case as precedent? 'Ihis is especially helpful if the holding of
the court goes against your client’s position. Sole: Some case-brief formats have a
separate section for dissenting opinions.
3. WTiy the case may or ma\' ncit be on point.
For Example Referring to the e xcessi ve f orce e xa mpl e , a ss um e t h a t in the cli

ent's case there is evi dence t h a t t he client never c e a se d resisting.
You might include the following c o m m e n t in the c o m m e n t section o f t h e brief: "It
is quest i onable w h e t h e r this c ase can be relied on as p r e c e d e n t due to the dif
f e r e nc e s b e t w e e n the f act s o f t h e c ase and our client's facts. In the court case,
force conti nued a fter resi stance c ea se d, and the court held t h a t t h e conti nued
use of force constituted a b a t t e ry I nas muc h as in our c ase t h e r e is e v i d en c e
that r esi stance n e v e r c e a se d, the court opinion m a y not be appl icable. "
129
I. lieferciices to the opinion in subsequent eases or secondary sources, sucli as a law

re\ie\v aiticle.
3. Any inlorniation updating the case, that is, concerning whether the case is still
good law (see next section).
E. Case B rie f— U p d a tin g

Whenever an assignment requires \’ou to brief a case, \’ou should determine if the case is still
gocid law, which means \ou must check to determine if the opinion has been reversed, modified,
or in an\- wa\- affected b\- a later court decision. 'Ihe primar\- method of accomplishing this is
through the use ofthe appropriate Slicpaiii's citator. Shepard’s citators are published b\' Lexis-
Nexis. A researcher must be familiar with Shepard’s ('.itatioiis in order to update a court opinion.
Instructions on how to use a Shepani’s citator are included in the beginning of each volume.
In addition, certain computerized serx'ices prov ide online citators that are usually more
up to date than the Shepard's printed citati)rs. 'Ihese online services include:
l.exCjte—includes a list ot the lecent cases citing a case (available through I.exis-
N’exis) (see Chapter 7)
Insta-(jte—provides a summarv of the prior and subsequent historv' of a case and
includes references to the case in C.orpits juris Seeiuiditin (available through W'estlaw)
KeyCMte—W'estlaw’s citator service that includes information on whether a case has
been reversed, modified, or in any way affected b\- later court decisions, as well as a
list of all cases citing a case
Shepard's Citator .Si’n'/ci’.' —presents information not yet included in the Shepard’s
printed volumes (see (Chapter 3)
VII. K E Y P O I N T S C H E C K L I S T : Locating, Reading, and Briefing

Court Opinion
If the research question involves a statute, look to the statute and the statutory anno
tations first to locate case law. II the statutorv' annotations do not provide help, next
look to a digest.
Read opinions caretfilly and slowiv. You cannot speed read case law. Often v’oii mav-
have to take notes as you read a case.
If you have a probleni identif v ing the kev- facts, refer to (Chapter 9.
/ W'atch for the court’s statement ofthe issue. Ihe court mav- state the issue in a broad
or procedural context. If v-ou have a problem identifying or stating the issue, refer to
(Chapters 10 and 1 I .
/ If you hav e trouble understanding the majority opinion, often the concurring or dis
senting opinion will summarize and clarifv- the arguments and reasoning adopted bv-
the majority. Be aware that the dissenting opinion mav- mischaracterize the majority
opinion in support of its own position.
If )-ou have trouble understanding the opinion, Shepardize the case to deterniine
if there are any other cases, law rev iew articles, ALR citations, or other secondar)-
soLirces of information concerning the case. CConsult a treatise that discusses the
area of law inv-olved in the opinion. Refer to the digest for other cases addressing the
same area of law.
Do not be discouraged if v-ou hav-e trouble reading and understanding opinions. It
takes time and experience, lhe more v-oli read opinions, the easier it becomes. Your
skill iniprov-es o n k through doing. Iherefore, read as many cases as possible.
130
CHAPTER 4 CASE L A W - R E S E A R C H A N D BRIEFING
lU’ad opinions with ;i critical eye. Ciourt opinions are just that —opinions. On occa
sion, courts are wrong. Do not read with unquestioning taith. Read critically. Ques
tion! .Ask \’ourselt, "Does the reasoning support the conclusion?’’
VIII. APPLICATION
This section tirst discusses Vanessa’s assignment to locate a case that could be used in a response
to a motion to dismiss. This is followed b\- a briet ot the case (R a e l i'. ('a d c u a ) . The text and
brief of S terlin g C o m p u t e r S y ite in s o f I'exus, hie. r. T exa i Pipe B e n d in g C .otnpany tollow the
brief of R ael v, C a d e n a . The brief t)f the Sterling case is included to prov ide another example
ot a case brief.
A. L o c a tin g Rael u. Ca den a

X'anessa begins her search for an appropriate case b\' looking lor a statute that establishes a cix’il
caLise of action for battery. (Tvil batters' is tort law, and in most states the majority of tort law is
case law (established bv court decision) rather than statutor}’ law. 11 there is a statute, \'anessa
looks to the statutory annotations to see if there is a case on point, that is, a case in which the
court addressed the question of whether an indiv idual present at the scene of a battery, who
did nothing more that strongly encourage the perpetrator, could be liable tor civil batterv’.
If there is no statute or a case on point in the annotations, then \'anessa looks to the
regional or state reporter digest under the term b atte ry . Assume that Vanessa resides in New
Mexico. She refers to the index ol either the N e w M e x i c o R ep orts or the Pacific Digest to locate
the volume number for battery. Batter)' is indexed Linder “assault and batterv ,” and b\' scan
ning the topic ke\' numbers she locates Ke\' 18—Pers(Mis Liable. She looks under “persons
liable” because that kev is closest to the tacts identitied in the issLie: Is a bystander liable when
he encouraged the perpetrator to hit the client? Li)oking at the case summaries under Ke\'
18, Vanessa finds Rael i'. C'adena, 93 N.M. 684, 604 P.2d 822 (Ct. App. 1979), a case which is
on point (see Hxhibit t I ). She continues her search to locate any other cases that ma\' be on
p(>int She checks to determine it the Rael case has been m erruled ('r ('therwise nioditied bv
sul->sequent court decisions.
It there is no case under Kev 18, the digest will reter lo a legal encv'clopedia cite that
.iddresses the topic and provides reterence to cases. At this point, \'anessa could also look lor
an .AI.R annotation that discusses the question. She could also perform this search electroni-
calh' using Westiaw or LexisNexis.
B. B rie f o f Rael u. Cadena

The sample briet is presented tirst, lollowed b\' connnents on the briet.
C ita t io n : R ael v. C a d e n a , 93 N.M. 684, 604 R2d 822 (Ct. App. 1979)
Parties: Hddie Rael, Plaintilf-Appellee

I'jiiilio Cadena and Manuel (;adena, Defendants-Appellants
Facts: While visiting Hniilio Cadena’s honie, Ixidie Rael was beaten
by Hmilio’s nephew, Manuel ('adena. After the attack began,
Hmilio yelled to Manuel, “Kill him!” and “Hit him more!”
Hmilio never actuallv struck Rael nor physicalh' participated
in the battery. Rael was hospitalized as a result ofthe beating.
P r io r P r o c e e d i n g : Hddie Rael sued Hmilio and Manuel Cadena for batterv'. The
trial court, sitting without a jur\', found Hmilio jointly liable
with Manuel for the batter)'. Hmilio appealed the iudgment of
the trial court.
131
Issue: Under New Mexico tort law, does a battery occur wlien an
indiN'idiial, present at a battery, encourages the perpetrator
of tlie battery b\- s elling “Kill him!” and “Hit him more!” but
does not in any other way participate in the battery?
H o l d in g : Yes. An indiv idual may be liable for battery by encouraging
or inciting the perpetrator b\- words or acts.
R e a s o n in g : The rule oflaw in the United States is that civil liability for
assault and battery is not limited to the direct perpetrator but
extends to any person who by an\' means aids or encourages
the act. The act of verbal encouragement at the scene ma\-
give rise to liability. The trial court found that Emilio Cadena
\ elled encouragement to his nephew while the nephew was
beating Rael and, therefore, under the rule oflaw, is jointly
liable for the batter}-.
D isp o sitio n : The judgment ofthe trial court was affirmed.
C om m ents: If, in the client’s case, less aggressive language was used, it
ma}' be \ aluable to re\’iew other cases to determine the t\ pe
of encouragement necessar}- to constitute a battery. Here,
Emilio’s comments were \ erv aggressive. Would he ha\-e
been liable tor batter}- had he merely said, “Go
ahead, Manuel”?
C. C o m m e n ts on th e Case B rie f
Note that the brief includes the essential information ol the case:
1. The name ofthe case and where it can be found
2. The names oft he parties and their status belore the court
3. Ihc facts that gave rise to the dispute
T. WTiat the trial court tlid
5. The issue, or legal question
6. The holding
7. The law governing the issue and the application of that law to the facts of the
dispute
8. Tlie disposition
9. Relevant comments
^'ou may include in the comments section a notation that the issue in the case was a
matter of first impression in New- Mexico; that is, the issue addressed in the case had never
been decided b}- New Mexico courts. That is why the reasoning refers to n on -Ne w Mexico
law and secondary authority rather than to New Mexico law. See the reasoning section
o ft h e brief
D. B rie f o f Sterling C o m p u t er Systems o f Texas, Inc. u. Texas Pipe

Bending C om pany
A second example ofthe application oft he principles presented in this chapter is illustrated
with the brief of the Sterling (kiinpntcr Systems case. The case is presented in the following
text. (Comments concerning the case brief follow the brief
13 2
CHA PTER 4 CASE L A W RESEARCH A N D BRIEFING
CASE lor lexas Pipe Bending. (Certain prices were quoted in the
agreement, whicli were “based on a minimum ot 20,000 digi
STKRI.lNCi COMFL TKR SVSTl.MS Ol- Tl.XAS, IN'C., tized cards per month." Ihe term of the agreement was to
Appellant, ha\c been for one \ear, but after pros’iding cards and pay
\, ing in full lor eight niimths, I'exas Pipe Bending refused to
THXAS I'lPH BHNDINC, COMRAXY, Appellee., furtlier prox ide Sterling w'ith digitized cards, ihe trial court
granted i’exas Pipe Ik’nding’s motion for summarx- judg
No. 963.
ment. .AlthoLigh the judgment does not so recite, it xvas ap-
OPINION parentlx" based on the argument proposed by i'exas Pipe
(Court ot (Ci\-il .Appeals ot Texas. Bending that the contract was unenforceable because ofthe
1loiiston ( Nth Hist.). lack of mutualitx. Sterling has appealed.
Ihe relevant portion ot the contract is tound in a clause
March 20, 1974.
denominated as “i-IMl’l'A'l'iON OF l.iABIl.i'i'Y.” 'Ihis clause
Rehearing Denied April 10, 1974. prox ides in part as follows:
307 S.\V.2d 282 (Tex. Ct. App. 1974) S(CS [Sterling] shall not be liable for its failure to profide
|sic| the serxices herein and shall not be liable for any
Action tor breach ol'contract lor data processing ser\ ice. losses resLilting to the client ('I’exas Pipe Bending] or any
The District (Court, Harris (Coiintw Paul Pressler, |., granted one else by reason ol such failure.
sunmiary iudgnient lor deleiulant, and plaintili appealed, Ihe general rule as stated in Tcxiii Fanii Bureau C'.otton
(he (Court ot (Ci\ il Appeals, I’unks, (C. |., held that contract, Ais'ii r. Sloviill. 113 lex. 273, 233 S.W. 1101,1103 (1923), is;
which contained an express pros ision that plaintili would
not be liable tor an outright relusal to pei'lorni data pi'ocessing [AI contract must he based upon a valid consideration,
services tor detendant. and which contained no requirements and ... a contract in w-hich there is no consideration mox -
that plaintifl niake a reasonable etlort to perform, tailed lor ing trom one partx', or no obligation upon him, lacks mu-
want of nuitualit\- and was unenfoiceable. tuaiit}-, is unilateral, and imenforceable.
Atlirmed. L'nder the express terms ofthe contract in question Ster

ling would not be liable for an outright refusal to pert'orm
Contracts 10(2) the data processing serxices. Ihis tact renders its obligation
(ConUacV, which coniaiucd c\pv-css pvovision lh.\l plAiniiil a nullitx-.
would not be liable tor an (uitright relusal lo perform data Sterling cites various cases which purportedly support
proce,ssing services tor defendanl, and which contained no its position that the trial court erred in granting summary
requirement that plaintiff make a reasonable effort to per judgnieni tor Texas iîpe ik’iiding. 'Ihe gist of tliese cases is
form, failed for want ol niutuality and was unenf'orceable. that although a contract may not expressly obligate a partx-
to perform, such an obligation may be implied by its terms.
Alvin L. Zimmerman, Houston, tor appellant. In i'exas (ias Utilities (Company x-. Barrett, 460 S.W.2d 409
Robert H. Singleton, Pei'cy D. Williams, floListon, for ('lex. Sup. 1970), the Texas Supreme (Court held, under a
appellee. similar contention, that there xvas a niutuality of obligation.
In that case the contract provided that the (¡as Company
TUNKS, Chief lustiee. would not be liable for failure to delixer xvhen such failure
was “caused by conditions beyond its reasotiable control,"
The issue in this case is the propriety of a summary judg and then enumerated certain situations which exemplified
ment for the defendant in a breach of contract suit, which the above phrase (over none ot which would the (Cias C om
was granted on the theor\- that the contract lacked niutuality. pany have control). The (Court noted, “it ]Gas Company]
The appellant. Sterling (Computer Systems of I’exas, Inc., was bound, hoxvever, to supply available natural gas to re
brought suit for breach of contract against the appellee, Texas spondents ...” i'exas Gas Utilities Company v. Barrett, supra
Pipe Bending (Company. In essence, the contract in question 460 S.W.2d at 413. in the present case there existed no re
provided that i'exas Pipe Bending was to provide Sterling quirement that Sterling make a reasonable effort to perform,
with digitized cards and computer programs each month, 'ihe exculpatorx' clause allowed Sterling to refuse to perform
with W 'h i c h Sterling was to perform data processing services with impLUiity.
(Continued)
133
( iL'incnt l’i(idi.ii.i.'rs’ Rclining (Co., 277 S.W. 634 (Tex. losses resulting to the client j'lexas Pipe[ or anvone else b\'
Comm'ii .\pp. 1923. iilgnit adopleii), was another ease in reason ol sLich lailure."
whieh nuiUiahtx was toinid. lhal ease involved a eontiacl
lor an agent’s eommission. Ky the terms ol the agreement PRIOR PROCKFDINC.S:
the principal was to pa\ the agent a commission on goods
which “nia\‘ be supplied ” b\' the principal. N'otwith.standing Sterling sued Texas Pipe for breach ol contract. Texas Pipe
this proN'isioii the (Commissit)ii ol .Appeals held that the con moved for smnmary judgment, arguing that the contract was
tract impliedh' obligated the principal to suppK' goods to the unenlorceable because it lacked muttiality. lhe trial coiut
agent. ! Iowever, the (Coin't staled: granted the motion. Sterling appealed.
[Als there is no language used which would clearly indi
cate that the company was not obligated to fin'nish goods ISSUE:
and products, the courts are not warranted in holding that
no such obligatiiin was imposed ... b\’ its terms. (Clement Under Texas contract law, does a contract lack consideration
V. Producers’ Refming (Co., supra at 633.
and is, therefore, inienforceable if it contains a limitation of
liability clause that pro\ ides that a part\' “shall not be liable
lhe case at bar is distinguishable because the contract lor its failiH'e to provide the services herein and shall not be
contained an express provision that Sterling would not be liable for an\’ losses resulting ... bv reason ol such laikn'e"?
liable if it did not pertorni. Various other cases cited by ap
pellant are similarly distinguishable because in those cases HOI DINCi:
contracts were iinoKed which did not expressh’ provide that
one ol the contracting parties could tail to perform without \es. Under Texas contract law, a contract lacks consideration
incurring liabilit)-. and is unenforceable if it contains a limitation ol liability
■As a matter of law the contract in question lails lor want ol clause that provides that a part}’ “shall not be liable for its
mutualit). Ihe trial coint correctly granted sunimar\’ iudg- lailine to pro\ ide the ser\ ices herein and shall iu)t be liable
ment lor the deleiuiant, Texas Pipe Bending (Comjuiny. lor any losses resulting ... by reason ol such tailure.”
.Atln ined.
REASONINCi:
CITATION:
lhe rule ol law presented in Ic.Xiis ¡■arm Ihircau ( aiIIoh
Siciiiiig C.oniputcr Syslcnii oj I’c.xiis. Inc. i: hwas Pipe Hciidiiig socialioii V. Sloviill, 1 13 lex. 273. 233 S.WC 1101 ( 1923), is that
('oinpdiiy, 307 S.V\'.2d 282 (Tex. (Ct. .App. 1974). where there is no obligation upon a party to a contract, the
i.ontract lacks nuilualitv, is unilateral, and is unenlorceable.
PARIIKS: Under the limitation clause. Sterling is not liable loi' its re
ftisal to perlorm. Iherelore, as a matter of law, the contract
Sterling (Computer Ssstems oi lexas. Inc., Plaintill Appellant lails lor want ol mutualit)'.
Texas Pipe Bending (Company, Defendant Appellee
DISPOSITION:
FACTS:
lhe trial court’s granting of the motion for summar)’ iudg
Sterling (Computer S\stems (Sterling) entered into a con ment was afhrmed
tract with I'e.xas Pipe Bending ( Texas Pipe) under which
Texas Pipe was to pro\-ide Sterling with digitized cards and COMMENTS:
computer programs each month with which Sterling was
to perform data-processing services for i'exas Pipe. After Ihe court did not address any potential avenues of relief
comph ing for eight months, Texas Pipe refused to provide that may be a\ailable lo Steiling m equity, such as equitable
Sterling with the cards, lhe contract contained the following restitution or reliance. Such avenues may be available in our
provision, “S(CS [Sterling] shall not be liable for its faikire to case and slK>uld be e.xplored. Also, does Sterling have a claim
prohde [sic] the ser\'ices herein and shall not be liable for any against the drafters ol the i.untiact for legal malpractice?
1 34
E. C o m m e n ts o n th e Case B rie f— P ro c e d u ra l v e rs u s
S u b s ta n tiv e Issues
Note that the court identifies the issue as: “ Ihe issue in this case is the propriety ot a s u m
mary judgment for the defendant in a breach of contract suit... .” 'Ihe actual issue in the case,
however, is whether a contract is enforceable when it contains a clause that allows a party to
escape liability when it tails to pertorm. Olten a court will state the issue in the procedural
context of how the matter came before the court.
For Example " T h e I ssue in this c a s e is w h e t h e r t h e m o t i on f o r s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t

w a s p r o p e r l y g r a n t e d by the trial c o u r t . " This is h o w t he m a t t e r c a m e
b e f o r e t h e c o u r t p r o c e du r a l l y : An a p p e a l w a s t a k e n f r om t h e trial court' s ruling on t h e
m ot i o n f o r s u m m a r y j u d g m e n t . T h e real i ssue i nvo l v es a que st i on of w h e t h e r , in light
of t h e f a c t s and t h e a p p l i c a b l e l aw, t h e r e w a s a s u f f i c i en t basi s fo r t h e c o u r t to rule
as it did.
In answ'ering the procedural c]uestion, the court actually addresses the substantive
question raised by the facts of th e case. Ihc iiibstiiiiti\’c question is wluit tiu' ease is actually
about. In this case, summary judgment was granted because, as a matter oflaw, the contract
tailed for want of mutuality (lack ot consideration) due to the limitation ot liability clause.
Iherefore, Sterling could not enforce the contract because it was not \alid. 'Ihe substantive
issue addressed by the court was whether the clause rendered the contract unenforceable due
to the lack of consideration. Always lool< for the substantive issue when the court states the
issue in a procedural context.
Sum m ary
A court opinion, often referred to as a case, is the court’s resolution of a legal dispute and the
reasons in support of its resolution. W'hen resolving disputes, courts often interpret consti
tutional or statutor) provisions or create law when there is no governing law. Ihe body of
law that emerges from court opinions is called the comnn)n or case law. Il constitutes the
largest body ot law in the United Slates, far larger than constitutional, legislative, or other
sources of law.
Because \’ou must read court opinions to learn the case law, it is necessary to become
familiar with and proficient at reading and analyzing case law. There are several additional
reasons, however, for reading opinions. A court opinion:
1. Helps you understand and interpret constitutional provisions and statutory law
2. Helps you understand the liligalion process
3. Provides insight into the structure of legal analysis and legalargument
4. Provides a guide to proper legal writing
iMost court opinions consist oft he facts oft he case, the procedural history o ft he case
(what happened in the lower court), the legal questions (issues) addressed by the court, the
decision or holding of the court, the reasons for the decision reached, and the disposition
(the relief granted).
135
I'cderai and state court opinions arc published in booi<.s called reports and reporters and
are available through W'estlaw and I.exisN'exis. In addition, court opinions are often avail
able through otficia! court W'eb sites and other Internet resources. If the question involves a
statute, the search I'or case law should begin with a review oft he annotations following the
statute. II the question does not involve a statutory law, the search usualh' begiiis with a digest.
Computer-assisted research is discLissed in (Chapter 7.
A case brief is a written suinmary of a court opinion that presents, in an organized
tormat, all the essential intorniation ot the opinion. A researcher may be assigned the task ot
briefing a case. A case brief is valuable because it:
1. Saves an attorney the time required to read the case

2. Serves as a valuable learning tool
Is a reference tool
4. Is a writing tool
Ihe first and possibk most imporlant step in briefing a case is to read it carefulh- and
slowly. Reading case law is ofien a difficult process, especially for the beginner. Il becomes
easier as inore opinions are read.
(diapler 9 ihrough Cdiapler 1 1 provide guidelines lhal are helpful in identifying man\'
ofthe elements of'a case brief'.
Ihe importance of case law cannot be overemphasized. Ihe difficulties \'ou encounter
in reading and briefing court opinions can be lessened ihrough the use of the guidelines
presented in this chapter.
Quick R eferences
Advance sheets 1 14 Ke\' number 110
Body ot the opinion 1 10 National Reporter System 116
(Caption 109 Parallel citations 106
('ase brief 123 Parties 109
Ciase law 104 Prior proceedings 127
(Mtalioii 106 Reasoning 11 1
(Common law 104 Regional reporter 119
Côurt opinion 104 Reporter 1 14
Disposition 129 Shepard's 123
Federal court decisions 113 Slip opinion 113
Headnotes 109 Stale court decisitins 119
Holding 128 Syllabus 109
Issue 127
http://\v\v\v.lawschool.cornell.edu
Opinions ot'the United States Supreme (ôurt may be located at this site,
http:// WWW. oyez.o rg
You may hear the oral arguments or read the court briets of United States Supreme Court
cases at this site, 'ihe oral arguments are available for cases from 19(->() to present.
http://www.supremecourt.gov
'ihis othcial page ofthe United States Supreme C'ourt ieatures coLirt opinions, orders,
rules, calendars and schedules, news releases, and general information,
h 11p :/ / w w^\. 1a w. e m o r y.e d u
ihis site provides access to United States federal court cases.
http://www.uscourts.gov
ihis site is the home page for all federal courts,
http:// WWW. fi n d 1a\v. co m
llirough l-'indi.aw, you can locate court cases in general.
http://www.courts.net
ihis site provides access ti) W'eb sites maintained by courts nationwide,
h 11p:/ / w w w. u sd o j.gox'
United States Attorney Cieneral opinions are axailable at this l'nited States Department of
lustiee W'eb site,
h 11p :/ / w w w. n a a g.o r g
Man\’ state attorne\’ general opinions are av ailable at this .National .Association of .Attor-
ne\ s (ieneral W'eb site.
CASE LAW C rr A T I O N
ihe Bluebook and ALWl') iJtatioii MiuiunI rules governing case law citation are discussed in
(Chapter (S. Some briel notes and examples are presented here. II tiie docmnent \'ou are working
on mav be filed in a coiu't, such as a state supreme court, check the court rules tor an\' citation
rule that mav ditfer from the Bhu'hook.
A. Federal Court s
1. LTiited States Supreme (ôurt. ihe Bluebook provides that cases troni the United States
Supreme ('ourt require citation to the oificial reporter, the I 'iiited Stales Reports: Stone
V. Pour//, 428 U.S. 465 ( i 976)
(stations may be to all three reporters: In re Keniu'dy, 525 I'.S. S07, I 19 S. (^t. 38, 142
L. Ed. 2d 30 (1998)
2. United Slates C.ourt of Appeals. Cite to the federal Reporter: F.ssex ln<. (,'o. i'. Davidson..
248 F.3d 716 (8th Cir. 2001)
3. United States iîstrict ('ourt. (îte to the Federal Supplement or the Federal Rules Deci
sions: McC'oIlum I'. .McDaniel, 136 E. Supp. 2d 472 (1'). Md. 2001)
B. State Court s
According to the Bluebook, in documents submitted to a state court, all citations to opinions
decided liy that state’s courts must include citation to the official state reporter and any other
parallel citation: Ford v. Revlon, Inc., 153 .Ariz. 38, 734 i^.2d 580 (1987)
if the state has a public domain citation, citation should be to that citation, and citation
to the regional reporter nia\' be added.
in all other documents, the citation is to the regional reporter: Ford r. Revlon, Inc., 734
P.2d 580 (Ari/. 1987)
Exercises
Additional asiigiiiucuti iiiv tivailahlc on the (AnirsvMatc. ASSIGNM ENTS

ASSIGNMENT 1 Look to ) our state statute concerning aggra\'ated or armed
robbery and the annotations that follow fhe statute.
List and describe the elenients iil a case brief.
A. Gi\e the legal encyclopedia reference(s) that refers
ASSIGNMENT 2 to aggravated or armed robbery.
W'hv are court opinions iiiiportant?
B. Give the ALR cite (if any) that addresses the question
ASSIGNM ENTS of how the use of an unloaded gun aflects criminal
Consult West’s (h'ncral Digest, Tenth Series. responsibility.
A. Gi\ e the name and citation of a 2001 Minnesota case C;. Give the name and citation of any case that answers
which listing the elements of battery. the question of whether a toy or fake gun is a “dan
gerous weapon.”
B. Referring fo the Minnesota case, does battery rec]uire
the intent to injure? ASSIGNM ENT?
C. Cite a Kentucky case prov iding that fourth-degree Describe the importance of briefing a case.
assault can be pro\ed only if the result ofthe assault
ASSIGNM ENTS
is physical injin‘\\ not death.
Refer to Morgan r. Cireenwaldt at the end of ('hapter 10.
D. You are researching a t]uestion concerning the ad Identify the citation, holding, and disposition.
missibility of evidence in an arson case. To what ke\'
number would \'ou refer? ASSIGNM ENTS
E. You are looking for the case Adams v. Soble. What is Refer to People v. Sanders and United States v. Martincz-
the Federal Supplement citation? What L'nited States limeuez in Appendi.x A. For each of these cases, identity
District Court rendered the decision? LCnder what the parties, citation, holding, and disposition.
key numbers nia\’ the case be foimd? ASSIGNMENT 10
ASSIGNMENT 4 Following the format presented in this chapter, read and
Refer to the regional digest for your state (see Lxhibit 4-4) brief the following court opinions.
or to your state court digest. (li\e the name and citation of A. United States i'. Leon (see Appendix A)
a decision from \-our state that discusses the elenients of B. Aeaeia Mutual v. American (¡eneral Life (see
assault or battery. Refer to the case. Wiiat are the elenients Chapter 10)
of assault and battery? If there is no decision from your
C. Commonwealth v. Shea (see Appendix A)—briefonh'
state, wiiat legal enc\clopedia reference is listed?
the issue ofwhether the ocean can be considered a
ASSIGNM ENTS deadly weapon
The client has been charged with bank robbery with a dan D. Atlantic Beach Casino, Inc. i’. Marenzoni (see (Chap
gerous weapon in federal court. Refer to the L'nited States ter 17)—brief onl\- the issue concerning the consti
Code Annotated and answer the following cjuestions: tutionality oft he municipal ordinances
A. Give the ALR cite that addresses the c]uestion of E. Cardwell v. Cwaltiiey (see Appendi.x A)
how the use of an unloaded gun affects criminal F. State V. Benner (see Appendix A)—brief only the is
responsibility. sue oft he sufficiency oft he evidence to support the
B. Give the name and citation ofthe 1986 United States conviction
Supreme Court case that addresses the question of G. McClain v. Adams (see Appendix A)
when an unloaded handgun is a “dangerous w'eapon.”
H. Cooper e. Austin (see Appendix A)— brief onl\- the
C. Gi\'e the name and citation of a 1993 Eleventh Circuit issue of the validity oft he codicil
case that answers the question ofwhether a toy gun
is a “dangerous weapon."
ASSIGNMENT 11 A. How n'lai'iN' unpublished opinions are there lor the
Access the L’.S. Siiprenie ('ourl W’eb site and locate the curient year?
Opinions link. L’nder the Opinions link, go to tiie link lor ii. W'hat New .Mexico Rule of Appellate Procedure con
Sliplists. trols whether these unpublished opinions may be
A. W’hat intorniation is prin idet! in each Sliplisti' cited?
B. W’iiat happens to each Sliplist as new bound \-olunies A S SIG N M EN T S
are produced? Access the New Mexico Siiprcn'ie (ûirt W'eb site and lo
ASSIGNM ENT12 cate the Opinions link. SpecificalK', go to the Prior \'ear
Opinions link.
Access the L'.S. Supreme ('ourt W'eb site and locate the
Opinions link, specit'ically the 2011) I'erni Opinions ol the A. How are the opinions organi/ed?
(x)urt. SpeciticalK' locate the case with the docket number B. Locate the link to search New Mexico Coiu't ot Ap
09 10876. In what volume ot’the i 'nitcd States Kcports will peals and Supreme ('ourt opinions. W'hat online
the opinion be published? source does that link take \'ou to for conducting the
search?
ASSIGNM ENT13
Access the Xew Mexico Supreme (ôurt W’eb site and lo ASSIGNMENT 15
cate the Opinions link. SpeciticalK', go to the L'npublished •Access the Lenth (Mrcuit (.iourt of Appeals Web site. Locate
Opinions link. the link to Opinions. W'hat ways does this W'eb site provide
for researchers to search for cases?
^ The available C our s eMa te for this text has an interactive eBook and interactive learning
^ tools, including flash cards, quizzes, and more. To learn more about this resource and access
CourseMate free demo CourseMate resources, got o www.cengagebrain.com, and search forthis book.
To access Cours eMa t e materials that you have purchased, go to login.cengagebrain.com.
Secondary Authority and Other Research
Sources —Encyclopedias, Treatises, American
Law Reports, Digests, Shepard’s
Outline In c a r K M a y , M e lis s a w a s a c c c p t c d to la w s c h o o l l o r t h e t e r m b e g i n n i n g t h e t o l l o w i n g t a ll. In
l u n e , a lt e r a t t e n d in g a p a r t y w h e r e t h e r e w a s a lo t o t ' d r i n k i n g , s h e le ft w it h O a m o n , a v o u n g
1. Introduction m a n s h e h a d k n o w n s in c e h i g h s c h o o l . B o t h o l t h e m h a d b e e n d r i n k i n g , a n d r a t h e r t h a n t a k e
II. I.egal Hncyclopedias h e r h o m e a s s h e e .x p e e t e d , D a m o n t o o k h e r to L o o k o u t P o in t to “ t a lk .” I le h a d .s o m e t h in g o t h e r
Hi. Treatises t h a n t a lk o n h i s m i n d , h o w e v e r , a n d w h e n M e lis s a r e s is t e d h i s a d v a n c e s , h e s la p p e d h e r , c u t
t i n g h e r l ip a n d l o o s e n i n g t w o o t h e r t e e th . .A s s h e e x it e d t h e c a r , h e g r a b b e d t o r h e r a n d to r e
I\'. A n i c r i c i i n L a w R c p o i i s
h e r b lo u s e . I'o r t u n a t e ly , t h e r e w e r e o t h e r e a r s p a r k e d at L o o k o u t P o in t , a n d D a m o n d r o v e o il'
y.
r a t h e r t h a n p u r s u e h e r.
VT. Updating and \'alidating .M e lis s a w a s t u r i o u s ; s h e h a d n e v e r b e e n t r e a t e d l ik e ih a t . S h e t a lk e d to t h e p o l ic e a n d
Research t h e y i n f o r m e d h e r th a t s h e c o u l d h ie a s s a u lt a n d b a t t e r y c h a r g e s a n d s h e s h o u l d c o n s u l t a n
VII. Research Using Uitators a t t o r n e y a b o u t o b t a i n i n g c i\ il r e lie l b y t i l i n g a b a t t e r y t o r t c la im . S h e d i d n ’t e v e n k n o w w h a t
VIII. Key Points CTiecklist: t h e o l li e e r m e a n t b \' “ b a t t e r y t o r t c la im . ” S h e h a d a s s u m e d th a t th e o n l y t h i n g s h e c o u l d d o w a s
Secondary Authority f ile c r i m i n a l c h a r g e s . S h e d e c i d e d th a t s in c e s h e w a s g o i n g to la w s c h o o l , s h e m ig h t a s w e ll l i n d
IX. Apphcation o u t l o r h e r s e ll w h a t th e o l t i c e r w a s t a l k i n g a b o u t . I h e r e s e a r c h s o u r c e s .M e lis s a w o u ld c o n s u l t
to le a r n a b o u t t h e lo r t la w o t b a t t e r y a r e d i s c u s s e d in t h e .'X p p lic a t io n s e c t io n o l t h i s c h a p t e r .
Learning Objectives
After completing this chapter, you
should Luiderstand:
• The role of secondary authority in
general
• Ihe role of encyclopedias,
treatises, annotated law reports,
digests, and citators in research
• How to locate and conduct
research using encyclopedias,
treatises, annotated law reports,
digests, Shepard's, and KeyCite.
1 40
CH A P T E R 5 SECO ND AR Y AU TH O R ITY A N D OTHER RESEARCH SOURCES
Chapters 3 and 4 cover primar)' authorit)', the law Itsell': C()nstitutit)ns, enacted law (statutes),
and case law. Courts refer to and reh' on priiiiar\' autliorit\' first when resoK Ing legal problems.
In many instances, a court may be bound to follow the primary authorit\'.
For Example Courts are bound to f ol l ow the provisions of the United States Constitution,
and l o w e r courts are bound to f ol l ow the deci sions of the hi ghe r courts
in t h e jurisdiction.
'llierefore, locating the primar)' authorit)' that nia)' apph' to a problem is always the
first step of legal research.
This and Chapter 6 address seco ndary authority and other sources a court may rely
on that are not the law, that is, not primarv' authorit)'. Secondar)' authorit)' consists of sources
that summarize, compile, explain, comment on, interpret, or in some other wa)' address the
law. As mentioned in Chapter 1, secondary authorit) is used for several purposes:
T'o obtain a background or o\'crall understandiiig of a specific area ofthe law if you
are unfamiliar with aii area t)t law. Legal enc\'clopedias, treatises, and periodicals are
useful for these purposes.
For Example If the r e s e a r c h e r is unfarniliar wi t h a speci fi c a r e a of law, such

as de f a ma t i o n , a tr eati se on tort l a w or a legal e n cy c l o pe d i a will
provide an o v e r v i e w of t h e area. If the r e s ea r ch e r seeks an organi zed s u m ma r y of
the c ase l a w on the topic, the R e s ta te m e n t (S e c o n d ) o f Tortsw ould be consulted.
To locate priniary authorit}' (the law) on a qLiestion being researched. Secondary

authority usualh' guitles the researcher h\' prov iding relerences to statutor)' and case
law. Am erican Law Reports (ALR) and digests are particularly useful k)r this
purpose. This chapter discusses these sources, Shcpiinl’s ('ittitions, anil Westlaw’s
KeyCite. (]ases ma\' also be located through reference to legal encs'clopedias, trea
tises, periodicals, RcsttilcDtt'iils of the Law, and uniform laws,
lb be relied upon by the court when reaching a decision. This usually occurs only
when there is no primar)' authorit)' go\'erning a legal question, or it is unclear how
the primary authorit}' applies. Treatises, law reviews, and Restatements are some sec
ondary sources relied on bv coin ts.
There are literally hundreds of secondar}' sources. This chapter covers the more fre
quently used secondary sources. It addresses sources that provide the researcher with either
an overview or a detailed treatment of specific areas oflaw: legal encyclopedias, treatises, and
American Law Reports. The chapter also discusses other research sources that are of great as
sistance in locating case law: digests, SlicpiUil's, and KeyCite. Fxhibit 5-1 shows the primary
use of th e secondary and other research sources discussed in this chapter.
NOTE: As discussed in CTiapter 1, secondar}' authority is not the law. It is persuasive author
ity, not binding on the courts, but courts nia\' reh' on and follow it. Therefore, secondary
authority is usually consulted after priiiiary authorit}'. Most legal research focuses on pri
mary authority with little reference to secondar}' authorit)'. If there is primary authorit}' that
answers a question being researched, such as statutor}' or case law, then secondary authority
is not necessary If the secondar}' authorit}' describes and refers lo primary authority on a
subject, locate and refer to the primar}' authorit}' w hen anah'zing the law.
141
E x h ib it 5 - 1 Secondary A uthonty— Prim ary Use as a Research Tool.
A U T H O R IT Y PRIMARY USE AS A RESEARCH TOOL

Legal U s e to o b ta in an o v e r v i e w of a specific a re a of th e la w
Enqrclopedias a n d t o l o c a t e c a s e l a w in t h a t a r e a .
TVeatises U se w h e n you are seeking m o r e th an the general

s u m m a r y o f t h e l a w a v a i l a b l e in a l e g a l e n c y c l o p e d i a .
T reatises p r o v id e in -d e p th d iscussion of legal to pic s a n d
e x p l a i n , a n a l y z e , a n d criticize t h e law .
American Law U se to obtain a c o m p r e h e n s iv e analysis of individual

Reports legal issues, provides a greater in-depth discussion
o f s p e c i f i c l e g a l i s s u e s t h a n a v a i l a b l e in a t r e a t i s e . L e g a l
issues a re a n a ly z e d t h r o u g h s yn th es is a n d disc us sion of
cases f r o m e v e r y jurisdiction.
D igests U s e to locate case la w th a t a d d r e s s e s specific point(s) of

l a w . D i g e s t s a r e h e l p f u l in t w o s i t u a t i o n s :
You k n o w the n a m e of a case that addresses the point
of la w being researched and are looking for o th er cases
th a t a d d re s s th e s a m e point.
You do not k n o w of a n y cases th a t a d d r e s s th e p o in t of
la w being researched.
Shepard’s U s e t o d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r a c a s e o r o t h e r a u t h o r i t y is
Citators g o o d l a w . Shepard's i n d i c a t e s w h e t h e r a c a s e h a s b e e n
r e v e r s e d , m o d i f i e d , o r o v e r r u l e d . It a l s o r e f e r t o a n y
case law or secondary sources that have discussed the
p rim a ry authority being researched.
II. L E G A L E N C Y C L O P E D I A S
Legal encyclo p e d ia s are designed to pi'o\ ide an o\ ervievv of all the areas of law. 'Ihey do
not provide the in-depth einerage that is a\ailahle in a treatise or periodical article.
For Example In the hypothet i cal pr e s e nt e d a t t h e begi nni ng o f t h e chapt er, r e f e r e n c e t o

assaul t and ba ttery in an e nc y c l o p e d i a w o u l d be a good starting point for
Me li s s a to begin her r e s e a r c h b e c a u s e it w o u l d provi de her wi th an o v e r v i e w o f t h e law.
Legal enc\'clopedias pro\ide a summar\' oft he law; they do not criticize or anahze it.
'They summarize the law primaril\- through a summary of case holdings. For that reason they
are valuable for locating cases on a subject. However, due to the large number of cases on
any subject, one-half or less of a page ofthe encyclopedia may be text, with the remaincer of
the page listing citations in support ofthe narrative. 'Ihe problem becomes one of too many
cases. Also, in legal encyclopedias there is less emphasis on statutes and statutory law than
on case law. Because of their general treatment of topics, legal encyclopedias are not freciuently
cited in court opinions or documents filed in court.
Legal encyclopedias are similar to other enc\ clopedias in that the subject matter :s ar
ranged alphabeticalh’, and there is a table of contents for each topic and a detailed general i.idex.
lhe two t\pes of legal enc\clopedias are national and local or state.
1 42
C H APTER 5 SECO ND ARY AUTH O R ITY A N D OTHER RESEARCH SOURCES
A. N a tio n a l E n c yc lo p e d ia s
Tlie tvso iiationai encNclopedias are Anwriain liirispnulcnic Sccoiui, eonini(inl\' known as Am.
lur. 2d, and C.orpiii Itirii Scciiiidtnu, or C/.S. Both ol these eiic\cK)pedias are national in scope;
that is, they present a general overv iew oi tederal and state law. Both Aincrictui Jurisprudence
Second and ('orpui Juris Secundum are preceded b\- earlier sets: Aniericun Jurisprudence and
Corpus Juris. Man\' law libraries do not retain the earlier sets due to space constraints. In
addition, it is increasingly common tor law libraries to carr\- only one ot the two national
encyclopedias in print t'ormat.
Each encyclopedia co\-ers more than 400 legal topics. Originalh’, the\- were published b\-
ditierent publishers and were conipetiti\’e sets. I'odav, W'est publishes them both. Inasmuch
as the\' are similar in most respects and share many leatures, a researcher will use one set or
the ('ther, not both.
1. Features
The similar and dissimilar leatures Ainericiin lurisprudence Second and Corpus luris Secun
dum are discussed here.
a. Similarities
Both sets share the tollowing:
Topic presentation. Topics are ai'ranged alphabeticalk, with each topic beginning
with a table ol coiitents (see b.xliibit 5 2). The presentation ot'tt)pics is in the form of
a narrative SLmimarw with the narrati\'e and citations presented on each page (see
I'xhibit 5-3 and hxhibit 3-4).
Cieneral index. .Acompreliensix e general index accompanies each set, and each \’ol-
unie has indexes for the topics co\ ered in that \olume.
'Topic summary. At the beginning ot each topic is a summar\' ot what is covered,
what topics are treateil elsewhere, and West's ke\' nuniber relerences. I his allows \’ou
to use the West’s iligests to locate other cases on the same topic (see Fxhibit 5-4).
Both sets will reler vou to other research soiuces.
Updates. Pocket parts are used to update each \-olume and replacement \olumes are
provided as necessar)' (see F.xhibit 3-5).
Tables. liacb set has a table of statutes, rules, and regulations that lists the title and
section where specific statutes, rules, and regulations are cited (see Hxhibit 3-6). Nei
ther set has a table of cases.
b. Dissimilarities
Ihe sets are ditierent in the following wa)s:
Size. (AVpus luris Secuiuium is larger than Amcricun lurisprudeiwe Second, with
more than 100 \'olunies compared with 80 volumes. Ihis fact does not indicate that
CIS provides a more coniprehensi\-e co\’erage of topics than Ain. lur. 2d. Rather, CJS
attempts to include every case reported in its discussion of topics, resulting in man)'
pages having one or two sentences of narrative, with the rest ofthe page consisting
ot lootnotes to cases, which largel)’ accounts tor the additional number of volumes.
.4;//. Jur 2d is more selecti\'e in its inclusion of cases, presenting a cross-section
ol leading cases, and includes citations in its footnotes and other research references
(see Fxhibit 3-4).
Emphasis. Am. lur. 2d emphasizes statutor)’ law somewhat more than (dS. Neither
set, however, locuses on statutorv analvsis.
143
E x h i b i t 5 - 2 C J . S . Table of Contents foi Assault and Battery. R ep rin te d from W e s: Group.

Cot p u s Ju ris Secundư m . Vủl 6A 119751, p 3 0 9 Reprinted ívith p erm ission from Tho m so n Reuters.
fiA CV ,1. S.
ASSAULT A N D BATTERY
AlKllv.'ii.S
I. IN ( i K N K R A L . ÿÿ 1-3
II. t IV II. I J A B I I . i rV, SS 4-61
A. 1:1J;MHNTS o f CAUSE OF ACTION AM) I.IABII.ITV IN GENERAL. 4-12
B. DEFENSES. 13-29
C. .ACTIONS, SS 30-61
III. C R I M I N A L R K S P O N S I B I L I T V , SS 62-1.30
A. OFFENSES AND RESPONSIBILITY THEREFOR. SS 62-99
1. Ndtnre and Elenients in General. SS 62-82
2. Defenses anil Persons Liahle, SS 83-99
B. PROSECl'TION AND PLiNISH.MENT. SS lOO-LÔ
L in General: hulietiueni <n- ¡nfiinuiition. SS 100-113
2. Eviilence. Trial. Sentence, and Punislunent. SS I 14-130
Siih-.\nahsis
L IN (.K N K R A L - p 316
Scopc of litic — p 3 16
2. Dctniilions — p 3 l 6
3. Distinctions — p319
II. ( I M I . L I A B I I . n V 320
A. LLEMF;NTS OF CAUSE 01- .ACTION AND LIABILlT'i IN GENF;RAL p 320
4. .Assault —p 320
.^. -----IntL'iil aiul inalicc — p 322
6. Foae aiul \ iciL'iico - p 323
7. Baiiei) - p 324
8 . — Touchiiiii. toice. aixl \iolciicc — p 327
9. - - liiicnt. malice, and aiigor p 329
10. Persons entitled lo sue — p 331
I I. Persons liable — p 331
1 2 . ------.Ioint and se\eral liability — p 334
B. DEFENSF;S — p 33.5
S 13. In general — p 335
14. .Accident -- p 336
15. ( ’ondition of mind; ignorance — p 337
16. Consent or e(Midonation — p 337
17 . --Nhitiial combat — p 339
See also descripti\e word index in the back of this Volume
144
C H APTER 5 SECO NDARY AUTH O RITY A N D OTHER RESEARCH SOURCES
E x h i b i t 5 - 3 C J . S . Main Volume Entry for Assault and Battery. R ennnted from Group. C o r p u s J u n s S e c u n d u m ,
1 0 / 6 A iW 7 5 i.p 316 R e p 'u v e d witl) perm issio n from Thom as Reuters
I 1-2 ASSAULT & BATTER\

I. IN < ;i.M R Al,
Ü 1. S t o p t ' ol l illc e u t io n s lo r o th e r o lT e tis e s a r e tre a te d in C - J . S . I n d i c l m e i i l s

Iillc tliscusscs and includes acts ol \iolciicc
I I l ls a iu l In lo r n ia t io n s .
louards ilic pcrsiin nl another, c'ilhcr with or uilhoul an>
i; 2. D erm itlo n s
actual liHichiiit! or striking, ullich i-li) not conshtiilc an clc
M ain a. .A s s a u lt
iiicnl in or an attcinpi to comniil an\ othei specific in|iir\
te x t- or oUense. Delenses. lusiifieation. and excuse for such h, B a lt e ix o r a s s a u lt a n d h a lte rv
acts are co\ered. as \iell as ciicunisiances of ay^ravalion. ;i. Vssiiult

I.iahiliiies and leiiieilies therelor. hmh ci\il or criniinaf A n assault is ans iin la u t'al olTcr ttr atteniiit to in ju re an oiiie i'
are likeu ise ireateil. \\illi appai'eni presoni a h ilit\ to e llce tiK ito the attonipt u iu lc r e ir-
Subjects \ihieh are co\ered in olher tilles anti not cu m si.in c e s eivatiH i: a I'car ot m in iin cn t peril.
treated in this title inclutle ei\ II liahihtv for assauli resiili- in II,. \ l o i k '\ \ Slîlc. ; il Si. ’ >)S. Slid. l.Ss l-|j. 545
in^ in death, assaults in connection with unlaulul References to West's

arrest, assaulls h\ operation of niolor \eliieles. atid X 's.iu li .m J li.iiU'iAkey numbers I. 2 . 4.S ~
assiiults eoiniiiiued in ohsiructin;j process or resisting an An a s s a u lt m a\an\ intentionaf be d e f in e d as
ollicer.' unlaulul offer of corporal itijurx lo anotlicr bs force, or
rile c o t i in i is s i o i i o l an a s s a u lt ilh in le n t lo . o r in an force unlaufulK iliiecteii toward the person of another,
a tte m p t lo . p e rp e tra te o th e r o l le n s e s . is d is c u s s e d in c o n under such circumstances as create a well founded fear ol
n e c t io n u i l l i the p a r l ic u l a r o f f e n s e , in ( '..I S . t it le s H o m i- imniineni peril, coupled with the apparent present ability
c k l e . R a p e , a iu l R o h b e r x . ( o i n i e t i o i i s o f a s s a u lt in pi'<;se- to efleetuate the attempt if not prevented.' .Also, the
Citations to ' ‘ O r. S t .n e \ C . ir r o ll, f O I ’ 2 d S.'O . I \ . ( ( u iis io e k . 2 . ' I. . W . ^ 2 1 . 5 " ’ M i e h .
Or S5 , 17 6
CQSG l o w ” t I l alsL- I m p n s n m i K n l
V Si^'c ( .1 S \ l o h n \ c l i K i c s . S , ( '. K i r v e n \ . K i r \ e i i . U i O S l , 4 ,'2 . M in n . S la t e \. In t ih a r . 1 5 2 N . W 2d 315.
J See ( I S ( )h siiiit.iin L : J ii N ik c 4 .Í5 . ! ii2 S . C Ifi2 , 2 7 7 ,M tn n . 22.^
\ la W c s k “n i I n io ii l o k 'ij i; ip li C o . l e im . I li o ii K i s s o n \ e s k T ii I n io n .Vliss. C i i L u t i n o \ . S i a k '. 2 4 S o , 2 d 9 ,'.
M il l. I S O S o . 7 0 9 . A L i. A p ji. .>41). l ei ( o.. 5 '1 e iin .( \\ ..App, M O . 1 9 9 , \lis s , 2 .'5 ,
( . c r lio iu iI l I l’ii i l 'J 15 0 Si). " I I . 2 2 7 A L i, W a sh ( t u p u s l u l l s S e t i i n d u i i i e ile d in N J. S i a i c \. S l a u . 1 16 A . 4 2 5 . 9 " N J.

4(iU I ’e iis le s \ I ’u^je! S o u n d I u l’ l^.iiiê l,a\^ _M 9.
I ’.a N C o . . r N \, r c . v , 'L - \ , N V o v K \ . N .\.S ,2 J .

I Li S4S 4N5 H o u e ll \ W in t e r s . lO S 1’ 1 0 7 7 . .Í42. 10 A . I ) . 2 d 2.Í1
N k D n i u k ! \. I O ld . A p p , . 2 2 ^ S o . 2 il 5 S \\a sh ()h io S ia k ' lle t / e l. I 12 N . f : . 2 d V i9 .
M h i n jlu \ S l . i k ’. A p | i . 2 14 5 C .1 p 11«)k- 5. 159 O h i o S i .Í50,
So .M SS7 O lh e r d e lin ilio n s S t a le \ , T h e i s e n . I 15 N I ' 2(1 S 6 3 . 9 4
111. iV . 'p l^ - A lk - n . 2.^4 N I. . 2 l! IO .V ( M i n g e n e r a l. ( ) h io .-\pp. 4 6 1 .

11 7 l l l . A p p , 2 J 20. I '. S . - . \ n d e r s o n \ . ( ’ravs lo rd , Or Cook \ K in / i t a P in e M i l l s C o . . 29.^
K ;in . C o i p i i s ,)u n s S c c u n d u i i i u ilc il in C ( A .K a n . 265 I P .2 d 7 1 7 .
S i;ik ' \ il. i/ c n . I(\'^ M 2(1 2 . U . 2.'^^. U iO k a n s o n i \ . M a l s i 'i i N a \ ii!.iln>ii C o.. \ 'a T h e H a r d ) C a s e . 17 ( ir a lt , 5 9 2 . 5
K ;in I)C A V u s h .. I I Supp 244 ( '..I p 7 I 2 n o te S 2 a .
K\ . I f ii k i n s \ K iM i U k 'k s l l t > l c l . S 7 S A \ I S V H a n d . \\i . 2 6 I ( \ i s N o |S. <2 1 , \ s s a u l l is t h r e a l o f i n j u r > ,
2 d ').S|. 2 f il K > . 4 1 ‘i S in iih ( iiu \ d \. 29 7. 2 U a sh .C ( 4.ÍS. I S l) a l\ P e d e rso n . D . C . M i n n . 2 7 S
2 4 4 S A V . ii7 S . I ^ h K > . 2 S I . 2 9 A I R. A la . K e i H i h l ic Ir o n \ S i e e l C o . \. S e ll. I S u p p , K S.
I v rV 6.S S.). , '2 S . 1 9 2 A la . 4 0 .Í. ! k \ .| 9 I5 I ( ) .An o i l e r o r a t le n ip l lo i n l l i e l h o d i l s

I,.I. O s h o r n c \. I V o p l c 's l k ‘i ic \ . Iik Iu n - 516. h a r m o n an<)|her p e r s o n ,
( II. 11 1 .lie In s. C h . o l I tu ii's iJ iK i. 1 .^9 S o . T a \lo r S t a le . 1 7 5 S o 6 9 S . 2 7 A la k I l. iu \ , S u y a r n u n . A . 2 d 75."i.
7 '.V 7 'vS. 11) I.a A p p . A|ip. 5 5 S . 105 k I , 727.
\ lk ii. ( 'o r p iix Im iv S c c u n d i i i n q u o l e d in C a l. P e o p le \ 'l sla s. . 7 Í al. 6^1). (4) , \ e l w h ie h is le ^ a l c a u s e o t e o n la e i
I i n k i e r s- K k I i i o i . 2 9 5 N A V 2 0 ! . 2 0 .V i X 'l . M ark e r \ H a n r a t ls . 9 7 A . 9 0 4 . 6 w i l h a n o t h e r p e r s o n a n d w h i c h i s o tT e n -
29.^ M i c h . '9 6 B o \ e e 217. s i\e 10 r e a s o n a h le s e n s e o l p e r s o n a l di<j-
W o. C o r p u s .h ills S e e i ii u l u n i e i k 'd in ( ia . C o p e la n d n . D u n e h o o . I 3 S S 1-. n it> it act is d o n e w ith in t e n t io n o l
. \ d le r \ I. w iiil:. A p p . . . U 7 S A \ 2 d .'9 ii. 2 6 7 . , '6 ( ia , \p p - S I 7. i n l l i e l i n ^ h a r in l'u l o r o t i e n s i \ e c o n t a c t

402 S i.M e \ . Il n j ^ i n s . A p p . , 2 5 2 lo u a M o ld o r t \ . i lo U l t n l . 1 6 9 \ W. u p o n the o ilie r
S W ,2d M l . 7 . '7 . I S 5 lo w a S . 'S . Pa. I- s i ii o n d L is c io . 2 2 4 A . 2 d 7 9 .V
S iiile R o h e r ls . | S S S.l-;.2d .'O .'. K \. C o in iiio n u e a llh K e n ile \ . 2119 P a . S u p e r . 20(1.
270 \ ( i5 5 Sune .lo h iis o n . 142 5 , \ V . 2 d " S 4 . 2 5 7 K s . 2119. i 5 ) A n in t e n t io n a l a tt e n ip t b> \ i o l e n c e
S I. 2 d 151. 2 M N (■ >9S. .M ie h . W a r m e lin k I 'is s u e . 2 4 1 \ \\ lo in j u r e ih e p e r s o n o t 'a n o t h e r ,
O k l. D iin k ir S k i K '. I '1 I ’ 2 d I Ih . 7 5 2 0 ; '. 2 5 7 M i e h . 2 2 S I'e o p le \ , D o u d . I la. I ia il e > v. S la t e . 7 9 S o . 6 3 9 . 7 6
Okl C r 275. |9.’> N . W S S 4 . 2 2 . ' M ie h . 1 2 0 D re w M a , 2,^0,
1 45
E x h i b i t 5 - 4 An'. Jur. 2d Main Volume Entry for A ssault and Battery. R e p n n ie d fiom W est Group. A m e n c a n ju n sp ru d e rc e .
: VUI 6 t W 9 9 '.p 10 with p e rm issio n of Thom son Reuters
Ỉ I ASSAULT AM) BATT1:KV 6 Am Jur 2i.l

I, INTRODL'CTION ISS l-4|
Research references Research Rcleiences
18 L'SCA S M3
ALR Diyest: AssauU and Bailor) SS I - 3. 25
AI.R Index: Assaiill and Ballery
2 .Am .lur Prool'iii l-'acls 81. Assaidl anti Batter) ; I ,\m .lur P()l-3(,l 613. Assatilt and Batter)
36 ,Ani .iui T'riais 241. Deleiiding .Assault and Balter) Cases
West Diiiest. .Assault and BatieiA 1-7. 41-5}
Topic .Sunimar) _______________
S I. (ie iic r a liy : assault

(ienerally speaking, an assault is a clenionsiration oi an iinlauiul inlenl by one person to
Topic sum m ary inHiet imiiiediale injur) or oliensi\e contact on the person of anolher then present.’ .Although
physical eonlact is not an essential element, violence or oliensi\e contact—thieaieneil i’ll’
offered— is.' The threat musi be to cause immediate injur), nol injury in the future.'
• Definition: A\ssaiilt is frequentl) dellned as an intentional attempt b) a person, b) t'orce
oi’ \ iolenee. to ilo ari injin'v to the person of another, or as any atteni|’)t to conniiit a hatter),
or an) threatening gesture showing in itself or by words accompanying it an inimediaie
intention, coupled with a present ability, to coniniit a battery."
1. '»’a le T o v '.n o f .'M lc n s t c iu n . '■Xi'-) h. .S u p p . C ir . 1 9 y f i) ( c i il lc 'd h Uo d iH ib t o n o t h e r ư r c iu K Ì s b \ .

12 I i ; . R , C 'a s . ( I Ỉ N , . \ ) i:0 9 . 72 |-:n ip !. P r a c . la is n iin y c T T 'e r n iin i.x In l e r n . C c )-. 1 0 2 l'.3 d l.s 7 ]
D o c . ( ( ' ( ■ | | ) ‘| | : 4 5 1 S 4 ( I ) , N . I I . 1W 7 ) ( a p p l ) in j; N e w (K it h ( n. IW ii) ) ( a p p lv iii” K a iis iis l a w ) ; .IcM isc
H a m p s h ir e la w ); M d iin t V c r iiD H I nc h is . Ci\. R i i n y o n . 4 9 0 t'. .S u p p . I . ^2(1 (1 ) . I ' l a h I9 y s ) ; IV o p Ic
C ita tio n s to case la w - - 1 )1 ,R H A s s o c ia t e s . 967 I-, Supp. lO .S (.S .D .N .Y , . A 'j in la r . 16 C ' a f 4 t h 1 0 2 -V 6(S C ’a l. R p l r . 2 d 6.S.S.
1 9 9 7 ). lu d y n ic n t a ir 'd . 152 I ,.ul ( 2 d ( '¡ r . I W S ) p .:d 1 2 0 4 ( 1 W 7 ) ; D i c k c n s \. P u r \ c a r . ,'( I2 N , c ,
( a p | il\ in ij N e w Y o rk l a w ) ; H i l l a d o \, I ’a r r ) . 9 '( 7 I'. 4 .^ 7 . 2 7 6 S . L . 2 d .''2.S ( I9 N 1 ) ( d is iin i; in s h c 'i.l o n o t h e r
Supp. .w (1 ) . \ T . l ‘ )‘ ) 6 ) u p p U i n g V c - r n u m i l a w ) . i; \ o u n d s b ) . B r s . u u IT ’i a l h i n i c i B r o s ,. In c .. 113
K i\ c r a c\ r c l, K i\ c r a \. C 'll) 1 >I' N a | ip a n c e . 704 N . C '. A p p . I . 4 .^ 7 s i : . 2 d .-^1^) ( i:p p s \ . C o m ..
\.l,.2d 131 ( h u f C l . ,\ p | i, B a c o n on H c h a ll 2 S V a . , \ p p . .s,s. ,S(I2 . s . i; . 2 d 140 ( I W S i . r e h 'g cn
o l iỉa c íin B a c o n . ."¡67 N . \ \ . 2 d 4 1 4 ( I o w a 1 W 7 ): banc i z r a i il c d . 28 V a . .A p p . 27(1. ."ĨO.Í . s . l : . 2 d 81.^
C n \ o l ( lr c c - n \ illc \. iiawscHid. 1.^0 N . c . .\ p | i. 2 7 1 . ( I 9 ‘.)<S) a n d o p i n io n w i t h d r a w n a n d v a c a t c d o n r c h 'n
M)2 S . I - ; . 2d 43 1) ( I W S ) . r e v ie w d e n ie d , . w N .('. c n h a ii c . 2 ‘) V a , ■ Api’i..''1 0 s . I - ; . 2 d 2 7 ‘) I
3s4. \\1 . I 0 1 4 8 ‘)K ( I ' W S ) ; i : p p s C o n i., 2 S
3 . ('it \ o f S c a lt k - .A lle n , so W a sh . ,\ p p . 8 2 4 .
V a . A p p . .’S S . M)2 S ,H ,2 d 1 4 0 ( I W S )' r c h ' y c n h a n c ‘J l l I> :d I.V M ( l) i\ . I I W 6 ) ( d is t in y iiis h c - d h ) . S ta te
; j r a iilc 'd . 2 S V a , .\ p p . 2 7 0 . .’SO,^ . s . i; . 2 d S l . i ( 1 W 8 ) V. A g iiM a r . 1999 v\ I . .- ĩh lT .S : ( W a s i r C l . , \ p p . D iv . 1
and o p i n io n w it h d r a w n and \ a c a lc il on r c 'h 'ij c n
h a n c . 2 9 V a . A p p , 16^). .'ijO s . i ; . 2 d 2 7 9 ( 1 9 W ) .
4. A h r ;d ia n i Kaso . \> \- S iip p . 2 il (D.N.J.
,\ s 1(1 th e l i a h i h t y o l a c c c 'v s o r ic s o r p a n i c i p a i i l s
l ‘W S ) ( a | ip l\ in i; New .le r s c ) la u ); M c V a ) \. D c l-
in a n a s s i u ih a iu l h a ltc - r \ . SC’C 21 .A m .III! 2 d . C r i m i
c h a in p s , h ie .. 7 0 7 S o . 2 d 9(1 ( l . a . ( 't . .A p p . .sth C i r
nal La w I c l se q .
1 W 8 ); T h o m p s o n W il h a m s o n C 'o iin t ) . I'cT in .. '')(t5
As 1(1 i l i c n e e d l ( ir in t e n t . SCC s iS.
f. Supp. 1 0 2 6 . 2 .Ỉ , \ . l ) . l ) , .^81 (M .D . I'c n n . 1997)
Practice re fe re n c e s -------- I 'n u licc R flc r c n e c s : 1 .A m J u r P O l ’ .'d 6 .^ 1 . .A s s a u lt (a p p ly in g : T e n n e s s e e law ): W 'aa*: 'r h d in a s F u m i a c .
a n d B a ttc -r). B i i i c k . C iM C '. i n c . . ‘■)3(l I ’. S i ip p . 74 f a i r lin ip l.
2. '> 'ane / \ . C 'it ) o l N o w 'i'o r k . 2 9 I'. S i ip p . 2 d i(H ) P r a c . C a s , ( B N W i 12. 6 9 I ' j n p l . P r a c . D c c . ( C ' C I I ) ' I I :
( l ' . . i X N . ’i . I W S ) ( a p p K iii'j N c u > ’o r k la w ) ; U . S . \. 4 4 .‘i0 7 (I). M in n . 19% ) ( d is a g r e e d w it h on o th e r
l.c - C o n ip t c . lo s l-.3 d 94S. 46 I c 'd . R. i;\ id . S c 'r \ . 'jr o L u u ls h \ . I'd r re s \. N a t io n a l P r e c is io n B la n k in i;.
(l.C 'P ) S.^.^ (S t h C ir 1997) la p p K in i: IS I ' S C '. A s a I)| \ . ol N a t. .M a t e r ia l L .P .. '■J43 I ’. .S a p p . j
Il3 (a l(3 )): W 'lls im M ccks. 1247 ( lO t h 7.^ l - 'a ir H m p l. P r a c . C a s , ( B N A ) IN 4 .V 71) ■
146
C HAPTER 5 SECONDARY AU TH OR ITY A N D OTHER RESEARCH SOURCES
E x h i b i t 5 - 5 Am. Jur. 2d Pocket Part Page. Repnnted from vves; If' Am erican Ju risp ru d e n ce , 2d Ed., Vol. 6 (200V, p 3.
Repr nted p e in iis sio r' from Tlômson R e u te is/lV est
A S S A U L T A N D B A T TER Y
K e v C 'it f : Cases and other legal materials listed in Ke\('ite .Scope can be researched through
West (ii(Hii)'s Ke\Cile scr\ice on Westlaw . I 'se Ke\('ite to cheek citations tor tbrm. parallel
releienees. prioi' and latei' historx. ;ind e('nipivlieiisi\e citator int'orniatioii. including citations
to olher tlecisions and sccondai \ materials.
I, IM R O D l ( T IO N IÍ Í 5 I an a c l. w as u n c o n s t it u t io n a llx \a g u e under Duo

R r o c e s s C l a u s e ; it w a s u n c le a r w h a t r e a s o n a b le s t e p s
S l? a lti‘r \
w e r e r e q u ir e d in o r d e r to c o m p lx w it h s t a t u t e , a n d
S 4 — N i 'f d l o r l)o(lil\ i n j u r )
s ia u i t e p r o x id e d no g u id e lin e s to r a u t h o r it ie s in
K t ' s e i i n h Ri'Ci'renei's d e t e r m in in g xxhat c o n s t it u t e d r e a s o n a b le ste p s.
A | ip a 'l K ’ n ilin L i ilic w eapon « illiin : lh e e ase lo r r .S .C .A . Am end. 14; .S .H .A . C o n st. A rt. 1. S 2;
c r i n i i n a l i / i n i ; Ih e i n le n li o n a l t r a n s m i s s io n o l l l l \ . ,'(i S . H . A . 721) I L C S 1 5 0 / 5 .1 . P e o p l e \. , \ l a n e s s . 191 I I I .
N o new inform a tio n
A m C rn n L R 2 d 4 7 S . 2 4 7 111. D e c . 4 9 0 , 7 .^ 2 N . K . 2 d 5 4 5 ( 2 ( K ) 0 ) .
on Sections 5 - -
S 9 K i 'l a t i d n s h i p assault a n d h a tle r\ S .Ml I V a e e o H i c e r
tiiro u g h 8
( asc's ( asc's
D o l e i u la n l w a s _ü u ill\ o l a s s a u lt n i the' l l i n d t le ^ ie e . ( ) r i~ il i it x . u n i lo r m e d p o l ic e o f t ie e r w h o w a s e n g a g e d
w h e r e U e le n ila n l e li o k e i l \ i e h m . h is w i l e . h \ p la e iiiü in s e c o ik la r x e m p lo x n i e n t a s s to re s o c u r it x gu a rd lo r
h is Ik h u I s a r o iin ü her ih r o a l. c a n s in e her lo lo s e p r ix a le e m p lo x e r w a s a c t in g in h is " o l't 'ic ia l c a p a c i t x "
e o n s e io u s n e s s l o r h r ie l p e r im l o l l im e . C '. ( r S . , \ . S as p o lic e o t'fic e r w h e n he in x e s t ig a t e d c o n l'r o n t a t io n
. s . v i - M ( a ) ( 2 l . .S ta le \. .A t k in s o n . 4 (i C o n n , .S u p p , l . ’ D. b e tw e e n s to r e e m p lo x e e and d e fe n d a n t, and th u s,
7 4 1 A . 2 d W l ( S u p e r . C l . I W ‘ )i. d e f e n d a n t 's e n s u in g a s s a u lt on o t fic e r w arran te d
c o in ic lio n s lo r a s s a u lt on [ lo lic e o f f ic e r and
II. ( U l M I N A i I I \U IIH A IÍÍÍ} l(l-9.<|
o b s t r u c t in g p o lic e o lfic e r ; exen th o u g h o f f ic e r
\ l.\ C .L .M RA I IÍÍ 10 l.s|
r e e e ix e d c o n i | ie n s a li ( i n fro m sto re , t l u li e s o f f ic e r
$ I l l ( li - n i r a l l N : e i i n s t i l u l i i > n a l i l \ o l s i a t u t i ' s p e rro rm e c.1 a s s e e u r it x g u a r d x x e re s u p p l e m e n t a l to h is

p r in ia r x (.lu lie s a s la w e n f o r c e m e n t o f f ic e r . C o t l e . 6 1 -
( asfs : uhmvI. c '. 61 - r u n . st.ue x phiUn's, 2(i? \v. v.\,
N e w cases S l a l k i n j : s i a l i i l e . a s n a r r o w l\ e o n s i r i ie i l l o s iip p K ( i 7 V ^2(1 S .I - : .2 d 6 7 0 ( I W 9 ) ,
r e q u ir e m e n i s o l L 'e n u in e i h r e a l a n ti in le n l lo e a r r \ o n l
lh e ih r e a l. is nol la e ia lK lu e r b r o a L l n iu le r l iis i S M I’a r e i i l s a n d p e r s o n s \ e s l e d \> ith
A n i e i u l n i e n l . lh o iiL ! h s la t u le J o e s n o l e o n la in e x p r e s s (|u a si-p a re n ta l a u th o r itv
e x e m p t io n l o r a ll l o r m s o f e o n s i i u i i i o n a l K p r o le e le J
K i s u a r e l i K e l 'e r e n e e s
-p e e e h . I S . C A . A in e iu l 1; O R S 1 6 1 7 .^ 2 . S i a l e \
S p a n k i n g a n ti o t h e r c o r p o r a l p u n is h m e n t o f c h i l d r e n
R a n s je l. .'O S O r . 2 'M . I ’ 2 d }!'■) i I W ) i .
b x p a r e n t s : O x e r x a l i i i n g p a in , i i n d e r x a l u i n g c h i l d r e n .
I), I I I I . C l Ol I A .M II V R I . I . A I I O N S I I I I ’ O R H o u sto n I.R 1 :1 4 7 ( I 9 W ) .
I 'O S I i lO N O l- A t I M O R I lA 2‘) V^|

5 — D o m e s tic x io leu ee s ta tu te s
5 2 ‘) ( i e r i i ' r a l l \ ; h u s b a n d a t u l « H e : d o n u 's t i i '
K e s e a r e h K el'e re iiecs
p arlniT s
D o m e s t ic x iiile n c e and m e d ia t io n : A t r a g ic
k i's e a r e h R e lV reiues
c o m b in a t i o n l o r x i c t i m s in C a l i f o r n i a F a m i l y C o u r t .
N e w research - L h e d o m e s t ic \ io le iie e d ile m m a : l i i i w o u r i n e l le e li \ e
.'5 C ; i l W e s l L , R 2 :.V S 5 ( 1 9 9 9 ) .
an d \ a r ie d r e s p o n s e s r e lle e i o u r e o n llie ie d \ ie w s o f
references T h e l.a u le n b e r g .A m e n d m e n t : C o n g r e s s h it th e m a r k
lh e p r o b le m . 71 S C a l I . R .V 6 4 I I I W ^ i .
bx b a n n in g f ir e a r m s f r o m d o m e s t ic v io le n c e o f f e n d e r s .
Cases .'II S t M a r x 's L J _^:S()1 ( I9 X )9 ).
S t a U ile m a k i i i i i a p a r e n l g n i l l x o l p c r m i i t i n g s c x n a l
( asc's
a b u s e o l a c h i l d , il p a r e n l k n o w i i i y l ) a llo w e r l a e l o l
S t a iu l a r d fo rm fo r D o m e s t ic V io le n c e P r o t e c t iv e
c r i m i n a l s e x u a l a b u s e o r c r i m i n a l s e x u a l a s s a u lt u p o n
O r d e r ( D \ ' P O ) . F o r m , A O C - C \ ' - 3 0 6 . is d i s a p p r o x e d ;
h is o r h e r c h i l d a n d k i l l e d to t a k e " r e a s o n a b le s t e p s "
l o r m c o m b in e s s e v e r a l p o s s i b le f in d . . .
to p r e v e n t c o m m i s s i o n o r lu t u r e o c c u r r e n c e s o l s u c h
O W e s t ( i r o u p . 5 /2 0 (1 1 3
147
E x h i b i t 5 - 6 Am. Jur. 2d Table of Statutes and Rules Cited. R,<p!^ntca from i i p s r Group. A m erican Jurisp ru d e n ce 2i Ed..
Vol 6 120011, p. will. Reprinted i'. T ‘' perm ission *rom Ttiom son R e u te is
TABLE OF STATUTES A N D RU LES C IT E D

L NITI-:i) STA TES COD1-; A N N O T A T l:!)
Titlc A m J i i r 2d 11 tie A ni , |u r2 d
and titio a n d and title and
Section section Section section
5 I SC A 2S I S( A
8 1 3 0 .................................................................................................. \ s s i g i i S 9 5 1450 .......................................................................... Adach ii 29
1 1 l SC'A 2405 .......................................................................... Altach i 66
3 6 5 ( a ) ................................................................................................ .Assis! S 2 3 2710ei soq..............................................................Allach S 261
12 U S C ' A 2710-2717 ................................................................Aiiacli ii 67
9 1 ........................................................................................... A t l a c h S 7 0 . 8 7 2 71 0 ........................................................................ Allach S 187
15 I S C A 2710(b)................................................................. Allach S ^14
6 1 .............................................................................................................. - \ss() ÿ 2 271 1 ........................................................................ Allach ii 273
7 1 4 b ( c ) .............................................................................................AltaL'h ÿ 8 4 2 71 3 ...............................................................Allach ij 444, 614
1 6 7 1 - 1 6 7 7 ................................................................................. A l i a c h S 178 2 71 7 ........................................................................ Allach S 540
1 6 7 1 ( h ) ..........................................................................................-XllaL-h S 178 3001-3308 ..............................................................Allach S 239
1 6 7 2 ( 0 ....................................................................................A l l a c h ÿ 2. 178 3 10 1 ........................................................................ Allach S 265
1 6 7 3 ( a ) ..........................................................................................A l t a c h § 178 3101(h).................................................................... Allach S 223
1 6 7 3 ( h ) ( 1 ) ............................................................................. A l ( a c h ÿ 178 31()l(c)( 1) ..............................................................Allach ii 267
1 6 7 3 ( b ) ( 2 ) ................................................................................. A i i a c h S 178 29 I S( A
1 6 7 3 ( c l ......................................................................................A l l a c h ÿ 178 206(a)( 1) ................................................................Allach S 178
1 6 7 4 ( a ) .............................................................................................A l l a c h ÿ 1 1 31 I S( A
16 l S t ’A 192.............................................................Assijiti lof Crs ii 115
3 .......................................................................................................... A s s i g n S 9 5 37 1.1.......................................................... Assign Idi' Crs ii 115
18 r S C A 37 13( a )( 1)(.A)(1)....................................... Assign ImCt s i; 115
1 1 1 ......................................................................As s i t H S 2. 15. 18. 6 3 37 13(b)..................................................... Assign loi' Cts ij 1I
1 1 2 ...........................................................................................As s i t c<; H S 14 3727(a)......................................................................Assign i 95
1 1 3 ....................................................................................... A s s h B ÿ 9. 14 3727th)......................................................................Assign i: 95
1 1 3 ( a ) ( 3 ) .................................................................................. As s l i c'c B ÿ 1 3727(c)......................................................................Assign i: 95
1 1 3 ( a ) l 4 i .......................................................................... As si t c'v; B S 14 40 r s ( A
1 1 3 ( f ) ....................................................................................... A s s h c'c B ÿ 17 308 .......................................................................... Allach !j 184
1 1 5 ...........................................................................................A s s h c<: B S 14 309 .......................................................................... Allach ii 184
11 6 ...........................................................................................As s l i c'c B ÿ 14 41 I'SC A
1 1 1 4 .......................................................................................... A s s h c'c B S 15 1 5 .............................................................................. Assign i: 95
1,501 As si t c<; B ÿ 14 15(a)....................................................................... .Assign i: 95
21 1 4 .......................................................................................... As s i t c»«:; B S 14 15(h)....................................................................... .Assign i: 95
26 I SC'A 42 I SC A
5 0 1 ( i ) ......................................................................................................A s s o S 4 1983 ...............................................................................AssdS 5
New Topic Service. A d i . ¡¡ i v . 2 d includes a New Topic Ser\'ice binder liial inlroduces
new lopics. New lopics arc rclained in lhe binder until they are incorporated n re-
N'ised \'okimes in the main sel.
Desk Book. .Aiu. ¡in: 2d includes the A;». Iiir. 2d I^cik Book, which incktdes general
information such as slalislica! charts, tables, data, and diagrams. It includes, tor ex
ample, a diagram ot \ arious tederal agencies, the text ot the United States C'oiKtilu-
lion, and the addresses and lelephone numbers o ft he tederal coLirts.
148
CHAPTER 5 SECONDARY AUTHORITY AND OTHER RESEARCH SOURCES
2. Research Techniques— National Encyclopedias

You use a legal eiiex c l o p e d i a to o b t a i n a n o \ e r \ lew ol a speci li c are a ot t h e law a n d to l ocat e
case law in t ha t area. I h e f o l l o w i n g t e c h n i q u e s are he l pf ul t o r l oc a t i n g legal topics.
a. G e n e r a l i n d e x L'sualK- o n e b e g i n s r e s e a r c h b\' c o n s u l t i n g t h e g e n e r a l i n d e x that

a c c o m p a n i e s e a c h set.
Ify o u are in te re s te d in a g g ra v a te d a s s a u lt w ith a d a n g e ro u s w e a p o n , you

w o u ld look in th e in d e x u n d e r " a s s a u lt and b a tte ry " and w o u ld be d ire c te d
to the a p p ro p ria te to p ic and s e c tio n .
b. T a b le o f C o n t e n t s If \ ’o u k n o w t h e a r e a o f l a w t h at c o v e r s t h e s u b j e ct \ i n i are r e
s e a r c h i n g , yo u c a n refer to t h e \- ol uni e t h a t c o \ ers t he t opi c a n d sc a n t he tabl e o f c o n t e n t s for
t h e speci fic topic.
For Example If you are in te re s te d in w h o is en title d to sue fo r an assault, you c o u ld

retriev e the v o lu m e th a t c o v e rs the to p ic and s c a n the ta b le of c o n te n ts
to lo c a te the a p p ro p ria te s e c tio n (see Exhibit 5-2).
N o t e t hat t h e s p i n e o f e a c h v o l u m e i de n t i l i e s t h e r a n g e ol s u b i e c t s c o \ e r e d , s u c h as
“ P r i va t e F r a n c h i s e ( ' o n t r a c t s to P r o c e s s . ”
t'. S t a t u t e , R iilc i, a n d R e g u l a t i o n s II \ i h i are l o o k i n g for a speci li c st a t ut e, rul e, o r

r e g u l a t i on , t h e I'able o f St a t u t e s a n d Rul es ( j t e d will d i r ec t y o u to t he s e c t i o n s w h e r e it is
d i s c u s s e d (see Hxhibit ? - 6 ).
A l w a y s c o n s u l t t h e p o c k e t p a r t to u p d a t e \ o u r r e s e a r c h , to ensLue t h at t h e n a r r a t i v e
s u m n i a r \ - in t he m a m text h a s n o t c h a n g e d a n d to l oc a t e t h e m o s t r e c en t cases.

A u u 'r ie a ii ju r is p r u d e n c e S e c o n d a n d C o r p u s Juris S e c u n d u m a re a vail able o n W'estlaw. A m .
lur. 2 d is also avail able o n L e x i s N e x i s a n d ( ID-RO. NL N e i t h e r set is axail able o n n o n l e e - b a s e d
W'eb sites. N o t e t hat c o p \ r i g h t e d s e c o n d a r \ - s o u r c e s are generalK- not a\ ail able t o r free o n t h e
Int er ne t . In m a i n ' law l i br a r i e s w h e r e o i i K o n e ot t h e n a t i on a l e n c \ c l o p e d i a s is a \ a i l a b l e in
pr i nt , t h e e n c y c l o p e d i a n o t a v a i l ab l e in p r i n t c a n oft en b e a c c e s s e d el ec t r oni c a l K' at a p u b l i c
c o m p u t e r . C h e c k w i t h a r e s e a r c h l i b r a r i a n for a\'ailability. ( C o m p u t e r - a i d e d r es e a r c h is d i s
c u s s e d in C h a p t e r 7.
B. State Encyclopedias
S o m e legal e n c \ c l o p e d i a s a r e p u b l i s h e d for i n d i \ idual states. ' Ih e s e e n c \ c l o p e d i a s a re o r g a
n i z e d like t h e n a t i o n a l e n c y c l o p e d i a s a n d i n c l u d e n'lany o f t h e s a m e f eat ures, s u c h as a tabl e
ot c o n t e n t s for e a c h s e c t i o n , a g e n e r a l i n d e x , a n d p o c k e t p a r t s u p p l e m e n t s . S o m e sets h a \ e
tabl es o f cases, st atut es, a n d r e g u l a t i o n s . ' I h e y p r o \ ' i d e a n a r r a t i v e s u m m a r \ o f t h e laws ot t h e
st at e w i t h c i t at i on s to st ate a n d f e d e r a l c a s e l a w that ha\-e i n t e r p r e t e d st ate law. R e s e a r c h is
c o n d u c t e d in t he san'ie m a n n e r as w h e n u s i n g a n a t i on a l e n c y c l o p e d i a . State e n c \ c l o p e d i a s
a r e m o s t va l u a b l e w h e n c o n d u c t i n g r e s e a r c h o n q u e s t i o n s in\'oK i ng st ate law. N o t e t h a t m o s t
st ates d o n o t have st ale e n c \ ' c l o p e d i a s . (Consul t y o u r local la\s' librarx' to d e t e r m i n e if o n e is
p u b l i s h e d for \ ' our state.
149
III. TREATISES
Treatises aiv texts that p r o v i de a c o m p r e h e n s i \ ' e analysis ot'a single a r e a ofl aw, s u c h as t or ts or
c r i m i n a l law. W h e r e a legal e n c v c l o p c d i a p r e s e n t s a b r o a d o v e r v i e w o f a n a r e a o f l a w , a tr eatise
d o e s m u c h m o r e . It prov ides a m u c h mi i r e i n - d e p t h d i s c u s s i o n ol t h e l a w in w h i c h it expl ai ns,
a n a h zes, a n d cri ti cizes t h e law. S o m e t r eati ses i n c l u d e g u i d a n c e for t h e legal p r a c t i t i o n e r , s u c h
as p r a c t i c e tips, checkl i st s, a n d legal fo r ms . Legal e x p e r t s in t h e field w r i t e treati ses; ther ef or e,
c o u r t s rely o n a n d cite tr e at i ses n n ) r e o f t en t h a n legal e n c y c l o p e d i a s . 'Lreatises, how'ever, are
still s e c o n d a r ) ' authorit )-; t h e y are n o t t h e law, a n d c o u r t s d o n o t h a v e t o follow' a p o s i t i o n o r
a d o p t a n i n t e r p r e t a t i o n a d \ ’o c a t e d by t h e a ut h o r . H o we v e r , t h e r e are a few t r e a t i se s that are
a u t h o r e d b)' w e l l - k n o w n s c h o l a r s w h o a r e h i g h h ' r e g a r d e d by t h e c o u r t s . ' I h o s e p a r t i c u l a r
t r e a t i s e s are of t en ci t ed by t h e c o u r t s e\-en t h o u g h t h e t r ea t i s e is s e c o n d a r y a u t h o r i t y a n d t he
c o u r t is n o t r e q u i r e d to fol low it.
For Example Search and Seizure: A Treatise on the Fourth Amendment by W a y n e

LaFave is a m u ltiv o lu m e tre a tis e o fte n c ite d b y t h e c o u r ts w h e n d e c id in g
' a c a s e in v o lv in g Fourth A m e n d m e n t issu es b e c a u s e it has c o m p re h e n s iv e c o v e ra g e
I of fe d e ra l and state s e a rc h and seizure law s.
A. Types an d Features of Treatises

I h e r e are several t ) p e s o f treat i ses, r a n g i n g fron-i s i n g l e - v o l u m e t e x t s to mul t i \ ' ol un' i e sets.
I h e r e are s i ng l e - \ ' o l u n i e tr e a t i se s o n h u n d r e d s ot legal t opi cs, a n d t h e t o p i c s c o v e r e d m a y be
v e r \ speci fic ( s uc h as t h e First A iu c iu in ic n t F a w F la n d h o o k b)' l a m e s L. S w a n s o n ) , o r t h e \ m a y
c o v e r a n e n t i r e a r ea o f l a w ( s u c h as '//u’ L a w of'I'orts by D a n 15. D o b b s ) . ' I h e b r o a d e r t h e topi c
c o v e r e d b)' t h e s i n g l e - v o k m i e text, t h e less d e t a i l e d t h e coverage.
I h e r e a re m u l t i \ ' o l u m e t r e a t i se s l o r m o s t m a j o r a r e a s o f l a w . A n m l t i v o l u m e t reati se is
like a n e x p a n d e d \ e r s i o n o f a si ng l e - t ex t treati se. D u e t o its size, it p r t t v i de s m o r e ext ens i ve
a n d m o r e i n - d e p t h t r e a t m e n t o f a legal t op i c t h a n a s i n g l e- t e x t t r ea t i se can.
For Example Fletcher Cyclopedia Corporations cons\sts of 33 h a rd b o u n d and lo o s e -le a f

volum es. It a nalyzes c o rp o ra te la w and a d d re s s e s in detail the legal issues
I c o rp o ra tio n s m ay fa c e . Obviously, this p u b lic a tio n c o v e rs the area of c o rp o ra te la w in
{ m u c h g re a te r detail th a n a s in g le -v o lu m e treatise.
1________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I h e m u l t i v o l u m e sets a r e m o r e likeh' to i n c l u d e ai d s f o r t h e p r a c t i t i o n e r , s u c h as for ms ,

che ckl i st s, a n d p ra c t i c e g u i d es .
M o s t tr e at i ses ha\-e t h e f o l l o w i n g features:
Narrative presentation. T h e s u b j e ct m a t t e r is p r e s e n t e d in a n a r r a t i v e f o r m a t s i m i
lar to t hat o f a legal e n c y c l o p e d i a . D o c u n i e n t a t i o n s u p p o r t i n g t h e n a r r a t i ve text,
i n c l u d i n g c ase c i t a t i on s a n d r e f e r e n c e s to o t h e r s o u r ce s , is p r e s e n t e d in f o o t n o t e s
(see Hxhibit 5-7).
Index. A n i n d e x is i n c l u d e d at t h e e n d o f t h e s i n g l e - v o l u m e t r ea t i s e o r as a s e pa r a t e
v o l u m e ( s ) in m u l t i v o l u n i e sets.
'l able of cases. M o s t t r e a t i s e s i n c l u d e a tabl e o f cases a r r a n g e d a lp h a b e t i c a l l y a n d a

tabl e o f c o n t e n t s for e a c h su b j ec t area.
Updates. M o s t mu l t i v o l u i i i e tr eat i ses are u p d a t e d a n n u a l l y o r s e m i a n n u a l l ) ' t h r o u g h

t h e use o f p o c k e t p a r t s f o r e a c h v o l u m e o r s e p a r a t e s u p p l e m e n t s . M o s t si ngle-vol -
u m e t r eat i ses are u p d a t e d t h r o u g h t h e p u b l i c a t i o n o f a n e w ed i t i o n . S o m e single-
N'olume tr eati ses, s u c h as t h e s o f t b o u n d C o r p o ra te C o n im u iiic a tio n s F la n d h o o k by
W' alton a n d Se ghe t t i , are p u b l i s h e d a n n u a l l y r a t h e r t h a n u p d a t e d . A l w a y s c h ec k t h e
p o c k e t p a r t t)r s u p p l e n i e n t to e n s u r e y o u r r e s e a r c h is u p to d ate.
E x h i b i t 5 - 7 Sam ple Treatise Page. R e p n m e d from W e s t G ro u p D an B D o h b s. The L a w o f Torts ¡20001, p. 6 3 R e p n n t e d withi

p e ir n is s io n fio n i T h o m so n R eu tO 'S
Î? 33 SIMPI.I-; A S s r i T 63
ait ackcr woul d mil he liable I'oi' a battei> if he me i e l \ failed li> prevent the attacker f r om hitting the plaintiff.
D u ty III p r iilc ii llie ¡¡UiiiihJI fr o m oilier.s' htilleries.' On the ot her hand, the d e f e n d a n t mi g h t be u n d e r a
dtitN lo pi'oieet the plaiiiiill. [-miiloyers, for e x a mp l e, are u n d e r a duty to protect e m p l o y e e s f r o m sexual b a t
teries land o l h er foriiis o f sexual harassnient). If an e m p l o y e r k n o ws that an e m p l o y e e is b e i n g sexual l y
battered b\ a n o t h e r e m p l o \ e e . it is not i mplausibl e to sa\ lhal the e m p l o y e r is also gui l t y o f a battery, t h o u gh
he has nol c o m m i t l e d an\ "act' ' and in s o me instances the battery cl ai m might be a d \ a n t a g e o u s . ' Simil arl y,
a hospital is u n d e r a (.luly lo protcct patients from attack, and a k now ing failure to d o so mi gh t be t h o u gh t o f
as a battery b\ inaction. In practice, however, court s are likely to think o f both ki nds o f c l a i m s as n egl i gence
cl a i ms turning on i c as o n a b l e n c s s rat her ihaii batleiy cl ai ms turning upon intent.'’ T h a t is not n e c e s s a r i l y the
plaintiff' s loss, since the d e f c n d a m ' s liahiliiy i nsurance ma y co ve r negli gence but not battery. T h e u p s h o t is
that an affirmati' .e acl is at least ordinarily if nol iinariablv rec|uired to est abli sh a battery.
M earioiis liiihiliix fa r Ininery. Liability mas. ot course, be i mp o s e d upon one w h o i ns t i gat es a batt ery
or ol her tiespassory ti)rt b\ another. That is nol a case o f inaction but a case o f liability o f o n e p e rs on for
the actions o f anot her . ' ll may also be imp o s ed upon e m p l o y e r s and persons in a n a l o g o u s roles for the act i ons
of their empl oy ees c omm i t l e d w iihiii lhe scope o f e mp l o y me n t .
TOPIC D. ASSAULT
§ 33. Simple Assault
.\iiiiire (<! ilie to n . New spapers and e\ei i Jiulges aiul lawy ers siimetimes use the terni assault to m e a n a
baiier\. More lechni calK. assauli is a c|uiie ililfcrent lort. alt hough il of'len precetles a battery. An a ssault is an
acl thaï is inteiuled to and iloes place the plainiiff in ;i pprehension o f an i mmedi at e u n c o n s e n t e d - t o t ou c h i ng
_tha! wiuild a mo u n i lo a battery. T h e plaintil'f's suhj ec l i \ c rc cogml i on or ap p r é h e n s i o n thaï she is about to be
Text
louchei.1 in an impcrmi ss i bl e w a \ is al ihe corc of ihc assault claim.
Inieni d iu l iriiiisierred iiiieiii. A s in o l h e r c a s e s , inie nt m a \ be hased either on the ilef'endant's p u rp o s e
o r o n liis s L i b s t an l i al c e r i a i n t v l h a l
5. Heciiusc cmpl oyei' s are generally proleclcd C ou n t y Hospital C'(M'p.. S6 N . c . .App. 3,‘Ĩ8. 357 S.E.
from ne gl i ge nc e cl ai ms u n d e r wo r k e r s ' c o mp e n s a - 2d 3 7 6 ( 1987) (\iewiniz c l a i m a gai ns t hospi tal for
licMi laws, bul s o me t i me s nol for inlenlional tort lailure to protect psychi atri c pati ent f r o m m o l e s t a
claims. .See generally, -lean l . o \ e . .Actions for N o n tion as a ne' jli' jence case).
physical Ha rm: ’Lhe Kclali onshi p Hel ween lhe I'orl 7. H.g.. West \. LTV Steel Co. . H39 F. Supp. 55 9
S y s t em .ind No- l' aul l C' ompensal ion (With an lim- (N. l) . Ind. 1W3).
phasis on Wo r k e r s ' ( ' o m p e n s a l i o n ). 7 } (',AI.. L.
8. See Chapter 22 on \icarious liability
RL:V. S.^7 ( 19X.^).
general ly.
6 . ¡jii/iliiyer.s litihle f i r nei;liiienec: li.g.. (-'oril \.
References
— Res Ion. Inc.. I.^S."! .Ari/. 734 P. 2.d .^SO (14X7). ỉi 33
to cases H d sp in il lia hle fa r iiei^lii;eiice: S u mb l i n \. ( ' r a \ e n I. Rcs i a t eme n l §§ 21 & 32.
'Reference to
secondary source
151
B. Research Using Treatises

M o s t law l i bi a r i c s h av e a tr e a t i se s e c t i o n w h e r e b o t h t h e s i ii g l e - \ ’o l u n i e a n d m u l t i v o l u m e
t r e a t i se s are a r r a n g e d a l p h a b e t i c a l l y b\' legal topi c (e.g., tr e a t i se s o n c r i m i n a l law will fol low
tr e a t i se s o n c o n t r a c t s ) . S o m e p u b l i c l i brari es ma\- h a \ e s i n g l e - v o l u m e t r e a t i s e s l o c a t e d in t h e
legal sec t i on. (Check t h e c a t a l o g o r wi t h t h e li brari an to d e t e r m i n e w h i c h t r eati ses are a\ ailable.
1. Use as a Research Tool

L'se a tr eat i se w h e n \ ’o u are s e e k i n g m o r e t h a n t h e g e n e r a l s u m m a r \ - o t ' t h e law p r o \ ' i d e d by a
legal encNcl opcdi a. ' I he issue \’o u are r e s e a r c h i n g ma\- not b e c o \ e r e d in sul fici ent de t a i l in an
encNxi opedi a. Also, t h e a n a h s i s o r c r i t i c i s m o f t h e law p r o \ i d e d in a t r eati se m a y b e n e c e s s a r y
w h e n seeki ng i n f o r m a t i o n o n h o w to c o u n t e r an o p p o n e n t ’s i nt er p r e t a t i on ot or reliance o n a law.
For Example The re s e a rc h que s tio n involves a m ajority s h a re h o ld e r in a fa m ily c o r p o r a

tion w h o s e actions harm the m inority shareholders. The m ajority s h a re h o ld e r
c o n tro ls the board of d ire c to rs and refuses to issue divid e n d s o r a llo w the m inority s h a r e
holders to benefit from the c o rp o ra tio n in a n y w a y . The m inority s h a re h o ld e rs w a n t to k n o w
w h a t re m e d ie s are available to them . A legal e n c y c lo p e d ia m ay not a dd re s s the s u b je c t in
s u ffic ie n t detail to be of a ssistan ce . Fletcher Cyclopedia CorporationsmW c e rta in ly c o v e r
the to p ic in g re a te r detail and likely p rovide the answ er. The tw o - v o lu m e treatise, O'Neal's
Oppression of Minority Shareholders, \N\Wprovide an even g re a te r in -depth d is c u s s io n of
the subject, along w ith citations to cases th a t discuss various ty p e s of oppressive c o n d u c t.
I reat ise s a r e also e x t r e m e k \ a l u a b l e in l o c a t i n g cases. In t h e p r e \ ious e x a m p l e , b o t h

i-k'tc hcr CA'ilopL'iliii (io rp o riitio iif a n d O ' S a i l ' s O p p r c iiio ii o f M i n o r i l y S lu tr c h o ld c ri v.ill p ro -
\ ide i u n n e r t ) u s case c i t a t i on s to i n s t a n c e s ol o p p r e s s i \ e c o n d u c t , o n e ol wiiich m a \ ' m a t c h t he
lact silLiation b e i n g r e s e a r c h e d . A legal e n c v c l o p e d i a u s u a l h will n o l a d d r e s s as m a n v specific
fact s i t u a t i o n s as a treatise.
2. Research I'echniqiies—Treatises
I h e f o l l o wi n g t e c h n i q u e s are h e l p f u l for l oc a t i n g s|H’cific t opi cs in treatises,
a. (icneral Index
L'sualK' r e s e a r c h b e g i n s b\' c o n s u l t i n g t h e i nd e x at t h e e n d of t h e text o r t h e set.
For Example If you are in te r e s te d in o p p re s s iv e c o n d u c t by m a jo r ity s h a r e h o ld e r s ,

lo o k in th e in d e x u n d e r " s h a r e h o l d e r s , " " m a j o r i t y s h a r e h o l d e r s , " or
" o p p re s s iv e c o n d u c t."
b. lah lc of Contents/Table of Cases

If y o u k n o w w h e r e t h e t opi c y o u a r e r e s e a r c h i n g is c o v e r e d in t h e tr eat i se, g o to t h e s c c t i o n o r
\ - ol uni e t hat c o \ e r s t h e s u b j ec t a n d sc an t h e t abl e o f c o n t e n t s fc)r t h e specific s u b t o p i c . I f y o u
are l o o k i n g for t h e t r e a t m e n t o f a speci fic c a se in a treati se, c o n s u l t t h e tabl e o f cases.
c. Rctcrence from Other Sources

O f i e n a n o t h e r so u r ce , s u c h as a c i t at i on in a case t)r legal e n c y c l o p e d i a , will d i r e c t \ ' 0 u to a
sp ec i l i c tr ea t i se s e ct i on.
For Example A c o u r t o p in io n m a y read, "F o r an e x h a u s tiv e t r e a t m e n t of d e r iv a tiv e

a c tio n s see 4 A la n R. B ro m b e rg & Larry E. R ibstein, Partnership^ 15.059."
152
As w i t h .1 cncv'clopLxliii, cilwdvs c o n s u l t t h e p o c k e t p a rt o r s u p p l e m e n t tii u p d a t e

y o u r rcseareTi, to loc a t e t h e inosl r e c e n t cases, a n d to e n s u r e t h a t t h e nari ' at i xe s u m m a r y in
tile m a i n text h a s n o t c l i an g e d . II t h e t r ea t i se is a si ngle \ o k m i e t h a t is n o t u p d a t e d , c h e c k t h e
case c i t a t i o n s t h r o u g h S l i c p i i n i ’i o r W' est l aw' s Ke \ ’C i t e to m a k e s u i e t h e c ases a r e still g o o d
law. Slicpiird's ( j t i i l i o i i i a n d K e \ ( a t e are t l i s c usse d in s c c t i o n \ T o t ' t h i s c h a p t e r .

M a n \ ’ t r ea t i se s are a vail able o n W' estlaw o r i.exisN'exis.
For Example W rig h t and Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure, is available on W e s tla w .
Mail}' t r ea t i se s a r e a v a i l ab l e o n (11) R O M . Treatises, like o t h e r c o p \ r i g h t e d s e c o n d a r \ ’

s o u r c e s , u su a l lv ar e n o t a \ a i l a h l e o n n o n l e e ^ i a s e d W e b sites.
IV. AMERICAN LAW REPORTS

O n e a p p r o a c h to r e p o r t i n g a n d a n a h / i n g the case law is that t a k e n by t he A iuci icaii L a w R ep o rts
( A L R ) . ' I h e A L R p u b l i sh e s the text o t ' l e a d i n g st at e a n d federal c o u r t opinitMis a d d r e s s i n g s p e -
citic issues. F ol l o wi ng t h e o p i n i o n is a n a n a h sis ( r ef er r e d to as iiiiiiotatioiis) ot t h e legal i s sues
r a i s e d in t h e o p i n i o n a n d a s u m m a r \ ' o t ' t h e ca se s f r o m e \ e r \ - j u r i s d i c t i o n t h a t ha\' e a d d r e s s e d
t h e s a m e o r si m i l a r issues. I h e case s u m m a r i e s a re a r r a n g e d b\- j u r i s d i c t i o n a n d p r o v i d e t h e
r e s e a r c h e r wi t h a v i e w ot t he t r e a t m e n t ol t h e legal issLie o r issues rai sed in t h e case.
For Example A s s u m e the a n n o ta tio n analyzes the ques tio n ; " W h e n is a w o r k e r e n

titled to c o m p e n s a tio n for injuries s u ffered afte r te rm in a tio n of e m p lo y m e n t
w h e n th e re is som e c o n n e c tio n b e tw e e n the injury and the e m p lo y m e n t? " The a n n o t a
tio n o rg a n iz e s and p res ents the c ases a c c o rd in g to h o w the c o u rts have a n s w e re d the
q u e s tio n . The c a s e s th a t have a llo w e d c o m p e n s a tio n are p re s e n te d t o g e th e r by state,
j The c a s e s th a t have not a llo w e d c o m p e n s a tio n are also p re s e n te d together.
Ill a d d i t i o n to the case s u m m a r i e s , t h e a n n o t a t i o n s prcn ide r e f e r e n c e s to v a r i o u s o t h e r

r e s e a r c h s o u r c e s . i , a w \ e r s w i t h ex| U'rtise in t h e a r e a of law seleci t h e cases a n d p r e p a r e t he
annotations.
I h e a n n o t a t i o n s l o l l o w i n g t h e text of t h e c o u r t ( ' p i n i o n are t h o r o u g h h ’ r e s e a r c h e d a n d
nia\- r a n g e in l e n g t h f r o m a few p a g e s to m o r e t h a n 100 pages. A si ngle A L R \ - o l u m e m a y r u n
to m o r e t h a n 1,000 p a g e s a n d p r o \ i d e a n n o t a t i o n s to f ewe r t h a n l.'i cases. I h e a n n o t a t i o n s
c o \ er o n l y sel ect e d legal issues. If t h e issue \ o u a re r e s e a r c h i n g is a d d r e s s e d b y a n a n n o t a t i o n ,
t h e a n n o t a t i o n is a r e s e a r c h s h o r t c u t . It will o f t en prcn ide, in o n e place, all y o u r r e s e a r c h : a
c o m p r e h e n s i \ - e anaK' sis o f ' t h e issLie, r e l e r e n c e s to a n d s u m m a r i e s o f t h e ca se law o n p o i n t ,
a n d r e f e r e n c e s to o t h e r r e s e a r c h sour ce s.
A L R b e g a n p u b l i c a t i o n in 1919 a n d for \ e ar s wa s p u b l i s h e d b y L a w \ e r s ’ ( k v o p . ' I' oday,
W e s t p u b l i s h e s A L R . It is c o m p o s e d of t h e f o l l o w i n g m u l t i \ ' o l u m c series:
A L R ( Fi rst Seri es) f e d e r a l a n d st ate cases f r o m 1919 to 1 9 4 8 — 175 \ o l u m e s
A L R . 2 d ( S e c o n d Series) f e d e r a l a n d st ate cases I r o m 1948 to 1 9 6 5 — 100 \ ’o l u n i e s
A I . R . } d ( I h i r d Seri es) f e d e r a l ca se s I r o m 1965 to 1969 a n d st at e cases f r o m 1965

lo 1 9 8 0 — 100 \ o l u n i e s
A I.R . itli ( F o u r t h Series) State cases f r o m 1980 to 19 9 1 — 100 v o l u m e s
A F R .S tli (Fifth Series) Siate ca se s f r o m 1991 to | u n e 2 0 0 5 — 1 25 v o l u m e s
A L R . 6 t h (Si xth Seri es) State ca se s f r o m Kme 2 0 0 5 to p r e s e n t I 53

A I R I'cdcrul I c d c r a l e ases iroiii 1969 td 2(105— 200 v o l u m e s
A L R I^'dcnil ( S e c o n d 1 edei'al eases f r o m 200 5 to p r e s e n t

Seri es)
A, ALR C o m p o n e n ts
T h e r e w e r e c h a n g e s in o r g a n i / a t i o n a n d u p d a t i n g w h e n t h e s e c o n d s e r i e s w a s p u b l i s h e d
a n d a g a i n wi t h t h e p u b l i c a t i o n o t ' t h e t hi r d series. I h e a n n o t a t i o n s in t h e t h i r d , f o u r t h , tifth,
si xt h , a n d t ed e r a l ser i es ar e g e n e r a l h s i m i l a r in t’o i niat a n d u p d a t i n g a n d s h a r e t h e f o l lo wi n g
components:
Prefatory statenient. A n annotatiiMi b e g i n s w i t h a s t a t e m e n t t ha t b ri et h ' d e s c r i b e s

t h e t opi c o f t h e a n n o t a t i o n a n d cites t h e c a s e u s e d to il lustrat e t h e legal issue d i s
c u s s e d in t h e a n n o t a t i o n . At t h e e n d o f t h e s t a t e m e n t is a r e f e r e n c e to t h e p a g e w h e r e
t h e c a s e is p r i n t e d in t h e A I.R \ o l u m e (see Hxhibit 5-8).
Table of contents, l-ollow i ng t h e pr e t a t or \ - s t a t e m e n t is a d e t a i l e d t a bl e ot c o n t e n t s

for t h e a n n o t a t i o n (see li xhibi t 5-9).
Research references and sources. A r es e a r c h s e c t i o n follows w h i c h lists r e f er e n c e s

r el at ed to t h e a n n o t a t i o n . Ihi s s e c t i o n i n c l u d e s r e f e r e n c e s to r e l a t e d A L R a n n o t a
t i ons, e n c N c l o p e d i a s e c t i ons, texts. West ke\' n u m b e r s , law r e v i e w art icl es, a n d o t h e r
p u b l i c a t i o n s, p r a c t i c e aids, a n d c o m p u t e r - a s s i s t e d r es e a r c h so u r ce s .
Article index. Ne xt is a n i n d e x that lists t h e s u b j e c t s a n d w h e r e e a c h subj ec t is co\' -

e r e d in t he a n n o t a t i o n .
Jurisdictional tables, l o l l o w i n g t h e i n d e x is a t a bl e that lists all t h e c ases ci t ed
in t h e a n n o t a t i o n by j u r i s d i c t i o n a n d t h e s t a t u t es r e l e \ a n t to t h e a n n o t a t i o n (see
Hxhibit 5 - 1 0 ).
E x h i b i t 5 - 8 A.L.R. Annotstton. R e p n n te d from L a n y e is C o o p e ia tw e Pu b h sh in g , .A m erican L a w R e p o rts. 5tl'^ S e i . [-'ol I 0 i] 9 9 3 l,

p 3 3 7 R e p rin te d witLi p e r m is s io n from T h o m so n R e u te rs/W e st
10 AI,K5th 337
W H A T P R 0J P :C T S INVOLVP: W O R K S U B J E C T
T O STATE ST A T U T E S R E Q U IR IN G PA Y M E N T
Prefatory O F P R E V A IL IN G W AG ES O N P U B L IC W O R K S P R O J E C T S
Statement in s o m e c as e s i i n o h i n g state siatiites rec|Liiring the p a \ me i i i o f p r e \ ai l i n g wag e s to empl('_\ees on public
w o r k s pr oj ects, issues arise as to w h e t h e r the acti\ it\ in quest ion shoul d be consi dered a project subject to
the statute. F o c u s i ng on the ty|ie o f wo r k that the project calls for. s o m e court s h a \ e e x a m i n e d the staliitory
d es cr i p t i o n o f e o \ e r e d wo r k and the t \ p e o f u o r k called for by the contract. In C & C Teletronics. Inc. \
L). S. West I n f o r ma t i o n Syst ems. Inc. (1987. Mi nn App). 4 1 4 NA\'2d 758. 10 AL R 5 t h 980. for e x a mpl e, the
court he l d that a general contract for the installation o f a nev\ t el e phone sx stein in the st ate' s unix ersity biiikl-
ings w a s not subj ect to pr e \ ai l i n g w a g e rei.|uirenienis. wliere it did not const it ute a "project.'' "cons t ruct i on. "
or "repair. " for p u r p o s e s of' M.S..-X. SS 177.42 sLibd. 2 and 177.43 subd. 1. the prevailing w a g e law. Fhis
a n no t a t i o n c o l l e ct s and a n a l w e s such cases, deali ng with \arioiis U p e s of work.
C & C Teletronics, Inc. v I . S. West Inl'orniiition Svstenis. Inc. is full> reported at page 980. infra.
154
E x h i b i t 5 - 9 A .L.R. A n n o t d t i o n — T able o f C o n t e n t s . R e p r.n te a L a n y e r s C o o p e ia tiv e P u b h sh m a , A m e ric a n L a w R e p o rts,

5 lh S e i Voi 10 ll9 9 3 i, p. 3 3 8 R e p n n te ơ íMth o e im is s 'o n fio m T h o m so n R e u te rs
I ' k I \ Ml l \ ( , \ \ \<il s 1 . \\\ S - - P k (>,I( ( I S I ALR.-Sih

l()A I,R 5 t h 337
Table of Contents
Keseach Refercnct's
Index
Jurisdictidiial Iiil)le of C itud Statutes and ( ases
A R T lC I .K O r T L IM ;
I. Pkli.imin \KY M A m Ks
S I. Intnxluctiiin
Ia I Sciipc
| h | Relat ed a n n o t a t i o n s
2. Suni ni ary
Ii. C(i\i,KA(ii Ol Work IN dik P xkiici i \r S i \n iokv T i .kms

. \ . T i k\is Ol I nci .i SION
S 3. " P ubl i c w o r k " or "jiublic wo r k s "

l a| T e r m a|iplicable
| b | Ter m inappl icabl e
S 4. " P r oj e c t " or "state proj ect "
l a| T e r m appl i cabl e
| b | T e r m ina| iplicable
S ".Alteration"
| a | T e r m appl i ca bl e
| b | T e r m inap| ilicablc
S 6 . " C o n s t r u c t io n "
I'.'.l T e r m applic^vblc
| b | Ter m inappl icabl e
S 7. " D e m o l i t i o n"
S 8 . " Fi xed wo r k"
§ '■). " R e pa i r "
B. T i RMS Ol F\( I t SION

SlO. Ma i nt e n a n c e
| a | Stat utory c. \cki si on appl i cabl e
jb] Stat utory e.xclusion inap| ilicable
Scope. I h e b o d y of t h e a n n o t a t i o n b e g i n s w i t h a s c o p e s e c t i o n t h a t ident i f i es w h a t is
a n d w h a t is n o t ccn-ered in t h e a n n o t a t i o n (see F.xhibit 5 - 1 I ).
Related annotations. Ne x t is a reference to related A I.R a n n o t a t i o n s (see

Hxhi bi t 5-1 n .
Summary and comment. I hi s se c t i o n p r e s e n t s a s u m m a r y o f t h e t opi c t h a t i n c l u d e s

b a c k g r o u n d a n d o t h e r i n f o r m a t i o n h e l p f u l in u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e topic.
Practice pointers, lh e next section o f t h e b o d \ ’ presents case pr epa ra ti on a n d o th e r

guidelines for practitioners.
155
E x h i b i t 5 - 1 0 A.L.R. Annotation— Junsdictional Tables. R e p rin te d from L a w y e rs C o o p e ra tiv e P u b lish in g .

A m e ric a n L a w R e p o rts. 5th S e i , Vol 10 ¡19931 P- 341. R e p rin te d w ith p e rm is s io n from T h o m so n R e u t e rs / W e s t
10 A l . K ^ l h F k ia M l i\(¡ \\’\(;i s L aws - P ko ji -cts

10 A L R 5 t h 337
Scope o l ' a n n o t a t i on , S l | a | I ' el ec o n i m u n i c a t i on s s s s t e m . SS 31al, 4 | b | . 5 | b | .

•Sewers. SS 9 61 b I
Shruhber_\ r en i o\ a l . SS 3| a| , Train ser si ee. S 3|b|
Siilewalk removal. S 7 T r a n s mi s s i o n lines. S IO|a|
Streets. S 3 Tree r e m o \ a l or niai ntenanee. SS 3 | a | . IO| a|
Summar\. S 2 Liiiversity c a mp u s . SS 3 | a | . 4 ( b | . .‘^lb| . 61b|
S w e ep i n g ol ' st reet s. S 31a| Wa r r a nt y work. S 3 | al
Jurisdictional Table of Cited Statutes and Cases*

C A L IF O R N IA
Cal Lab Code S 172» (I)eeriiig). See SS 3| a. b| . .Sla], 7
Cal Lai) Code SS 1771. 177.^ (I)eering). See S 10| a|
1-ranklin \ Riverside ( 1 9 6 2 ) .58 Cal 2d I 14. 23 Cal Rpt r 40 1 . 373 P2d 4 6 . \ 4.s C C H LC <|| .5(1591 —S 10|u|
International BrotherhotuI o f Llectrieal Wor ker s \ H a r b o r Co mr s . . Bt)aril o f ( 1977. 2 nd Dist) 68 Cal Ap p
3d .556, 137 Cal Rptr 372. 82 C C H LC >|| 5,5083. 57 O C R 3 2 9 — S 3 | b |
Priest \ Housi ng Aiiihoritv o f O x n a r d (1969. 2nd Dist) 275 Cal A p p 2d 751, SO Cal Rpt r 14.5— SS
51a|. 7
IL L IN O L S
III Ann .Stat ch 48 para 3‘>s-l et seq., 39s-2, 39s-3 (.Smith-Hiircl). See S IO|a|
III Re\ Stat eh 48 para 39s-l et seq. ( 1987). See S 3 | a |
III Rev Stat ch 48 para 39s-2 ( 1975). See S IO|al
III Re\ Stat ch 48 para 39s-2 ( 1989). See S 8
Beaver C l a s s & Mi r r o r Co. v lul ueati on. Board o f (1978. 2d Dist) 59 111 Ap p 3d 880. 17 111 Dec 378. 376
N'L;2d 377. 84 C' CH LC' | | 5 5 1 4 3 - S lOjaj
l ' r \ e \ Iroquois. Count x ol'( 1986. 3d Dist) 140 III A p p 3d 749. 95 III Dee 185. 4 8 9 N L 2 d 406 . 27 B N A W H
Ca s 9 79 S
■Statutes, rules, regulations, and constitutional provi the appropriat e statutory or regulatory compi l at i ons to
sions bearing on the subject i)!' the annotation are ascertain the cuirent status o t f e l e \ a n t statutes, rules,
included in this tabic only to the extent, and in the regulations, and constitutional provisions.
form, that the\ are relleeted in the c(Uirt opini ons di s For federal cases involving slate law. see state
cussed in this annotation. Th e reader should consult headiiius.
156
E x h i b i t 5 -1 1 A . L . R . A n n o t a t i o n — B o d y o f A n n o t a t i o n . R e p i'n te c l from L a w y e rs C o o p e ra tiv e P u b lish in g . A m e ric a n L a w

R e p o rts. 5th S e : . Wui I 0 ' l 9 9 3 i p 3 4 4 R e p n n te d w^th p e n v r s s io n Iro m T h o m so i' R e u te rs
I I’ki \ \iMN(. W \(;i s I . \\\ s - Pkoji c I s 10 A L R 5 t h

lOALR.Mh 3'7
I. I*rt'liminar\ Mattirs W'hat e m p l o y e r s are subject to prevai li ng w a g e
r c i | ui r eme n t ot' state st atut es r e q u i r i n g p a > m e nt
Scope 1. InlnKliiclion
( 'f p rcxai l i ng w a g e s cmi p ubl i c works pr oj ects.
' |a| S c(» p t‘ 7 . \ L R S t h 444.
T his aniioialii'ii c o Hcl' I s a nd a n a l \ / e s ihc eases dis- W'hat are "pr evail ing wages. " or the like, for
eii ssi n” w h et h e r a project i i n o K c s w o r k ot a iiaiLiic p u i p o s e s o f state statute requi ring p a y me n t o f p r e
renderiiii; the project siihject to a state statute reeiuir- vailing w a g e s on public w o r k s projects. 7 A L R 3 t h
iiiii noiiyiisei'nnicntal e m p l o y e r s lo p a \ prexailing 400.
wai;cs lo wo r k e r s on public wo r k s projects. W ho is "e mp l o y e e . " " w o r k m a n , " or the like, o f
l un n b e r ol jurisdictions h a \ e rules. legulalioiis. c on t r a c t o r subject to stale statute requi ring p ay me n t
const it uii onal provi sions, or Icgislalixe e na c t me n t s o f pr e v a i l i n g wages on p ubl i c works pr oj ects.
iliiectl_\ beaiiiig on this suhjeci. T h e s e pro\isi(iiis. 5 ALR.^th 513.
includiiii: pre\ailiiii: wa g e statutes, are discussed W hat entities o r proj ects are " pu b l i c " for p ur
herei n onl \ to the extent a nd in the form that the\ are poses o f slate statutes requi ri ng p a y m e n t o f prevai l
r el lect cd in the court opiniiins that lall within the ing w a g e s on public w o r k s projects. .5 A L R 5 t h 470.
sci)pe ol lhe a nnolal ion. T h e reader is conse(.|uenll\
Validity, const ructi on, a nd effect o f state and
a i b i s e d to consul t the a ppr opr i a t e statutorv oi' rcgu- local law s requi ring g o v e r n me n t a l units to give " p u r
l at o i \ c o mp i l a t i o n s to ascertai n the CLirrent status of
c h a s e p r e f e r e n c e " to g o o d s nia n u f ac t u r e d or services
Rebtec all statutes tliscussed herein, i ncl uding t hose listed in p e r t or mc d in state. X4 A L R 4 t h 419.
annotations the .lurisilictional Table o f Cit ed Statutes and Cases.
W'hat c onst it utes "publ i c w o r k " withi n statute
jh| R ilali'd aniiotalions relating to c o n t r ac t o r ' s bond. 48 A L R 4 t h 1 170.
l : m p l o \ e e s ' | i i i \ a t e right o f acti on to e n f o r c e slate \aliditv o f stale statute iir local o r d i n a n ce
statute lecjuinng p a \ m e n t ol pres ai l i ng w a g e s on i et| un ing. or giv mg
pLiblic works projects. 10 ,\l.R.^th .ViO.
1. 'Vhis annol al i on. \v^gclho\ wnl i S ,\1 .Rv,h 471i. \ o a s\a\c pvc \ai li ng w a g e sValule, see 5 ALRfiUi
.‘S Al R.Mh ,5 I 3, 7 Al R.sih 400, 7 Al R.sih 444, and 470. As to the c]uestion w h et h e r a part icul ar
10 Al.R.'sth .ViO. su p er s e d es the an n o t at i o n at e m p l o v c r mvolvetl in a publi c wo r k s project is
93 AI . R 1249. coverctl bv a siatc prevailing wa g e statute, see
2. As to the (.|uesiion w h e t h e r a project is ol' a 7 Al R.sth 444.
" pu b l i c " nature so as to leiuler the project subject
Substantive provisions. I h e b u l k ot t h e b o d y ot a n a n n o t a t i o n is c o m p o s e d ot t h e
s u b s t a n t i v e s e c t i o n s t h a t o r g a n i z e , s u m m a r i z e , a n a k z e , a n d e v a l u a t e t h e c a s e law
o n t h e t op i c o f t h e a n n o t a t i o n , b’o r e a c h c a s e d i s c u s s e d in t b e a n n o t a t i o n , t h e r e is
a p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e facts a n d issue(s) b e t o r e t h e c o u r t rel at ed to t h e t o p i c ot t h e
a n n o t a t i o n , t h e c o u r t ’s c o n c l u s i o n s o n t h e issue(s), a n d t h e c o u r t ’s r e a s o n s t o r its
conclusions.
In a d d i t i o n to t h e c o m p o n e n t s o f e a c h a n n o t a t i o n , t h e A I.R ser ies h a s t h e f o l l o w i n g

ge n e r a ! feat ures:
A I.R Index, l h e A L R ( i e n e r a l h i d e x lists t e r m s a n d p h r a s e s a l p h a b e t i c a l l y w i t h ref

e r e n c e s to all rel at ed a n n o t a t i o n s . ' I h e i n d e x is c o m p r e h e n s i v e w i t h e x t e n s i v e c ros s-
r e f e r e n ce s (see h.xhibit 3-12).
For Example If you are looking fo r a n n o ta tio n s on " a s p h y x ia tio n ," th e index w ill
d ire c t you to " s u ffo c a t io n ."
157
E x h i b i t 5 - 1 2 A .L.R. Index. R e n rm re d f'o n i W e s t G fo u o , A m e n c a n Law R e p o rts. In a e \ A B iW 9 9 i. p 3 2 4 R e p rin te d w ith p e r n 't s s io n

from T h o m so ri R e u te rs
. \ L R I NI ) i ; , \
ASIM IAl T A M ) A S I'H A I T A SSA SSIN A H O N — ('(.iifd

Reference PUODl'C IS — Confcl 18 .\LR4th
for initial citntacl with attornex.
iVaiKis c.xccplion in I'CC' S 2-2(ll(.i)(a). 669. S3|a|; 18AI.R4th 743. ÿ 3 J o p ic
45 A l.lU th 1126. ÿ 10 A S S A l L T A M ) HAT I L R \
A S I’H'S X IA ITON I'or lelated topics, see .Abuse o f P e r s o n s ; -------
Related
Sul'foi'iition ( t h i s i i i d e M Lif>h(iii” topic
A S P IR IN •Admiraltx. what const it utes assault resulting
D r u g s U i r c s a i u l t l r i i g g i s i s , h a b i l i l s ol in serious bodiU injur\ within the special
|ihainiacist w h o acciiralcl\ fills p r c s c i i p i i o n ma r i t i me or territorial jurisiliction o f the
lor h a r m re sulting to user. 44 ,\I.U5th .V>3, L'nited States for p u r pos e s o f IS LLS.C'.A.
S 15. 20|a|. 42|h| ÿ 1 l.^lf). p r o \ i d i n g p u n i s h me n t for such act.
.Malpracticc. ncgligencL' in d i a g n o s i n g or 55 A L R Fed 895
treating aspirin p(' isoning. liabilits lor, .Agents and agencs
36AI,K3(1 1358 e m p l o \ e r ' s liabilit\ to e m p l o y e e or agent
for inJuiA or death resulting from assault
ASPO U IM ION
or cri mi nal attack by third person.
Interstate or loreigii shipnicnts, whal
40 A LR5th 1
c onsi ii utes ol f ense uiuler p r o \ i s i o n s o f IS
f r anchisor ' s tort liabilit_\ lor injuries
r . S . ( ' . , \ . S 6.59 pcii ali /i ng ihel't from
allegetll) c au se d by assault or ot her
ml erst ate oi' foreign shi pment s.
cri mi nal acti\ it_\ on or near franchise
8 AI R l td 938
premises. 2 A LR 5 tli 369
Mo t or \ e hi e l e . asportati on o f mo t or \ e h i el e
.Aggra\atecl assault
as iieeessaiA element to support charge of Stationary
kicking as ag g r a \ a t e i l assault, or assault
larcens, 70 ALK.hI 1202
w ith (.langerons or ileaills we a pon. 'object
P a u n m g , taking, and pletlging or pawni ng,
19 A LR 5 lh 823
a n o t h e r ' s pr oper t\ as l arcen\.
st;itionar\ object or att ached lixtuie as
82 AI ,R2(1 863
dea dK or d a n g e r o u s w e a p o n lor purjioses
l ' r i \ a c \ . false light invasion ot, a c cusat ion or
ol siatute aggravat ing o l l e n s es such as
innueiulo a s to criminal acts. 58 .\l.R4lh
assault, r o b b e r \ , or honiicKle,
902. S 11
8 AI.R5lh 775 ----------------------------------- Annotation
Separat e offense
sufficiency ol biulilv iii|ur\ to su|iport
seizure or detent ion for purpos e of
charge o f ag g r a s a l e d assault. 5 .\LR 5 lli
c o mm i t t i ng rape, rohheiy. or ot her offense
243 ^
as const it uti ng separate cri me of
. \ g g r a \ a t i o n (if d a ma g e s , see g r o u p
kitliiapping. 39 ,\I.R5lh 283
Miti gati on or a g g r a \ a t i o n o f d a m a g e s in
shoplifting. \aliilit_\. c onst ructi on, aiul effect
this topic
o f statutes est abli shing shop-lifting or its
.AIDS, tr ansmi ssi on or risk o f tr a nsmi ssi on o f
ec|Lii\alent as a separate cri mi nal offense.
h u m a n imii uinodel ici eney virus ( H l \ ' ) or
i>4AI.K4th 1088
acquir ed i m m u n o d e n c i e n c s s y n d r o m e
A SSA SSIN A ITO N (.AIDS) as basis lor p ros ecut i ng or
, \ l i e n ' s entitleiiK'nt, d u e to threat to hfe or sent enci ng defeiulant foi' cri mi nal offense.
fr ee d o m, to wi t hhol di ng o f deport ati on 13 ALR5th 628
uiuler S 243(h) o f I mmi gr a t i on and .Anuisements aiul exhibi ti ons
Na t i onal i t \ Act o f 1952 (S I'.S.C',.A. em| Tl o\ee. liabilit\ o f a m u s e m e n t o| ie rator
S 1253(h)). 83 A L R Ltd 16. ÿ 8|a. cj. f('r a personal assault by e m p l o y e e upon
lOKI. I Mil. I3|h| cust omer, patron, or ot her iin itee.
Cont a c t w ith attorney, denial or interference 34 A LR 2 d 422
v\ith accLisetl's right to or re(.|uest patron. liabilit\ o f ow ner or ope r a t o r of
t heater or ot her a m u s e m e n t to patron
Consul t P OCKL' ] ' P.AR'L for Later An n o t a t i o n s
158
I h c i n d e x is a n ui h i v o k i i i i e sel llial p i c n i d e s r e l e r e n c e s to a n n o t a t i o n s in M .R .J il, A L R . 3d,

A L R . Ilh, A I .R . 5 1 I1. A I.R .Ó lh, a n d A L R L cdcnil. A L R Lederal 2d.
Quick Index. I h e one-\'(ili.niie s o f t b o u n d i n d e x p r o v i d e s r e f e r e n c e s to A L R . 3d,
A I.R . Ith, A L R .S th , A I.R .6 lh , A I R Lederal. a n d A L R Ledera l.2d. I h e r e is al s o a n A L R
Lederal Q i d i k liule.\ p r o v i d i n ” r e f er e n c e s lo tlie .-M.R L'eilerid a n d .AI.R L ederal.2d.
Tlie Q id e k Inde.xes a re n ol as d e t a i l e d as t h e (ie n e r a l lm le.\.
Table of Laws, Rules, and Regulations. T h e i n d e x i n c k i d e s a t ab l e t h a t i n d i c a t e s

w h e r e sl al ul es, rules, r e g u l a t i on s , a n d so o n are c it ed in a n n o t a t i o n s .
Annotation History Table. T he last v o l u m e ot t h e .ALR (¡eneriil Inde.x i n c k i d e s a

hislor}' tabl e that i n d i c a t e s if a n a n n o t a t i o n h a s b e e n s u p p l e m e n t e i l in o r s u p e r s e d e d
by a lat er a n n o t a t i o n (see I^xhibit 3-13).
A L R Digests. T h e r e are i i u i l t i v o k i m e .ALR d i g e s t s s i m i l a r to t h e W'est d i g e s t s ( d i s

c u s s e d in s e c t i o n \ ' ) . In t h e digests, t h e law is d i v i d e d i n t o m o r e t h a n 4 0 0 t o p i c s a n d
a r r a n g e d al pha be t i c al l y, k a c b t op i c is d i v i d e d i n t o n u m e r i c a l s u b s e c t i o n s . ' I h e s e c
t i on s i n c l u d e a s u m m a r \ - o f t h e a n n o t a t i o n s a n d re f e r e n c e s to o t h e r s o u r ce s , s u c h as
e n c y c l o p e d i a r e f er e n c e s a n d p r a c t i c e re f e re nce s. T h e r e are s e p a r a t e d i g e s t s f o r A L R
a n d A L R . 2 d a n d a c o m b i n e d d i g e s t for .A LR .3d. .ALR. Ilh, .A L R .3 th. .AI.R.6lh, A L R
Lederal, a n d A L R Led eral.2d.
Updates. .ALR a n d .ALR.2 d a re u p d a t e d d i t f e r e n t h t h a n t h e o t h e r .ALR series.
A L R . T h e .ALR is u p d a t e d b\- c h e c k i n g t h e .ALR lih ie h o o k of S ii p p l e n i e n h d Deei-

iio n s . T h i s is a n o n c u n i u l a t i v ’e m u l t i v o k i m e set, me a n i n . g t ha t c a c b v o l u m e c o v
e r s s u p p l e m e n t a l c a se s for a set p e r i o d o f v e a r s — x ' ol u mc 3 cov e r s s u p p l e m e n t a l
d e c i s i o n s t r o m 1932 t o I93S. T h e r e is a n a n n u a l p a p e r b a c k p a m p h l e t l o r d e c i
s i o n s s u b s e q u e n t to t h e last h a r d b o u n d v o l u m e . T h i s m e a n s t ha t e a c h v o l u m e
a n d s u p i ' l e m e n t m u s t b e c h e c k e i l to l o c a t e all t h e s u p p l e m e n t a l cases . F o r t u -
natelv, b e c a u s e .ALR onlv c o v e r s c a s e s t h r o u g h 1948, it is n ot I r e q u e n t l v u s e d .
T h e lU u eh o o k lists t h e .ALR c i t a t i o n (e.g., 121 A.1..R. (i l 6- ( i 2~) t o l l o w e d b y a list
o f c a s e s d e c i d e d a lt er t h e c i t a t i o n w a s p u b l i s h c d . T h e lU iiehook a l s o i n d i c a t e s if
a n a n n o t a t i o n h as b e e n s u p p l e m e n t e d o r s u p e r s e i l e d by a n o t h e r a n n o t a t i o n .
A I.K .2 il. T h e ,Al.R.2il i s u p d a t e d bv r e l e r e n c e to t h e m u l t i v o l u n i e A L R . 2 d L a ter

(Aise Service, li ach v o l u m e is u p d a t e d wi t h a p o c k e t p a r t , so v ou m u s t c h e c k t h e
p o c k e t p a r t as well as t h e m a i n v o l u m e . T h e L ater Ca.<e S ervice l i s t s t he .A LR .2 d
c i t at i on f o l l o we d by a s u m m a r v ’ o f t h e n e w cases a n d lists s u p p l e m e n t a l o r s u p e r
seding annotations.
A l.R .. id , A l . R . l t I t , A L R .S t h , A L R . 6 lh , a n d A L R Lederal. T h e A L R .3 d , A L R . i t h ,
.A LR .3th, .ALR.(till, a n d .ALR Lederal a r e u p d a t e d t h r o u g h t h e use ol’a n n u a l c u m u
lative p o c k e t p a r t s u p p l e m e n t s i n s e r t e d in t h e b a c k o f e a c h v o l u m e . T h e p o c k e t
p a r t lists t h e .ALR c i t a t i o n t ol l o w e d by a list ol n e w s e c t i o n s a n d s u b s e c t i o n s , a list
o f n e w r e s e a r c h re f e r e n c e s , a n d s u m m a r v ' o f t h e n e w cases. It also i n d i c a t e s if an
a n n o t a t i o n h as b e e n s u p p l e m e n t e d o r s u p e r s e d e d by a n o t h e r a n n o t a t i o n ,
l. atest Câse Se r vi c e H o t l i n e . In t h e fr o n t o f e a c h p o c k e t p a r t s u p p l e m e n t o f
.A LR .3d, .ALR.4th, .A LR .Sth, .A LR .6th, a n d .ALR Lederal is a t ol l - free n u m b e r for
o b t a i n i n g cites to c a s e s d e c i d e d s i n c e t h e p u b l i c a t i o n ot t h e p o c k e t part .
I . cxi sNexis a n d West law. I h e .ALR Series a re avail able o n I.exisN'exis (Lexis) a n d
W'estlaw. I h c .AI.Rs o n l i n e a r e u p to d a t e , as s u p p l e m e n t a t i o n is i n t e g r a t e d i n t o
the anno tation.
159
E x h i b i t 5 - 1 3 A L,R. Annotation History Table, R e p n n ie a fio m ivesi G io u p . A n v : 'ai- L,T~': R e p o 'ts , G e n tv a l

ln d e \ 119991. p. ¡3 2 5 R e p n n te d \\!th pern'':ns:o n from T h o m so n Reuteir-
ANNOTATION HISTORY TABLE

This lahlc lists aiinolatioiis in , \ I , R (f'iist Series). AI. R2d. ALR.hI. AI,R4iIi. A L R 3 t h t hr ough Vohinic W .
AI. R F-ci.1 ihroLiiih \ o k m i c 155, whi ch h a \ c tx-cn super seded i>r suppleiiieiitcd h\ Liter a nnotat ions. Cons ul t
the pocket |iart in this \ oluni e lor latei' histiiry
A I.R (First .Scries) 1 A I.R 1632 2 A I.R 1522

.Superseded 5,' ,AI.R2d 572 S u p e r s ed e d 157 AI . R l.v^9
1 A I R 148
Su p e r s e d e d 74 .Al.RZd S2S 1 A I.R 168S 2 A L R 1576
Siipersciled W AI . R2 d 7 S u p e r s e d e d 7 7 , A I . R2 d 1 l<S2
1 A L R 222
Subtliv Vlll Su p e r s e d e d 71 2 A I.R 6 3 A I.R 242
A l . R 2 d 1 140 SLipplcniented 49 . \ I . R 2 d 9S2 Su p e r s e d e d 72 A l . R 2 d .U2
I A L R 329 2 AI R 61 3 A L R 312
■Superseded .Ỉ6 , \ L K 2 d S6I Su p e r s e d e d 14 Al.R.VI S u p e r s ed e d 24 A L R 2 d 194
1 A I R 343 2 A I .R 225 3 A I R 610

Su p e r s e d e d 51 A L R 2 d 1404 S up p l e me n t e d 41 A l . R 2 d 126,î S u p e r s ed e d 12 A I , R 2 d 611
1 A I .R 3S3 2 A l R 287 3 A I R 664

Su p e r s e d e d 13 AI , R4 t h 1 I5.Ỉ Su p e r s e d e d 1 1 AI . R4 t h .U5 Su p e r s e d e d 4S A L R 2 d S94
2 A l R 345 74 A I . R 4 t h 90
1 A I .R 449
S u p e r s ed e d : s A I . R 2 d 662 Su p e r s e d e d 44 A I . R 2 d 1242 3 A L R 824
2 A I.R 545 .Supersctled 1.^ . \ L R . h I S4S
1 A L R 528
Su p e r s e d e d 87 A L R 4 t h 1 1 Siipersetled 54 .XI.R. h I 9 3 A L R 833
2 A I.R 579 S u p e r s e d e d 22 A I . R . h I 1
1 A L R 546
Snpersedeil 50 A l , R 2 d 1.Ỉ24 Supcrsctleel 50 AI . R2 d 1 Uil 3 A L R 902
2 AI R 592 S u p e r s e d e d 57 AI. R. h I IOS.î
1 A I R 834
Su p e r s e d e d 91 A L R 2 d 1. U4 S u p e r s e d e d 12 AI R. h I 9. v ^ 3 A L R 1003
2 Al R 867 Supei' seded 9S .AI.I'^.h I (105
1 AI R 861
Su p e r s e d e d 41 A l , R 2 d 12 1 Supcrsctlctl 25 AI . R. h I 94 1 3 A L R 1096
2 A I .R 1008 SupcrsedctI S9 .AI.R. h I 551
1 A I.R S84
Supersc(.led. as to private Su p e r s e d e d 90 AI , R2d 1210 3 A L R 1104
easeiiienis 25 . \ l , R 2 d 1265 2 AI R 1068 Su p e r s e d e d S A I . R 4 t h SS6
1 A L R 1163 Su p e r s e d e d AI. R. h I 1457 3 A L R 1109

Sup e r s e d e d AI , R4 t h 482 2 A I.R 1368 S u p e r s ed e d 92 A I . R 2 d 1009
1 A I R 1267 S u p e r s ed e d 56 AI. R. h I 1 1S2 3 A L R 1130

.Superseded 87 A I . R 2 d 271 2 A I.R 1376 S u p p l e m e n t e d 41 .ALR2d 739
1 A I.R 1368 S u p e r s ed e d 45 A l . R 2 d 1296 3 A L R 1279

Su p e r s e d e d 4 6 A L R 2 d 1 140 2 A I.R 1389 Subdis II Suji erseded 100
Su p e r s e d e d 2S A1.R.\1 1. U4 A L R 2 d 227
1 A L R 1528
•Superseded 1,^ Al . K 3 d 42 2 AI R 1428 3 A L R 1304
S up e r s ed e d 61 AI . R5 t h 7.^9 Su p e r s e d e d S2 A L R 2 d 61 1
Consul t I’O C K ir r PART for l. atcr Hntries
B, Research Using ALR

llie f o c u s o f legal r e s e a r c h is u s u a l k o n a specific issue ra i se d b \ ’ t h e facts o f a c l i e n t ’s case, ' l h e
v a l u e o i'A l.R as a r e s e a r c h tool lies in its c o m p r e h e i i si \ ' e a n a l y s i s o f speci ti c legal issues, i f t h e r e
160 is a n a n n o t a t i o n th a t a d d r e s s e s t h e legal issue \ ’ou a re r e s e a r c h i n g , nn)st o f \ o u r r e s ea r ch is done.
llic i s s u e is a n a l y z e d t h r o u g h t h e d i s c u s s i o n a n d s y n t h e s i s ot c a se s t r o m c \ e r y j u r i s d i c t i o n .
S e c o n d a r ) ’ sour ces , s u c h as tr eati ses. We s t digest kev n u m b e r s , a n d pr a c t i c e a i d s a r e ident i f i ed.
For Example The ques tion being re s e a rc h e d involves th e a d m is s ib jlity of p o ly g ra p h e v i

d e n c e by the d e fe n d a n t in a m a lic io u s p ro s e c u tio n case. This is a s p e c ific
q u e s tio n th a t could require a g re a t deal of re s e a rc h . There is an ALRcWe th a t d ire c tly a d
d re s s e s th is topic: "S te v e n J, Gaynor, A n n o ta tio n , Admissibility of Evidence of Polygraph
Test Flesults or Offer or Refusal to Take Test, in Action for Malicious Prosecution, 10 A,L,R,
5th 663 (1993)," R eference to this 4 /./? annotation saves th e re s e a rc h e r an im m ense a m o u n t
of tim e b e c a u s e all the rese a rc h to the year o fth e p ublic ation is consolid ated in one source.
2. Research Techniques
C e r t a i n r e s e a r c h t e c h n i q u e s will h el p y ou l o c at e speci fic A I .R a n n o t a t i o n s , as d e s c r i b e d here,
a. Index to Annotations
F ro b a b l ) ' t h e m o s t I' requentK' u s e d a p p r o a c h tt> l o c a t i n g a n n c H a t i on s is to consLilt t h e ni ul t i -
N'olunie i n d e x . I f y o u k n o w t h e g e n e r a l a r e a o f l a w , t h e i n d e x will d ir e c t ) o u to t h e a p p r o p r i a t e
annotation.
For Example The q u e s tio n is w h e th e r a .stationary o b je c t can be a d e a d ly w e a p o n u n d e r

a c rim in a l s tatute e n h a n c in g th e p e n a lty fo r a s s a u lt w ith a d e a d ly w e a p o n .
By lo o k in g in the index und e r "a s s a u lt and battery," the re s e a rc h e r w ill be q u ic k ly d ire c te d
to th e a p p ro p ria te a n n o ta tio n (see Exhibit 5-14),
b. A L R Digest
,As w i t h t h e i ndex, a n n o t a t i o n s c a n be l oc a t ed b \ ’ l o o k i n g u p t h e t o p i c in t h e g e n e r a l a r e a o f
law i n t h e digest. In a d d i t i o n to r e f e r e n c e s t o a n n o t a t i o n s , t h e di ges t s u n i n i a r i z e s r e l e \ a n t
c ases p r i n t e d in A i.R .
c. I’able o f Laws, Rules, and Regulations

If )'ou k n o w t h e s t a t u t e that g o \ e r n s t h e issue b e i n g r e s e a r c h e d , )<ui c a n refer to t h e tabl e a n d
be d i r e c t e d t o t h e a n n o t a t i o n s t ha t i l iscuss t h e st atut e,
d. Reference from Other Sources

O f t e n y o u m a y be d i r e c t e d to a speci fic A I.R a n n o t a t i o n f r o m a n o t h e r s o u r ce , s u c h as a c i t a
t i on in a case, art icl e, o r S lic p a r d i’ ( jta ti o iis . In s u c h c a s e s yt)u c o u l d g o d i r e c t h ’ to t h e v o l u m e
a n d s e c t i o n cited.
A lw a y s consult the pock et part a n d S L i p p l e m e n t t o u p d a t e y o u r r e s e a r c h a n d t o l o c at e
t h e m o s t r e c e n t cases. In adcfi ti on, a lw u y s c o n s u l t t h e a p p e n d i x \ o l u n i e to e n s u r e t h a t y o u
h a v e l o c a t e d all t h e c a s e s u m m a r i e s . N o t e t h a t t h e a p p e n d i x \ ' o l u m e s a r e n o t c u m u l a t i x ’e;
each m u s t be checked,
3. C om pu ter-A id ed Research
I h e A L R is a v a i l ab l e o n C D - R O M a n d We st i a w, C o m p u t e r - a i d e d r e s e a r c h is d i s c u s s e d in
C h a p t e r 7,
V. DIGESTS
As d i s c u s s e d in C h a p t e r -t, c o u r t o p i n i o n s ar e p r i n t e d in r e p o r t e r s in c h r o n o l o g i c a l o r d e r ;
t h e y ai'e n o t o r g a n i z e d b\- topi c, I f y o u ar e a t t e m p t i n g t o l ocat e a c as e t h a t a d d r e s s e s a speci fic
161
issue, t h a t is, a case o n p o in t , it w o u l d t ak e ) (hi f o r e \ ’e r to fi nd it by r a n d o m l y l o o k i n g t h r o u g h
E x h i b i t 5 - 1 4 A ssault and Battery Key N um ber Outline. R e p rin te d from W e s t Group, E le v e n th D e c e n n ia l D ig e st, V ol 5 2001).
R e p rin te d w ith p e rm is s io n from T h o m so n R e u te rs.
Topic
ASSAULT AND BATTERY
Subjects included- -------------------------- S I H JK C T S IN C L I D KI)
Acts 1)1 \ ioleiicc Idwaals the person ol' another. \\ ith or \\ ithout actual touching or striiîng. not constituting an
element in. or attempt to commit , any other specific injury or offense
■lustifieation or e.xcuse for such acts, and c i r cu ms t an c e s o f a g gr a \ at i on
Liabilities anti r e me d i e s therefor. ci\ il or criminal
,SL H .IIX I S KXC IA D KI) A M ) C O V K K K I) K \ O T H K R T O P IC S

Death, assjjwffresulting in civil liabilitv. see DE.ATH
MoUjj>Veliicles. assaults by operat i on ol. see A L T O M O B I L H S
Subjects -isiructing process or resisting officer, assaulls c omni i t t od in. see O B S T R U C T I N G J L ' S T I C E
covered O t h e r off enses —
elsewhere C o m m i s s i o n o f assault with intent It), or in attenipt lo. perpetrate, see H O M I C I D E . R A P E .
R OB B ER ' )
Con v i ct i o n s of assault in pros ecut i ons for, see I N D I C T M E N T A N D I N F O R M A T I O N
Unlavvl'ul arrest, assaults in connectitdi with, see FALSf i I . M P R I S O N M E N T
For tietailed ref erences to o t h e r topics, see Descripti\'e-VV’ord Inde.x
(A) A C T S C O N S T L L U T I N G A S S A U L T O R B AT T ER Y A N D L I A B I L I T Y T H E R E f - O R .
i B) . VCLIONS. «== 19-46.
II. ( R IM IN A I, R K S I'O N S IH IIT T ^ . 47-100.

(A) ()i f l ; n s l ; s . 4 7 -7 1 .
(B) PROSLX L n i O N . «== 72-99.
(C) SL'.NTF.NCL, . \ N1) I’UNl S l l Ml - . NT, KKL
1. ( IM L L IA H II.n V.
(A) .ACTS C O N S T I T U T I N C A S S A U L T 16. Accident .
O R B,\TTF;RY a n d I . I AB I L I T ' i - 17. Pers ons entitled It) sue.
I i i f ;r f ;i ( ) r . 18. Pers ons liable.
C^l, Nature anti e l e me n t s o f assault and battery. (B) A C T I O N S .

In general. 19. Cirounds and c o n di t i ons precedent .
Intent anti malice. 20. Jurisdi cti on and venue.
4. A b i h t \ lo e xecut e intent. 21. T i me lo sue and limitations.
s, - Overt act in general.
Key 22. Parties.
6. -------Unlaw ful act. 23. Process.
numbers 7. -------Excessiv e force in d o i n g law ful act. 24. Pleading.
8. Delenses. (5). In general.
9. -------In general. ( 1). Declarat ion, petition, or c onipl aint .
10 -------Exerci se o f authority or duty. (2). Plea or a n s w e r and replication.
I L -------Co nse nt . (3). Issues, prt)of, and vari ance.
12 . -------Provocat ion. 25. Ev idence.
13. -------Self-defense. 2.S.I. ------- In general.
14. - De f e nse o f another.
L3. - De f e nse o f properly.
162
c a s e a f t er case in t h e r ep o r t e r s . ,\ tiigcst is not seconciar\- a u t h o r i t y ; tliat is, it Is n ot a s o u r c e

a c o u r t will rel\' o n to i n t er p r e t t h e law. Rather, it is a s o u r c e ilesi gneil to al l ow r e s e a r c h e r s t o
l o c a t e ca s e s easih'.
.A digest is a set o i h o o k s t h at o r g a n i z e t h e l aw h\- t o p i c , su c h as c o r p o r a t i o n s o r tor t s,
a n d di \ ' i d e e a c h t o p i c i n t o s u h t o p i c s . Th e d i g e s t p r o v i d e s t h e c i t at i on to a n d a h r i e t ' s u m n i a r y ,
o r d i ges t , o f all t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n s t ha t h a v e a d d r e s s e d t h e s u b t o p ic s . T h e abilit}' to r e v i e w
t h e c a s e s u n m i a r i e s a l l o ws t h e r e s e a r c h e r t o select t h e case m o s t s i mi l a r t o t h e c l i e n t ’s case,
t h a t is, t h e cas e m o s t o n p o i n t . T h u s , a d i g e s t s e r \ e s as a tool t o r l o c a t i n g ca s e s o n specific
c] ue s t i ons b e i n g r e s e a r c h e d .
A. W e s t ’s Key N u m b e r Digest System

T h e m o s t c o mp r e h e ii s i \ ' e a n d f r e q u e n l h ’ us e d diges t s are t h o s e p ub l i s h e d b\' W'est. As d i s c u s s e d
in C ' h a p t e r 4, t h e a p p e l l a t e c o u r t d e c i s i o n s in t h e U n i t e d States are p u b l i s h e d in t h e v a r i o u s
West' s r e p o r t e r s . W'est d e\ - e l o p e d its diges t s y s t e m to facilitate a ccess to t h o s e d e c i s i o n s . A n
u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f h o w t h e s\ ' steni is o r g a n i z e d is hel p f ul w h e n l e a r n i n g h o w t o u s e it.
W'est o r g a n i z e s t he law i n t o t he t o l l o wi n g m a i n categories: p e r s o n s , propert}' , c o n t r a c t s ,
torts, c r i me s , r e m e d i e s , a n d g o \ ' e r n n i e n t . '1 h es e b r o a d c at e g o r i e s are d i v i de d i n t o s u b c a t eg o r i es ,
a n d t h e s u b c a t e g o r i e s are s u b d i v i d e d i n t o m o r e t h a n 400 topics. I h e list o f e v e r \ - digest t o p i c is
l o ca t ed at t h e b e g i n n i n g ot e\ er\' We s t digest \ o l u m e . Each topi c is listed in a l p h ab e t i c al o r d e r in
t h e digest. Hach topi c is s u b d i \ i ded int o s u b t o p i c s a n d e ach s ub t op i c is a s s i g n e d a n u n i b e r called
a k e y n u m b e r ( see H.xhibit 14). ICach s u b t o p i c is r e f e r r e d to by biitli its topi c a n d key n u m b e r .
For Example A s s a u lt and B a tte r y 7 re fe rs to k e y n u m b e r 7 of th e t o p ic of " a s s a u l t

and b a tte ry "; C o n s titu tio n a l L a w 7 re fe rs to key n u m b e r 7 of th e to p ic of
" c o n s titu t io n a l la w ."
Lo d e t e r m i n e t he s u b t o p i c title o f a ke\- n u m b e r , l o o k to t h e tabl e ol c o n t e n t s o f t h e

t o p i c in t h e di ges t (see L.xhibit .5 14).
• i i j If you w a n t to k n o w the title of th e s u b to p ic A s s a u lt and B a tte ry 7, you

w o u ld look up " a s s a u lt and b a tte ry " in th e digest, th e n look to key n u m b e r
7 and find t h a t key n u m b e r 7 is "e x c e s s iv e fo rc e in doing la w fu l a c t." (See E xhibit 5-14.)
F o l l o w i n g t h e t o p i c t abl e o f c o n t e n t s is t h e b o d \ ' ol t h e diges t t h a t lists t h e k ey n u n i b e r

t o l l o w e d b\- a s u m m a r y (di gest ) ot all t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n s t ha t h a\ ' e in s o m e w a y d i s c u s s e d t h e
t o p i c (s ee H.xhibit 13).
For Example A s s u m e the c lie n t w a n ts to sue th e p o lic e fo r bea tin g him up w h e n he

w a s a rre s te d for a DUI. To find c a s e s t h a t a d d re s s e d th a t to p ic , you w o u ld
look to the d ig e s t u n d e r "a s s a u lt and b a tte ry ." In th e b ody o f t h e d ig e s t u n d e r key n u m
b e r 7, " e x c e s s iv e fo rc e in d om g a la w fu l a c t," is a s u m m a ry of all the c a s e s t h a t have
a d d re s s e d th e to p ic .
H\' er\’ c o u r t o p i n i o n p u b l i s h e d in t h e W' es t ’s r e p o r t e r s is l i nk e d to t h e d i g e s t s t h r o u g h

t h e use o f h e a d n o t e s . As \' ou will recall f r o m CTi apter 4, lie n d iio tc i a re s u m m a r i e s o f all t h e
p o i n t s o f l a w d i s c u s s e d in t h e o p i n i o n . I h e h e a d n o t e s fo l l o w in s e q u e n t i a l o r d e r t h e re l e\ ' an t
p a r a g r a p h s ot t h e o p i n i o n , li ach h e a d i u i t e is a s s i g n e d a t o p i c a n d s u b t o p i c key n u m b e r t r o n i
t h e W' est c l as si f i cat i o n s \ ’st eni a c c o r d i n g t o t h e are a o f l aw d i s c u s s e d in t h e case.
163
E x h i b i t 5 - 1 5 B o d y of D ig est for A ssault and Battery— Case Sum m aries. R e p rin te d from iv e s t Pu Lrish m a . Feciera Prac-
ỉic e O ig ^ s t 4th. Vol 3 A 1 19941. p 7 6 6 R e p n rite d w ith p e rm is s io n from T h o m so n R e n te rs
^ 1 A SSA ULT & BATTERY 3A F- Í ’ I ) 4 t h 766
lo r later casts set' same Ibpif and Kev Niimht r ill I’ockct I’iirt
N o cases under
I ( IV 11. I . I A B l l . n 'I . C . A . 9 ( C a l . I 1 9 4 1 . A l l c n i p l i n c c ' s s ta te la u a s s a u lt a iu l
key number
h a llL 'iv c l a i m a y a i ii s t h i', M i p c r \ i s o r w a -. lu n p r c e n ip lc i.1 h y
(A ) AC r s c 'o N s r n r r iN C i A S S A i L i
th e L a h o r M a n a g e m e n t R c l a l i o i i s A c t . a s th e a c t s a l l c a c d
O R l l \ i r i;R V A M ) L I A B I L I I ^
u c i u k i \ io k ili.’ s t a le la w i n v s p c c t Ì N C o l' th e id L 'n tit\ o l Ih c
u r o r i ü J o c r o r I l i s \ i c l i n i a iu l (.lid n o t r e q u ir e in t e r p r e t a t io n
1. N a l i i r i ' iiiul clfiiK 'iits o f a s s a u l t a n d l):illcr>. 1)1 L i ) l k ' ( . li \ L - Ix H i ja in i ii L : iiL 'r c L 'n ic m p ro s is io n s . Labor
M a n a ư C M K -n t R e la t i o n s A ct, 1947. s .^ 0 1 . 29 L l S .C '.A .
I ,il) r a r \ r i'rc rtiK i's
1 X 5 ; W e s t 's A n n . C a L P c n a l C o d e S S 2 4 0 , 2 4 2 .
( '. . I S , A s s a u l l u i ii l lỉa llL 'i'\ Ü 2.
( ia l\ L V K u l i n . y . V i l', 2 d 7 7 3 .
Key number III 'J C iK T a l.
l h a l SU|1L'I'\ i s o r 's c o n d i i c l u ; i s n i o t i s a t e d h y
( '.A .D .C . 19SS. I i u Il t l ) l s l r i i . l (il C 'o k i m b i a i a u . s ii r -
(.Il- s ìiv 111 l i i u l iv a s o n lo l i i v e m p l o y CC w a s IIH > t e n u o u s a
/ Ü C O II w h o p L M lo n n s o p L 'r a lit iii (111 n i i n o r p a l i c n l u i i l u H i l
c iin n c c lio n to c o l li .'c l i\ L ' h a i i i a i n i i i ' j aL’ r e e m c n t d i s c h a r i : 0
/ L o n s c n l o l i n i i i i i i \ p a r c i i l s c i i n i n i l l s I i s s a u l l l i i r w h ic h lie is
p n i\ i s i o n s lo p rc c iii| M L 'liip lo N C L -'s '.t a lc law c k iiin s (ll
Library / Iia b i c i 1 ü . m i a ü c s . a b s e n t L'\(.L‘ p l i i ) i i a l c ir i . u i ii s la m . x ’\ . s m .il
a s s a i i l l a n d h a ll c i A a ü il in s l s u p e r \ ÌM 'r . L a h o r N h iiK iiiL M iie n t
a s u l i L ' i i i h c i c is b o n a I r I l ' m e d ic a l c m c i ü L - n c ) . p a lÌL -n l is
reference R e la t i o n s A c l . 1 9 4 7 . Ịi ỳ ì r . S . C . A . s 185,
■ ■ n ia liii'c I i i i n d i . " p a iv n iN a r c m il a ' a d i l ) iiL C i." - s ib lc . I i r p a i-
(iaKc/ Kuhn. l ' . 2d 1 1 }.
o rU s h a \ i.' l l i c i i ' i n i p l i c J c im s c m .
C . A . K I l C o lo .) 1 9 7 9 . ila c k h a r l C 'm c i ii n a t i I k ' i i ü a U .
K ( i/ u p ( ic o i'jc liiu ii I'iii\ c r s il> , X 5 I I - . 2 J 4 . Ỉ7 . 2 7 1
I n c . , (lO I l'.2 t l 5 1 (1 , ( . C i l i i i r a i i d e n ie d 100 s . ( ì . 275. 444
I S .A p p .D C . IS 2 . tin iv m a n d 19X9 \ \ l, .ỈM lM Ki.
r . S. 9 .ÌI. ( i 2 I X S .
.lỊip c a l . i I I lm iL 'iiia iu l 9()(1 1 .2 d 7 .S .V 2S5
I .S .A p p D .C . S9 , ( ' . A . II ( ( i i i . l Ill a h s c iK C o t c o n s c n t. M iiü c rx
c iiiis liu iu 's h a l l e n .

( ' . A . 9 I A r i / . ) 1‘> S 7 . I V i s i i n L ' o m n i ii s UM'I ( ll " a s s a i i i r ' 11
I k ' i u l i h u r i ; \ , D o i n p s c v , ')()>) 4 6 . Ỉ , c c r l i o r a r i d e n ie d
h e a c l s w it h i n l c i i l t il c a i i s c a n o tliL 'i' l i a r n i h i l ( ir o l Í L ’ i is i\ L '
III S .C l :o .\ \ 5 ()() l \ s , 114 L K J . 2 Ü 4 5 >).
C D iila c t tu a p | H v lK ‘ n s u ) ii t l i c r c o l . a i k l ( illiL ’ i iX ’ i s i i n u p p r c -
a p | v a l a l l e r i v n i a m l 19 557.
Iic -'ik Is I i i i n i i n c i i t L o n l a c l .
(ia iv ia I S ,. ,s:fi 1 , 2 d S()(>, ( '. \ . i i ( M i l ' l l . ) I 9 S 6 . P r is o n t i i u i R l \ u : i \ i n i ; o r k n il i. ' in
lid iil 111 p . i ia p k ' > jl c p r is o n e r c d H s lilu t L 't l C ( i m n u ) i i- l a w
I V i M i i i C D i n i n i l s I o n 1)1 " h a l i c r v " ll h e . K l v w it h i n lc n l
.i s s a u h , w h i c l i i i c i k ' i a l i la n u ie c s w o r e | ir c s u i ii L \ l lo
1(1 L 'a iis c h a n n lu l o r o H c n - 'i v c c n iiia c l. o r Iip p iv h i.- n s it in
H o w . a n ti i h i i s . p i i s t ii ic i u a s I' li t i lk H l to t;i;n L’ i a l i l a n i a ü c s
i h c i v o l . a iu l c im k ic l o c c u r s .
l o r ih .il (.'D iu lu i.I.
( la iv i.i I S . . X 2 f i l-.2 d S IK i.
I ’l i n i s l i .I t ih n s iin . s o o I rill (lOO .
(C 'a l.l 1991. Ijiip lo s c c u n ÌD ii '- Ic w a r d 's s la k ’
('.A .5 (M is s .) I 'W . V I'iu Ilt M is s is s ip p i h iw . m e re
la w h a llc is c la im J ü a ln s l i ii.u ia ^ L 'iiiL ’ n l a n is e
u o r K . u i ll m u l ih a - .il I'l \ io k 'iiC L '. Lire i n s i i l i k i c n l
Ir o m r i i i h l c l'L 'a lc il I n i i u Ic | V i k 1c ii1 s t a le c i i i n i i u i n h iu u iiil
It) s i i p p o i l I h u I ì h í ; o l c i\ il a s s a i i i l .
sum m ory ------- not h \ l- ia r e a in iiiu a y i v c n K ’ i il s a iu l. t h u s , s U ilc
Ila n W a lk e r . 7 : o i- ,:d l 4 . V i,
h i u ( . l a i i i i w a s lU il h> l . a h o r M a i K i 'J c n i c n l k c l a -
l i o n s A c t ; u l K i k ’ \ c r p a n ic - - ' r i'j ilt '- a iu l d i i l i c s u i k I l'I' c c 'ik ’c - W l i c i v L 'tn in lv s ii| ic r \ i s ( 'r d i s p i a \ c J h r c a r m in p i i r p o r l -
li\ c Ix ir ü a in in ü e ii ii 'c c n ic i il . t lic v c o L ik l n o t p o s s i h iv h a \(.' i n i; to a r r e s t p i a i n t il T , f i n i l i n i ; th .it s u p c iA i s o r c o n i i i i i t t c J
n c ' j c ' l i a l c d i i i r r i il 'j C M ic i il ( i f c m p l i n c c u n io n s l c w i i a l ' s s t a le i i \ i l a s s M iill u p o n p h i l n l i t i I i i u l c r M i s s i s s i p p i la w w a s n o l

h iu r i i i l i l l o b e I'i v l - I r o m b a lk M Ạ . L a b o r M a n a y L ’ i i i c m R c l a - c Ic a r K c ir o i K ' iH i '' ,
l i t i n s A c l . 1 9 4 7 , ii .^,01, 2 9 I ■ .S . C '.A . ỊÍ I S 5 . Ih 'ir l W '.ilk c r , 7 2 ( i h .2 d l 4 . V i.
Ila > d c n K c i c k c a l , 9 5 7 l-.2 d I5 ( ) ( i. C . A . 2 ( N . ^ . ) 1 9 9 3 . " A s s a u l t " is i i i i c i u i n n a l p h n -'in t: o f
lim p it n c c ''' s t a le la w rÌL ih t l o be lic c iV im i b a il e r s . a i u i l h c r p c i's d n In I c a r o t i i n i i i i n c i i t l i a r i i i l u l o r t i l T c n s K e
C D iu l r u iI n i; in llii- 'liiM i o l s t r e s s , a iu l \ c r h a l a b u s e h e a l k 'ü c d c o n l a c l.

w a s r c t a i i a l i o i i l o r I l l s u n io n a c l i \ i t ic '. d id n o t m r n (in i m c r - U n it e d N a l . In s . C 'ti. W 'a lc r tV o n t N e w 't 'o r k R e a lly
p i v t a l i o i i ( ll a n > te rm 1) 1 c o lk 'L - li\ c h a r 'ja in iiiü a ü iv c iu c n l C i i r p . . W 4 l-.Z d 1 0 5 .
a n d u c a ' n o l p r c c m | ilL 'i.i b> l . a h o r M a i i a i i c i i i L 'i i l R e la t i o n s ■ B a U c i > " IS a il i i i lL 'i it i o n a l u r o n ü f i i l p h \ s i c a i c o n l a c t

A c t . L a h o r M a i K i ü c m c i i l R e la t i o n s A l I . 1947, í ." io i, 2 9 v \ iih a iio lliL - r p e r s o n u i l l i o i i l c o i i s c m .
L I.S .C .A . s IS 5 . lin ilc d N a l . In s . C t i . \ . W a t c r lV d n t N e v\ \ 'o r k R e a lt y
Il a > e ii - n V. R c i c k c r d , 9 5 7 1 .2 d 15(16. C o r p . . W 4 l- ,2 il 1 0 5 .
I - O I 'c i k \ l r . S . C . A . s e c i i o n s a iu l k ’ i : i s l a l i \ c h i s t o r \ . s e e I ' n i l c J S t a k ’ s C ( k I c A n n o t a t e d
164
For Example R efer b a c k to Exhibit 4-1. In Raelv. Cadena, h eadno te 1 c o n ta in s a s u m m a ry

of th e point of la w d is c u s s e d in th e b ody of the o p in io n b e tw e e n [1] and
[2], The to p ic is A s s a u lt and Battery, and the s u b to p ic is key n u m b e r 18 (P e rs o n s Liable).
H e a d n o te 2 is a s u m m a ry o f t h e p o in t of la w d is c u s s e d in the opinion b e tw e e n [2] and [3],
also A s s a u lt and B a tte ry key n u m b e r 18. H e a d n o te 3 is a s u m m a ry of th e la w d is c u s s e d
in th e opin io n b e tw e e n [3] and th e end of the opinion. A s s a u lt and B a tte ry key n u m b e r
35 (W e ig h t and S u ffic ie n c y of Evidence).
' I h e b e a u t y o f t h e c l as si f i c at i on s y s t e m is t h a t tiie s a m e n u n i b c r i n g s y s t e m is usecf f o r all

t h e d e c i s i o n s p u b l i s h e d b\- W'est, e s s en t i a l l y all tlie p u b l i s h e d f ederal a n d st a t e a p p e l l a t e c o u r t
d e c i s i o n s in t h e U n i t e d States. All r e p o r t e d d e c i s i o n s a r e s u m m a r i z e d ( p r o v i d e d h e a d n o t e s )
u s i n g t h e s a m e key n u m b e r cl as si f i cat i on s\ s t e m, a n d all c ases a r e l i n k e d t h r t ) u g h t h e s a m e
s y s t e m to di ge s t s tliat identif}' all o t h e r cases t h a t a d d r e s s t h e s a m e topi c.
For Example If you are interested in any reported case a n y w here in the United States, state
or federal, that discusses w h e n persons m a y b e liable for an a s s a u lte r battery,
you can refer to any W e s t digest u nder A ssault and B a n e ry key num ber 18 and find the oth e r
cases. Assault and Battery key n u m ber 18 is the same in all the headnotes and all the digests.
B. C o m p o n e n ts of W e s t ’s Digests
I h e n u m e r o u s di ge s t s p r e p a r e d by We s t ar e d i s c u s s e d in s e c t i o n \'.C. '1 b e s e di g e s t s fol low t h e
s a m e f o r m a t a n d s h a r e several c o m p o n e n t s . La c b t o p i c p r e s e n t e d in a digest b e g i n s w i t h t h e
n a m e o f t h e t o p i c title, s u c h as “Assa ul t a n d Battery.” .After e a c h t o p i c title is t h e foll owi ng:
Subjects included and excluded. Ihi s s e ct i o n lists th e a r e a s c o v e r e d in f he t o p i c a n d
t h e ar e a s n ot c o v e r e d . Loi' t h e s u b j e c t s e x c l u d e d , t h e r e arc r e f e r e n c e s t o t h e t o p i cs
w h e r e t h e s u b i e c t s are c o v e r e d (see L.xhibit 3-14).
l a b l e o f t o n l c u t s . N e \ l is l,\blc o f c o n t e n t s listin'^ th e ú ü c And key n u m b e r o f .\ll

t h e s u b t o p i c s (see L'xhibif 3 14).
('ase summaries. L o l l owi ng t he t abl e ol c oi i t e n f s is t h e b o d v o f t h e diges t t h a t p r e s

e n t s a s u m m a r v - by kev' n u m b e r of everv' c a se r e p o r t e d t ha t h a s a d d r e s s e d a speci fic
s u b t op i c . I h e di ges t p r e s e n t s a s u m m a r y o f ' o n l y tliat p o r t i o n of t h e c a s e t ha t a d
d r e s s e d t h e specific kev n u m b e r .
For Example In th e body of the d igest u n der A s s a u lt and B a tte ry key n u m b e r 18 (P ers ons
U a b le ) w ill be a s u m m a ry of only th a t portion of e ac h c ase w h ic h d is c u ss e d
the to p ic of w h e n a p e rs o n is liable fo r an a s s a u lt or battery.
Thi s saves y o u f r o m h a v i n g to reail a s u m m a r y o f t h e e n t i r e c a s e a n d a l l o w s y o u to

focus o n t h e specific q u e s t i o n b e i n g r e s e a r c h e d . If t h e r e ar e n o cases t ha t a d d r e s s a k e y n u m
b e r s u b t o p i c , t h e d ig e s t will list a n e n c v c l o p e d i a r e f e r e n c e w h e r e t h e t o p i c is c o v e r e d . (See
Hxhibit 3 13.)
In a d d i t i o n to t h e c o m p o n e n t s o f e ach a n n o t a t i o n , e a c h digest set i n c l u d e s t h e fol lowing:
Outline of the law and list of topics. At t h e b e g i n n i n g o f e a c h d i g e s t v o l u m e is

W'est’s o u t l i n e ol t h e law a n d a list of diges t topi cs.
Topics covered. Indicated o n tiie spine are t he topics covered in t he vo l u me, SLich as "Gas
to I labeas C.orpus." I iiis allows v'ou to locate tiie v o l u m e voli are loo k i n g tor w i t h o u t h a v
ing to loc'k in the book. In aildition., inside each v o l u m e is a list ot topics co v e r e d in the
v o l u m e a n d t he page n u m b e r wh e r e the topic begins, sucii as “Cias ... 1” or ‘Xiifts ... 249.”
165
Descriptive word index. A c o m p r e h e n s i v e desci ipt ive w o r d i n d e x a c c o m p a n i e s

e a c h set. ’iiu' i n d e x is a m u h i v o k m i c set t ha t hst s w o r d s o r p h r a s e s in al pi i abet i -
cal o r d e r l-'ollowing t h e w o r d o r p h r a s e is a r e t e r e n c e to tlie t o p i c a n d key n u m b e r
w h e r e it is d i s c u s s e d (see l-.xhibit 3-16).
Table of case.s. Hach digest h a s a table ol ca se s li st i ng c ases a l p l i a b e t i c a l h b\' t he

n a m e s o f t h e plaintitl's (see Hxhibit 3-17). S o m e di g es t s a lso h a v e a tabl e o f cases list
ing cases a l p h a b e t i c a l l y b\' t h e n a m e o f t h e d e f e n d a n t t o l l o w e d by t h e plai nti ff' s n a m e .
Words and phrases. Mo s t federal a n d st ate d i g e s t s i n c l u d e a t a b l e t h a t lists, in a l

p h a b e t i c a l o r d e r , w o r d s a n d p h r a s e s t h a t h a v e b e e n i n t e r p r e t e d o r d e f i n e d in coin't
op i n i t ) ns a n d t h e c it a t i o n to t he o p i n i o n s .
Updates. Di gest s are u p d a t e d t h i o u g h Lise o f t h e l o l l o wi ng :
Pocket parts. Hach di gest v ol i ni i e is u p d a t e d t h r o u g h t h e u s e o f a n a n n u a l p o c k e t

p a r t p l a c e d at t h e b a c k o t ' t h e v o l u m e . T h e p o c k e t p a r t p r e s e n t s by k e y n u m b e r
t h e s u m m a r i e s o f n e w ca se s that a d d r e s s t h e ke\' n u n i b e r topi c. If t h e r e are no
n e w cases t o r a key n u n i b e r , t h e r e will b e n o r e f e i e n c e t o t h e ke\' n u m b e r .
Siipplenientar)- pamphlets. S u p p l e m e n t a r v ' p a m p h l e t s w i t h f u r t h e r u p d a t e s are

p u b l i s h e d b e t w e e n a n n u a l p o c k e t part s.
Later cases. B o t h t h e p o c k e t p a r t s a n d s u p p l e m e n t a r y p a m p h l e t s i n c l u d e a “( .l os

i ng" t abl e t h a t hst s t h e n a m e s ol all t h e r e p o r t e r s c o v e r e d in t h e diges t . If t h e r e is
a r e p o r t e r v o k m i e s u b s e q u e n t to t h e last o n e listed, it m u s t h e c h e c k e d to d e t e r
m i n e if t h e r e a r e case s pLiblished a l t er t h e o n e s in t h e SLipplement. .As m e n t i o n e d
in ( T i a p t e r 4, t h e r e is a key l u m i b e r di gest in t h e h a c k of e a c h r e p o r t e r v o k m i e tor
t h e ca se s p r e s e n t e d in t h e v o k mi e .
For Example If the clo s in g ta b le reads, "C lo s in g w ith c a s e s r e p o r te d in 243 F.3d 713,"
then c h e c k the key n u m b e r d ig e s t in the b a c k of a n y Federal Reporter
3d S e r / e s v o lu m e s u b s e q u e n t to v olum e 243, page 713 fo r la te r cas e s .
C. Types of Digests
We s t p u b l i s h e s several di f ferent digests, e a c h o f w h i c h I'ulfills a s peci fi c n e e d . 1-ach o f thes e
d i g e s t s i n c l u d e s t h e c o m p o n e n t s d i s c u s s e d in t h e p r e v i o u s s ec t i o n . A hri ef d e s c r i p t i o n ot the
d i g e s t s a n d t h e i r f u n c t i o n is p r e s e n t e d here.
1. A m eric a n D igest System

T h e m o s t c o m p r e h e n s i v e a n d i n c l us i ve di g e s t is t h e Am erican Digest System. Th i s digest
p r e s e n t s s u m m a r i e s o f all t h e r e p o r t e d st ate a n d fe de r a l c o u r t d e c i s i o n s . D u e to t h e large
n u n i b e r ot cases c o v e r e d , th e digest c o n s i st s of several m u l t i v o l u m e set s w i t h e a c h set cov e r i ng
a s peci fi c t i m e p e r i o d . T h e (.¡cncnil D igcil c o v e r s fi ve-year p e r i o d s o f t u n e a n d t h e D ccciiiudl
D igest c o v e r s t e n - y e a r p e r i o d s o f t i me. T h e sets are n o t c u m u l a t i v e ; t h e r e f o r e , i f y o u w a n t to
f i n d all c ases t o r a speci fic ke\' n u n i b e r , y o u w o u l d n e e d t o c h e c k t h e m o s t r e c e n t G c iic'a l
[')igcsts a n d m o v e b a c k w a r d t h r o u g h t h e D ca 'iiiiin l F>igcsts.
For Example If you w a n t to locate the c ases addre s s in g A s s a u lt and B a tte ry key n u m b e r
18, you w o u ld have to c o n s u lt the General Digest for c a s e s fro m 1996 to
present, the Tenth Decennial Digest for casesfrom 1986 to 1996, fo r 1976 to 1986 th e Ninth
Decennial Digest, for 1966 to 1976 the Eighth Decennial Digest, and so on.
166
E x h i b i t 5 - 1 6 D escnptive-W ord Index. Hp: " e c i from IV c s t G ro i.;. I ’l G enera/ D ig e st, Vol 6 (2 0 0 V. p 9 2 9 . R e p rin te d with
p e ii-" S S !O n from T h o m so n R e u te rs
DESCRIPTIVE - WORD INDEX

V o Iliiik- I (iL'iieial Digest, r c m h Series
Topic
Ret'ereiKes are to Digest Topics and Ke\ N u mb e r s
.\ B A M )().N M h \ T A D D IT l R .\l-f ! R M . \ p < f ; f) l.f i.N S f:S Age

Al r O M O B I I . t S . \ iitc is i : I . r . d . A I . o r e t | u i i a h l e . se e t h i s i n d e x L e i j a l B A N K R ^ / F r C ' l . r e l i c t I'ro iii s la t.
o r l!tju ila h le N a lin e o l f^ o c e e d in iis jif< <c'e e din g s . f5 a n k r 2 4 .V i_
discrim ination
B.AN KRl P r C ' ^ . ahaiKliiniiionl ol
p r o j X ’ rt\. s oo tliis i n d e x Bankruincx

A I ) i ; O l A l l, P R O T i X T I O N ,\(;fi
10 c n i i i i n a l c l iargL-, C ' l i n t l.avt
B A N K R t t > T C > . se e t h i s u n l e \ f ' l S C R f M l N . A I f O N C i t i f R 106
. Í I . MI
B a n k ru p ic \ f jn p lo s m em -
Key
A B O K I C il N A I , P l iO I ’i i;S C i e n e r a f l t . C i \ i l R 16S 17 2
. \ D M I N I S r R . V H \ l. I.A W
S e c ^ c n c i a l K . ih is iiiilo v liu lia n s P re s u m p tio n s anti b u rile n o l p ro o l. number
\ M ) l> R ( ) C i;i) l R l.
C i t i l R ,'SO
A B O K T 'I O N A P P I A l. and erro r -
R e l i c t i n a g e d i s c r i m i n a t i o n in
I .A M II.'i' p la n n in t ! - R i p e n e s s . A d m i n l , a \ t 7(14
e m p l o t n i e n t a c t i o n s . ( ' i t il R
(iu s t 'in n K 'iU i r a n ís a iu l an tees. C O M X I O D I I 'l l u t u r e s i r a d i n j :
406. 407
.So elal S 4 .6 re;jula lion
R e in c tlic s anti p ro c e e tlin g s . C i t i l
A d m i n i s t r a t i t c a iie n c ie s . s a n c lio n s Range o
A B .S K N C - [- ;A M ) .\ B S | -N n i: s R .v^l 4 . Í I -------------------------------------------
a n d p r o e e e d i n s ; s . C o m f u l ,s| 61
B .A I.I.O T '.S , see th is n id e \ .\ h s e n l A o ie rs W e ig h t anti s u tT ic ie u c t o l c \ itlence. cey numbers
I ) I S C ( ) \ I RY. A d m i n I.a u 4 6 6
I IM I T . V I T O N ot a e lio n s - C i t i l R .iSS
n o t B I. I -. j e o p . i n K . p r o c e e t l m g s a l i e e l e t l .
( iu a r a n to r s . elTeet as to. I im ol
D o u b l e .1 2 4 A ( i { ¡ k A \ \ r i O N O f- D A \ f A C d ; S
A e l 94
R l - A l l - W . see .A p p e a l a n t i e r r o r , a n t e R f' d If f- in e t | i i a l e i i i p l o t n i e n l
.lo in tl\ OI s e \ e r a ll\ lia b le p a rtie s.
o p p o rtu n itie s a clio n s. C i t i l R 402
e lie e i as lo. 1 in i o l A e l ‘14 A D X 1 IR A I.IA
S iir e D e s . e tte e l as lo . l.im o l .Ael 94 IN I I R I. S I \ ( i R I ( I I f C R A f. C O X ff'O S f f fO N S
P re |u d j;m e n l. Interesi .í9i2,2.s i A N f) f..\ f f-N S fO N S
A B t . S i; 0 1 - I ' K O C t i S S
l . A X I I f 'i f a r m e r s , se e I h i s i i u l e x I , i m i l >
B A N K R t l ’ T C 'i B a n k r 2 ;.s .V .is o : .X D O P M O N
I-,i n n e r D e b t , A i l i n s i m c n l
II.M il.A S C O R P t S
A B t .St-.l) ( l l l l D K t . N
( Iro u iu ls lo r rclie t l l a b C o r p .s.'4 \I D I RS A N D A B f f T O R S ,11 f < O R S
I A ID i.N C i:
R e p re s e n ta tio n ot e o n in u m it t . l u r t
l.v p e it ie s iin io n > C r'im I.a u 4 7 4 . 4 i4 i A D D P I IO N O f C IIII.D R I.N
I 4i
IK 'X U 'S f \ l \ f S , i b i l i l \ to ado^n
.X L 't'h .S S W .lite r
\ilo p 4
< '. A B l.t . le le \ is io n s s s ie n t s C h a lle n g e b ased o n age ol
A c c e s s ru le s . I'el 44')| It l i A D \ f . R I IS I X lf . N T p ro s p e c ti\e iiiro t. .Iur\ I 10(4)
A i r o R M ' N S. se e t h i s i i u l e x A t l o r n e s
A C ( '( ) .\ llM .IC i: S A .N f) A C C I- S .S O R II.S \!R
•md C lie n t
r .‘\ c k i t i ; i ;r i n c i r ic o :i P O I.i n i O N . se e t l i i s i n t l e x ,A i r
C O N I R A C IS
P o llu iio n
A C C O IN T A N T S I n ile t l S i.iles . a d \ e r l i s e m e n t l o r
BANKRt PTCY— p r o p o s a l s o r h i i t s . 1' S 6 4 . 2 ,s ,\IR P O I . I . r if O N
C o m p e n s a t io n . H a iik r '1 6 1 I M P f O 'l N lf N l. tlis c rin iu ia lio n . C i t i l C i e n e r a l K , f l e a l l f i iX; f- 2.S.6
R .-\ C K [:n -:t ;R iN ( ;- R I.S6 f N X f f < O N X f f. N T .A f. in ip a c i sia te m e n t.
I jit e r p r is e . a c c o u n lin jj f n in as I R I T - D O X I o l s p e e c h a nti press. C o n s t I f e a f t h cX: f i 2.s M l
R I C O 42 I . a u ') ()..i . l u d i c i a l r e t i e t t o r i n l c r t c n t i o n -■
S K C C R I ' l lt-;S r e jz u la lio n — S cope o t in t)u ir\ oi r c tie tt. Ile a llli
. \ D \ fCf -. O f - ( O l N S i ; t .
1-etleral re g u la tio n , see th is in tle \ iX; Í-; 2,-S,l,si l O i
.S e c u ritie s R e g u la t io n
f'fdf^NSf; j r D I C I . A I , r c tie tt oT re g u la tio n s o r
C r i m i n a l c h a r g e . C n m I . a u .'( 7.20
S ta le re g u la tio n , see th is iiu ie x tShie i n t c r t e n l i o n , f f c a l i h i'o f- 2 ,s , l ,s
S k > I.a u A D X fS O kS S c o pe o l in t |u ir t o r rc t iett l l e a l i h iX;
C 0 N f X 1 0 f ) f ’ f 'i l u t u r e s i r a d i n s ; r e i i n l a t i o n . f-; 2 . s , f . S | 9 i
A C i IO N S A N D ( ) r n i ; R
s ee t h i s i i i t l e x C o m m o t i i t \ f - u l u r e s X f r N f C I P , - \ f . r e g u f a t i o i i , , X fi m C o r p 6 0 6
p R ( ) C i:i;i) iN C ,s
f ra tlin g r e g u la iio n . I'a ssm i N llS A N C fiS
C O M M H N C h . M l A T o l a c tio n s
f f c a l t h tX: f i 2S
B a n k r u p ic ) e ase . B .u ik r 22(1.2 A f-f I R A I I X f A C T fO N
,N u is .1 1 , ' )
IN .IU N C T IO N S - i ; \ f P f .O 'i X l f l N T d is c r im in a lio n . C i t i l R
P r e lim in a r ) in ju n e lio n I.S4 A IR P O R T S A N f) f.A N D fN C i I ffd .f'S
(ir o u n d s anti o h ie e tio n s . In i R e l i e l in e t j u a l e m p l o \ n i e m Sf-: \ R C H f - ; S a n d s e i / u r e s . S e a r c h e s 7 2
l,'X .2 7 o p p o r l u n i l i e s a c t i o n s . C i \ il R .^92 f ) r u L i s e a r c h e s . I ' r u i j s iX; N IK.V.s
P ro c e e tlin L’ s. In i I .'9 I.s9.,s l i X f l ’ f . O V M f i N ’f' t l i s e r i m i n , I l i o n s u i i .
r e l i c t i n . se e i h i s i n d e x C i \ i ! R i g h t s
167
E x h i b i t 5 - 1 7 Table of Cases. R e p n n te d from W e s t PublislTing, Tentti D e c e n n ia l D ig e st, Vol 4 0 IW 9 3 I, p W th D P t 1-4.

R e p rin te d with p e r m is s io n from T h o m s o n R e u te rs
A.A. lO T H D P T 1 - i
I'lir Lak-r C'asij Hi st or \ Inlornialioii. see I N S T A - C I T E on W E S T L A W
•\\ XiiihiikiiK'c C h .. Ii k . Miildii'MUih A A A A l-nterprises. inc. l .S,. ClC't. l O C I C t A A; A In i er n .. In c. v. L . S . . C I L 676 FSupp
C u u i i U . O r A p p . ■’»-M P M S I.V | d: O i-A pp PJI. l-ed C t s I 104. I 105. 1 1(W. I I I I. I [}'-). 263. C iis i Dut 17. IS. 14. 2()(lt. 26(3).
K c coril' 54. (■'.V ^S. .A.A.Aclion i’l u m h in i j C o . \ . S l e u a i l . T e \ - . A p p - S 4( 7) ,
\ \ .V n ih u lan cc C»».. In c . M ulliH 'inah l i o u s 11 Disil. 7 4 2 S \ V 2 d 5 0 1 . e r r o r d e n . .A .A i n v a l i d V a n S e r v i c e v. .M ed e v a c M i d a m -
(\n in l\. O iA pp. P : d ^M)7. O r A p p 6 IS. T i m e 10(41. e n c a o f K a n s a s , i n c .. D K a n . ^ 14 f - S u p p 1014.
S o c C'iirc A n i h u l a i i c c C n , . inc. \ . .Muliiu'iiuiti •Aaberi: B\ and T h ro u Li h A aberg v .Aahcri:. See i reem an v. M edevac M idaincrica ot
(\uini>. Ala. 5 l 2 S o 2 d L '75, M ar ri a^ je l . \ 5 0 ( h . K a n s a s . Inc.
W . Charlc'-. M j l t c r nl'. N > - M ) D c p l. 5 5 0 . \ a y a a r d - . l u e r i : e n s e n . Inc. v L e u e h e r . l-la.App 5 ,A A; H C a t t l e C o . o f N e v a d a . Inc. v. C ii v of
ISII. S c e C h a i l e s \ A . M a i l e r ol. Dis t. 5 ~ 4 S o 2 d 4 0 4 . Da iiiai: 2 2 " . H s c o n d i t i o . C a l A f i p 4 i ) |s t . 2 3 S C a l R p l r 5S 0.
\ \ i-a!lh, M aU cr ol. ^ ^ . \ l ) DcfU. 5.'<) .A a y a a i d - J u e r v j e n s c n . In c. \ . I .e tte lie r. P la .A pp 5 142 C A 3 d 1 0 3 2 . - . M u n C o r p 6 5 . 5 4 2 t I ),
\> SM > IS . A I)2d S e e I-ailh A A . Dis i. 5 4 0 S o 2 d 2 2 4 . .App .V I: 7 4 I 2 ) : C o r p ,A iV B H e a l i n g & .Air C o n d i t i o n i n i i . M a t t e r of.
.Mallei o t . .Vi.V J i k l e m 1S 5( 2) . IS 5 (5 ) . C A M ( F l a ). X6 I F 2 d 1 5 3 S . - B a n k r 3 7 8 L
•\.\. hchall d I ( 'oo[X’r n i a n . N J S u - A A ! C o r p . \ . I ' , S . , C I C t , 22 C I C t . U l . K 'd A c't B H e a t i n g A: .Air C o n d i t i o n i n g . M a t l e r o L
p e r A U . 52 fi a :J 1 IO.'. 2 I S N J S u p e r .'2. - C t s 107S: 1' S 7.'^(4,. C A M ( F l a ). ^ S 2 3 F 2 d 4 6 2 . c e r t g r \ u i d v a c I ' S
C o i i s l l . a u 27N.5 i 7 ) . .S chotiK (4 i . Aaker .Aaker. M i n n .A p p . 4 4 ' W'v 2d 607. V. ,A tV: B H e a l i n g a n d ,Air C o n d i t i o n i n g . Inc.
\. \ l\u illr\ I an i!' ' . In c. k>>Ne .Acre |-ar ni s. re v ie w ilen. Divorce 224. 2 4 0 | I i. 2 4 0 i 2 ) . IDS S C i 1 7 2 4 . 4 S 6 l ‘S KH)2. l ( ) 0 L F : d 2 d IS 4.
Inc .. C . A ' f l n d i . SS 1 l ' 2 d cert J e n I 10 2 4 5 ( 2 ) . 2 4 7 . 2S6( 1 ). 3 0 S . 3 1 0 . 3 I 2 . 6 ( I ); P a r o n r e m a n d S61 F 2 d I5.^S. - i n i Rev 4K 32.
SCI 4<>4 I S l O U i. lOS I.1 a 12J 5 01 , e n t iV C .^..î6). A .V B H o m e s , l . t d . . in re . BkrtL-> H i n ' a . 4 S B R
led C i\ I’r o c iv'd; .M o n o p I'll.S i; 'i'laile .Xak jer S pa ^ jn ol i. S C .A p p . .V'^2 S i ; 2 d 50.1, 241 2 4 3 , - - B a n k r 2 6 7 8 . 3 0 6 4 ; .Sec T r a n 10. S4.
Re i: ' ) I S . S C 165. App 1 0 4 S (7 ). 10 5 S H ). 1067: A iV ii H o r s e F a r m s L'.S.. C i C l , IS C I C l 30 2.
\ \ l’o u l t r \ l a r m s . Inc. R o s e A c r e l a r n is . Autos 242(1). 246(34). 2 4 6 ( 5 5 i : Jur> 144; S e e H a h e r i n a n v, I S.
Inc .. SD Im l. (iS;> I S u p p a t f S SI |- 2 J .A c'v; B P i p e a n d S u p p Iv C o . v. T u r n b e r r v Tow
N e w T r 3 0 ; T ri a l IS. 30 . I 15(5). 2 6 0 i S ): W itn
c e r t Lien I Ml S C i l. '2(i. 4^)4 I S HlMJ. er s C o r p . . F l a A p p 3 i i i s i . 5 0 0 S o 2 d 2 6 L
20S( I ). 2 7 5 i 6 | . 374 ( I ). 4 05 ( 1 ).
lOS | J - . J 2 i l ^01 I eil C i \ I ' r o e 2 ’v Vv 2.V,9. J u d g n i ISK.
A . A . I . . . In I n t e i e s i ol'. VVjsApp. 4 4 S \ \ \ ' 2 d 2 3 4 .
2i>nS; l-ed C l s f>W). 6 i i 0 .2 0 ; M oiiup 12( h . •A t'v; B R e s i a u r a n l Li .|u i p m e n l . I i k . \ . H u m e -
152 \ \ i s 2 d 154. App \ !• 4 4 5 : C o n s t Law
I 2( 1,2t. I2( U).5); T i a i i e Re-: ^)l I, 1 ^)\A. s e e k e r s Sav . and Loan. L a A p p 4 C ir. 5 0 6
S2(lO i. 274<5i; C o u n ties I3 S ; C ourts 1;
‘>20. ‘^2‘^. S o 2 d 137. w r i t d e n 5 1 2 .S»Od S 5 2 . r e c o n s j i l-
I n l a n t s 2 1 2 . 2 4 3 . 2 5 2 ; S la t e s I I L
i ’rol'ilc'.. Inc. C ] l \ ol' ¡ 1 , I aiulei'ilale. eration den 513 So2d ll45. -B r o k 106:
.A.A.I... M a i l e r o f .A d o p l i o n of. W is .A pj x 44.S
Nam e and ( A l I il lai. S 5 0 1 2,1 l 4 S i . reli ilcn Sfil [-2.1
\\\2 d 2 '4 . 152 \ \ i s 2 t l 154. S e e A.A I... In
Refer IOO 1 6 1 : Ve n Pur 34 . 113 . 14^.
" 2 " , c e r i lien l(W S ( ' i P 4 . V 4 ‘i(i I S 1020. 3 . U 1 1 1 . 3 4 1 (3 » .
citation 104 I l-.a2tl ISO. C i\il l< 2 0 4 . Im D oin
I n i e r e s i ot .
A C B Id g a n d I n d u s . M a i n t e n a n c e C o r p . v.
A a l h e r s v. l n w a D e p t, ol .lob S e r v i c e . Io w a, 4 M
2( 1 ,2). 2 7 7 : / o n i n j j Ifi7. L .S ..C K T I I C i C t 3 S 5 . - F e d C i s 107 7.
of cose <,)iialii\ C o ii s i \ I 'h o i n as . M>nil. ”' 2 S l*2il
NA\'2d 3 . '0 . S o c i a l S 4.’i7, 5S4.
A ^ D C a r e . In c . In re. B k r t c > M D P a . S 6 B R
A.ilco l i a i n e v C o . v. Il ar rv S a n d e i R ea ll v C o ..
4lfv 224 Monl I DS D.inia-: \h^): M ech 4v iian k r 20S4.5, 20S5. 2102.
Inc.. M o A p p . 771 S W 2 d M22, S e e S h o c k l e v
! lei is I 54i 2 ) A \ D C a r e . i n c . . In re. B k r i c v W D P a . 4 o B R
\ , H a n v S ai i de i Ke all v C o . . inc.
■\ \ . kick>. M ailer ol. \V \I) D e p t. 541 I is. B a i i k r 2 0 4 5 ; F e d C i s 47 ,
\ a l i j . i a r d v M e r c h a n l s \ a l . l^ ank . h K .. C a l .A p p
\ ' l S 2 , l 2(vl. 14() \ I ) 2 J 4 ’^ i S e e l<ick> AA . A tV D S u p e r i n a r k e l s , Inc .. N o. 2 v. I ni i ed
' D is i. 2^4 C alkpir SI. 224 C .\3 d 6^4.
M a l l e i ol f o o d aiul C o n i i n e i c i a l V^’o r k e r s . L o c a l L n i o i i
rev iL-w d e n . ce rt d e n I I 2 S C i 27 S . 1 16 I ,|-Al2d
\ . \ . A H.iil Bciiiiliii'.' ( ■" \ S la le , ( l a . ,'S.> .SI-2J SSO. N D O h io . 732 i Supp 770. M onop
:M i Banks 2^1. C ivil R 14^». ( o u s p IL.
I 25 . 2 5 ' i ( la 4 M li ai l SO 12 (4 i. | 7 i 1,7). 2Si 1,7). 2 S (5 i . 2X ( 6 .2 ): S t a t e s
.Mas] .V S 4 .5 . ' 4 ; S i a i e s I S . 2 C I S.4 5.
\ \ \ i^ oiuhnL' ( ' o ^ _ > < ^ i u - . { ia \ p | i . 'S(i Si 2 J I S . 33,
Aa lu iu l V, W iliiam s C ountv. \l). 442 NW '2ii
^ 0 , 1*>2 ( K k\ f»f <^ S 4 l ia il 77( I ) A \ i I’a c i f i c C o n s t Co v. S a i p a n S l e v e d o i e
400. Liii D o m LS7. 23.Si4i.
\ \ . \ ( j j i t T i ^ c n ICC. In c \ ( )iiinil'';tnk I n i \ e i - C o . . Inc.. C A 4 ( N M a r i a n a I s l a n d s ) . SSS F 2 d
.A. A. M . . S l a l e in I n t e i v s i o l . N.l Su |X ‘i'Ch. 54 S
s>i<1hils. \ A,. C o l o A p p . ^2.^ l ’2 J I5fv 6 S. C ' l v i l k I S I : l-ed C t s 7 7 6 : M o n . i p I 6 ( 1 ).
A 2 d 5 2 4 . 2 2 S N.i Su |X ’r 4 D iulis \ |07;
• " ^ ' on I s 2. Couil-' S5( 1 ); M ech l.iens 272. 24( 7 I. 2S( 1. 6 ): S h i | ) 1 03 : T e r r i l o r i e s I S ; ' l r e a -
I n l a n l s 6.S ,7(2). 6 S . " i 3 i
2 S l i I i: P r e l i i a l I ' r o c 7 4 6 . i ie s <S.
Topic and key A \.\ D iN in hu io i-s a i u t .Avsocuiie''. In re. C A 4
.A a m c o T r a n s m i s s i i i n s v. ( i e n e r a l C a s . C o . tit
A <S; [. S u p p K C o . , Inc. v. . N a ti o n w i d e .Mui. F ire
W is c o n s i n . W 'l s A p p . 422 NA\ 2 d 154. 143
number i \ C ) . ' ! 2 2 I 2J 1146 S e e R a \ n t i r . In IV.
\ \ ' i s 2 d 6 6 1 . S e e S i i v e r t t m L n i e r p r i s e s . Inc. v.
Ins. C o . . C A 4 ( \ ’at. 74.S F-'2d 6 6 4 . c e r i d e n
A A A [--lee. S e i A i c e I : irm ci '' H o m e Miil. InN. 107 .set 1.^02. 474 CS 1041. 44 L F 'd 2 d
( i e n e r a l C a s . C o . i>t W i s c o n s i n .
reference C o . . I ' l a h A[tp. "(I. ' I’2ii S i 4. S e e A m e r i c a n
A.A .MC O I' r a n s t n i s s i o n s , in c. v. H a r r i s . |- D P a .
I5 S , - Damag IS 4 ; Fraud 58(4); Insurance
iio n i in ii .’ C o \ , NeNon, 1 1. 6 0 2 4 ; T r o v e r 4 0 | 4 ) .
\ \ \ C i i ta r a n i e e i l . M ort u.. Inc. \ , S t a l e . D e p l, ol 7 5 4 (-'Supp 1 I4 L - C oniracts 16,S; i-'ed Civ A A: H. Inc .. in re. B k ri c v W D W i s . 122 BR
B anking anJ l-'in;ince. I)i\, ot |-i i u i n ce . P r o c 2 4 4 2 ; h'ra ud 7; L i m I' f \ c i 2 (1 ) ; T ra t lc S4.- B ankr 2828. 3544.
l l a A p p 2 Div t. 5 1 7 S o 2 J I - li ro k R cl! S 7 1 . 3 . A tHc H \ e n d i n g .S erv ice . Inc. v. V i l l a g e of
.A A.A S»h1. Inc. v W e i t / e r C o ri i . . l - ' l a A p p 4 Di st . A ain co i ra n sm issioiis. Inc. v. S m i l h . l:DPa. S c h a u m b u r g . ill. Ap p 1 Dis i. 118 i l l D e c 7.33.
51.' S o 2 J 750. M c c l i L i e n s 2 S l i I j. .^04^ I i. 7 5 6 F S u p p 2 2 5 . — 1-cd C i s 31 . 2 1 4 . 21 7. 5 2 2 Nl-;2d I 8 S. 16S l l l A p p 3 d 6 1 . a p p e a l d e n
.MOi ^]. A a i n o d t v, L . S . . C I C t . 2 2 C I C i ' 1 6 . a l f 4 7 6 l '2 d 125 illD ec 2 1 0 . 5M) N F 2 d 23 S . 122 Il l2 d
\ . \ - \ \ ’a n S e r v i c e s , In c. W'illis. ( i a . A p p . . ' 5 4 64 I , I .al io r 4 16 , 1. 5 6 4 . — I j c e n s 7( 1 ). 7( 4) .
S I.2J IS 2 ( i a A p p 4 0 , - A p p .V li .C^S; .A ,A . A c o u s tic s , Inc. v. V a lin s kv . l l l A p p 1 A ^ J A u l o B o d y . In re. B k r t c y D M a s s . 6 3 B R
C o s ts 2NI(5i. Dis i, 147 I l l O e c .S40. 554 \R 2 d 1 I SO. 2 0 2 3 3 5 . S e e R u s s o , in re.
A .A A \ ; i n S e r v i c e s . In c, W i l l i s . C ia A p p . .U S lllA p p .V I 5 1 6 . a p p e a l d e n 151 I l l D e c 3 7 9 . 5 6 4 .A lSc .1 Ciilfs S h o p V. C h u . N V A D 3 D e p t . 5 3 6
S 1 : 2 J 4 7 5 . I S O C . a A p p IS. App ^ K 2I5(I); N L 2 d S . U . 135 i l l2 d 5 5 3 . App h 4S4(5); N > ' S 2 d 2 0 4 . 145 A D 2 d 3 7 7 . a p p e a l d e n 5 4 2
B ail iii Attv .V C 2 4 . 3 2 ( 1 1 ) ; C o s i s 2; M e c h L i e n s N V S 2 d 5 1 8 . 7 4 N ' l ^ d 6 0 3 . 5 4 0 NF :2 d 7 1 3 . -
A A \A Ijiierpnses. In c. K i \ e r Place C o m - 244. Ta.\ 13 11 , 1 31 6.
niiiiiitv I'rlxin K e J c v e lo p m e n l C orp.. O hio. .A .V; .A C a k e D e c o r a ii n ^ j S upplies Inc. v. .A J T i e B e a m S e r v i c e v, K e n d le . F la.A pp I
55 .i M ; 2 i1 5^7. 5 0 O h i o S i.'d 157. a p p e a l k a m o s . L a A p p 3 C ir . 5 0 2 S o 2 d 117 1. -A pp Disi. 511 St>2d 653. V \o rk Comp 853.
a l l c r r e iii ai u l 5 ^ S . \ t ' , 2 d 7 I 1. 7 4 O h i o App.VI L I I0 6( I ). i 86 I.
17 0 . i iin s Ll ic li o n al nu'titMi t i s e i r 5 7 ‘J N I i 2 J A tV; ,A ( i r o c e r v v. S tate L i q u o r .Au tho ritv . A cV K F>roduce. In re. B k r l c v S D N Y . 1 06 H R
214. 62 O hio S i .'h I 1 44 1, l.m Doi ii I S . 5; W A D 1 D is i. 5 5 6 . \ Y S 2 d 3.^0. .See M o h s i n 42. See New York Pn>duce A m erican it
ludL ;m IS 1( 15). 1X 5(2). IS 5 (6 ) . V. S t a t e Liqut>r ,Auth{>rii>. K t)r ea n .A u c ti o n C o r p . . in re.
For Later C a s e H isto ry In fo rm a tio n , see IN STA -CITE on W ESTLA W
168
I h c w e a k n e s s ot llic iligcst Is its s t r e n g t h , tliat is, it c o \ e r s all the cases. V o u m a y be i n

t e r e s t e d o n l y ill t eder al cases, ca se s t r o m y o u r r e g i o n o t ' t h e U n i t e d States, o r case s t r o m \-our
st ate. W i t h t h e A in c riiiiii l')igcsl. y o u ma \ ' h a v e to w a d e t h r o u g h a lot o l ' c a s e s u m m a r i e s to
t i nd t h e case y o u w a n t . I ' o r t u n a t e K , W e s t also p u b l i s h e s o t h e r , m o r e t' ocused digests.
2. D igests o f Federal Court O pinions

We s t p u b l i s h e s s e p a r a t e d i g e s t s tor d e c i s i o n s ot t h e t ed e r a l c o u r t s :
United States Supreme (ôurt Digest, l h e L'nilcil S in tc i S u p iv iiu ' ('.ourt D igest p r o -
\ ides a s u m m a r y ot' all t h e t l eci s i ons o f t h e S u p r e m e C o u r t o f t h e U n i t e d States.
I h u s , i l ' y o u r r e s e a ic h is t' ocused o n S u p i ' cme ( ' o u r t d e c i s i o n s t h a t h a \ e a d d r e s s e d a
s peci ti c topi c, \ ’o u c o u l d c o n s u l t thi s di gest to find t h e cases.
Federal Court System. West p u b l i sh e s s e \ e r a l d i g e s t s th a t c o v e r t h e d e c i s i o n s o f t h e

U n i t e d States S u p r e m e (,' ourt, the U n i t e d States ( ' o u r t s o f .Appeals, a n d t h e U n i t e d
Stat es Di st r i ct (Courts, liach digest c o \ e r s a speci ti c t i m e p e r i o d .
F e ik 'w l Digest 1734 to 1938
M o iic n i I-'ciieral I’nic tic e Digest 1939 to 1961
W e s t’s I'e d en il P n ie tiee Digest 2 d 1961 to 1975
West's h'edenil P m e lic e Digest 3 d 1975 to 1983
West's l-'edenil P n ie tiee Digest -4th 1983 to p re s en t
l h e di ge s t s u m m a r i e s o t ' t h e S u p r e m e Côurt cases a r e listed tirst; t h e C o u r t ot A p p e a l s

c a s e s a r e next , fol lowetl by t h e l ' n i t e d Stat es Di st r i c t (Courts case s a n d o t h e r t e d e r a l c o u r t
cases, i h e r e a r e also speci ali zed tederal di gests t ha t c o \ e r t h e d e c i s i o n s o f o t h e r specific feder al
c o u r t s , s u c h as \ \ ' c . v / H a n k n i p t e r Digest.
3. Regional Digests
Wes t p u b l i s h e s d ig e s t s k>r l o u r ol t h e r e g i o n a l re po r t e r s :
At'iiintii ¡îge.si loi cases l e p o i l c i l m l h e A i'u m lu R e p o iie i

S o r ll i W estern Digest for cases re p o r t c t l in t h e \ o r t h W este rn R ep o rter
Piieifie l'>igest t o r c ases r e p o r t e d in t h e Paeifje R ep o rier
S o u th Hdsterii Digest t o r ca se s r e p o r t e d in t h e S o u th P astern R ep o rter
Fa ch regional digest i n c l u d e s s u i n m a r i e s ot t h e ca ses p r e s e n t e d in t h e r e p o r t e r o r

g a n i z e d by state.
For Example S u ppose th a t you w a n t to lo c a te the c ases a d d re s s in g A s s a u lt and B a tte ry

key n u m b e r 18 in the Pacific Digest. The d ig e s t s u m m a rie s of the c a s e s
fro m A rizona w ill be p resented together, the digest sum m a rie s o fth e cases fro m C alifornia
w ill be p re s e n te d togethe r, and so on.
To l o c a t e t he ca se s t'or t h e st ates c o v e r e d in t h e S o r t h P.astern R eporter, S o u t h W e s te r n

R e p o rte r, a n d t he S o u th e r n R ep o rter, \ ' ou m u s t c o n s u l t t h e A m e r i c a n l')igest o r t h e s t a t e r e
p o r t e r digest.
4. State Digests
W'est p u b l i s h e s 46 st ate d i ge s t s a n d a digest for t h e Di st r i c t o f (Columbia. N o st ate d i g e s t s a r e
p u b l i s h e d for Del a wa re , N e \ ’ad a , a n d L'tah. ' Ih e D e l a w a re d e c i s i o n s arc i n c l u d e d in t h e A tla n tic
169
I h g c it , a n d t h e N’e\ ' ad a a n d U t a h d e c i s i o n s are i n c k i d e d in t h e Piicific Digcit. I h e ciecisions

I r o m D e l a wa r e , N e v a d a , a n d Utali, a k ) n g w i t h t h o s e triMii all t h e o t h e r states, are i n c k i d e d in
t h e A iu e r ic u u D igci! S y s te m . I h e D iik o ta D igest i n c l u d e s b o t h N o r t h a n d S o u t h D a k o t a . ' I he
\ ’irgiiiiii a n d West M rginiii Digest i n c k i d e s b o t h \ ’i r gi n i a a n d We s t \ ' i r g i n i a.
I h e st ate d i g e s t s u s u a l l y i n c l u d e t h e r e p o r t e d s t at e c o u r t d e c i s i o n s , as well as f eder al
c o u r t d e c i s i o n s , a ri s i n g in t h e state.
D. Research Using Digests

Di g e s t s are u s e d to l ocat e case law t h a t a d d r e s s e s a speci fi c p o i n t ( s ) ot' law. Vou use di g e s t s in
t w o si tuat ions;
\' ou k n o w t h e n a m e o f a c a s e t h a t a d d r e s s e s t h e p o i n t o t ' l a w b e i n g r e s e a r c h e d a n d
are l o o k i n g f'or o t h e r cases t hat a d d r e s s t h e s a m e p o i n t .
For Example The question being re s e a rc h e d is the s am e as th a t raised in Rael

1/. Cadena, th a t is, " W h e n m ay a b y s ta n d e r be liable fo r a b a tte ry ? "
(See Exhibit 4 -k ) This question is identified in the case h eadno tes as being covered
und e r the topic A s s a u lt and B a tte ry key n u m b e r 18. You are fa m ilia r w ith the Rael
case, but the client's fa c ts are s o m e w h a t d iffe re n t fro m th o s e in Rael. C hecking
A s s a u lt and B a ttery key n u m b e r 18 in a d ig e s t w ill lead you to all the other ca s e s
th a t address the question. A sc a n of the case s u m m a rie s m ay lead to a case th a t
is fa c tu a lly clo s e r to y o u r client's facts, a c a s e th a t is on pomt.
You d o not k n o w o f a n y ca s e s t h a t a d d r e s s t h e p o i n t of law b e i n g r e s e a r c h ed , hi

most instances a researcher has identified the qu est ion being researched but needs
to local e c o u r t o p i n i o n s t h a t a d d r e s s t h e topi c.
For Example The clien t w a s s e v e re ly beaten by police w h e n he w a s arrested fo r

a tra ffic vio la tio n . He w a n t s to sue th e p o lic e fo r using e x c e s s iv e
force. The question is, " W h a t c o n s titu te s e x c e s s iv e f o rc e w h e n an a rre s t is being
m a d e ? " Consulting the to p ic " a s s a u l t a n d b a tte r y " in a d ig e s t w ill l e a d y o u t o key
n u m b e r 7, "e x c e s s iv e fo r c e in d o in g la w fu l a c t ," and a s u m m a ry of all the c a s e s
th a t have a d d re s s e d the q u e s tio n . One of th o s e c a s e s m a y be d ire c tly on point.
2. Research Techniques
I h e s t a r t i n g p o i n t for c o n d u c t i n g d i g e s t r e s e a r c h is to l o c a l e t h e c o r r e c t di ges t sel. Re f e r to
t h e t\ pe s o f di ges t s d i s c u s s e d p r e v i o u s l y a n d sel ect t h e a p p r o p r i a t e digest. If y o u are l o o k i n g
k i r feder al cases, c o n s u l t a feder al digest. If y o u a r e l o o k i n g k>r ca s e s f r o m a p a r t i c u l a r state,
u s e t h e st ate c o u r t digest for t ha t slate. F o r st ale c a s e s f r o m a p a r t i c u k i r r e g i on , s u c h as t h e
w e s t e r n p a r t ot t h e U n i t e d States, c h e c k t h e r e g i o n a l d i g e s t s u c h as t h e Pneifie Digest. If n o
st a t e o r r e g i o n a l digest is avail able, ref er to t h e A m e r i c a n Digest.
Af t er s e l e c t i n g a digest, \ o u nia\- u s e se\-eral t e c h n i q u e s to l o c a t e specific cases.
170
a. C'ase Headnotes
It you alre.id}' k n o w ot a caso related to tlie issue bein» researched, leter to the topic a n d k e y n u m b e r
ot the relevant h c a d n o t c f r o m t he case a n d c onsul t that topic a n d ke\ n u m b e r in the digest. B\' g o
i ng di r ect h' to t he key nunii>er, \-ou avoid o t h e r research steps, su ch as h a \ ’ing to reler to the inde.x.
For Example You are r e s e a rc h in g the issu e of w h o (nay be liable in a battery. You are
fa m ilia r w it h Rael v. Cadena, but th e client's f a c ts are quite diffe re n t. Even
th o u g h Raells not on point, the ca s e h e a d n o te , A s s a u lt and B a tte ry key n u m b e r 18, w ill
lead you d ire c tly to the c a s e s th a t have a d d re s s e d the to p ic .
Ihi s is by tar t h e q u i c k e s t wa y to l o c at e o t h e r cases. ' I h e re t o r e , il is h e l p t u i it' you k n o w o f

a re l at e d case w h e n y o u b e g i n . I h i s is \vh\' it is i m p o r t a n t w h e n c o n d u c t i n g statutorv- r e s e a r c h
to c o n s u l t t h e case s i u i i n i a r i e s in t h e a n n o t a t i o n s to t h e st at ut e. .AltlioLigh t h e r e nia\' n o t b e
a case d i r e c t h ' o n p o in t , t h e r e m a \ ' b e a r el at e d ca s e s u m m a r i z e d in t h e aiinotatiiMis t h a t will
proN'ide t he digest key n u m b e r t'or t h e p o i n t ot ' l aw b e i n g r e s e a r c h e d .
b. Descriptive Word Index

11 \' ou are u n a w a r e ot a s p e c i h c case, t h i n k ol all t h e a r e a s ot law o r w o r d s a n d p h r a s e s t h a t
ma \ ' b e rel ated to t h e t o p i c b e i n g r e s e a i c h e d a n d consLilt t h e i ndex, l h e i n d e x will r e t er \ (Hi
to t h e digest t opi c a n d key l u m i b c r
For Example T he q u e s tio n in v o lv e s th e firm g of a p e rs o n b e c a u s e of age. You m a y

look u n d e r s e v e ra l in d e x to p ic s , s u c h as " a g e ," " d is c r im in a tio n ," "c iv il
rig h ts ," or " e m p lo y m e n t" (see E xhibit 5-16). Id e n tific a tio n of s e a rc h te rm s is d is c u s s e d
in C h a p te r 2.
c. Topic O utline
11 y o u k n o w t h e t opi c that c o \ e r s t h e i s s u e , g o d i r e c t l y to t he l o p i c in l h e d i g e s t a n d r e v i e w t h e
t opi c o u t l i n e ot'all t h e ke\' n i m i b c r s L i n d e r t h e t o p i ^ . By s c a n n i n g the oLitline, y o u c an iilentit'y
t h e r e l e \ ’a n t key n u m b e r s a n d r e\ ' ie w t h e rclex a n t c a s e s in t h e d i g e s t .
d. l able ot Cases
It \ (Hi k n o w t h e n a m e ot'a ca s e but d o not k n o w t h e citation, c o n su l t t h e table ol’cases. l h e tabl e
lists t h e cases al pl ia b e t i c a l K’, p r o \ ides t h e c i t a t i on s , a n d i n c l u d e s t h e t opi c a n d k e \ n u m b e r s
t or t he iligest e n t r i e s (see (i xhibi t 5 17).
e. Reference from Other Sources

O t t e n , \' ou ma\- be d i r e c t e d to a speci fic d i g e s t t opi c a n d k e y n u m b e r f r o m a n o t h e r s ou r c e ,
s u c h as an A L R ci t a t i o n , e n c y c l o p e d i a cite, o r a n article. In s u c h cases y o u c o u l d go d i r e c t h ’
to t he v o l u m e a n d s e c t i o n cited.
f. Update
.Always c o n su l t t h e p o c k e t p a r t a n d s u p p l e m e n t to u p d a t e \ ' o u r r e s e a r c h a n d to l ocat e t h e
m o s t re c e nt ca.ses.
3. Com puter-A ided Research

l h e il i ges t ' are n ot av a i l a b l e o n n o n t e e - b a s e d I n t e r n e t sites. H o w e \ e r , W' estlaw p n n ’ides a ke\'
n u m b e r scrx ice d a t a b a s e t h a t pro'. ides ac c es s t o all t h e ke\' n u m b e r case s u m m a r i e s . S e a r c h i n g
o n l i n e t or cases in g e n e ra l is d i s c u s s e d in (Cha pt e r 7.
VI. UPDA TING A N D VALIDATING RESEARCH

W’h e n \ o u loc a t e p r i m a r y a u t h o r i t y t h a t prov ides an a n s w e r to a q u e s t i o n b e i n g r e s e a r c h e d , it
is necessar}- to d e t e r n i i n e it t h e a u t h o r i t v h a s b e e n r e v e r s e d o r m o d i f i e d by a s u b s e q u e i i t l aw o r
c o u r t de c i s i o n . ' Ihat is, y o u m u s t d e t e r m i n e if t h e a u t h o r i t y is still vali d, if it is still “g o o d law.”
' Ih e first st ep to e n s u r i n g a n author it }' is “g o o d l a w ” is t o u se a citator. ' Ih e t w o m o s t c o m m o n
c i t at o r s a re Shepard's Citations, in priiit o r o n l i n e (Lexis), a n d W' est law’s K e y C i t e . ' I' radi ti on-
all}-, o n l y S h cp a n i's C ita tio n s in p r i n t w a s avail able for v a l i d a t i n g p r i m a r y a u t h o r i t y. In r e ce n t
years, h ow e v e r , W' estlaw h a s a lso d e v e l o p e d a c i t at o r ser vice, c a l l e d KeyCi te. ' I h e p r o c e s s o f
c o n s u l t i n g a S h e p a r d 's s o u r c e to d e t e r m i n e t h e c u r r e n t v a l i d i t y o f a n a u t h o r i t y is c a l l ed
S h e p a r d i z i n g . '^bu S h e p a r d i z e a ca se o r st a t u t e w h e n } o u c h e c k it in S h e p a r d ’s C ita tio n s.
H o w e v e r , toda}- t ha t t er ni is u s e d w h e t h e r }’o u a r e u s i n g S h e p a r d s’ o r y o u a r e u s i n g W' est l aw’s
KeyCi te.
A. Using Shepard s in Print

Shepard's ('ita tio n s is a set o f b o o k s t h at c on s i s t o f c i t at i on s to legal a u t h o r i t i e s , su c h as a c o u r t
o p i n i o n , fo l l o we d b}' a list ot c i t a t i o n s to c ases a n d o t h e r a u t h o r i t i e s t ha t di s c u s s , an a l y z e ,
o r in s o m e w a y affect t h e legal au t h o r i t y. S h e p a r d ’s will n o t onl\- tell y o u w h e t h e r a c a s e or
o t h e r authorit}- h a s b e e n r e v e r s e d , m o d i f i e d , o r o v e r r u l e d , b u t will a lso r efer y o u to a n y o t h e r
c a s e o r authoritv- t h a t h a s d i s c u s s e d t h e case. A l t h o u g h it is i n c r e a s i n g l y c o m m o n to va l i da t e
r e s e a r c h e l e c t r o n i c a l l y u s i n g S h e p a r d s’ o n l i n e , L u i d e r s t a n d i n g t h e l a y o u t a n d f u n c t i o n a l i t y
o i Shepard's in p r i n t e n h a n c e s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f o n l i n e u p d a t i n g , '^'ou will f i nd in t h e f r o n t
o f e a c h v-okune i n s t r u c t i o n s o n h o w to u se S h e p a n t s’ . B e c a u s e a r e s e a r c h e r m o r e f r e q u e n t l y
u s e s a S h e p a r d s’ for u p d a t i n g case re s e a r c h , t h e p r o c e s s o f u s i n g a S h e p a r d ’s in t ha t c o n t e x t is
d i s c u s s e d in det ai l here,.
A S h e p a r d 's c i t a t o r p a g e is c o v e r e d w i t h n u m b e r s a n d m a y l o o k i n c o m p r e h e n s i b l e at
first gl ance . Af t e r y o u u n d e r s t a n d t h e f o r m a t a n d c o m p o n e n t s , h o w e v e r , a c i t a t o r is easy to
use. I h e r e a r e v a r i o u s t} p e s oi S h c p a n i 's c i t a t o r s a n d t h e y all s h a r e t h e s a m e basi c f' ormat a n d
c o m p o n e n t s . I h e v a r i o u s tv p e s o t S h e p a r d 's c i t a t o r s a n d t h e c o m n i o n c o m p o n e n t s o f t h e m
all a r e d i s c u s s e d here.
1. S h e p a r d ’s Case Law Citators

Sheparil's p u b l i s h e s a set o f c i t at o r s for e a c h case r e p o r t e r . Usua l l y t h e c i t at o r s a r e l o c a t e d n e x t
to t h e c a s e r e p o r t e r s in t h e law- librar}-. S o m e o f t h e c i t at o r s a n d t h e c o u r t s t h e y c o v e r a re as
follow's:
U n i t e d States S u p r e m e C o u r t c a s e s — Shepard's U n ite d States C ita tio n s
l.ow'er f e der al c o u r t s , t h a t is, c a s e s f r o m t h e Federal R ep o rter, Federal S u p p le m e n t,

Federal R tdes D ecisions, C o u r t o f ( d a im s Reports, a n d U n ite d States C la im s C o u r t
R e p o r te r — S h e p a r d ’s Federal ( j t a t i o n s
Stat e coLirt d e c i s i o n s . I h e r e is a s e p a r a t e set oi' S h e p a r d s’ c o v e r i n g t h e d e c i s i o n s o f
e a c h st at e a n d P u e r t o Rico. In a d d i t i o n , t h e r e is a set o i S h e p a r d ’s for e a c h o f t h e
r e g i on a l r e p o r t e r s .
For Example The c a s e s p u b lis h e d in the New Mexico Reporter are c o v e re d

in Shepard's New Mexico Citations. The c a s e s p u b lis h e d in the
Pacific Reporter are c o v e re d in Shepard's Pacific Reporter Citations.
172
An a d v a n t a g e iif a st at e c i t a t o r is t ha t it will d ir ec t y o u to m o r e r e s e a r c h s o u r ce s , sucli as

l aw revi ew articles a n d A t t o r n e \ ' Cieneral o p i n i o n s . A d i s a d\ - a nt a ge o f a state c i t at o r is t h a t while
it i n c l u d e s c i t a t i o n s t o st at e a n d t ed e r a l cases, it d o e s n o t i n c k u l e c i t a t i o n s f r o m o t h e r states.
Case law citators s h a r e t h e f o l l o w i n g f eat ures:
Abbreviations—analysis and introductory material. .At t h e fr on t of t h e c i t a t o r is a

t abl e o f a b b r e v i a t i o n s p a g e t h a t i dent if ies all o f t h e a b b r e \ i a t i o n s u s e d in t h e c i t a t o r
(see Fxiiibit 5-18). F o l l o w i n g t h i s p a g e are i n s t r u c t i o n s o n how to u s e t h e c i t a t o r
I h e s e i n s t r u c t i o n s u s u al l y i n c l u d e a n i l l u s t r a t i o n i n t e r p r e t i n g a s a m p l e c i t at i on . If
\' ou n e e d g u i d a n c e o n h o w to u s e t h e cit ator, t h e s e p a g e s a re in\ aluabl e.
Case location. Tlie r e p o r t e r \ ' o l u m e n u m b e r is p r i n t e d in t h e u p p e r r i ght o r left c o r

n e r o f e a c h p a g e o f t h e c i t a t o r (see F x h i b i t 5-19). ’I h e c ase p a g e n u m b e r is p r i n t e d
in b o l d o n t h e p a g e (e.g., — 1 0 5 5 — ). T h e n a m e of t h e ca se a n d ve a r fol low t h e p a g e
n u m b e r (see E x h i b i t 5-19).
For Example A s s u m e you are look ing fo r th e c ita tio n s to Young v. Wyoming,
695 P.2d 1055 (W yo. 1985). You w o u ld look to the Shepard's Pacific
Reporter Citations, lo c a te the page w ith v o lu m e 695 a t t h e to p of th e page, th e n
look fo r — 1055— (see Exhibit 5-19).
Parallel citations. F o l l o w i n g t h e c ase n a m e a n d y e a r ar e t h e paral lel c i t a t i o n s (if

any) in p a r e n t h e s e s (see Fx h i b i t 5-19). W' h e n a ca se is p r i n t e d in m o r e t h a n o n e
r e p o r t e r, t h e c i t a t i o n to e a c h r e p o r t e r is c a l l ed a paral lel c i t at i on , for e x a mp l e : ('();/;-
l u o n n ’calth v. D c M ic h u c L 442 Pa. 553, 2 77 A . 2d 159 (1971) . l h e paral lel c i t a t i o n s arc
i n c l u d e d in t h e first S lic p u n fs \-oli.mie p u b l i s h e d a ft er t h e paral lel c i t a t i o n is a \ ai l
able. T h e v a re n ot i n c l u d e d in t h e s u p p l e m e n t s . If t h e st at e c o u i t o p i n i o n s a r e o n l\
p u b l i s h e d in t h e r e g i on a l r e p o r t e r , n o paral lel c i t at i on is listed.
History of the case. F o l l o w i n « t h e paral lel c i t at i on are c i t a t i on s tt' c a se s t h a t i i u d h c
t h e s a m e case. Th i s is t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t s e c t i o n of t h e c a se cit .it ions b e c a u s e any
s u b s e q u e n t d e c i s i o n d is m i s s i n g , m o d i f y i n g , o r r e v e r s i n g t h e S h c p a r d i / e d c a s e will
b e i n d i c a t e d here. A let ter b e f o r e t h e c i t at i on will i n d i c a t e t he a c t i o n t a k e n .
For Example Refer to the c ita tio n s fo llo w in g 695 P.2d 1010 in Exhibit 5-19. The
c ita tio n re fe re n c e " r 713P2d98" m e a n s th a t th e c a s e at 695 R2d
1010 w a s re v e rs e d by th e d e c is io n fo u n d at 713 P.2d 98.
As d i s c u s s e d p r e v i o u s l y , t h e list o f w h a t t h e r a n d o t h e r a b b r e \ i a t i o n s s t a n d for is p r e
s e n t e d in t h e a b b r e \ i a t i o n s p a g e at t h e f r o n t o f t h e ci t at or .
Later case treatment. F ol l o w i n g t h e hi.story o f t h e c a se a re c i t a t i o n s to e v e r y o t h e r

case t ha t h a s m e n t i o n e d t h e ci t e d c a s e a n d r e f e r e n c e s to s e c o n d a r \ - a u t h o r i t i e s. Ihc
cases ar e a r r a n g e d in c h r o n o l o g i c a l o r d e r w i t h t h e e a r l i e r cases m e n t i o n e d first. The
cas e c i t a t i o n is to t h e p a g e in t h e ca s e w h e r e t h e S h e p a r d i z e d c a s e is d i s c u s s e d . Th u s
if a case c i t a t i o n is to “7 46 P.2d 875,” 8 75 is t h e p a g e in t h e ca s e w h e r e t h e S h e p a r
d i z e d c a s e is d i s c u s s e d r a t h e r t h a n t h e b e g i n n i n g p a g e o f t h e case. T h e c a se c i t at i on '
i n cl u d e t r e a t m e n t c o d e s t ha t i nd i c a t e h o w t h e S h e p a r d i z e d c as e was t r e a t e d in llu
cit ed case. T h e s e t r e a t m e n t c o d e a b b r e v i a t i o n s ar e p r e s e n t e d in t h e a b b r e \ i a t i
p a g e at t h e f r on t o f t h e citator.
173
E x h i b i t 5 - 1 8 Abbreviations for Case History and Treatment. L e \ ,s N e \ is . S n e p a rc i's Fe d e ra l Citations. 8th

E d . Vol 15 1 I 9951 . in s id e co v e r o f te\t R e p rin te d w ith the p e rm is s io n o f L e \ is N e \ is
HISTORY AND TREATMENT ABBREVIATIONS

A h b r e \ ialioiis l i a\e hocn a ssigned, whe re applie;ible. lo each cilini: case to ¡luhcale the elTect tlie
citing c ase hail on the case s o n aie .She|iai(.li/iiig. The resiihing " h i s i o n " (altlinieil, r e \ e i s e d . nKKlitleil.
etc.) or ' ' i r e a t men t ' ' ( t oll owed. critici/eil. expl ai ned, etc.) ot ' th e case >011 are . Shepardi /i ng is iiKlicated b\
a hb r e \ iat ions |-)reeeding the citing case ivl'eivnce. I-or exa mpl e , the relereiice ■'l'4.^4l-'2dS72" me a n s that
ther e is l angt iage on page S72 o f sol ii me 4 . U o t ' t h e I'e d e n il Rcpartcr. Se cond Series, that iiulieates the
ciHirt is "I ' o l l o u i ng " the case yon are Shepart l i / i ng. Instances in wh i c h the citing re l er e n ce occurs in a
Llissenting o p i n i on are indicated in the sa me manner. T h e ab b r e \ iations usetl ti) reflect both history and
t r eat men t are as lollows.
History of C ase
a latfirnieel) Th e decision in the c ase are Shepardi /i ii i: was atTirmed o r adherec-l to on
appeal.
ce ( c o n n e c t e d casi Identifies a diflerent ca se tVom the case MUI are Sheparili/inL!. but line risiiii! out I't
the s a me sLibjeet mat t e r or in s o me m a n n e r iiitimatel) c onnect etl therew ith.
D (dismissedi ■An appeal Irom the c ase \ I H I are Sliepardi/iiii: wa s di s mi ssed.
m (m o d ilie d ) Th e decision in the c ase \ o i i are S h e p a r d i / i n >2 v\as chaiiiied in s o me way.
p (parallel) The citinu case is sLibstantiall_\ alike or on all lours, e i t h e r in law or facts, w ith the
case \(U I are S he par di / i n' j .
r (re\ e i s e d ) Th e tiecision in the c ase \oi i are Sh e| ia r t h / i n i2 was r e \ e r s e d on appeal.
s (sa m e c a s e ) T h e c a s e s o n a re S h e p a r t li/ in t : i n \ ( ) l\ e s th e s a m e lit i'ja t io n a s th e c it i i ii i c a s e .
a h h o L i t i h at a i l i l ' l ' e r e n t s t a ' j e i n t h e I i r o c e e t l i i i ' j s .
s (sup ersed ed ) The citint; case de ci s i on has been substituted tor the ilecision in the case \ o u are
Sheparili/inii.
ls cert d e n Certiorari w a s t l e n i e d h \ the L'.S. S up r e m e ('oiirt.
L'S c e r t t l is C'ertiorari was dini issed b\ the I .s. S u p re me Court.
ls c e r t or ; i n t' er tior ari was 'jrantei.1 h \ the U.S. S u p re me ('ourt.
Ls r e h (.len Reheari ng wa s deniei.1 h\ the I' .S. S u p r e m e Court.
■r s r eh lI is RchearinL! was di s mi ss e d h\ the I' . S. S u p r e m e C'ourt.
\ (\ acated ) I'he (.iecision in the c ase \ (U I are Shepardi /i ii ' j has been \ a c a te d .
1 iTatineiit of Case
L’ ( e r i t i c i / e d ) T h e cit mg case tlisagrees wiih the reasi)ning/(.lecision oí the c a s e s o n are
S h ep a r d i / i n u .
d {disiinoiiisbed) T h e citing case is dil'ferent either in law or t'acl. I'or reas ons gi\ eii , l'rom ihe case
\c)u are S h e p a r t h/ i ng .
e (ex|ilained) The case \ o u are S h e p a r d i / i n g is interpretetl in sonie signi l l cant way. Not nierely a
restatement ot lacis.
Hx 1H x a n i i n e r ' s T h e case yi'u are S h e p a r d i / i n g was eiteil in an . \i.lministrati\e . \ g e n c \ Exaiiiiner' s
ileeisionl Decisión.
I' (f o l l o w e d ) T h e eiling case rel'ers to the case yon are S h e p a r d i / i n g as coni r ol l i ng antlioritx.
h (b a r m o n i / e d ) , \ n a pparent ineoiisistenc_\ hc t we e n the citing case and the c a s e yon are
S h e p a r d i / i ng is explaineti and show n not to exist.
,i (dissei ii ii ií : The case is cited in a dissent i ng opinion.
opinion)
1, (limitedi The citing case refnses to extend the holdi ng ol ' th e case yciti are S h e p a r d i / i ng
b e yond the precise issnes i i n o h e d .
0 (o\erriile(-l) The rnling in the case y o n are S h e i i ar d i / i n g is expressiy o \ e r r u l e d .
q lc| iiestioned) Th e citing case q u e s t i o n s the c ont i nui ng \alidity or precedent i al \ a l n e o l ' t h e case
\OLI are S h e p a r d i / i ng .
L_....
174
E x h i b i t 5 - 1 9 Case Citation Page from the Shepard's Pacific Reporter Citations. LexisNexis, Shepard's Pacific Reporter
Citations. 1994 Bound Volume, Vol 2. p i.3 Rep'mteti'.v th the perniission of LexisNexis
Case Page Reporter Volume

Number \ , N um ber—
p.xciHK k h p () k t [:r . 2ii s i ; r i i ;s ' Vol. 69.^
1(114 7 0 7 P 2 d ■ 1 64 105S 7 7 0 P 2 d 74(1 - 1076—

d 7 > ) ii> ;d > j i : W a s liiiijjlc in \ 7,-=;6P2d-775 Case 1 77 6P 2 d 244 K e lln e r v _
,SI.^ I> 2 d 7'),’. S e lle r s IV S,^ :’ 6 7 P 2 d l 6 S e 7S2P2d 592 C u r t is I9 S 5
Case name
C i t \ N a lio n a l
,S I.S P 2 d 7 9 4 7 6 9 P 2 d 'S S 9 7S6P2d
\ p 7 ‘ )i)i
Ban k \ C ro cke r ( . A K S .A S 2 9 I. - M
■ si.^ i’ M 7'),-=; 7^ .M ’ 2 d '9 2 4 1 7 K 9 P 2 d T ( I.M
CC ( i2 M ’ 2d.>2 2 l'7 ,^ 2 P 2 d 192
N a t io n a l 15ank
S 4 7 l> : d > X ,7 i 7S9P2dS62 7 9 IP 2 d .M 6
7 2 IP 2 d 5 4 S 19S4 7 < S 4 P 2 d -6 -S7
\Ionl S I6 P 2 d S 7 | 7 9 6 P 2 d l.v V i
7 2 2 f ’ 2 d l.v ^ 2 I 8,= ¡4P 2 d 7 .^ 9
7 i( ) i > : d 41) I S n i ’ 2 d 4 .> (l (2 1 I C ; i R . s l 7 l S O I P 2 d 4 ( l2
7 .U P 2 d '9 7 4
s 1 9 7 C 'a R 7 2 l
'm 7 4 IP 2 d I S 2 ()P 2 d 9 9 .i S ( l2 P 2 d '9 9 0
S 4 S P 2 d 'S IS ,.\la 2,’i S C 'a R 7 7 6
74IP2d\^9.> H a l l \ .A d d -
C ir, .> .S | S o 2 d 9 7 7 2 .^ 9 C a R 1 17
N a t ic iiia l T i i k '
‘76.’P2d'472 V e n u ir e s L i d .
In s u r a n c e C n . \
7 S ( ) P 2 il N 7 0 9 IS t -2 d n.-Ô I0 5 S 2 .V X 'a R 7 1 6 198.^
■’N0P2JSI C 'lr, S 2 4 2 C 'a R 198
\\asliinj;t(in 9 IB R W
Case 2
2 4 i C a R 22(1
I.A K S .A S 2 9 I2 )
I ‘W.S r 7 S 'H ’ 2 d .s 2 7 2 7 I ’ 2 d 3(1,5
C i r , 10 .lo h n s o n iV : 4 4 C a R 4.S2
r 7S9P2d 7 7 4 P 2 d ' 'l 9 7
( . ^ A \ A | i7 . S S ) 9 0 n - 2 d ' S ,\'. .lo h n s c in \ 2 4 _ ^ C a R 401
S I >P2d I2 ').’^ ^ 7 9 P 2 d ‘ .^ l4
CC 7fi.'^l’ 2 il.'( ' 9 3 S P '2 d 'l I 12 S u p e r io r C o u r t 2 4 .S C a R 4(16
Nehr I 7 9 iP 2 d l( k s
7 .'^ ')l> :d -7 ()(i
492\W 4- L la h o t S a il I ’r a n c is c o 2.riCaR .S7S S.V -= ;P 2 d l2 ()V
7 .^ ) l> :d 7 (l(, 7 .S 7 P 2 d 4 7 1 19S.> 2 .> 4 C a R 7 9 7
1021 ,i S . \ S P 2 d l 2 l \
^ 4 I I’ M 14 I'enn 1 .« C .H l2 4 , i| 2 .^ 4 ( 'a R S (I7
7 4 1I ’ M l.> \ n iin \ 7 2 S S W 7 .S .-S ( 2 IIC a R .^ i7 i 2 .^ .^ C a R S 4 9 1090 \
' 4 I I ’: J I . S W u in im ;.; I'iS .s S 7 .t .l7 S n s 2 0 0 C a R S I2 2 .> 6 C a R 9 4 N o rto n \
x : : i ’ 2 d i2 .'ii) CC ( W 4 P 2 d l 1‘) I 7 l( M ’ 2d 2 6 .S 2 .^ 7 C a R ,i2 S . A lc o h o li c
1042
CC 7 7 4 l ’ 2 d .V )7 7 4 6 P 2 d S 7 .> 2 6 0 C a R .^42 B c N e r a jz c
I lo y a n \ I ’o s iin
e 2 6 4 C '; ; " '
CC S I IP 2 d 2 .S .S I 2 2 1 C a R 4 6 .s
I 'A C i g i c c n 19S.T
Scliiiol Disincl
7 ()6 P 2 d '2 ." l(i d 2 2 IC a R '7 7 1 - '’« 'a Point bf low discussed in Headnote 7
7 2 1 P 2 d '.^ 7 S 224CaR422 26,S ( 'a
7 l. ^ l '2 d 240
2 6 9 C .,,i, of tfiei Shepardized case
\ n . I 14 \
7 l. s P 2 d 249
74,M’2(rS6,> I2 2 4 C a R 4 2 4 ;
l lu n u m K ii^ h ls
J 'l9 P 2 d 2.1(1 I0 4 S 2 2 (iC a R .'0 2 7 ,i( ;iR .i2,S
( (ininnssion 2 7 6 C a R I , ‘i9
740P2d946
J 7 l> ) P 2 d 2 .'(I 2.’' 2 ( 'a R 6 . S S
I'IS .S Hauer \ 7 , S 4 P 2 d '2 4 4
7 1 9 P M ' 2 Í4 2 4 2 C a k 7 ,i6 2 7 7 C a R 206
Wyimiw^ C\ vcl 6.5 1„5 In - __ .
■’ ! ' 9 P : d l 2 9 7
7 | 9 P 2 il ' 2 .U il 2 .\M ;iR 761 - J ^ 6 l ^ d ’ .'i86
W o r k e r 's
1(107
7 2 I P 2 d l ( l . ’v l
C 'o n ip c M s a lin ii
d 2 .^ ,U 'a R 761 6 7 , l, 4 4 . i n
7 8 7 P 2 in t » « ~ - Secondary
r (il 7 2 I P 2 d 'lO .^.S 2 S 0 C a R ,S,i9 1071 7 9 M ’ 2 d '6 l8
l) i\ is i( in 19,S.S autfiority
Distinguishe(J from 7"<S|’ 2d 442 2 S 4 C a R 6 .s .^ 8 2 4 P 2 d 71 1
7(l,M’2dl(ISI 1 4 C a k 2 d .> 6
\ 'a n ( l u li k \
Shepardized cose _ I 7 4 M’ 2 d .'0 0
I 7(l3P2dl()S2 R e so u rce 8 2 4 P 2 d I.V r fi
7 .> 2 P 2 d 414 C ir. 9 ,S.‘iO I’ 2 d '6 . i l
\ 7 4 2 l’:d l .’O 7 ( ) S P 2 il lo t s
7I I [>2d .^99 67 1 1 S I . S 4 . >
D e N e lo p in e n t
N .M
\ c 74r)l>:d'S4i 7 7 s P 2 d ■ I 1(12
7 l 9P 2d' 2.V) C o u n c i l to r
1(166 808P2d66
- d 74(>1>:..I S4.S 7 9 2 P 2 d l.\S,S
d 7 l 9P2d 240 A la s k a In c . 19S.^
8 0 S P 2 d ‘6 7
i:::
7 4 M > :d e 722P2d I 6S T 'n n is il \ I,A K S ,\ S 2 9 I0 )
7 9 2 P 2 d ' l. v ^ S
'4(iP:d'l222 d 774P 2d.^9 l C a lilo r n ia B a r M ass 1094
r S ( ) S P 2 i l ‘2 (l.'
19S.>
:'" ;4 i> '’d i ■
’71 I S 2 (IP 2 d l2 (i
7 5.M ’ 2 d l 6 6 4 S 9 N L I0 2 4 W in l e r \ C o o r
S .^ .SP 2d .^10
7 S .iP 2 d 'l6 7 (.^SC.VI.^.^7) S I) 1985
695 P.2d 1 0 1 0 ' V ' ' 7 S 9 P 2 t lS 6 9 >0 4 N \\5 9 7
III j S .V ^ P 2 d .^ l .^ | 2 I ICaR.^2.-=i| ( 1 4 4 .A / 5 6 ) \
reversed r 7 9 .S P 2 d 7 6 4 727P2d 6 4 , l. l 0 7 . ^ n
S 4 2 P 2 d '.^ 2 2 7 () 8 P 2 d 4 .M ()
i S 4 2 P 2 d .^ 2 .^
r 7 9 6 l ’ 2 d 4.^0 7 ,^ S I’ 2 d 7.VS 1074 7 j ( l i ’ 2 d l0 4 7
^ Parallel
1055 7 ,V )P 2 d I.V i
\ lO lO ,\ r i/ S p e in llo N c \ 7 .^ 6 P 2 d '8 2 2 citation
7 2 ( lP 2 d 106 7 .V ) l’ 2 d 1 2 S 4 d 7 7 IP 2 d 'l.« l
\ 'o u n g \ A n c lio r a u c
\ M o lt \ iM u lic illI ■ '4 IP 2 d 21.1
720P2d 10(1 \\ N o n iin t: ,M u n ic ip a l d 7 7 IP 2 d 'l,« l
S cc hh oo o l D i s il r i c l '4 . ^ P 2 d 9 1 9
N o . M K l ‘)S.^ lO.M 19 S , ' . r
7 4 7 P 2 d 1 I4 S
/ o n in ” B o ard o l 8 0 9 P 2 d 4,^1
8 .^ 9 P 2 d ''4 6 7
\(.i‘)\\Ap7')2) l u lle d S t a le s s 67s i’2d s \ ) 7 4 9 P 2 d 1.^07
I ’ \ a m in e r s ic
C ir . 9
' r 7 l . " l ’ 2 d ‘ )S a c liii" Ih r o u g h 7()6P2d 272\ 7 .^ IP 2 d 4(iO
A p p e a ls I9 S ,^
S ( ) 6 F 2 d 'l.i7 1
'l)4l’2iLfi.^(i 1 a r n ie r s l l o i i i e 7(17P2d-l.x^ \ 7 .S | P 2 d 4 6 4 l,A K S .A S 2 9 1 4 )
.\ il n ii n is t r L il io ii \ 7()7P2d IK 4 \ 7 6 4 P2d 706 1) 4 7 4 C S K 9 5
R e d la n d I9 S .S 71.sP2d 2 4 9 \ 7 6 6 P 2 d .^6.' 1) S S I . i ; 2 1 7
i i9 9 P 2 d ' .'0 7 I) 1 0 6 S C 2 1 6
^ ( l7 P 2 d M M
Young v, Wyoming
175
For Example T h e re are s e v e ra l c ita tio n s f o llo w in g 695 P.2d 1048 (s e e Ex
hibit 5-19) w h ic h s h o w d iffe re n t w a y s the c a s e w a s tre a te d by
s u b s e q u e n t cou rts : in "j 7 0 3P 2dl082," th e t r e a tm e n t c o d e y m e a n s the S h e p a r
dized case (695 P.2d 1048) w a s cite d m the d is s e n tin g opinion in 703 P.2d at page
1082; in "d 774P2d591," the d m e a n s t h a t t h e c o u rt d is tin g u is h e d the c a s e from
the S h e p a rd iz e d case in 774 P2d at page 591.
' l h e t r e a t m e n t c o d e s are i n c l u d e d in t h e t a bl e ot a b b r e \ ' i a t i o n s at t h e b e g i n n n g o f

e a c h Shepard's c i t a t o r
in a d d i t i o n to t h e t r e a t m e n t c o d e s , t h e c i t a t i o n s i n c l u d e r e f e r e n c e s t o speci fic p o i n t s o f
l a w d i s c u s s e d in t h e S h e p a r d i z e d case t h a t a r e also a d d r e s s e d in t h e c i t e d case. Ihi s is a c c o m
p l i sh e d t h r o u g h the use o f small, r a i s e d - n u m e r a l r ef e r e n c e s f ol l owi ng t he r e p o r t e r a b b r e\ ' ati on
in t h e c i t at i on , ' i h e s e n u m b e r s c o r r e s p o n d to t h e h e a d n o t e n u m b e r o f t h e S h e p a r d i z c c case.
For Example The c a s e bein g S h e p a rd iz e d a p p e a r s at 695 P2d 1081. One of

the c a s e c ita tio n s is "779P2d'314." The raised 7 m e a n s th a t the
point of la w d is c u s s e d in h e a d n o te 7 of the S h epardiz ed c a s e (695 R2d 1081 is
d is c u s s e d in 779 P2d at page 314 (see Exhibit 5-19).
I h e s e r c f er e n c c n u m b e r s a r e i n \ ' a l u a b l c d u r i n g r es e a r c h bccaLise t h e \ ' a l l ow to

c o m p a r e t h e t r e a t m e n t o f a speci t i c p o i n t o f law in b o t h cases. II’ t h e r e is n o raised
n u m b e r in a c i t at i on , t h e n t h e c a s e di s c u s s e s t h e S h e p a r d i z e d c a s e in g e n e r a l or d o e s
not SLimmari ze a p o i n t o f law f r o m t h e case.
Secondary sources. I ' o l l o w i n g t h e case c i t at i on s arc re t e r c n c c s to s e c o i u l a r v so ii ces,

s u c h as A I.R a n n o t a t i o n s , t h a t in s o m e way r e f e r e n c e t h e S h e p a r d i z e d case (see
I ' xhi bit 3 19).
2. S h e p a r d ’s Statutory, Constitutional, and Other Enacted Law Citators

lus t as y o u m u s t S h e p a r d i z e ca se law to d e t e r m i n e if it is “g o o d law,” y o u n n i s t a lso S h e p u di ze
s t at u t or \ - a n d c o n s t i t u t i o n a l p r o \ isions, a d m i n i s t r a t i \ e r e g u l at i on s , a n d coLirt rules. Shc.nird's
p u b l i s h e s v a r i o u s c i t at o r s that alk)w \ ’o u to S h e p a r d i z e t h e s e t\ p e s ol l aws t o d e t e r m i i u t h e i r
hi s t o r y , c u r r e n t st atus, a n d h o w t h e c o u r t s l un e i n t e r p r e t e d t h e m . S o m e o f t h e s e citato-s are:
Statutory, constitutional, and court rules. I h e S h cp u n i's c i t a t o r t o r a st at e’s s t it ut e s

is e i t h e r i n c l u d e d w i t h t h e Shepard's st al e ca se c it at o r o r p u b l i s h e d as a s e [ a r a t e
N'olume. ( ' i t a t i o n s to st ate c o n s t i t u t i o n s a n d st ate c o u r t r ul e s a r e i n c l u d e d wiih t h e
S h e p a r d ’s c i t a t i o n s to t h e st at e st atut es. Shepard's Federal S ta lu te C.itiilioiis c o v c' s t h e
feder al st at u t es a n d i n c l u d e s t h e c i t a t i o n s to t h e L' nited States (Co n s t i t u t i o n and f e d
eral c o u r t rules.
Federal and state regulations. You m a \ ’ S h e p a r d i z e t h e r e g u l a t i o n s o f t h e f i deral

a g e n c i e s p u b l i s h e d in t h e (.Auie o f Federal R e g u la tio n s b\- u s i n g S h e p a r d s’ C.ide o f
Federal R eg u la tio n s C itatio ns. S o m e st ate admi nistrafiv' C a g e n c \ ’ r e g u l a t i o n s c i t i t i o n s
are i n c l u d e d in t h e S h e p a r d ’s st at e c it ati ons.
Shepard's c i t at o r s to e n a c t e d l a w a re s i m i l a r to t h e ca se law c i t a t o r s in man\ - respects:

Abbreviations—analysis and introductory material. At t h e I r on t o f t h e citat( r is a
tabl e o f a b b r e v i a t i o n s p a g e t h a t i dent if ies all o f t h e a b b r e v i a t i o n s Lised in t h e c t a t o r .
F o l l o w i ng thi s p a ge a r e i n s t r u c t i o n s o n h o w to u se t h e citator.
176
Statute location, i^riiited in tiie i i pp c r c o n i e i ' ol e a c h p a g e ol t h e citator\- is t h e s t a t

u t e title, v o l u m e , o r chapte i' l u i m b e r As d i s c u s s e d in ( d i ap t ei ' 3, s t at u t or y o r c o d e
l u m i b e r i n g s\ s t e m s \ a r \ I r o m st ate to state. W h e n m o r e t h a n o n e title is c o v e r e d o n
a page, t h e title n u m b e r is usLially i n c l u d e d in a box. I h c s e p a r a t e s e c t i o n n u m b e r s
a r c p r i n t e d in b o l d (see H.xhibit ,^-20).
History, l h e first e n t r i e s u n d e r a s e c t i o n i n d i c a t e a n v legislative a c t i o n t a k e n t ha t

at fects t h e statute.
For Example If it has been am ended, an /1 fo llo w e d by the c itation to the a m e n d

m e n t w ill be p re s e n te d (see Exhibit 5-20).
Case treatment. Af t e r t h e h i s t o r y o f t h e st at u t e are ci t at i on s to c a se s t h a t h a v e m e n

t i o n e d t h e st atut e. P r e c e d i n g th e c ase c i t at i o n s ar e t r e a t m e n t c o d e s t h a t i n d i c a t e h o w
t h e s t a t u t e wa s t r e a t e d in t h e ci t e d case (see Hxhibit 5 20).
For Example A C p r e c e d in g a c a s e c it a t io n in d ic a te s th e s ta t u te w a s held

c o n s titu tio n a l.
If t h e r e is n o letter p r e c e d i n g t h e c i t a t i o n, t h e n t h e case m e r el y d i s c u s s e s t h e s t a t u t e
general ly.
Secondary sources, l o l l o w i n g t h e c a se c i t a t i o n s a i c re l e r e n c e s to s e c o n d a r \ - s o u r c e s,
s u c h as A I .R a n n o t a t i o n s , that in s o m e way r ef er e n c e t h e st at u t e (sec H.xhibit 3-20) .
3. U pdating S h e p a n i’s Citations in Print

Mo s t set s of Slicp dnl's ( 'it u tio u i consi st ol o n e o r m o r e h a r d b o u n d v o l u m e s a c c o m p a n i e d b\'
o n e o r m o r e s u p p l e m e n t p a m p h l e t s . l oi- m o s t citatoi's, a d v a n c e s h e d s a re p u b l i s h e d b e t w e e n
p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h e p a m p h l e t s . I hc p a m p h l e t s a n d a d v a n c e s h e e t s upi l at e t h e h a r d b o u n d v o l
u m e s . O n t h e c o ve r o f e a c h p a m p h l e t is a “w h a t v'our librar\- s h o u l d c o n t a i n " s e c t i o n l i st i ng
all t h e h a r d b o u n d v o l u m e s a n d s u p p l e m e n t s l o r t h e set. (Check thi s list to e n s u r e t ha t \ ’o u r
r e s e a r c h is c o m p l e t e . It o n e of t h e .S7k’/>i¡/¡/> is m i s s i ng , c h e c k wi t h t h e li b r a r i a n .
B. C o m p u te r iz e d U pdating Using Shepard’s Online

TVaditionallv, t h e o n l v wax’ to u p d a t e a n d v al i d a t e v'oui' r e s e a rc h was t h r o u g h S lic p a n fs C i t a
tions. in p ri n t . ( C o m p u t e r i z e d u p d a t i n g is faster a n d m o r e eflicient, a n d e l i m i n a t e s t h e n e e d to
k n o w w h a t b o o k s f r o m ea c h Shepard's set are rct]uircd. ( C o mp u t er i ze d u p d a t i n g a n d v a l i d a t i n g
is m o r e u p to d a t e b e c a u s e e l e c t r o n i c r e f er e n c e s are avai l abl e m u c h m o r e q u i c k h ' t ha t t h o s e in.
pr i nt . In a d d i t i o n , l aw l i brari es o r law p r o f es s i on a l s w i t h a s u b s c r i p t i o n to Hexis h a v e S h e p a r d ’s
o n l i n e , o b v i a t i n g t h e n e e d for t h e p r i n t v e r s i o n s a n d s a v i ng s p a c e a n d mo n e \ ' . Signi fi cantl y,
c o m p u t e r i z e d u p d a t i n g w i t h S h e p a n l s’ o n l i n e e l i m i n a t e s t h e n e e d to l e a r n o r ref er to t h e list
o f a b b r e v i a t i o n s for c a se t r e a t m e n t s , case liistory, a n d o t h e r re f erenc e s. I h e o n l i n e s e r v i c e
p r e s e n t s t r e a t m e n t o f cases, c ase historv, a n d t h e like u s i n g r eg u l ar t e r m i n o l o g \ - r a t h e r t h a n
t h e a b b r e v i a t i o n s u s e d in t h e Shepard's p r i n t ve r s i ons.
177
E x h ib it 5 -2 0 Citation page from Shepard's Federal S ta tute C itations. LexisNexis, Shepard's Federal Statute Citations,
1996 Bound Volume, Vol, 1, p 65 Reprinted with the permission of LexisNexis,
Title
r N I T ' i ; i ) ST' ,VI' i;,S C O D I - ; I 9 S S a n d I W 4 H d s , 'T I T L H 33 s 910
s ‘xm (J) C ir , 1 7 8 . S | - 2 d l3 l 8 S 9 0 9 (h ) C ir , 4 C in I 1
, \ d 9XStl646 9 l| - 2 d l3 ( l 7 9 ( ) l- 2 d 4 2 0 ■A 8 6 S l 1 2 3 1 , ^ 7 f - S 7 l7 672F2dS4X
,5 9 9 l'2 d 4 ( iS 7 9 7 F '2 d 2 1 ,i 4 4 0 l! S 3 3
Cir, 1 C ir , 3 S ‘>«9 (f)
6 4 6 F 2 d 7 12 8 1 8 F '2 d 3 9 8 4 6 ! l^ S 6 2 6
I I l-3d254 6 ( ) ll- 2 d l3 l9
C ir , D C
6 8 8 1 - 2 d 8 6 ,i 8 2 0 1 - '2 d l4 1 1 39FF122
Cir, 9 5 8 1 -2 d 130(1 C ir , 9 75F2d236
8,s 1 |-2 d 4 7 6 I.i;i9 7
4,s7F2di:0,s 8S5F2d9S4 6 , s l- , id 4 6 l 99SC904
3 6 7 F '2 d l3 8 7 160F2d254
:01'3d66l 2 9 1 -S 3 7 7 1 0 3 S C 2 ()4 7
8 K ,5 F 2 d 9 8 6 S 9 0 9 (d ) C ir , I
2,M',\I1I)9 .U 4 1 - S 3 2 .S A 8 6 S t 1231
C ir , 2 C ir , D C ' 9 1 F 2 d 13 3
C'lr, 9 39 I I S 1360 4 3 6 L 'S 6 ( I 1 l3 6 F 2 d 6 5 7
9 3 1 - 2 d (i6 3 3 7 F 2 d 4 4 (l
95.M2d557 2 ()9 F 2 d 9 l4
6 6 2 I-S 9 9
131F2 d 234 36FF368
C ir , 2
Section......... S908 (j)|3) 2 4 I F '2 d 7 M i C ir , 6 133F2d238 9 8 S C 2 ()0 1
.S 6 F 2 d l() 5 2
2 7 2 F 2 d l? 6 ( ) O I '2 il l2 2 1 2 1 8 F 2 d 8 6 (l C ir , D C 60F2d896
C'ir, 5
C 5 4 S F 2 d 1113 8 .S()F2 d 2 8 .-S ,3 4 3 F 2 d 2 l 1 1 6 () F 2 d 2 3 3
17F,VI7S6 C ir , 4
6 ( ) 7 1 - 2 d l( ) 3 9 C ir , 7 . 3 4 8 F 2 d l0 4 9 ,3 4 3 F 2 d 2 l I
S 9(W ft si'(|. I5 4 F 2 d 5 6 0
7 ( ) 2 F 2 d 4 l2 3 3 2 F S I9 3
Amended Cir, 7
.x S 4 l- 2 d 3 ll) C ir , 2 4 7 F S .% 6
I9 1 'S 9 ( I7 6 4 7 | -2 d 7 l9 C 'ir, 1 1 3 3 F 2 d l3 2
702FS72: 961 S 9 ? 4 6 IR D 3 4 3 8 3 F 2 d i 169
Ci r , 5
304FS32I
I9 2 1 - S 3 6 4 l3 ( ) F 2 d 7 9
s M(»y C ir , 8 883F2d983
C II, 4
2 0 2 1 - S 8 ,s 9 S I8 F 2 d 3 9 9
,\ H ii S i 12 5 1 ,3 8 3 F '2 d 8 7 7 C ir , 2 3 3 F '2 d 3 () ()
,A 9 S S 1 I 6 4 7 4 1 1l - S I I 8 1 C ir , 6
,38F’3 il 1 2 3 6 963F2d342 !9 8 F 2 d 2 3 7
2 N 5 L :s ,^ S 8 2 2 1 -,S 9 4 9 I ,iS F S 8 3 4
C ir , 9 I6 ( ) F S 7 8 4 4 7 3 F 'S 1 ( )
2 X 7 l ' S . S . ’' 7 C ir , 3 C ir , 9
'i l - 2 d l . s 3 C ir , 3 C ir , 3
,5 I7 L 'S ,V J I 9 S I- 2 d l( ll6 l7 .S F 2 d 9 l2
, i2 N I- 2 d 8 7 7 18 3 F 2 d 9 .’>7 6 2 F 2 d l2 2
,W 6 l ' S 7 . V ) 18 3 l- 2 d 9 3 6 I X 8 F 2 d 4 , ‘S.S
4 9 6 1 '2 d 1 2 4 9 2 6 7 | -2 d 6 0 I3 0 f - 2 d 7 9
,'i‘) N U S 4 ( ) 7 2 l)9 l-2 d 2 1 )(l
5 4 .'S I-2 d ,'3 8
,-S671-2d 138,3 343F2d338 3 I9 IS I,^ 7 6 !}909(s)
4 4 ( l l. S ,M
C , 3 9 6 I'2 cI9 0 0 I6 IS 6 7 7
4 ( ill'S ( i.C ' C ,5 7 71 ‘2 d 8 .S 2 Cm, 9 C ir , 2
7 0 8 | - 2 d 4 l,3 2 4 IS 2 4 3
7(il.i:(iO."i 2 4 F ,S 2 4 ,s ! 7 3 F 2 d 9 l1 I9 2 F S _ S 6 9
7 1 7 | -2 d l2 8 4 3 6 I-S 6 2
77LH 4S1I C 1 I7 [-,S 6 (I,S
S 8 2 l'2 d l4 ,i7 16 6 I - S 9 0 9
3 6 7 l - 2 d 1,^87 § 910
S 7 F I.,v \ ' 2 2 31 S 4 ( ) l 2 K 5 l'S 3 H
9 3 8 1 - 2 t l9 8 3 :,S 4 i S 3 3 0 S 909 ( f )
1 X 1 ,1 .4 9 2 ,i3 6 IS 8 ( )(l 3 I7 L IS 3 9 0
I4 IS I.3 9 A 8 6 S l 123 1
C ir , 3
2 6 1 ,i;.V i( l C ir , 4 A 98SH 647 7 6 F F ;W ) 5
9 8 1 S 1(12 I 1 l( ll'2 d 2 6 9
.• S 9 l,i;i2 .i 4 3 l- 2 d 9 8 , i ^ I3 IS 3 I4 4 4 0 1 'S 2 9 S 7 F F .3 5 3
13 0 1 '2 d 7 9
7 ( i l, i : 2 ( ) 2
Secondary l.3 4 F 2 d ? 6 ( l
C ir , 1 1 l6 8 F 2 d 8 7 3
4 6 1 l'S 6 2 6 52SC2H 7
.S 2 S C 2 S 7 I8 4 | - 2 d 7 9 5 9 1 ,1 ,1 2 2 63SC289
7 6 6 l- 2 d l.3 l7 6 ( ) ll- 2 d l3 0 8
source 2A2_ C ,s 3 9 F 2 d 3 7 8 7 6 1 ,F I 9 7
C iC I 3 2 2 F S I2 3 2 C ir D C
(■,^SC2^ 99SC904
-_ J I) .3 t - '2 d ,i7 8 8 5 F 2 d 4 lI
.S 7 S C 'I4 2 ,^ C ir 7
? 9 4 l- '2 d 4 l) 7 l( ) 3 S C 2 0 4 7
l 6 , 1 R I '6 8 9 i i l8 3 F 2 d 8 l9
9 ( I S C '1 7 9 l 46FRD 34
9 F S 3 1 ,s
S 909 (il t o j;l C 'ir D C 233F2d70l
99SC906 9 l'S 7 4 . s C ir , 9
545F2d211 2 9 0 F 2 J3 5 8
1 ().^ S C 2 ()5 () 47FS568 C ir , D C l6 9 F 2 d 9 8 8
628F2d89
186[-SS(),-=i 7 4 9 F 2 d 7 ,3 l8 8 F 2 d 4 3 7 C ir 1
C'ir, r x ' 793F2d32l
2 4 ,3 | 'S 2 ,^ 4 3 6 7 F 2 d l3 8 3 885F2d984
Held 7 7 F 2 d 5 4 . ’' S 9 0 9 (a ) I7 3 F S 3 8 I
l()lF2d255 4 7 5 F S I» ,\ 8 6 S l 1 2.3 1 6 (IF S 8 0 6 C ir , 3
constitutional l07F2d264 C ir , ,A 9 .8 S I 1 6 4 7 C ir , 1 1 l8 3 F 2 d 9 3 7 C ir , I
489F2d10 4 1
I I F2d2.^3 3 ? F 2 d .^ 4 6 C ir . D C 672F2d848 545F2d338
6 4 6 F 2 d 7 1I
i47l-2d,S6,’' 4 9 F 2 d 8 (1 7 6 7 0 l'2 d 2 l 1 7 6 6 F 2 d l3 l4 Cir, 4
8 5 1F2d4
J9()F2d.^() ,s 4 F 2 d 2 l2 C ir . 1 S 9 0 9 (c) 5 6 I- 2 d 2 16
885F2d991
5W 2 J9 4I ,5 7 F 2 d 2 ,3 7 8 8 3 l '2 d 9 9 3 ,A 8 6 S t 1 2 3 1 C ir 5 942F2d819
,M 5 k k l2 l( ) .■=i7F2d263
C ir . 3 C ir , D C 322FS1232 I IF 3 d 2 5 0
W I7 F 2 ^ 8 I 68F2d56
1 8 3 l-'2 d 9 3 7 3 4 3 l'2 d 2 1 1 C ir 6
6()7F2dl)x(i I3 3 1 -2 d 3 ( )5 C ir , 2
2 4 IS 2 4 3 3 4 8 F 2 d l0 4 9 8 5 ()F 2 d 2 8 5
67(l^■2d2l(^ 2 0 4 l'2 d l7 3 769F2d67
7491-2d68 5 l9 F 2 d 5 3 6 C ir , 3 C ir , 1 C ir , 9 884F2d57
5.UF2dl().^l) \ 6 ( ) ll'2 d l3 0 7 6 ( ) ll'2 d l ^08 883F2d983 4 IF 2 d l.5 4 9 6 9 F 2 d l4 0 8
929l'2d7,^7 C 634F2d844 C ir , 6 C ir , 3 46F2d54l 2 4 4 F S I 12
17.n-S,« I 6 ,S I| - 2 d 2 8 8 8 3 0 l '2 d 2 9 4 183F2d937 5 6 7 F 2 d l3 8 5 329FS697
178
1. H ow to Use S h e p a rd ’s O nline
I f y o u are u s i n g l.exis to d o c ase r e s e a r c h a n d \'oii a re v i e w i n g a cas e ('ii t h e s c r e e n in
t h e t o p left to o l b ar , cli ck t h e Sh cp a n i's link. I h e n e x t p a g e will r e q u i r e y o u to c h o o s e
S h c p i i i d s’ for v a l i d a t i o n (KWIC]) o r S h e p a n i s’ for r e s e a r c h ( FUl . l . ) . M a k e y o u r c h o i c e
a n d click “( ' h e c k . ” T h e r e s u l t s are p r e s e n t e d in t h e n e xt sc r e e n.
For Example You are v ie w in g Young v. Wyoming, 695 P.2d 1055 (W yo. 1995), in
Lexis. C lick on the Shepardize icon. A s e p a ra te s c re e n w ill open,
d is p la y in g all of tfie S h e p a rd iz e d re s u lts (see E xhibit 5-21). H ere t h e r e is no
neg a tiv e (s u b s e q u e n t) h is to ry and no citin g re fe re n c e s (see th e gra y area of
th e s c re e n s h o t in Exhibit 5-21).
I f y o u h a ve t h e c i t a t i o n o f a case t ha t \' ou w a n t t o S h e p a r d i z e , log o n to Lexis a n d

cli ck o n t h e Shepard 's icon. T y p e in y o u r c i t a t i o n (148 N. . \ L 330) in t h e h l a n k field
p r o v i d e d a n d select Shep ard's tor v a l i d a t i o n ( KWT ( ' ). T h e r e s u l t s will he p r o \ i d e d in
p l a i n l an g u a g e , i n d i c a t i n g t h e h i s t o r y a n d / o r t r e a t m e n t ot t h e case, d e p e n d i n g u p o n
w h i c h o p t i o n y o u ch,)se. O n e o f t h e h e s t f e a t u r e s o f S h e p a r d i / i n g o n l i n e is t h a t il
\'c)U a re i n t e r e s t e d in a c c e s s i n g a r e t e r e n c e listed in t h e S h e p a r d i / e d result, y o u s i m
pl y cli ck o n it a n d a n e w w i n d o w o p e n s s h o w i n g t hat r e t e r e n c e in its e n t i r e t y (see
E x h i b i t 3-22).
For Example You w a n t to Shepardize a case to see w h a t other cases have cited
it and w h e th e r it is still good law. Log in to Lexis and clic k on the
Shepard'sl'mk. E n te rth e citation 148 N.M. 330 and s e l e c t " Shepard'sfor re s e a rc h "
(FULL) and then click on "C heck." The results s h o w there is one distinguishing case,
three cases following the decision, and tw o explaining the decision (see Exhibit 5-22).
E x h i b i t 5 - 2 1 Screen shot of results after using "Shepardize" fot a case. Cotiynght 2012 LeMsNexis, y .iivision of Reed
Elsevier Inc All Rights Reserved LexisNexis and the Knowledge Burst logo are registered tiadeinaiks of Reed Elseviei Properties Inc and
are used with the permission of LexisNexis.
L e x is
My t r x i s ' S«.>r<h » C.el 4 D ck u m v n t » sh«f> ^rd's% '■ M or^ ' . t*•• l ry Al-r*
1 b ■- ' ■1
S h e p a r d s • O Y o u n q v . St.it.> ,
O - :
Uniettmtcd
S u m m a ry
Q N o su b seq u en t h is to ry . Prio r h i« to rv availabi«*.

Citing
s ;-.* Cili-'g d * : s o ->5 .--•x no 3€ j q n e i 3
P R IO R H I* ;rO R Y ( I «rtifig r r f * r » n i^ ) Hk ).- C r.i.r H .itt.ry
C l HN <. ni^CI S IO N S < 'It m g d»<M>on« I
W YO M IN t; S d P H IM f C O U K t
C<t»d by
179
E x h i b i t 5 - 2 2 Screen shot of results: State v. Sims. 201Q-NMSC-027, 148 N.M. 330, 236 P.3d 642 Shepard's for
vslldation (KWIC). Copyright 2012 LexisNexis, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc All Rights Reserved LexisNexis and the Knowledge Burs'
logo are registered trademarks of Reed Elsevier Properties Inc. and are used with the permission of LexisNexis
L e x is
I J H islo rv A lrrts
B , *<WI-
s x r PAK H '-(IHMAKV
Unrv»lmevd *Sumniary KWR
Oi«linqu>sh»d (I I
P o f fr .e
'■•ut'a' *'>« .
L>iir»N«xr« H v s^ n o t« » .
She« M i t» rt ;t
• U B S( QUi NI A P P r I I A H H ISTO RY I r.t.iiq Itll» ................... I Api—lUt
l « t « r pro<»»dir>g
C ITIMC. liJC IS tO N S ( %. Ifin.j tj<*. m ons ]
NI W Hf X l( O S IJC N i Ml (C H iK I
FoO.>OTpdt>Y F« p i«in *d b v
2. Characteristics o f S h e p a rd ’s O nline
S h e p a r d ’s t o r X'alidation ( K W K ; ) — p r o \ idc.s a list o f s u b s e q u e n t l i i s t o r \ ’ a n d ci t i ng
r e f er e n c e s witli analysis, w h i c h m e a n s n e g a t i \ e h i s t o r \ ' ('iih'. I h i s is u s e d w h e n \ o u
o n l \ w a n t to d e t e r n i i n e if t h e l aw is still \ alid.
Shepard's l o r R e s e a r c h (l-'L'l.l.) — p r o s i d e s p r i o r a m i s u b s e q u e n t l i i s t o r \ ’ as well as

all c i t i n g re l er e n c e s , i n c l u d i n g s e c o n d a r s ' so u r ce s . Ihi s n i e t h o d p r o \ i d e s a list ol all
a u t h o r i t i e s r c l e r e n c i n g t h e law b e i n g S h e p a r d i z e d .
Shepartl's S u n i n i a r y p r o \ ides a n o v e r \ i e \ v o f t h e e n t i re r e p o r t at a gl a n c e . \ ' o u can

q u ic kl y see t h e si gnal i n d i c a t o r o f w h e t h e r t h e law is still \ a l i d a n d a l i st ing o f t h e
m u i i b e r ol r e l e r e n c e s t ha t h a \ ’c p o s i t i \ e , n e g a t i \ e , a n d n e u t r a l a n a h s i s , as well as
o t h e r c i t i n g r ef erences. If \ o u click an\- o f t h e i t ems, \' ou will b e t a k e n to t h e tirst i t em
in t h a t p o r t i o n o f t h e r e p o r t (see gr a y a re a s o f Lxhibi t 5-2 I a n d ICxhibit 5-22) .
N a \ i g a t i o n Bar M e n u ( l oc a t e d at t h e b o t t o m r i g h t o f t h e r esults p a g e ) — a l l o w s y o u to
j u m p to p a r t i c u l a r j u r i s d i c t i o n s o r s o u r c e s , s u c h as a p a r t i c u l a r c i r c u i t ( 1 0 t h C i r c u i t )
o r p a r t i c u l a r s o u r c e ( A. L. R. A n n o t a t i o n ) (see li xhibi t 5-21 a n d L x h i b i t 5-22) .
S h e p a r d ’s A l e r t s — a l l ows y o u t o set r e g u l ar l y s c h e d u l e d u p d a t e s f o r c e r t a i n laws. II

\' ou set a n alert, y o u will b e e - m a i l e d o n t h e s c h e d u l e \' ou c h o o s e a s t o w h e t h e r t h e r e
h a s b e e n a c h a n g e in t h e va l i di t y o f t h e law. I h i s is p a r t i c u l a r k h e l p f u l w h e n y o u are
u s i n g a c a s e f r o m a n i n t e r m e d i a t e a p pe l l at e c o u r t t hat y o u k n o w still faces re\ ie\v by
the highest court.
CAi st oni i z a t i on— I h e r e a r e n u m e r o u s w a y s to c u s t o m i z e t h e r e p o r t , l h e “D i s p l ay

O p t i o n s " li nk a n d t h e “ P r e f e r e n c e s ” l i nk a re iust a few w a y s to c u s t o m i z e t h e a p p e a r
a n c e o f a r ep o r t . I h e r e is a t u t or i al l i nk that will g u i d e y o u t h r o u g h u s e o f e a c h o f t h e
m e t h o d s ot c u s t o m i z a t i o n .
180
T abl e ol A u t h o r i t i e s — a n a h / c s t h e c a se s c i t ed by a ca se vo u a re r e l y i n g o n . T h e Table
o f A u t h o r i t i e s f e a t ur e n ot o n l y s h o w s t h e c ase s \ ' o u r c a s e rel ied u p o n , b u t al s o t he
s t at u s ol’t h o s e cases. This a l l o ws y o u to d i s c i t ver if t h e f o u n d a t i o n u p o n w h i c h \ o u r
c a s e rests is w e a k e n e d in a n \ ’ waw w h i c h ult ii nateK' m a y w e a k e n \ ' o u r case.
3. S h e p a r d ’s Signals
Red Stop Sign. W a r n s t h a t thei'e is si g n i l i c a n t negat i \ ' e histor\- o r t r e a t m e n t , s u c h as
re\ ' ersal o f t h e ca se o n at least o n e p o i n t o f l a w .
Yellow Triangle. W a r n s ol s o m e n e g a t i \ e h i s t o r \ ' o r t r e a t m e n t , s u c h as b e i n g d i s t i n

g u i s h e d t r o m a n o t h e r c a se (see lixhibit 3-22).
(ireen I’Ui.s. R e \ eals p o s i t u ' e histor\-, s u c h as b e i n g t o l l o we d b\- a n o t h e r case.
Letter “Q ” in Orange Square. W a r n s t ha t t h e \ al i di t y o f t h e ca s e h a s b e e n q u e s

t i o n e d b\- a n o t h e r j u r i s d i c t i o n .
Letter “A” in Blue Circle. R e \ e a l s tliat t h e c a s e h a s b e e n a n a l y z e d b\' a n o t h e r case in

a neutral manner.
Letter “I ” in Blue Circle. I n d i ca t e s o t h e r s o u r c e s h a v e r e f e r r e d t o \ o u r case.
Red Fxclaniation Point. W a r n s t h a t t h e r e is a c a s e t ha t n e g a t i \ e l y i n t e r p r e t s a

st atut e.
C. O th er Lexis Validation Products

T h e r e a r e s ever al o t h e r t ool s t h at c o m p l e m e n t Lexis' Slicp<ird's s e r \ ice. lhe\- in cl u d e :
BriefClieck. Ibi s is a s e p a r a t e s o t t w a r e p r o g r a m w h i c h will s c a n y o u r d o c u m e n t

( n i e n i o r a n d i n n , b r i e f etc.) a n d coll ect c i t a t i o n s f r o m it aut omat i cal K' . Hach author it }'
in v' our d o c u m e n t is S h e p a r d i z e d u s i n g e i t h e r t h e “ ['ULI.” o r “ K W I C ” o p t i o n s , a n d
res ul t s c a n b e e i t h e r di s p l a y e d o n t h e s c r e e n o r p r i n t e d o ut in a s e p a r a t e d o c u m e n t .
S h e p a n i ’s Link. Thi s is a n o t h e r s o l t w a r e a p p l i c a t i o n w h i c h i d e n t i t i es c i t a t i on s in a
d o c u m e n t . T h i s tool a d d s Sliepiinl's s i gna l s so t h a t \ ’o u c a n see w h e t h e r t h e r e is an\'
w e a k a u t h o r i t ) - in \ ' o u r i l o c u m e n t .
FullAuthority. This tool will c r e a t e a t a bl e o f a u t h o r i t i e s for \ ' o u r d o c u m e n t . This

is a n a l t e r n a t i v e to m a n u a l k c r e a t i n g a t ab l e o f a u t h o r i t i e s u s i n g a w o r d p r o c e s s i n g
p r o g r a m ; h o w e \ e r , yo u m u s t c ar e f u l l y c h e c k t h e a cc u r a c \ - o f t h e t abl e b e f o r e s u b n i i t -
t i n g an)- d o c u m e n t to \ ' o u r s u pe i ' \' is i ng a t t or n e \ - o r to t h e c o u r t s.
D. Using W e s tla w ’s KeyCite

1. H ow to KeyCite Cases
K e \ - ( j t e is W' es t l aw’s o n l i n e citator. WTien u s i n g W e s t i a w y o u will u se Ke\'C'ite to \-alidate a n d
u p d a t e \ o u r r e s e a r c h . KeyClite is obv iously a d i f f e r e n t c i t a t o r t h a n S h e p i w d s’ . b u t y o u will fi nd
t h e y a r e s i m i l a r in t h e w a y s t h e v a re m o s t o f t e n u s e d . K e \ C i t i n g cases, s t a t u t e s, a n d o t h e r
p n m a r \ - s o u r c e s o f l a w is s i m i l a r to S h e p a r d i z i n g t h o s e so u r c es. B e c a u s e a r e s e a r c h e r m o r e
f r e q u e n t l y KeyCTtes c a s e ci t a t i on s , t he p ro c e s s o f Ke\ C i t i n g in t ha t c o n t e x t is d i s c u s s e d here.
If \ ' o u a r e u s i n g W e s t i a w to d o a s ea r ch a n d \-ou a re v i e w i n g a c a se o n t h e s c r e e n ,
c l i c k i n g oil t h e Ke\-(Tte si gnal for t h e c as e will t a k e yo u t o t h e Ke\ ' (' it e results. Alter-
nativeb' , t r o m t h e left m a r g i n y o u c a n c h o o s e o n e ot t h e Ke y ( Tt e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f
Lull Mistor\' , D i r e c t H i s t or \ ' ( ( i r a p h i c a l R e \ ’iew), o r C i t i n g R e f e r e n c e s to go d i r e c t h '
to p a r t i c u l a r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ol KevCTte.
181
For Example You do a s e a rc h to r c a s e s In N e w M e x ic o involving w h e t h e r a

person w a s in a c tu a l phy s ica l c o n tro l of a v e h ic le fo r purp o s e s of
being c o n v ic te d of driving w h ile intoxicated. Your results lead you to State v. Sims,
2 0 1 0 -N M S C -0 2 7 ,148 N.IVl. 330,236 P.3d 642. You see a y e llo w flag in the to p left of
the case; w h e n you clici< on it, you are taken to KeyCite and the case th a t cau s e d
the y e llo w flag signal, State \j . Cotton, is presented (see Exhibit 5-23). If you w a n t t o
v ie w the Full Flistory or D ire c t Flistory, you can c lic k eith e r icon in the left m a rgin
I f \ ( ) u h a \ e t h e c i t at i on o f a ca.se tliat y ou w a n t to K e \ C j t e , log o n to W e s t l a w a n d

click t h e Ke\ ' Cj t e i c o n in t h e t o p t ool bar. l y p e in \ ' ou r c it at i on ( 1 4 8 X . M . 3 30) a n d
click “(io. ” ' I h e res ul t s will b e p r o \ i ded. It \' ou ar e i n t e r e s t e d in acce.ssiiig an\' c as e o r
r e f e r e n c e listed, si niph- click o n it; a n e w w i n d o w will o p e n , s h o w i n g t h e r e t e r e n c e
in its entirety.
2. H ow to KeyCite Statutes, Constitutions, and O ther Enacted Law

lust as \(Hi m u s t s’a l i da t e case law, y o u m u s t v a l i d a t e a n y o t h e r p r i m a r \ ' s o u r c e o f l a w , s u c h
as s t at u t e s, c o n s t i t u t i o n a l p r i n' is i on s , o r a d m i n i s t r a t i \ ' e r e g u l at i on s . I h e p r o c e s s ol Ke\ ( ' i t i n g
t h e s e o t h e r s o u r c e s o t ' l a w is a l m o s t i d en t i c a l to t h a t I'or K e \ ( ' i t i n g c a s e law.
I'o K e y C j t e a s t at u t e , cli ck o n tiie K e y Ci t e i con in t h e t o p t o o l ba r . '1 y p e in \ ’o u r c i t a t i o n
( N'M Stat. A n n . 66-S-102) a n d cli ck “( i o . ” Il \' ou a r e l oi )ki ng at a s t a t u t e o n t h e s cr ee n as t h e
r e s u l t o f a s ea r ch , e i t h e r use t h e K e y C i t e b o x to t h e left o l ' t h e s cr ee n o r click o n t h e si gnal
f or t h e st atut e.
Ke \ ’C i t e s i gna l s for statLites in c l u d e;
A rcilJliig w a r n s that a s t a t u t e has b e e n a m e n d e d , r e p e a l ed , o r held u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l .
A ycUowJJiig w a r n s t h a t t h e r e is s o m e ii e ga t i se history, s u c h as case kus' l i m i t i n g t h e

a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e s t a t u t e o r p e n d i n g legislation.
A i n d i ca t e s t h a t o t h e r s o u r c e s h a v e cit ed y o u r st atut e.
E x h ib it 5 -2 3 Scre e n shot of KeyCite Results After Clicking on a Yellow Flag Signal in a Case. R e p rin te d w ith
p e r-'irsis o n o f T h o n is o n R e u t e rs
ptMOiNnT Ktfctrf nMcraar RtrNuMiM arriKA^

WestlawL COUKTOOCt FOMWINOfli P C O ftf E X W IT C E N T S) COURT W ftvlm A C «« AtMlC«nttr R M av c tiT ral
S t o t p V . S ia is
Find ciW tion ta

\> S o m e n p g .it iv “ h K t o f . b u t n o t o v e r r u le d Kc\<lit Mislorv
^ c j i i H is to ry
S h o v M o q N '- q .it iv « T r.-,itm < » n t O n l,
! ly h K Ji V - r t . SiS
N p q d tiv e C iliiiq R e f e r e n c e s (U S .A .)
M a/VtCf -.Vith ,f.; A I .-1
r " ... .
f u l l I e * 1 OocufTM'fit
• asePutJinH S ta tp V C o tto n , IS O f J M 58 3 ? 6 3 P J d Q ? S . 2 0 1 1 N M f A 0 Q 6 'N M A p p )u l 18 2011 .N O 3 0 .O N ♦ HN
(P I d )
P e titk > n \ B rie fs Ik M Jinqs
ResuluPtiB VlcwJ^'!R>' utf - - r . - 5 -* c -- •

A m .Ju r.2 d : A utom obiles and H ig h w a y Traffic
1. A k o h t X Of O f u a R e l a t v d O f f e r n - e s . R e q m s i t t f - o f
lmßi!I£ilByyinaOe!ins5§J^hî Cqnsi!tytes_.Q«!y?ixi^'
'Q p e f a b n g . - or B e m g in A ct u a l P h y s i cal C o n t r o t o f
M o t o r V e h i dt '
A m .Ju r.2 d : Aulom obH es and H ig h w a y T ra ffk

2^PfvinnWWsIniQXKitLed.OLUndeMnfluencpQfUQ»w
Qi-QlCUflLJniienef^l. iienerallv
A m .Jur. Trials
3. D e f e n s e o n C h a r g e s o f P r i v m a W M q i n t P i K d l e d
182
3. Characteristics o f KeyCite
Al t l i oi i gh d i s c u s s e d h e r e in r e t e r e n e e to eases, Ke\ ( Cite tor othei ' s o u i e e s ol law lias t h e s a m e
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s as t or Ke\ (Citing eases:
Full history. l ^ i 'o N i d e s a lull histor\ - ot t h e K e \ C j t e d ease, liiis i n c l u d e s d ir ec t his-

tor\', c i t i n g r e t er e n c e s , a n d o t h e r m a t e r i a l s s u c h as c o u r t d o e u n i e n t s t h a t i n c l u d e
c i t a t i o n s to t h e ca se o r t h e bri efs filed in rel at i on to that p a r t i c u l a r case.
(iraphical display of direct history. S h o w s in a l l o w c h a r t t he p r o g r e s s i o n ot t h e ca s e

f r o m t rial t h r o u g h t h e a p p e l l at e c o u r l s\ st em.
(Citing references. iU'\-eals o t h e r s o u r c e s t h a t h a \ e c it ed tiie case. I h i s in c l u d e s le\'els

o f t r e a t m e n t s u c h as negat i \ ' e t r e a t m e n t , p o s i t i v e t r e a t m e n t , a n d s e c o n d a r ) - s o u r c e s
t hat li a\’c ret’e r e n c e d l h e c ase (see f.xhibit ,5-24).
Depth of treatment stars, l h e list ot c i t i n g r e t e r e n c e s i n c l ud e s g r e e n st ars to i n d i

cat e t h e le\'el o f t r e a t m e n t (see Fxhi bi t .5-2 }).
For Example Click on the KeyCite link in the top to o lb a r menu. Enter 148 N.M . 330
{State 1/. Sims) and click "G o." N ext c lic k "Citing R e fe re n c e s " in the
left n a v ig a tio n bar. You w ill see th a t the c ase th a t is DistlnguishedUom State v.
5 / m s t h o r o u g h ly e x a m in e s Sims b e c a u s e th e re are fo u r s tars (see Exhibit 5-24).
l.imit KeyCCite Display. L'se t h e l i m i t Ke\(Cile Displ a\' icon at t h e b o t t o m left o f t h e

res ul t s p ag e to n a r r o w t h e results by i l o c u n i e n t t ype, date, j u r i s d i c t i o n , h e a d n o t e ,
d e p t h o f t r e a t m e n l , a n d so on.
Quotation marks. II q u o t a t i o n m a r k s a re i n c l u d e d in a listing, t h e c a s e o r t t l h e r

s o u r c e i n c l u d e s d i r e c t q u o t e s t r o m t h e Ke\(Cite(.i case (see ICxhibit 5 2-4).
E x h ib it 5 -2 4 Screen Shot of Results From Using KeyCite "Citing R eferen ces" R e p n n t e d w ith p e rm is is o n o f T h o m
s o n R e u te rs.
fm t m n i N rrcTTi om ecT otir K rrN U M M t a n iiA F

Wéstlawt COURT o o c t FOm iFIN O« PtO PLEM A P E X P B tT C E N T » COUNT M RC Preference« Alen Center iỉeMvcn Tnt
V. Sim s
N p q rth v e í:<»st*s (U .S .A .)
r " '
• Iting Oistinọuistiod b y
•• ■- - . ■íK\^09f> 0 0 6 - N
I ull I*'X l !><>( u n io ii t
P o s itiv e C d sf-s ( u . s A )
tviitioiis, K f ili nq s
R esultsPlus •• ‘IMS’IO SÓ 0 3 6 - NM Jun : 4 2010, NO 31,092 « HN:

.^,8.1 I (f> Ui )
A n ).lu r.2 d : A u to m o b iies a n d H ig h w ay Traffic
l.A k g h f - ; !.■<.•. , R»;qui-. t-
V . • • .t- ♦ » Ci tP d
Q pụidli.'m. .fl A ttJJl.P 'i; .
'c '.ic- " . l 2010-NMSC 033, 033 N.M Jun :4 . 2010; : NO. 31,785. «
■;4 HN: 3 ,6 ,1 0 ( P .3 d )
A m .> u r.7 d : A u to m o b iles a n d H ig h w ay Trdffic
- • . . y ii . ’ i , .. i-t.-
or jr. ij'-. • • ■ . '3 t. T 3. , r ' C r ,nd I : - t r M, t „ f . .>hi p 3đ 7j:. ■'•ì: 14Ọ n m 51 8 , S 2 3 . : o n NM CA -0 3 1 . 031
Ol' NO ”
A r n .ỉu r. Iriđls
U-.I'
183
For Example The e ntry tor State v. Cotton, w h ic h d is tin g u is h e d itself fro m Sims,
has purple q u o ta tio n m ark s in the listing. Cotton mW have d ir e c t
q u o ta tio n s fro m Sims in the opinion (see Exhibit 5-24).
H e a d n o t e r e f e r e n c e s . R e f e r e n c e s to speci ti c h e a d n o t e s f r o m S im s a r e n o t e d . H N : 2,
3, 13 ( P. 3d) i n d i c a te s that C.ottoii d i s c u ss e s tlie p o i n t ot la w re l at e d to h e a d n o t e s 2 , 3 ,
a n d 13 in S i i m (see Hxhibit 5-24).
K e y C i t e a l e r t . K ey Cj t e A l er t lets yo u set r e g u l ar l y s c h e d u l e d a le r t s f o r c e r t a i n laws.

I f \ (Hi set u p a n alert, y o u will b e e - m a i l e d o n t h e s c h e d u l e y o u c h o o s e w h e n t h e r e
h a s b e e n an\- c h a n g e to t h e validit\- o f t h e l aw o r if t h e r e a r e n e w c i t i n g re f e r ences.
T a b l e o f a u t h o r i t i e s . '1 his tool a n a l y z e s t h e c a s e s c i t ed by t h e c a s e y o u a r e Ke y Ci t i ng .

Ihi s a l l ows \ ’o u to d e t e r m i n e if t h e law is w e a k e n e d b y s u b s e q u e n t c a s e s o r o t h e r
laws.
4. KeyCite Signals
R e d flag. W a r n s t h a t t h e r e is si gni fi cant n e g a t i ve hist ory, s u c h as r ever sal o r t h e case
b e i n g ON’e r r u l e d o n at least o n e p o i n t o f l aw.
Yel l ow flag. W a r n s o f s o m e ne g a t i ve h i s t o r y o r t r e a t m e n t , s u c h as b e i n g d i s t i n
g u i s h e d f r o m a n o t h e r lat er case.
( i r e e n “ C^.” I n d i ca t e s t ha t t h e ca se h as b e e n ci t e d by s o m e o t h e r s o u r c e s , b u t reveal s
n o n e g a t i \ e c i t i n g r ef er e n c e s a n d n o d i r e c t history.
B l u e “ H.” R e \ e a l s t h a t t h e s o u r c e b e i n g K e y Ci t e d h a s s o m e history. T h e h i s t o r y ca n
b e d i r e c t , s u c h as c e r t i o r a r i b e i n g g r a n t e d ; o r i n d i r e c t , s u c h as a n o t h e r c a s e f u r t h e r
e x p l a i n i n g t h e s our ce .
VII. RESEARCH USING CITATORS

Slu 'pa nl's ( j h U i o n i a n d Ke\ ' (' it e a i e u s e d for t w o p u r p o s e s :
1. To d e t e r m i n e if t h e a u t h o r i t \ - v o u h a \ e l o c a t e d is still “g o o d law.” I h i s is t h e m o s t
i m p o r t a n t u se ot a citator.
2. To l oca t e ca se law o r s e c o n d a r } ’ s o u r c e s t h a t h a v e d i s c u s s e d p r i m a r y a u t h o r i t y
b e i n g r e s e a rc h e d . Hven t h o u g h a c o u r t o p i n i o n h a s n o t b e e n r e v e r s e d , it is i m p o r
t a n t to d e t e r m i n e h o w o t h e r c o u r t s h a ve a n a l y z e d it.
For Example If later courts have uniform ly c riticized the holding and reasoning
of a c o u rt opinion, or it has been lim ited in som e w a y, you m ay
not w a n t to rely on it.
Y o u m a y also w i s h to l oc a t e a d d i t i o n a l a u t h o r i t y t o s u p p o r t a n d a d d w'eight to t h e c a s e
b e i n g r el i ed t)n. It is a lso p o s s i b l e t h a t t h e r e a s o n i n g in t h e ca se b e i n g r e s e a r c h e d is n o t clear,
a n d t ) t h e r ca se s o r s e c o n d a r y a u t h o r i t y a r e necessar\- to h e l p clar if y it.
A. Research Using Shepard’s Citations

I h e s t e p s p r e s e n t e d h e r e a re g u i d e l i n e s for u s i n g S lic p a n fs C ita tio n s t o c o n d u c t r e s e ar ch.
184
1. Select the appropriate Shepard’s citator (in print) or select Ihe Shepanl’s link in
l exis (online).
2. Locate and review the entry for the authority being Shepardized (in print) or
review the results of an electronically Shepardized authority (online). K e e p the
t o l l o w i n g in m i n d :
a, Cârehilly re \ iew t h e h i s t o r y t o r s u b s e q u e n t cases o r legislati\ e a c t i o n s th a t ha\ e

r e x e r s e d , o \ ' e r t u r n e d , r e p e a l e d, a m e n d e d , m o d i f i e d , o r in a n \ w a y a t l e c t e d t he
a u t h o r i t v b e i n g S h e p a r d i z e d . A n v s u c h a c t i o n m a y m e a n t ha t t h e a u t h o r i t x i.s
n o l o n g e r reliable; t h a t is, it is n o l o n g e r “g o o d law."
b. Câretully r e v i ew t h e t r e a t m e n t o f t h e a u t h o r i t \ ' in s u b s e q u e n t c o u r t o p i n i o n s .
H\-en t h o u g h t h e a u t h o r i t ) - b e i n g S h e p a r d i z e d m a \ ' n ot h a \ ' e b e e n rex erseil,
r e p e a l e d , a n d so o n , r e l i a n c e o n it ma\- b e p r o b l e m a t i c if it h a s receiv e d an\'
n e g a t i \ ’e t r e a t m e n t b y t h e c o u r t s.
For Example If m a n y of th e c ita tio n s to th e S h e p a rd iz e d c a s e inv olve

n e g a tiv e letters, s u c h as c ( c r itic iz e d ) o r Q (q u e s tio n e d ), it
m ay ind ic a te th a t th e case, although not o v e rru le d or r e v e rs e d , is not being
tre a te d as good a u th o r ity by s u b s e q u e n t courts.
^' ou m u s t r ea d t he c ase s th a t t r eat t h e S h e p a r d i z e d case n e g a t i \ ely. It is poss i bl e

t h a t N’o u r S h e p a r d i z e d case is b e i n g c ri t i ci z e d t o r t h e t r e a t m e n t ot a n issue dit
t e r e n t t r o m t h e o n e y o u a r e r e s e a r c h i n g . l-\)r i ns t a n c e , y o u m a y be r e s e a r c h i n g
a n e g l i g e n c e issue r a i se d in t h e c a s e b e i n g S he p a r t l i ze d , w h e r e a s t h e n e g a t i \ e
t r e a t m e n t in tiie s u b s e q u e n t cases i n \ ’ol\ es a dif ferent issue s u c h as a n i m p r o p e r
jury instruction.
It \' ou a r e c o n c e r n e d w i t h o n e issue in t h e S h e p a r d i z e d case, it m a \ o n l \ be

n e c e s s a r y t o re\' iew t h o s e ci t ed c a se s a d d r e s s i n g t h at s a m e issue.
For Example A s s u m e you are re s e a rc h in g h e a d n o te 7 of the c a s e being

S h e p a rd iz e d . Your re s e a r c h w o u ld fo c u s on th o s e c ite d
c a s e s a d d re s s in g h e a d n o te 7, th a t is, c a s e s w ith th e rais ed 7 fo llo w in g
th e re p o r te r nam e (e.g., 779P2d'314).
d. If a case d o e s n o t a p p e a r in a Shepard's v o l u m e (in p r i n t ) , o r t h e i n q u i r y res ul t s

st a t e " N o Result s T o u n d , ” it m a y m e a n t ha t n o c o u r t o p i n i o n h a s discLissetl
y o u r case. A l w a y s c h e c k t h e c i t a t i o n to b e s u r e it is c o rr ec t .
3. Update your research (in print only). C h e c k t h e s u p p l e m e n t a r \ p a m p h l e t s aiul

a d \ ' a n c e s h e e t s a n d p e r f o r m t h e r e s e a r c h s t e p s p r e v i ou s l y m e n t i o n e d .
B. Research Using KeyCite

I h e s t eps p r e s e n t e d h e r e a re g u i d e h n e s for u s i n g K e y Ci t e to c o n d u c t r e s ea r c h .
1. Once you have identified a case, statute, or other pritnary source oflaw that you
will rely upon in your document, click the KeyCite icon.
2. Enter the citation and click “Go.” Choose Citing References in the left margin to
review the results.
185
a. Re\'ie\v t h e results t o r s u b s e q u e n t eases o r legislative a c t i o n s t h a t ha\-e r ever s ed,

(u e r t u r n e d , r ep e a l ed , a m e n d e d , m o d i f i e d , o r in a n y \va\' af f ec t e d t h e autliorit}'
bei i i g Ke\'CCited. An\- s u c h a c t i o n ma\ - m e a n t h a t t h e a u t h o r i t ) ' is n o l o n g e r
reliable; t ha t is, it is n o l o n g e r “g o o d law.
b. Re \ ' ie w t h e positix'c a n d n e g a t i v e t r e a t m e n t o f ' t h e a u t h o r i t ) ' in s u b s e q u e n t

c o u r t o p i n i o n s , lix'en t h o u g h t h e a u t h o r i t ) ' beii ig Ke)’CCiteci ma ) ' ha v e n o t b e e n
r e \ e r s e d , repe a l e d, a n d so o n , re l i ance o n it ma \ ' be p r o b l e m a t i c it it h a s recei ved
an)' i i egati ve treati' iient b\' t h e c o u r t s.
VIII. KEY POINTS CHECKLIST: Secondary Authority

I h e first s t e p of' legal r es e a r c h is to loc a t e prin' iar)' a u t h o r i t y ( t he law), b e c a u s e c o u r t s
l o o k to p r i m a r y a u t h o r i t ) ' first w h e n resoK i ng legal probl eii is. S e c o ri d a r y a u t h o r i t y
is u s e d w h e n t h e r e is n o prii'i'iar\' a u t h o r i t ) ' o n a t o p i c in a j u r i s d i c t i o n , in s u p p o r t of
t h e e.xisting p r i m a r ) ' a uthor it )' , to h e l p )'ou u n d e r s t a n d t h e p r i m a r ) ’ a uthor it )' , o r to
l ocat e c o u r t o p i n i o n s a n d o t h e r r es e a r c h s o u r c e s i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e p r i m a r y a uthor it )' .
N o n e o f ' t h e r es e a r c h s o u r c e s d i s c u s s e d in thi s c h a p t e r are p r i m a r y a u t h o r i t ) ( t he

law). .A c o u r t ma \ ' refer to a n d reh' o n t h e s e c o n d a r ) ' a u t h o r i t i e s m e n t i o n e d in thi s
c h a p t e r , b u t it is iiot b o u n d to f'ollow' t h e m .
Legal e i i c y c l o p e d i a s a n d t r e at i ses are p r i m a r i h ' u s e d to o b t a i n a f ami l i a r i t y w i t h or

u n d e r s t a n d i n g of a specific a r e a of t h e law.
L'se a n A I.R it )'ou a r e l o o k i n g l o r a c o m p r e h e n s i \ e a n a h sis a n d s) n t h e s i s of cases
f r oni ever) ' i m' is d i ct i on o n specitic legal issues.
Re t e r to a digest whei'i )'ou n e e d to l oca t e case s t h a t h a v e a d d r e s s e d a specific legal

q u e s t i o n o r w h e n y o u a h e a d ) h a \ e a ca se a n d wi s h to l oc a t e o t h e r ca se s t ha t a d d r e s s
t h e s a n i e legal q u e st i o n ( s ) .
.■\lwa)'s \ a l i d a t e anti u p d a t e t h e p r i m a r ) ' a u t h o r i t ) ' )'ou are r e K i n g o n , b)' usiiig

S lii'piin l’s (ir Ke\'(Cite, to et'isute t ha t t h e a u t h o r i t y h a s n o t b e e n o \ e r l u n i e d , re xe r s c d,
repeal eil , o r a m e n d e d .
W i t h all re s e a rc h so u r c e s , )'ou m u s t c h e c k t h e p o c k e t p a rts , SLipplements, o r w h a t
e v e r is u s e d to u p d a t e t h e s o u r c e to e n s u r e t h a t )'om' r e s e a r c h is c u r r e n t .
IX. APPLICATION
I h i s sectioii e x p l o r es t h e a v e n u e s of re s e a r c h Mel i ss a iiiay p u i s u e to lear n a b o u t t he t o r t law of
batter)'. Mel i ss a c o u l d b e g i n h e r s e a r c h by c o n s u l t i n g a legal e n c y c l o p e d i a , s u c h as A n ic ric iin
l i i r i i p n i d c i u c Sccoiiil o r (,'()/'/)//>' ¡iirii ScciiiiiiiiDi, at t h e local l aw library. B)’ c o n s u l t i n g t he
( i e n e r a l I n d ex , s h e w o u l d b e d i r e c t e d to t h e \ ' o l u m e t ha t a d d r e s s e s ass aul t a n d battery. If s h e
know' s that t he t opi c she is l o o k i n g f'or is “assault a n d battery,” she c a n go d i r ec t h ' to t h e v o l u m e s
o n t h e s h e l f I h e s p i n e o f e ac h b o o k will i n d i ca t e t h e r a n g e o f c o \ e r a g e o f t h e v o l u m e , s u c h as
“As s au l t a n d Bat t e r y to A t t a c h m e n t a n d ( l a r n i s h m e n t . ” She w o u l d pull t h e a p p r o p r i a t e v o l u m e
a n d r e a d a b o u t ass aul t a n d batter)', l h e e n c y c l o p e d i a will give h e r a g e n e r a l overvi ew' o f t h e
topic. She c an also access .Am erican J u r i i p n u l c n a ’ S tx o iu i t h r o u g h b o t h Westlaw' a n d LexisNexis.
If Mel i s s a w a n t s a m o r e i n - d e p t h s u m m a r ) ' o r an a l y s i s o f t h e law o f civil ass aul t a n d b a t
ter)', s h e c o u l d c o n s u l t a t r e a t i se s u c h as P rosser a m i K c c lo n on th e L a w o f Torts o r I h e L a w of
Torts b\' D o b b s , She w o u l d l o c a t e t h e s e b o o k s b)' g ( ' in g to t h e local law l i b r a r y a n d a s k i n g for
t h e t r e a t i se s e ct i on. ' I h e t r ea t i se s a r e u s u a l h ' a r r a r i g e d a l p h a b e t i c a l h ' b)' topi c. ' I h e r e f o r e , t h e
t o r t tr ea t i se s will b e s h e h ' e d t o g e t h e r . Me l i ss a is i n t e r e s t e d in a ss a u l t a n d bat t e r ) ' in s i t u a t i o n s
186
s u l H as liors, u i i c r c t h e a t t a c k t o o k placo in a d a t e s i tu a t i o n . T h e t r ea t i se will p r o \ i dc a d i s c u s

s i o n ol t he t opi c in g r e a t e r a n a l y t i c al detai l t h a n a n cn c \ ' c l o p e d i a . it sh e h a s ac c e ss to W’e s t l a w
o r I.exisN'exis, she c o u l d c h e c k to see if a t or t t r e a t i se is available.
I' or a m o r e d e t a i l e d analysis ot the subi ect specifically r e g a r d i n g d a t e si t uat i ons, sh e c o u l d
l o o k t o r a n M R a n n o t a t i o n . If s h e w e r e to loca t e a n a n n o t a t i o n t h a t a d d r e s s e s t h e q u e s t i o n in
a s i t u a t i o n s i m i l a r to he r s , it will p r o \ ’ide, in o n e place, a c o m p r e h e n s i v e a n a k s i s o f t h e issue,
r e f e r e n c es to a n d s i m i n i a r i e s o f t h e case law o n p o i n t , a n d re f er e n c e s to o t h e r re s e a r c h so ur c e s .
If Me l i ss a is u n a b l e to l o c a t e s u c h a n a n n o t a t i o n , s h e c m i l d r e f er to a W'est di g e s t a n d
l o o k u n d e r t he t opi c “ass aul t a n d battei'\-." I h e r e sh e w o u l d locat e s u m m a r i e s o f specific c o u r t
o p i n i o n s t ha t di s cu s s a s s a u l t s a n d b a t t er i es t h a t t o o k pl a c e d u r i n g a dat e. She w o u l d t h e n
select t h e c ase o r case s m o s t f a c t u a l K’ s i m i l a r to h e r s i t u a t i o n a n d r e a d h o w t h e l aw appl i es.
I h r o u g h t h e s e s o u r c e s , Me l i s s a c o u l d e x p l o r e t h e s u b j ec t in detai l a n d d e t e r m i n e wTiat
t h e officer m e a n t w h e n h e s a i d s h e c o u l d file a b a t t e r \ ' t o r t cl ai m. She c o u l d a lso d e t e r m i n e
w h a t r e m e d i e s a re a \ ’ai l abl e t o her.
Sum m ary
T h e foc us of' t his c h a p t e r is sec o n d a r ) - authorit )' , t ha t is, so u r c e s r e g a r d i n g law that a c o u r t m a \ '
rel)' o n b ut t ha t are riot t h e m s e h ’es t h e law, t hat is, not p r i m a r y authorit )' . S e c o n d a r ) ' a u t h o r i t ) '
c o ns i s t s o f legal r e s e a r c h s o u r c e s that suni niari /. e, c o m p i l e , e x p l ai n , c o n m i e n t o n , i nt e r p re t , o r
in s o m e o t h e r wa\' a d d r e s s t h e law. S e c o n d a r y au t h o r i t ) ' is u s e d t o r several p u r p o s e s , i n c l ud i n g :
I'o o b t a i n a b a c k g r c u i n d o r o\' erall u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f a specific a r e a o f t h e law. Legal

encN'clopedias, treati ses, a n d p e r i o d i c a l s are usef ul for t h e s e p u r p o s e s .
I'o loc at e p r i m a r ) ' a u t h o r i t y ( t h e law) o n a q u e s t i o n b e i n g r e s e a r c h e d . A iu c ric iv i l.a w

R c p o r tf ( A I.R ) a n d d i g e s t s a re p a r t i c u l a r h ' u sef ul for thi s p u r p o s e .
I'o be relied u p o n b) t h e coui' t w h e n r e ac l i i n g a d e c i s i o n . ' Ihis usuall)' o c c u r s o n h '
w h e n t h e r e is n o p i ' ima r \ ' a uthor it x' g o \ e r n i n g a legal q u e s t i o n , o r w h e n it is u n c l e a r
h o w t h e p r i m a r ) ' a u t h o r i t ) ' a ppl i es to t h e q u e s t i o n at h a n d .
T h e i e a r e li teralh' h u n d r e d s of s e c o n d a r v s o u r c e s . Ihi s c h a p t e r c o v e r s t h o s e s e c o n d a r y
s o u r c e s t ha t p r o \ i d e t h e r e s e a r c h e r w i t h t r e a t m e n t o f t h e law t hat r a n g e s f r oni t h e g e n e r a l to
t h e specific. I h e s e s o u r c e s a r e legal e i i c ) c l o p e d i a s a m i treatises.
Legal e n c ) ' c l o p e d i a s p r o \ ide a n o \ ' e r \ iew o f all t h e a r e a s o f knv. Ihe)' d o n o t p r o v i d e
i n - d e p t h c i n e r a g e , a n d the)' a r e s i m i l a r to o t h e r e n c \ ' c l o p e d i a s in t h e i r g e n e r a l t r e a t m e n t
of topi cs.
Treatises a r e s i ng l e \ ' o l u m e o r m u l t i \ ' o l u m e texts tha t prcn ide a c o m p r e h e n s i v e a n a l y s i s
o f a siiigle a r e a of l aw s u c h as t o r t s o r c r i m i n a l law. W h e r e a s a legal e n c ) ' c l o p e d i a p r e s e n t s
a b r o a d o v er \ ' i e w o f aii a r e a of law, a t r e a t i se p r o v i d e s a n i n - d e p t h d i s c u s s i o n a n d e x p l a i ns ,
a n ah ' z e s , a n d cri t i ci z e s t h e law.
I hi s c h a p t e r also f o c u s e s o n s o u r c e s t h a t h e l p a r e s e a r c h e r l oc a t e a n d a n a l y z e ca se law:
.A m eric a n l.a w R e p o rts (.AI.R) a n d digests. A I R e x h a u s t i v e l y c o v e r s specific legal issues. A
di ges t o r g a n i z e s t h e l a w b)' t o p i c a n d p r o v i d e s a s u n u i i a r y o r “d i g e s t ” o f all t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n s
t h a t h a v e a d d r e s s e d t h e topi c. It is a n e xc e l l e n t ca se f i n d e r w h e n a r e s e a r c h e r n e e d s to l o c a t e
c o u r t o p i n i o n s o n speci fic topi cs.
Be f or e r e l yi n g o n aii)' p r i m a r ) ' a u t h o r i t )' , t h e r e s e a r c h e r m u s t d e t e r m i n e if it is still
“g o o d l a w t h a t is, t h e r e s e a r c h e r m u s t d e t e r m i n e t h a t it h a s n o t b e e n r e \ ' e r s e d , m o d i f i e d ,
o r o t h e r w i s e n e g a t i v e h ' af f e ct ed b y s o m e s u b s e q u e n t o p i n i o n o r s t at u t e . ' I h e us e o t ' S h e p a r d ’s
C i ta tio n s o r W' est l aw' s KeyC' ite al l ows a r e s e a r c h e r to d e t e r n' ii ne if p r i m a r ) ' a u t h o r i t y is still
“g o o d law" a n d also t o l o c a t e o t h e r ca ses a n d s e c o n d a r y a u t h o r i t i e s t ha t d i s c u s s a s peci fi c
court opinion.
187
Q u ick R e f e r e n c e s
A n ie r ic a n D igest S y s te m 166 Legal e n c N c l o p e d i a s
A m erica n Ia i w R ep o rts (A I.R ) 141 R e g i o n a l d ig e s t s
Câse law c i t at o r s 173 S e co nda ry authority
C o d e ol F ederal R eg u la tio n s Shepardizing

C ita tio n s 176
S liepiird's ( 'it a t i o n s
Digest s 163
Statute citators
Ke yCi t e 172
Lreat ises
In te r n e t R e s o u r c e s
Mo s t ol t h e s e c o n d a r y a u t h o r i t y a n d o t h e r r e s e a r c h s o u r c e s d i s c u s s e d in this c h a p t e r a r e ava i l
able o n We s t l a w o r LexisNexis. M o s t o f t h e s o u r c e s are no t a\' ailable o n n o n l e e - b a s e d W e b sites.
c r r A T io N
I h e B lu e b o o k a n d A I M ’D C.itatiou M a n u a l r u l e s g o v e r n i n g c i t a t i o n lo t h e \ ai ious s e c o n d a r y
a u t h o r i t y s o u r c e s are d i s c u s s e d in C^hapter cS. S o m e e x a m p l e s of ci t at i on s to t h e s e c o n d a r y
a u t h o r i t y s o u r c e s d i s c u s s e d in t h i s c h a p t e r a r e p r e s e n t e d here.
A. Legal Fncyclopedias
6 A m . | u r 2 d A ssa u lt a n d B a tte r y § 2 ( 1 9 9 9 )
6A (?.).S. A ssa id t a n d B a tte r y § 11 ( 1 9 7 5 )
B. lreatises
D a n B. D o b b s , Ih c L a w of Torts 23 (W'est ( ¡ r o u p 2()()0)
C. ALR Annotations
lefire\' L'. ( i h e n t , A n n o t a t i o n , M o d e r n S ta tu s of S u d d e n E m e r g e n c y D o ctrin e, 10 A.L.R.
3t h 6H0 ( 1993)
D. Digests, Shepard’s
i h e cases y o u l ocat e t h r o u g h d i g e s t s a n d S h e p a r d s’ a r e c it ed a c c o r d i n g to t h e B lu e b o o k. ' I he
di ges t s t h e m s e l v e s a re n o t cited.
E x e r cise s
.A d ditiona l a iii g iiin c n ti arc ava iliiblc on th e (AU irscM alc. AS S IG N M E N T S
A S S IG N M E N T 1 lias 2 .A.L.R. l-'ed. 347. b e e n re p l a c e d o r SLiperseded? By

w h a t a n n o t a t i o n h a s th is b e e n d o n e ?
W' hat a r c t h e Lises ot s e c o n d a r \ ' aLithorit\ i'
A S S IG N M E N T S
A S S IG N M E N T 2
Your a s s i g n m e n t is to o b t a i n g e n e r a l i n f o r m a t i o n o n t h e
I h e c h e n t s eeks a d x i c e c o n c e r n i n g t h e a c t i o n s o f t h e m a
c r i m i n a l a sp e c t s ot caLising o r p r o c u r i n g t h e t e r m i n a t i o n
jor i t y s t o c k l i o l d e r in a s m a l l c o r p o r a t i o n . I h e ma j or i t }'
o f a h u m a n p r e g n a n c y . ( ' onsLi lt t h e A L R . 3d, A L R . 4 t h ,
s t o c k h o l d e r o w n s 38 p e r c e n t o f t h e st ock, a n d t h e client a n d
.M .R .5 th , A L R . 6 t h , a n d A L R F e d e ra l d i g e s t s. U n d e r t h e
a n o t h e r s h a r e h o l d e r t o g e t h e r o w n 42 p e r c e n t , i h e mai ori t)'
“ P r a c t i c e References, ” w h a t is t h e r ef e r e n c e to t he “D e f e n s e
s t o c k h o l d e r c o n t r o l s th e b o a r d o f d i r e c t o r s a n d is p r e s i d e n t
o f PaternitN' (Charges” in A m . f u r P r o o f o f Facts 2d? W h a t
o f t h e c o r p o r a t i o n . H e r e f us e s to a l l ow t h e c o r p o r a t i o n to
is t h e c i t at i on o f a 1999 N e b r a s k a c ase i nv o l vi n g t h e st at e’s
issLie a n y s t o c k dix idenils. L'ntil recent ly, t h e c h e n t a n d tlie
p a r t i a l - b i r t h a b o r t i o n statLite?
o t h e r mi nori t N s t o c k h o l d e r w o r k e d f o r t h e c o r p o r a t i o n ,
l.ast m o n t h , t h e m a j o r i t y s t o c k h o l d e r fired t h e c li ent a n d A S S IG N M E N T 10
t h e ni i nori t}' s t o c k h o l d e r . W' hat .M .R a n n o t a t i o n d i s c u s s e s 42 U.S.C.A. § 740?
W' ha t s e c t i o n s o f lur. 2 d di sCLi s s t hi s t o p i c?
A S S IG N M E N T 3 I he client's l u i s b a n d a t t a c k e d h e r so s e v er e h ' t hat s h e wa s
W h i c h /\ni. l u r 2 d title a n d s e c t i o n s a d d r e s s 18 L'.S.C^.S. h o s p i t a l i ze d . I h e y are n o w s e p a r a t e d , a n d t h e cli ent w'ants
§ 204? to sLie h e r h u s b a n d . ' I h e I n i s b a n d still lix'es o n t he m i l i t a r y
AS S IG N M E N T 4 b a s e w h e r e t h e y l i \ e d at t h e t i m e o f t h e i nc i de nt . Re f e r to
t h e Fcilcral Practicc D igest a n d l o c a t e t h e d i ges t t o p i c a n d
I h e c l i e n t ’s b r o t h e r was k i l l e d in an a u t o m o b i l e c oll ision,
kev n u m b e r t hat a d d r e s s thi s topic.
l ami K' m e m b e r s d i s a g r e e a b o u t w h e t h e r \ i e w i n g ot t h e
d e c e as e d s h o u l d be al l owe d , dLie to t h e d e g r e e o l ' d a m a g e to A S S IG N M E N T 12
t he body. W' hat s e c t i o n o f j u r 2il l i i s c usse s t h i s topi c? Cii\e t h e n a m e a n d c i t a t i o n ot a 1994 N e v a d a ca s e h o l d
i ng t hat t h e use o f a t oy g u n to c a r r \ ' o u t a k i d n a p p i n g is
not a d e f e n s e to a k i d n a p p i n g c ha r ge . Refer to t h e T enth
Reler to C o r p u i luri> S c c u n ilu n i. W h a t s e c t i o n t l e l i nes t h e
D cc c n n ia l Digest.
t e r m n m n c , a n d w h a t is t h e d e f i n i t i o n ?
ASS IG NM E NT 13
AS S IG N M E N T 6
\oLi r sLiperx i si n g a t t o r n e y asks \' ou t o locate t h e digest topi c
I h e cl i ent , a s h a r e h o l d e r in a c o r p o r a t i o n , b e l i e \ e s t hat
a n d k e \ i i Li mb e r s t o r t h e Cjlover v. L o ckh e ed (,'orp. c a s e li st
t h e c o r p o r a t i o n e.xceeded its aLithorit\- w h e n it e . x p a n d e d
ing. I le r e m e m b e r s it is a F ederal S u p p le m e n t case, b u t he
t h e c o r p o r a t i o n ’s b u s i n e s s t r o m t h e r e p a i r ot a u t o m o b i l e s
ca nn ot r e m e m b e r the citation.
to t h e sale o f aLi t omobi l e p a r t s . W h a t s e c t i o n ol' l-lc lih cr
(A 'clo pcdia of th e L a w o f P r iv a te ( 'o r p o r a t i o n i a d d r e s s e s A S S IG N M E N T 14
this t opi c? W' hat is t h e t e r m t or t h e a c t i o n ot a c o r p o r a t i o n I h e a s s i g n m e n t reciuires r e f e r e n c e to a S h e p a r d s’ cit ator.
that e.Kceeds its p o w e r ? In r e g a r d to 18 U.S.C. § 1 201(a ) , w h a t is t h e c i t a t i o n o f
A S S IG N M E N T ? t h e L’n ite d States R ep o rts d e c i s i o n t hat h e l d t h e p r o v i s i o n

LiiiconstitLitional in p a r t ? W' hat Sixth C i r c u i t case t oLi nd
I h e c l i e n t s ’ s o n b e l o n g s t o a r e l i g i o u s cLilt. I h e c l i e n t s b e -
t h e prox ision c o n s t i t u t i o n a l ? W h a t S e c o n d ( ' i r c u i t case,
lie\’e t h e CLilt Lised i m p r o p e r m e a n s t o i n d o c t r i n a t e t h e i r s o n
in 2001, d i s c u s s e d s e c t i o n 1201(a) (1)?
a n d k e e p h i m i n t h e c u l t . ' I h e s o n h a s gi x' en all h i s g o o d s
t o t h e c u l t a n d r eliises t o s e e o r t a l k t o h i s p a r e n t s . Is t l i e r e A S S IG N M E N T 15
an A I.R a n n o t a t i o n t h a t a d d r e s s e s t h e liabi li t \- o f a CLilt f or I h e a s s i g n m e n t r e q u i r e s a ccess t o We s t l a w o nl i ne . C h o o s e
i m p r o p e r actix ities? t h e Key(,'ite i con a n d e n t e r t h e c i t at i on t or B td lc o m in g v.
\ ' c w M c x ic o , 131 S. Ct. 2 7 0 3 (201 1). W' hat is t h e c i t a t i o n r. W a s h in g lo n , 341 U.S. 36 ( 2 0 0 4 ) ; s e l ec t F U L L a n d cl i ck
t or t h e 201 1 Illinois C o u r t o f Ap p ea l s , First Di st r i ct , case “C h e c k . ”
t hat B iillcoiiiing is d i s t i n g u i s h e d by? A. W' hat is t h e S h e p a r d 's si gna l for Crawford'^.
A S S IG N M E N T 16 B. W' hat tx pes o\ c a u t i o n a r y a n a ly s is a r e t h e r e ? P r o v i d e

Thi s a s s i g n m e n t r e q u i r e s a c c e s s t o S h c p a r ii's ( i n l i n e . b o t h t h e t y p e a n d t h e n u m b e r o f r e f e r e n c e s f o r e ach.
C l i c k o n S h i'p iird 'f a n d e n t e r t h e c i t a t i o n f o r C .n iw /o rd
^ The available C ourseM ate for this text has an interactive eB ook and interactive learning
CourseMate free demo CourseMate resources, g o to www.cengagebrain.com, and search for this book.
To access CourseM ate m a te ria ls th a ty o u have purchased, g o to login.cengagebrain.com.
Secondary Authority—Periodicals, Restatements,
Uniform Laws, Dictionaries, Legislative History,
and Other Secondary Authorities
A s s i s t a n t C .'ity A t t o r n e y ( ¡ e n o v ie v e C i r a y s a id to h e r i n t e r n , l . u is S i s i i c r o s , “ L u i s , t h e c it \ ' c o u n
O u tlin e
c il is c o n s i d e r i n g d r a l t i i i g a z o n i n g o r t i i n a n c e r e s t r i c t i n g t h e l o c a t i o n o l a d u lt e n t e r t a i n m e n t
b u s i n e s s e s . 1 n e e d s o m e p r e l i m i n a r y r e s e a r c h o n i 'i r s t A m e n d m e n t a n d o t h e r c o n s t i t u t i o n a l I. Introduction
l i m i t a t i o n s o n s u c h o r d i n a n c e s . H o w w o u ld y o u l ik e to t a k e a c r a c k at t h i s ? ” L u i s h a d ju s t s t a r t e d II. I.L'gal Peri odical s
h i s i n t e r n s h i p w it h t h e c it v a t t o r n e y ’s otV iee. 'I h e c it \ ’ p r o \ id e d t h r e e i n t e r n s h i p s t o r p a r a le g a l
111. Rcstiilcniciilf ot llu' I.inv
s t u d e n t s . "Y e s, I ' l l s t a r t r ig h t a w a v ,” L u i s r e s p o n d e d , a n d t h i n k i n g to h i m s e l l , “ I h i s is g r e a t .
1\'. Liiiloriii Laws a n d Model Acts
1 e x p e c t e d s o m e g o - l e r t y p e a s s i g n m e n t s l ik e l o c a t i n g a n d c o p y i n g s t a t u t e s a n d c a s e s ."
\'. Di c t i on a r i es a n d W o r d s and
I h e s t e p s L u i s I o ll o w s w h e n p e r l o r m i n g t h is a s s i g n m e n t a n d t h e r e s u lt s o l h is s e a r c h a r e
Phr a s e s
d i s c u s s e d in t h e .- X p p lic a t io n s e c t io n o l t h is c h a p t e r .
\' I . Legisl ati \e 1li st ory
\'ll. l u r y I n s t r u c t i o n s —-Ot her
Research Soin ces
\' III. Key Points (Tiecklist:
Peri odical s, R isliU cnicnti,
U n i l o r m Laws, Dicti onari es,
Legislative 1 listor\', a n d O t h e r
S e c o n d a r y A u t h o r i t i es
L\. Appl i cat i on
L e a r n in g O b ie c t iv e s
Alter c o m p l e t i n g this chapter, you
should understand:
• i h e role ol' perit)dicais,

R cstalem cuts, u n i f o r m laws a nd
dict i onar i es, a n d mi sc el l aneous
s e c o n d a r y so u r c e s in legal
research
• H o w t o c o n d u c t r es earch using
peri odical s, RcstiUeinents,
u n i f o r m law's a n d dict ionar ies,
a n d o t h e r s e c o n d a r y sour ces
191
I. INTRODUCTION
C h a p t e r 5 a d d r e s s e d t h e m o r e IreqiientK' u s e d r e s e a r c h s o u r c e s t h a t h e l p a res ea r cl i er s u m -
n i a r i / e , e xplai n, i n t er p r e t, locate, o r u p d a t e t h e law. Ihis c h a p t e r p r e s e n t s o t h e r f r e q u e nt l y used
s e c o n d a r } ' a u t h o r i t ) ’ s o i u ’ces. l h e c h a p t e r d i s c u ss e s legal p e r i o d i c a l s t h a t n i a \ ’ b e u s e d \ s h e n
s e e k i n g a n a n a h s i s a n d c r i t i q u e ot a specific legal t o p i c that is iiiore i n - d e p t h o r n a r r o w ’er ii’i
f o c u s t h a n t h at p r o \ i d e d b \ ’ a legal en c y c U i p e d i a o r a tr eatise. It also c i n e r s s e c o n d a r y s o i u v es
t h a t p r e s e n t d e f i n i t i o n s o r u n i f o r m s t a t e m e n t s o f t h e law, s u c h as d i c t i o n a r i e s , R c s ta tc in c n lf oj
th e L a w , a n d u n i f o r m huvs. In a d d i t i o n , t h e c h a p t e r c o \ ers legislati\'e histor\ - a n d p r a c t i ce aids
s u c h as f or ni b o o k s . F.xhibit 6-1 s h o w s t h e p r i m a r \ ’ u s e of t h e s e c o n d a r \ ’ s o u r c e s d i s c u s s e d
ill t h i s c hapt e r.
E x h i b i t 6 -1 Secondary Authority— Primary U se as a Research Tool.
AUTHORITY PRIMARY USE AS A RESEARCH TOOL

Periodicals U se w h e n y o u a re s e e k in g an a n a ly s is a n d c r itiq u e o f
a s p e c i f i c le g a l t o p i c t f i a t is m o r e i n - d e p t h o r n a r r o w e r
in f o c u s t h a n t h a t p r o v i d e d b y a le g a l e n c y c l o p e d i a o r
tre a tis e .
Restatements U se to lo c a te a s ta n d a r d iz e d d e f in it io n o r s t a te m e n t o f
ofthe law t h e l a w , r e a s o n s in s u p p o r t o f t h e d e f i n i t i o n o r s t a t e m e n t
o f th e la w , a n d c ita tio n s to re la te d case s, tre a tis e s , a n d
o th e r s e c o n d a r y a u th o rity .
Uniform Laws U se to lo c a te a m o d e l te x t f r o m w h ic h a la w m a y be
and Model Acts c r a f t e d , a r g u m e n t s in s u p p o r t o f t h e l a w , a n d c i t a t i o n s t o
c a s e s , t r e a t i s e s , a n d a r t i c l e s i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e la w .
Dictionaries U s e t o o b t a i n t h e s p e l l i n g , p r o n u n c i a t i o n , a n d le g a l
m e a n i n g o f t e r m s u s e d in t h e la w .
Legislative U s e t o d e t e r m i n e t h e m e a n i n g o r a p p l i c a t i o n o f a la w .
History T h is m a y be h e lp fu l w h e n th e m e a n in g o f a la w th a t
g o v e r n s a f a c t s i t u a t i o n is u n c l e a r o r w h e n t h e l a w is
w r i t t e n s o b r o a d l y t h a t its a p p l i c a t i o n t o a s p e c i f i c f a c t
s i t u a t i o n is u n c le a r .
II. LEGAL PERIODICALS

Legal p e r i o d i c a l s p u b l i s h art i cl es o n legal topi cs; t h r o u g h t h e s e v a r i o u s p u b l i c a t i o n s, art icl es
a r e ax ail able o n literally e v e r \ ’ legal topic, l h e art i cl es a re u s u a l l y a u t h o r e d b y i ndi s i dual s w h o
h a \ e e x p e r t i s e in t h e area, s u c h as law’ p r o f es s o r s a n d e x p e r t p r a c t i t i o n e r s in t h e field, o r b \ ’
l aw s t u d e n t s w h o h av e c o n d u c t e d ex t e n s i v e r e s e a r c h o n a topic. I h e art i cl es are v a lu a b l e for
t h e i r d e p t h ot r e s e a r c h ; c i t at i on t o n u m e r o u s p r i m a r v a n d s e c o n d a r y so u r c e s ; a n d i n - d e p t h
a n a l y s i s o f c u r r e n t legal issues, r e c e n t h ’ e m e r g i n g ar e a s o f t h e law, o r speci fic topics.
For Example S. K. Horn, Lexicon Dreams and Chinese Rock andRolt Thoughts on Culture,
Language, and Translation Strategies of Resistance and Reconstruction,
53 U. M ia m i L. Rev. 1003 (1999) is an e x a m p le of a la w re v ie w a rtic le a d d re s s in g a v ery
s p e c ific topic.
192
C H A P T E R S SECONDARY AUTHORITY
l-’u h l i c a t i o n s in legal pci iiKiicals a r e s e c ( i n d a r \ ' a utl ior it \' . Il ie\’ a r e n o t p r i m a r y a u t i i o r -

ity, b u t c o u r t s o n o c c a s i o n cite t h e m w h e n t h e r e is n o p r i ma r \ - authorit }- o n a t op i c o r w h e n
i n t e r p r e l H i g pri mar}- authorit }- s u c h as a st at ut e.
For Example "T h e c o u rts of th is state have not a d d re s s e d the q u e s tio n of th e liability
of a m a jo rity s h a re h o ld e r in a s ituation s u c h as th e one p re s e n te d in th is
case. G uidance, h o w e v e r, is pro v id e d in [nam e of la w r e v ie w a rtic le ] w h e r e th e q u e s tio n
has been th o ro u g h ly ana ly z e d ."
A. Types of Legal Periodicals

Legal p e r i o d i c a l s c an b e classified iiito t o u r d i s t i nc t categories.
1. Law Reviews
Law reviews are scholarl}- p e r i o d i c a l s p u b l i s h e d by law- sc h o o l s. Ihe}- c o n t a i n art i c l es w r i t
t en b}- law pr of es s or s , iudges , p r a c t i t i o n e r s , a n d law s t u d e n t s a n d ar e u su a l l y p u b l i s h e d f o u r
t i m e s a \-ear. .Most a c c r e d i t e d l aw s c h o o l s in t h e U n i t e d States p u b l i s h at least o n e law review.
Law s t u d e n t s edit law re\ iews u n d e r t h e g u i d a n c e ot t h e law- s c h o o l l a c u l t y a n d a d n i i n i s t r a -
t ion. R i g or o u s s t a n d a r d s a re e m p l o } e d to e n s u r e h ig h c]ualit}-. H u e to t h e i r scholar!}- n a t u r e,
the}- ar e oft en ci t ed by c o u r t s.
Law- rex i e w s a r e \ a l u a b l e f o r t h e i r d e t a i l e d anal}-sis o f c u r r e n t legal i s s u e s , r e c e n t h -
e m e r g i n g a r e a s of t h e l aw, a n d s p e c i l i c t o p i c s ( s e e H x h i b i t 6 - 2 ) . L a w r e \ i e w s u s u a l h -
include:
.Articles. Ar t i c l e s a re w-ritten b}- s c h o l ar s , judges, o r p r a c t i t i o n e r s a n d usuall}- p r e
s ent a c o n i p r e h e n s i \ e a n a h sis o f specific t o p i c s s u c h as t h e l.cxicoii D n'c in ii art icl e
m e n t i o n e d p r e \ iousl}-. I h e a rt i cl es are thoroLighh- r e s e a r c h e d w i t h f o o t n o t e s c i t i n g
\ u \ n i c r o u s cascs, slvidics, a n d o l h c v souvccs. T h e y o t t cn cvitici/.e t h e law rccum
m e n d c h a n g e s o r al t e r n a t i \ ' e legal s o k i t i o ns .
Notes and conimcnt.s. Ih e s e a re s h o r t e r pi e c e s w r i t t e n b}- s t u d e n t s . The}- a r e like
the art icl es in t hat t h e y ar e narrow- in focus, t h o r o u g h h - r e s e a r c h e d , a n d e x t e n s i v e l y
f o o t n o t e d . I n a s m u c h as s t u d e n t s a n d n ot e x p e r t s in t h e field w r i t e t h e m , the}- ha ve
less au t l n) r i t y a n d a re less frequentl}- cited.
Reccnt developniciils and cases. Th i s s e c t i o n d i s c u s s e s r e c e n t c a s e s a n d d e x e l o p -

m e n t s in t h e law su c h as n e w st atut es. S t u d e n t s a u t h o r thi s se c t i on.
Book reviews. M o s t law- r e v i ews i n c l u d e b o o k r e v i e ws o f r ec e n t legal p u b l i c a t i o n s .
2. Bar Association and O ther Association Publications

1-A’er}- state h a s a b a r a s s o c i a t i o n w h o s e n i e n i b e r s a r e a t t o r n e x ’s l i c e n s e d to p r a c t i c e l aw in
t h e state. T h e r e are n a t i o n a l b a r a s s o c i a t i o n s o p e n to p r a c t i t i o n e r s nationall}', t h e largest a n d
best k n o w n b e i n g t h e A m e r i c a n Bar A s s o c i a t i o n . M o s t o f t he s e a s s o c i a t i o n s p u b l i s h j o u r n a l s
t h at a r e s i mi l ar in ma n \ - r e s p e c ts to law- revi ews. T h e j o u r n a l s i n c l u d e art i c l e s o n speci fic legal
subi ects, r e c e n t d e \ ' c l o p m e n t s in t h e case a n d s t a t ut or \ - law, ar. d ti ps a n d g u i d e s t o r p r a c t i
t i oner s. I h e y also i n c l u d e b o o k r evi ews, n e w s a b o u t t h e a s s oc i a t i on , a n d t e c h n o l o g y u p d a t e s .
Like law re\-iews, t h e art i cl e s a re t h o r o u g h h ' r e s e a r c h e d , wi t h f o o t n o t e s c it i n g c a se s a n d o t h e r
sour c e s . State bar association journals t e n d to p u b l i s h art icl es t ha t a r e local in n a t u r e
a n d o f int erest p r i m a r i h to p r a c t i t i o n e r s o f t h a t j u r i s d i c t i o n . I h e A m e r i c a n Bar A s s o c i a t i o n
|Hiblishes t he A n u 'r ic a ii B a r AsMu iatioii Journal, w h i c h i n c l u d e s art i c l e s c o n c e r n i n g n a t i o n a l
legal d e v e l o p m e n t s .
193
E x h i b i t 6 - 2 Sample Law Review Page, u n iv e rs ity o f N e iv M e xic o S c h o o l o f Law . Tom L e ste '. Protecting the
Gender Nonconformist from the Gender Police—W hy the Harassment of Gays and Other Gender Nonconformists Is a Form
of Sex Discrimination in Light of the Supreme Court's Decision in O n ca le i/ S u n d o w n e r 2 9 N e w M e xic o L R e v il9 9 9 i p 8 9
R e p n n te d with p e rm iss io n from the N e w M e xic o L a w R e v ie w
PROTECTING THE GENDER NONCONFORMIST

FROM THE GENDER POLICE—WHY THE
HARASSMENT OF GAYS AND OTHER GENDER
NONCONFORMISTS IS A FORM OF SEX
DISCRIMINATION IN LIGHT OF THE SUPREME
COURT’S DECISION IN ONCALE V. SUNDOW NER
T O N I ITiSTHR
INTRODUCTION T'HH Sll.HNCl-; S L' RR O l ' N D I N C i 11 ARASSMl-CNT' BASICD

ON HOMOPHOBIA
rratlitioiiully. people w h o are harassed al work b e eause they are uay' h a \ e I'lniiid that they have not been
grant e d the same k md ol legal proi eeti ons that their heterosexual e ouni er pa r t s have reeeived. This is true
d espi t e the I'ael ihat the sexual harassnient o f ga ys is nn)l i\ ated by h o m o p h o b i a , vv hieh in turn is mot i xal ed
in large part by misogyny. Sinee mi sogvny in all its ma n y mani fesi ali ons is o n e ot ' t h e things that Tit le V’H's
prohi bit ion against sex iliserimination is supposeil to altaek.* the failure o f the eourt s to r e e o g n i / e that
ha r as s me n t against gays is a kind o f sex diseriniinatioii is at best niisguiileil and at worst \ e r y d a n ge r ous .
A l i ’i l i i t l c d R c sc a rc h S clio K ti W cllo slcx ( V n lc r> U ir W o m e n : lo n n c r \ i m I im íí I . iv\ S c h o la i. In slilu lc lo i R fs c a tx h o n W o m e n am i
( ic n Jc r. S ian lo rd I n i\c isil \ . A s^ o c ia ic I ’r o l o s s o r ot I .;iu . an il lo lin so n K csc aiv h C h a n . B a h so n (\)lk \ü c . B S . .1 I ) . ( k m m ' l i c I o u n I n i-
; \o r s iiv
I use ih c icrn i liciv bto acllv lo m e a n ih o sc u h o k lc n iils ih c n isc U e s as lio n io sex u a l m e n . le sb ia n s, h isc x u als. a n d iran s-
se v u als. I re e o g n i/e iliai llie te rm is i h e su h je el ol ‘j r e a i d e h ale lo d a \. Im w ever. I \ m II l a l k a h o u i th e d e h a ie a n d e x p lain m \ use n f th e
. le rm m ijrealer d e iail in I ’a r i I.
I S< ieel lia n sse x u a ls.
' h o n u > se \iia ls t> r i r a n s v e s i n e s i : I )esa n tis P a e il'ie I e l, iV: I 'e l. C o . . i> ()S I 2d ,^ 0 (^>lh C u . (sla lm g lh a l In le \ ll's pro -
h ih ilio n ot ■‘ s e x ' d is c n m in a lio n . , . sh o u ld nol h e lu d ic ia lls e x ie n d e d lo n ieiu d e se x u al p ie le ie n c c ' i: \ c f K ei^m a 1 S io n e - H a n is .
S i¡ n u - S c \ U a m w m a H T h e S i c p in ih c ¡ A o h i i u m o f S e x u a l fh in i s M i ic n i l.aw ( 'm lii T u le \ //. 2S S T ^ l\K ^ ■ s I ..I. 2 S ^ ( l ‘ )^)f->>
isi.iiw ii: lh a l in d e ah n ii u ilh 'h o s iile o r a h u s u e u o r k e n \ir o n m e n l e la n n s " hriuiiihi b \ a m a le \ie iim a y an isi a m a le o lte n d e r " u h o
h e h e x e d ih e \ ie lim u a s h o m o se x u a l." e< »uris h a \e 'r u le jd l a ^ a in si ih e p la m lill. " u iih lh e a u lh o r tln d n iii \\ "n o ta b le . . In m e lo se K
lhe o lle n siv e c o n d u e l |in ih e se ease s) p arallels o lh e r e o n d u c l u h ie h e o u ris h a \e h u n u i lo Iv d i s e r m i n i a l o r x " i.
• S V c . i . l, ’, , I ’r i c e W a le rh o u se lio p k m s . 4^)0 I S, 22S. 251 ( 1 ‘) S ‘ ) ) C A n e m p lo x e r v \h o o h ie e is lo agL iressix en ess m w o m e n bul
w h o s e p o sitio n s req u ire th is iran p la ee s w o m e n in an in lo lerab le a n d im p e rm issib le e ale h 22: o u l oT a jo b il l h e \ b e h a v e a i!^ ressi\ei>
a nd o u l i>l a |o b it t h e \ di> nt>i. fille V II lil'ls w o m e n o u l ol ih is b in d ." ): M e n io r \ insi> n. 4 7 7 \'.S. 5 7 . h 7 ( ( " Se x u a l h a ra ssm e n i
w h ie h e re a ie s a h o stile or o tte n siv e e n \ n o n rn e n l lo r m e m b e r s o f o n e sex is e \ e r \ bii th e iirb itraiA b a rrie r to se x u al e q u alils at th e w o r k
p lace ih at racial harassm en i is lo racial e c|u a lii\." (cilinL i H en so n \. H u n d ee. CiS2 I 2d S ‘> 7 . ‘) ( ) 2 (1 I l h C ir, l ‘) S 2 i ) l : l.lh so n Iirad> . ‘) 2 4
i-.2d X72. KSl (9 ih C 'lr. I W I i ("C o n iiress d esiiin ed T ille V II to prexent lh e p e rjx n u alio n ot sie reo ty p e s a n d a sense ol dcijrad alio n w h ic h
serve to close or d iscourage e in p io v n ie n i o p p o n u n iiies for w o m e n ," (ciiini! A n d re w s \. P h ilad elp h ia. XM.'S I 2d 14i>^). I4S .^ (.h1 ( 'ir .
lW O ))i; B arnes \, ( 'o s ile . 5i^l I 2d ^)K .v ‘■ ) S 7 ( I ) C ’. ( ' i r . l ‘- ) 7 7 ) m o lin g th at "[n lu m en > u s su id ies have s lu m n lh al w o m e n are p la ce d in
th e le ss ch allen g in g , th e less resp o n sib le an d th e less rem u n erativ e jx )siiio n s o n lh e b asis ol th eir sex a lo n e." and I'ln tlin g " su ch b laian ilv
ilisp arale irea tm e n t . . . p a ilicu larlv o b iectio n ab le in v iew ot th e tact lh al T ille \ il has siv cilicallv p ro h ib ited sex d isc rim in a lio n sin ce
ils e n ac in ien i in P)i> 4,"i: T tirres v. \ a i ‘l fV ecisio n B lan k in g . ^>43 1. S upjx ^)>2. ^^.'^4 ( N . l ) . 111. IW h ) isia iin g lh al "lh e p rin cip al p u rp o se
ol in c lu d in g lh e lerin 's e x ' in lh e A c l v âs lo 'd o st> m e g o o d li> r l h e m in o n iv sex iciiin g 1 K K 'i )\(.. R i ( . 2 . S 7 7 ( 1 9 f > 4 ).
S o m e have a rg u e d lh a l T itle \ ll's p ro h ib itio n a g ain st sex d isc n m in a lio n w a s ih e rcsull o\ a llu k e. in w h ic h ( ’( M i g r e s s m a n H o w a rd
S m ith o t V irg in ia h t'p e d to siv m ie lh e b ill's p a ssa g e hv a d d in g lh e w o rd , "sex ' lo th e b ill, n e v er c x p e c lm g ii to b e a p p ro v e d . S e e
C f i v K i I s iV: B v K M VK V W H VI I N . T ill l.( t\( .i Si 1)1 n \ i 1 A 1.1 ( . i s i \ I IVI llis io u '» in i h i C i \ ii K k .ii is ,\( i 1 15 - 1 1S i l ‘) S 5 ) .
194
In a d d i t i o n to b a r a s s oc i a t i on s , t h e r e a r e a s s o c i a t i o n s for p a ra l eg a l s a n d legal as s i s t a n t s .
S o m e o f t h e s e a s s o c i a t i o n s p u b l i s h n e w s l e t t e r s t h a t i n c l u d e a rt icl es o f in t er e s t to p a r a l e g a l s
a n d legal a ss i st ant s.
3. C om m ercial Publications
'Ihere are n u m e r o u s commercial journals a n d p e r i od i c a l s t h at focus o n specific area s of l aw,
s u c h as t h e Jo urna l o f T axa tio n . I n d i v i d u a l s i n t e r e st e d in a specific ar ea o f law' m a y s u b s c r i b e to
s u c h a publ i ca t i on . ' Ih e articles are si mi l a r to b a r j ou r n a l articles in that t h e y are well re s ea r c h ed .
I h e y o f t e n i n c l u d e b o o k rex iews, p r a c t i t i o n e r g u i d e s a n d tips, a n d t e c h n o l o g y u p d a t e s .
4. Legal Newspapers and Newsletters

A n u m b e r o f legal newspapers are avail able by s u b s c r i p t i o n , s u c h as t h e N a t i o n a l [.aw
l o u r n a l a n d t h e Legal T im es. T h e N a t io n a l L a w Jo u r n a l a n d Legal T im es a r e p u b l i s h e d w e e k l y
a n d i n c l u d e art icl es a n d f e a t u r es o n t r e n d s in li t i gat i on, d e v e l o p m e n t s in t h e hnv, i n f o r m a
t i o n o n a t t o r n e y s a n d t h e legal p r o f es s i on , a n d b o o k revi ews. T h e r e are m a n y s ub j ec t - s pe c i f i c
n e w s p a p e r s , s u c h as t h e C o r p o ra te Legal T in u ’s. In m a n y cities, t h e r e are local n e w s p a p e r s t h a t
p u b l i s h legal not i ces , c o u r t d o c k e t i n f o r m a t i o n , a n d a rt i cl es o f local int erest .
I n a d d i t i o n to n e w s p a p e r s , t h e r e a r e t h o u s a n d s o f newsletters pu b li sh ed by c o m
m e r c i a l a n d p u b l i c i n t e r e s t g r o u p s . ' I h e se n e w s l e t t e r s a r c u s u a l l y i s s u e d w e e k l y o r m o n t h l y
a n d f o c u s o n c u r r e n t i n f o r m a t i o n in specific a r e a s o f t h e law.
M a n y legal n e w ' s p a p e r s a n d n e w s l e t t e r s m a y b e a c c e s s e d o n l i n e . See t h e I n t e r n e t
R e s o u r c e s s e c t i o n o f t hi s c h a p t e r .
B. Research Using Legal Periodicals

R ef e r t o a legal p e r i o d i c a l w h e n y ou ar e s e e k i n g a n a n a l y s i s a n d c r i t i q u e of a speci fic legal
t o p i c t ha t is m o r e i n - d e p t h o r n a r r o w e r in f o c u s t h a n t ha t prox i d e d by a legal e n c y c l o p e d i a o r
a t r eat i s e, h i m a n y i ns t a n c e s , a n art icl e m a legal p e r i o d i c a l will go i nt o i i u i l Ii greater dep th
t h a n a t r e a t i s e a n d p r o v i d e m o r e case c i t a t i o n s, statistical i n f o r m a t i o n , a n d r e f er e n c e s t o o t h e r
s o u r c e s . You ma) ' al s o refer to a p e r i o d i c a l w h e n s e e k i n g i n f o r m a t i o n o n a r ec e n t l y e m e r g i n g
legal is sue t h a t is n o t yet a d d r e s s e d in treatises.
2. Research Techniques— Legal Periodicals

As is a p p a r e n t f r o m t h e p r e v i o u s s e c t i o n , h u n d r e d s o f p e r i o d i c a l s exist, m a k i n g it i m p r a c t i c a l
to r e s e a r c h e a c h p u b l i c a t i o n f or art icl es o n a speci fic topic. ' Ih e re s e a r c h t ool s m e n t i o n e d h e r e
a r e d e s i g n e d to h el p y o u l o c at e specific articles.
a. Index to Legal Periodicals

Ihe In d ex to Legal Periodicals (ILP} prox i d e s a n i n d e x to t h e c o n t e n t s o f m o s t legal
p e r i o d i c a l s in t h e U n i t e d States, t h e U n i t e d K i n g d o m , a n d m o s t c ; o n i n i o n w e a l t h c o u n t r i e s .
( See E x h i b i t 6-3 for a s a m p l e i n d e x p age. ) H a r d b o u n d x' olunies are p u b l i s h e d a n n u a l l y w'ith
m o n t h l y s o f t - c o v er u p d a t e s . I h e x o l u n i es a n d u p d a t e s ar e n ot c u mu l a t i v e , ' f h e r e f o r e , if y o u are
l o o k i n g f o r a n art icl e p u b l i s h e d in t h e c u r r e n t year, s t ar t w i t h t h e c u r r e n t soft-cox-er m o n t h l y
x ' ol u me a n d w o r k v o u r wax' b a c k w a r d .
For Example If you are in te re s te d in an a rtic le pu b lis h e d s o m e tim e in the past fiv e y ears ,
c h e c k the h a rd b o u n d v o lu m e fo r e a c h y e a r and e a c h update.
195
E x h i b i t 6 - 3 Page from the Index to Legal Periodicals and Books. The h i-v W :iso n C o m p a n y, i n d e x t o L e g a l P e r i o d i c a l s .-md
B o o k s (2000!. p. 68. R e p rin te d w ith p e rm is s io n from The H .W . W ilso n C o m p a n y a d iv isio n o f E B S C O P u b lish in g
I N D E X T O L E G A L P E R I O D I C A I . S cV B O O K S
A s h l o n . l i r u t ’f I., - itn il. ( .lí ilo rn i. i

s a l e h a r b n r s l o r c n i p ! o \ c r ' > i n i h c S c r s i c c '' i j u a i i f i c d p l a n T h e C h í n e s e A m c n c a n c h a l l c n i i e It» co ur i-m aik lai c> .l ijUí'i.ts m S.in
correciK )!! e x a m p l e s ; h \ C . 1-. K o i > l i . B . L . A n I u c m i . N . J . W h i l e . V I f r a n c i s c o s p u b l i c s c h o l 'l s . lU'les I r o m a i p a r t i s . t n i p a n i c i | ' . n i t -
nofi./. ¡ii\ n .MM-57 1) IW i)bscr\c r n I I c \ me 1(W/í/n, Ẳ/í //(/ /../ 39-145 Spr 2i)(KI
A shton. Roj»i*r I). R e d c e m i n g u h i t c n c s s m i h c s h a d o w ot i n t c r n m c n t : L.arl W a r r e n .
C o n s o l i d a t i o n in i h e l l n a n c i a l s e r s i e e s s e c t o r ; t a \ i m p l i e a l i o n s lo Bri»w n. I B ro w n \ B o a r d ol 1 d u c a l i o n . ' 4 S. C i. 6Sfi ( 1954 )| aix t a
s l a k e h o k l e r s . 4 9 Kcp. f ’roc. A nn . Ta.\ Conf. C a m r n c J h y Can. ¡'a\ llieorv ot ra c i a l r c d c m p t i o n . s C h o 40 n o I li.( ¡ . Hi\ 73-1 70 I)
I'o um r 2 1 . 1 - 5S 199S
. A s h w o r t h , .A n d r e w •Asian p. ic ifi c l '. c o n o m i c C o o Ị t c r a l i o i i ( ( ) r g a n i / a l i o n i S u A s i a - I ’a c i t i c
A t l i c l e fi a n d t h e l a i r n e s s o l t ri al s . 1 Crim. /.. Rev. 2 6 1 - 7 : A p 1 9 ^ ^ L c o n o m i c C i 'o p c r . i t io n I( ) | '.MUI/ . I l i o n I
R e s t o r a t i v e j u s t i c e a n d v i c t i m s ’ r i g h t s . 2(MH) A' ./ , L..I. S 4 -S M r 2IHKI A sim ow , M ichacI
Asia-Pacific K c o n o m ic C o o p e r a t io n (O rjia n i/.a tio n > B;id law ye r s in i h c m o \ les. 2 4 n o 2 \i'\a l. Rl r. 533-91 W'iMi 21)00
T h e r o l e ot A P h C in i h e a c h i e v e n i e n l o t r e g i o n a l c o o p e r a t i o n in I n l c r i m - r m a l ru l e s ; inakiiii.’ h a s i c s j ií w K . 51 n o 3 .\(lmin. /.. A’< 1 . ~ 0 3 - 5 5
S o u t h e a s t A s i a . 1.. C. C a r d e n a s . A. l i u r a n a k a n i t s , 5 n o l .-\nn. Snrv. S u m m 19 99
im '! Co m p . /„ 4 9 -S O S p r I W 9 '■Jusiice w i t h a n a l t i i ii d c " . J t u l g c ,l ud \ .Iiul i h c d a M i n i c t e l c \ i s i o n biincli.
A s i a - P a c i f i c l e g a l d t ; \ e l o p n i e n t ; e d i t e d hy i X m g l a s M. J o h n s t o n a n d G e r r \ 3S n o 4 Juii'î-s ' J 2 4 - S + l .ill 19 99
I- erg us on. C n i \ e r s i t > o f li C. P r e s s j W S 61 I p I S B N l)- 7748-(Ki7.V7 L C A s k i n . K r a n k . 19 32
99-IS341K •A law s c h o o l w h e r c s i u d e n t s d o n ' i ịusi Ic ar n t h e l a w ; i h e \ h c l p n i a k c
Asiain. Jorjie H u g o t h e law 51 n o 4 / S / Ki\. S 5 5 -~ 4 1999
F i n a n c i n g o f re a l e s t a t e p r o j e c t s ui .Ar ge nt in a. 4 n o l S . \ h I A K n . 9 6 - K W \ s k i n . K e lly D a w n
W'int I W 8 ( r i m e s wi i l ii n ilic |UIisdiclii)ii I't lile I n i c r n a l t o n a l ( r i m m a l C o u n . 10
A sian A m e r ic a n s n . ' l Crun. / , . / í í - 5 9 1 9 99
All Ihe t h e m e s hut o n e . h . M u l l e r . 6 6 n o 4 I . Chi. L. Rt v. 1 3 9 5 - 3 3 I s s u e s s u r r o u n d m g ilic c r c a M o n ot a r e g i o n a l h u m a n r i g h i s s y s t c i n for
ha l l 19 99 t h e A s i a - P a c i f i c , 4 n o 2 / / s \ ./ h u í .'i c.>m¡>. L 5 9 9 - 6 0 1 S p r 199S
A r e .A sians h l a c k . ’; I h e A s i a n - A n i e n c a n c i s i i r i g h t s a g e n d a a n d ih e S e x u a l \ i o l e n c c m d c c i s i o i i s .Uki i n d i c t m e n i s o f i h c ^ 'u ’J o s l a \ a n d
c o n te n ip o r a rs s ig n ifican c e o f the b l a c k /u h i l e p a r a d i g m J. Kim. R w a n d a n t r i b u n .i ls c u r r c n i si.it us 9 ' m > l \ m J Inf l l 9 2 '1 2 'J a
s t u d e n t a u t h o r . lOS n o S Yale L J . 2 . ^ S S - 4 I 2 J e 1 9 9 9 |99<)
.Asian .A m e r ic a n s , t h e l a u . a n d il le g a l i m m i g r a l u ) n in p o s t - c i \ i l ri g h t s Asiuiid. \ nders. 1952 ---------------------------------------------------- Entry by author
A m e r i c a : a r e \ i c u o f t h r e e boi>ks. H Ciee. ^ 7 n o l t . D e l .\/<7cv /, L a w in R u s s i a s no4 / l.iir ( K, \ 9(> 101 l a l l I99M
Hfv. 7 1 - S l Pal l 19 9 9 .\s n u is . D a n ie l (i.
B e s o n d h l a c k a n d u h i t e : s c l c c t c d \ s n l m g s h \ .Asian . A m e r i c a n s u i i h i n Ser\ ICCpr»'\ i d e r li.ibihtv A u s t r a l i a n I Il’j h ( o u r t 'JI\CSihc w urld a
t h e c r it i c a l r a c e i h e o r s m o v e m e n t H. ( i e e . .^0 n o 3 .Si. \ i t i r \ \ L.J. lìrs i shoiild ihe I Iiileil S t a l e s l o l lo w Niiil ’ l7no| D u f , J I n i ' l L .
7 5 9 -9 9 1999 1 8 9 - 2 2 8 Lall |9 'J S
l-. m cr gi ng f r o m t h e m a r g i n s o f h i s t o r i c a l c o n s c i o u s n e s s : C ' h m e s e A S(H I/U . \ina/u \.
i m m i g r a n l s a n d t h e h i s t o r ) o f .A m e r i c a n law. K P C o l e . (> J C h i n . The a i l i ' p i i o n <>t t h e I \ ( 'I I R \ l ni oi lc t law 111 N i ' j c r i a im pii ca iH 'M s o n
17 [11)2 UiM tV Hi\!. I^fv. 3 2 5 - i i 4 S u m m 1 99 9 Ihe rect>i:nilU'n a n d i - n t i ' i c c m c n i 111 .Iibi ira l .i w a i d s ,/ ¡in'. I
J u s i i c e h e l d h u s i a g e : I ’ S i l i s r e g a r d f o r i n i e r n a t i o n a l la\ \ in t h e V\o rld I S 5 - 2 0 4 M r 19'»')
W a r II i n t e r n m e n i ol J a p a n e s e P e r u \ i a n s a c a s e si u d v . N T S a i t c \ s p i ti. \ l a r \ in I .. I*»34-
4(1 n o l li ( L K r i . 2 7 5 - 3 4 S I) I99K rll'l ml
L e x i c o n d r e a m s a m i C h i n e s e r o c k ;ind roll ih o u g h is on culiurc. It's ho w \t)ii pl ,i \ i h c jMin«’ I I C'liMi' u ini'" / / / , / / 2 s ' 2 Ỉ I I*>9S
l a n g u a g e , aiu l M a n s l a t i o n a s s t r a t e g i e s ot r e s i s u i n c e a n d \splii. I a r r \
r e c o n s t r u c i i o n . .S. K I h n n . 5 3 n o 4 1' M i a m i /. A’< i. 1 0 0 3 - ! ' ’ II P>99 Ireiuls in indicia I let cm inn ck\'lii'iis, 19ii Ị. I 'JOS s ' ill'2 Jii¡th ailiri
I.OC li ner 11 .o t' lin e r \. N e \ \ Y or k . 2 5 S. C t, .'i ^9 ( 1 9 0 5 1 |. p a r i l \ . a n d th e "'»-SI S;() j'lO'j
C 'h i n c s e l a u n d r y c a s e s I'l 'i ck W o \ , l U i p k n i s . 6 S. C l. 1 06 4 ( I S S 6 ) | V s p l c n . ( h r i s t o p h e r N.
n K B ernstein 41 n o l Wm. ^ f a r \ /. Htv. 21 1-94 I) 1 9 9 9 I n l c j i a l i i i ' j I )N \ Ic c h i i i' l o 'j s Iiiio i h e c r i m i n a l iUs iicc s \ \ i c i n . s ^ til' '
M c C a r t h s i s m . ih e i n t e r n m e n i a n d t h e c*>nlra<licii<ins o f p m \ c r . .M J Jiuln-atnr< 144-W \ - l ) I 9 9 ‘)
MatsLida. 4 0 n o l li.C. /.. Kt v. 9 - 3 6 I) I99K .A s s al a L ju le s h. iw St ( 1 I k l c s h a u . \ N s a i a . 1 9 5 0 - Entry by topic
N o r ig ht t o o w n ' T h e e a rl y i w e n t i e i h - c c n t u r y "Alien L a n d L a w s ” a s a •Assaull a n d b. i l lc r\
p r e l u d e t o i n l e r n m c n l . K. A o k i . 4 0 n o l H ('. /., Kev. 3 7 7 2 I) I99.S S f f iil\o Assault and Battery
O u t o f t h e shad (*w : m a r k i n g i n t e r s e c t i o n s in a n d b e t w e e n .Asian P a c i fi c Battered Uitm cn
• A m er ic an c r it i c a l le g a l s c h o l a r s h i p a n d I.atUKi/o c r il i c a ! l e g a l l h e o r \ . C hild abuse
F-.. ,\L Ig l e s i a s . 4 0 n o l li. C I.. Hrv 3 4 9 - S 3 I) | 9 9 S A l u r i s p r u d e n c e in dis. iiT iy ‘HI b a t t e r y , w r o n g l u l l i \ i n ü . a n d t h e rig h t lo
P r a i s i n g u i l h fa in t d a m n a t i o n the troubling re habilita tion o f b«»dil\ in i c i : ri i\ \1 . p S tr a s s c r . ' 6 (ii)4 Stin l ) n i:i> I. Ke\. 9 9 ~ 1041
K o r e m a l s u [ K o r e m a l s u v. U n i t e d S t a t e s . 6 3 S. C l . 1 124 1 1 9 4 4 i | A . C . Lall 1 9 9 9 '
'I'cn, 4 0 n o l H.C. /,. H n . 1-7 I) 1 9 9 8 S c o r e aiu l p i e r c e : c n m c s lit fas liK 'n ’ B*kIv a l t c r a i i o n aikl ct> nscni U»
R ace, rights, a n d th e Asian A m e r ic a n ex p e rien c e; a re \ic w essay. assault. . \ J W a l k ii i s . s i u d c n t .lu lh or . 2 s n o 2 \ / i / . I . Wi llin'îon L.
H. Ciee. 13 iio4 ( ¡ t c . lmmii;r. L.J. 6 3 5 - 5 1 S u m m 1 9 9 9 Kev. 3 7 1 - 9 8 \ l y I 9 9 S
R a c i a l r e p a r a t i o n s : J a p a n e s e .A m e r i c a n r e d r e s s . m d A f r i c a n A m e r i c a n ( anada
c l a i m s , h , K. Y a m a m o t o . 4 0 n o l li.C . /.. Kev. 4 ~ 7 5 2 3 I) I 9 9 S f raud. H l \ a n d t i n p r o l c c t c d si-x: R \ ( u c r n c r |[ 1 9 9 8 1 2 S . C R 11
R e p a r a t i o n s a n d t h e ■’m o d e l m i n o r i t y " i d et » lo g \ o f a c q u i e s c e n c e ; t h e R- K. ^ . l m . l d a . s i u d c n t a u t h o r 6 i i u l S u .,// A h a '.\in . 1 5 7 - ^ 6
n e c e s s i t y t o r e f u s e t h e r e t u r n t o o r i g i n a l h u m i l i a t i o n . C . K. I ii in ia . 4 0 Sp r 1999
n o l li.C. L. Kiv. 3 8 5 - 4 2 7 1) 1 99 8 Secrets and h \ e s i h c p u b h c salciN ex c ep t i i H i t o s o l i c i t o r - c l i e n i
T h e stran g e r w h o resid es w ith yo u : ironies o f A sian-.A m erican an d p r i \ i l e g e : S m i l h \ . J o n e s [ | | 9 9 9 | I ti9 !) I R , 4 t h 3S 5] w , N. R e n k e .
• A m er ic an I n d i a n l e g a l h i s to r v . J W S in g e r. 4 0 n o l H ( ' /.. Kw . "v n o A A I r a . 1. K( \. l 0 4 5 - 7 t i I) l ‘»99
1 7 1 -7 D 1 9 9 8 (Irciit B rita in
S y m p tis iu m ; ihe long shad o w o f K o re m a ls u |K o r c n ia ls u l'nite d •Assiiuli. b a l l e r \ a n d i n d i i c c l \ l o l c n c c \l llusi 1 9 9 9 C/7/;/. / . A?< V.
' s t a l e s . 6 3 S. C l. 1 1 2 4 ( 19 4 4 )] 4 0 n o l II C . L. K n : 1 - 5 3 5 D 199 8 5 5 7 -( i0 .1 1 19 99
•A ta le o f n ew p r e c e d e n t s : J a p a n e s e A m e r i c a n i n t e r n m e n i as f o r e i g n C o n s e n t , th re .i t s a n d d e c e p t i o n in c r i m i n a l law. .1. H o l d e r . 10 n o l
a f f a i r s law. ( i . ( i o t t , 4 0 n o l li.C. L. Rev. 1 7 9 - 2 7 4 i ) 1 9 9 8 Ki na 's c. L.J 10 4 -S 1 9 99
I ' s i n g r ) S M - I V lo t l i a g n o s e m e n t a l i l l n e s s in .Asian A m c n c a n s . T. B. C o r p o r a l p u n i s h m e n t ol c h i l d r e n , a ca n i ii 'j t o r (lie I ni tcii Kii iii il om .
I r a n , s i u d e n i a u t h o r. 10 7. C dn i c m p . Lciâl l.wiics 3 3 5 - 5 7 1 9 9 9 A. B a i n h a m . 5 s pl 2 ( amhrui'î' I .•/. 2 9 I -3 J I 19 99
T h e o r i s i n g i h c l i m i t s o f [he ' s a d o m a s o c h i s i i c h o m o s e x u a l ' i d c n i i ụ in
S c c /S t ’f ai sa i h f fallow tna, h o a k { \) : R \ H r o w n II 19 94 ] 1 .A .c . 2 I 2 | S C l i . i n d r a - S h c k c r a n . s i u d e n i au t h o r.
C h a n g . R. S, D i s o r i c n i e i l ; A s i a n A m e r i c a n s , law . a n d t h e na i i t 'i i- s ta te . 21 n o 2 Mt'lh. I . I Kev. 5 S 4 - 6 0 0 I) 199 7
N e w 't'ork l i n i s e r s i i y P r e s s 1 9 9 9 x. 1 SOp
196
I h e i n d e x i n c l u d e s t h e f o l l i ns i n g feat ures;
1. S u b je c t /i u it h o r in d e x . Art i cl es ar e i n d e x e d a l p h a b e t i c a l l y by b o t h s u b j ec t a n d a u
t h o r in t h e s u b j e c t / a u t l n ) r i nde x. If \ ' ou k n o w t h e n a m e o f t h e a u t h o r o r y o u k n o w
t h e subj ec t , s u c h as “ass aul t a n d bat t ery, ” y o u c a n u s e t hi s i n d e x to l o c at e art icl es.
I h e i n d e x i n c l u d e s t h e title o f t h e art icl e, t h e n a m e o f t he a u t h o r , a n d t h e n a m e
a n d d a t e o f t h e p u b l i c a t i o n (see Hxhibit 6-3).
2. T able o f cases. C a s e s t h a t h a \ e b e e n n o t e d o r d i s c u s s e d in art i cl es a r e i n d e x e d

a l phabe t i ca l l ) - b y t h e n a m e s o f b o t h pl ai nt i ft a n d d e f e n d a n t . Ho l l o wi n g t h e ca s e
n a m e a r e c i t a t i o n s to t h e articles.
3. T able of sta tu te s. It v o u k n o w t h e n a m e o f a st atut e, t hi s i n d e x will d i r e c t y o u to

a r t ic l es t h a t h a v e d i s c u s s e d t h e st atut e.
4. H ook r e v ie w s . I h e b o o k re x i ew i n d e x lists by b o o k title t h e p e r i o d i c a l s t h a t h a v e

r e v i e w e d t h e title.
b. Current Law Index

Ihe Current La w Index (CLI) is a p e r i o d i c a l i n d e x s i m i l a r to H P . It prox ides a n i n d e x o f
ar t i cl es o f s e v er a l h u n d r e d pe ri o d i c a l s . (See E xh i b i t 6 - 4 for a s a m p l e i n d e x pa ge. ) H a r d b o u n d
v o l u m e s a r e p u b l i s h e d a n n u a l l y w i t h mo n t hl x ' u p d a t e s , [.ike t h e HP. t h e x o l u m e s a n d u p d a t e s
ar e n o n c u n i u l a t i x ’e. ' I h e C IA i n c l u d e s a r t i c l es b e g i n n i n g in 1980; it d o e s n o t r e t e r e n c e art i cl es
p u b l i s h e d p r i o r to 198Ü. ' I h e i n d e x i n c l u d e s t h e f o l l o w i n g feat ures:
1. S u b je c t in d ex, ' llie (,7./ h a s a s e p a r a t e s u b j ec t i n d e x w h e r e art i cl es a r e i n d e x e d a l

p h a b e t i c a l l y by subj ect . I f y o u k n o w t h e n a m e o f t h e s ubj e c t , s u c h as “a ss a u l t a n d
batterx',” y o u c a n u s e thi s i n d e x t o l o c a t e articles. I h e i n d e x i n c l u d e s t h e title o f
t h e art icl e, t h e n a m e o f t h e a u t h o r , a n d t h e n a m e a n d d a t e o f t h e p u b l i c a t i o n (see
Hxhi bi t 6-4).
2. .Xuthor/titlc index. Ihe r e is a separate i nde x xvhere articles are indexed alpliabeticalh'
b\- a u t h o r a n d title. Ihis index also incl udes b o o k rex'iews i n d e x e d bx' a u t h o r a n d title.
3. l a b l e o f cases, ( i as e s that hax'e b e e n n o t e d o r d i s c u s s e d m art i cl es ar e m d e x e d

a l p h a b e t i c a l l y b\' t h e n a m e s o f b o t h p l a i n t i t f a n d d e f e n d a n t . Hol l owi ng t h e n a m e s
a r e c i t a t i o n s t o t h e articles.
4. T able o f sta tu te s. I f y o u knoxv t h e n a m e o f a st atut e, thi s i nd e x will d i r e c t y o u to

a r t ic l es t h at h a v e d i s c u s s e d t h e st atut e.
c. Other Periodical Indexes

In a d d i t i o n t o t h e m a j o r i n d e x e s d i s c u s s e d prex iously, t h e r e ar e sex eral o t h e r i n d e x e s .
For Example Index to Foreign Legal Periodicals. This index f o c u s e s on jo u rn a ls

p u b lis h e d o u ts id e th e U nite d S ta tes and th e B ritis h C o m m o n w e a lth .
Current Index to Legal Periodicals. This index, p u b lis h e d w e e k ly , p ro v id e s a c c e s s to
a rtic le s n o t y e t in d e x e d in the ILP or th e CLI.
C h e c k w i t h a l aw librarx' f or speci fic i n d ex e s ,
d. Reference from Other Sources

A n o t h e r s o u r c e , s u c h as a c i t a t i o n in a c o u r t o p i n i o n , legal e n c y c l o p e d i a , o r treati se, max’ d ir e c t
you tt' a legal p e r i o d i c a l article. C')lten r e f e r e n c e s t o l a w r ev i ew art i cl es t h a t ha\-e a n a l y z e d a
s t at u t e ar e i n c l u d e d in t h e a n n o t a t i o n s t o t h e st a t ut e . In s u c h i n s t a n c e s , x'ou w o u l d g o d i r e c t h ’
to t h e p e r i o d i c a l ; y o u w o u l d n o t n e e d to u s e a n ind e x .
197
E x h i b i t 6 - 4 Sample Subiect Page from the C u r r e n t L a w In d e x . The G ale Group, C u r r e n t L a w I n d e x , Vol. 2i 12000), p 5i
R e p rin te d w ith p e r m is s io n from the G ale G ro u p
SUBJECT INDEX ASSETS, FROZEN

Ihc n»lc t ’l p h il;in ilìio |ụ in i Ik - Iiitci- \ S I I I S. K c n i o s a l 1)1 s<r a p a n n c f ''
M V i i o n l u i u c c n c u l u i t v . I i ul c o m i n o i v c In c ora A s h tiiNpos.il assaull, (I niicJ K in y d * u n i M \ n n riuMnpsi>n
M inki(;ini A S lil KST M orns c ^ ^ p A: F a r l n o r s h \ J . A , C o u U s
2*^^ J o n n i i i l t>! \ r i \ \Iiiiiii\.u ’n u in . (¡Hit M c r i ĩ c r \ \ a \ 0 s. (li iu t i r n i s ) h \ Slmíì h a r ro l l f)4 J o u r n a l <»/ i r i n ii i u i l h i w
Si»r i < 7 \ S ĩ t m n n r. 2 \ \ n u lit (in ¡Aiu xcr 2 4 A m ;u \ i. 2(f(K>
A S I A . S o u i h u c s i \f t R c c a k i i r a n l H I \ ' - p o M l i \ c p e r s o n s : ih o p r o b
-( ;|SI'S \ l K k l k - l-.i.M l e m ot p e o p l e w h o a r c u n u i l l i n g or u n a h l e u>
T h o J c ; i l h o i ,i a n d [he hi rlli o l (he \ S I A . W e s t e r n \( t p re\cn i the iranstnission ot' c o n n n u n i e a h l e
c n i i i l c n i o n i 111 liituliiiu o t Ihc .Ills- fC'.tvo Noici SU M k Ỉ-..1M Jiscases. (C anada) K C 'u em er h\ linioih>
H r o o k h n l i ìs i i l u k ' ol \ r i s iV; SI.ICIKC'' V. ( |I> *>t \ S I -\ N A n i c r i c a i i s C hristie
N e u York h \ D .iniolk- I (\im iiitli (\>inparaii\e r; i c i a l i / a l i o n : rjcial proliliiii! 2 0 H i ii h h Iaiw in ( \ i n a J a M a y . 2(H n)
H> ItirtỉlKiiii I nifllct lun l 1‘rnỊu n \ . M i d i ii A aiu l i h c e a s e o f W o n Mo l. c e . ( R a c c a n d t h e Law Ot T e n c e s a g a i n s i t h e P e r s i m A c t I S M . s, 2 0 ■
¡ . n ỉ r i ỉ d i n i i i c n l ¡Ätw J d i i n u i l S7^"*-i(l4 S p n m i . al Ihc T u r n o l t h e C e n u i r \ ) b \ N e il C jo uu ul a Mi llictlng grieM>us bt Kiil\ h a r m - \ \ l i e t h e r r e a
2(K)n -Ỉ7 r C I A I aiw H c \ it w !6 cH 9 -l7 0j Aiii;usi. son ab le m an foreseeing injurs must he taken
A K I S . I sL 'l ul 2(HHi l o h a v e t h e s a m e a u e a n d s ex as i l e l e n J a n l .
pcr''pi.\ti\c lok'cironic CÌ)111I1K‘Ĩ1.'C) (lnicr\ic\s I The interrckilionship bet\\CL’n anti-A sian ( I ' n it e c l K n i y d o m ) R \. M arjo ram h\ C lare
b\ K kli.irii S l;i\ro s \inlcncc iiiiil AsUiii A m c r i c i i . (H ate C rim es B ar s b> a n d J .C . S m i t h
i'i<hli rinr^h ỉì\ I l y - U i ü s \Ị iril 2(MI(): A S \ t i i p o s i u m ant i (' « i n i t ii u n i l \ i -b ru i n C r im in a l h i w K c v i i w M 2 - . U 4 \ U i \ . 20(H )
l \ .noi) o n H a l e in A n i c i i c a ) bs V i c t o r M . H u a i i i i R a c i a l Is agiirasated assaull o ccasion! nu
\ S \ K I O T l S . K l-ị ; ii uì
21 ih iid fio LiHiiit) lutw Review I7-J7 actual bodils harm • approach to setuenc e
l ’ r t i p o s L ‘i.1 j m i ' i u l i n L M i l s l o l l i c r . S . C i i n i a g L - S p r in ii. 2ÍH I0 ( l ’n i t e d K ini!dom ) R. s. Saunders bs D A.
dt (ìihkIn Scj Aci a rcspoii^c lo I'jiL’ l i s h l.otiLi vi ri h j ^ lo t o r Ji is i i co ; Avian Pacific 'rh o m as
k . ' n i k i N i i i > ( r osi' ii 'iiNC I o . I i ' i k l c b \ K c 'jm a A sa n - .\iiii.Tk-ans h a \ c pkiNCil a kc> r o l e in t h i \ a i u n - C r im in a l /.<;u R fv ic w - J 1 4 - j f !> .\{>ril. 200<f
; ii k] \ l k l i . i cl N . ' I ' s i i n p l i ' - 111 p r c \ l o u s i s s i k ' o l [rs 's c i \ il r i' jh is s t r u i : ‘:lcs . I' hc ir liiihi is no l y d R acist assaults - seniencm y guidelines,
(Ill's n u i m .i l . M i c l i a c l I- Su iilc> OUT. h> R uckueil C liin. W illijm (j. Paul. (l'n ited K i n j z d i m i i R. s. S a u n d e r s bs I’h i l i p
\ f i i r i l i i H ( t i i i i l ( i i i n n i i II l i l l L i i u (Jiiiir- K c h c r l S. C h ai i i: . Kr ist ii i C 'h o o . P r a n k n Uu. Fh> wilen
Il r l \ . ' i j v ,\Vm, / V W
1 a u r a Ki iiịislo) ll iin i: a n d f V t c r M . S i i / u k i 6~f J i m r n a l a l C r i m i n a l h i w L ^.S-IO O
I ink'll uc si. iiu l K o lk iio r Ken Ik 'iiik lsc n ■S5 M i . \ J o u n u i l \i)v . I W A p r il. 2 0 0 0
t l i a ' - ' i i o s c i l u i i l i m c s n i t n . - l i ( > i i i a l r « n i i u u r k i i i i j Iti il I iiulliiỊỉ i h c m e in l . a l C n t l l i f o r y : ih oi ii i h t s linlorcenient <>1 t h e assault and battery
piỊìc liKii'iA.uul solK'ili't .ỉini Li\|of h.iiulk'tl 111' o n kiii'jiuiLic at.i|iitsi[in[i a n d l os s. ( S i ih s l ; i i il i \ c e x c l u s i o n in l . o u i s i a n a : H i c k c v s. C c n t e n a r s
ciisci (\'k'lorKii h\ Kc\in ChikN S».'ll-l)cỈL-iniiiuituni: D c ni oc ra L Ạ . ( ' o n i m u n i c a - O ssier Hiuisc Hickes s. C cnienars O sstei
~~l l . i i w l n M i i i i f f . l o i i r t i i i l I I )' 2 Ì A i i ự i i s i . li\c I’dskci and Inicr/nalional l . a h o r k i i il i l s ) l l i i u s e b \ D a s ill .A. S / s s a k
'( ( ii I m' il .iK'ri l III S \ i n p o N Ì u n i ) b \ Jt )h n [ i a \ a k : i u a f)0 I j n t i s i u n a Ix iw Ui \ n \\ 7V.i-,SY/7
Iiu li is li v luiok S p rin g . 2000
\ s l i c s l i t s ICIlliA.ll .V'f / n i \ c r s i i \ (>l \ iit iin i I.tin Rt vitw I re a lin g spousji \ loicnce ‘d i t l e r e n t l s '
Jul\. I9W (S pecial issue on D tm iestjc V m lencei b\
•( ; i sf s Ì siiiii l ) S M - I \ t o tliai:n<»sf m e n i a l illncsN ill K a i h s l . a s t e r a n d R iij jc r D o u g l a s
Ih«.' I.OIIIM. III.I l oilỊ! . u m Nl.lllltL- slickiics Asian \ m i T i c a n s , 11 a n d St;i[|stic;il 7 In it-r n a r itin a l R f v i f w o f \'u n n i o l in i \
iv si'iiil ilN iv .k Ii (C.INL- K ik k 'Iiih l \ \laiui.il ot \ 1 o i ii a l l)]si)riÌLMs) I R o ll i m k i fi i: S p n n i ; f-a ll. 2 o(H )
()ucii'> ( t'miii'j l ihci ijl.i'('«>fp its Kcll\ i li/.i- N K n u i l l ) i s a h i l i i \ I. a w : R f s o K i i i L ’ O k l Iss ue '' Pased ss ith i!onil intentn>ns: niand.iiors
I x i l i ( i lK 's l l . l i H ' ! u \ .1 N«.av N \ i U c n n i u n \ ' b \ T a m H T r a n . m v s i .m d d c c r c a s t i \ ^ t h e t h r e s h o l d l»'r .iss.aiU
I I i i w /\’t 1 N u ~SỊ W inur ¡(1 I h i . / I ’l i r n i i l I>l C o n i c i n / y f > i ( i r \ I a ì ỉ u I I s m i c s (W o m en . C hildren and D om estic \'io ic iK e:
\ S H I s 1( )S .ih ak'iiio iil M I sprin\ỉ. C u r r e n t T e n s i o n s ;m d E m e r g i n g I s s u e s i (P ; in e l
\S 1 \N r c t U i i o c s \2^ 6 ~ l
. s - llìiillsíl \ \ S K \ . (liiil Ifh. 2(KM>
\sỉỉí s I()S Itijiisii\ In w o r k i . i r c w o rk in g (u o \c rn n ic n i prt»- C r o s s n ( \ n i r t s p o s s e r t o m a k e a r e s tr ic i n » n
\ s b k . -s it »s k ' i j i s l . i i i o i i ( l Ui li l II ỈX' i h f e n d ’ h \ i:ratii'> rc ij ui rin ij w c l t i i r c rL*ci[>icnis U) vviirk) o n i e r . ( I n i t e d K i n j i i l o m i K. s A s b u n u d i e
K iin Iii i I I 'l . iv iin o 'V) h i i i l 11 . h i m . ( N o w '»'orki ( P a n e l D i s c u s s m t i ) 6 -i .In iir n a l a f C r i m i n a l h t w M i .^2 f t h . 2 0 (* 0
I n Ilk- l o < lc t. il C l . m i l s in;is S' Joii ifu il (>f I aiw a m i h t H c \ ¡(>7-177 J o i n t e n t e r p r i s e - s s n h d r a s s a l . (( n i i e d Kins:-
C | u c n c h . I ' - hc 's io - ' 1 ) 0, 1 v Ul l i n l i i ' l SC.II h\ h ill, / w d . . m ) R s. M i t c h e l l
T(.'n\ C .i t l ci \ S P I I Al l cctncnt 6. i J (H tr n iil i)f C r i m i n a l I a iw
V) \ỊỈ \ J o n n i i i l i2 i I > 2 (I IHI c<»niraclor w a s no t r o q u j r e J ỈO u s e D n. /Wy
\ S H I . S I O S t m i i f s .Iiul iniiiitiü \(1 ac cr u .i l i n c l h o d . b y N i c h o l a s J. I 'i o re b i n d i n g cla nt N in a ( i r a s o p t i o n : a c r i t i q u c
M i i i i n i : HKl iiNlrx J l Thi- Tux ÁílvÌH-r 74,s O d . 2<t(H) ol P e n n s y l s a n i a ’s i n f o r m e d c o n s e n t d^ K i ri n e .
\ S B I S I O S rcnitual A S i ’H A I n e .cm cnt s.r G r a s s. ( i r u n n a y l e bv N a t h a n A . K o n k a m p
• V s h c N t o s lìn^.•^ i2i \ c u a r n i i i ' j l o c o n s i r i i c i m n A s p h i i li c c n i c n i 6 1 L 'n iv (‘r \ i i \ o l P i n s h u r i ’h U n v H t-v ic w
clk'iiiN (I 'niioil K i n y i l o n i i h \ J . i k i i u l a I'oTilini: A S P H 't X ÍA 2 4 l-2 S fi h ill. ¡ W
H i i i l l h t i i h l S ) i f c J \ l i n i l c l i n S i Ị I I h i . / ‘^ w 1 iiliil Mith»c;ilion b \ r u b b e r h a l l o n s in ch i i - A jurisprudence in disarray: on battery,
St'f lliso lir cn: [n c ch an Ì M ìi atitl prc\LMilion, by \ ] .A . svronj-'tul h s i n j : . a n d t h e rii ih i t o b o d i l s i n t e ^ -
• A ' . h o s l o s i i k I i i s I ia A l x l o l - k ; i h n i a n IIKS f - o r r n s i c Si i c l u r h u c n u i - III), b y M a r k S t r a s s e r
A S H J i S r O S rciiiov.il \rr lio n a l h h 14. 2(HH) S a n D i i '^ o I m w K c v iv w 9 ^ 7 - 1 0 4 1
A s l x ’siiK inJiisiiA ^í 'í' ( ¡ i s o h ill. / W V
NCI'SWUV2 IIUlUsIIẠ\cc D ro u n in i: .vt't’ al.S(i
Reference to subject S i i a n ‘j l i n ^ Affray
S .- il./V S N( I X S S A T I . r ami haliLMN I n d e c e n t a s s a u lt
ol SiHllll f-.isl A nỉ . ì IÌ NillU'Ils CovI'. d c l c i u l a n t ' s c o s i s (tn.ji.T - P r o s e c u t i o n P oisoning
A S H dlspns;il 1>1 o t t c ĩ i c c s A c t I f) - p R K ' C C d i i l i j s d i v - A S S A l i ; r C rim inal ut
T ra s ti. iish. . i n J i h c |>tn>cni\; a l i ll h ;m ni\LT- t'oiHiniiL'il - u h c i t i c r c u s N o r d e r aỊìprt.»priítte, R ape
s;ir> I'l i Ik ' S ii p t v n i c C o u n ' s Cil> ol (I'liilcd KiiiLĩiioni) R. \ . S o u t h W’C''! S u r r e y A S S A C l . T . S e x u a l .see
Chica^jo \\.ivk--lo-cni.'ri:> conihusiu'M ash \la* jisln iics' C o u rt ( c \ p a n e Jiim cs) h \ DC. Rape
(k'LiNioii. C'it\ 1>! C’hk'iii:!) l-i n i r on n io nl .il O r n ic in c l ai u l T o m R e e s A S S A l'l . T vseapons
Dc k 'M sc I'liiiil. I i k , hs \ l a r k i i s ( i i’lulor C r in i t i i n l L i w R e v ie w Ai<i;iisl. 201)0
^*6 ( '('//<';’(• l . n v i r c n i n i n ĩ n l A f i d i r s
/,</11 H f v n w I S S p n in :. / w v
198
CHAPTER 6 SECONDARY AUTHORITY
3. C om puter-A id ed Research
'1 h e I iu ie x to Legal P eriodicals a n d C u r re n t l.iiw lu de .\ ar e a \ a i l a h l e in ( d ) i \ ( ) M tor in. l h e IL P
a n d (,7,/ are avai l abl e o n W' estlaw a n d LexisNexis. Bo t h are t h e m o s t e o i n p r e h e n s i \ e i n d e x e s
a n d t h e i r o n l i n e v e r s i o n s i n c l u d e all u p d a t e s , l h e IL P is al s o avai l abl e o n l i n e ; thi s v e r s i o n is
c a l l e d h u i c x to L ega l P eriodicals Full Lext a n d is Lipdated m o n t h h ' . l h e C L l o n l i n e , as well as
o n CCI)-R(OM, i.s ca l l ed LegalF rae a n d is a\' ailable o n t h e I n t e r n e t b\' s u b s c r i p t i o n . Legal'Frac
i n c l u d e s s o u r c e s in a d d i t i o n to t h o s e listed in t h e C.I.L
M a n \ ’ l aw re vi ews , pe r i od i c a l s, a n d legal n e w s p a p e r s a r e as ail able o n b o t h W' es t l a w a n d
Lexi sNexi s . S o m e l a w r e v i e ws a r e avai l abl e t h r o u g h law sc h o o l W' eb sites, a n d s o m e p e r i o d ic a l
a r t i c l e s a r e av a i l ab l e t h r o u g h t h e p u b l i s h e r ' s W e b site. See C h a p t e r 7 t o r t u r t h e r d i s c u s s i o n
o t ' c t i m p u t e r s a n d legal r e s e a r c h .
III. RESTATEMENTS O F TH E LAW

' l h e A m e r i c a n L a w I n s t i t u t e ( A L i ) w a s t o u n d e d in 1923 to a d d r e s s t w o m a i o r d e t e c t s in
A m e r i c a n law: u n c e r t a i n t \ - a n d c o mp l ex i t y. Un c e r l a i nt ) - e x i s t e d b e c a u s e o t ' a lack o f a g r e e
m e n t a m o n g m e m b e r s o f t h e prt )fession o n t u n d a m e n t a l p r i n c i p l e s ot t h e c o m m o n law. Also,
t h e r e w a s a l ack o f p r e c i s i o n in t h e u s e o f legal t e r m s , a n d st a t u t es we r e of t e n p o o r h ' d r a f t e d .
C o m p l e x i t y a r o s e b e c a u s e o f n u m e r o u s ditf' erences in t h e law in t h e \ ' a r i o u s i u r i s d i c t i o n s in
t h e U n i t e d States.
l h e p r i m a r y goal o f t h e ALI is to p r o m o t e c l ar i f i c a t i o n a n d s i mp l i f i c a t i o n o f t h e law.
' l h e f o u n d e r s d ec i t l e d t ha t t hi s goal c o u l d be a c c o m p l i s h e d t h r o u g h a r e s t a t e m e n t o f t h e law
d e f i n i n g w h a t t h e law is for basi c legal subj ect s. '1 o a c c o n i p l i s h thi s task, t h e ALI r e c r u i t e d
n a t i o n a l l y k n o w n s c h o l a r s to dr a f t t h e R e s t a t e m e n t s . I ' r o m 1923 to 1944, Restatem ents
o f the L a w w e r e p u b l i s h e d t o r a ge n c y , c o n f h c t o f laws, c o n t r a c t s , j u d g m e n t s , p r o p e r t \ ' r e s
t i t u t i o n , s ecur i t y, t or t s , a n d trusts. In 1952, t h e o r i g i n a l R e s t a t e m e n t s w e r e r e p u b l i s h e d w i t h
u p d a t e s , e x p a n d e d c o m m e n t s , a n d analysis. N e w R e s t a t e m e n t s w e r e p u b l i s h e d in s u c h a r e a s
as l a n d l o r d - t e n a n t a n d fo r e i g n r e l a ti o n s law. I h i s s e c o n d set of p u b l i c a t i o n s is call ed R estale-
ineiil S ec o n d . In 1987, t h e ALI b e g a n R e s t a te m e n t Ih ird . It i n c l u d e s re\ i s i o n s a n d u p d a t e s ot
t h e R e s t a te m e n ts a n d n e w subj ect s, s u c h as u n f a i r c o m p e t i t i o n , a n d s u r e t y s h i p aiul g u a r a n t e e ,
R e s t a te n u ’n ts a r e t h e p r o d u c t of h i g h h ' c o m p e t e n t s c h o l a r s in e a c h a r e a ot t h e l aw a n d
a r e a h i g h i v r e s p e c t e d a n d \ a l u a b l e researcli tool. D u e to t h e a u t h o r i t a t i \ e n e s s of t h e R e s t a t e
m e n ts , t h e y a r e f r e q u e n t h ' ci t e d b\' t h e c o u r t s a n d o f i en a c c o r d e d a r e c o g n i t i o n g r e a t e r t h a n
t h a t a c c o r d e d t o treat i ses.
For Example M o s t of the la w of torts is not s ta tu to ry law ; th a t is, it is e s ta b lis h e d in c o u rt

o p in io n s . A s s u m e a state c o u rt has not defined a term such as superseding
cause in n e g lig e n c e law. A n a p p e lla te c o u rt of th e state, w h e n fa c e d w ith a c ase th a t
re q u ire s th e te r m to be defined, m ay re fe r to th e Restatement of the Law of Torts § 440
and a d o p t its d e fin itio n o f t h e term .
N o t e t h a t t h e R e s t a t e m e n t s o f th e l.a w a r e s e c o n d a r y a u t h o r i t y a n d u s e d to s u p p o r t
p r i m a r y a u t h o r i t y o r w h e n t h e r e is n o pr i n i a r \ - a u t h o r i t y .
R e s t a te m e n t s e c t i o n s c u r r e n t h ' exist for t h e f o l l o w i n g a r e a s o f t h e law:
Agency R e s t i t u t i o n a n d u n ju s t e n r i c h m e n t
C o n f l i c t s ot l aw Securit\’
Contracts Suretyship a nd g ua r a n i }
F o r e i g n r e l at i on s l aw o f t h e U n i t e d States Torts
199
ludgmonts Ti'usts
l . aw g o \ c r n i n g lawx'ers L’n i a i r c o m p e t i t i o n
Property
A. R e s ta te m e n t Features
T h e R i'itiitciiicnti o f t h e L a w h a v e t h e l o l l o wi n g ieatLires:
Organization. Kach R e s t a te m e n t is d i x i d e d i nt o c h a p t e r s t ha t c o \ e r m a j o r areas,

l h e c h a p t e r s are t h e n d i \ i d e d i nt o b r o a d e r topi cs, a n d t h e t o p i cs a re d i \ i d e d int o
indiv idual s e c t i o n s that p r e s e n t a g e n e r a l p r i n c i p l e o f law.
For Example One c h a p te r of the Restateivent of the Law of Torts, Products Li-
ability ls title d , "L ia b ility of C o m m e rc ia l P ro d u c t S e lle rs Ba sed on
P ro d u c t D e fe c ts at Time of S a le." This c h a p te r is divid ed into to p ic s . Topic 1 is
"L ia b ility Rules A p p lic a b le to P ro d u c ts G enerally." This to p ic is divid ed into fo u r
s e c tio n s . S e ctio n 1 p re s e n ts the g e n e ra l p rin c ip le of la w g o v e rn in g the "L ia b ility
of C o m m e rc ia l S e lle r or D is trib u to r fo r H arm Caused by D e fe c tiv e P ro d u c ts ."
At t h e b e g i n n i n g ot e a c h \ o l u m e a n d e a c h c h a p t e r is a tabl e ot c o n t e n t s listii
t h e t opi c a n d s e c t i o n s c o v e r e d in t h e c h a p t e r (see Hxhibit 6-3).
Restatement of the Law. luich R esla tenieiit s e c t i o n b e g i n s w i t h a s t a t e m e n t o f t he

p r i n c i p l e ol lavs’ o r a l ule o f law, s u m m a r i z i n g a n d d e f i n i n g t h e A m e r i c a n l aw o n
t h e t opi c (see H.xhibit 6-3).
Comments and Illustrations. Hollowing t h e r ul e of law is a c o m m e n t s e c t i o n that
i n c l u d e s an a n a h t i c a l d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e r ul e a n d m a y p re s en t h y p o t h e t i c a l illustra
l i o n s ol a p p l i c a t i o n of t h e r u l e (see li xhibi t 6-3). T h e a u t h o r i t y w h o d ra f t e d t h e Re-
state)iient p r e p a r e s t he c o m m e n t s a n d r e p o r t e r s ' n o t e s (see “ R e p o r t e r s ' No t e" next).
As t h e w o r k p r o d u c t ol a w e l l - k n o w n a u t h o r i t v, t h e \ a d d \ a l u e to t h e Restiileinent.
Reporters’ Note. Hol l owing t h e c o m m e n t s a re r e p o r t e r s ' n o t e s t h a t i n c l u d e g e n er a l

i n f o r m a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g t h e R esta te n ie n t a n d c i t at i on s to cases, treati ses, articles,
aiul o t h e r s e c o n d a r v s o u r c e s in s u p p o r t ol a n d o p p o s i t i o n to t h e R e ita te iiie n t (see
Hlxhibit 6-6),
Cross-referenccs. Cj ' o s s - r e f e r en c e s to t b e W e s t ’s di gest key n u m b e r s a n d A L R a n

n o t a t i o n s a c c o m p a n y e a c h R e sta te m e n t.
Appendix volumes. B e g i n n i n g w i t h t h e R e s ta te m e n I Second, t h e r e a r e n o n c u m u l a -

ti\’e a p p e n d i x v o l u m e s t h a t c a t e g o r i / e a n d s u m m a r i z e d e c i s i o n s o f ' c o u r t s f r o m ilif
fer ent j u r i s d i c t i o n s tliat h a ve ci t e d R esta tenienls.
Updates, liach R e s ta te m e n t is u p d a t e d wi t h p o c k e t p a r t s for e a c h h a r d b o u n d \(il-

u n i e a n d s u p p l e m e n t s t h a t a r e p la c e d b e si d e t h e a p p r o p r i a t e h a r d b o u n d \ o l u n i e .
l h e title p a g e o f tiie p o c k e t p a r t o r s u p p l e m e n t p r o v i d e s t h e d a t e s of t h e c as es r e
p o r t e d a n d i n s t r u c t i o n s for l o c a t i n g e a r l i e r c i t a t i o n s (see Hxhibit 6-7). S e mi a n n ua l l y ,
i n t e r i m ca se c i t at i on s p a m p h l e t s are p u b l i s h e d t ha t a re u s e d in c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h t h e
pocket parts a nd supplements.
index. A c o n i p r e h e n s i \ - e i n d e x a c c o m p a n i e s e a c h R e s ta te m e n t t h a t r e f e r e nc e s s e c
t i ons, c o m m e n t s , a n d r e p o r t e r s ’ notes.
200
E x h i b i t 6 - 5 Res tat ement (Third) of Torts, Products Liability § 1. A m e ric a n L a w institure. R e

s t a t e m e n t (Third) of Tor t s , 3 d ed., Vol. 1 119981, p. 5 © 1998 b y the A n ie n c a n L a w Institute. A ll n g h ts re se rv e d .
R e p r in t e d w ith p e r m is s io n
CHAPTER 1
LIA BILITY OF C O M M E R C IA L P R O D U C T
SE L L E R S BASED ON PR O D U C T D E F E C T S
AT TIM E OF SA LE
TO PIC 1, Ll.ABlLITY RULES A P P L IC A B L E

TO P R O D U C T S G E N E R A L L Y
Section
I. Liability o f C'omniercial .Seller or Dist ribut or lor Ha r m C a u s e d by
[ ) e t e c t i \ e [Products
Contents- -2. Cateizories o f Product Defect
Ci r c u mst an t i a l Kv i dence ,Supportin>z Inference (ít' Product Defect
4. N o n co n i p l i an c c and C o m p l i a n c e with Product ,Satety Stat utes or
Rciiulaticins
T O P IC 2, L I A B II J T Y RU LES Af^PLICABLE TO S P E C IA L
P R O D U C T S OR PR O D U C T M A R K E T S
.5. LiabilitN ol Coninicrciiil S c IIl-i' or Distributor ol Product Conipiiiient.s lor
H a r m CaLiscd hy Prodiicis Inti) Wh i c h (' oiiipt)noiits Ar e Intem'Lited
6. Liabilitv (if Coni ni crci al .Seller or Distributor for H a r m C a u s e d by
i:>efccti\e Presciiptiiin Druiis and Mcdi cal l ) c \ ices
7. l.iabilit\ o f C'oiiinicrcial .Seller or Distrilxitoi' t o r H a r m C a u s e d b \
I ) e l c c t i \ c Footl PriKliiLts
8. 1 iahilitx ('t ( ' o n i u u ' i v i al Seller or Distrihutcir ot IX‘l e c t i \ e IKetl
l’r(Klu(.ts
TO PIC 1, L IA B IL IT Y RULES A P P L IC A B L E
TO P R O D U C T S G E N E R A L L Y
§ I , Liability of Com m ercial Seller or Distributor for Harm

C aused by Defective Products
One engaged in the business o f selling or otherwise distrib-

Rule — uting products who sells or distributes a defective product is
subject to liability for harm to persons or property caused by
the defect.
Comment Comment:
a. Hisiorw This Section stales a general rule of toil liability

applicable to comiricrcial sellers and other distributors of products
generally. Rules of liability applicable to special products
201
E x h i b i t 6 - 6 Res tat ement (Third) of Torts, Products Liability Notes. Anencan Laiv/'isf/-
fuie. R e s t a t e m e n t (Third) of Tor t s , 3 c / e d , Vo/ I il9 9 8 i. p 9 © 1 9 9 8 b v the A n ie n c a r L a w In s v tu le Ah n g h ts
re se rv e d . R e p rin te d w ith p e rm is s io n
Ch. 1 L IA H II.n ^ H A SI.I) ON IIM K -O I -SA I.K D K K K C I S Í I
noniiiaiuifactiiring sellers or distrihiiioi s tlo nol i h e n i s e h e s reiidei' the protlucls

d e re c tis c and regardless o f w h e t h e r ihe\ are in a position to p r e \ e n i def'eets
I'roni occurring!. See S 2. C'oninieni o. Legislation has been e n a c t e d in nian\
jur i sdi e t i ons that, to s o m e extent, ¡ni imini /es nonnuuuif' acturing selleis oi'
distributors I'roni strict liabilit\. T h e legislation is p r e mi s e d on the belie! that
bri ngi ng nt)nmanLit'acluring sellers or distri butors into pr oduc t s l i abi l i u litiga
tion g enerat es wasteful legal ct)sis. Al t h o u g h liability in most c a s es is ulti
mat ely passed on to the niamif'acturei' w h o is respiinsible for cr e a t i ng the
product defect, no n n i a n u r a c t u r i n g sellers or ilistributors must d e \ o t e re s o u r c e s
to protect their interests. In most situations, theiel'ore. ini nuii ii /i ng ii onnianu-
f'acturers from strict liabilit\ saves th('sc resources v\ithout jec' par di/ ing the
plaintiff's interests. To assure plaintiffs access to a r esponsibl e a n d s o h e n t
product seller or distributor, the statutes generall_\ p i i n i d e that the nonmai ui -
facturing seller or distri butor is i n i mu n i / e t l fr om strict liabilit_\ only if : ( I ) the
ma n u f ac t u r er is subject to the jurisdiction of the court of' plai nli ff' s domi ci l e:
and (2) the ma n u f ac t u r er is not. nor is likel\ to b e c o me , ii is ohent .
In c o n n e c t i o n with these statutes, t wo p r o b l ems m a \ need to be r e s o K e d

to assure fairness to plaintiffs. L'iist. as curreniK st ructured, the st atut es t \ pi -
calK i mp o s e upon the plai nti ff the risk o f insoKencx o f the m a n u f a c t u r e r
b e t we en the li me an action is brought a nd the time a j u d g m e n t can be enfor ced.
If a n o nma n u f ac t u r i n g seller or tlistribulcM' is d i s mi s s e d from an acti on at the
outset wh e n it a ppea r s that the ma n u f ac t u r er will be able to pa\ a jiiilgmcnt.
and the ma n u f ac t u r er subsequentlx b e c ome s iiisoKeni and is unabl e to pas tlic
j udgment , the plaintif f ma y be Icfl to s u f f c r t h c loss lui compensatct i. O n e p o s
sible solution could be to loll the statute o f limitations at;ainsi nonmanufacUir-
ers so that the\ iiia\ be brought in if necessarx. Secoiul, a ii oii manul act ur i ng
seller or tiistributor occasionall> will bc r esponsibl e for the iniroi.luction of a
ilefect in a product even t h o u g h it exercisetl reasonahl e care in haiKlling or
super vi si ng the product in its control. In such instances, liahilitv for a S 2(a)
detect shiiuld be imposctl on the i i onma nuf a c t uri ng seller or distributor. See
ij 2. iiluslration 2.
KKPORI K K S ' NOri:

C o i u m e i i t tl. m .s io n . l>.2d S 7 I. S S L 82 (Alaska 1979)
I. A b u n d a n t authoril ) recot ; ni / es (.Accortl. Shanks \. L'pjohn Co.. S.\^
the division o f product defects into l>.2cl I 189, I 194 (Alaska 1992)); Dart
manufacturiniz defects, desiüii delects, V. Wi ebe Mfg.. Inc,. 709 P,2d 876.
and defect s based on inadetỊuate 8 7 8 - 7 9 ( A r i / . 1 985) (en b a n d : Barker
instructions or vvarnines. See. e,e.. V, Lull Laig'g Co.. 573 l>,2d 443. 4,^4
Cateijiillar Tractor Co. V. Beck, ỹ'-)} (Cal. 1978) (recognizing that different
202
E x h i b i t 6 - 7 R es tat ement (Third) of Torts, Pocket Part Cover Page. A m e n c a n L a w Institute. R e s t a t e m e n t

( Third) of T o r t s , 3ci ed., C u m u la tiv e A n n u a l P o c k e t Part lo r U s e m 2 0 0 0 l2 0 0 0 i. p 2 6 © 2 0 0 0 b y the A m e n c a n L a w Institute.
A ll lig h ts re se rv e d . R e p n n te d w ith p e rm is s io n
Insert this Pocket Piirt iit the back ol’ the R e s t a t eme n t
o f t h e Law 'I'hird. Torts: [’n x l u ct s Liabilils (1 9 9 8 )
C a s e C it a t io n s to t h e
R e s t a t e m e n t o f t h e L aw
C um ulative A nnual Pocket Part

For Use In 2000
R e p o r t i n g C 'a s c > I ’r o n i , li i l\ I9 (S 4
Dates of fhe cases reported T h r o u g h J u n e 19 9 9 T h a t C i t e
R e s t a t e m e n t o f the L a w S e c o n d ,
Torts 2d, §§ 4 0 2 A an d 4 0 2 B
a nd
R e s t a t e m e n t o f the L a w T h ir d,
Torts: P r o d u c t s Liability §§ I to E n d
This I’oeket Part cont a i ns all citations to the Re s t a t eme n t o f the Law Third.
I'orts: Product s [.iability. as well as citations, for the perioil Ironi .liil\ 1984
Instructions for locating t hr ough .lune 1999, to §§ 4()2,-\—K)2P o f t h e Re s t a t eme n t S e c o n d o f Torts. For
earlier and subsequent e arl ier cit ati ons to iiS 402.' \ -402B. see the 'Volume titled "Tort s 2d .Appendix
citations SS 4 0 2 A to 402F5 Report i ng ,\ll C a s e s t hr ough Jinie 1984." l-’or su b s e q u e n t

cit ati ons see also the Interim C a se C ilalion s lo lhe R e s k itc m e u ls oJ lhe Law
p a mp h l et s clesignated for use with the 2(KK) I’oeket lârts and Su p p l e me n t s .
Editor: Ma r i a n n e McCiottigan Walke r

T h e A me r i c a n l.aw Institute
402.5 Ch e s t n u t Street
Phil adelphi a. PA 19104
.S T P A U L . M N
,\.\H Ric \N t.\\\ i N s i i n II I’ r m i s i i i K s
:(l()()
203
B. Research Using Restatements ofthe Law

I . Use as a Research Tool
Ri'iliitfiiicnls o f t h e l.a w have several uses as a research tool. You m a y refer to a R e sta te m e n t w h e n
a speeitic legal tei iii, pri ncipl e, o r rul e has not b e e n d e f i ne d in y o u r juri sdi ct i on. In s u c h s i t u a
tions, a c o u rt n i a \ ’ reter to a n d a d o p t t h e R e sta te m e n t as t h e law in t h e juri sdi ct i on. I h e Restale-
n ien t pros ides g u i d a n c e as to h o w t h e law s h o u l d b e d e f i n e d o r stated; r e a s o ns in s u p p o r t ot t he
defi nit ion o r s t a t e m e n t of t h e law; a n d cit ati ons to cases, treatises, a n d o t h e r s e c o n d a r y authorit y.
W h e n a R estateiJieni has b e e n a d o p t e d , t h e c o m m e n t s a n d r e p o r t e r s ’ no t e s a r e inva l ua bl e
a i d s in l o c a t i n g cases f r o m o t h e r j u r i s d i c t i o n s a n d o t h e r s e c o n d a r y s o u r c e s i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e
R e s la te m e n l. A R e s t a te m e n t m a y also b e u s e d to l o c a t e a u t h o r i t y t o c h a l l e n g e a n e x i s t i n g law.
For Example The client's case re q u ire s the c h a lle n g e of a rule or s ta te m e n t of th e la w

ado p te d by a s tate th a t diffe rs fro m the one re c o m m e n d e d by th e Restate
ment. The Restatement m ay pro v id e re a s o n s and pers u a s iv e a u th o rity t h a t c a n be used
! to c h a lle n g e the existing rule or s ta te m e n t o f t h e law.
2. Research Techniques—Restatements
I h e f o l l o wi n g r e s e a r c h t e c h n i q u e s h e l p y o u l ocat e specific R e s t a te m e n t topics,
a. Index
'i'ou m a y l ocat e R e s ta te m e n t t o p i c s b\' c o n s u l t i n g t h e a l p h a b e t i c a l i n d e x usual l y l o c a t e d at t he
e n d ol e a c h R estiitenient.
For Example If you are interested in the definition of superseding cause in a negligence case,
you w o u ld refer to the index to the Restatement of the Law of Torts, Second.
b. lable ot (Contents
If \' ou are f a mi l i a r wi t h t h e a rea a n d tt>pic, y o u c a n s c a n t h e t abl e of’c o n t e n t s i)f' the Restiite-
m e n t \ o l u m e for t h e specific s e c t i o n .
For Example You are re s e a rc h in g s tric t liability in a to rts ca s e involving m a n u fa c tu rin g

d e fe c ts . Look m th e ta b le of c o n te n ts to th e Restatement of the Law of
j Torts, Products Liability volume.
c. Table of Cases
M o r e re ce nt R e s ta te m e n ts h a \ e a “T able o f C a s e s ” in t h e i n d e x v o l u m e for t h e R e s ta te m e n t. If
\'ou l oo k u p a case n a m e cit ed in t h e R esta tem e n t, t hi s table will lead y o u to t h e rel evant sect i on.
d. Appendix Volumes
Refer to t h e n o n c u m u l a t i \ ’e a p p e n d i x v o l u m e s for s u n n n a r i e s o f c o u r t opinicMis a d d r e s s i n g
t h e R e s ta te m e n t s e c t i o n \ o u are r e s e a r c h i n g .
e. Rcferencc from Other Sources

O f t e n \' ou ma \ ' b e d i r e c t e d to a speci fic R e s t a te m e n t s e c t i o n f r o m a n o t h e r so u r ce , s u c h as a
c i t a t i on in a case, article, a n d S h e p a r d s’ R e s ta te m e n t o f t h e L a w C itation s. You c o u l d g o direct!)-
to t h e v o k n n e a n d s e c t i o n ci t ed r a t h e r t h a n c o n s u l t t h e i ndex.
204
,A lw a y s cli eck t h e p o c k e t p a rt a n d s u p p l c n i o i i t to u p d a t e x'our researeli a n d to l o ca t e

t h e m o s t r e c e n t cases. In a d d i t i o n , a lw a y s c o n s u l t t h e a p p e n d i x v o l u m e to e n s u r e t ha t \' ou
h a v e l o c a t e d all t h e c a s e s u m m a r i e s . N o t e t hat t h e a p p e n d i x \ o l u m e s a r e n o n c u m u l a t i \ - e , so
e a c h m u s t b e c h e c ke d .
3. C om pu ter-A id ed Research
' I h e R e s t a te m e n ts o f t h e L a w are avai l abl e on C 1 VRC) M, as well as We s t l a w a n d LexisNexis.
IV. UNIFORM LAWS A N D MODEL A C T S

1 h e N a t i o n a l C o n f e r e n c e ot C o m m i s s i o n e r s o n L ' n i t o r m State Laws ( NCXX' Sl . ) wa s f o r m e d to
dr a f t a n d p r o m o t e u n i f o r m laws. I h e m e m b e r s i n c l u d e j udges , a t t o r n e y s , law p r o f e s s o r s , a n d
legal s c ho l a r s . T h e g o a l o f t h e NXXIL'SL is to m a k e a \ a i l a b l e for a d o p t i o n b y st ates uniform
laws and model acts in a r e a s o f t h e law w h e r e un i f o r m i t \ - w o u l d b e bene fi ci al to t h e states.
For Example For c o m m e r c e to ta k e pla c e s m o o th ly and e ffic ie n tly b e tw e e n s tates, it

is b e n e fic ia l if th e la w s g o v e rn in g c o m m e rc e , s u c h as th e sale of goods,
are u n ifo rm am ong th e states. To this end, th e N a tio n a l C o n fe re n c e of C o m m is s io n e rs
on U n ifo rm State L a w s and th e A m e r ic a n L a w Ins titu te d ra fte d th e U nifo rm C o m m e rc ia l
Code. E v ery state has a d o p te d th e c ode in w h o le or in part.
M o d e l acts ar e d r a f t e d for t h o s e situatit>ns in w h i c h a st at e d o e s n o t i n t e n d to a d o p t an

e n t i r e law, b u t r a t h e r i n t e n d s to m o d i t \ ' a u n i t o r m law to m e e t t h e st ate' s r e q u i r e m e n t s . I h e
A m e r i c a n Law In s t i t u t e h as d r a t t e d se\'eral m o d e l code s. I h e s e i n c l u d e t h e M o d e l P e n al C o d e ,
t h e M o d e l Côde o f L v i d e n c e , t h e M o d e l L a nd D e v e l o p m e n t (ôde, a n d t h e ,\Ii>del B u s i n e s s
CA) r p o r a t i o n s Act.
I h e u n i f o r m laws a n d m o d e ! acts are s e c o n d a r y a u t h o r i t y . I h ey b e c o m e p r i m a r v ’ a u t h o r
ity o n l y w h e n t h e ) ’ a r e a d o p t e d b\- a st ate' s l egi sl ature. W h e n a d o p t e d , the\- will b e a s s i g n e d
s t a t u t o r y n u m b e r s t h a t tit w i t h i n t h e st ate s st at ut orx' n u m b e r i n g s c h e m e
For Example The fir s t tw o s e c tio n s of A r tic le 2, Sales, of the U nifo rm C o m m e rc ia l Code
are n u m b e re d and titled Section 2-101, Short Title, and Section 2-102, Scope.
W h e n th e state of C o lo ra d o a d o p te d th e s e s e c tio n s , the n u m b e rs w e r e a m e n d e d to fit
w ith in th e state's s ta tu to ry n u m b e rin g s y s te m — S e c tio n 2-101 is S e c tio n 4-2-101, S h o rt
Title; S e c tio n 2-102 is S e c tio n 4-2-102, Scope.
A. Features of Uniform Laws a n d Model Acts

T h e L ' n i t o r m Laws . An n o t a t e d (L'.L.A.) h a \ e t h e t' ollowing teatures:
Organization. L a c h law o r act is d i v i d e d i nt o t o p i c s a n d s u b t o p i c s by art i c l e s a n d

s e c t ions .
Uniform law. F a c h s e c t i o n p r e s e n t s a s t a t e m e n t o f t h e u n i f o r m law (see Lxhi bi t 6-8) .
Comniis.sioner.s’ notes. T h e law m a y b e f ol l o w e d by t h e c o m m i s s i o n e r s ’ c o m m e n t s

o n t h e law, w h i c h i n c l ud e , a m o n g o t h e r t h i ng s , t h e p u r p o s e o f t h e law, a d i s c u s s i o n
o f t h e v a r i a t i o n s a d o p t e d by t h e states, r e f er e n c e s to law rex'iew art icl es, a n d a list o f
t h e st at es t ha t h a v e a d o p t e d t h e law.
Library references. F ol l o w i n g t h e law ar e li brar}’ r e l e r e n c e s o r g u i d e s to o t h e r r e

s e a r c h s o u r c e s , s u c h as diges t ke\- n u m b e r s a n d e n c y c l o p e d i a cites (sec F x hi b i t 6-8).
Notes to decisions. F a c h law i n c l u d e s a s u m m a r y o f c o u r t d e c i s i o n s i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e

l aw f r o m all a d o p t i n g st ates (see Fx h i b i t 6-9).
205
I'ables. l!ach s o l u n i c has tabl es li sting st ates that h a \ e a d o p t e d t h e law.
Index, b a c h u i i l t o n i i law h a s an i n d e x in t h e b a c k o f tlie \ oluiiie.
Updates. Po c k et p a r t s u p d a t e e a c h v o l u m e (see Hxhibit 6 9).
B. Research Using Uniform a n d Model Laws

It'a r e s e a r c h e r is p r o p o s i n g o r d r a f t i n g legislation, u n i f o r m laws a n d m o d e l ac t s a re I m al ua bl e
g u i d e s . No t oiiK' d o t h e y prt )vide a m o d e l text t r o m w h i c h a l aw nia\' b e c r a f t e d , b u t t h e \ ' also
p n n i d e acce ss to a r g u m e n t s in s u p p o r t o f t h e law a n d c i t at i on s to cases, tr eat i ses, a n d art i cl es
i n t e r p r e t i n g t b e law.
E x h i b i t 6 - 8 Sample U.L.A. Assault Page. W e s t Group. U n ifo rm L a w s A n n o ta ted . M o d e l P e n a l C o d e , \'ol W,

1975. p 5 3 8 © 1975 b y the A m e rica n L a w Institu te A ll n g h ts re s e rv e d R e p rin te d w ith p e rm is s io n
S 211.(1 M O D KL I’K N A L C O D K
A R T I C I . E 21 I
AS.SAl LT; K K C K L K S S K N D A N iiK K lN X ;; I HRKAT.S
211.0. Definitioiis
In this . An i d e , lhe tlefiiiilions given in .Section 210. 0 appl_\ unless a diflerent
me a n i ng iilaini) is rec|uiretl.
§211.1. Assiuilt
Text — (1) Simple .Assault. .A person is yuilly ol assault if he:
(al altenipis to cause or purpos el s. k n o u i i i g l s or r eckl essl \ ca us e s
botlils injur_\ to another: or
(hi negli gentU c a use s b o d i h injurv i c ' a n o t he r w ilh a d e a d K w e a p o n :
or
(c) allenipls b\ plivsical me n a c e lo pul a n o t h e r in fear o f ininiineni
serious bodi l \ injurs.
Si mpl e assault is a n i i sd e me a n o r unless co mn i i l i e d in a figlil or scut tl e
enlereti into b\ mut ual consent , in wiiich case il is a pells ni i sdemeanor.
(2) .Afij>ravated .Assault. .A person is guilts ot a g g r a s a i e d assault if he:
(a) allenipls to ca u se serious bodils injuiA lo another, or c a u s e s such
injurs piirposels. knossiiiiils or recklessly uniler c i i ci i ms i a n ce s manil'esi-
ing e Mi e ni e j ndj fference lo the s a l u e ot' h u m a n lit'e: or
(b) alleniiils lo c a u se or pur posels or kiiossiiigis c a u s e s hotlils injurs
lo a n o t h e r s\ ilh a deailly w eapon.
.AggrasalecI assault u n de r par a gr a ph (a) is a felons ot the s econd tlegree;
a g g r a s a l e d assault u n d e r p aragr aph (b) is a felons ol the third ilegree.
Library references --------------------------------------Library References

•Assaull and Balters « = 4 8 lo .^8. C..I.S. .Assault and Halters SS .^1. 57
el sec|.. M . I } el sec|.
§ 211.2. Recklessly Kndanj>ering Another I’erson

,A person conini il s a m i s d e m e a n o r if he recklessly e ng a g e s in conduct ss liich
places or ma y place a n o t h e r person in daiigei' o f death or serious boilils injury.
Re c k l es s n e s s and d a n g e r shall be p r e s ume d w here a person knowiiigis points
206
E x h i b i t 6 - 9 U.L.A. Cumulative Annual Pocket Part Page. LVesr Group, U n ifo rm L a w s A n n o ta te d , M o d e l P e n a l C o d e ,

V o l W <1975), C u m u la tive A n n u a l P o c k e t P a n i2 0 0 ll p 191-192. R e p rin te d w ith p e r m is s io n from l / ^ e s f G roup.
PENAL CODE S 21 Ll
C a k l u L 'll . I’lL h iS ? . 5 3 2 \.2 c l S M . 5 i ’a. 4 4 1 . rv itriiu n io m c ic n icd n u ird c r. ih e re n i' w a y (il d e le r m iiiin g w h e lh e i ju r y w o u k l h a ve
? 5 () A . 2 J 7 S 5 . 5 2 0 \\ i. W . lo u n d lin e p ro p e r a g g r a v a t in ;; c ir c iin is ia n e e o u lw e ig h e d a n y m ili-
g a liiig jir e u iiis t a n c e s . w ith o u t a d d illo n a l a g g r a v a t e d a s s a u ll c o n -
In a ll e a se s c h a p je ci u iu ie r ih c ('« k Ic 's im irc ic r p r o v is io n s , in
M ctio n . C o m . s. K a r a b in . P a .S u p e r . 1 4 S 7 , .S24 .A .Jd 5 1 6 . !>a.
o rd e r t'l’r the d e ath p e n a lts lo he im p o s e d . S ta te n u ist p ro ve
S u p e r. .^(K). a p p e a l g ra n te d .5.11 A . 2 d I I I'A ,5|6 P a . 6 1 7 . a U lrrn e d
b e y o n d a re a s o n a b le d o u h t that a ^ iir a v a t in ^ fa c to rs o u tvse i^ h e d
.5.54 .-\ .:d 19. 521 Pa. .54.\
the m it ig a tin g la c to rs . S ta te v. R ie g e n w a ld . N .J.I^ iX '^ . 5 2 4 A . 2d
\ M) . !()(' N . J ^ . V S e n te n c e ot d e ath e o u ld not he a llo w e d to sta n d w h e re h a ll o l
jury h e a rd that d c ie n d a n t w a s w a n te d o n o th e r m u rd e r c h a r g e s
T o su p p o rt a L iiira v a iin g lactcM' u n d e r N ..I.S ..-\. 2 C ': I I 3. su h d .
p r io r to \ e r d ic l on d e le n d a n t 's p e n a lty . Com . v. W illia m s ,
e (4 )( f) . I(tr in u rd e r c o n in iitte d lo r p u rp o se o l e s c a p in g d e te ctio n .
P a . l9 S 7 , S 2 2 .A .2d 1 0 5 8 . 5 1 4 P a. 6 2 .
a p [> re h e n sio n . tr ia l, [u m is h m e n i o r ct> n H n e n ie n i to r a n o lh e r
o tte n se c o m m itte d hv (.le lc n d a n i o r ant>iher. there n u ist be e v i
17a. R e s e n te n c in g
d e n c e fro m w h ic h lurv c tu ild in fe r that al least on e re aso n lo r
.\ d m is s io n o f m u rd e r c o n v ic t io n lh a l w a s e n te re d a lte r c a p it.il
k il li n g w a s to p re ven t v ic t im fro m in fo r m in g p o lic e an d te s tify in g
m u rd e r c o n v ic tio n , h u l b e fo re re s e n te n c in g p h a se , an d lh a l w a s to
a g a in s t d e fe n d a n ts. S i a i c \ .M oore. N . J .S iip e r I .. IM X5. .■^04 A . 2d
he c o n s id e r e d as a g g r a v a t in g fa c to r a l r e s e n te n c in g p h a se d id not
K 0 4 . 2 0 7 N .J.S u p e r ,
v io la te d o u b le je o p a rd ) c la u s e s o f S t a le an d l e d e ra l C o n s titu tio n s .
S la te V. B ie g e n w a ld , N . J . I 9 X X , .542 A . 2d 4 4 2 . 1 10 N .J . 5 2 1 .
14, In d ic tm e n t
D e fe n d a n t m ay not he s u b ie c t to p o s s ib le im p o s itio n o f d eath
IS . Intent
p e n ah y u n le s s in d ic tm e n t c o n ta in s a lle g a tio n that h o m ic id a l act
M e re fact th a l m u rd e r is p re c e d e d b \ w a r n in g lo v ic t im w o u ld
w a s c o m m itie d b\ d e fe n d a n t's o w n c o n d u c i o r that d e fe n d a n t
n ol f u lf ill re(.|uirem enl th a l m u rd e re r in te n d s to. o r h a s e .x p h c il
pH K 'u re d c o m m is s io n o f o lfe n s e by p a v m e n t o r p ro m ise o f p a y
p u rp o se to. n illic t se v e re p s y c h o lo g ic a l o r p h y s ic a l p a in p r io r to
m ent of a n \ t h in g of p e c u n ia rv v a lu e . S ta te v. M o o re .
ile a th fo r p u rp o s e o f p r o v is io n in d e ath p e n a lty statu te lis t in g as
N .J.S u p e r .! .. l^ iS S . 5 0 4 A , 2d S 0 4 . 2 0 7 N .J.S u p e r , ,S61.
a g g r a v a t in g c ir c u n is t a n e e fa c t that m u r d e r w a s o u t ra g e o u s ly o r
u a n lo n K \ ile , h o r r ib le , o r in h u m a n a n d lh a l il in v o lv e d d e p r a v ity
1 f’ ro s e c u lio n v%itn ess
o f n iin d . S ta le v. K a m s e u r . N . J . 1 9 X7 , 5 2 4 ,-\.2d IK X . 1(16 N .J . I2 .V
D e fe n d a n t's a d m is s io n that he k ille d v ic iin is b e ca u se o f h is c o n
d e n ia l o f h a b e a s c o r p u s a lT irm e d 9S.1 F .2 d 12 15 . c e r tio r a ri d e n ie d
c e rn that they c o u ld late r id e n lifv d e fe iu la n t o r h is a c c o m p lic e s w as
1 l.^t S .C t . 24.1.1. .50X L '. S . 9 4 7 . 124 I . . l i d . 2d 6 5 .Í.
nol s u ffic ie n t ti' e s ia b lis h . as a g g r a v a tin g c ir c u m s ta n c e , fo r p u r
p o se s o f d e te rm in in g w h e llie r death se n te n ce c o u ld be im p o se d ,
19. IX 'p r a v its o f m in d
that one v ic t im w a s p r o s e c u tio n w itn e ss k ille d to p re ven t h is le sti-
l a d s th a l m u rd e re r c o m m it ie d m u r d e r b e c a u s e he lik e d il o r il
m onv a g a in s t ile le n d a n l. C o m , v. C a k l w c l l. f'a,l*^JS7. 5.^2 .A.2d
m a d e h im le e l b e lte r, that he k ille d b y s ta n d e r s w ith o u t re a so n , that
X l.^ . 5 K > Pa. 4 4 1 . re a rg u m e n i tie iiie il 5 5 0 . 2 d 7 S 5 . 5 2 0 Pa.
he k ille d c h ild r e n o r o th e rs w h o s e h e lp le s s n e s s u d u ld in d icLU c
lh a l there w a s nt> re aso n to m u rd e r, o r th a l m u rd e re r in te n tio n a lly
16. .Nature <uul e xtent o l p u n is h m e n t
m u lila le d b od y he b e lie v e d w a s n o lo n g e r a liv e h u m a n b e m g ,
S e n te n c e o f d e ath m n x 's c d on vlefe n d :u u lo r m u rd e r o i h is
e v id e n c e '\ le | ir a v ily o l n im d " lo i p u r p o s e s til p r o v is io n in tie a lh
m /w h,'r u a s n e ith e r e x c e s s iv e n o r d is p ro p o rtio n a te to p e n a lty
p e n a llv s ia lu le lis t in g a s a g g r a v a t in g c ir c u m s t a n c e la c l lh a l m u r
CO SG S U r n m Q r i6 S i ” 'sim ila r e a se s. ( o m . V. J e r n n n. I'a 1 9 X7 . A . 2d 74.
d e r w a s o u t ra g e o u s ly o r w a n to n ly v ile , h o r r ib le , o r in h u m a n m
in t 6 r D r 6 t in Q ow p o s t - c o n v ic lio n re lie f a t fu n ie d 6 2 0 A . 2d
thal It in v o lv e d d e p r a v it y o f m in d . S t a le v. R a m s e u r . N .J .1 9 S 7 .
^ ^ i ’a .'T * H ^ 4 :^ ^ g u n ie n l d e n ie d , c e r tio r a ri d e n ie d I 14 S .C t .
5 2 4 .\ .2 d IX S , 106 N .J . I 2.1, d e n ia l o f h a b e a s c o r p u s a ltu m e d 9S.1
7 0 3 . 511) I .S . 1 0 4 9 ? T i7 T '+ r 4 ^ 4 ^ 6 6 ‘). ile n ia l o f p o s t - c o n \ ic lio n
L.2 d 1 2 1 5 , c e r tio r a ri d e n ie d I 1.1 S .C t . 24.Í.1. .50X C . S . 9 4 7 . 124
r e h e f a ffir m e d 6 5 2 A . 2d X 2 1. 5 ? T '1 V - .^ 7 1 . c e rtitira ri d e n ie d I 15
I ..K d .2 d 6 5 1 .
S .C ’i. 2 2 S 5 . 132 I .l-,d.2d 2 S 7 .
17, V a ca te d se n te n ce 20. S ta te o f m in d
D e a th se n te n ce w a s p ro p e rly v a ca te d an<J se n te n ce of life In d e te rm in in g w h e th e r m u r d e r w a s o u tra g e o u s ly o r w a n to n ly
im p riso n m e n t im p o s e d u p i)n d e fe n d a n t c o n v ic te d of m u rd er, v ile , h o r r ib le , o r in h u m a n in Ih a t it in v o lv e d to rtu re o r a g g ra v a te d
b a se d t>n im p r o p e r s u b m is s io n to ju ry, as a g g r a v a t in g c ir c u m b a lle rv to v ic t im fo r p u r p o s e s o f a g g r a v a t in g c ir c u m s ta n c e in
sta n ce . o f a g g ra v a te d a s s a u lt c i'in i c t io n s u b s e q u e n tK o ve rtu rn e d d e a lh p e n a lty s ia tu te . c o u r t m u st lo o k at d e fe n d a n t s s la le o f m in d ,
b v v ir iu e o f gra n t ot ile fe n d a n t's m o tio n lo w iih d r a w h is g u ilt y an d n o l m e re la c l lh a l v i c l i n i a c u ia lly su ffe re d as re su lt o f a tta c k ,
p le a to a g g ra v a te ii a ss a u lt c h a r g e , w h ic h w a s p e n d in g at tim e of an d e x tre m e p h y s ic a l o r m e n ta l s u f fe r in g m u s i b e p r e c is e ly w h at
s e n te n c in g , notw ith s ta iu iin g d c fe n ila n i's su b s e iju e n i con v ic lio n d e fe n d a n t w a n te d to o c c u r in a d d itio n lo d e a lh . S la le v. R a n is e u r .
fo r a g g ra v a te d a ss a u lt, w h e re a lth o u g h jurx w a s p ro p e rly p re N . J . 1 9 X7 , 5 2 4 A . 2 d IX X , 106 N . J . 121. d e n ia l o f h a b e a s c o r p u s
se nte d w ith oth e r a g g r a v a t in g c ir c u m s ta n c e , that d e fe n d a n t w a s a ffir m e d 9X.1 |-.2d 1 2 1 5 , c e r lio r a r i d e n ie d 11.^ S .C t . 24.11. 5 0 S
s e r v in g life se n te n ce lo r m u rd e r al tim e o\ c o m m is s io n ( if se co n d U . S . 9 4 7 , 124 L , E d .2 d 6 5 1 .
A R T I C I . t : 21 1
A S S . - U 'l . T ; R h C K L h S S K N D A N f i E R I N G ; T H R H . A T S
Í 21 1.1. A s s a u ll.
N ote to decisions topics
I
N o t e s lit D c c i s it i l l s -
(¡L-norail> I Ivxclied ulleraiices I Ha

.'\ d ci |u ac v I't couilsL'l M o tiv e an d in ten t I Xb
.■\i.lniissihilil> 1)1 c v i i l c n c c
f’ h t)to g ra p h s 18
(¡cncralK If.
207
W h e n a j u r i s d i c t i o n h a s a d o p t e d a u n i f o n i i law, tlie c o n i n i i s s i o i i e r s ' e o m n i e n t s a n d

n o t e s t o d e c i s i o n s a r e i n v a k i a b l e a i d s in l o c a t i n g c ases I r o m o t h e r j u r i s d i c t i o n s a n d o t h e r
s e c o n d a r y s o u r c e s i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e law. 'Iliis is e s p e c i al h ' h e l p f u l w h e n t h e st at e c o u r t s h a \ e
n o t i n t e r p r e t e d t h e law. T h e c o m m i s s i o n e r s ' c o m m e n t s a n d n o t e s to d e c i s i o n s m a \ ’ also be
h e l p f u l in l o c a t i n g p e r s u a s i v e a u t h o r i t y to c h a l l e n g e a n e x i s t i ng law.
For Example The client's case re q u ire s c h a lle n g in g the a p p lic a b le state s tatute, w h ic h
diffe rs fro m the u n ifo rm law. The a n n o ta tio n s to the u n ifo rm la w m a y p r o
v id e re a s o n s and p e rs u a s iv e a u th o rity th a t can be used to c h a lle n g e the existing statute.
2. Research Techniques— Uniform Laws

I h e f o l l o w i n g r e s e a r c h t e c h n i q u e s will h e l p \ o u l oca t e specific i m i f o r m laws a n d m o d e l acts.
a. U n ifo rm Laws A n n otated , M aster E dition

Ihe Uniform Law s Annotated, M aster Edition (ULA), p u b l i s h e d by I h o m s o n West,
i n c l u d e s t h e u n i f o r m l aws a n d a n n o t a t i c i n s t o all u n i f o r m laws t ha t h a \ e b e e n a d o p t e d b \ ’ o n e
o r m o r e states. Hxhibit 6- 8 a n d F x h i b i t 6 - 9 are f r o m t h e U L A . ' I h e a n n o t a t i o n s i n c l u d e t he
f e a t u r e s listed in s u b s e c t i o n A a n d are i n v a l u a b l e r e s e a r c h tools. I h e set i n c l u d e s u n i f o i m
l a w s a n d m o d e l acts. A p a m p h l e t , e n t i t l e d “ Director}- ol U n i f o r m Act s a n d erodes: fabl es a n d
e rodes, ” is p u b l i s h e d wi t h t h e set. ' I h e “ D i r e c t o r y ” lists t h e u n i f o r m laws ati d m o d e l laws b}'
n a m e , s ubj e c t , a n d a d o p t i n g j u r i s d i c t i o n .
b. R eference from O ther Sources

O f t e n y o u m a y b e d i r e c t e d to a speci fic u n i f o r m law s e c t i o n t r o m a n o t h e r so u r c e , s u c h as a
c i t a t i o n in a case, article, o r t h e .AI.R I m l c x lo .Aiinolnlioiis.

U n i f o r m laws a n d m o d e l acts ai'e avai l a bl e o n W e s t l a w a n d I.exisN'exis.
V. DICTIONARIES A N D W O R D S A N D PHRASES
A. Legal Dictionaries
W o r d s of t en h a v e a m o r e c o m p l e x o r di f f er e n t m e a n i n g w h e n u s e d in a legal c o n t e x t t h a n in
e v e r v d a v use.
For Example M o s t p eople th in k the w o rd publication m eans "to m ake s o m e th in g k n o w n

to th e p u b lic in g e n e r a l," s u c h as th r o u g h p u b lic a tio n in a n e w s p a p e r.
W h e n used in c o n ju n c tio n w it h th e la w of d e fa m a tio n , the te rm m e a n s " c o m m u n ic a tin g
in fo rm a tio n to one or m ore p e rs o n s ." In this context, tellin g d e fa m a to ry in fo rm a tio n a b o u t
an indiv idu al to one o th e r pe rs o n is " p u b lic a tio n ."
Legal dictionaries p r o \ ’i de t h e spel li ng, p r o n u n c i a t i o n , a n d legal m e a n i n g a s s i g n e d

t o t e r m s u s e d in t h e law'. Legal o r “l a w ” d i c t i o n a r i e s a r e s i m i l a r to o t h e r d i c t i o n a r i e s in that
t h e t e r m s a r e a r r a n g e d al phabe t i cal K' . ' Ihe}’ differ f r o m o t h e r d i c t i o n a r i e s in t h a t the}’ cit e t h e
s o u r c e o f t h e d e f i n i t i o n , s u c h as a t r e a t i se o r c o u r t opiniciii.
208
For Example F o llo w in g the de fin itio n of a te rm s uch as s a /e s m a n w ill be a c ita tio n to th e
c o u rt o p in io n or a s e c o n d a ry a u th o rity s o u rc e w h e r e th e te rm is defined.
[.egal d i c t i o n a r i e s , t h e r e f o r e , a r e v a l u a b l e n o t o n l y f o r t h e i r defi nit it )ns, b u t also f o r t he

L it at i on s t ha t a r e a r e s e a r c h s o u r c e t o r b o t h p r i m a r y a n d s e c o n d a r y a u t h o r i t y .
l h e t w o best k n o w n law' d i c t i o n a r i e s a r e B l a c k ’s L a w D ic t io n a r y p u b l i s h e d b y ' I h o t n -
s o n W' est a n d O r c i i ’s D ic t io n a r y o f t h e L a w p u b l i s h e d b y I h o m s o n D e l m a r P u b l i s h i n g . ' Ihe
d i c t i o n a r i e s a r e si mi l a r . B o t h d i c t i o n a r i e s a r r a n g e t h e t e r m s a l p h a b e t i c a l h ' , p r o \ ' i d e c i t a t i o n s
t o t h e d e f i n i t i o n s , a n d c o n si s t o f a si n g l e v o l u m e . B lack's is a va i l a bl e o n W’est law.
B, Words a n d Phrases
Words and Phrases is a m u l t i v o l u m e set, p u b l i s h e d b\' I h o m s o n W'est, t ha t p r o v i d e s t he
j udi ci al d e f i n i t i o n o f w' ords a n d p h r a s e s . It i n c l u d e s o n l y t e r m s t ha t ha v e b e e n d e f i n e d in f e d
e r al a n d state c o u r t o p i n i o n s . If a t e r m h a s n o t b e e n d e f i n e d in a n o p i n i o n , it will n o t a p p e a r
in W o rd s a n d Phrases. It p r o v i d e s e v e r y c o u r t d e f i n i t i o n o f a t e r m a n d a b r i e f s u m m a r y o f
t h e o p i n i o n . A t e r m will u s u a l l v h a v e m u l t i p l e d e f i ni t i o n s , s o m e t i m e s c o v e r i n g sever al pages.
' I h e set is kept u p to d a t e w i t h a n n u a l p o c k e t p a r t s for e a c h v o l u m e . It is avai l abl e o n W'estlaw,
u s u a l l y as a s e p a r a t e d a t a b a s e . H o w e v e r , c o u r t d e f i n i t i o n s o f specific t e r m s a r e avai l abl e o n
b o t h W e s t l a w a n d Lexi sNexi s .
W o r d s a n d P h rases is a v a l u a b l e case fi nder, e s p e c i al h ' in s i t u a t i o n s w h e n \ o u a r e l o o k
i ng for a u ni t ]ue d e f i n i t i o n o f a t e r m o r p h r a s e (see E xh i b i t 6-10).
E x h ib it 6-10 Screen Shot of Results from W ords and Phrases Search for C a se s Providing the Definition of
"Actual Physical Control." R e p n n te d w ith p e rm is s io n o f T h o m so n R e u te rs
nntnwT icrrart oRKTarr KcmMiiin «ttiu*

Wéstlav\¿ COURTOOCt /MUFiHOO» PK»« l*AP BTOT CCMT» COURTWR£
I la«>S<hool Weitiaw NeiMllcKim
ÍỈ .r
« » •su its: _i ^ A«
^ r .......... . ResuhsW i* v >€>% AP Results '
^1 C-. . '.-/r. 6-.' • E .‘ i ■; Vt ic c 2' H I
N e v a d a Moti on
.10 iHustfdte actual physical control, Aop»?ie€ otes united

S tales V. Mcfdrtand. J6 9 F, 2d 54 (D. MD. 2005), wheê
” Ỉ, cb. Ci«' '5-'í;ívví--.tp Jctc::; an owner of a rar asleep m the dnver's seat with the key m
the ignition w « n actual physical control .
iOOT
Uni»(j SW et Chitncf Coon, D. Nevada.
i K¡> ■Zcr- - r •:' -Í V» -'-CC JC-'- r
N p v a d a M o tio n
’ Ạ. ;t.! e . uj»T»r jtr p jo i iS M i
.m ere e*thef w3S actuat p hy siral control and/or operatw n of
the vessel or there w as r>ot...
UnitnJ States Dittnct Court. 0. Ve.aJa
C o lo r a d o R r k f
...Therefore, it follows that ‘ drr/mg' m eans bemg actual

physical ain tro l of a v e^ id e-
199?
Supreme Court 0? Cơtersdo.
O kA for fr e e Sunm arv
8. >*le . CiKcCr ỈKÍ M 'e?CCĨ 'A :C09|1] A m l u r . 2 d : A u t u m o b ik ^ s a n d H i« }h w A y T r a f f k

4. :jtohol or pfuo-Retated Qfleftses. Reotfsites QÍ moa<i* d
5e-no in ActBat P h v s lq l Control o f Motor vehitfe
A n i .J u r . 2 d ; N e g lig e n c e
filniur».
Ir- ĩ i i n v ấ . Actwl ?r Cttfftrti
» BeffiQ m C o rtro l of
* li. . .• cunj »» - 7-Í ;C0r
: r C^dmance
7. AppKát?ii.t>', to Q pef3t»n of Motor v e N d e op private

cf LM-?iaP?ri Matjng pr^Qên Qnyina 3 tnmral
22iQ5S
13 . c.-n> V ■Junj sCi i li i„ctf í’
209
For Example You are looking for how state courts have defined the phrase "actual
physical control" as used in driving while intoxicated or driving under the
influence statutes. Black's does not define the phrase, but a search in Westlaw using
Words and Phrasesy\el6s results of cases with a definition ofthe phrase (see Exhibit 6-10).
VI. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

Legislative history is the r ecord o f t h e legislation d u r i n g t he e n a c t m e n t process before
it be c ame law. It is c o m p o s e d t)f c o m mi t t e e r epor t s, t r an sc r i pt s o f hear ings, s t a t e me n t s of
legislators c on c e r n i n g t he legislation, a n d any o t h e r mater ial p ub li s he d for legislative use in
regard to the legislation. It is a s e co nd a ry a u tho r i ty s o ur ce s o m e t i m e s relied o n by the cour ts
w hen inter preting laws.
'1 here are se\eral different sources o f legislative hist ory for federal statutes. 'Hie research
sources for locating the legislati\’e histor)- for state statutes m a y be similar to s o m e o r all o f the
federal legislativ e histor)- sources. 'Iherefore, the r esear ch s our ce s for l ocati ng federal legisla
tive histor)- are discussed here. I he state sour ces var\' f ro m state to state a nd m a y be limited
or nonexistent, d e p e n d i n g on the state. C o n su l t t h e a p p r o p r i a t e state legislative records or
serv ice olfice for the availabilit)- o f legislative history.
Il is iiiiportanl to note that legislativ e hist ory is c o n s i d e r e d o nl y if the plain meaii ing
ot a statute is not clear or sections o f a statute are inter nally i nconsistent. If the m e a n i n g is
clear, that m e a n i n g will be appl ied by the cour t even if the legislativ e histor)- indicates the
legislature i n t e n d e d a dilierent me aning.
A. Federal Legislative History S o u rc e s

I he lollow ing are the ma i n sources ot legislativ e histor)'. Usually, i n t o r m a t i o n t r o m m o r e than
on e of these sources is necessarv' to d e t e r m i n e legislative intent.
1. C'oiigressional Bills
liacli bill goes t hr o u gh several versions before it is passed. A n e xa ni i na ti on o f the t e r ms or
provisions deleted o r a dd e d in the various versions o f t h e bill m a y reveal the legislative intent.
For Example An early version ofthe Housing Discrimination Act may have used the term
citizen rather than person. The substitution of the more expansive term
person in a later version may support an argument that the legislature intended that the
act have an expansive application ratherthan a limited one.
Intor ni at i on g ai ned t h r o u g h this s our ce c o n c e r n i n g legislative intent is bas ed o n the

n ’s c i i n l i c r ’s in te r p r e t a ti o n o f what the legislature i n t e n d e d w h e n it a d o p t e d different versions
o f a bill. Iherefore, ot he r legislative history sour ces are necessar y to o bt a i n addi tional s upp or t
lor a parti cular i nt e r pre t at ion o f legislative intent.
2. C o m m i t t e e H earin g s
( ’ongressional conimittees hold hearings to receive public input a nd expe r t testimony c o n c e r n
ing proposed legislation. Ihe records o ft he hearing are c o m p o s e d of transcripts o f t h e legislators’
questions and witness testimony along w'ith exhibits a n d d o c u m e n t s submi tted. S o me o f t h e
informati on may help explain h o w the legislation applies o r the reason certain t e r ms or phrases
210
were used. I he h e a r i ng records, ho\ve\'er, include all a rg u me nt s an d inl or ma t i on s ubmi tt e d b \’

individuals an d gr ou p s bot h in s u pp o r t ol and opposit ion to s ome or all ol the legislation. It
is dilficult to d e t er m in e on wh i c h t e s t nn o n y and int or ma t i on the c o mmi t t e e relied. Iherelore,
t he i nl o rma t i on t r o m this soiu'ce is usLially used in s u ppor t of ot he r legislatix e history sources.
3. C o m m i t t e e R e p o r ts
A c o m m i t t e e r ep or t o n a bill u s u a l h ’ includes the text ot the bill, the ma i o r it \ ’’s r easons lor
r e c o m m e n d i n g t h e bill, an analysis o f t h e cont ents o f t h e bill, a nd the m i n o r i t y ’s reasons for
o p p o s i n g the bill. Because the r epo r t c l e a r h’ states the legislators’ intent a n d is p re p ar e d b\’
t h o s e w h o w or ke d with t he bill, the r epo r t is usualh cons i der ed the most aut hori tati ve source
ot legislative hist ory b \ ’ the courts.
4. C o n g r e s s io n a l D e b a te s
C o n g r e s s ma y h o l d d eba t e s o n a bill, a n d the records ot the debates are p ubl i s hed in the
(Congressional R ecord. D u r i n g t he debates, n i e mbe r s o f (Congress present a r g u m e n t s tor and
against a bill a n d a m e n d m e n t s to a bill. ' Ihe debates often include expl anat i ons o f pro\'isions
ot t h e bill, its p u r p o se , o r h o w it applies. M a n \ ’ dilierent, a n d often cont ra di ct or}’, reasons ma}’
be p r es e nt ed in s u p p o r t o f a bill, f o r this reast>n, it ma}’ be dithcult to d et e r ni i n e legislatix’e
mt e n t froni the debates.
B. R e s e a r c h i n g Federal Legislative History

1. U se o f L egisla tive H is to r y
O n sonie occasions, a law that gox’erns a client’s fact situation nia}’ be written in such a m a n n e r that
its me an i ng is unclear. Ihe lack o f clarit}’ ma}’ be due to the use of an a mbi guous term or phrase,
or the law ma}' be written so b r o a d h that it is uncleai' how’ it is supposed to a p p h ’ in a specific
fact situation. I he courts ma}' resoh'c the matter b}' looking to the legislati\e histor}’ o f t h e law to
d et er mi ne the legislature’s intentled me an i ng of a term or phrase or intention as to when or how’
the law applies. Legislatn e I’listor}’ ma}’ be ol assistance in se\'era'i wa} s. Ihe hi.stor} nun identil}
why an a mbi guous term was used and what meaning the legislature intended, what the legisla
ture intended the statute to accomplish, what the general purpose o f t h e legislation is, and so on.
For Example Section A(9) of the Housing Discrimination Act provides that no person
shall deny an individual housing on the basis of gender preference. The
court is called upon to interpret the term person. Does it include corporations and busi
nesses such as partnerships? In the case before the court, a closely held corporation that
owned an apartment complex refused to rent an apartment to a couple because of the
couple's gender preference. The corporation argued that a corporation is not a person
within the meaning of the statute. Included in the legislative history of the statute is a
committee report recommending passage ofthe legislation. The report contains the fol
lowing language: "the intent of the legislation is to eliminate any and ail forms of gender
discrimination in housing. The term 'person' is intended to include all individuals and
business entities, including corporations." The legislative history in this example provides
the court guidance in interpreting the statute.
2. S o u r ces for L o c a tin g a n d C o m p i l i n g Federal L egislative H isto ry

There are several a\'enues to p u r s u e w h e n }’ou compile the legislative history ot a lederal statute.
'Ihe starting point o f y o u r resear ch is to locate the statute in the USC, U S C A , or the U S C S a nd
review the hist ory o f t h e statute in t he annot at i ons. 'Ihis will pr o\ ’ide you with several pieces
211
ot i nt or ni a t i on noccssarx' to locate the legislative histoi \’: the public law luiiiiber, the d at e the
law was enacteil, the Statutes at Large n umbe r , and wher e the law is published in the U nited
States Code Congressional and A dm inistrative News (USCCAN). Ihe legislative
histor}' may iiiclude the Senate r epor t niiniber, the House eoiiterence report nuniber, a n d the
p o p u l a r name.
For Example Following the text of 42 U.S.C.A. § 2000aa is the following information:
Pub. L. 96-440, Title I § 101, Oct 13, 1980, 94 Stat. 1879, Senate Report
No. 96-874, House Conference Report No. 96-1411,1980 United States Code Congressional
and Administrative New s Service, page 3950.
i h e public law' n u n i b e r is most i mp o r t a n t because most ot’the toll owi ng sour ces index
laws b}' the public law nuniber. It'you d o not k no w the pu bh c law n u m b e r, s om e ot' the sources
listed in the tollowing subsecti ons include subiect indexes, Ihe lollowing are the ma i n sources
tor locating a nd c o m p i l i n g legislati\e histor\'.
a. C o m p i k i i i e g i s l ( t t i \ ’e H i s t o r i e s
A st a r t in g poinl lor researcliing legislative histor}' is to d e t e r m i n e it the legislati\'e histor}'
has alread}' been compiled. Lor nian\' laws, the govei'iiment agenc}' c ha r ged with regulating
t he legislation, a c o m m e r c i al publisher, or o t he r g r oup s ha\'e ahead}' con-ipiled the legi.sla-
t i \ e histor}. it there is a c omp i l e d legislati\’e histor}', then your reseaich nia\' be d o n e a n d
t he re is no need to l ook t'urther, Se\-eral publicat ions list c om p il e d legislative histories; ciieck
t he cat al ogue listings at a law librar}. S o me ot the sources tor loc at mg c om pi l e d legislatix'e
histories include:
I’lil’lii' l.invs i.cgisliitivc llislo rics on M ic ro fu iic , published b}' C o m m e r c e Cl earing
H ou s e ( C C l l )
SouiiL's <)/ (..oiiipiL'd i.cgisliitivc llislorics, s po ns o r e d b\ the .American .Association ol

Law Libraries an d published b} L'red B. R o t h m a n Publications (see l.xhibit 6 1 I)
l-'ederal agencies responsible tor a d m i ni st e r i ng the legislation
b. C o t i f ’r e s s i o i t a l I n f o r m a t i o n S e r v i c e
ihe Congressional Inform ation Service (CIS) is a c o mme r ci al publicat ion that is con
si d e re d o ne of the most coni prehensi ve publicat ions ot legislatixe histor}' d o c u m e n t s . P a m
p h l e t s , whi ch are p L i b l i s h e d monthl y, are as sembl ed into a nn ua l b o u n d \ ' olumes, ' Ihe ('.IS
incl udes s u m m a r i e s o f t h e law; c o m mi t t e e reports, d o c u m e n t s , an d hea r in g testimon}'; and
references to debates published in the C o n g ression al Rccord. Ihe (.'/S' makes t he d o c u m e n t s
s i m i m a r i z ed a\ ail able on microfiche. ' Ihe ('.IS includes a com p r e he n si v e index \' olunie that
allows you to locate d o c u m e n t s in several ways, such as bill n umb er , subject, a n d p op ul a r
n a m e (see I'xhibit 6-12).
c. U S C C A N S e r v i c e
' Ihe U S C X ' A S service publislies the texts o f federal statutes a n d c o m m i t t e e reports. It is p u b
h sh e d by I h o m s o n West and is available at most law libraries. West publishes an edi tion for
each session o f (Congress in i n o n t h h ' p am p hl et s that are subsequeiitl}' as sembl ed in b o i m d
N'olun'ies. In each pa m p hl et a n d b o u n d \'olunie is a legislative histor}' table that lists i n f o r m a
t ion relating to the law, such as the public law numbei', date o f a ppr o\ a l, bill n u mb e r, the
H o u s e a n d Senate report n umb e r, and dates the Llouse a n d Senate cons i der ed the bill. Wi th
t he text o f each act is a legislative histor}' section that pro\'ides references to all r epo r t s related
212
E x h i b i t 6-n Page fro m Sources of Complied Legislative Histories. Sources of Com piled Legislative
Histories: A Bibliography of Government Documents, Penodical Articles, and Books, by Nancy P. Johnson, A A L L P u b i S e r ie s
N o . 14, Fred B. Rothman Publications, a division of William S Hem & Co., Inc., Buffalo, New York, 2000, p. B 124. Repnnted
with perm ission from William S. Hem & Co.. Inc.
C 'O N T K N T S
P I B I.IC l.A W .AC 1 ACTUAL. CTTKS T O
H IL L N U M B R R ST.A iT T L i:N T R Y IX X 'S . D O CS.
9 4 Sta t, 2 } 1 \ A L A S K A N A I IO N A L I N T L R L S T L A N D S
c o n s l ; r v ,v i i o n a c t
I H S i . e a i s la lis c H is t o rie s .M ic ro tk T ie P r o ^ ia ni.
Q u a r le s . S te \ e n P. "T lie .A la s k a L a n d s A c t 's In n o v a tio n s

m the l-Liu ot .A ee e ss .Aei\>ss L e d e ra l L a n d s : Y'on C a n G e l
T h e r e tro m H e re . " 4 ,A la s k a L a u R e s ie ^ 1 I I9 S 7 ) ,
9 4 Sta t. 2 7 ,i7 S A I- L ; D R I N K I N C , W AT L R ,A C T A . M L N D M L N T S o l 19X1)

H R . S I 17
L>.S. C o n jjr e s s , S e n a te , C o m n iiu e e on L jiv n o n n t e iil an d
P iih lie W o ik s , ,A L e g is l a tiv e H is to r \ o l'lh e S a le D r in k iiii;
\y a te r.A e t. V \a sh ,. D .C , : ( i P O , I9 S 2 ,
S u D o e : Y 4 ,P 9 W lt ) :9 7 - 9
M ie ro fte h e : C I S . s : - S , i 2 : - . s
96-510 9 4 Stat, :7 ( i7 c () .\ i p r i .h l ;\ s i \ ' l ; i ;n \t r o n m ln la l r l ;s p o n s l ,

H R . 7 0 :( ) C O M P L . N S A I T O N . A N D L I A H I I . I L 'i A C L O L I9 S 0
( ir a d . L r .n ik P, ' ,A l,e j;is la li\ e H is lo r s o l lh e

( 'o in p r e h e n s i\ e lit n irtn itiie n ta l R e s p o n s e . C .'o n ip e n sa tio n
an d L ia h d it v ( " S u p e r t in u L 'i .Act ot 19,SO,"
S C o Iu n ,ib ia lo u rn a l o l L’n \iro n n ie n ta j, l.a\s I (1 9 8 ^ )
I H S L e g is la t iv e H is t o r ie s M ie r o l]e lie P r o ^ ia in ,
N e e d h a m . H e le n an d C o h n . .M enetee. ed. .S,iipcj rin id :

L e £ is k it i\ e lijs io r y . W a s h .. D .C : L j i \ iro n m e n ta l
l.a w In stitu te . 19S4,
9 6 -.-SI7 9 4 .Stat, .VIL-^ P A I 1;N I A N D I R A D L A I A R K l.,A \V A M L : N D M I : N T O l- I9 K 0

tLR.
C h i s ii n i. D o n a ld S , P aten ts: .A T r e a tis e on the L a w o l
P a le n ta h ilitv . \ 'a lid it \ . an d I n l'rin ije m e n i. N e w '»'ork:
M atth ew B e n d e r. I9 7 X - , u i l. 6 . a p p .2 S ,
L C : KL,"!! I4 .C 4 7
9 6 -.S 6 I 9.1 Stat. A N U , R I ( A N L I S H L R I L . S P R O M O T I O N .A C T O f- I9 S 0

•S. : i 6 , ^
S ta n le v . S te p h e n , ",Mare C la u s u m : T h e A m e r ic a n l is h e rie s
P r o m o tio n A e l o i I9 S 0 ," 9 S v r a e u se Jo u rn a l cif
In ie rn a tio n a l L a w an d C o m m e r e e 40.^ 1 1 9 S 2 ),
R e v 2 -K X
213
E x h ib it 6 -1 2 CIS Index of Bill Numbers. Congressional information Service. C IS Foui-)'e.ai Cumulative lnde\ I9 7 9 -I9 S 2 In d e x
o f S u b ie c ts a n d N a m e s R - Z S u p p le m e n t a r y In d e x e s 11982), p 3481 Reprinted with the perm ission of Le\isN e\is
Th i'. iiu k -x lis is iill Ih c P iih lic l i i l K thal \ u -iv ih c M ib jc c ls d l p u lilu '. ilii'iis ,lh^t^.lctc^l in the l') 7 ') lh n > u ;jh I ‘) n 2 ( T S
AnnuaK.
INDEX Th e b ills :iiv t v lc r c iK c d l o C ' I S aivcssicM i m iiiih L 'is. as \ i c ll as to P iih lic I.a u lu in ih c is u Ik 'IV ap |'ru|i|iati'. In c a c h
c a s e the iv lc r e iK c i l n iim h c r h e y in s u ith a h o k l la t c \ c a r n u in h c i in d ic a ln v j the p a rt ic u la r ( 'I S / A n n u a l in » h ich lh a l
OF BILL a b stra c t u i l l bc lo in u l.
NUMBERS T h is in d e x c o n ta in s b ills fro m the 4 K t throu_i;h the ').sih C 'o n iz rc s s c s . .A ll b ills a rc p ic c c d c d b\ ('^Jl i. i ') 2 i . I ' l. 'i . I'M i.
( 4 5 1. |4(i), o r ('■)7| i d c n iil\ in ; j the C o n g r e s s in w h ic h the\ u e r c c o n s id e r e d .
S e p a ra te lis ts are p r o \ id c d Itii e a ch C o n g r e s s . W 'tiliin ('u n d r e s s e s . H o u s e a iu l .Senate b ills a rc lis ic d s c p a r a lc h

a rra n g e d b> b ill l\ p e .
(9 2 ) S . 3 0 4 0 ......................................... S I P l,9 ( v 3 0 X ( 9 3 ) I L R , 1 5 X 5 6 .................................. 8 0 P I.9 6 4 X 7

91st CONGRESS (9 2 ) S . 3 1 1 6 ......................................... s o P l ,9 6 3 0 X ( 9 3 ) I L R . 1 6 6 4 3 ................................. 7 9 P I .95 59 X
House Bills (9 2 ) S . 3 1 1 6 ......................................... SI PL96 30X
(41 I H . R e s . IO « .................................. 8 2 H 5 2 3 -35 (9 2 ) S . 3 1 3 3 ......................................... SO S 5 2 3 S
(911 H .R . 1 0 3 5 1 .................................. «1 H .3 4 3 -5 (9 2 ) S . 3 1 3 3 ......................................... 50 P L 9 6 30X 93rd CONGRESS
(9 1 ) H R . 1 7 0 7 0 .................................. 7 9 [1 6 2 3 -4 (9 2 ) S . 3 1 3 3 ......................................... 51 P L 9 6 3 0 X Senate Bills
|9 I 1 H R . l7 W iH .................................. 8 2 H 5 2 3 -35 (9 2 ) S . 3 1 4 5 ......................................... 50 P L 9 6 30X
(9 3 ) S..I. K c s . 1 .................................... 79 S523 5
(9 ^ ) S . 3 1 4 5 ......................................... 51 P I 9 6 3 0 X
(9 3 ) S . R e s . 71 .................................... 79 S ' S I 5
( 9 2 ) S . ^5X7 ....................... 50 PI 9 6 30X
(9 3 ) S . 1 .................................................. SO 11523 4 2
91st CONGRESS (9 2 ) S . 3 5 X 7 .......................... 51 P I 9 6 ,i()X
(9 3 ) S . 1 ............................................... SO S .S2I 14
Senate Bills (9 3 ) S . 1 ............................................... 82 S523 1
191) S .J . R e s . 1 ..................................... 7 9 S 5 2 3 5 93rd CONGRESS (9 3 ) S . 15 ............................................ SO H 3 4 3 /

7 9 S 7 6 3 *)
(9 1 ) S . 2 0 0 7 .......................................... 81 II.M 3 5 House Bills ( 9 i ) S . ■’ X 4 ............................................
(9 3 ) S . 2 X 4 ............................................ 7 9 P L 9 6 —-) —-t
(9 1 ) S . .^ X 4 2 .......................................... 7 9 11623 4 (9 3 ) I L C o n . R e s . 4 0 ........................ S 2 11703 i9 3 ) S . 5 0 0 ............................................ 79 P L 9 5 572
14
(9 3 ) H . C o n . R e s . 152 S 2 11703 14 l 9 i ) S . 5 9 0 ...................................... SO S 3 X I 2X
(9 3 ) H . C o n . R e s . 2 9 2 ..................... S 2 11703 14 I 9 3 l S . 7 9 X ......................................... 79 S523 31
92nd CONGRESS (9 3 ) I L C o n R e s . 3 4 0 ..................... S 2 i r o 3 14 193) S . 9 7 S ............................................ SO S 5 2 3 X
House Bills (9 3 ) H . C o n . K c s . 4 0 4 ..................... S2 H 7 0 .’^- 14 (9 3 ) S . 9 7 X ..................................... SO P I 9 6 30X
1 9 2 1 H . C o n . R e s . 2 4 . ' ...................... 8 2 11703 14 (9 3 ) I I . J . R e s . 7 X 4 .......................... 79 P L 9 5 521 | 9 ’M S 9 7 X ..................... S I PI 96 30S
192) H . C o n . R e s . 2 9 6 ...................... 8 2 11703 14 (9 3 ) H R . 9 ............................................ SO P I 9 6 2X3 I 9 i | S . 1 0 4 (1 .................... SO S 3 13 19
1 9 3 )IL R . 1 2 ......................................... SO 11343 7 (9 3 ) S . 1 1 3 4 ................................ 7 9 S 3 13 21
(9 2 ) H R . S .5 0 ...................................... 81 P L 9 7 .i4
(9 3 ) I I R . 1 2 2 ....................................... SO P I 9 (, 30S (9 3 ) S , 1 1 3 4 ..................... SO P L 9 6 2X3
(9 2 ) ( L R . 9 2 f i 5 ................................... 7 9 IM .9 6 22
(9 3 ) H R . 1 2 2 ................... S I P L 9 (, io s (9 3 ) S . 1 2 7 0 ..................... 79 P L 9 5 625
(9 2 ) H R . 12.V50 81 H . U '( - 5
(9 3 ) H R . 9 X 2 ............................... S 2 S s 2 ’> 15 (9 3 ) S . 1 321 ..................... 80 PI 96 517
(9 2 ) H R . 1.3 ()7 fi................................. 8 0 IM .9 6 2X3
( ‘ I ’m U K IX 5 S S I P I ‘ 1^ '4 ,m ;, s I ' l l 81 P i ‘ 16 M""
(9 2 ) I L R . I . U K i ................................. 79 H 563 2
( 9 3 ) IL R , 2 2 9 5 .................................. 7 9 11563 2 i 9 'm s. 1 4 0 0 ..................... 82 S5 2 3 1
(9 2 ) H R . I . U K i ................................. 8 0 1>!,96 4 X 7
(9 3 ) H R . 2 2 9 5 .................... SO P L 9 h 4 X 7 (9 ,;) S 1401 ..................... SO S 5 2 3 2
(9 2 ) H R . I. V ) 0 4 ................................. 8 0 P I , 9 6 2X3
(9 3 ) H R , 6 2 6 5 ................................. SO 11343 6 i 9 3 i S . 1401 ........................... S I S,s23 X
(9 2 ) H R . I 4 K K ) ............................... 81 l ’ i.9 7
(9 i) IL K 7 7 ^2 ............. SO P I 9 6 2X3 ( 9 i ) S . 1 7 2 4 .. . SO 11523 h
(9 2 ) H R . 14121 ................................. 81 P I .9 7 .i4
(9 3 ) I L K . 9 2 9 X ................................. SO H U 3 6 ( 9 3 ) S . 2 5 0 4 ...................................... 8 2 P I .97 2 4 7
(9 2 ) H R 1 4 1 9 .^ ................................. 81 P I . 9 7 - . U
(9 3 ) H R . 1 0 0 1 4 ................................. SO PI .9 6 - 3 0 X ( 9 3 ) S . 2 5 7 5 ...................................... 79 P L 9 5 4 X !
|92) i l . R . 1 4 9 1 8 .................................. 8 0 P L 9 6 2X3
(9 3 ) I L R . 1 ( H ) I4 ................................ S I P L 9 6 3 0 X ( 9 3 ) S . 2 5 7 6 ...................................... 7 9 P l ,95 4 X 3
(9 2 ) I L R . K i l X X .................................. 8 2 S 5 2 3 15
(9 3 ) I L R . 1 0 7 9 2 ................................. 79 P I.9 5 5 9 X (9 1) S . ■’(lO O .................... 7 9 P I 95 521
(9 2 ) I L R . U i 9 3 2 .................................. 8(1 I I . U 3 7
(9 3 ) H R . 1 1 0 6 7 ................................. 7 9 P I ,9 5 521 ( 9 3 ) S . 2 6 0 3 .......................................... 7 9 P L 9 5 521
( 9 3 ) H .R . 1 l O X I ................................. 7 9 P I.9 5 521 ( 9 3 ) S . 2 6 11 .......................................... 7 9 P I ,95 521
193) I L R . 1 1 1 3 5 ................................. 7 9 P I .95 521 ( 9 3 ) S . ■'615 ............................. 7 9 P I 95 521
92nd CONGRESS (9 3 ) H R . 1 1 1 4 5 ................................. 7 9 P I .95 -521 ( 9 3 ) s . ' ( . | 6 .......................................... 7 9 P I ,95 521
Senate Bills (9 3 ) H R . 1 1 3 2 1 ................................. 8 0 H 3 4 3 -7 ( 9 3 ) S . 2 6 31 .......................................... 7 9 P I ,95 521
( 9 2 ) , s . 2 1 5 ............................................. 81 S 5 2 I -4 (9 3 ) H R . 1 1401 7 9 P i ,9 5 -5 2 1 ( 9 3 ) S . 2 6 4 2 .......................................... 7 9 IM ,95 521
(9 2 ) S . 3 4 3 ............................................. 7 9 P I. 9 5 521 (9 3 ) H R . 1 1 5 5 5 ................................. 7 9 P I.9 5 -521 ( 9 3 ) S . 2 7 3 3 .......................................... 7 9 P I .95 521
(9 2 ) S . .344 ............................................. 7 9 P L 9 5 - 5 2 1 (9 ^ ) H .R . 1 1 7 5 4 .................. S 2 P I ,9 7 4 4 6 ( 9 3 ) .S. 2 X 7 X .......................................... SO P I .96 2 X i
(9 2 ) S . 6 4 3 ............................................. 8 0 P I .9 6 -5 1 7 (9 3 ) H .R . 1 I X 3 X ................................. 7 9 P I ,9 5 -5 1 1 ( 9 3 ) S . 2 X 7 9 ........................................ 8 2 S 3 1 3 35
(9 2 ) S . 6 4 3 ............................................. 81 P L 9 6 - 5 1 7 (9 3 ) H R . 1 2 2 3 ,3 ................................ SO P I , 9 6 2 X3 .s, ................................... 81 S 5 4 3 4
(9 2 ) S . 1255 .......................................... 8 0 P L 9 ( i - 5 17 (9 3 ) H R . 1 2 9 9 ,3 ................................. SO S 2 6 3 4 7 ( 9 3 ) S . 3 2 6 5 ......................................... 7 9 P I .95 5 7 2
(9 2 ) S . 1255 .......................................... 81 P l .9 6 - 5 1 7 (9 3 ) I L R . 1 4 0 2 7 ................................. 7 9 P I ,9 5 - 5 7 2 ( 9 3 ) S . 3 3 6 X ......................................... 8 0 S 9 6 1 1 1,3
(9 2 ) S . 1 X 7 6 .......................................... 8 0 P i ,9 6 -4 X 6 (9 3 ) H .R . 1 4 2 1 2 ................................. 7 9 P I ,9 6 122 (9 3 ) S. 3 4 4 0 .......................................... 7 9 P I ,95 51 1
( 9 2 ) S . 2 0 H 7 .......................................... 8 0 H .3 4 3 -7 (9 3 ) H .R . 1 4 2 1 2 ................................. SO P L 9 6 122 (9 3 ) S. 3 7 7 6 .......................................... 7 9 P I ,95 572
(9 T ) S . 2 I 0 ! < .......................................... 79 S7 6 3 - 2 (9 3 ) H .R . 1 4 4 4 9 ................................ S I 11343 5 (9 3 ) S . 4 0 2 6 .......................................... 7 9 P I ,95 5 9 X
( 9 2 ) S . 2 I 0 X .......................................... 79 P L 9 6 -2 2 (9 3 ) I L K . l.sOO"’ ................................. SO S 9 6 I - 1 1,3 (9 3 ) S . 4 0 5 1 .......................................... 8 0 PI 9 6 4 7 9
( 9 2 l S . 2 6 5 7 .......................................... 8 2 S 5 2 1 -6 5 .4 (9 3 ) I L K . 1 5 1 .W ................................. 7 9 11303 6 (9 3 ) S . 4 0 6 2 .......................................... 7 9 PI .95 51 1
(9 2 ) S . 2X01 .......................................... 7 9 S 3 1, V 2 1 (9 3 ) H .R . 1 5 1 3 9 ................................. 7 9 P I ,9 6 122 (9 3 ) S . 4 1 5 3 .......................................... 8 0 PI ,9 6 4 5 X
(9 2 ) S . 2X01 .......................................... 80 P I,9 6 -2 X 3 (91| H R l s M 9 SO P I ,9 6 122 ( 9 3 i S 4 1 7X 81 ll.''4 3 s
(9 2 ) S . 3 0 1 0 .......................................... 81 IL 3 4 3 - 5 (9 1 ) l i R . 1 5 ^ 7 6 ............. SO 11343 6 ( 9 i | S 4 2 " ’ 7 .. 7 9 P L 9 5 521
(9 2 ) S . 3 0 4 0 .......................................... 8(1 P I , 9 6 3 0 S (9 3 ) H .R . 1 5 X 5 6 ................................. 7 9 11563 2 ( 9 3 i S . 4 2 5 9 .......................................... SO S 5 2 3 5
214
CHAPTER 6 S E C O N D A R Y A U T H O R I T Y
t o t h e act. A h h o u g h USCX 'A N d o e s n o t p u h h s h all c o m m i t t e e r e p o r t s , it is a g o o d s o u r c e t o r

( . o m m i t t e e a n d c o n f e r e n c e r e p o r t r e f e r e n c e s a n d a n o v e r v i e w of t h e legislative h i s t o r y of t h e
law. I h r o u g h t hi s s o u r c e y o u c a n i de n t i f y t h e repiM'ts a n d o t h e r s o u r c e s f r o m w h i c h \' ou c a n
a s s e m b l e t h e legislati\' e history.
d. C o t t g r e s s i o t i a l R e c o r d
I h e Ckingrcssional R c cord is a r e c o r d o f t h e d e b a t e s o n t h e f l o o r o f t h e S e n a t e a n d H o u s e . It is
us ef ul i f y o u a r e i n t e r e s t e d in r e v i e w i n g t h e f l o o r d e b a t e s o n a bill. It i n c l u d e s a n i n d e x t h a t
r e f e r e n ce s s u c h t h i n g s as d e b a t e s , c o m m i t t e e r e p o r t s, a n d p a ss a g e i n f o r m a t i o n . I n f o r m a t i o n is
i n d e x e d by s ub j e c t m a t t e r a n d histor\-. F o r i n f o r m a t i o n in t h e h i s t o r y s e c t i o n , y o u m u s t k n o w
t h e H o u s e a n d S e n a t e bill n u m b e r s of t h e legislation.
e. C o n g r e s s i o n a l I n d e x
’I h e CAnigrcsiional In d e x is a l o o s e - l e a f se r \ ' ic e p u b l i s h e d b\- C o m m e r c e (Clearing H o u s e . It

i n c k u i e s v a r i o u s i n f o r m a t i o n o n bills, s u c h as i n d e x e s of bills b y su b j ec t a n d s p o n s o r , a s u m -
ma r \ - o f e a c h bill, t ab l es o f a c t i o n s t a k e n o n a bill, c o m p a n i o n bills, a n d v o t i n g r e c o r d s o n a
bill. It d o e s n o t i n c l u d e t h e text o f t h e bill, d e b a t e s , c o m m i t t e e r ep o r t s , a n d so o n , b u t it is a
v a l u a b l e aid in l o c a t i n g d o c u m e n t s .
f. C o n g r e s s i o n a l a n d O t h e r S o u r c e s
( i o p i e s o f legislati\' e h i s t or\ - d o c u m e n t s , s u c h as bills a n d c o m m i t t e e r ep o r t s , u s u a l l y a r e a v a i l
a bl e t h r o u g h y o u r c o n g r e s s i o n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . You c a n also S h e p a r d i z e a s t a t u t e a n d l ocat e
law r e v i e w ar t i cl es a n d A L R a n n o t a t i o n s t h a t h a \ e a n a l y z e d t h e statute. O f t e n t h e a n a K sis will
i n c l u d e a s u m m a r \ ' o f t h e legi sl ati ve histt)ry.
g. C o m p u t e r - A i d e d R e s e a r c h
' I h e r e are s ever al o n l i n e s e r v i c e s t h a t ma\- b e u s e d to locat e a n d c o m p i l e legislative h i s t o r v ’.
U is hel p f ul And o f t e n n c c e s s ; \ r y tu h;\vo t h e p u b l i c Ia w n u m b e r o f t h e law o r t h e S e n a t e o r
H o u s e bill n u m b e r s .
W e s t i a w a n d L ex i s Ne x i s . B o t h o f t h e s e se r v i c e s h av e d a t a b a s e s t hal a l l ow y o u to a c
cess t h e full text o f bills, s e l e c te d legislative h i s t o r y d o c u m e n t s s u c h as c o m m i t t e e
r e p o r t s , a n d t h e (A nig ressiou id R eco ni. B ot h h av e b i l l - t r a c k i n g services. C IS is a v a i l
able o n L exi sNexi s .
F e d er a l f) igest S y s t e m a n d I h o m a s . I h e feder al g o v e r n m e n t m a i n t a i n s t h e F e d e r a l
D i ges t S y s t e m a n d I h o m a s W'eb sites. The\' p r o v i d e a ccess to legislative h i s t o r y d o c
u m e n t s . ' I h e F e d e r a l D i g e s t S y s t e m i n c l u d e s li nks t o legislative h i s t o r y m a i n t a i n e d
by t h e G o v e r n m e n t P r i n t i n g Office. I h o m a s is a legislative h i s t o r y site m a i n t a i n e d
by t h e Librar\- o f C;ongress. ' I h e W e b site a d d r e s s e s are listed in t h e I n t e r n e t R e
sources section ot this chapter.
C. S ta te Legislative H istory
just as c o u r t s n i a \ ’ l o o k to f e d er a l legi sl ati ve h i s t o r \ ’ to re s ol ve a n a mbi guit v' in a f eder al law,
st ate c o u r t s m a y l o o k t o s t at e legi sl ati \’e h i s t o r y as a g u i d e to i n t e r p r e t st ate law. ' I h e r e s e a r c h
s o u r c e s a n d p r o c e s s e s f o r l o c a t i n g t h e l egi sl ati ve h i s t o r \ ' for st ate s t a t ut e s are s i m i l a r t o t h o s e
for feder al law. Stat e l egi sl ati ve h i s t o r v a n d its l oc a t i o n v a r \ ’ t r o m st ate to st ate a n d ma ) ' b e
l i mi te d . (Consult t h e a p p r o p r i a t e s t a t e legi sl ati ve r e c o r d s o r serx'ice otfice for t h e availabilitv’ of
legislative history. I n f o r m a t i o n o n st a t e l e g i sl at i on m a y b e avail able fri)m t h e st ate l e g i sl at u r e ’s
W'eb site, anci W' est law a n d L e x i s N e x is b o t h o ff er st ate d a t a b a s e s . In a d d i t i o n , t h e local law
l i br a r i an s h o u l d b e a b l e t o g u i d e y o u t o t h e s o u r c e s for st ate legislative histor}'.
215
PART II L E G A L R E S E A R C H
VII. JURY IN ST R U C T IO N S— OTHER RESEARCH SOURCES

In a d d i t i o n to t h e r e s e a r c h a u t h o r i t i e s m e n t i o n e d in C h a p t e r 5 a n d in t hi s c ha p t e r , t h e r e are
o t h e r s o u r c e s , w h i c h ar e b r i e t h ' d i s c u s s e d in t hi s s e c t i o n .
A. Jury I n s t r u c t i o n s
I' ollowing t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e e v i d e n c e in a trial, t h e jur\- is i n s t r u c t e d o n th e law t hat applies
to t h e case, s u c h as h o w t e r m s a r e d e f i n e d a n d w h a t m u s t b e p r o v e d fo r a p a r t y t o p revai l (see
Hxhibit 6-13) . M o s t st ates a d o p t u n i f o r m o r m o d e l j u r y i n s t r u c t i o n s t o r t h e c o u r t s to lol low
w h e n i n s t r u c t i n g t h e jury. T h e s e jury instructions are often pu bl is hed with the a n no ta te d
statutes. If n o t , c h e c k at t h e local l a w l i b r a r y t>r w i t h t h e c o u r t . If t h e r e is n o a p p r o \ ’ed set o f
j u r y i n s t r u c t i o n s , t h e r e a r e se ve r a l t ext s t h a t i n c l u d e m o d e l j u r y i n s t r u c t i o n s , s u c h as A m . Jur.
Plciuliitg a u il I’n u ticc h o ru ii.
It is i m p o r t a n t to k n o w h o w to loca t e j ur y i n s t r u c t i o n s b e c a u s e y o u m a y b e called o n to
p r e p a r e t h e m f'or a case. In a d d i t i o n , t h e i n s t r u c t i o n s p r o v i d e t h e d e f i n i t i o n s o f t e r ms , t h e ele
m e n t s o f a c a u s e o f a c t i on t ha t m u s t be p r o v e d , a n d so o n , w h i c h t h e st ate h a s a d o p t e d , l h e i n
s t ruc t i ons also oft en p r o \ ide a n n o t a t i o n s r e f er e n c i n g c o u r t o p i n i o n s t h a t d i s c uss t h e i nstruct ion.
For Example If you want to determine what your state requires to establish a negligence
claim, consult the state's approved jury instructions. The annotations to
the instructions reference court opinions that have discussed the topic.
L„
B. Practice a n d Form Books

I he r e are m a n \ t\ p e s of s i n g l e - \ ' o l u m e a n d m u l t i v o l u m e t e xt s d e s i g n e d to assist p r a c t it i o n e r s .
lh e\ range from form bool<S t o t ext s t ha t p r o v i d e d e t a i l e d l i ti g at i o n g u i d e s a n d strategy.
For Example If you are called upon to prepare a legal document, such as a contract for the
sale of a business, be sure to check a form bookto avoid omitting anything.
C' heck t h e tr ea t i se s e c t i o n o f y o u r l i br a r y o r w i t h t h e l i b r a r i an . S o m e o f t h e b e t t e r k n o w n
texts are:
W ests l-cilcml [ o n u s
West's l.L'gcil l-'onus, 2 i / — m o d e l p r a c t i c e f' orms su c h as c o n t r a c t s a n d real e st at e f o r m s
l-'lctihcr C o rp oratioti F o rm s A;¡;ioííiít.’í/— c o r p o r a t i o n law’ f o r m s
A m . j u r Plciiciiitg ¡ m d Pructicc F o r m s — m o d e l l i ti g at i o n d o c u m e n t s s u c h as c o m
p la i nt s a n d i n t e r r o g a t o r i e s
. \ m . jur. Lcgtd F'orms, 2 d — m o d e l p r a c t i c e f o r m s s u c h as c o n t r a c t s a n d wills
A m . Jur. Proof o f Facts— i n f o r m a t i o n r a n g i n g f r o m int ervi ew' s a n d d i s c o v e r y to wh a t

m u s t b e p r o \ ' e d in a c a s e
,4/». Jur '/')■/((/.<— i n f o r m a t i o n o n c o n d u c t i n g a trial, s u c h as o p e n i n g a r g u m e n t s a n d

trial s t r a t e g y
Ma n \ - o f t h e f o r m a n d p r a c t i c e b o o k s a r e al s o a v a i l ab l e o n VVestlaw' a n d LexisNexis.
C. Loose-Leaf Services
Loose-leaf services a r e p u b l i c a t i o n s t h a t f o c u s o n a speci fic a r e a o f law a n d i n c l u d e p r i m a r y
a u t h o r i t y s u c h as s t at u t es, r e g u l a t i o n s , a n d s u m m a r i e s o f c o u r t a n d a d m i n i s t r a t i v e deci s i ons.
Also, t he y u s u a l l y i n c l u d e a n a n a l y s i s o f t h e l a w a n d r e f e r e n c e s to s e c o n d a r y s o u r c e s . Each
p u b l i c a t i o n i n c l u d e s i n d e x e s a n d f i n d i n g a i d s t ha t di f fer a c c o r d i n g t o t h e s u b j e c t m a t t e r a n d
216
CHAPTER 6 S E C O N D A R Y A U T H O R I T Y PERIODICALS, RESTATEMENTS, U N IF O R M LA W S
E x h ib it 6-13 Sam ple Ju ry Instruction. l-V e s f Giouo. M a n u a l o f M o d e l C iv il J u r y in s t r u c t io n s fo r th e

D is t r ic t C o u rts o f th e E ig h th C iic u it, by Comm ittee o d M odel Civil Jury Instructions within the Eighth Circuit,
1999, p. 28. Repnnted with perm ission from l/V e s/ Group
2 .0 9 ( l\ II IN.ST RrCTIONS
2.09 IMPEACHMENT OF WITNESS,

Jury instruction
PRIOR CONVICTION
Yiiii ha\ c heaid l'\ k Iciicc tliat w i t n e s s ________lias been einn ieted of'
■|a eriiiiel |ei inies|. '\'oii nia\ use tliat e\ idence onf\ to help \ mi decide whether
to belie\e the w itness anti how nuieli weight to g i \ e his |her| testimony.
Committee Comments
The admissihilit\ of prior coin ictioiis lo impeach a w itness' credibilit\ is
L’o\erne(.l hy ['ed. R. F:\id. 609. In ci\il cases tried hef'ore Deeeniher I. 194(1.
the trial jndge had no discreticMi lo balance the probative \akie against lhe
|irejin.licial ef'f'eei. The com ielion had to be adniitled if' it came w iihin the rule.
(jrc c n V. Hock ¡Aiuiulrx M iu hinc Co.. 490 L^.S. ,^04 ( I9S9); .¡ones r. H oard o i
I ’olici Coiiuii'r.\. S44 f-'.2d ,^04 05 (Sth C ir. |9SSl. i!l'f'eeti\e December I.
1990. Rule 609 reinstates the balancing feature. If the coin ielion in\oKes
dishonesiN or false statements, il ma\ be aifmitteil even if not a feloin. K\l. R.
E\ id. 609. T here is substantial dispute about how much mformation ma\ be
iniecletf concerning the |irior coii\ ielion. .Some judges do not even allow evi-
(.lence ol vvhal crime, or what punishmeiil was invnlvetl. The jiulge max allow
ev idence ol the specific crime committed aiul the sentence. A’os.s i-. .loucs. SSX
l'.2d .'S4(S. ,>51 iSth Cir. 19S9). l ed. R. livitl. 105 gives a |iart\ the riglil lo
require a limiting iiisirLiction explaining that the use of this ev idence is limited
lo ciedihiiity.
S e e .Manual of M o d e ! C riinin id .Iurv I n s m i c lio n s fo r lhe i'.nihlh C in n i l.
2 . IS; t;dvvard .1. Devin, el al . I liDIT^.AI. U R'l l>R,\( riC'I-; . \N D
IN.STRl'CTTON.S: Civil ii 73.05 (4lh eti. 19S7); l-.,I.C.('. insiruclion 30; I'ifth
('ircuil I ’lUicrn .lur\ lirsirui lions Civil. Insiruclion 2.17 ( West 1998); ,\'inili
C ircuii .\h u u iid of M o d e l .Iurv Inslruciio ns —Criiniiuil. Insiruclion 4.S (W'esi
1997). .See McncruUv f-ed. R. livid. 609. 105; Wesi Kev # - \ \ i t n e s s e s " 344l I
5). 345 I 1 ^ ) .
Notes on Use
I . if the party in a civ il case has a eonvieti('ii which is introdiieeil in ev i-
ilence. il would he appropriate to modifv liighth Cir. Crim. Inst. 2.16 and give
the follow ing instruction, unless the e\ idence is adniitled under Fed, R. Hv id.
404(b) to prove motive, intent, plan. etc. Crim. Insi. 2.16. modil'ied f'or civ il
cases IS as follow s;
217
tlic publi sl icr. l h c \ ’ a r c n o t u p d a t c t l b \ ’ p o c k c t pai ts; iMtlicr, llic page's arc iiidi\ iduall\' phiccci
in b i n d e r s a n d u p d a t e d b\- r e p h i ce n i o n t pages. Several d i l i e r e n t p u b l i s h e r s p u b l i sh l o u s e- l e a l’
se r v i c e s t ha t c o \ e r n i a n \ ' s u b j ec t s , s u c h as l a b o r law, e n \ i r o n m e n t a l law, t a m i h ’ law, a n d tax
law. S o m e o t ' t h e m a j o r p u b l i s h e r s ar e ( C o m m e r c e c ;i e a r i n g 1 Unise (CX^H), Bu r e a u ot’X a t i o na l
At i a i r s ( B X A ) , a n d . Mat t h e w B e n d e r ( MB) .
D. P re s id e n ti a l M a t e ria l s
Presidential materials ar e d i r e c t i \ ’es i s s u e d b\- t h e p r e s i d e n t . I h e t wo m a i n t\ p e s are p r o c
l a m a t i o n s a n d e x e c u t i \ ' e o r d e r s . P r o c l a m a t i o n s ar e a n n o u n c e m e n t s t hat h a \ e n o legal efi’e ct,
s u c h as d e c l a r i n g a w e e k , t o r e x a m p l e , “N a t i o n a l Bi csc l e r s W'eek.” Hxecutive o r d e r s c o \ e r a
w i d e r a n g e ot t op i cs a n d a r e usual i \ ' d i r e c t i \ e s to a g e n ci e s. I h e s e d i r e c t i v es h a \ e t h e f or ce of
law. P r e s i d e n t i a l p r o c l a m a t i o n s a n d e x e c u t i v e o r d e r s a r e p u b l i s h e d in t h e l-citcral R cgiitcr,
C.I R. L’S ( X ' A \ , a n d t h e W eekly C o m p i la t io n o f P r c iid e n tia l n o e ii ii ie i it i ( p u b l i s h e d b \ ’ t h e t ) t -
fice of t h e l-'ederal Regi st er). Ihe\- a r e al s o ax'ailable o n W e s t i a w a n d LexisNexis, a n d o n t h e
( i o \ ' e r n m e n t P r i n t i n g Offi ce W'eb site.
E. M a r t i n d a l e - H u b b e l l Law D irectory
Ihe M artindale-H ubbell Law Directory, p u b l i s h e d by LexisNexis, is a c o m p r e h e n s i \ e di
rector}- of’a t t or n e } s. ' I h e m u l t i \ ' o l u m e set, a r r a n g e d a l p h a b e t i c a l l y b}' state, prov ides a t t or n e y s '
n a m e s a n d b i o g r a p h i c a l I n f o r m a t i o n , s u c h as d a t e ol a d m i s s i o n lo t h e bar, law s c hool a tt e n d e d ,
a n d p u b l i c a t i o n s . I h e r e is a m u l t i v o l u m e I n t e r n a ti o n a l ¡.¡nv i:>ireitorv listing a t t o r n e y s f r o m
f'oreign coLuitries. M a r tiiid a le -H iib b e ll is a va i l a bl e o n ( H ) - R O M , I.exisN'exis, a n d t h e director}-
W'eb site (see I n t e r n e t R e s o u r c e s al t h e e n d o f ' t h i s c h a p t e r ) .
I n c l u d e d w i t h t h e law- director}- set is a M a r t u u U d e ! i u b b e l l L a w Digest, w h i c h c o n t a i n s
bri et s u n m i a r i e s ot s o m e ( b u t n o t all) ol t h e l aws ol t h e s t at e s a n d n i a n \ l o i e i g n c o u n t r i e s .
I h e set al s o i n c l u d e s s o m e u n i l ' o r m l aws a n d m o d e l act s a n d t h e A m e r i c a n Bar .Associ ation' s
M o d e l Rul es o f' P r c ' l e s s i o n a l C o n d u c t ,
VIIL KEY POIN TS CHECKLIST: Periodicals, Restatements,

Uniform Laws, Dictionaries, Legislative History, and Other
Secondary A u t h o r i t i e s
/ Use p e r i o d i c a l s p r i m a r i h - to o b t a i n a n a h s i s a n d critic]ue ot’a specific legal t opi c t hat

is m o r e i n - d e p t h o r n a r r o w e r in f’o c u s t h a n t hat prt)\ i d e d b\- a legal e n c } c l o p e d i a o r
a treatise.
/ R e i t a t e m e n t i o f th e Law, imif’o r m law s, a n d m o d e l a c t s prov ide a m o d e l text f r o m

w h i c h a law ma\- b e c r a f t e d . Ihe}- p r o v i d e acce ss to r e a s o n s s u p p o r t i n g a r e c o m
m e n d e d s t a t e m e n t of t h e law a n d c i t a t i o n s to cases, t r eati ses, a n d art icl es i n t e r p r e t
i n g t h e law.
/ C o n s u l t t h e legi sl ati ve hi s t o r } ol a l aw w h e n t h e n i e a n i n g o r a p p li c a t i o n of t ha t law is

un c l e a r . Il ' the m e a n i n g o r a p p l i c a t i o n o f a law is clear, a c o u r t will n o t refer to l egi sl a
tive history-.
/ D o n o t try- to d r a f t legal d o c u m e n t s o r p l e a d i n g s f r o m scr atch. Refer to t h e f'orms

t)r s a m p l e s a va i l a bl e in i h e law oflice o r consLilt a lt)i'm biH)k, s u c h as .Am. lur. I.egal
L orm s, 2 d o r .Am. lur. ¡^leading a n d l^raetiee Forms.
/ Li ke all r e s e a r c h s o u r c e s, }'ou nuLst c h e c k t h e p o c k e t p a r t s , s u p p l e m e n t s , or whatev-er

is u s e d to u p d a t e t h e s o u r c e to e n s u r e t ha t v-olu" r e s e a r c h is c u r r e n t .
218
CHAPTER 6 SECONDARY AUTHORITY— PERIODICALS, RESTATEMENTS, UNIFORM LAWS
IX. APPLICATION
Luis t h i n k s to himsel f, “' I h e issue h e r e in t h e b r o a d e s t s e n s e is, ' W' hat a r e t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l
l i mi t at i ons o n t he city restricti\ el\’ z o n i n g a d u l t e n t e r t a i n m e n t bu si ne sse s ?' I r e m e m b e r t r o m m y
c o ns t it u t i o n al l aw class that t h e I'irst A m e n d m e n t ’s f r e e d o m o f s p e e c h g u a r a n t e e s are inx o h ed.
So I c o u l d start by l o o k i ng at t h e a n n o t a t i o n s to th e First A m e n d m e n t in t h e U n ite d States C o d e
A n n o t a t e d a n d l ocate t h e s e c t i o n d e a l i n g w i t h a d u l t e n t e r t a i n m e n t . I h i s w o u l d lead m e to case
law o n t h e subject. I h e p r o b l e m w i t h t hi s is it w o u l d t a k e m e a w h i l e to f i nd t h e se c t i o n , t h e n 1
w o u l d h a v e to w a d e t h r o u g h all t h e cases. I c o u l d l o o k t h r o u g h a t r eat i se o n t h e First A m e n d
m e nt ; b ut again, 1 m a y ha v e t o w a d e t h r o u g h a lot o f ma t er i al b e f o r e I l i nd w h a t I n e e d . I n e e d a
s ou r ce f o c u s e d o n ni\' specific topi c t h a t h a s a d d r e s s e d t h e q u e s t i o n , s u c h as a law r evi ew article.”
Luis h a s p e r f o r m e d t h e i m p o r t a n t first s t ep in his q u e s t . H e h a s i d e n t i f i e d t h e q u e s t i o n
he n e e d s t o r e s e a rc h a n d w e i g h e d t h e r e s e a r c h a \ e n u e s a \ a i l a b l e . Fie c o u l d l o o k fo r a law
r evi ew art i cl e o n t he t op i c b y c o n s u l t i n g t h e I n d e x to Legal P erio dicals o r t h e C u r r e n t L a w
In d e x , w h e r e h e will fi nd s e v e r a l a r t i c l es t h a t a d d r e s s t h e t o p i c . B o t h t h e IL P a n d C IA a r e
avai l abl e o n WX\stlaw a n d I.exisN'exis, o n t h e I n t e r n e t for a s u b s c r i p t i o n , a n d m a y be a v a i l a b l e
in t h e local l aw l i br a r y o n C D - R O M . .A l a w r e v i e w a r t i c l e will t h o r o u g l i K ’ a n a l y z e t h e t o p i c
t h r o u g l i a d is c u s s i o n o f t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l issues a n d s y n t h e s i s o f c ase s t h a t h a \ ’e a d d r e s s e d
s u c h o r d i n a n c e s . It will i n c l u d e r e f e r e n c e s to o t h e r r e s e a r c h s o u r c e s .
l.uis c o u l d c o n s u l t t h e U n i f o r m L a w s A n n o t a t e d , M a s t e r H ilition t o d e t e r m i n e if t h e r e is
a u n i f o r m law o r m o d e l z o n i n g o r d i n a n c e re s t r i c t i n g t h e l o c a t i o n o f a d u l t e n t e r t a i n m e n t b u s i
nesses. If t h e r e is, Luis will b e p r e s e n t e d n o t o n k w i t h t h e u n i f o r m l a w b u t al s o wi t h r e f er e n c e s
to s t at es t h a t h a ve a d o p t e d t h e act, d i s c u s s i o n (if \ a r i a t i o n s a d o p t e d b\- t h e s t a t e s, r e f e r e n c e s
to law re v i e w articles, r e s e a r c h r e f e r e n c e s s u c h as d ig e s t ke\' nL i mb e r s a n d e n c y c l o p e d i a cites,
a n d s u m m a r i e s o f c o u r t d e c i s i o n s t h a t h a \ ’e i n t e r p r e t e d t h e law.
Sum m ary
' Ihi s c h a p t e r di s c u s s e s r es e a r c h a u t h o r i t ) ’ s o u r c e s t h a t a r e f r e q u e n t l y Lised to locate, i n t e r p r e t ,
a n d a n a l y ’^'e st at ut i' ry a n d c a s e law; le»al p e r i o d i c a l s . Re<talcinent> o! the I aw. u n i f o r m -and
m o d e l laws, legislative h is t ory, a n d o t h e r sour c e s.
Legal peri odi cal s pLiblish art icl es o n legal t o p i cs in e \ e r ) ’ a r e a o f t h e law. Pe r i o d i c al articles
a r e v a l u a b l e for t h ei r d e t a i l e d a n a h s i s o f c u r r e n t legal issues, r e c e n t l ) ’ e m e r g i n g a r e a s o f t h e
law, o r \ ' cry specific topi cs; d e p t h o f r e s e a rc h ; a n d c i t a t i o n to p r i m a r y a n d s e c o n d a r y s o u r c e s .
R e s ta t e m e n ts ol Ihe L a w p r e s e n t a i m i t o r m s t a t e m e n t ot t h e l a w t o r a r e a s o t c a s e law
s u c h as t o r t s a n d c o n t r a c t s . F a c h R e s ta t c in c n t p r o \ i de s g u i d a n c e as t o h o w t h e law’ s h o u l d be
d e f m e d o r s t at ed; r e a s o n s in s u p p o r t o f t h e d e f i n i t i o n o r s t a t e m e n t o f t h e law; a n d c i t a t i o n s
t o cases, tr eati ses, a n d o t h e r s e c o n d a r ) ’ s o u r ce s .
U n i f o r m laws a n d m o d e l a c t s p r o \ i d e u n i f o r m s t a t e m e n t s o f t h e l aw t h a t a re a v a i l ab l e
t o r a d o p t i o n b y states. I h e y a r e i n v a l u a b l e gui t l es w h e n d r a f t i n g o r i n t e r p r e t i n g l egi sl ati on.
I h e c h a p t e r a l s o c o \ ’e r s o t h e r t o p i c s , s u c h as l e gi sl ati \' e h i s t o r y , a n d o t h e r r e s e a r c h
s o u r ce s , s u c h as f o r m b o o k s . I h e l e g i s l a t i \ e h i s t o r y is t h e r e c o r d o f t h e l eg i sl at i on d u r i n g th e
e n a c t m e n t p r oces s . It o f t en i n c l u d e s g u i d a n c e as to t h e m e a n i n g o r a p p l i c a t i o n ot t h e st at u t e.
I h e c h a p t e r briefly c o v e r s o t h e r r e s e a r c h soLuces t h a t m a y b e \- aluabl e t o a r e s e a r c h e r :
l u r y i n s t r u c t i o n s — p r o v i d e t h e definiticMi o f t e r m s , e l e m e n t s o f a c a u s e o f a c t i o n , a n d so
o n that a j u r i s d i c t i o n h a s a d o p t e d
P r a ct ic e a n d f o r m b o o k s — p r o \ ’ide g u i d a n c e w h e n d r a f t i n g legal d o c u m e n t s o r p l e a d i n g s
L o o s e - l e a f serv ic e s— p u b l i c a t i o n s t h a t f o c u s o n speci fic a r e a s of huv a n d c o m p i l e p r i

m a r y a u t h o r i t ) ’ s u c h as s t a t u t e s a n d s u m m a r i e s o f c o u r t a n d a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d e c i s i o n s
Presidential materi als— p r o c l a m a t io n s a n d executive o rd er s by the president
M c irtin d a le-H u h h ell L a w D ir e c t o r y — a c o m p r e h e n s i v e d i r e c t o r y o f a t t o r n e y s

219
Q u ic k R e f e r e n c e s
C'omm er cial iournals I9.S .M a r tin d a l e -H u b h e ll
Liiw D irecto ry 2 18
(,'()/igressitm a l I n l o r m a t i o n
S ervice (C IS) 212 \ h ) d e l acts 203
C u r r e n t L a w I n d e x (C.I.I) 197 Presidential materials 218
Form books 216 R e s ta l e m e iit s o f t h e L a w 199
I n d e x to Legal P eriodicals (ILP) 193 Stat e b a r a s s o c i a t i o n j o u r n a l s 193
lur\- i n s t r u c t i o n s 216 L ' n i f o r m laws 2 03
La w r e v i ews 193 C n ifo rm Laws A n n o ta ted ,

M a s t e r E d it io n ( U L A ) 208
Legal d i c t i o n a r i e s 20S
U n ite d States C o de Congressional
Legal n e w s p a p e r s / n e w s l e t t e r s 195
a nd A d m in istra tive N ews
Legi sl at i ve historv' 210 (U SC C A N ) 2 12
L o o se - l e a l ser vi ces 216 W'ords a n d Phrases 209
Internet Resources
' I h e I n d e x to Legal Periodiciils, C u n e n t L a w In d e x, R e ita le i n e n ts o f t h e Law, u n i f o r m laws, a n d
m o d e l a ct s are avai l abl e o n W’est l aw a n d I.e.xisXexis. LegiiLl'rae is av ail able o n t h e I n t e r n e t b\-
s u b s c r i p t i o n . Bo t h W' estlaw a n d 1 exisN'exis have d a t a b a s e s that all ow y ou to access t h e full text
ot bills, sel ected legislatix’e h i s t o r y d o c u m e n t s s u c h as c o m m i t t e e r e p o r t s, a n d t h e C ongresiiotial
R ecord. Black's is avai l abl e o n W'estlaw. C IS is avai l abl e o n LexisNexis.
S o m e law review s a n d p e ri o d i c a l s ar e avail able o n t h e p u b l i s h e r ’s W'eb site. You c a n clieck
t h e l aw s c h o o l W'eb site to d e t e r m i n e il a law r e v i ew is p u b l i s h e d ther e.
L' sing "legal n e w s p a p e r " o r “ legal n e w s l e t t e r s ” as a s e a r c h topic, \ o u c a n t m d t h o i r s a n d s
ot W'eb sites tliat p r o \ ide ac c e ss to legal n e w s p a p e r s , law i o u r n a l s , a n d n e ws l et t e r s ,
h 11p :/ / w w \N. w a s ll Ia w.e d u
Ihis site Ir om W a s h b u r n L' ni\ei si t\ School ol Law prov ides links to legal n e wspa per s,
newsletters, a n d magazines.
http://thom as.loc.gov
Legislative history is available at this site ma i n t a i n e d by the Librarv’ of (Congress.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys
l.egislative history is available at this site m a i n t a i n e d b\’ the ( i o v e r n i n e n t P r i n t i n g Oftice;
access is available to legislative historv', presidenti al d o c u m e n t s , the United States Code, the
C ode of Regulations, Lederal Register, a n d ni m i e r ou s o t h e r docLiments.
ll 11p :/ / WWW. \ Vh it e ll o u s e .g()\7
I he Wh i t e f l ou s e virtual library W'eb site provi des access to presidential material.
http://w ww.h ouse.gov/
Ihis site is t he h o m e page o f t h e L'nited States H o u s e o f Representatives,
h t t p : / / WWW.s e n a t e . g o v /
'Ihis site is the h o m e page o f t h e L'nited States Senate,
h 11p :/ / \v\Vw. ni a r 11n d a 1e . COm
I h e M a rtind ale-H uh bell locat or site provi des links to n u m e r o u s legal topics,
h 11p :/ / w w\v. c c ll.c o 11 1
Ci o mmer c e Cl ea r i ng H o u s e is a ma i or publ i sher o f k)ose-leaf services,
h t t p : / / w \ v \ v.b n a . c o m
Ihe Bureau ol Nat i onal Allairs is a ma i or publ i she r ol loose-leaf services,
h t t p : / / WWW.i l r g . c o m
The I nt ernet Legal Re source ( l ui d e site provi des links to for m sources.
Citation
C l i a p t c r >S di s c u s s e s t h e B lu eh o o k a n d ,A/.U7) ('itiitioii M a n u a l rul e s g c n e r n i n g citaticin t o t h e
N'arioLis s e c o n d a r y a u t h o r i t y sour ces. S o m e e x a m p l e s o f c i t a t i o n s to t h e p r i m a r y a n d s e c o n d a r y
a u t h o r i t y s o u r c e s d i s c u s s e d in thi s c h a p t e r are p r e s e n t e d here.
A. Legal Periodicals
M i c h a e l A s i m o w , B a d L a w y c r i in the M ovies. 24 N o \ ' a L. i-lex’. 533 (2()()0)
B. Restatements
R e sta ten u 'iit (S e c o n d ) o f Torts § 21 (1965)
C. Unifortn Laws
U. C. C. § 2 - 315 , I U.L.A. 1 1 1 (19 9 7 )
.Model Penal C o d e § 210 (1974)
D. Dictionaries
Blaek's L a w D i c ti o n a r y ( 7 t h ed. 1999)
E. Legislative History
1. Bill -S. 2 01, 107th C o n g . § 2 (20 0 1 )
H.R. 60, I 0 6 t h C o n g . § 8 (1999)
2. ( ' o m m i t t e e H e a r m g — Ih e L'reedoin to L-File .Act: lleiw in g s on IL R . iS’52. Before the

S u h e o n u n . o n D e p a r t m e n t O p eratio ns, Oversight, S u t r i t i o n . ¡m d Forestry, 106th
C on g. 56-"~ (2000'
3. C o m m i t t e e R e p o r t - 11. R. Rep. No. 106-986, at 17 (2000)
1. C o m m i t t e e R e p o r t - 11. R. Rep. No. 101-665, at 279, re p rin ted in 1990 U S ( X ' , A N

at 3004 ( 1 9 9 0 )
F. Presidential Proclamations and Executive Orders

Rule 14.7 o f t h e B lu e h o o k p r o v i d e s t h a t t h e c i t a t i on s h o u l d b e to t h e ( d ' R cite w i t h a pa r al l e l
cit ati on to L'SC. If t h e ma t e r i al is not in the (H R . t h e n th e mat eri al is cited in t he Federal Register.
1. P r o c l a m a t i o n : P r o c l a m a t i o n No. 66 4 2 , 58 I-'ed. Reg. 6 7 6 2 5 (1993)
2. E x ec u t i v e (' )rder: Exec. O r d e r No. 13202, 66 Fed. Reg. 1 1225 (2001)
G. Loose-Leaf Services
Brito V. C o u n t y o f P a lm Beach, Florida, [1999 T r a n s f e r Bi n d e r ] Prod, l.iab. Rep. ( ( X ] H ) 15403
(Fla. Hist. Ct. App. Nov. 9, 1998)
E x ercises
A d d it io u a i itsiigiu iiciilf tiir iivailid^lc on ihc ('ou ric A id ti'. ASSIGNMENTS

I h e cli ent o w n s a c l o t h i n g store. She h a s t ] u e s t i on s c o n
ASSIGNMENT 1
c e r n i n g w h a t c o n s t i t u t e s a n offer a n d a n a c c e p t a n c e . R e
Refer to t h e I n d e x to Legal Periodicals. W h a t 1998 art icl e
fer t o t h e U n ifo r m L a w s .Annotated, M a s te r E d itio n . W’hat
distinguishes b e tw e e n e u th a n a s ia a n d the w ith d ra wa l of
u n i f o r m l aw g o v e r n s t h i s q u e s t i o n ? W h a t s e c t i o n of t hat
l i f e -s us t a i ni n g t r e a t m e n t ?
l a w a d d r e s s e s offer a n d a c c e p t a n c e ? W’h a t CJS r e f e r e n c e is
ASSIGNMENT 2 i n c l u d e d in t h e “L i b r a r y R e f e r e n c e s ” s e c t i o n ? W h a t 1998
I h e s u p e r v i s i n g a t t o r n e \ - is i n t e r e s t e d in o n l i n e p a t e n t c a s e he l d t h a t a fax s t a t i n g t ha t a n ele c t r i c utility w a s w i l l
s e a r ch i n g . Refer t o t h e C.urrent L a w In d ex. W h a t 1997 law i ng to a c c e p t s h i p m e n t s o f coa l f r o m a coal c o mp a n} - o n a
r e v i e w a d d r e s s e s t hi s topic? p r o b a t i o n a r y b a s i s if speci fic c o n d i t i o n s w e r e a c c e p t e d by
t h e coa l c o m p a n y c o n s t i t u t e d a n offer?
A SSIG N M EN TS
Ref er to t h e C u r r e n t l.a w In dex. W h a t Illinois B a r Jo urna l ASSIG N M EN T?
law r e vi e w a r t ic l e a d d r e s s e s W tw d v. K .M .AIW C.orp., 554 I h e s u p e r v i s i n g a t t o r n e y ’s s o n w a s abl e to log o n to a W’eb
N . E . 2 d 233 (111. 1990)? site t ha t s h o w e d c h i l d r e n h o w to t o r t u r e cats. She s e e m s
to r e m e m b e r t ha t s o m e le gi sl a t i on w a s i n t r o d u c e d in t h e
ASSIGNMENT 4
106t h C o n g r e s s t ha t d e a l t w i t h o n l i n e p r o t e c t i o n o f c h i l
Refer to R e s ta te n te n t (S e co n d ) o f Lorts. W’hat s e c t i o n sets d r e n . C o n s u l t t h e U n ite d Sta tes C o d e C o n g re ss io n a l a iu l
o u t t h e e l e m e n t s o f false i m p r i s o n m e n t ? W h a t a r e t h e e l e A d m i n i s t r a t i v e N e w s a n d l o c a t e w h a t , if any, l e g i s l a t i on
m e n t s o f false i m p r i s o n m e n t ? Is a p e r s o n liable if h e o r she was introduced.
unint ent io nal ly causes the c o n f m e m e n t o f an o th er ? W h a t
s e c t i o n a d d r e s s e s c o n f i n e m e n t c a u s e d indi rect !}' by t h e A SSIG N M EN TS
institution of c ri mi nal proceedi ngs? W’hil e c r o s s i n g a n i n t e r s e c t i o n , t h e cli ent w a s s t r u c k by a
\' ehicle d r i v e n b}' a m i n o r . I h e m i n o r ’s p a r e n t s o w n e d t h e
A SSIG N M EN TS
vehicle, a n d t h e m i n o r w a s driv i ng w i t h t he i r k n o w l e d g e
Refer to R e s ta t e m e n t ( Ih ird ) o f U nfa ir Cômpetition. W’hat a n d c o n s e n t . I he m i n o r has b e e n cit ed twice for s p e e d i n g in
s e c t i o n d e f i n e s a t r a d e s e c r e t ? W' hat is t h e d e f i n i t i o n ? t h e past t h r e e \ ’ears. Refer to A m . Jur Pleading a m i Practice
W h a t is tlie r e a s o n l o r ) n o \ i d i n g p r o t e c t i o n l o I r a d e
L o rm s a n d locat e t h e p r o p e r n e g l i ge n c e c o m p l a i n t f o r m for
s e c r et s ? W h a t R h o d e Is l and l aw a d d r e s s e s t r a d e secr ets? suit a g a i n s t t h e p a r e n t s .
W h a t 1998 cas e tVom t h e L’n i t e d States Di s t ri c t CAUUt for
t h e S o u t h e r n Di s t ri c t of I n d i a n a d i s c u s s e d t r a d e secr et s?
^ The available CourseMate for this text has an interactive eBook and interactive learning
01 * tools, including flash cards, quizzes, and more. To learn more about this resource and access
f CourseMate free demo CourseMate resources, go to www.cengagebrain.com, and search forthis book.
To access CourseMate materialsthatyou have purchased, goto login.cengagebrain.com.
Computers and Legal Research
l a m e s R e d h o r s c \ \ a s oo i n a n J r ai s ci l in W i n d d w kcick, A r i / o n a , o n t h e X a v a i o R(.-'L'r\ a t i o n . Hi-,
O u tlin e
p a r e n t s i n s i s t e d t h a t all t h e i r e h i k l r e n g i a d i i a t e I r o n i h i g h sc Ik x i I a n d c n c o u r a g e d t h e m t o g o
t o c o l l e g e . .Alter g r a d u a t i n g t r o m p a r a l e g a l s c h o o l l i \ e v e a r s a g o, l a m e s g o t a j o b at a l a w l i n n I. Introcfuclion
in W i n s l o w, . Ar i z o n a . H i s d r e a m is l o s a \ e e n o u g h n i o n e \ l o g o t o l a w s c h o o l . O v e r t h e p a s t II. C' omrnercial I nt e r n e t Research
t i \ e \ c a r s , l a m e s h a s h e c o n i c q u i t e s ki l l e d at l egal r e s e a r c h a n d is r o u t i n e K a s s i g n e d r e s e a r c h
III. N o n f e e - B a s e d La w- Rel at ed
p r o j e c t s , l ast m o n t h , t h e f i r m s u h s e r i h e d t o W' est law. I h e p a r t n e r s a r e l e a r n i n g t o u s e Wc s t -
We b Sites a n d O t h e r
law. h u t b e c a u s e l a m e s l o o k a W' e st knv c o u r s e in s e h o o k h e h a s b e c o m e t h e “ \ \ ' e s l l a w p e r s o n . ”
C o m p u t e r - Based Resour ces
T h e s e n i o r p a r t n e r c a l l e d l a m e s i n t o h i s o t h c e a n d s a i d, T just h a d a n i n t e r v i e \ v w i t h
IV. Key Points Checkli st:
.Mrs. B u r g e s s . S h e is 8 0 y e a r s o l d , a n d s i n c e h e r h u s b a n d d i e d l i \ e \ e a r s a go, h e r c l o s e s t c o m -
C o m p u t e r s a n d Legal Research
p a n i o n is h e r cat , .Alice. 1 l e r n e x t i l o o r n e i g h b o r h a t e s c a t s a n d r e p e a t e d l\ w a r n e d .Mrs. B u r g e s s
V. Applicat ion
t h a t it .Alice c o n t i n u e d t o u s e h i s r o s e g a r d e n a s a b a t h r o o m h e w o u l d 'get r i d ol h e r l. ast w e e k ,
he set a cat t r a p l o r Al i ce. S h e w a s c a u g h t i n t h e t r a p a n d d i e d . 1h e n e x t d a \ , w h e n M r s . B u r g e s s
a s k e d t h e n e i g h b o r il h e h a d s e e n .Alice, h e r e p l i e d , '1 t ol d \ o u I xvoul d t a k e c a r e ol h e r a n d 1 did. '
I le t h e n s h o w e d h e r t h e tra[> xvith . Mice slill in it. S h e b e c a m e s o u p s e t ox’c r t h e i n c i d e n t t h a l s he L e arn in g O b j e c t i v e s
w e n t t o h e r d o c t o r .Mrs. B u r g e s s is e x I r e m c K d i s t r a u g h t o v e r t h e a c t i o n s ol t h e n e i g h b o r a m i t h e
loss ol h e r cat . S h e Icels t h a t s h e is n o u all a l o n e a n d h a s lost h e r b e s t I r i e n d . S h e w a n t s t o sue.
After c o m p l e t i n g t hi s c ha pt e r , you
1w a n t \(H i t o ge l o n W e s t l a w a n d d o s o m e r e s e a r c h i n l o w h a t t\ p e ol d a m a g e s n i a \ b e r e c o \ e r e d
sh o u l d u n d e r s t a n d :
lor l o s s ot a p e t . I ' m e s p e c i a l h m t e r e s t e i l il s h e e a n r e c o \ e r l o r t h e d i s t r e s s t hi s h a s c a u s e d lier." • 'Die role o f c o m p u t e r s in legal
I h e a n s w e r t o t h i s q u e s t i o n , uul t h e r e s e a r c h s t e p s l a m e s l o l l o w s a r e t i i s e u s s e d in t h e research
A p p l i c a t i o n s e c t i o n ol t h i s c h a p t e r .
• I low t o c o n d u c t b as i c \cgal
r esearch usi n g t h e m o s t
frequentl y u s e d c o m m e r c i a l
services, West l aw a n d I.exisNexis
• The role a n d t y p e s o f nonf ee-

b ased l aw-relat ed W e b sites
• The role o f C D - R O M s in legal

research
223
I. IN TROD UCTION
A. In G eneral
T h e e arl i er ehapt e i ' s o f t h i s text f o c us o n t h e t e c h n i q u e s k>i' c o n d u c t i n g r e s e a r c h u s i n g p r i nt
r e s ou r c e s , s u c h as t r e a t i s e s a n d b o u n d \ ' o l u m e sets. l-ven as te c h n o l o g \- d e v e l o p s a n d r e s e a r c h
is i n c r ea s i ng h - c o n d u c t e d u s i n g e l e c t r o n i c r e s o u r c e s , it is still i m p o r t a n t lo k n o w h o w to r e
s e a r c h u si n g p r i n t r e s o u r c e s , l or at least l o u r r e a s o n s :
1. T h e o r g a n i z a t i o n a n d e l e n i e n t s ol t h e e l e c t r o n i c d a t a b a s e s are b a s e d o n t he s t r u c
t u r e o f t h e p r i n t ma t e r i a l . T h e r e f o r e , a famil iari t\ - w i t h t h e p r i nt s o u r c e m a k e s it
m u c h e a s i e r to u n d e r s t a n d t h e s t r u c t u r e o f t h e e l e c t r o n i c d a t a b a s e a n d c o n d u c t
e 1e c t ro n i c re s e a r c h .
2. T h e m a t e r i a l \ ’o u a r e l o o k i n g for m a \ ' n o t b e o n a n e l e c t r o n i c d a t a b a s e . T h i s is
e sp e c i a l l y t r u e in t h e c a s e o f tr e a t i se s. E x p e r i e n c e d r e s e a r c h e r s r e c o g n i z e t h a t a
r e s e a r c h p r o j e c t m a y r e q u i r e k n o w l e d g e ol a n d r e l e r e n c e to p r i nt re s o u r ces . T h e y
d o n o t rely e x cl u s i v e l y o n c o m p u t e r - a s s i s t e d legal r e s e ar c h .
3. O n o c c a s i o n , a c c e s s t o e l e c t r o n i c r e s e a r c h s o u r c e s m a y b e u n a \ a i l a b l e , s u c h as
w h e n t h e local s e r v e r is d o w n . In s u c h s i t u a t i o n s y o u are helpl ess it y ou d o not
k n o w h o w to c o n d u c t r e s e a r c h u s i n g p r i n t ma t e r i a l s .
4. C o s t c o n c e r n s m a \ ' l i mi t t h e a m o u n t o f t i m e y o u c a n s p e n d u si n g c o m m e r c i a l
e l e c t r o n i c ser\' ices. S o m e f i r m s u s e e l e c t r o n i c serv ices onK' to d o u b l e - c h e c k w h a t
t h e \ ' h a v e l o c a t e d in p r i n t s o u r c e s o r to u p d a t e t h e i r r es e a r c h . Thi s l i mi ts t he t i m e
s p e n t o n e l e c t r o n i c r e s o u r c e s a n d t h u s r e d u c e s costs.
C h a p t e r 3 t h r o u g h C h a p t e r 6 m e n t i o n if a n d w h e r e t b e p r i n t r e s o u r c e s a r e avail able
o n e l e c t r o n i c d a t a b a s e s s u c h as W’e s t l a w o r L e x i s Ne x i s , b u t t h e y d o n o t d is c u s s h t nv to c o n
d u c t e l e c t r o n i c r e s e a r c h . T h i s c h a p t e r p r e s e n t s a n o v e r v i e w o f legal r e s e a r c h u si n g t he m o s t
I r eq u e n t K ' u s e d c o m m e r c i a l ( l e e - b a s e d ) s er vi ces, W' e st l a w a n d LexisNexis, a n d a revi ew ol
n o n t e e - b a s e d (Iree) I n t e r n e t a n d o t h e r c o m p u t e r - b a s e d leg.il r e s e a r c h sour ces.
B. Search T e rm s
Th e initial st eps for c o n d u c t i n g a s e a r c h , d i s c u s s e d in C.Tiapter 2, appl y to t h e c o n d u c t ol a
c o m p u t e r - a s s i s t e d s e a r c h as well: a n a h ze t h e a s s i g n m e n t , d o p r e l i m i n a r \ ' p r e p a r a t i o n , ide nt i l y
t h e k e \ ’ facts, a n d i de nt i f y t h e issue, ( ' o m p u t e r s e a r c h e s are u s u a l l y c o n d u c t e d u s i ng ke\' w o r d s
o r t e r m s f r o m t h e issue ( o f t e n r e f e r r e d t o as Boolean searches, o r te r m s a n d a n m e c lo r s
sc iin h c s ) . Se c t i on II.A. l . a ( 2 ) - ( 3 ) in t h i s c h a p t e r d e s c r i b e s s e a r c h e s u s i n g ke\- t e r m s . ' Ihe basi c
st ep s for d e t e r m i n i n g t h e s e a r c h t e r m s are:
1. Stat e t h e i s sue y o u a r e r e s e a r c h i n g as specilicalK- as p o ss i b l e in t h e c o n t e x t o f t h e

facts.
2. I ' o r m u l a t e t h e s e a r c h q u e r y . Re \ i e w t h e i s sue a n d sel ect t h e si gni f i ca nt t e r ms . A s k

yours el f, “W’h a t t e r m s in t h e i s sue a r e likely to b e i n c l u d e d in t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l
p r o v i s i o n , st at u t e, o r c a s e I a m r e s e a r c h i n g ? ” l b save cost s, f o r m u l a t e t h e s e a r c h
q u e r y b e f o r e y o u s i gn o n .
Af t er y o u i d e n t i h ’ t h e t e r m s , t y p e t h e m in t h e s e a r c h q u e r ) ' b o x a n d e x e c u t e t h e s e a r c h
b y c l i ck i n g o n t he a p p r o p r i a t e c o m m a n d , s u c h as S e a r c h o r S u b m i t . M o s t W’eb sites t h a t a l l ow
y o u to se a r c h u s i n g k e y w'ortls a l s o i n c l u d e i n s t r u c t i o n s o n h o w to c o n d u c t a se a r ch ; l ook t or
a H e l p i c o n o r a \ ’i e w ' Lut ori a l i c o n n e a r t h e s e a r c h q u e r y box. I n c r ea s i n g l y, W’eb sites a r e
u s i n g s i m p l e s e a r c h e s s u c h as t h o s e o f f e r e d b y ( i o o g l e r a t h e r t h a n u s i n g t r a d i t i o n a l B o o l e an
s e a r c h e s (see E x h i b i t 7-1).
224
CHAPTER 7 COMPUTERS AND LEGAL RESEARCH
E x h ib it 7-1 United States Government Printing Office Search Query. From http://www.gpo.gov/fdsYs/search/home.action
S im p le S e a rc h B o x to s e a r c h a ll c o lle c tio n s
C ' v .w w g p o g o v \ ■Ù \
J Web SiKe O SI»ckbo*f(J Lejm PC CTLT | P cV nI.rw © N * v s'» b O re Q ' jw t..- 1^ Othei bookm«rki
About G P O { N M w o o m A M i« I C o n v 'tM « io fi« l 1 IfW fM d o r G m m t« ! \ C a r M n ( C o n C K t [ askG P O | H elp
G i Q U .S. G O V E R N M E N T P R I N T I N G O F F I C E i K e e p è j i ca Informed
f-O s y «
G P O s fe i1 » * ta l [>iç|ital S y s t o i
V e n d o rs
Find out hov. y o c car, D o B u sir« sî
G PO
r rtrr th<. ' ■
Iihfattps Featured Publication
Frod m fo'm ation ab o u t F e rlerai d eo o srto fy
htKafies S th e C a ta lo g o( U S Constitution, Je ffe rs o n 's ManuaL and
G ove’n m en t P u b tic a l'o n i
R u le s of the H o u se of R epresentatives,
112th C o n g r e s s
G P O Q u ic k L in ks
■ U S G o w n n w il BookM ort
BROVrtE COUECTIONS
• B«n's Guide to
U .S . Govemmern for K*ds
■ Catalog o( U S. G o w m m e « Beta Collection In Partnership with the
PuWiCfltwns
Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts
United S ta te s C o u rts O pinions
I f y o u ar c c o n d u c t i n g a b r o a d .scarch for g e n e r a l i n f o r m a t i o n o n a topi c, t h i n k o f all the

t e r m s u n d e r w h i c h t h e t o p i c ina\ ' b e c a t e g o r i z e d a n d c o n d u c t t h e s e a r c h u s i n g a n y c o m b i n a
t i o n o f t h es e t e r ms .
For Example The question involves child custody and the researcher wishes to gain
familiarity with this area of law. The first step is to list all of the terms under
which "child custody" might be indexed, such as divorce, marriage, custody, parent and
child, child custody children, and domestic relations. The topic will be found under at
least one of those search terms.
II. C O M M E R C I A L I N T E R N E T R E S E A R C H
I h i s s e c t i o n p r e s e n t s a n cn’e r \ i e w o f legal r e s e a r c h u s i n g t h e t w o m o s t f r e q u e n t l y u s e d c o m
m e r c i a l ( f e e - b a s e d ) se r vi ce s: W e s t i a w ( a n d W’est lawNe. xt ) a n d l.e.visNexis, It al s o i n c l u d e s a
d i s c u s s i o n o f s m a l l e r a n d s o m e w h a t less irec]uentl\' u s e d s er vi ces. A l t h o u g h o t h e r c o m m e r c i a l
e l e c t r o n i c r e s e a r c h s e r v i c e s a r e a \ ’ai l abi e, b e c o m i n g f a m i l i a r w i t h We s t i a w, W e s t l a w N e x t ,
a n d L exi s Nexi s will give y o u t h e i n f o r m a t i o n y o u n e e d to u s e o t h e r serv ices. Thi s s e c t i o n is
l i m i t e d t o an o v e r v i e w o f w h at i n f o r m a t i o n is av a i l ab l e a n d h o w to c o n d u c t ba si c res e a r c h,
for t wo r eas ons :
I n a s m u c h as t h e r e a r e e n t i r e text s d e \ ' o t e d t o h o w t o u s e We s t i a w a n d Lexi sNexi s, a
d e t a i l e d d i s c u s s i o n is b e y o n d t h e s c o p e o f t h i s text. S e e Judy A, Long, Legal Research
Using W estia w ( D e l m a r Ck' nga ge L e a r n i n g , 20 0 1 ) . We st i a w, Le xisNexis, Loislaw,
\ e r s u s L a w, a n d o t h e r t e e - b a s e d s o u r c e s u p d a t e a n d ni odi t v' t h e i r se r v i c e s fr equentl y,
r e n d e r i n g a d e t a i l e d d i s c u s s i o n o u t d a t e i / h y th e t i m e a te x t is p u b li s h e d .
West iaw and LexisNexis each have t h o u s a n d s o f da ta ba se s that include p r i m a r y a n d

s e c o n d a r v a u t h o r i t v r e s e a r c h s o u r c e s a n d n u m e r o u s o t h e r s o u r c e s , Tli ere a r e d a t a b a s e s for
225
all a r e a s ot reder al a n d st at e law, i n c l u d i n g s t a t u t o r y a n d c ase law. .Materials a r e av a i l abl e on

specific p ra c t i c e areas; t h e s e ser vices a l s o give y o u ac c e ss t o p u b l i c rect>rds of all tv pes, n e w s
s o u r c e s , b u s i n e s s m a t er i al s , p e r i od i c a l s, legal t reati ses, li t i gat i on ma t e r i a l s , f o r m s , legal a n d
o t h e r statistical i n t o r m a t i o n s o u r c e s, d i r e c t o r i e s of all tvpes, law revi ews , a n d i n t e r n a t i o n a l
ma t er i al s , llie d a t a b a s e s a r e n o t l i m i t e d lo l a w - r e l a t e d i n t o r m a t i o n a n d a r e t o o e x t e n s i v e to
list h er e ; t o r e x a m p l e , t h e l.e.xis W' eb site i n d i c a te s l h a l it h a s m o r e t h a n 5 0 , 0 0 0 s o u r c e s.
A. W e s t la w
W'estlaw, b y ' I h o m s o n Reuters, pr o v i de s access to t h o u s a n d s o f pri marv' a n d sec o n d a r v ' r es earch
s o u r c e s . It is a vail able direclK' o n t h e I n t e r n e t at w w w . w e s l l a w . c o m . I h i s s e c t i o n d i s c u ss e s
l o c a t i n g p r i m a r y a n d s e c o n d a r v ' a u t h o r i t i e s, v i e w i n g s e a r ch results, u p d a t i n g r e s e a r c h , a n d
p r i n t i n g s e a r ch results.
1. F in d in g P rim a r y A u th o rity
As m e n t i o n e d in (Chapter I, pri niarv' a ut hor i t v' is t h e law itself— c o n s t i t u t i o n a l law, e n a c t e d
law (s t at ut es), a n d c a s e law. i h i s s e c t i o n f o c u s e s o n l o c a t i n g s t a t u t o r y a n d c o n s t i t u t i o n a l law
( n o t e t h at c o n s t i t u t i o n s are u s u a l l y l o c a t e d w i t h t h e s t a t u t es ) a n d c ase law.
a. F inding Statutory Laws and C on stitu tion al Provisions

I h e r e are f o u r p r i ma r v ' wav's to l ocat e a s t a t u t e o r c o n s t i t u t i o n a l p r o v i s i o n , d e p e n d i n g o n the
a m o u n t ot i n t o r m a t i o n yo u have.
(I) S c a r c h h y ( ' i l a l i o n W' he n y o u k n o w t h e c i t at i on o f a st at ut e o r c o n s t i t u t i o n a l p r o v i

s i o n , y o u c a n l oca t e it bv p e r t o r n i i i i g t h e t o l l o w i n g steps:
O n t h e W’e s t l a w W e l c o m e p age, Iv p e t h e c i t at i on in t h e “ l i n d t h i s d o c u m e n t by cita

t i o n ” b o x a n d click (lO. I h e d o c m n e n t will c o m e u p (see li xhibi t 7-2).
E x h ib it 7-2 Westlsw Welcome Paqe. Repnnied wilh permission of Thomson Reuters
F in d b y C ita tio n K e y C ite D ir e c to ry
k e t c it i w nfCTO iy KEVNtHMHit « t iiia »

Westlaw COlMTDOCa FOMIFMOSI PEOPLE MAf> EXPERT CCNTBt COURT VWW P n le r tn c u AWrlC«nt«< R«Ma<cliT
o k o m e l o W e s tla w
fjn d th is do cu m en t bv Citation: W c s t I f i w P R O I d ít io n
S e l e c t F o rm F m d e r c o n t ? n t >3 r.o A av-iiU bti^ m th e pi*.-. . \ - i t l a / . Do,: S F o fm B uild^'•' d o c u m e n t a s s e m b ly p r o d u c t E tp e rn » n c e h cv s y o u c a n e x p e d it e y o u r form

b u ild in g p r o c e s s b y c lic k in g c n l 'o . F o tm b u i f V ' link ■ i ' ■ • •• ^
B e y C H e th is citation N i W : A m e r ic a n A r b ih a U o f i A ‘> s o u r ttio n la t) O t r tn d [ n ip lo y m e n r A r b if s a t io n A w a f d s : /V v A A R B A W A kO .
[¡g
C o u r t t r a n s c r ip t s w it h a u d io t i i u l v i r l r o : D iis in p s s c v / n e is a w a rd e d ove r 51M fro m C A W a t e r D is t r ic t io r illn e s s a n d e m o t io n a l
i « « r c h fo r a d a M b flv e :
d is tr e s s c a u s e d b v d u n k in g tte a te d -> o v v a g e w r i t f fu r m e re tfia n a yeat S ee p l a in t if f 's in fe c tio u s d is e a s e e x p e r t ’s t e s t im o n y a t /o : 1
'W 580^ 0 ? j. F lo r id a ju r v a w a rd e d 'f lO m illio n v * if d iL t l o th e p a ie n t s o f a o f a f o o t b a ll p la y e r w it h s ic k le t e ll t r a it w h o d ie d d u r in g a
c a p re s e a s o n p r a c t ic e , V V a lc Ii t h e t e s tfiiK m y o t ^ ^ la lt lllf f ■ ^ e x p e r t c a r d i o l o g i s t a t /O il VV.
R e ctn t D a ta b a se s C h e c k o u t th o s e n e w t r i a l c o i i r l ( i o f u n u M i t s : M is s ¡ ‘; s i p r ¡ ju d g e is s u e s in ju n c t io n b lo c k in g H a le y B a rb o u r p a rd o n s : ^ 01^ W i 80710

Ffl.onte Databases V e lv e t U n d e rg ro u n d sue>^ A n d v W a r h o l fo u n d a t io n fo r tia d e m a r k m f r in g e in e n t : JOl? 'v V i S u it a lle g e s V e r iz o n in te r fe r e d w ith
th e b u s in e s s o f o n e o f it s to p N r» w Y o r k r e t a i le r s : •: Z. 1 ;i .'- i. F o r m e r N F L p l a y e r s s u e L e a g u e o v e r c o n c u s s io n s : ^011 W L
S w is s B a n k e r s c h a r g e d w ith c o n c e a lin g S l ,2 b ilh u n m ta x c ra c k d o w n ; 201^ W i 8 3 2 ^^. 32 y e a r s e n te n c e fo r M L K P a ra d e
riÍAP.<ỉĩ5bạ_s.ẹ WiLjífJ a tte m p te d b o m b in g case; ’ vV . K a ty P e iiy an d R u s s e ll B r a n d d iv o r c e p e titio n ; 2 0 1 1 W l . In v e s to rs in P onzi

sche m e sue P ro s k a u e r R o s e . C h a d b o iitiiP 8t P a rk e *. >• • '..I’ i n . j . S a m s u n g 's M o tio n t o D is m is s A p p le 's C o u n t e r c l a i m ; 2011 W i
lyttinu '' 6002/ 22. F o rm e r P e n ri S ta te coach S anduskv c n n iin a l C o n ip la in t ; .-h : ; W i i. O i. / 'U 1 A m e r ic a n A ir lin e s f ile s fo r b a n k ru p tc y ; 2 0 1 1 W l
M o to r o la accused o f s te a lin g tra d e s c c rt-ts ' l ’ ■ •. C o n r a d M u ir a y fo u n d g u ilt y o f in v o lu n t a r y m a n s la u g h t e r in
d e a th o f M ic h a e l J a c k s o n - re a d o r ig in a l C o m p la in t- V *.
S ig n if ic a n t e r ih a n c e in e n t s to tin * W e s t j N 'ii^ t.- - i .v •• ’ . A t t o r n p y e d ito r s r e c la s s if ie d a p p r o x im a t e ly 400,00 0 h e a d n o te s

In c lu d e d a r e s ig n if ic a r it c tia n q e s to C r im in a l ia - v \ ( 110^ and A rre s t ( 3 5 ).
T h e s a m e c u s to m e r s u p p c .rr v o u , r.. fro m / . r i t is a . j i l i b l e tc r u s t o m e r s a c c e s s i n g W e s tla v . t h r o u g h v .e s tla w c o m
• F or W e s tia /. te c h n ic a l äi-iuXan- '.-rn d a n h 'iiail m ^ - s a a - r .. • .i; • o r c a ll 1- 8 0 0 -W E S T la W ;i 8 0 0 -' 5 37 - 8 S 29
D a ta b a s e W iz a rd
226
For Example If you want to find 18 U.S.C.S. § 2113, type "18 uses 2113."
Il'vou are not at tlie W' elconie page, click o n F i n d & Pri nt at t he t op of t he page. F i n d a
[ d o c u m e n t will a p p e a r (see Hxhibit 7-3), as well as t h e F i n d & Pr i nt mu l t i p l e cit ati ons
box. To access a single citation, t\-pe t h e cit ati on in t h e “Fi nd this d o c u m e n t by citation"
bo x a n d click Cio, l b h n d mu l t i p l e cit ati ons at t>nce, type all ot ' the cit at i ons s ep a r at e d b\-
a s e m i c o l o n o r h a r d r e t ur n in t he “ F n t e r ( ’i t a t i on( s) ” bo x a n d click S e n d Request,
(2) S e a r c h h y I s s u e — N a t u r a l L a n g u a g e In m o s t i n s t a n c e s , y o u will n o t k n o w t h e
c i t a t i o n o t ' t h e s t a t u t e t ha t g o v e r n s t h e issue b e i n g r e s e a r c h e d . ' I h e r e f o r e , \ o u m u s t l o c a t e t he
s t a t u t e u s i n g t h e i n f o r m a t i o n f r o m t h e is sue y o u h a v e i d e n t i f i e d . I h c u io it critical step in
th e research process is fr a m i n g the issue in the co ntex t o f t h e specific facts o f t h e case. A w e l l - f r a m e d
issue, s t a t e d in t h e c o n t e x t o f t h e facts, p r o v i d e s a r e s e a r c h e r w i t h t h e i n f i ) r m a t i o n necessarv'
t o f r a m e th e r e s e a r c h q u e r y u s i n g t h e t w o m o s t c o m m o n r e s e a r c h m e t h o d s : n a t u r a l l a n g u a g e
a n d t e r m s a n d c o n n e c t o r s (see n e x t s u b s e c t i o n ) . F o r h el p in i d e n t i l v i n g a n d s t a t i n g issues,
s e e C h a p t e r s 10 a n d 11.
Natural language is a s e a r c h m e t h o d t h a t al l o ws y o u to r e s e a r c h b\- s t a t i n g t h e s ea r ch
q u er \ - ( t h e i s sue) u s i n g p l a i n Hnglish. T o c o n d u c t a n a t u r a l l a n g u a g e s e a r c h , p e r f o r m t h e
I' ol lowing steps:
a. Stat e t h e is sue v o u are r e s e a r c h i n g as speci fically as pt ' ssi bl e in t h e c o n t e x t ot

t h e facts.
For Example The facts of the case are that an individual robbed a bank us
ing a toy gun. The question is whether, under federal law, a
"dangerous weapon" was used in the robbery. The assignment is to locate the
federal statute governing this question. The issue may be stated as follows:
"Under federal statutory law, does bank robbery with a dangerous weapon
occur when the weapon is a toy gun?"
E x h ib it 7 -3 Westlaw Find & Print page. Repnnted with permission of Thomson Reuters.
F in d s in g le c ita tio n F in d m u ltip le c ita tio n s a t o n e tim e
/ FiKOiPWliT
I
KCYCtT'. OIRICTOirr KEYNUMeit« S T I llA f
Westlawt Cm mTOO Ct fORMFIHDa PEOPL£MAP EXPERT C E N T « COURT V PrtfcrencM AJtrtC«rtw R «w »chT
_|^We»l1«w<^ WMtlay W LI G e n e r a l S u b s c r ip tio n |
Find a f)o< iim ent/i
F in d a n d P o n t Multipl® C ita t io n s
F iiid f tP r ii il M u t t i p J e ^ t a t i o n ^
E n le r C ita tio n { s )
f i n d th is d c c u m e n / b v c rtá tio n
an d Pnnt
P u bitca C io n C o u n t r , . .r
■JS I, n ip f) S tair'S - r* 4 -3' ; e:. •
227
b. Locat e t h e a p p r o p r i a t e d a t a b a s e . As w i t h a n y s e a r c h , n a r r o w it t o t h e s o u r c e s t hat
c o n t a i n t h e m a t e r i a l i n\ ' ol ved in y o u r searcii, s u c h as t h e L 'SC A t o r feder al law
a n d t h e st at e s t a t u t e s t o r st a t e law. lust as y o u w o u l d l o o k in d i f f e r e n t sets ot b o o k s
for d i t f e r e n t laws, W e s t i a w h a s d it f e r e nt d a t a b a s e s fo r d i f f e r e n t r e s e a r c h areas (sec
Ex h i b i t 7-2). T o l oc a t e d a t a b a s e s , u s e e i t h e r t h e D i r e c t o r y l i n k o r t h e F i n d a D a t a
b a s e W i z a r d (s e e E x h i b i t 7-2).
For Example When you are looking for federal statutory law, click on Direc
tory on the Welcome page. On the Directory page, click on U.S.
federal materials, then click on Statutes, then United States Code.
c. E n t e r t h e n a t u r a l l a n g u a g e d e s c r i p t i o n . O n c e t h e D a t a b a s e p a g e c o m e s up, on
t h e left si de o f t h e p a g e cli ck N a t u r a l L a n g u a g e a n d t y p e t h e n a t u r a l l a n g u a g e d e
s c r i p t i o n o f t h e issue in t h e n a t u r a l l a n g u a g e “S e a r c h ” bo x . N e x t , cli ck o n Search
We s t i a w (see E x h i b i t 7-4) . I h e s e a r c h r e s ul t s will t h e n a p pe a r .
(3 ) S e a r c h b y I s s u e — T e r m s a n d C o n n e c t o r s A n o t h e r w a y to find t h e st at ut e t ha t gover ns
t h e issue is t h r o u g h t h e u s e o fte r m s and c o n n e c to r s . I h i s t y p e o f s e a r c h ( o f t e n r e f e r r e d to
as a B oolean search) a l l ows y o u t o c o n d u c t a s e a r c h u s i n g ke y w o r d s of t h e issue a n d s y m b o l s
( c o n n e c t o r s ) . T h e c o n n e c t o r s sp e c i fy t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p s b e t w e e n t h e ke y t e r m s , a n d t h e sear ch
re t ri e v e s d o c u m e n t s b a s e d o n t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e t e r m s .
For Example In the search query -deadly/p weapon/p bank/p robbery-, the connector
"Ip" locates all ofthe documents in which the words deadly, weapon, bank,
and robbery appear in the same paragraph of a document.
E x h ib it 7-4 [Vestlaw Terms S< Connectors Search page Rep'"'ted w:'' of Thcn^sc^ Rente’s
T e r m s & C o n n e c to r s N a tu ra l L a n g u a g e F ie ld s
nNMPWMT MTCITI OtMCTORV KrrNUVVcfi« «TCDAr twwHi

V\tetlawt CO'.irrOOC« F(MWINDB( R O f lE M A P exPFrfTCCN TM COIMTVMRE Attrt O n ttr fl««Mrcn Trt4
¿«3 a Tst
CustQOi FdJti Njrcs

Char>Q ^ D a t a b a s e is !' ; I s s
Add C o n n e c to rs o r E x p a n d e rs
I S AND In « a m e s t n t * n c e
. y 1• Pr«'’£-dmg Atthm 5‘^ncerice
Phras® ; In « a m * p a r3 g r a D h
’ • But n o t •; f 'r - c i.d io g A ith in p j r a g r a p h
I Por't e-D andei .ViCh.n n re rm s of
j ' O n i.e r s a i ,N a i3 ' tr e c e d i n o A ilh in n te f m s oi
C o n n e c to r s a n d E x p a n d e rs
228
1o perldi ni a t e rms aiul c o n n e c t o r s search, \'<hi mu s t be tamiliar witli the lollowing

intoimation:
Plurals and possessives. W’estlaw automaticalK' r etr ie\’es plurals an d possessi\-es ol
terms. If \ o u tvpe rol’bcr, W'estlaw will search for i v h l ’cr, robbers, robbers', and ro b
ber's. It will not retrieve the singul ar l or ms if \' ou type the plural.
[ioot exp an d er (!). I'o search t'or all t'orms o f a word, place the root e x pa nd er "1” at
the e n d o f t h e root o f t h e word.
For Example The query -work!- retrieves the various forms of the word (e.g.,
worker, working, works).
Universal character (*). I'o search t'or all \'ariations o f a wcM'd, insert an asterisk ('
the uni\'ersal character, in place cif the \'ariable character.
For Example The query -r*ng- retrieves all the documents with ring, rang, and rung.
C o n n ec to r s. (.Connectors specit'\' t he relationship b et we en the search terms. Ihe\'

goxer n the scope ot the search. A l w a \ s use a space to separate the c o nn e ct o r ir om
the search term. Ihe list o f c o n n e c t o r s can be f ound at the b ot t o m o f t h e terms and
c o n n e c t o r s search page (see l:xhil>it 7--1). l ollowing is a list ol the c on ne ct or s a nd an
expl anation ol how the\' are used.
C O N N E C rO R RUl.FS (iOV KR N ’INC. USK OF C O N N K C FOR
& (and) . \ n a m p e r s a n d (t^) b e t we en the t e rms letrieves all docLunents

that cont ain both terms. Ihus, the search quer\- bank & robber-
retrieves all d o c u m e n t s with both terms: b u n k and robber.
sp a ce (or) A space b e t we en wor ds retriex'es all docLiments that cont ain either
search term. Ihus, the search quer \' -b an k robber- retrieves all
d o c u m e n t s that cont ain either the word b u iik or the wortl robber.
/s ,-\n "/s" b et we en the t e r ms r etr ie\es all d o c u m e n t s that contain
bo t h t e rms in the sa me .sentence, ilnis, the search quer\' - bank /s
r o b b er retrie\ es all d o c u m e n t s in which b u n k and robber a p p a w
in the s a m e sentence.
/P A "/p" be t we en the t e r ms retrie\'es all dci cuments that cont ain

bo t h te rms in the s a m e par agraph. Ihus, the search quer\- - bank /p
robber- retriex es all d o c u m e n t s in whi ch h a n k and robber
in the s ame par a gr a ph .
In An “/n" bet\N'een the t e r ms r et r i e\ es all dt i c ume nt s in which the
t e rms a pp e a r within a certain n u m b e r o f wor ds of each other. ITie
n is the specihed n u m b e r ot words. Ihus, the search qiier\’ -bank /3
r obber- retriev es all d o c u m e n t s in which b u n k and robber AppciW
within fi\ e w o r d s o f each other.
(co n tin u e s)
229
CONNFCTOR RULFS (iO V E R N T N G USE OF C O N N E C T O R {c o n tin u ed )
“ ” Place t e r m s in q u o t a t i t ) n m a r k s w h e n \ oli w a n t to locat e

doc Lui i e nt s in w h i c h t h e t e r m s a p p e a r in t h e s a m e o r d e r as t h e y
a p p e a r w i t h i n t h e q u o t a t i o n ma i ks. I h u s , t h e s e a r ch q u e r y - " b a n k
r o b b e r y ” - l o c a t e s all d o c u m e n t s in w h i c h t h e t e r m s hiinl< a n d
ro/’/’iTV a p p e a r t o g e t h e r a n d biinl< p r e c e d e s robbery.
% To e x c l u d e a t e r m t r o m a s e a r ch q u e r y , p l a c e t h e ‘'o s\ n i b o l b e t ö r e
the term. 'Ihus, the search q u e ry -ba nk & ro b b er % w ea po n-
ret rie \' es all d o c u m e n t s t h a t c o n t a i n t h e w o r d s bcuil< a n d ro b b er b u t
n o t t h e w o r d w eapon.
F o l l o w i n g a r e e x a m p l e s ot s e a r c h q u e r i e s u s i n g ct>nnectors. I h e q u e r i e s a r e s h o w n in bol d:
• bank robbery d an gerou s w eap on I h e s e a r c h r et r i e v e s all d o c u m e n t s t h a t c o n t a i n

a n y o n e of the te rm s. I h i s is n o t a p r o p e r t e r m s a n d c o n n e c t o r s se a r ch b e c a u s e it d o e s
n o t utilize c o n n e c t o r s ; it will t h u s result in a \'er\' large n u m b e r ot r e s u l t s t h a t are
p o o r l v m a t c h e d to \ i ) u r d e s i r e d results.
• bank & robbery & d a n gerou s & w ea p on I h e s ea r c h r et r i e v e s onl\- t h e d o c u m e n t s

t ha t c o n t a i n all o f t h e s e t e r ms .
• bank /p robbery /p dangerou s /p w eap on ' I h e s e a r ch r et r i e v e s o n l y t h e d o c u m e n t s
t ha t c o n t a i n all o f t h e t e r m s in t h e s a m e p a r a g r a p h .
• “da ngerou s w ea p o n ” & bank & robbery I he s e a r ch r e t r i e v e s o n l y t h o s e d o c u

m e n t s t ha t i n c l u d e t h e t e r m s banl<. robbery, da ng ero us, a n d w ea p o n w h e r e t h e t e r m s
d a n g e ro u s a n d w e a p o n a p p e a r t oge t he r .
T o c o n d u c t a t e r m s a n d c o n n e c t o r s s e a r ch , p e r f o r m t h e t o l l o w i n g steps:
a. State the issue vou are r e s e a r c h i n g as speciticalK' as poss i bl e in the c ontext o f t h e facts.
Ihis step is t h e s a m e lor b o t h na t ur al l a n g u a g e a n d t e r m s a n d c o n n e c t o r s searches,
b. F o r m u l a t e t h e t e r m s a n d c o n n e c t o r s s e a r ch querv'. R e v i e w t h e i ssue a n d select t h e

key t e r m s t h a l arc si gni fi cant l o t h e issue b e i n g r e s e a r c h e d . Ask y our s e l f , “W h a t
t e r m s in t h e issue a re likely to b e i n c l u d e d in t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l p r o v i s i o n o r s t a t
ute being res ear che d?”
For Example The issue is as follows; "Under federal statutory law, does bank
robbery with a dangerous weapon occur when the weapon is
a toy gun?" The assignment is to locate the federal law that governs a bank
robbery with a dangerous weapon. You are looking for a statute that includes
the terms bank, robbery, dangerous, and weapon
After y o u h av e i de nt it ied the t er ms, t o r m u l a t e t h e q u e r y u s i n g t he a p p r o p r i a t e c o n n e c t o r s .
For Example Referring to the previous example, the search is for a statute that
includes the terms bank, robbery, dangerous, and weapon. The
terms dangerous and weapon probably appear in the same order, so they are
placed in quotations in the query. The query is -"dangerous weapon" & bank &
robbery-. Using the United States Code Annotated as a database, your search
will retrieve all statutes that include the terms bank, robbery, and dangerous
weapon. The search will retrieve only those statutes in which the terms danger-
ousand weapon appeartogether. To narrow the search, the query could read
-"dangerous weapon" /p bank/p robbery-. This formulation ofthe search will
retrieve only those statutes where the terms appear in the same paragraph.
230
c. I.ocatc t h e a p p r o p r i a t e d a t a b a s e . Ihi.s step is t h e s a m e as that u s e d tor a n a t u r a l

l a n g u a g e sear ch.
d. Hnt er t h e t e r m s a n d c o n n e c t o r s . O n c e t h e d a t a b a s e s e a r c h p a g e c o m e s up, o n
t h e let't s i d e o t ' t h e p a g e click Terms a n d c o n n e c t o r s . In thi s b ox, t y p e t h e t e r m s
a n d c o n n e c t o r s for t h e issue y o u are s e a r c h i n g , t h e n click .Search W' estlaw (see
Exhi bi t 7-4). ' [ h e s e a r c h res ul t s will t h e n appear.
W ' h e n c o m p a r i n g n a t u r a l l a n g u a g e a n d t e r m s a n d c o n n e c t o r s s ea r ch e s , y o u will see

c e r t a i n a d v a n t a g e s a n d d i s a d \ ' a n t a g e s t o r b o t h . .A t e r m s a n d c o n n e c t o r s s e a r c h h a s t h e d i s
a d v a n t a g e o f rec]uiri ng a familiarit)- w i t h t h e u se o f t h e c o n n e c t t ) r s . It h a s t h e a d v a n t a g e ot
a l l o w i n g t h e r e s e a r c h e r t o t ai l or t h e s ea r ch.
For Example A terms and connectors search using the 7p" connector retrieves only
those documents in which the terms appear in the same paragraph.
A natural language search retrieves all the documents that contain the search terms.
A l t h o u g h it ta k e s s o m e p r a c t i c e tt) b e c o m e f a mi l i a r w i t h t e r m s a n d c o n n e c t o r s s e a r ch e s ,
m o s t r e s e a r c h e r s p r e f e r t h e m b e c a u s e o f t h e abilit\- to li mi t t h e se a r c h.
(4) S e a r c h h y ¡'able o f C o t i t e n t s In s o m e i n s t an c e s , y o u m a y be abl e to l oca t e a s t a t u t e

o r c o n s t i t u t i o n a l p r i w i s i o n by re \ i e w i n g t h e tabl e o f c o n t e n t s ot t h e laws \ ’o u a re s e a r c h i n g .
For Example You are looking for the federal law that governs bank robbery. Ratherthan
construct a natural language or terms and connectors search, you may
be able to locate the statute simply by looking at the criminal law section of the table of
contents of the United States Code or the United States Code Annotated.
'I'o c o n d u c t a t abl e o f c o n t e n t s s e a r ch , p e r t o r m t h e t o l l o w i n g steps:
a. Select D i r e c t o r y t r o m t h e na \ ' i g a t i on b a r at t h e IO Ị1 o f t h e page.
b. Select t h e a p p r o p r i a t e d a t a b a s e , ' i h e s e a r ch que r \ - b o x will o p e n .
c. f r o m t h e scarcli pa ge , select f abl es o t (Content s l o c a t e d at t h e to| i r i ght, ( ' l i c k o n

t h e tabl e o t c o n t e n t s \ ( ) U w a n t to \ iew.
d. To p r e v i e w t h e c o n t e n t s o f t h e topi c, click o n it. l b s e a r c h w i t h i n t h e topi c, cli ck

t h e b o x ne xt to It a n d click S e a r c h at t h e b o t t o m o f t h e page.
b. Finding Case Law

' I h e r e a r e sever al wa y s to k)cat e c o u r t o p i n i o n s o n W'estlaw. M o s t o f t h e s c a r ch m e t h o d s a n d
s t eps ar e si m i l a r to t h o s e u s e d t o s e a r ch t o r s t a t u t o r v a n d c o n s t i t u t i o n a l law.
(I) Search by C ita tio n If v o u k n o w t h e c i t a t i o n o f a case, v o u c a n loc a t e t h e c a s e by

u s i n g e i t h e r o f t h e follow’i n g steps;
a. O n t h e W e s t l a w W e l c o m e page, t \ p e t h e c i t at i on in t h e “ F i n d t h i s d o c u m e n t bv
c i t a t i on ” b o x a n d click Cio (see Hxhibit 7-2). ' I h e d o c u m e n t will c o m e up.
For Example If the citation is 713 F. Supp. 1296, type "713 fs 1296" and click Go.
b. If you are n o t at t h e W e l c o m e page, click o n F i n d & P r i nt at t h e t o p o t t h e pa ge .

As w h e n s e a r c h i n g s t a t u t o r y law, t h e i-'ind a d o c u m e n t b o x a n d t h e F i n d & P r i n t
nni l ti pl e c i t at i on s b o x will a p p ea r . I'o acce ss a si ngle c i t a t i o n , t \ p e t h e c i t a t i o n in 231
t h e " I ' i nd thi s d o e u i n e n t b\- c i t a t i o n ” b o x a n d click ( k ) . To ti nd m u l t i p l e ci t at i ons

at o n c e , t y p e all o t ' t h e ci t a t i ons, s e p a r a t e d b)- a s e m i c o l o n o r h a r d r e t u r n , in t he
“ I ' nt e r CCitationfs)" b o x a n d click S e n d Reque st .
(2 ) S e a r c h h y I s s u e — N a t u r a l L a n g u a g e In m o s t i n s t a n c es , w h e n \' ou a r e t r y i n g to tind
t h e ca se law t hat g o v e r n s t h e issue b e i n g r e s e a r c h e d , \ o u d o n o t k n o w its n a m e o r c i t a t i on (as
is of t en t h e ca se w h e n \' ou are s e a r c h i n g for st atut es). I h e r e f o r e , y o u m u s t k)cat e t h e case law
u s i n g t h e i n f ' o r ma t i o n f r o m t h e issue, l h e s t e ps for p e r f o r m i n g a n a t u r a l l a n g u a g e s e a r c h for
s t a t u t o r y a n d ca se law a r e t h e s a me . See s e c t i o n I I . A. l . a ( 2 ) in t h i s cha pt e r, ' l h e m o s t critical
s t e p in t h e r e s e a r c h p r o c e s s is f r a m i n g t he issue in t h e c o n t e x t o f t h e specific facts o f t h e case.
To c o n d u c t a n a t u r a l l a n g u a g e s e a r c h t o r case law, p e r f o r m t h e f o l l o wi n g steps:
a. Stat e t h e issue y o u a re r e s e a r c h i n g as spe ci ficalh' as p o s s i b l e in t h e c o n t e x t o f t h e

facts.
For Example Under federal statutory law, does bank robbery with a danger
ous weapon occur when the weapon is a toy gun?
b. l.ocate the apprt)priate case law database.

c. l i n t e r t h e n a t u r a l l a n g u a g e d e s c r i p t i o n . O n c e t h e d a t a b a s e p a g e c o m e s up, t y p e
t he n a t u r a l l a n g u a g e d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e issue in t h e N a t u r a l l a n g u a g e d e s c r i p t i o n
b o x a n d click Se arch. ' Ih e s e a r ch res ul t s will t h e n a p p e a r (see F x h i b i t 7-4).
(3 ) S e a r c h b y I s s u e — I'e n iis a n d C o i u u ’c t o r s l h e s t eps f o r p e r f ' o r m i n g a t e r m s a n d

c o n n e c t o r s s e a r ch for statutorv' a n d case law are t h e s a me . ' I h e s a m e t e r m s a n d c o n n e c t o r s
a re u s e d for all se ar c he s. See s e c t i o n II.A.f .a(3) in thi s cha pt e r.
l o l l o w i n g is a s i m u n a r y ol t h e s t eps l o r c o n d u c t i n g a t e r m s a n d c o n n e c t o r s s e a r c h l or
c ase law.
a. State t h e issLie \' ou a re r e s e a r c h i n g as spe ci ficalh' as p o s s i b le in t h e c o n t e x t ot t h e

tacts, liiis first st ep is t h e s a m e for b o t h n a t u r a l l a n g u a g e a n d t e r m s a n d c o n n e c
t or s s e ar ches.
b. f o r m u l a t e the t erms an d co nne ct or s search query. Review the issue a n d select the
key terms that are significant to the issue bei ng researched. Ask \'OLU'self, “W’hat
terms in the issue are likeK' to be included in a c o u rt o p i n i o n ? ” After you have
identified the terms, formul ate the quer\- using the a pp r opr iat e conne ct or s.
For Example Referring to the previous example, the search is for court opin
ions that include the terms bank, robbery, dangerous weapon,
and toy gun. The terms dangerous ar\6 weapon ar\6 toy gun probably appear
in the same order, so they are placed in quotations in the query. The query is
-"dangerous weapon" & bank & robbery & "toy gun"-. If you want to narrow
the search, the query could read-"dangerous weapon" /p bank/p robbery/p
"toy gun"-. The search would retrieve only cases in which the specified terms
appear in the same paragraph.
c. l. ocat e t h e a p p r o p r i a t e d a t a b a s e . ' Ihi s s t e p is t h e s a m e as t h a t t o r a n a t u r a l l a n

g u a g e s e a r ch . See s e c t i o n I I . A. f. a( 2) in thi s cha pt e r.
d. Hnt er t h e t e r m s a n d c o n n e c t o r s . O n c e t h e d a t a b a s e p a g e c o n i e s up, t y p e t h e t e r m s
a n d c o n n e c t o r s for t h e i ssue b e i n g s e a r c h e d in t h e T e r m s a n d ( C o n n e c t o r s b o x a n d
click Se a r c h (see F x h i b i t 7-4). T h e s e a r ch results will t h e n a ppear.
232
( 4 ) S e a r c h h y I ' i t l e / N a i u e lt'\'oi.i k n o w t h e n a m e o f o n e o r m o r e o i t h e p a r t i e s in a case,

y o n c a n it)cate t h e c a s e by p e r l o r m i n g t h e t o l l o wi n g steps:
a. Cl i ck F i n d & Pri nt. O n t h e left si de o f t h e s cr ee n , sel ect t h e m e t h o d w i t h \'ou

w o u l d like to se a r ch, s u c h as b\- a p a r t \ 's n a m e .
b. F'ind d o c u m e n t by t h e title. O n t h e s e a r c h s cr ee n , t\ p e t h e n a m e o f at least o n e o f

t h e p a r t i e s , select a t o p i c o r j u r i s d i c t i o n , a n d click (io.
( 5 ) S e a r c h b y D i g e s t — T o p ic a n d K e y N u m b e r s If \ o u are s e a r c h i n g for cas e l aw t h a t

a d d r e s s e s a n issue, y o u c a n p e r f o r m a diges t s e a r c h o n West iaw. As d i s c u s s e d in C h a p t e r 3,
VX'est’s di ge s t s o r g a n i z e t h e law b\- t o p i c a n d s u b t o p i c s a n d e a c h s u b t o p i c is a s s i g n e d a ke\'
n u m b e r . ' Ihe W e s t i a w C u s t o m Di gest al l ows y o u to access t h e d i ge s t s o n l i n e , ' l b u s e t h e digest,
p e r f o r m t h e f o l l o w i n g steps:
a. Ac c e s s t h e C u s t o m Di gest page. O n t h e W e l c o m e page, click Key N u m b e r s , t h e n

cli ck We s t Key N u m b e r Di gest O u t l i n e .
b. Select a t op i c a n d key n u m b e r . At t h e W'est Ke\- N u m b e r Di gest page, r e v i e w t h e

t o p i c s a n d select t h e ke\' n u m b e r for t h e s u b j e c t \'oii are r e s e a rc h i n g . I'o se e all o f
t h e ke y n u m b e r s u n d e r a topi c, click t h e p l u s si gn ( + ) n e x t to t h e t o p i c n u m b e r .
C h e c k t h e b o x n e x t to t h e key n u m b e r y o u w a n t to sea r c h ; or, if \x)u alread}' k n o w
t h e k e y n u m b e r , t } p e it in t h e b o x at t h e t o p o f t h e p a g e a n d click S e a r c h S e l ec t ed
at t h e b o t t o m left o f t h e page. I h e Ke \ ’ N u m b e r S e ar c h p a g e w i t h \ ' o u r ke}' n u m
b e r s el ec t i on will appea r .
c. Select t h e ¡u r i s d i ct i on . Select t h e t e d e r a l o r st ate i u r i s d i c t i o n v o u w a n t to sea r c h,

a n d a d d m o r e s ea r ch t e r m s in t h e t e r m s a n d c o n n e c t o r s b o x ( o p t i o n a l ) . W h e n
}'ou click o n Se a r c h at t h e b o t t o m ot t h e page, t h e case s i m i m a r i e s will a p p e a r o n
t h e ri ght si de o f t h e page.
c. Picid Restrictions
VN'hen r e s e a r c h i n g c as e law, W e s t i a w a l l o ws \ ’o u to l i mi t \ ' ou r s ea r ch to speci fic pci r t i ons t)f
d o c i m i e n t s or d o c u m e n t s p u b l i s h e d oii c e r t a i n da t e s , t h r o u g h t h e u s e ot field restrictions.
You c a n access t h e list ol field r e s t r i c t i o n s by c l i ck i n g o n t h e “ Fields" b ox o n t h e S e a r c h p a g e
(s ee lixhibi t 7-4) . l y p e t h e field r es t r i ct i on initials b ef o r e t h e t e r m s a n d c o n n e c t o r s , w h i c h
a re p l a c e d in p a r e n t h e s e s .
For Example To locate the federal law governing bankrobbery, your query may be -bankS
robbery-. To narrow your search to only those documents in which the
terms banl< and robbery appear in the caption of the statute, your query would be -Tl
(bank & robbery)-. The search then would only retrieve statutes in which the terms banl<
and robbery appeared in the title. It would not retrieve all ofthe other statutes where the
terms appear in other places, such as in the text or annotations, and thus significantly
narrow the search.
d. Search Results
I h e s e a r c h r e s u l t s a r e d i s p l a y e d o n a split sc r e e n , l l i e text o f t h e d o c u m e n t r e t r i e v e d is o n
t h e r i g h t - h a n d f r a m e , a n d t h e left f r a m e c o n t a i n s i n f o r m a t i o n l i nks c o n c e r n i n g t h e sear ch.
(I ) D o c u m e n t T e x t In t h e d o c u m e n t text, t h e se a r c h t e r m s are h i g h l i g h t e d in yellow. In a

n a t u r a l l a n g ua g e sea r c h, t h e p o r t i o n o f t h e d o c u m e n t m o s t closeh' r el ated to t h e q u e r y is in red.
KeyCi te flags, w h i c h we r e d i s c usse d in (Chapter 5, a p p e a r at t he b e g i n n i n g o f t h e d o c u m e n t .
C l i c k i n g h\'j.ierlinks a l l o ws y ou to i m m e d i a t e l y v i ew a case o r a st at u t e c it ed in t h e d o c u m e n t .
233
(2 ) In fo n u a tio n I h e left t r a m e ot tlie s c r e e n a l l ows a c c es s to i n t o r m a t i o n r e l ev a n t to

t h e d o c u m e n t , i n c l u d i n g Key(;i te results, h e a d n o t e s tor cases, tabl es o f a u th o r i t i e s , a n n o t a t i o n s
t o r st a t ut e s, a n d c o n s t i t u t i o n a l p r o v i s i o n s . I h e left f r a m e a lso lists t h e n u m b e r ot d o c u m e n t s
r e t r i e v e d . I h e “ Resul t s List" alk)ws \' ou to vi ew t h e list o f d o c u m e n t s sel e c t e d ; click t h e li nk
t o r e t r i e v e d o c u m e n t s f r o m t h e list ( s e e Ex h i b i t 7-3). W h e n t h e r e are K e y C i t e tlags, t h e y
a p p e a r in t h e ci t a t i o n s list.
e. Updating Research—KeyCite
It is e s s e n t i a l to d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r t h e s t a t u t e o r c a s e y o u h a v e f o u n d is still “g o o d law.”
KeyCite is W e s t l a w ’s o n l i n e citator. H o w to u se K e y Ci t e is d i s c u s s e d in d e t a i l in C h a p t e r 3.
2. F in d in g S e c o n d a r y A u th o rity
W e s t l a w prox’ides access to t h o u s a n d s o f s e c o n d a r y sources. I h e r e a r e d a t a b a s e s for A m . Jur. 2d,
A L R , legal p e r i odi c a l s i n c l ud i n g law reviews, treatises, legislative history, a n d legal forms. 'R> \ iew
t h e a\ ailable da t a ba se s, click D i r e c t o r y o n t h e h o m e page. .\t th e We s t l a w d i r e c t o r y page, be sure
to select .All Dat abases ; t h e n select t he a p p r o p r i a t e s e c o n d a r y a u t h o r i t y d a t a b a s e category, such as
“ Lreatises, CLEs, Pra c t i ce Gui de s. ” T h e n , click o n t he a p p r o p r i a t e s e c o n d a r y a u t h o r i t y dat aba s e.
.-Mternatively, y o u m a y select t h e “ F i n d a D a t a b a s e W i z a r d ” l i n k o n t h e W e s t l a w W e l
c o m e p a g e (see E.xhibit 7-2). F o l l o w t h e s t ep s to n a v i g a t e to t h e s e c o n d a r ) - a u t h o r i t y d a t a b a s e s
a n d select t h e a p p r o p r i a t e on e .
I h e s t ep s for p e r f o r m i n g a secondar y- a u t h o r i t y s e a r c h a r e general!}- t h e s a m e as t h o s e
u s e d for a p r i m a r y a u t h o r i t y se a r c h; t h a t is, y o u m a y s e a r c h b y c i t a t i on , t e r m s a n d c o n n e c t o r s ,
n a t u r a l l a n g u a g e , a n d so t or t h . See s e c t i o n II.A. I in thi s c h a p t e r .
3. Print an d Save
W e s t l a w p r o \ ' i d e s sever al o p t i o n s for p r i n t i n g a n d sa\ ing. You c a n d o w n l o a d d o c u m e n t s to a
d i s k , h a \ e t h e n i sent to a n e - m a i l a d d r e s s o r a ta.x n u m b e r , o r p r i n t t h e m . I f \ i ) u w a n t d o c u
m e n t s t o b e p r i n t e d as t h e v a p p e a r in p r i nt , select oii e ot t h e p r i n t o p t i o n s , e i t h e r “c o m p o s e d
E x h ib it 7-5 Case retrieved from a Westlaw search. Hepnnted with permission of rhomson Reuters
K e y C ite K e y C ite F la g P rin t O p tio n s
/
FHIOtPfflNT KEWiTI OlMCTO«r K C V M U m ett « T I MAP
Westlaw COURT DOCI FORKFINra PEOf>LEWAP EXPOIT CENTS* COURT WIRE
r i l G e n e r a l S u lM c r lp tio n : N ew n e x t c o l
‘ndcitat'C“ tí
P» 5f-Tva nP O JtN A h i s t - . '. tJ'jt n rit
148 N M 3 3 0 . J 3 6 p .3 d f> 4 :. : 0 1 0 N M 5C 02"’
B n e fs O t i i e i R*’ iii-» .'.l O o i i i i n f i i * ' .
» F u l l T e x t D « Ku n w ‘nt
lu d ij* -'-' A t t o r n p y '.
Supreme Court of New Mexico,
STATE of Npw Mexico, P la in tiff-R esp o n d e n i,
V,
P o tit io d s , H r ip f s K > ilin q s
Maik SIMS, D efend ant-Petitio ner,
R«uKsP1us ••.'vw All Resurt::
No. 30,827
A n i.Ju r.2 d : A ulom obiles and H ig h w a y Trafnc June 8, 2 010 .
I . A lc o h ol Of p r u ^ R e iJ t t jJ R e (im site & of
im p ji r g d D r y in g C>H cfise ? . C o r i- t it u t e s " O n v in o .' Ba ckgro u n d : Defendant entered conditional auilty p lea, in m etropolitan court, to driving w hile intoxicated
O D c 'd tin Q .- or P t- ii- a jn .A c l y . i l M h y S ia l.C S n L r fiL a C
(D W I). Defendant appealed. The D istiicl: Court, B e rnalillo County, Neil C. Caticielafia, D .3., affirm ed. Defendant
appealed. The Couit of A p peals, f. cn.i f uy e d‘-t Mu, J., M j N M. 100. 1 /6 F-’ -3d 113<’, affirm ed, and certiorari
A n i.)u r.2 d : A ulo in o b iles a n d H ig h w a y T ra ffk was granted.
D n . inQ W fule ln to « K 3 t P d Of U n d ^ f lo fk ie n c ^ of LiQ o of
Holdings: The Supreme Court, (.luiv*-/. J , held th at:

A n iJu r . Trials CiJ evicience w a s insufficien t to support defendant’s conviction foi DVVl; and
, Qr'' - • A h .1 - IntP>Q £álfid
234
s i ng l e " o r "dual e ol u n i n. " D o e u m e i i t s c a n al s o h e p r i n t e d as t h e y a p p e a r o n tlie c o m p u t e r

s c r e e n . D o c i m i e n t s c a n lie p r i n t e d e i t h e r i m m e d i a t c K ' o r u p o n e xi t i n g W'estlaw. O n t h e t o p
o t t h e d o c u m e n t b e i n g r e s ea r ch e i l a r c p r i n t o p t i o n s (see lAliibit 7-3).
B. W e s t l a w N e x t
1. S ea rc h in g W estlaw N ext
W e s t l a w N e x t was d e s i g n e d in r e s p o n s e to c u s t o m e r f e e d b a c k s e e k i n g a cl ea ne r, less c l u t t e r e d ,
a n d s i m p l e r way to se ar c h , l h e result is w h a t W’est l a w refers to as W e s t S e a r c h t ec h n o l og \ ' ,
w h i c h e l i m i n a t e s t h e n e e d to c h o o s e a d a t a b a s e a n d prov ides a si ngl e s e a r c h q u e r \ ' b o x l o r all
s e a r ch e s . R e s e a r c h er s c h o o s e a i u r i s d i c t i on , e n t e r t h e i r se a r c h quer\ - in e i t h e r n a t u r a l l a n g u a g e
o r t e r m s a n d c o n n e c t o r s , o r e n t e r a c i t a t i o n (see Hxhibit 7-6). W’h e n y o u click S e a r c h , W’est-
h i w N e x t s e a r c h es all d a t a b a s e s , l h e list ot results i n c l u d e s p r i m a r \ ' a n d s e c o n d a r y a u t h o r i t }'
r a n k e d a c c o r d i n g to relev a n c e a n d d o c u m e n t t\ pe.
I h e r e a r e still several ways to s ea r ch for t h e law' in W’e st l a w Ne x t :
a. L'se t h e si ngle se a r c h bo x . (Choose a j u r i s d i c t i o n , t h e n e n t e r v' olu' s e a r c h q u e r y

in n a t u r al l a n g u a g e o r t e r m s a n d c o n n e c t o r s , o r e n t e r a c i t a t i o n a n d click S e a rc h
(see Lxhibi t 7-6). l h e res ul t s will b e p r e s e n t e d in a list o n t h e left o r g a n i z e d bv'
r el ev a n c e a n d d o c u m e n t t y p e (see H.xhibit 7-7). If v'ou wi sh to n a r r o w t h e results,
us e t h e filters b e l o w t h e " \ ’iew" list ot c o n t e n t c ate gories.
b. Brow se d a t a b a s e s . O n t h e W’estlaw'Xe.xt h o m e p a g e y o u c a n b r o w se t h e d a t a b a s e s ,
w h i c h h a v e b e e n o r g a n i z e d u n d e r c o n t e n t t a b s (see H.xhibit " - 8 ) . Siniplv' cli ck
t h r o u g h t h e l i nks to get to t h e d a t a b a s e , e n t e r y o u r se a r c h t e r m s in t h e si n g l e
se a r c h bo x , a n d c h o o s e a iLU'isdiction. Vou m a y al s o start t y p i n g t h e n a m e o f t h e
li atabase, sLich as New M e x i c o Stat utes, in t h e si ngle se a r c h b o x a n d select t h e a p
p r o p r i a t e link that tli'ops dov\ n. .-VdditionalU', it v'ou recall t h e i l a t a b a s e i d e n t i h e r
t r o m W’estlaw', v'ou n'lav t \ p e it i n t o t h e si ngl e se a r c h b ox to a ccess t hat d a t a b a s e .
E x h i b i t 7 - 6 'A 'o s ;! 3 v v \ 't '\ : C . X i y p j g c . .; -I.” , ' t ■ ’
S in g le S e a rc h B o x D a ta b a s e s C h o o s e J ijn s d ic tio n
<- C ■ /
J| 13 jD ■ ' a ' O / O t in tcc k m a tls
C H 7 i fo lO O T T .
WestlawNtixt ' :
1 A ai
Ill B ro w s e J e n n ife r 's R e s e a r c h (0 )
235
E x h ib it 7-7 Results of WestlawNext search. Repnnted with pelr^^lSSlon of Thomson Reuters

V ie w o f R e s u lts in L is t F o rm a t S e a rc h Q u e ry J u r is d ic tio n P rin t O p tio n s
/ I \ \
J
C ■
Wet) SiKe Cillery O

a n e iit ^ s tia 'A
Le«m PC i[J CTLT | PC Online O N e v .T it> £ 3 ire Q Tumcir 1

j \
OkW «StS«Hdl’'
\ \\
a « 7 |F « < a *rt- jM *s to r> 'r

Jthei bockfTiark’
S ijn O fl 1
IS a J n v in g in b a c K s e d T o f c a r in a c t u a 'p h v s ic d l c o n tiü l Í - j nh
v ie w / O v e rv ie w 11 4 )
CK-erviev.
\ . . .
K e y C ite F la g s
E x h ib it 7 -8 List of Databases. Repnnted with permission of Thomson Reijters

D a ta b a s e s T a b S h o w in g D a ta b a s e C a te g o r y S e a rc h a n d J u n s d ic tio n b o x e s
■*t aw C 'l'n
;ii d L«arr. Pi. . TLT | PC Orvlme Q Nev.
MConlwiI 'tiba
WestlawNaxt
Cases
rOOlSAHl S(HIHr{S
Federal C ases Court
Federal C ases by Circuit
C ases by State
236
c. F in d & P r i nt . Iliis t' eaturc o f W' estlaw is s i mp l e r in W e s t l a w N e x t . I t ' you a r e s e e k

i ng a si ngl e c i t a t i on , t\ p e it i nt o t h e si ngle s e a r ch b o x a n d click Se a rc h. It y o u a re
s e e k i n g m u l t i p l e d o c u m e n t s , t \ p e all o t ' t h e ci t a t i o n s , s e p a r a t e d by s e m i c o l o n s , in
t h e si ngl e s e a r c h b o x a n d click S earch. CHieck t h e b o x n e x t tt) e a c h i t em, o r click
Select all o n t h e re s u l t s p a g e a n d c h o o s e \'oin' p r i n t o p t i o n . As w i t h We st i a w, y o u
m a y p ri nt , e - m a i l , o r d o w n l o a d t h e d o c i m i e n t s (see Hxhibit 7-7).
2. R e v ie w in g Search R esults
R e s e a r c h re s u l t s f r o m a W e s t l a w N e x t sea r c h i n c l u d e d o c u m e n t s f r o m all d a t a b a s e s p r e s e n t e d
in o r d e r o f rel e\' ance. A list o f t h e t\ p es o f d o c u m e n t s a n d t h e n u m b e r o f d o c u m e n t s f o r e a c h
ty'pe a p p e a r s o n t h e left o f t h e s c r e e n in t h e “ \ ' i e w ” b o x (see Hxhibit 7-7). I h e d o c u m e n t s
t h e m s e l v e s , in t h e o r d e r ot t h e list p r o \ i ded, is p r e s e n t e d in t h e c e n t e r ot t h e s cr e e n . O n t h e
h o m e pa ge , t o t h e r i g h t o f t h e list o f d o c u m e n t s is a list o f a d d i t i o n a l s o u r c e s t h a t m a y b e u s e
ful. ' i h e r e a re sever al k e y f e a t ur e s to t h e results page:
I h e m o s t r e l e v a n t r es u l t s o v e r a \ a r i e t y o f c o n t e n t c a te g o r i e s ( d a t a b a s e s ) a r e p r e
s e n t e d in t h e o v e r v i e w c a t e g o r y in t h e “\ ’iew" list (see Hxhibit 7-7).
' I h e r e s e a r c h e r c o n t r o l s t h e a m o u n t o f c o n t e n t t ha t is visible t o r r e v i e w i n g r e s u l t s
b y s e l e c t i n g m o r e o r less detai l f r o m a d r o p - d o w n m e n u l o c a t e d just a b o \ e t h e
documents.
Key(]i te Flags for m o s t negatix'e histor\ - are i n c l u d e d in t h e results list (see Hx

hibi t 7-7). W ' h e n a d o c u m e n t is s e l e ct ed a n d o p e n e d for review, t h e KeyC' ite Flag
a l s o i n c l u d e s a d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e ne g a t i ve history, a n d a s h o r t c i t a t i on to t h e m o s t
n e g a t i ve c i t a t i o n is p r o v i d e d a b o \ e t h e d c i c uni ent . O t h e r Ke\' Cite i n f o r m a t i o n is
ava i l a bl e f r o m t h e K e y Ci t e t ab at t h e t o p o l ' t h e d o c u m e n t (see Hxhibit 7-9).
E x h ib it 7-9 W estiaw N ext Key Cite results. Reprinted with permission of Thomson Reuters.
N e g a tiv e K e y C ite E x p la n a tio n a n d C ita tio n O th e r K e y C ite H is to ry
I y
^ C ii a ne*t w estidw com I i t ■
j J Web S K » G illefy O EU«kb04>d Le«rn PC / T L T | PC Onhne O n e Q ' jfnbif Q O lhef bookm «
....
a a r Bacn«»! ■- ir-u» - r- i
' M-
•1 ■ • hi -
C»ci.fvri TOFit»r.a bt
T b i“ .\ T t -’t X ri.'^ n a. P->riri: n o r
H o n F r a jiW > \W U 'i J iH g e P r' ' t th > * > u p « " n 'r '■•■•ir* • ■th** o l V/;.'->nd in
iPinifl rf--pcr, 1-n:
,uid
Fr.inl. E.iit.i.M R-.il P.ir?-. r
.......
237
Filters t(ir s e a i vh results a l l o w t h e s e a r c h to h e n a r r o w e d b\' c a t e g o r i e s s u c h as j u r i s

d i c t i o n , date, topi c, o r w h e t h e r t h e d o c u m e n t w a s r e p o r t e d o r u n r e p o r t e d .
O n c e a d o c u m e n t h a s h e e n \ i e we d, an e \ e g l a s s e s i con a p p e a r s t o al er t v o u t hat you

h a \ e a l r e a d y \ i ewe d t hat d o c u m e n t .
Rel evant p o r t i o n s ot s e a r c h results c an h e h i g h l i g h t e d , l h e h i g h l i g h t e d p o r t i o n can

be c o p i e d w i t h t h e c i t at i on , a n o t e c a n b e a d d e d , o r t h e text c a n b e s a v e d t o a f ol der
(see F x h i b i t 7-9).
3. O r g a n iz in g Search R e su h s
W' est l awNe x t oil ers t h e abilit\- to o r g a n i z e se a r ch r esults in I'olders. R e s u h s c a n b e d r a g g e d a n d
d r o p p e d i n t o folders. Hi g h l i gh t e i l text c an b e s aved w i t h c i t at i on to f ol de rs (see F x h i b i t 7-9).
'i'ou c a n ev e n o r g a n i z e t h e c o n t e n t w i t h i n t h e folder.
4. Vâlidating Research
K e y C i t e c o n t i n u e s to b e t h e m e t h o d o f v a l i d a t i n g r e s ea r ch . ' l b KeyCCite a case, st a t ut e, c o n
s t i t u t i o n a l p r o v i s i o n , o r o t h e r p r i n i a r \ - s o u r c e o f law, s i m p l y t \ ’p e t h e c i t a t i o n i nt o t h e si ngle
s e a r c h b o x a n d click Search. O n c e t h e result p a g e o p e n s , a n \ ’ n e g a t i ve Ke\ ' (' it e tlag will be
p r e s e n t e d at t h e t o p o f t h e d o c u m e n t . To see t h e full KeyCCite histor\-, cli ck o n t h e K e yC i te tab
a b o v e t h e d o c u m e n t (see ICxhibit 7-9).
C. LexisNexis
i . ex i sNe x i s (l.exis), like W'estlaw, is a c o m m e r c i a l legal r e s e a r c h s e r vi c e t h a t prox i des access
t o t h o u s a n d s ot p r i m a r y a n d s e c o n d a r }' r e s e a r c h so u r c es, l h e Lexis r e s e a r c h se r vi c e is o p e r
a t e d b}' LexisN’exis, a di v i si on o f Re e d ICIsex ier Inc. It is axail able direct!}' o n t h e I n t e r n e t at
h t t p : / / \ v w w . L e x i s N ' e x i s . c o m. I h e r e are d i l fe r e n c e s b e t w e e n Lexis a n d W’estlaw, b u t t h e basic
o r g a n i z a t i o n a n d r e s e a r c h p r i n c i p l e s are t h e s a me . Lexis r e c e n t h c h a n g e d its i n t er f a c e to be
. . l e ane r a n d m o r e like W’esllaw Ne x L
R a t h e r t h a n r e p e a t t h e i n l o r m a t i o n t h a t a p p l i e s to s e a r c h e s o n b o t h L e x i s N e x i s a n d
W’est l aw, }'ou will liiul r e f e r e n c e h e r e to t h e a p p r o p r i a t e s u b s e c t i o n s o f t h e p r e v i o u s W' est law
d i s c u s s i o n , l h e first s e c t i o n a d d r e s s e s f i n d in g p r i ma r } ' a n d s e c o n d a r y a u t h o r i t y , follow’ed by
v i e w i n g se a r c h results, u p d a t i n g } o u r r e s e a r c h , a n d p r i n t i n g s e a r c h results.
1. F in d in g Prim ary A u th o r ity hy C itatio n

Ih i s s e c t i o n f o c u s e s o n l oc a t i n g p r i ma r } ' authorit}'.
a. My Lexis Tab
F r o m t h e M}' l.exis tab, t\ p e in t h e c it at i on in t h e “Ciet CCitation” box. CChoose Ciet a D o c u m e n t
a n d cli ck Cio.
b. Search Tab
' l y p e t h e ci t at i on i n t o t h e “Q u i c k Lools” b o x a n d click C e t a Doc.
c. Get a Document Tab

l'}'pe t h e c i t at i on i n t o t h e s e a r c h b o x a n d click Ciet. ' Ihi s t a b also prox’i des a l i nk to c i t a t i on
f o r m a t s if y o u are u n s u r e o f o r u n f a m i l i a r wi t h t h e p r o p e r c i t at i on f o r m . In a d d i t i o n , y o u c a n
s e a r c h for a d o c u m e n t b}' part}' n a m e o r d o c k e t n u n i h e r : Select t h e a p p r o p r i a t e li nk a n d t y p e
in a n y part}-’s n a m e o r t h e d o c k e t n u m b e r o f a c ase (see F x h i b i t 7-10).
238
E x h ib it 7-10 Search by Citation from the Get a D ocum ent tab. Copyright 2012 Le\isN e\is. a division of Reed Eiseviei
Inc All Rights Reserved Le'iisNeMS and the Kni'iviedge Burst logo are registered trademarks of R eed Elsevier Properties Inc and are used
with the permission of Le>usNe\:s
E n te r C ita tio n C ita tio n F o rm a t H e lp S e a rc h b y P a rty o r D o c k e t N u m b e r

/
^ C ie<i$.com
J W«b S iK f Gil*«ry O Bl*< ;b c » fi Liâ rn PC C Tt T i PC Onhf'f Q llit- £3 'f Q 'u'r'fc O lhef bock n a rk s
Lexis
My L e x ii ' S i» arc h
^ I c x is N c x is
2. Search by Issu e— Natural L a n gu ag e or Term s an d C o n n e c to r s
a. From the My Lexis Tab

I h e r e are t h r e e \va\’s to s e a r ch t m d e r t h e My Lexis tab: t e r m s a n d c o n n e c t o r s , n a t u r a l l a n
g u a g e , a n d easy search. ' I h e st eps t o r p e r f o r m i n g a t e r m s a n d c o n n e c t o r s s e a r c h for p r i m a r y
a u t h o r i t y are t h e same. ' I h e s a m e t e r m s a n d c o n n e c t o r s are u s e d for all s ea r c h es . See s e c t i o n
I I . A. I . a ( 3) a n d I' xhibit 7-1 1. You c a n also s e a r ch u s i n g n a t u r a l l an g u a g e . As w i t h all n a t u r a l
l a n g u a g e s e a r c h e s , t h e ke\- is f r a m i n g t h e issue in t h e c o n t e x t o f t h e specific facts o r t e r m s o f
t h e issue, tiasy S e ar c h a l l ows you to e n t e r y o u r s e a r ch t e r m s with less p re c i s i o n a n d is m e a n t to
b e like Ciuoglo se ar c h. LnK'v yuuv Icvms in w i l h t h e scAivh m c l h o J y o u h a v e s e k v l c J ,
You will t h e n n e e d to c h o o s e a s e a r ch t \ p e . " R e c e n t S o u r c e s " p r o \ ides a d r o p - d o w n
m e n u of s o u r c e s yo u h a v e s e a r c h e d recent l y, II \'oii c h o o s e “S o u r c e I ype, " \ o u will n e e d to
(.boose a j u r i s d i c t i o n , p r a c t i c e area, a n d s o u r c e c a t e g o r y (see Hxhibit 7-11) , (' )nce \ ( H 1 h a \ e
c h o s e n all t h e a p p r o p r i a t e b oxe s, click Ne xt , C;hoose t h e d a t a b a s e y o u w a n t a n d click Se a r c h ,
b. From the Search Tab

I h e Se a r ch t a b prcn ides sever al w a y s to o b t a i n d o c u m e n t s ,
(1 ) B r o w s e S o u r c e s In Lexis, S o u r c e s a r e s i m i l a r to W e s t l a w ’s H i r e c t o r y c a t e g o r i e s
(see F xhi bi t 7- 12) , 'i'o s e a r ch in thi s m a n n e r , c h o o s e a s o u r c e a n d t h e n c h o o s e a speci fic file.
In Lexis, files a r e s i m i l a r to West l aw' s d a t a b a s e s, ( Choose a tile a n d click S e a r c h Sel ec t ed, 'Iliis
will t a ke yo u to t h e s ear c h c]uery box. As wi t h all s e a r c h e s in Lexis, y o u m a y s e a r c h by t e r m s
a n d c o n n e c t o r s , na t u r al l a n g u a g e , o r Hasy Se a rc h,
(2 ) R e c e n t l y U se d S o u r c e s Caboose t h e r e c e n t k \' isited s o u r c e a n d click Cio, You will

he t a k e n to t h e s ear c h c|uer\- b o x , w h e r e you c a n s e a r c h b\' t e r m s a n d c o n n e c t o r s , n a t u r a l
l a n g u a g e , o r Fa.sy Search (see F x h i b i t 7-12),
c. Search by Topic or Headnote

Lexis p r o v i de s a m o d e for s e a r c h i n g b\' topi c a n d h e a d n o t e (see Fx h i b i t 7-12), L' nd e r t h e S ea r ch
tab, use t h e \ ’iew M o r e i c o n to o p e n t h e list of topi cs. As y o u mo\-e t h r o u g h t h e la\’ers o f t o p
ics, y o u will e n d at a s e a r ch p a g e w h e r e y o u c a n s e a r c h by h e a d n o t e , o r s e a r ch a c r o s s s o u r c e s
239
E x h ib it 7-11 Search from M y Lexis tab. Copynght 20^2 Le\:sNe\:s. a division of Fleed Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved.
l.e\isNe\is and the ’edge Burst logo are registeied trademarks of R eed Elsevier Properties Inc. and are used with the perm is
sion of Le\isN e\is
S e a rc h Q u e ry F in d b y C ita tio n C h o o s in g J u r is d ic tio n a n d P r a c tic e A re a
Lexis
JIV}
- -a
I h -..-
E x h ib it 7-12 U sing the Search tab. Copyright 2 0 I2 LexisNexis, a division of R eed Elsevier Inc All Rights Reserved
Le\isN e\is and the Knowledge Burst logo are registered trademarks of R eed Elsevier Properties Inc and are used with the perm is
sion of LexisNe\'S
Tabs S o u rc e s Q u ic k T o o ls
1 Q w icti T o o ls H elp 1
»ew #
5 ^ Q u ic k b e a r d )
P u b li; H ri ord%
5 » le ct Topic
( r v i ^ N ^ i > - V frd id
A n rtly /Z r
. . . f . ........ W itn e s * Protil«»4
S e a rc h b y H e a d n o te o r T o p ic
240
E x h ib it 7-13 Screen shot o f Lexis search results. Copy-.-gi't 2012 L . '\ s/V e x/s, a division of R eed Elsevier Inc All
Rights R eseived Le\iF.Ne\iR a'\: the Knowledge B uist logo aie registe-ed t-aden\vks of Reed Elsevie; Piopeities Inc and aie used
with tlie oeinvssion of L e \ ‘SNe\^s
H o w R e s u lts A re B e in g V ie w e d P rin t O p tio n s
I >*gril > > lis t 's I I S > ( «•dpr<il S t f ilp C < isp s. ( niiihin»'<1 '
T.-rr>r "ProtP«1ivr- s w f p p 'p w iir r A iil
- -
- f - 'f l t V. • K- '- f ', r f ' .-.•.Tf-V
Shepard's S ig n a ls D ocum ent T e rm
u s i ng torni.s a n d c o n i K ’c td r s o r n a t u r a l l a n g u a g e . S e a r c h i n g u s i ng t e r m s a n d e o i i n e e t o r s a n d
n a tu r a l l a n g u a g e is tiie s a m e as w i t h tiie o t i i e r searcii o p t i o n s .
llie s t ep s t o r p e r t o r m i n g a t e r m s a n d c o n n e c t o r s seareli l o r p r i m a r y aLitliorit\' a re t h e
s a me , llie s a m e t e r m s a n d c o n n e c t o r s a r e u s e d i o r all se ar c he s. See s e c t i o n 11..A. I .a(3) a n d
I' xhi bi t 7-11. As w i t h W' est law a n d W e s t l a w N e x t , y o u c a n also se a r ch u s i n g n a t u r a l l a n g u a g e .
In all n a t u r a l l a n g u a g e s ea r ch e s , t h e ke y is t r a i n i n g t h e i ssue in the c o n t e x t ol t h e specific tact s
o r t e r m s ol t h e issue.
3. Search R esu lts

I h e searcii r es ul t s will list all t h e d o c u m e n t s t ha t m a t c h y o u r s e a r ch (see I' xhi bit 7 - 1 3 t o r a
specilic s e a r ch result), 'i'ou i i a \ c s c \ e r a i o p t i o n s l or \ i e w i n g an\- d o c u m e n t listed:
1. C ite. To \ i e w t h e c i t a t i o n s o r b i b l i o g r a p h i c r e l e r e n c e s o f a doc L i me n t , click o n

( J t e in tiie u p p e r left c o r n e r o l ' t h e s c r ee n .
2. K W H ' . 11'you w a n t lo \ i e w o n l y t h e p o r t i o n s o f t h e d o c u m e n t s u r r o u n d i n g t h e i n
c l u d e d s e a r c h t e r m s , cli ck o n K W K ! in t h e u p p e r iefi c o r n e r of t h e s c r ee n . K WK' .
(ke y w o r d s in c o n t e x t ) d i s p l a y s a w i n d o w o f 13 to 23 w o r d s o n e a c h si de o f t h e
s e a r c h w or d s .
3. I'lilL l o \ iew t h e c o m p l e t e text o f a d o c u m e n t tiie s e a r ch ha s r e t r i e \ ’ed, click o n

I-'uil in t h e u p p e r left c o r n e r ot tlie s c r e e n .
I. ( ' i ii to n i . I'o \ iew onl\- a p o r t i o n o f a d o c u m e n t , s u c h as t he d i s s e n t in a c o u r t

o p i n i o n o r a n a n n o t a t i o n ot a s t at u t e , cl i ck o n ( ' u s t o m . Select t h e s e g m e n t ot t h e
field that you w a n t t o view.
3. ¡'O C U S . liie I' CXX' S f e a t ur e a l l ows \' ou to t u r t h e r n a r r o w \ ’o u r s e a r c h w i t h i n

\ ' o u r r e t r i e \ e d d o c u m e n t s , (^lick l O C X ' S a b o \ c t he r e t r i e \ e d d o c u m e n t , t\-pe in
t h e a d d i t i o n a l s e a r ch t e r m s , a n d click I C X T ' S a gain.
241
6. Icr in . l o m o v e to a n y o t y o u r s c a r c h t e r m s wliilc \ iewitig a i l o c im i c n t in KW' i C,

click o n t h e arrovs- next to t h e n u m b e r m t h e b o t t o m ri ght l o w e r n a \ i g a t i on bar.
7. D o c u i n c n t . l o mo\-e to tiie next d o c u m e n t , c h c k o n t h e a rr o w next to t h e n u m b e r

in t h e l ow e r ri ght n a \ ' ig at i o n bar.
4. F in d in g S e c o n d a r y A u th ority
I.exisN'exis, like W'estlaw, p r o \ ides access to t h o u s a n d s ot s e c o n d a r v s o u r c e s , i n c l u d i n g d a t a
b a s e s t or A m . Iiti: 2d. .-MR. legal p e r i o d i c a l s s u c h as law revi ews , t r eati ses, legislative hi s t ory,
a n d legal f o r ms . Mo s t o f t h e s e d a t a b a s e s a re listed u n d e r S e c o n d a r y Legal.
I h e s t ep s t or p e r f o r m i n g a s e c o n d a r ) ’ a u t h o r i t ) ’ s e a r c h a r e g e n e r a l ! ) ’ t h e s a m e as t h o s e
u s e d to c o n d u c t a p r i m a r \ ’ a u t l i o r i t \ ’ s ear ch. Iliat is, \ ’o u c a n s e a r c h b \ ’ citatioii, t e r m s a n d
c o n n e c t o r s , n a t u r a l l ai iguage, o r Has)’ Searcli.
Ho l l o wi n g a r e tlie basi c st eps t or c o n d u c t i n g a s e c o n d a r ) ’ a u t h o r i t ) ’ searcli w h e n y o u d o
n o t k n o \ \ ’ t h e c i t at i on:
1. State t h e issue o r researeli q u e s t i o n as speciticall}’ as p o s s i b l e in tlie c o n t e x t o f tlie

facts,
2, H o r n i u l at e t h e t e r m s a n d c o n n e c t o r s o r n a tu r a l langLiage sear ch,
.V l. oca t e anti click o n tlie a p p r o p r i a t e datalxise.
L P e r f o r m t h e se ar c h o n c e t h e d a t a b a s e p a g e c o n i e s up, u s i n g t e r m s a n d c o n n e c t o r s ,
n a t u r a l l an g u a g e , o r Has\’ Search.
5. Print an d Save
i n ities several o p t i o n s t or p r i n t i n g a n d sa\ ing docLuii ents (see lixhibit 7-13), Vou
m a y d o w n l o a d d o c u m e n t s , l i a \ e t h e m sent to a n e - m a i l a d d re s s , o r p r i n t t h e m . D o c u m e n t s
c a n be p r i n t e d in si ngle o r d u a l c o l u m n , w ith t h e searcli tei nis in b o l d o r italics, a m o n g ot i i er
o p t i o n s . Ill t h e u p p e r ri ght c o r n e r o f tlie d o c u m e n t , elick o n Pi iiit, D o w n l o a d , o r Hmail.
t l r o p - d o w n list will a p p e a r ; select \ o u r p re t e r e n c e s t r o m t hat list. O n c e you h a v e sel ect ed
t h e d e s i r e d o p t i o n s , t l i t k I'l int in t h e l owe r ri ght t o r n e i lo ti anst ci t h e do >. u me n t s to t h e w o r d
p r o c e s s o r \ ’o u l i a \ e sel ected a n d pi int t h e m I r o m there.
6. \'a lid a tin g Research.

S h e p a r d i / i n g c o n t i n u e s t o b e t h e m e t h o d ot \ a l i d a t i n g r e s e a r c h m Lexis. See (Chapter 3 f or a
d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n o n h o w’ to \ al i da t e re s e a r c h.
D, O th e r C o m m e r c i a l I n t e r n e t R e se a rc h Sources
l.oislaw’ a n d X'ersusl.aw are c o m m o n K ’ used c o m m e r c i a l legal res e a rc h se r \ ices. I he i r d a t a b a s e s
a re n o t as exteiisi\-e as t h o s e o f W' estlaw a n d LexisNexis.
1. Loislaw
Loislaw d a t a b a s e s i n c l u d e teder al a n d state case, s t a t u t o r ) ’, c o n s t i t u t i o n a l , a n d a d m i n i s t r a t i v e
law, as well as o t i i e r a u t h o r i t ) ’, I h e s e c o n d a r y a ii tl ior it)’ d a t a b a s e s i n c l u d e treatises, p ra c t ic a l
tools, a n d f o r m s t r o m W'olters K l u w e r c o m p a n i e s . A s p e n P u b l i s h e r s , CX' H, st ate b a r p a r t n e r s ,
a n d o t h e r sour ces, I h e d at a b a s e s c o \ ’er a wi d e \ a r i et \ ’ o f pra c t i c e areas, A list o f Loislaw services
a n d p r i c e s is a\ ail able o n its W'eb site: !itt p:/ /www. loi slaw. ct)in. Searcl ies are c o n d u c t e d in a
t e r m s a n d c o n n e c t o r s t o r n i a t s i mi l a r to t h e o n e u s e d in b o t h W'estlaw a n d LexisN'exis, Loislaw'
also ha s a \ ' al i d a t i o n tool, call ed (i lobaKMte, a n d a n alert tool, called l.awW'atcli, C i l ob a Ka t e is
not as c o n i p r e h e n s i \ e as e i t h e r W e s t l a w ’s Ke\ ’( ' i t e o r Lexis’s Shcparil'i, so r e s earcl i ers s h o u l d
b e su r e to \ ' al i dat e u s i n g o n e o f t h e m o r e c o n i p r e h e n s i \ ’e cit ators.
242
2. VersusLavv
VersusLaw p r o v i d e s access to t h e L'liital Slutcs Coilc; st ate st atut es; lull text a p p e l l a t e d e c i
s i on s f r o m 50 states, t h e L’n i t ed States S u p r e m e (Court ( s i n c e 1900), 13 f ederal c i r c u it s f r o m
¡ 9 3 0 , t e d er a l di s t r i ct c o u r t s , a n d s p e c i a l t y p r a c t i c e col l ec t i on s . S ea r c h e s ar e c o n d u c t e d u s i n g
a t e r m s a n d c o n n e c t o r s t o r m a t . .A list o f X’e r s u s l . a w serv ices a n d p r i ce s is avail able o n its W’eb
site: h t t p : / / v e r s u s l a \ s ' . c o m .
3. Fastcase
Fastcase p r i m a r i l y a l l o ws a cc e ss to feder al a n d st ate c a se s a n d st atut es. M a n y st a t e b a r a s
s o c i a t i o n s p r o v i d e ac c e ss to f a s t c a s e l o r t h e i r m e m b e r s . Fa st c ase h a s . Authori t)’ C h e c k as a
val i da t i t i n tool. Authoritv- (Check, like \ ’er s us L a w' s (ilobaKCite, is m o r e l i mi t e d t h a n S h e p a n f s
o r Kev’CCite, but it d o e s p r o v i d e a list o t ' o t h e r cases c i t i n g v'our case.
4. C a s e m a k e r
Casemaker is s i m i l a r to Fast case in t ha t n u m e r o u s st ate b a r a s s o c i a t i o n s p r o v i d e ac c e ss to
it t o r t h e i r m e m b e r s . ( Ca s e m a k e r a l l o ws a ccess to st ate a n d t e d e r a l p r i m a r v s o u r c e s as well as
legal f o r m s . ( C as ema k er is e x p a n d i n g to i n c l u d e sec o i u l a r v s o u r c e s as well.
III. NONFEE-BASED LAW-RELATED WEB SITES

A N D OTHER COMPUTER-BASED RESOURCES
' I h i s s e c t i o n p r e s e n t s a n o v e r v i e w ot t h e v a r i o u s n o n t e e - b a s e d ( f r e e ) I n t e r n e t a n d eit her
c o m p u t e r - b a s e d legal r e s e a rc h so u r c e s.
A. Ethics
I h e I n t e r n e t h o s t s literallv t h o u s a i u l s ot n o n t e e - b a s e t l We b sites. N o t e t h a t a n o n t e e - b a s e d
s e r vi c e d o e s n o t invol ve a c o n t r a c t u a l r e l a t i o n sh i p w i t h t h e c o n s u m e r ot its i n t o r m a t i o n . N o
l aws o r r e g u l a t i o n s g o v e r n t h e accuracv' ol t h e c o n t e n t ot n o n t e e - b a s e d W’e b sites. S u c h sites
d( ' iu)t h a v e a legal d u t \ to p r o v i i l e i n t o r m a t i o n t ha t is a c c u r a t e o r u p to d a t e, f r o m a n
ethics s t a n d p o i n t , v o u h a v e a n o b l i g a t i o n to p r o v i d e t h e cli ent w i t h c o m p e t e n t r e p r e s e n t a
t i on. I h e r e f o r e , it is vital t h a t y o u ve r i t y t h e a c c u r a c y o f i n f o r m a t i o n y o u o b t a i n f r o m s u c h
sites a n d d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r it is u p to date.
I h e r e are no h a r d - a n d - t a s t rules tor d e t e r m i n i n g wh a t m a k e s a n o n f e e - b a s e d site “g o o d . ”
Sites m a i n t a i n e d bv- law s c h o o l s a r e tisually a c c u r a t e a n d well n u i i n t a i n e d . Al wa y s c o n s i d e r
t h e a u t h o r a n d p u b l i s h e r a n d t h e c o n t e n t o f t h e i n t o r m a t i o n ; a n d c h e c k t h e site to d e t e r m i n e
h o w t r e q u e n t k t h e i n f o r m a t i o n is u p d a t e d . Be a w a r e t h a t a d v o c a c y g r o u p s p u b l i s h s o m e
sites, a n d t h a t i n t o r m a t i o n m a v be l i m i t e d o r s l a n t e d in t a v o r ot t h e p o s i t i o n a d v o c a t e d by
t h e s p o n s o r i n g g r o u p . Y o u mav- o b t a i n a i d s to e v a l u a t e W e b sites at t h e F. valuation o f I n
l o r m a t i o n S o u r c e s site: h t t p : / / w w w . v u w . a c . n z / ~ a g s m i t h / e v a l n / e v a l n . h t m ; f r o m “ E v a l u a t i n g
I n t e r n e t R e so u r c e s : .-X Select ive B i b l i o g r a p h y , ” h t t p : / / w w w . l i b . a u b u r n . e d u a n d l l i e V i r t u a l
(Chase, h t t p : / / w w w . v i r t i . i a l c h a s e . i u s t i a . c o m .
B. L im ita tio n s
A n c ) t h e r d i s a d v a n t a g e ot n o n t e e - b a s e d I n t e r n e t r e s e a r c h is t h e l i mi t e d a n u i u n t ot i n t o r m a t i o n
avai l abl e. (On nuinv W'eb sites, w h e n y o u s ea r ch for s t a t u t o r y law, o n lv t h e s t at u t e is avail able,
n o t t h e a n n o t a t i o n s . I he r e f o r e , n o n e o f t h e v a lu a bl e r e s e a r c h i n f o r m a t i o n , s u c h as A L R a n
n o t a t i o n s , l aw r e v i ew art icl es, a n d c as e r e t er e n c e s , is i n c l u d e d .
243
For Example Ifyou are using ht1p://www.lawschool.cornell.edu/ to search the United

States Code for the bank robbery statute, you will be able to retrieve the
statute but not the annotations.
W’iicn \ ’o u a r c l o o k i n g for e ase l a w , nian\- n o n f c e - h a s c d .sites r e q u i r e t ha t \ o u k n o w t i e

n a m e o r c i t a t i o n ol t h e case. It \ (ui a r e t r \ i ng lo h n d an \ ' c ase t h a t a n s w e r s t h e q u e s t i o n raised
hy t h e issue, y o u m a y n o t b e abl e lo c o n d u c i t h e s e a r c h b a s e d o n s e a r c h t e r m s . In m a n \ ' sites
t h a t d o al l ow Bo o l e a n s e a r c h i n g , tlie s e a r c h c a p a b i l i t i e s ai e n o t as s o p h i s t i c a t e d as t h o s e o f
c o m m e r c i a l ( f ee - b a s e d ) s c r \ i c e s s u c h as W’e st l a w a n d l.e.xisNcxis o r e v e n sites like Loislaw,
X' er susl aw, a n d l-'astcase. I m p o r t a n t l w m o s t n o n l e e - b a s e d sites d o n o t e n a b l e \ ’o u to u p d a t e
re s e a r c h .
For Example If you locate a case that is on point, most nonfee-based sites do not allow
you to check the history ortreatment of the case to determine if it has been
overturned or affected by a subsequent case. The sites also have no mechanism such as
Shepard'sto identify cases, articles, and other secondary sources that have cited the case.
C. N o n fee-B ased L aw-R elated Web Sites

I h e a d d r e s s o f a W e b site is re f e r r ed lo as a uniform resource locator (URL). Iheaddr es. ês
proN'ided in t hi s te.xt are c u r r e n t as ol t h e da t e ol p u b li ca t i on . 11 a W e b sile is no t at the ad d r e s s
l isted, it d o e s not m e a n t ha t t h e sile n o l o n g e r exists. I h e site c o u l d b e d o w n l e m p o r a r i K ’ d u e
to t e c hn i c a l p r o b l e m s , o r t h e a d d r e s s ma \ ' h a \ e c h a n g e d . I'o d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r an a d d r e s s
lias c h a n g e d , d o an o n l i n e se a r ch for a ke\' t e r m in t h e a d d r e s s u s i n g a se a r c h e ngi ne.
For Example Ifyou are looking for Legal-Pad and the site does not come up at http://www
legal-pad.com, then perform a search using the keywords legal pad. If you
are looking for a school's law library, search underthe name ofthe school and law library.
\ ' o u ma\- h a \ e a speci li c W' eb p ag e a d d r e s s , s u c h as a p a g e f r o m t h e W' i l l a me t l e C o l

lege o f Law W e b site, h t t p : / / w w \ \ .\\ i l l a m e t l e . e d u / w u c l , whicli p r o v i d e s s u m m a r i e s o f re c e nt
L ' n i t e d Stat es S u p r e m e C' ourt o p i n i o n s . O l t e n speci li c p a g e a d d r e s s e s c h a n g e . II y o u a r e u n
a b l e to retrie\-e a specific page, go t o t h e h o m e page. In thi s e x a m p l e , t h e h o m e p a g e is h t t p : / /
w w\ v. wi l l a n i e t t c . e d u / w u c l . I h e d i r e c t o r y o f i n f o r m a t i o n o n t h e h o m e p a g e will lead \' ou to
t h e i n f o r m a t i o n y o u w a n t . In ihis case, i h e h o m e p a g e d i r e c t o r y i n c l u d e s li nks to S u p r e m e
C' ourt o p i n i o n s .
D. Legal Search Engines

1. G en eral Access
ScN’eral sites pros ide general access a n d li nks to legal r e s e a rc h sites. I h e l i nks are to W'eb
sites t hat access st at ut or\ - law, ca s e law, a n d o t h e r r e s e a r c h s o u r ce s . S o m e o f t h e m o s t co n i -
p r e h e n s i \ e sites are as follows:
h t t p : / / w w w . f m d l a w . c o m / — L' indLaw is c o n s i d e r e d o n e o f t h e best a n d m o s t c o m p r e

h e n s i v e sites p r o \ i d i n g l i n k s to s o u r c e s for t ede r al a n d st ate s t at ut or \ - law, ca s e law,
g oN' er nme nt d i r e c to r i e s , law firms, legal o r g a n i / a l i o n s , law s c h o o l s, legal p r a c t i c e
ma t e r i al s , a n d n u m e r o u s o t h e r sour ces.
244
ht t p:/ /l ;i \scr a\\ icr.t ' indhnv. i . ()ni /-- l, a\s' Cr ;nvlcr use s s i mp l e s e a r ch t e r m s a n d p h r a s e s
to searcli t h e I n t e r n e t lor legal i n t o r m a t i o n sites, l - i ndl . aw is tlie p a r e n t site ol
l.a\s( brawler.
ht t p: / / \ v\ \ 'w. it l a x . co n i / l a\ v . ht ni / — ieti Fl a x’s Law Rel at ed R e s o u r c e s i n c l u d e s a c o m

p r e h e n s i v e list ot’liiiks to l a w- r e l a t ed W'eb sites.
h t t p : / / l a w . g s u . e d u / — Ihi s ( i e o r g i a Stat e Un i \ ' er si t y C o l l eg e o f Law site pro\-ides

l i nks t o l eder al r e s o u r ce s. It i n c l u d e s i n f o r m a t i o n o n m a i o r t opi c s s u c h as iudicial
o p i n i o n s , t e d e r al reg u l at i on s , a n d t eder al l e gi sl ati on (Ll ous e a n d S e n a t e bills a n d the
C .o ng rciiion al Rccord). At t h e h o m e pa ge , click o n “ Law librar\. "
h t t p : / / w w w . a b a n e t . o r g / — Ihi s . Ameri can Bar A s s o c i a t i o n (AB.A) site i n c l u d e s links

t o legal r es e a r c h s o u r c e s , law s ch o o l l i brari es, b r a n c h e s o f g o \ e r n n i e n t , c o u i ts, a n d
n u m e r o u s o t h e r sour ces.
h t t p : / / w w w . l e g a l - p a d . c o m / — ' Ihi s site i n c l u d e s legal clip art a n d a large n u m b e r ol'

li nk s to l aw - r el a t ed sites.
h t t p : / / w w w . l o c . g o v ' — I h r o u g h t hi s Li b r a r y o f (Congress W'eb site, \ ' ou ca n l oc a t e any

b o o k t ha t h a s b e e n p u b l i s h e d a n d h a s a n ISBN.
h t t p : / / w w w . l e g a l d o c s . c o m / — ' Ihi s site p r o \ i d e s t e m p l a t e s for legal d o c u m e n t s in
n i a n \ ’ areas, s u c h as wills, t r ust s , sales, a n d real estate, m a i n ’ of w h i c h a r e tree. (Clieck
t h e law o f t h e st ate w h e r e t h e d o c u m e n t is to b e u s e d to e n s u r e that t h e t e m p l a t e
d o c u m e n t c o m p l i e s wi t h state law.
h t t p : / / w w w . l a w g u r u . c o m / - l . a w g u r u p r o x i d e s l i nks to W’e b sites for h u n d r e d s ot'

legal resoLirces.
h t t p : / / w w w . i l r g . c o m / — I nt er n e t Legal R e s o u r c e C r o u p p r o v i d e s li nks to f o r m s a n d
o t h e r r e s e a rc h sour ces.
h t t p : / / w w w . l e c t l a w . c o m / — Ihi s site p r o \ ides l i nks to l u m i e r o u s r e s e a r c h sour c es.
2. Law S c h o o ls
,\h)st law schools ha\' e a W'eb site, a n d e a c h site prox ides a l i nk to t h e s c i i o o l ’s law librarx'.
I h e list ot e\-er\- law s c h o o l W'eb site is t o o e x t e n s i x e to i n c l u d e here. Lo l o c a t e t h e site o t ' a
sci i ool o f in t er e s t , u s e a s e a r ch e n g i n e a n d i n s e r t t h e n a m e o f t h e law s c h o o l , s u c h as “ Vale
Law S c h o o l . ”
' i' ou c a n c o i u k i c t r es e a r c h t h r o u g h m a n x ’ l a w s ch o o l librarx' W’eb sites. L o l l o wi n g is a
list ol law s c h o o l sites t h a t p r o v i d e legal r e s e a r c h links, r e s o u r c e s , a n d i n f o r m a t i o n :
h t t p : / / w ww . l a w ' . i n d i a i i a . e d u / — Ihi s I n d i a n a Unix'ersitx’ X’irtLial Law l. ibrarx’ i n c l ud e s

l i nks to sites o f sp e ci a l t y a r e as ot'law, gox-er nni ent r e s o u r c e s , s e a r ch e n g i n e s , a n d laxv
journals.
l i t t p: / /l ib r a r \ ' . l a w s c h o o l . c o r n e l l . e d u / — Ihi s C o r n e l l L'nix-ersitx' Law S c h o o l site pro-

x'ides extensix' e r e s o u r c e g u i d e s a n d access to di f ferent legal topics.
h t t p : / / w w w . w a s h l a w . e d u / — In a d d i t i o n to prox i d i ng l i nks to n u m e r o u s l aw- r e l a t ed

a n d legal r e s e a r c h - r e l a t e d W'eb sites, thi s W’a s h b u r n Unix’ersitx’ S c h o o l o f Law site
prox i des l i nks to state a n d feder al c o u r t a n d gox’e r n m e n t sites.
h t t p : / / w w w . l a w . u t e x a s . e d u / - l h i s L’nix-ersitx- of' I' exas S c h o o l o f Law site i n c l u d e s a

legal r e s o u r c e g u i d e o n di f ferent legal topics.
http://w-w-w-.kentlaw-.edu/— I n f o r m a t i o n o n how- to f i nd o n l i n e legal m a t e r i a l s o n

t h e I n t e r n e t is a x a i l ab l e at t h i s C h i c a g o - K e n t (College o f Law- site. I n c l u d e d are
lists g o v e r n i n g x' ari ous a r ea s , s u c h as t h e t e d e r a l g o x - er n n i e n t , c o m p u t e r law, a n d
h e a l t h Iaw.
245
PART II LFGAL RESEARCH
http://\v\\\s-.la\v.t.' iiioiy.cdu/— ' Ih i s l-iiiory L'iii\'ersity Scli ool o f l.aw site p r o v i d e s

a ccess to i n a n \ ledei' al c i r c u i t c o u r l d e c i s i o n s a n d o t h e r researcli mat eri al.
h t t p : / / w w w . l a \ s ' . \ ' i l l a n o \ a . e d u / — .At t h i s site, \ ’o u c a n u s e l o c a t o r s to f i nd ofii-

cial W'eb si tes l o r f e d e r a l a n d s t a t e c o u r t s a n d f e d e r a l g o x e r n m e n t i n t o r m a t i o n
r es ou r c e s .
E. Federal G o v e r n m e n t S o u rc e s
1. G eneral A ccess S o u r c e s
i h e f ol l owi ng sites a r e h e l pf u l in l o c a t i n g federal government online resources:
h t t p : / / w w w . u s a . go \ V— First(iO\- is t h e U n i t e d Stat es g o v e r n m e n t ’s official W’eb p o r
tal. l h e site p r o \ i d e s i n f o r m a t i o n a n d a c c ess l i nk s to \ a r i o u s feder al g o v e r n m e n t
o n l i n e r es ou r c e s .
h t t p : / / w w w . t e d w o r l d . g o v / — 1-edW’o r l d a l l ows y o u to s e a r c h for g o \ e r n m e n t r e p or t s ,

a n d locat e U n i t e d St at es g o \ - e r n m e n t W’e b sites, g o v e r n m e n t d o c u m e n t s , g o v e r n
m e n t s t udi es, a n d o t h e r m a t er i al s .
h t t p : / / w w w . u s c o u r t s . g o \ 7 — ' i h i s site is t h e h o m e p a g e for t h e f ederal c o u r t s.
h t t p : / / w w w . g p o . g o \ / f d s y s / — 'lliis is t h e l i n k t o r t h e G o v e r n m e n t P r i n t i n g O t h c e (see
Fxhi bi t 7-1). i h e site p n n i d e s i n f o r m a t i o n o n t h e execut i \ - e b r a n c h , i n c l u d i n g t h e
C o d e o f I c d c n d R eg u la tio n s, t h e F ederal Register, t h e C.oiigressional Record, g o v e r n
m e n t r e p o r t s , a n d o t h e r m a t er i al s .
2. Federal C o u r ts O p i n i o n s
'1 he fol lowing sites prov ide a c c e ss to t h e L' nited States S u p r e m e CCoiu't, the U ni t e d States CCircuit
(CoLu'ts o f .Appeal, a n d t h e l e d e r a l D i s t r i c t (. ' ourt r e s o i n x e s .
a. U n ite d S lates S u p r e m e C.ourl

Access lo L' niled Stal es S u p r e m e (Court m a t e r i a l s is a v a i l ab l e at t h e l o l l o w i n g sites, a m o n g
ot her s:
http://w w w .suprem ecourl.go\/ - Ihi s official p a g e of t h e Lhiited States S u p r e m e

(Court f e a t ur e s c o u r t o p i n i o n s , o r d e r s , rul es, c a l e n d a r s a n d s c h e d u l e s , n e w s r eleases,
and general in t o rm a ti o n .
h t t p : / / w w w . f i n d l a w . c o m / c a s e c o d e / s u p r e m e . h t m l / — ' Ih i s F i n d Law site i n c l u d e s S u
p r e m e (Court c a s e s a n d t h e U n ite d ShUes (Auie.
h t t p : / / w w w . o y e z . o r g / — You c a n h e a r t h e ora l a r g u m e n t s o r r ea d t h e c o u r t bri efs of

U n i t e d States S u p r e m e C o u r t c a se s at t hi s m u l t i m e d i a W'eb site.
h t t p : / / w w w . l a w s c h o o l . c o r n e l l . e d u / — At t hi s C o r n e l l U n i v e r s i t ) ’ Law S c h o o l site,
o n t h e h o m e p ag e , cl i ck o n C o u r t o p i n i o n s a n d in t h e d r o p - d o w n b o x t y p e “ US
S u p r e m e (Court " to a c c e s s S u p r e m e (Court t r a n s c r i p t s , o r d e r s , a n d d e c i s i ons.
h t t p : / / w w w . f e d w o r l d . g o v / — ' [ h e F e d W ’o rl d site a l l ows y o u to l o c a t e o p i n i o n s f r o m

1937 tt) 1973 if y o u kiH)w t h e n a m e s o f t h e p a r t i e s . ( You d o n o t n e e d to k n o w t h e
cit ati on. )
h t l p : / / w w w . w i l l a m e t t e . e d u / \ v u c l / — S u m m a r i e s of r e c e n t S u p r e m e C o u r t opinit>ns
a n d t h e text o f t h e o p i n i o n s a r e ava i l a bl e at W' il l a me t t e C o l l e g e o f Law. C a s e s f r o m
2002 to p r e s e n t a r e a \ ’ailable.
246
b. United States Circuit Courts o f Appeal

Acccs s to t e de r a l cir cuit c o u r t c a s e s is m a i l a b l e t h r o u g h s e \ e r a l s o u r c e s, i n c l u d i n g t h e o n e s
listed here:
ht t p : / /\ v\ v \ v. f i n d l aw. co n i / — I h r o u g h t h e l-'indl.aw site, \ o u c a n l ocat e all t \ p e s o f

c o u r t cases.
http:/7\\\v\v.la\v.\ i l l a n o \ -a . c d u / -—T h i s X’i l l an o v a Universit}' S c h o o l o f La w site i n

c l u d e s cir cuit c o u r t o p i n i o n s a n d rules.
btt p: / / \ v\ v\ v. l a\ v. emor\ ’. e d u / — You c a n a c ce s s c i r cu i t c o u r t o p i n i o n s t h r o u g h thi s

H m o r y U n i \ ’crsit\' S c h o o l o f La w site.
c. United States District Courts

As d i s c u s s e d in C h a p t e r 1, t h e L ' ni t ed Stat es Di s t ri c t C ' o u r t s a r e t h e p r i m a r y trial c o u r t s in
t h e f e de r a l sys t em. Mo s t l e d e r al d i s t r i c t c o m ts list t h e i r o p i n i o n s o n t h e c o u r t W e b page. Fhe
h o m e p a g e for t he feder al c o u r t s is h t t p : / / w w \ v . u . s c o u r t s . g o \ / , w h i c h p r o \ ides i n f o r m a t i o n
a b o u t t h e c o u r t s a n d l i nks to t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t W’e b sites.
d. Attorney General Opinions

U n i t e d Stat es At t or ne\ - ( i e n e r a l o p i n i o n s a r e ax'ailable at h t t p : / / w w w . u s d o j . g o \ - , t h e W'eb site
t o r t h e U n i t e d States D e p a r t m e n t o f lustice. M a n \ ’ st ate A t t o r n e \ ' ( i e n e r a l o l h c e s n o w also
m a k e t h e i r o p i n i o n s ax a i l ab l e o n l i n e . To l oc a t e a st a t e A t t o r n e y ( i e n e r a l ’s otiice, use a s e a r c h
e n g i n e . M o s t state g o w r n m e n t W’e b sites n o w h a \ ’c a s e a r c h quor\ - b o x a l l o w i n g y o u t o e n t e r
a q u e r y s u c h as “a tt or n e x ’ g e n e r a l o p i n i o n s ’ oi' e v e n “o p i n i on s . "
3. Federal Statutes, C o u rt Rules, and R e g u la tio n s

I h e ( tiitCil Shiti's C.Oilc. feder al c o u i t rul es, anti t h e ( ' o d e of h t i i c n i ’i Rcgnltitioiis are avail able
at t h e t o l l o w i n g sites.
a. United States Code

' I h e (Cornell Uni ve r s i t y Law S c h o o l site, h t t p ; / / h b r a r \ ' . l a w s c h o o l . c o r n c l l . e d u / , prox’ides access
lo t h e u s e . , "ôu can s ea r ch b y title a n d c h a p t e r , p o p u l a r n a m e , title o f indix i dual se c t i o n s , a n d
t abl e ot c o n t e n t s . I h e L'.S'i,' is a lso ax’a il able t h r o u g h F i n d L a w ( h t t p: / / wx v w. f i n d l a x v . c o m/ ) a n d
t h e ( i o x e r n m c n t P r i n t i n g O t h c e W'eb site ( h ( t p : / / wx \ w. gpo.gox-/fdsys).
b. Federal Court Rules

' I h e f eder al c o u r t r ul es are i n c l u d e d in t h e L'.S(’, as discLissed in t h e p r e x i o u s se c t i o n . I.ocal
c o u r t rul es are u s u a i k ax a il able t h r o u g h t h e speci fic f eder al c o u r t ’s W'eb site, w h i c h m a y b e a c
cessed at htt p:/ /wxvw. us court s . gox7. I h e federal c o u r t rul es are also ax'ailable at manx' law s c h o o l
W'eb sites, s u c h as ht t p:/ /wwxv. l awsclK)ol. coi n c l l . e d u / . At tlie C o r n e l l Unix' ersity Law Sc h o o l
site, x ou c a n s e a r c h t h e F e d e r a l Rul e s o f ( j x il P r o c e d u r e a n d Fx i d e n c e bx' k ey \ s o r d s e a r c h .
c. State and Federal Law

I h e W e b site h t t p : / / w w x \ . l a w s o n l i n e . c o m prox i d e s l i n k s to st ate a n d feder al law s o u r c e s . M a n y
s t at e s n o w prox ide state law s o u r c e s o n t h e i r s u p r e m e c o u r t W'eb sites, o r prox ide a l i n k to a
W’e b p ag e w h e r e t h e s t ate’s l aws c a n b e a c c e s s e d for tree.
247
d. Côdc ot l cderal Regulations

Vou iiKU c o n d u c t (,'f7\ s e a i c h c s at tlu' l ol l o w i n g sites:
h t t p : / / \ vu \ v . l a\ v s c h o o l . c o r n e l l . e d u / — Ihi s Cîi'iiell I' ni versi t}' La w S c ho o l site all ows

\' ou to s e a r c h h\' title a n d se c t i o n , i n d e x o t ' s e c ti o n h e a d i n g s , t h e ( i P O s e a r c h e ngi ne,
o r t h e i 'J-R t abl e o f c o n t e n t s .
h t t p : / / w w w . g p o . g o v / l d s y s / — Ihi s ( i P O site i nc l ud e s t h e C.iR a n d a s e a r c h e n g i n e for

li nd i ng c o d e se ct i o n s .
e. Federal Register
I h e h cilcn il R egister is a \ a i l a b l e at t h e ( i o v e r n m e n t P r i n t i n g O t l i ce W’e b site, h t t p : / / \ \ \ v w
.gpo. gov/t dsNs.
4. L egislation
I n l o r m a t i o n o n t ede r a l l egi sl ati on, i n c l u d i n g legislati\’e history, is axai l abl e at h t t p : / / t h i ) m a s .
lo c . g o w a site m a i n t a i n e d b\- t h e L i b r a r y o f C o n g r e s s . It i n c l u d e s i n f o r m a t i o n o n legislation,
t h e lull text ol t h e (A>ngicsiioiuiI Rccord. a n d c o m m i t t e e i n f o r m a t i o n .
I.egislati\ e h i s t o r \ ' a n d p r e s i d e n t i a l d o c u m e n t s ar e also a\ ail able at t h e site m a i n t a i n e d
b \ t h e ( i i n e r n m e n t I ' r i n t i n g Otli ce, h t t p : / / w w w . a c c e s s . g p o . g o v .
3. C o n g r e ss and Federal A g e n c ie s
1h e l o l l o w i n g is a p ar t i al list ol L’Rl.s l or (Congress a n d v a r i o u s teder al a ge nc i es. I h e U RL s lor
W'eb sites o f a g e n c i es not listeil h e r e ma\- b e ac c e s s e d throLigh t h e L i b ra r y o f (Congress W’eb
site, h i t p : / / w w w . l o c . g o \ ' / i n d e x . h t m l .
h t t p: / / w w w . c e n si i s . g o \ 7 — L’ni t ed States (Census Bu r e a u
h t t p s : / / w w w . c i a . g o v / - C e n t r a l h i t e l l i g en c e A g e n c y
http://www. cpsc. go\ / — L’nited States tainsLimer Product Salet\’ ( ' o m m i s s i o n

http://www.Lispto.go\7 L'nited States D e p a rt m e n t of ( i o mm e r ce / P a t e nt and Lrade-
ma rk Oliice
h t t p : / / w w w . u s d o i . g o \ 7 - - l ’ni t ed States D e p a r t m e n t o f lustiee
http://www.dol.g o \ / L' ni t ed States D e p a r t m e n t ol L a b o r
h t t p : / / w w w . d o t . g o \ / — L’n i t e d States D e p a r t m e n t ol’ l ' r a n s p o r t a t i o n
l i t t p: / /w w w . e p a . g o \ / — U n i t e d States H n v i r o n m e n t a l P r o t e c t i o n .Agency
h t t p : / / w w \ v . f a a . g o \ / — l-'ederal Avi at i on A d n i i n i s t r a t i o n
h t t p : / / w w w . l b i . go\-/— Fe d e r a l B u re a u o f In\-estigation
h t t p : / / u s c i s . g o \ ' / — U n i t e d States C i t i z e n s h i p a n d Imn-ii grat ion Ser\' ices
h t t p : / / w w w . i r s . u s t r e a s . g o \ ' / — I n t er n a l R e v e n u e S er \ ice
http://ww\s-.loc.go\-/ — L i b ra r y ot ( ^ ) n g r e s s
h t t p : / / w w w . n h t s a . d o t . g o \ - / - N a t i o n a l H i g h w a y ’IValfic Safety Adn-iii-iistration
h t t p : / / w w w . s e c . g o \ - / - U ’n i t e d States S e cu r i t i e s aii d F' xchange Con- ini ission
h t t p: / / ww w . s s a . g o \ - / — Social S e c u r i t y A d n ii r i i s t r at i on
h t t p : / / w w w . s t a t e . g o \ - / i n d e x . h t n i l / — U n i t e d Stat es D e p a r t n i e n t o f State
ht t p:/ /ww- w. hoi ise. go\ -/— L' ni t ed States Llouse o f Representati-\' es
h t l p : / / \ v \ v \ v . s en at e. go v / — L’ni t ed States Sen a t e
h t t p : / / w ww - . w h i t e h o i r s e . g o x ' / - I h e W' hite H o u s e
248
6. Presidential Materials
Pi vsidci it ial p r o c l a m a t i d n s a n d c x c c u t i \ e o r d e r s a rc avai l abl e o n W’estlaw a n d I. exi sNexis, as
well as t h e C' lovernnient P r i n t i n g Ol i i c e W'eb site, h t t p : / / w w w . g p o . g i n - ' l d s \ ' s . l h e site o t l h e
W’h i t e H o u s e ’s \ i r tual librar\- is h t t p : / / w w w . w h i t e h o u s e . g o \ - .
F. S tate Sources
l h e a m o u n t ot st ate legal r e s e a r c h m a t e r i a l a \ a i l a b l e t h r o u g h t h e I n t e r n e t \ a ri es f r o m st at e
to state, as d o e s t h e avail abil it v o f State sources. Incr easingl y, st ates are p r o v i d i n g p r i m a r y
a u t h o r i t y ( s uc h as cases, st atut es, c o n s t i t u t i o n s , a n d a d m i n i s t r a t i \ e r e g u l a t i o n s) o n o r t h r o u g h
t h e W'eb site o f t h e h i g h e s t st at e co u r t .
L a w- r e la t e d m a t e r i a l is u s u a l k a \ a i l a b l e t h r o u g h W e b sites ol st ate c o u r t s , s t at e g o v
e r n m e n t s , local l aw sc h o o l s , a n d st at e b a r a s s o c i a t i on s . CConsider a c c e s s i n g t h o s e sites w' hen
c ondL i c t i ng a se a r ch w i t h i n y o u r state, l h e legal m a t e r i a l s m o s t c o m m o n h ' a\ ' ai labl e a r e s t at e
s t at u t es , c o u r t o p i n i o n s , law r e \ ’iews, a n d a g e n c \ ' r e g u l at i on s . S p a c e l i m i t a t i o n s p r e v e n t t h e
li st i ng o f all W e b sites for all t h e states. F o l l o w i n g is a list o f t h e W e b a d d r e s s e s for si tes t h a t
p r o v i d e li nks to st at e sour c e s;
h t t p : / / w w w . f m d l a w . c o m / — I h r o u g h Fi ndl . aw, \' ou c a n ac c e ss st at e st a t ut e s, c a s e

law, a d m i ni s t r a t i \ - e law, law s c h o o l s , p r o f es s i on a l legal o r g a n i z a t i o n s , a n d s o m e law'
reviews.
h t t p : / / w w w . l a w s o n l i n e . c o m / - -l . aws O n l i n e p r o \ :des l i nk s to st ate s o u r c e s, i n c l u d

i ng state c odes.
h t t p : / / w w w . l a w . \ i l l a no\ a . e d u / - - Ihi s \ ' i l l a n o v a L’n i \ e r s i t \ ' S c h o o l o f Law site p r o -

\ ides l i nks to st ate c o u r t s a n d c o u r t o p i n i o n s .
h t t p : / / w w w . l a w . i n d i a n a . e d u / - A t t h e I n d i a n a L Hi \ e r s i t \ ' N'irtual Law Library, y o u

c a n t m d i n t o r m a t i o n o n m a n v st ate s o u r c e s a n d li nks to d i t l e r en t s p e ci a l t y a r e a s ot
law, s u c h as t a m i h ' law.
t i t t p: / / www. ke n t l a w. ed u , ' — .Access to insti u c t i o n s o n f i n d i n g o n l i n e legal m a t e r i a l s

a re avail able at thi s (Chicago Kent (College o f Law site, l h e site p r o v i d e s lists o t st at e
g i ) v e r n m e n t a n d specialis' a r ea s s u c h as h e a l t h law.
h t t p : / / w w w . i i c s c . o r g / — l h e N a t i o n a l (Center lor Stale (Courts W'eb site i n c l u d e s a list

o f st ate c o u r t s . 'I'ou a l s o c a n f md o t h e r law r el at ed I n t e r n e t sites here.
h t t p : / / w w w . h g . o r g / — T h e site p r o v i d e s acce ss to state a n d local g o \ e r n m e n t i n f o r

m a t i o n o n u n i f o r m laws, o n l i n e j o u r na ls , a n d o t h e r topics.
l i t t p: / /w w w . c o u r t s . n e t / —' lilis site p r o \ i d e s acce ss to W'eb sites m a i n t a i n e d by c o u r t s

nationwide.
h t t p : / / w w w . w a s h l a w . e d u / — Specifically lor st at e st atut es, thi s site i n c l u d e s l i nk s to

st ate laws.
h t t p: / /w ww . s l at e l oc a l g o \ Mi e t / - - Li n k s lo st ale g o \ e r n m e n f s o u r c e s are a v ai l a b l e at
t hi s P i p e r R e s o u r c e s site.
h t t p : / / w ww . n a a g . o r g / - - - l h i s site ol t h e N a t i o n a l A s s o c i a t i o n of A t t o r n e y s G e n e r a l
p r o \ ides ma i l ) ’ st ate a t t o r n e \ ’ ge n e r a l o p i n i o n s .
G. S e c o n d a ry A u th o ri ty a n d Specia lty Areas

M a n \ ’ secondar v' a u t h o r i t \ ’ a n d o t h e r s o u r c e s s u c h as A I.R , West' s digests, a n d t r ea t i se s a r e
avail able o n h ' at c o m m e r c i a l ( f e e - b a s e d ) W'eb sites SLicIi as W e s t l a w a n d LexisNexis. \ h \ n \ '
249
secondiiry sources such as S h e p a r d ' s .\rc available on co mme r ci al W’eb sites and C^D-ROM
(see section 111.I). Ilowexer, m a i n s e co n da r y and o th e r materials in specialty areas are
axailable on the Internet at no charge. Ihese specially area and secondarx' source materials
are discussed here. A go od source site lor into r ni a t i on an d links to n u m e r o u s s our ce s lor
the specialtx’ areas listed below may be i o u nd at the Roni inger I.egal W'eb site, http://x\xvw
.roniingerlegal.com. . \ n o t h e r site for accessing i ntorniation and research sources in n u m e r o u s
specialty areas is the l.awx'erH.xpress site at http://xvxx xv.lawxerexpress.com.
1. S pecialty Area S ources

I-'olloxving is a list of legal topics, a c c o m p a n i e d b\- W’eb sites wher e x ini can h n d i nf or mat i on
on each specific topic.
a. Administrative Law
Ihe l-'indl.axv site, http://xvww.lindlaxv.com/, prox ides access to federal a d mi ni s t ra t i xe codes,
regulations, orders, and agency rulings. State and local administratixe laws are available t hrough
the Municipal CÀ)de (Corporation site, ht t p: // \ vww. muni co de . c o m. Administratix-e laxv research
max’ be condu c t e d thr ou gh the Amer i c an Bar Association’s Administratix’e Procedur e Database
at http://wxvw.laxs'.fsu.edu/ (go to “Research (lenter,” then “Research Resources," t h e n “ I.egal
Research Databas es” ). Ihe (jPC) site, http://wxvxvgpo.gox7fdsys, proxides access to t he L’S('.
the C.odc of Rcgiiliilioiis, the l-'cilcnil Rcgiitcr. and n u m e r o u s o t h e r d o c um e n t s . 'Ihe LS.A: H i t
o f C h 'R S cctio iii .Alfcclcd (the mo n th ly p am p h l et a c co m p a n y i n g the (.'/-W) is also axailable at
the Ci PC) site.
b. Arbitration and Mediation

At the I-'irstCiox W'eb site, htlp://ww\x.gpo.gox’, xou can locate n u m e r o u s sources ol i nforma-
tion on ar bitration and mediat ion. Tx pe in either “ar bi t rat i on” or “m e d i at i on ” in the Search
box on the h o m e page.
c. Bankruptcy
At http://xv\vxv.tindla\vcom/, xou max' access i nf ormat i on on the x arious tvpes of banki'Lipicy
and bankrLiptc} law and links to bankr uptcx courts. I nternXet Bankrupt cx fibrarx', http://
b ank ru p t. c o m, prox ides access to publications and resource materials, and links to bankruptcx'
resources.
d. Civil Litigation
A director)- of expert witnesses is ax ailable at littp://xvwxv.iurispro.coni/. A site that prox ides
links to exper ts is http: //wxvw.expertpages. com. :\ site that includes i nf or mat i on on d am a g es
is ht t p: //www. laxvcatalog. com; type “d a m a g e s ” in t he Search box for i n f o r m a ti o n sources
c o nc e r n i n g damages.
e. Civil Rights
'Ihe cixil rights proxisions o f t h e C S C max’ be found thr ough Findl.aw, http://wxvxv.findlaw.com.
Ihe Web site o f t h e Ame r i c an C'ivil Liberties U n i on (AC'I.U), http://wxvxx-.aclu.org/, provides
extensix'e inf or mat i on on issues c o n c e r n i n g cix il rights.
f. Consumer Law
Ihe site of the National CConsumer Law CA'nter, http://wxvw.iiclc.org, i nckides coniprehensi\-e
inf or mat i on on c o n s u m e r laxv
250
g. ("orporatc Law
( i e n e r a l i n t o r n i a t i o n a b o u t c o r p o r a t e law is a \ a i l a b l e t h r o u g h t h e L a wy e r L x p r e s s site, h t t p : / /
w w w . l a w y e r e x p r e s s . c o n i . Stat e b u s i n e s s a n d p r o f e s s i o n a l c o d e s a r e a \ a i l a b l e t h r o u g h t h e
(Cornell U n i v e r s i t y Law S c h o o l W'eb site, h t t p : / / w w w . l a w s c h o o l . c o r n e l l . e d u . I n l o r m a t i o n o n
t h o u s a n d s o f c o m p a n i e s is a \ ail able at h t t p : / / w w w . l e a r n w e b s k i l l s . c o m / c o m p a n y . Hach st at e ’s
otfice o f t h e s e c r et a r \ ' o f st at e h as i n f o r m a t i o n o n i n c o r p o r a t i n g in a slate. F o r m s a n d d o c u
m e n t s u s u al l y ar e ava i l a bl e t h e r e as well. S e c r e t a r y ol st ate oflices c a n b e c o n t a c t e d t h r o u g h
t h e st a t e g o \ ' e r n m e n t W'eb site.
h. Criminal Law
l-’l o r i d a S t a t e L’ni s’e r s i t y ’s C o l l e g e o f C r i m i n o l o g y a n d C r i m i n a l l u s t i e e site, h t t p : / / \ v w w
. c n m i n o l o g y . f s u . e d u , prox i d e s e x t e n s i \ e i n f o r m a t i o n o n c r i m i n a l law. 'i’o u c a n l i n d l i nk s to
c r i m i n a l j us t i ce sites at t h e I n s t i t u t e l o r Law a n d lustiee, h t t p : / / w w w . i l j . o r g / .
i. Llder Law
I n l o r m a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g Me d i c a re , Me d i ca i d , ri ghts o f t h e elderls’, a n d so o n, ma\ ' be r e s ea r c h e d
at h t t p : / / w w w . s e n i o r l a w . c o m .
j. Environmental Law
I h e W e b site ol t h e H n \ i r o n m e n t a l P r o t e c t i o n A g e n c y is h t t p : / / w w w . e p a . gow '»’o u c a n fi nd
l i nks to e n \ ' i r o n m e n l a l law r e s o u r c e s at t h e W’W’W’ X'irtual Librar\- site, h t t p : / / w w w . \ ’l i b . o r g .
k. Estate Planning
(Consult st ale pr o b a t e s t at ut e s w h e n a r es e a r c h q u e s t i o n i nv o Ke s esl ate p l a n n i n g . I h o s e s l a l ut e s
a r e av a i l ab l e i h r o u g h F i n d l . a w, h t t p : / / w w w . l i n d l a w . c o m .
I. Eaniilv 1 aw
I h e D i \ ' o r c e N e t site, h t t p : / / w w w . d i v o r c e n e t . c o m , prox ides i n l o r m a t i o n o n st ale d i \ o r c e laws.
I n l o r m a t i o n o n n u m e r o u s f a m i l y law m a t t e r s , s u c h as p r o p e r t y issues, cu si od\ ' , a iul tax p l a n
n i ng , is a \ ’ai l abl e at h t t p : / / w \ v w . n o l o . c o m / .
m. Immigration
I h e ( ' i t i z e n s h i p a n d I m m i g r a t i o n S e r \ i c e s W'eb site is h t t p : / / u s c i s , go \ ' . F i n k s lo all l \ p e s ol
ma l e r i a l o n i m m i g r a t i o n a r e a\-ailable al h l t p : / / w w w . i m m i g r a l i o n d i r e c l . c o n i / . I m m i g r a t i o n
p r o c e d u r e s , f o r m s b o o k s , a n d o l h e r ma t er i al s are a \ a i l a b l e al h l l p : / / w w \ \ . u s - i m m i g r a t i o n . c o m .
n. International Law
I n t e r n a t i o n a l legal r e s o u r c e s ar e avail able at t h e site o f t h e C o r n e l l Uni ver s i t y Fa w S c h oo l Fegal
I n t o r m a t i o n Instit ute, h t t p : / / w w w . l a w s c h o o l . c o r n e l l . e d u / , a n d at t h e L’nit ed N a t i o n s Sv'stem o f
O r g a n i z a t i o n s site, h t t p : / / w w w . u n s y s t e m . o r g / . Al s o see t h e A m e r i c a n S o c i e U ’ o f I n t e r n a t i o n a l
L a w ’s .4S//. G u id e to Electronic Rcsoiircci for In t e r n a ti o n a l L a w http://www.asil.org/.
o. Intellectual Property and Copyright

I h e W' eb si te o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s ( A ) p \ ’r i g h l O l f i c e is h l l p : / / w \ \ \ v . l o c . g o \ 7 i n d e x . h t m l .
’I h e L ' n i t e d St at es P a t e n t a n d T r a d e m a r k Ol f i ce site is h l l p : / / w w w . u s p l o . g o v . I n f o r m a t i o n
a b o u t c o p \ r i g h l s is a l s o a \ a i l a b l e at i h e C ; o p \ ' r i g h t ( ' l e a r a n c e ( Ce n t e r site, h l l p : / / w \ v w
.copyrighl.com.
251
p. l egal D o c u m e n t s an d F o rm s
You iiia\- li nd legal d o c u m e n t s a n d t o r m s at sever al sites. Two p o p u l a r sites a r c t h e T.ectrie
1.aw Fihrary, htt p: / / \ v\ \ w. lectlaw.c()m/, a n d F e g a l d o e s , h t t p : / / \ v w \ v . l e g a l d o e s . e o m / . Li nks to
f o r m s o u r c e s are p r o \ i d ed at t h e sites o l ' t h e I n t e r n e t l.egal R e s o u r c e G r o u p , htt p: / / \ \ ' ww. i l rg
. ct)m/, a n d f indl . aw, h t t p : / / w w w . f i n d l a w . c o m .
q. Legal Lthics
You c an t i nd l i n k s to sites p r o x i d i n g i n f o r m a t i o n o n legal e t h i c s at http: / / www. l awsch(K' )l
. c o rn e l l . e d u a n d h t t p : / / w w w . l e g a l e t h i c s . c o m .
r. P er son a l Injury
l h e N a t i o n a l l l i g h w a \ ' Fraffic Safety A d m i n i s t r a t i o n ( h t t p : / / w w w . n h t s a . d o t . g o v ) p r o \ i d e s
i n f o r m a t i o n o n tratfic safet\-, c o n s u m e r c o m p l a i n t s , a n d o t h e r facts. D a t a o n c o n s u m e r p r o d
u c t s are a vail able at t h e U n i t e d States Cônsi mier P r o d u c t Safet y C o m m i s s i o n , h t t p : / / w w w
.cpsc.gt)\'. l h e A m e r i c a n s w i t h Disabi li ti es Act D o c u m e n t Cênter is l o c a t e d at h t t p : / / w ww . j a n
.\\ \ u . e d u / . Me d i ca l i n l o r m a t i o n is a\ ail able at t h e X'irtual M e d i c a l F a w C e n t e r , h t t p : / / w w w
.martindalecenter.com.
s. Real P rop er ty a n d L a n d lo rd I’en a n t Law

l h e N a t i o n a l .Association o f Rea l t o r s site is h t t p : / / w w w . r e a l t o r . c o m . ' l h e site p r o v i d e s li nks to
a w i d e \ ar i et v ol s o u r c e s o n real est at e ma t t e r s . N o l o l^ress m a i n t a i n s a l a n d l o r d a n d t e n an t
site at h t t p : / / w w w . n o l o . c o m / .
t. Lax Law
I h e W'eb site o f t h e I nt ernal R e v e n u e Servi ce is h t t p : / / w w w . i r s . i i st reas. gow/. F i n k s to ni.imerous
ta.\ law res ources are av ailable i h r o u g h Ihe 'fa.K P r o p h e t W'eb site at h t t p : / / w w w . t a . \ p r o p h e t . c o m .
u. L'nitorm C lom m crcial C'ode

C o m p r e h e n s i \ e i n f o r m a t i o n o n t h e U n i f o r m C o m m e r c i a l C o d e is a x a i l ab l e at t h e ( ; or n e l l
Universit)' Law School Legal I n f o r m a t i o n site, h t t p : / / w w w . l a w ^ c h o o l . c o r n e l l . e d u / . At t he h o m e
p a g e o n t h e lelt side ol t h e sc r e e n , select “ Law a b o u t . . t h e n select “C ' o n mi e r c i a l t r a n s a c t i o n s ”
m t h e d r o p - d o w n m e n u . In a d d i t i o n to t h e L ' n i f o r m C o m m e r c i a l ( ' o d e , t h e site p r o v i d e s links
to st ate c o n u n e r c i a l c o d e s t a t u t es a n d li nks to i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e U C C .
2. S ec o n d a r y A u th ority an d O th e r Source,s
I h i s s ec t i o n p r o v i d e s a list o f s o m e s ec o n d a r ) - a u t h o r i t ) ' a n d o t h e r s o u r c e m a t e r i a l sites that
a r e a \ ailable at n o n f e e - b a s e d W'eb sites.
a. Law R e v ie w s, Journals, a n d P e r io d ic a ls
N u m e r o u s law r ev i e ws , j o u r n a l s , a n d p e r i o d i c a l s a r e a v a i l a b l e o n l i n e . M a n ) ' l a w s c h o o l s
p u b l i s h t h e i r l aw re\ i e ws a n d j o u r n a l s . S o m e e x a m p l e s a r e t h e H a r v a r d L a w R evie w , at
h t t p : / / w w w . h a r v a r d l a w r e \ ’i e w . o r g ; a n d t h e C o r n e li l . a w R e v ie w , at h t t p : / / w w w . l a w s c h o o l
.cornell.edu.
D i r e c t o r i e s t h a t p r o s ' i d e l i n k s to l aw r e v i e w s a n d l aw j o u r n a l s i n c l u d e F i n d L a w at
h t t p : / / s t u . l i n d l a w . c o m / a n d ' I h e U n i v e r s i t y o f C ' hi c a g o D ’A n g e l o L a w L i b r a r y at h t t p : / / w w w
. l i b. u c h i c a g o . e d u / . I h e U n i \ e r s i t y Law R e v i e w P r o j ec t , h t t p : / / w w ' w . l a w r e \ ' i e w . o r g , p ro v i d e s
i n f o r m a t i o n o n t h e availabilit)' o f law r e\ ' iews o n t h e I n t e r n e t . A l s o see A n d e r s o n ’s D i r e c t o r y
o f L a w Re vi e ws a n d S c h o l a r l y Legal P u b l i c a t i o n s at h t t p : / / w w w . l e x i s n e x i s . c o m / .
252
b. I.egal Dictionaries
I.i nks to legal d i c t i o n a r i e s a r e a xa i l ab l e at h t t p : / / w ' w w . d i i h a i m e , o r g / . R e c e n t l y legal d i c t i o n
ar i es ha\' e b e c o m e a x ai l ab l e bx’ w i r e l es s a p p l i c a t i o n t o r p e r s o n a l digi tal a ss i s t a n t s ( P D A s ) ,
s m a r t p h o n e s , a n d tabl ets.
c. I.egal Newspapers and Newsletters

You c a n acc e ss legal n e x x s p a p e r s a n d nexxsl ett ers o n l i n e b\' u s i n g t h e n a m e as a s e a r c h t e r m .
Ma n ) ' c an a lso b e a c c e s s e d t h r o u g h F i n d Laxv at http://x\ \vx\'.hndla\\'.com. B o t h t h e W a s h b u r n
L’nix'crsity S c h o o l ot La w W e b site. htt p:/ /x\ x\' w. washl axv. edu; a n d t h e Laxv Nexvs Netxx'ork,
http://xvxvw.la\x'.com, prox i de l i nk s to legal n e w s p a p e r s , n e wsl e t t e r s, a n d m a g a z i n e s .
d. Law Firms
I n f o r m a t i o n o n l aw f i r ms a n d at t o r n e x ' l o c a t o r s is ax-ailable t h r o u g h Findl.axv at h tt p:/ /w\vxv
.findlaxx'.com a n d M a r t i n d a l e - H u b b e l l at h t t p : ' / w w w . m a r f i n d a l e . c o m ,
e. Statistical Information
Vou c a n find st ati sti cal i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e federal c o u r t s o n l i n e at http://xvxvxv. uscourts.
g o x ' / p u bl i c a t i o n s . h t m l . I h e I' ed er a l B u r e a u of Inxestigafion' s i ’liifo n n C r im e R ep o rts is ax’ail-
abl e at http://wxvw.fbi.gox' . ' I h e Bureaii o f lu.stice Statistics p r o x i d e s i n f o r m a t i o n at http://xv\\'xv
. oj p. us doj . gox/ bi s / .
t. Treaties
A n e.xtensixe c o l l e c t i o n o f t r e a t i es is ax a i l a b l e t h r o u g h t h e 'I'reaties & I n t e r n a t i o n a l A g r e e
m e n t s R e s e a r c h e r s ’ .Xrchix e. It is ax ail able t h r o u g h s u b s c r i p t i o n at htt p : / / wwx \ . o c ea n a l a \ x ’. c o m .
g. Uniform State Laws and .Model Acts

U n i f o r m st ate laws a n d m o d e l act s a r e ax a i l a b l e at t h e N a t i o n a l ( ' o n f e r e n c e of t ' o m m i s s i o n e r s
o n I n i t o r m Slat e L a ws ( N c X . L Si.) W e b site, h t t p : , / w w w . u n i l o r m l a x v s . o r g / . .Access to i n f o r
m a t i o n o n u n i f o r m laxvs is a lso ax ai l abl e t h r o u g h t he Unix-ersitx' of Pen n sx lxani a Laxv S c h o o l
W'eb site, ht t p : / / x v ww . l a w . L i p e n n . e d u /.
H. Listservs
A listserv is an e - m a i l d i s c u s s i o n g r o u p t h a t l i nk s p e o p l e wi t h c o m m o n i nt er e s t s so t h e y c a n
s h a r e i n f o r m a t i o n o n a t o p i c o r a n a r e a of e x p e r t i s e . Lo p a r t i c i pa t e , y o u m u s t s u b s c r i b e to o r
jt)in t he g r o u p . O n c e )' ou hax’e j o i n e d a listserx' d i s c u s s i o n g r o u p , y o u c a n s e n d ( p o s t ) m e s
sages a n d receix’e m e s s a g e s f r o n i g r o u p m e m b e r s . W' hen x'ou p o s t a me s s a g e , it is ax’ai l abl e to
all m e m b e r s xvho s u b s c r i b e to t h e g r o u p . In e s s e nc e , t h e i n f b r m a t i o n is publ i c; it is n o t like
p r i xat e e- mai l .
I h e r e a r e h u n d r e d s of d i s c u s s i o n g r o u p s o n x a r i o u s legal t opi cs. Listserx s a r e v a l u a b l e
be c a us e thex’ alloxv x'ou to receix'e t h e i n p u t o f co l l e a g u es w h o are i n t er e s t ed in a n d o f t en ex p e r t s
on a ce r t ai n legal t op i c . If ) ' ou hax-e difficult)' in h n d i n g an ansxver t o a legal q u e s t i o n , y o u c a n
pos t t he q u e s t i o n o n a lislserx' a n d o b t a i n a n ansxver o r g u i d a n c e f r o m o t h e r m e m b e r s o t t h e
g r o u p . lioxvex’er, x'ou m u s t alwax s x'erifx' t h e i n f o r m a t i o n x'ou receix’e.
I h e r e a r e txvo t y p e s o f li st servs: u n m o d c r a t c d , in xxhich all m e s s a g e s bx' g r o u p m e m b e r s
a r e sent to ex’erx’o n e in t h e g r o u p ; a n d m o d e r a t e d , in w h i c h a m e s s a g e is s e n t to a m o d e r a t o r ,
w h o rex’iews t h e m e s s a g e a n d d e c i d e s x v h e t h e r to r e t u r n it to t h e s e n d e r , edit it a n d s e n d it
on to t h e g r o u p , o r s e n d it o n to t h e g r o u p as is. I h e rul es e s t a b l i s h e d by t h e g r o u p usual l)'
g o x e r n t h e actix ities of t h e m o d e r a t o r .
253
I’w o W e b sites tli.it prov ide ii it oriiiatioii o n legal lislser\'s a r e t h e W a s h b u r n U n i v e r s i t y

S e h o o l o i l . a w site, hltp:/' /\vaslila\\ . edu/; a n d t h e We s t e h e st e i ' l,ibrar\- S\ s t e m site, htt p:/ /\ v\v\ v
. w e s t e l i e s t e r l i b r a i i e s . o r g / . H - n i a i l i n g lists a r e a l s o a v a i l a b l e t h r o u g h t h e I . y o i i e t t e I.oui s-
l a e q u e s ' s I.aw l ists, h t t p: / . / www2. li b. u e h i e a g o . e d u / .
I, O r g a n iz a t io n s
l ollow ing is a list o f l a w- r e l a t ed organizations a n d ass o c i a t i on s . A d d i t i o n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s
nia\- b e ac c e s s e d t h r o u g h I' indl. aw.
h t t p : / / w w w . a a l l n e t . o r g / — A m e r i c a n A s s o c i a t i o n ot Law Li b r a r i e s
h t t p : / / w w w . a b a n e t . o r g / — A m e r i c a n Bar A s s o c i at i o n
h t t p : / / w w w . a c l u . o r g / — A m e r i c a n Ci\'il Li bert i es U n i o n
h t t p : / / w w w . a l a n e t . o r g / — A s s o c i a t i o n o f Legal A d m i n i s t r a t o r s
h t t p : / / w \ v w . a a f p e . o r g / — A m e r i c a n A s s o c i a t i o n for P ar a l e g a l E d u c a t i o n
l i t t p: / /w w w . n a l a . o r g / — ' I h e N a t i o n a l A s s o c i a t i o n ol Legal As s i st a n t s
l i t t p : / / w w \ \ . n a l s . o r g / — N a t i o n a l A s s o c i a t i o n o f Legal S e c r e t a r i e s
h t t p : / / w w w . n a s s . o r g / — N a t i o n a l A s s o c i a t i o n o f Se c r e t ar i es ol State
h t t p : / / w w w . p a r a l e g a l s . o r g / — N a ti o n a l F e d e r a t i o n ol Paral egal A s s o c i a t i o n s
1. State Bar O r g a n iz a tio n s

You c a n access st ate b a r o r g a n i z a t i o n s by u s i n g a se ar c h e n g i n e a n d t \ p i n g in t h e n a m e o f t h e
s t a t e bar, sLich as “N e w York State P>ar.”
2. In tern ation al O r g a n iz a tio n s

F o l l o w i n g is a list ol p r o m i n e n t i n t e r n a t i o n a l o r g a n i z a t i on s :
http://uww.europa.eu/ l í u r o p e a n L' nion
htt p: / 7www. i c | - c i ) . or g/ — 1n t e i n a t i o n a l U o u r t ol lusti ee ( W o r l d U o u r t )
h t t p : / / w w w . o a s . o r g / — O r g a n i z a t i o n ol A m e r i c a n States
h t t p : / / w w w . u n . o r g / — L' ni t ed N a t i o n s
h t t p : / / W W W . w t o . o r g / — W o r l d Frade O r g a n i z a t i o n
J. CD-ROM
■Many legal I'eseaich s o u r c e s are still a\'ailable o n CD-ROM ( c o m p a c t disk, r e a d - o n h ' nieni or)' ) .
' I h e \ i n c l u d e A in crica ii l u r i i p r ii il c n a ' 2d, A L R , t h e U SC A , S hcp iini'i, st ate s t a t u t o r y a n d case
law, t r eati ses s lic Ii as W r i g h t a n d Mi l l e r ’s l-'edenil Practicc a n d Procedure, a n d p r a c t i c e aids s u c h
as A m e r i c a n lu r is p r u d e n c e Legal Forn>s, to n a m e just a tew. For o b \ i o u s s p a c e - s a v i n g r e a s ons ,
man}' law f i r ms n o w p u r c h a s e legal m a t e ri a l s in C D - R O M f o r m r a t h e r t h a n as p a p e r texts.
Cd^-RCXMs a r e Lised w i t h a c o m p u t e r like an\- c o m p a c t disk. ' Ihe\- h a v e t h e a d v a n t a g e
o f a l l o w i n g a r e s e a r c h e r to c o n d u c t r e s e a r c h at h o m e , at c o u r t , o r w h i l e o n t h e r o a d t r a v e l
ing, t h r o u g h t h e use o f a l a p t o p c o m p u t e r . P u b l i s h e r s u s u a l h ’ u p d a t e t h e i r C D - R O M s w i t h
r e p l a c e m e n t d i s k s at r e g u l a r int er\ ' als, s u c h as n i o n t h h - o r q u a r t e r l y . .A d i s a d v a n t a g e o f CF^-
R O M s is t hat t h e ma t e r i a l is o n l y as c u r r e n t as t h e u p d a t e . M a n y law l i b r a r i es h a v e r e s e a r c h
s o u r c e s o n c; D - R ( ^ M , a n d as l o n g as y o u a r e f a m i l i a r w i t h c o m p u t e r i z e d r e s ea r c h , it m a y be
e a s i e r to p e r t o r n i \-our a s e a r c h u s i n g a C^D- ROM r a t h e r t h a n a text i f y o u a r e f a m i l i ar w i t h
c o m p u t e r i z e d re s e ar c h.
C'D- R O M s , like texts, \'ar\- in t h e i r o r g a n i z a t i o n a n d s e a r c h f eat u r e s. Fl owe ve r , p e r f o r m
in g a s e a r c h o n m o s t ( ; i ) - R O M s is s i mi l a r to p e r f o r m i n g a s e a r c h o n W e s t l a w o r L e xi sNexi s .
254
T h a t is, a sear ch m a y be c o n d u c t e d b y c i t a t i o n , n a t u r a l l an g u ag e , t e r m s a n d c o n n e c t t ) r s, a n d so
t o r t h . It t h e ma t e r i a l is u p d a t e d o n h ’ m o n t h h ' o r q u a r t e r l y , it m a y be n e c e s s a r y to u p d a t e y o u r
r e s e a r c l i u s i n g W’est law o r l.exisXe.xis for m o r e t i m e h i n l o r m a t i o n . I’o r a list ot law-r elat eci
C I ) - R O i \ l p r o d u c t s , see t h e D ire c to ry of I.tiw -R chitcil C .D -RO M s. a s u b s c r i p t i o n ser \' ice b y
h i t o s o u r c e s P u b l i s h i n g , at h t t p : / / w \ v w . i n l o s o u r c e s p u b . c o n i . relerence b o o k that includes
a l a w - r e l a t e d C ' D - R O M p r o d u c t list is D ire c to ry of I.n w Reliitcii C D - R O M f b y A r e l e n e 1.. His
(1 n to s o u rces P u b Iis h i n g ).
K. WIRELESS APPLICATIONS
S o m e r e s o u r c e s are b e c o m i n g avai l abl e t h r o u g h a p p l i c a t i o n s ( a p p s ) tor wi r e l e ss d e v i c e s s u c h
as p e r s o n a l digi t al assistaiits, s m a r t p h o n e s s u c h as t h e i P h o n e , a n d tablets. B o t h W' est law a n d
Lexis h a v e wi rel ess appl i cat i ori s t ha t e n a b l e u s e r s to r e s e a r c h cases, st a t ut es , a n d v a l i d a t i o n
t ool s . Black's L a w D ictio iia rv is al s o avai l abl e t h r o u g h a wi rel ess a p p l i c a t i o n . Th i s a c c e s s i b i l i t y
is a l l o w i n g legal p r a c t i t i o n e r s to v a l i da t e a ca s e o r get a st at ut e, rule, o r d o c u m e n t q u i c k h ' at a
c o u r t p r o c e e d i n g recess o r in t h e m i d d l e o f s e t t l e m e n t c o n t e r e i i c e s o r d e p o s i t i o n s .
IV. KEY P O I N T S CHECKLIST: C om pu t e r s and Legal Resear ch

/ It is i n i p o r t a n t to k n o w h o w to r e s e a r c h u s i n g p r i nt r e s o u r c e s b e c a u s e e l e c t r o n i c
r e s o u r c e s nia\' n o t be avai l abl e o r ma\ ' be t o o e x p e n s i ve . Lllectronic r e s e a r c h s\ s t e n i s
are b a s e d o n p r i n t r e s o u r c e s , a n d a tamiliarit}' wi t h p r i n t r e s o u r c e s m a k e s it e a s i e r to
i m d e r s t a n d e l e c t r o n i c r e s ea r ch .
/ l h e iiiost f r e q u e n t h u s e d c o m m e r c i a l se r v i c e s a re W’est l a w a n d LexisN’exis. A tani i l -

iarity w i t h e i t he r ot t he s e t w o s e r v i c es will p r o v i d e y o u wi t h sut i i ci e n t i n f o r m a t i o n
to us e o t h e r services.
/ T h e m o s t critical st ep in t h e r e s e a r c h p r o c e s s is t ' r a mi n g t h e iNSue in t h e c o n t e x t o f

t h e specific facts o f t h e c as e (see ( T i a p t e r s 10 a n d I 1). ,A well t r a i n e d issue, s t a t e d
in t h e C(>ntext ot t h e tacts, p r o v i d e s a r e s e a r c h e r w i t h t h e i nl (>r ma t i on n e c e s s a r v t o
c o n d u c t r e s ea r ch u s i n g n a t u r a l l a n g u a g e o r t e r m s aiul c o m i e c t o r s .
As w i t h a n \ r e s e a r c h , it is e ss e n t i al to d e t e r n i i n e it t h e results ot e l e c t r o n i c r e s e a r c h
are still g o o d law. Bot h W' estlaw a n d Le x i s Ne x i s incl uil e s e r vi c e s t hat a l l o w y o u to
u p d a t e y o u r res earch.
/ N o n f e e - b a s e d o n l i n e r e s e a r c h s o u r c e s d o n ot h a v e a c o n t r a c t u a l d u t \ ' t o p r o v i d e in-
t o r m a t i o n t hat is a c c u r a t e o r u p to date. X'erily t h e ac c u r a c v ol anv' i n t o r m a t i o n yc)u
o b t a i n f r o m s u c h sites a n d c h e c k to d e t e r m i n e if t h e i n t o r m a t i o n is c u r r e n t .
W h e n u s i n g a ( ; i ) - KC) M, a l w a y s c h e c k to see t h a t t h e d i s k is c u r r e n t . It m a y b e n e c
e s s a r y to use a n o t h e r s o u r c e to u p d a t e t h e ma t e ri al .
V. A P P L I C A T IO N
As J a me s R e d h o r s e l e a r n e d in his legal r e s e a rc h c o u r s e , t h e lirst st ep o f anv' r e s e a r c h p r o j e c t
is to i de n t if y t h e issue as c o n c r e t e l y as p o s s i b l e in t h e c o n t e x t ot t h e tacts. He k n o w s a c o n c i s e
s t a t e m e n t o f t h e issue will all ow h i m to f o c u s hi s s e a r c h a n d i d en t i f y t h e s ea r ch t e r ms . Af t e r
c o n s i d e r i n g t h e tacts o f t h e case a n d s ever al d r a t t s , his p r e l i mi n a r v ' t o r m u l a t i o n ot t h e issue
is: ''L’n d e r .Arizona law, mav' d a m a g e s for e m o t i o n a l di s t r e s s be r e c o v e r e d w h e n a n i n d i v i d u a l
t r a p s a n d kills a n e i g h b o r ’s pet a n d s h o w s t h e d e a d pe t to t h e o w n e r, c a u s i n g t h e o w n e r s e v e r e
d i s t r e s s ? ” l a m e s k n o w s t h e issue mav' b e c o m e moi ' e r e l m e d as h e c o n d u c t s his r e s e a r c h ,
l i ie next s t e p is to d e t e r m i n e w h e r e to look. Wil l h e l o o k for st a t ut or v' law, c ase law,
o r s e c o n d a r ) - ai.itlK)rit)-? A l t h o u g h r e s e a r c h n o r ma l l v ' b e g i n s wi t h a s e a r c h t o r a g o v e r n i n g
255
statute', l a m e s k n o w s t h a t i e e o \ ei \' l o r e m o t i o n a l d i s t r e s s is u s u a l h ' g o \ e r n e d hy to r t l a w , a n d

m o s t t or t s a r e n o t s t a t u t o r y I le d e c i d e s to c h e e k A r i z o n a c a s e l a w l o r a c o u r t o p i n i o n that
h a s a d d r e s s e d t hi s q u e s t i o n .
Re \ ' ie wi n g t h e issue, l a m e s c o n c l u d e s that a t e r m s a n d c o n n e c t o r s s e a r c h s h o u l d i n c l u d e
a t i o t i o i u i l (iiilrcss, d a n id g c i. a n d pet. H e c h o o s e s t h e W' est law A r i z o n a c o u r t s d a t a b a s e a n d
f o r m u l a t e s hi s s e a r c h q u e r \ ' as “e m o t i o n a l d i s t r e s s ” & d a m a g e s & pet-. ' I h e s e a r c h r es ul t s
r e \ e a l n o c a se s o n p o i n t . Ihis d o e s n ' t s u r p r i s e l a m e s , b e c a u s e A r i z o n a d o e s n ' t h a v e a large
b o d \ ' ot c a s e k\w. I h i s m e a n s he will h a \ e t o l o o k t o t h e law t r o m o t h e r j u r i s d i c t i o n s.
R a t h e r t h a n s e a r c h st a t e b\ state, l a m e s d e c i d e s to l o o k I'or a n A LR art i cl e t h a t a d d r e s s e s
t h e subi ect . It t h e r e is o n e , it will prox ide a n a n a h ’sis ot t he q u e s t i o n a n d i n c l u d e r el e\ a n t state
s t a t u t o r y law, c a s e law, a n d s e c o n d a r }' authoi' it}' . 1 le selects t h e A I .R d a t a b a s e a n d e n t e r s the
quer}': “e m o t i o n a l d i s t r e s s ” & dan' iages & pet. I h e r es u l t s s h o w m o r e t h a n 180 d o c u m e n t s .
l a m e s d o e s i i ’t w a n t t o w a d e t h r o u g h t h a t mai'i\' a n n o t a t i o i i s , so h e d e c i d e s t o e di t his
q u e r y b}' r e s t r i c t i n g t h e s e a r c h to t h e titles o f t h o s e .ALR a n n o t a t i o n s t h a t i n c l u d e hi s s e a r c h
te r n i s. H e cli cks o n “e d i t q u e r \ , ” a n d ( u s i n g h e l d r e s t r i c t i o n s ) l i mi t s t h e s e a r c h t o titles t hat
i n c l u d e t h e s e a r c h t e r m s . I h e q uer} reads: 11 (“ e m o t i o n a l d i s t r e s s ” & d a m a g e s & pet ) . ' Ihe
s e a r c h r e s u l t s in o n e a n n o t a t i o n : " R cc o v c ry of D a iu n g c s fo r l i u i o t io n a l D istrcsi D u e to T rcat-
m c n l o f P c t i a n d .A n im a ls" b\ lay M. / i t t e r , 91 A. I, . R. 5th 345.
Ih i s a n n o t a t i o n a n s w e r s t h e q u e s t i o n . It s u m m a r i z e s all t h e c as e a n d s t a t u t o r } ' l a w t hat
h a s a d d r e s s e d thi s q u e s t i o n . It re\' eals t h a t s o m e st at es allow' d a m a g e s for e m o t i o n a l il istress
for t h e loss o f a p e t a n d s o m e d o not . W' ith t hi s i i i f o r n i a t i o n , l a m e s c a n re\ ' iew t h e ca s e s t hat
a r c tactuall}' cl o s e t o ,\h's. Bu r g e s s ' s case a n d p r e p a r e a m e m o r a n d i n n to t h e s e n i o r p a r t n e r
su m n - : a r i z i ng t h e law'.
Sum m ary
Ih e e a r l i e r c h a p t e r s o f t h e text f o c u s o n t h e t e c h n i q u e s for c o n d u c t i n g r e s e a r c h u s i n g p r i n t
r e s o u r c e s sLich as text s a n d b o u n d \ ' ol ume s . I h i s c h a p t e r li i s cusses r e s e a r c h irsing e l e c t r o n i c
r es o u r c e s . It is impt)rtai'!t, h o w e v e r , to k n o w ho w to r e s e a r c h usiiig pi'ii-it r e s o u r c e s for at least
f o u r r e a s ons:
1. ,\ fami l i ari t \ ' wi t h t h e p i i n t s o m c e m a k e s it m u c h e a s i er to u n t l e r s t a n d t h e sti'uc

l u r e of t h e e l e c t r o n i c d a t a b a s e a n d c o i u l u c t e l e c t r o n i c r e s e a r c h .
2. I h e m a t e r i a l \'oii ai'e l o o k i n g foi' ma \ ' n o t b e in aii e l e c t r o n i c i latabase.
O n o c c a s i o n , access lo elecli' oni c r e s e a r c h is u n a v a i l ab l e , s u c h as w h e n t h e local

s e r v e r is dow'ii.
4. C o s t c o n c e n i s m a y limit t h e a m o u n t ol t i m e }'ou c a n s p e n d u s i n g c o n i m e r c i a l
e l e c t r o n i c serv ices.
E x p e r i e n c e d r e s e a r c h e r s d o n o t rely exclusiv e h' o n c o m p u t e r - a s s i s t e d legal r e s e a r c h .

Ihi s c h a p t e r p r e s e n t s a n overv iew of legal r e s e a r c h d o n e t h r o u g h t h e m o s t fr equent l }'
u s e d c o m m e r c i a l services: W’e s t l a w a n d I.exisN’exis. A l t h o u g h manv' o t h e r e l e c t r o n i c r e s e a r c h
s e r vi ce s a r e avai l abl e, a familiarit}' w i t h e i t h e r o f t h e s e t w o p r o v i d e s s u f h c i e n t i i i f o r n i a t i o n
to u s e t h e o t h e r services.
D e s p i t e t h e d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n L e x i s N e x i s a n d W' est law, t h e ba s i c o r g a n i z a t i o n a n d
r e s e a r c h p r i n c i p l e s a r e t h e s a m e . Bo t h s e r v i ce s s h a r e t h e f o l l o w i n g feat ures:
D o c u m e n t s ma}' b e l oc a t ed b}' n a m e , title, o r c i t a t i o n .
D o c u m e n t s m a v b e l o c a t e d bv n a t u r a l l a n g u a g e , a s e a r c h m e t h o d t ha t a l l ows }'ou to
st ate t h e s e a r c h quer}' u s i n g pl ai n L ngl i sh.
D o c u m e n t s ma}' b e l oc a t ed bv' u s i n g t e r n i s a n d c o n n e c t o r s .
S e a r c h e s m a y b e c o n d u c t e d t h r o u g h r e f e r e n c e to t h e tabl e o f c o n t e n t s o f r e s e a r c h
256 sources.
• DdCLinioiUs m a y b e l o c a t ed by f o c u s i n g r es e a r c h o n speci l i c a r e a s o f l a w tlTrough
W' esl l aw’s Ke\' N u m b e r a n d Ke y S e ar c h serv ices, a n d L e x i s N e x i s ’s Sc a r c h Adv isor.
• R e s e a r c h ma \ ' b e u p d a t e d t h r o u g h t h e use o f W e s t l a w ’s Ke y Ci t e o r I.e.xisN’exi s’s

S h c p ii n fs s e r \ ices.
In a d d i t i o n to W' est l aw a n d I.exisN'exis, t h e r e a r e o t h e r c o m m e r c i a l W’e b - b a s e d legal

r e s e a r c h services. I'wo services wi t h less c ( ' m p r e h e n s i v e d a t a b a s e s a r e l. oi sl aw a n d W' rs u s I . aw.
'1 hoLisands o f n o n f e e - b a s e d W’eb sites p r o v i d e access to v a r i o u s tv pes o f legal i n f o r m a t i o n
o nl i ne . ' I h e r e a r e n o laws o r r e g u l a t i o n s g o v e r n i n g t h e accuracv- o f t h e c o n t e n t o f n o n f e e - b a s e d
W' eb sites; t h e r e fo re , thev' d o n o t h a v e a legal dutv' to prov ide i nformat i(. )n t h a t is a c c u r a t e oi'
u p to da t e , ' i' ou m u s t verilv' t h e accuracv- a n d d e t e r m i n e it anv' i n l o r m a t i o n y o u o b t a i n t r o m
s u c h si tes is c m ' r e n t. W ' h e n s e l ec t i ng a n i i n f e e - b a s e d site, a l w a y s c o n s i d e r t h e a u t h o r a n d
p u b l i s h e r a n d t h e c o n t e n t o f t h e i n f o r m a t i o n , a n d c h e c k t h e site to d e t e r m i n e h o w f r e q u e n t l y
t he i n f o r m a t i o n is u p d a t e d .
A l i m i t a t i o n ol m o s t n o n f e e - b a s e d I n t e r n e t s o u r c e s is t h a t t h e v d o n o t h a v e d a t a b a s e s
as e x t e n s i v e as t h o s e o l f e r e d by t h e c o m m e r c i a l s o u r c e s . M a n v ’ sites t h a t p r i n i d e statutorv-
law d o n o t i n c l u d e t h e a n n o t a t i o r i s . Manv- sites t h a t prov ide a c c e s s to case law d o n o t a ll ow
s e a r c h e s b a s e d o n s e a r ch w o r d s o r t e r m s ( B o o l e a n s e ar c h e s ) .
Ihi s c h a p t e r d i s cu s s e s a n d lists t h e W' eb a d d r e s s e s ( U R L s ) f o r manv- n o n f e e - b a s e d W' eb
sites t h a t prov ide access to v a r i o u s tv p e s ot legal inl orn-i ati on. I i i c l u d e d a r e l e d er a l a n d st ate
g o v e r n m e n t W e b sites, secondarv- authorit v- a n d specialtv- a re a s o u r c e s , a n d e - m a i l d i s c u s s i o n
g r o u p s (l ist servs). I h e c h a p t e r closes w i t h a d i s c u s s i o n o f C D - R O M s .
Quick References
Boolean searches 221 Natural language 227
Casemaker 24.^ Organizations 254
CD-RO.M 254 S e a r c h by c i t a t i o n 226
I'.thics 243 S e a r c h bv di gest 233
I' ast case 243 S e a r c h bv- t i t l e / n a m e 233
Fe d e r a l g o v e r n m e n t o n l i n e S e a r c h bv- tabl e o f c o n t e n t s 231

resources 24(1
S h c p iin l's 250
Field r e s t r i c t i o n s 233
Specialtv- a r e a s 250
( i e n e r a l acces> 244
Stat e s o u r c e s 249
KeyCite 234
Feri-ns a n d c o n n e c t o r s 22<S
Faw- s c h o o l s 245
L'nitorm resource
l.istserv- 253 locator (URL) 244
Fo i s l a w 242 X' er susl . aw 243
C itation
I h e KSth e d i t i o n o f Ih c B h ic b o o k a n d t h e c u r r e n t e d i t i o n o f t h e A I M ' D C it a ti o n M a n u a l :
, \ P i v f c i s i o n a l S ystem o f C ita tio n p r o v i d e t ha t if t h e a u t h o r i t y is r e a d i l y ava i l a bl e in p r i nt , vou
s h o u l d ci t e to t he p r i nt s o u r c e . It is n o t necessarv- to referen.ce t h e e l e c t r o n i c s o u r c e , s u c h as
W' est law o r LexisN'exis. ' Ih i s r u l e ap p l i es uriless t h e d o c u m e n t s are i-iot ava i l abl e in a p r i n t e d
s o u r c e o r a r e dilficult to o b t a i n , s u c h as u n p u b l i s h e d cases. See t h e discussioi-i o f c i t at i on to
e l e c t r o n i c s o u r c e s in (Chapter S.
Exercises
A d d i t i o n a l a s í ig n n i c n ts arc (n'ailablc on the CAmríc.\hitc. to recover. W' hat R esta tem e n t 2 d s e c t i o n s d e fi n e intcrve nm g
[•'or a s s i g n m e n t s 1 t h r o u g l i 4, u se W' estlaw. force a n d su p e r se d in g cause? I l o w a re t h e t e r n ’is d e f i ne d?
A S S IG N M E N T ! A SSIG N M EN T ?
l h e cl i ent is t h e c h a i r m a n of t h e h o a r d ot d i r e c t o r s ot an I h e cl i en t a n d h e r h u s b a n d a r e r e s i d e n t s o f t h e s t a t e o f
O h i o c o r p o r a t i o n , ' l h e b o a r d o f d i r e c t o r s h as d e c i d e d to G e o r g i a . S h e w a n t s to s u e f o r d i v o r c e c l a i n i i n g a d u l t e r ) ’.
me rg e the c o r p o r a ti o n with a n o th e r O h io corpor ation, lhe S h e d o e s n o t w a n t t o file a n o - f a u l t d i v o r c e . Is a d u l t e r y a
cli ent wi s h e s to k n o w it s h a r e h o l d e r a p p r o v al is re q u i r e d tor g r o u n d for div o r c e in Cieorgi a? If so, w h a t is t he s t a t u t e
t h e mer ger . Id e n t if y t h e O h i o st at ut e that g o \ ' er n s this q u e s a n d w h a t d o e s if p r o v i d e ? W' ha t law r e v i e w art i cl e p re s -
t i on a n d w h a t it prov ides c o n c e r n i n g s h a r e h o l d e r a ppr oval . e i ’ifs a s u r v e)' o f G e o r g i a c a s e s d e a l i n g w i t h d o m e s t i c
relations?
ASSIGN M EN T 2
Lor a s s i g n m e n t s 8 t h r o u g h 15, u s e n o n f e e - b a s e d
P e r l o r m a s s i g n m e n t 1 Lising \ ' o u r o w n st at e’s law.
I n t e r n e t sites.
A SSIG N M EN TS
' l o u r s u p e r v i s i n g a t t or n e} ' recal ls th a t t h e r e w a s a 1989 A r
I h e cli ent is a s h a r e h o l d e r o f a c o r p o r a t i o n in I' ennessee.
k a n s a s case in w h i c h a co u n t \ - c o u r t ju d g e w a s c o n v i c t e d in
W' ha t is r e q u i r e d for an a c t i on to be t a k e n b y s h a r e h o l d e r s
te d e r al c o u r t ot v ot e b u v i n g . A t i e r t h e L' nited States C o u r t
w i t h o u t a n i e e t i ng ?
o f A p p ea l s d e n i e d t h e a pp e a l , t h e state circuit c o u r t decku' ed
t h e j u d g e i ne l igi ble to h o l d p u b l i c t)tlice. ' l h e j u d g e c l a i m e d A SSIG N M EN TS
t h a t h e h a d r e c e i v e d i n s u t l i c i e n t n ot i c e ot t h e st at e c o u r t P e r t o r n i a s s i g n m e n t 8 u s i n g y o u r s t at e’s lavs’.
h e a r i n g b e c a u s e he h a d less t h a n a 2 4 - h o u r n o t i ce to a p p e a r
ASSIGNM ENT 10
at t h e h e a r i n g . W' hat is t h e n a m e a n d c i t at i on o f t h e case?
Usi ng the C'ôriiell Law School Wêb site, locat e a 199cS Uni t ed
U n d e r t h e h o l d i n g o f t h e case, w h e n is a p e r s o n “c o n v ic t e d "
States S u p r e m e C o u r t case f r o m t h e state o f M i n n e s o t a t hat
for p i n ' p o s e s o f r e m o v a l o f a p u b l i c otlicial f r o m otlice?
inv’olv e d a w a r r a n t l e s s s ear ch.
ASSIGN M EN T 4
ASSIGNM ENT 11
W' hat is the ci t a t i on o f a 1993 A I R a n n o t a t i o n that d i s c usse s
l h e 1 l o b b e s Br i d g e Act is i n c l u d e d in w h i c h sec t i on ot t h e
t h e admi ssi bi l i t v' ot ' po l v g r a p h test results in a n a c t i o n for
U n ite d States ('ode?
m a l i c i o u s p r o s e c u t i o n ? W' hat Ain. ¡nr. J i / e v i d e n c e re s e ar c h
r e t e r e n c e s a r e li st ed? I'o w h a t m a l i c i o u s p r o s e c u t i o n kev ASSIGNMENT 12
n u m b e r s d o e s t h e c i t a t i o n rel er? W' hat is t h e fee c h a r g e d by t h e U n i t e d States District C o u r t s
L or a s s i g n m e n t s .5 t h r o u g h 7, u se LexisN'exis. f or a s e a r c h o f t h e c o u r t r e c o r d s?
A S S IG N M E N T S ASSIGNM ENT 13
W' hil e t h e cl i en t w a s w a l k i n g h e r d o g in a city p a rk , t h e L ' n d e r t h e I' ed e r a l Rules o f Civil P r o c e d u r e , m u s t leave o f
c l i e n t ’s d o g w a s a t t a c k e d bv' a n o t h e r do g . Be t o r e t h e d o g s t h e c o u r t b e o b t a i n e d to t a k e t h e d e p o s i t i o n ct a p e r s o n
c o u l d be s e p a r a t e d , t h e c l i e n t ’s d o g was severelv' inj ured, a n d d e t a i n e d in p r i s o n ? I n c l u d e t h e r ul e ci t at i on.
it d i e d l a t er t h a t day. ' I h e c l i e n t ’s d o g w a s o n a leash, a n d
t h e o t h e r d o g w a s n o t l e a s he d , l h e cli ent w a s verv' cl o s e to
ASSIGNM ENT 14
h e r pet, a n d s h e w a n t s to s u e t h e o w n e r o f t h e o t h e r d o g for LIow is “c l a i m ” d e f i n e d in N a t i o n a l P a r k S e r v i c es r e g u l a
t h e e m o t i o n a l d i s t r e s s sh e su f f e r e d as a result o f w i t n e s s i n g t i o n s d e a l i n g w i t h m i n e r a l s m a n a g e m e n t ? I nc l ud e t he C F R
t h e a t t a c k a n d d e a t h o f h e r pet. '\'olu' s u p e r v i s o r y a t t o r n e ) ’ c i t at i on.
r e n i e n i b e r s t h a t t h e r e w a s a n A r i z o n a case, w i t h s i m i l a r ASSIGNM ENT 15
facts, ii’i w h i c h r e c ove r ) ' w a s d e n i e d . Li nd t he A r i z o n a case.
W' hat wa s t h e topi c o f t h e Fede r a l Re s e r v e n o t i c e is sued o n
A S S IG N M E N T S l a n u a r v ’ 2, 2 0 0 4 ( p u b l i s h e d in t h e Federal Regis:er)^
' I h e r e is a q u e s t i o n in t h e c l i e n t ’s n e g l i g e n c e c a s e as to
w h e t h e r a n i n t e r v e n i n g fo r ce I’l’iav' cut off t h e c l i e n t ’s ri ght
Legal Citation
O u tlin e . \ l i k c . \ h c r s is a s c c i M K l - s c i i i c s l e r p a r a le g a l s t u d e n t e n r o ll e d in a n i n t r o d u c t o r y r e s e a r c h a n d
u r i t i n g c la s s , l o l l o w i n g a s ix - w e e k i n t r o d u c t i o n to b a s i c r e s e a r c h , th e c la s s a s s i g n m e n t is to
1. I n t r o d uc t i o n J r .ill .1 s im p l e , i in o - i s s u e le g a l r e s e a r c h m e m o r a n J i u i i . T h e a s s i g n m e n t i n v o l v e s t h e q u e s t io n
II. Priniar\- Authorit}' o t w h e n a m o t h e r c a n lo s e h e r p a r e n t a l r i g h t s d u e to d r u g u s e a n d o t h e r m i s c o n d u c t . S t u d e n t s
III. S ec o nd ar y Aut h o r i t y m u s t i n c l u d e p a r a lle l c it a t i o n s in t h e c a s e c it a t i o n s in t h e m e m o . T h e i n s t r u c t o r d i v i d e s t h e
c la s s in t o g r o u p s , a n d th e a s s i g n m e n t l o r .M ik e s g r o u p is to a n s w e r th e q u e s t io n u s i n g t l e o r g i a
1\'. ( i e n e r a l Rules ol’Cj t a t i on
la w . B a s e d o n t w o ( i e o r g i a c a s e s a n d o n e s t a t u t e , .M ik e p r e p a r e s t h e r o u g h d r a f t o t 't h e m e m o ,
\ ’. Key Point s (Checklist:
l o r th e f in a l d r a t l, h e e n s u r e s h i s c it a t i o n s a r e c o r r c c t l y f o r m a t t e d . .M ik e 's a u t h o r it ie s a n d th e
I.egal (Citation
s t e p s h e t a k e s to e n s u r e th e c it a t i o n t o r n ia t s a r e c o r r e c t a r e d i s c u s s e d in th e .A p p li c a t i o n s e c
\ ' I. .Application t io n o l t h is c h a p t e r
After c o m p l e t i n g this chapter, you
s h o u l d u n d er s t a nd :
• The specific cit ati on rul es that

apply w h e n cit ing p r i m a r y
a u t h o r i t y —that is, case,
coti st it utional , atid e na c t e d
(s t at ut or y) law
• The specific cit ati on rul es that

apply w h e n cit ing s e c o n d a r y
a u th o r i t y
• The general cit ati on rul es that
a ppl y w h e n cit ing m o s t types
o f legal sour ces
260
C H A P T E R S LEGAL CITATION
I. INTRODUCTION
A. In G en eral
rhe d i s c u s s i o n s in c ; i i apt cr 3 t h r o u g l i (Chapter 7 a d d r e s s liDW to l i nd pi i m a r \ ' a n d s e c o n d a r v
.uithorit)-. Tliis c h a p t c r d i s c u s s e s h o w to p r e s e n t a u t h o r i t v o n é e you li nd it. W’h e n e v e r a ret er-
e n c c is m a d e in legal w r i t i n g to t h e law ( p r i ma r \ - autl iorit )' ) (1|- to a I i onlaw MHirce u p o n w h i c h
.1 c o u r t ma\ - rely (secondarv- a u t h o r i t v ) , \'0L1 m u s t identit'v t h e source' o f t h e r e f er e n c e . As t h e
wri t er, S’O I I c a n n o t sinipK' ,sa\’, “ I h i s is w h a t tlic law prox ides,” w i t h o u t r e t c r c n c i n g t h e legal
■tuthoritv t h a t s u p p o r t s tlic s t a t e m e n t . 'Ihiis, w h e n m a k i n g an a r g u m e n t t h a t a c e r t a i n legal
p r i n c i p l e g(i \' erns a p a r t i c u l a r sot o f facts o r a legal q u e s t i o n , \ (H1 nuisl r e f e r e nc e t h e S()i:rce o f
the- pr i nc i p l e, ' [his rct' ercnce is callc’d a citation.
A c i t a t i o n p r o \ ides tlic i n t b r n m t i o i i necessar\- t o r t h e r e a d e r to loca t e th e r e f e r e n c e ( t h e
spocilic s t at u t e, c o u r t o p i n i o n , law revi ew, encNclopc' dia, etc.) in o r d e r to c h e c k its c o n t e n t .
C i t a t i o n s a r e usual l\ ' r e q u i r e d ill o l ĩic c legal m e n K ) r a n d a , c o u r t briefs, a n d s c h o l a r l y w r i t i n g s
S Licli as l a w revi ew articles. 'llie\- ma\- also b c i n c l u d e d in g e n e r a l legal c o r r e s p o n d e n c e o r
ot l i c r d o c u m e n t s w h e n t h e r e is r e t e r e n c e to legal authorit}-.
It is e s s e n t i a l tliat tlie i n t o r n i a t i o n i n c l u d e d in a c i t a t i o n b e c o r r e c t . I h c w r i t e r se r v e s
n o p u r p o s e bv r e f e r r i n g a r e a d e r to a s o u r c e l i t ' i n t o r n i a t i o n a n d i n c d i r ec t l v i d e n t i f y i n g t h e
k)catit)ii t)t t h a t siHirce. I h e r e a d e r will IU) 1 b e p l e a s e d i f l i e o r slie t a k e s t h e t i m e t o l o o k u p
t he autlioritN' a n d f i nds tliat t h e aull ioril N’ is n o l l o c a l c d at t h e p a g e o r v o l u m e i n d i c a t e d
in t h e c i t a t i o n . I h e r e a r c sex'cral a d d i t i o n a l r e a s o n s \\ii\' it is i m p o r t a n t t h a t \ ( ) u r c i t a t i o n s
be c o r r e c t :
A c i t at i on tliat is i nc o r r e c t in f o r m o r c o n t e n t s e n d s t h e m e s s a g e t h a t t h e d r a f t e r
c i t h e r is not ca r c f ul n r lacks e d u c a t i o n . It t h e r e arc ori' ois ill c i t at i o n , t h e r e a d e r n i a \ ’
w o n d e r it' tlicrc a r c a lso e r r o r s in t h e s u b s t a n c c o f t h e researeli.
K r r or s in d o c u m e n t s sLibniittcd to a c o u r t nia\- cau.se t h e j u d g e t o q u e s t i o n t h e c o m -

potc'iice o f tlic attnrncN a n d t h e qualit\- a n d c o n t e n t ol tl u’ r cs c a i v h a n d analysis.
(ôLirt iLilcs r e q u i r e p r o p e r loriii, a n d i m p r o p e r c i t at i o n oxliibit> a d i s r e g a r d for
t h u s c rul es a n d d i s r o s p i ' f l lor tlu' c o u r t
O p p o s i n g c c nn i s c l Iiia\- I.|ucsti()n tlio a t l o r n c N ' s a b i l i t y U) iiioLml a n c l i ' c ct i ve o p p o s i

t i o n a n d bo loss i i i i .i i nct 1 t o s c t t i c a ccisc.
I h c writer' s re s ea r ch a n d iiiialvsis skills iiiiU' b c é o i n c su s p e c t il ros oa re h s o i i r c c s a r e

n o t p m p e r l y prcscntccl. I’rot' cssional r e p u t a t i o n is oltoii dftL'i'iiiinc-d li\- t h e q u a l i t y ot'
o n e ’s wm' k p r o d u c t .
B. T h e Bluebook a n d t h e ALWD Citation Manual

Ui f or t una t c l v, n o stand. ii d set o l ' r u l e s g over ni i i i ; c i t a t i o n t o n i i has b e e n a d o p t e d b y all t h e
j u r i s d i c t i o n s in t h e L’n i t ed States. I h e m a i n g u i d e a n d s o u r c c ol auth(irit\- o n legal c i t a t i o n s
tor t h e p a s t 73 N'cars lias b e e n I h c Bluebook: ,-\ i ' n i f o n n S v itc in o f C j t i i t i o n ( B lu e b o o k ) p u b -
li sicil b \ ’ tlic H a r v a r d I.aw l^cN'icw A s s o c i a t i o n . It p r e s e n t s t h e rul es a n d p r o p e r f o r m a t for
cit ng ccinstitiitions, st atut es, r e g u l at i on s , rules, cases, a n d o t h e r legal s o u r c e s s u c h as legal
enr yc l ope c i i as a n d law rev iews. S o m e st ates h a \ e a d o p t e d t h e Hliil'book in w h o l e o r in p a r t
as he otỉicial c i t at i o n r e f e r e n c e tor p l e a d i n g s a n d p a p e r s filed in tlic st ate c o u r t s . M o s t states,
thougl i , h a v e a d o p t e d at least s o m e ci t at i on rul e s t ha t d i t ỉ cr t r o m ti u’ B luebook, espiecialK' in
the ar e a of c i t a t i on to st at e c o u r t o p i n i o n s a n d st atut es, 'lliercfoi'c, it ii ncccssary to clicck llic
stc.tc rules w lien cvc r yo n nrc prepíirinịỊ ÍÌ (iociiinciil to he siihìiìitlưíí to il io u r t.
I h e B h u 'h o o k is n o t d e s i g n e d as a t e a c h i n g tool; a n d n i a n \ ’ stLulonts, i n s t r u c t o r s , a n d
p n c t i t i n n c r s f i nd it ditricLik to Lisc. As a n a l t e r n a t i \ ’e to t h e B liu 'b o o k. t h e A s s o c i a t i o n o f
Le>al W' ri t i n g D i r e c t or s c r ca t ed t h e A l. Wl') C iia tio u Míìiiiiíìl: /\ Proịcỉsiivìíìì S vỉlciìi o f C it a ti o n
{ A L W D ) . I h e a s s o c i a t i o n ’s m e m b e r s a r e p r o f e s s o r s I r o m n e a r h ' all A m e r i c a n l a w s c h o o l s.
261
A n a u t l i o r i t y o n A m e r i c a n legal c i t a t i o n , P r o t es s o i ' a n d A s s o c i a t e D e a n D a r b \ ' D i c k e r s o n , ol

tiie St e t s o n L ' n i \ e r s i t \ CCollege o f Law, d r a f t e d t h e A I.W 'IX A s p e n P u b l i s h e r s p u b h s h e d t he
tirst e d i t i o n in 2()()(). It is d e s i g n e d to b e eas\- to t m d e r s t a n d a n d u s e b\' p r o v i d i n g a s i ngl e set
o f rul es for all f o r m s o f legal w ri ti ng. W i t h i n t h r e e m o n t h s o f its p u b l i c a t i o n , t h e m a n u a l w as
a d o p t e d by 80 law' s c h o o l s a n d m o r e t h a n p a r a l eg a l s c h o o l s .
.At t h e t i m e ot this p u b l i c a t i o n , t h e B lu e b o o k a n d t h e A l. W'l) a r e t h e p r i m a r } ’ s o u r c e s ki r
r u l e s o n c i t a t i o n u s e d b}’ l a w a n d p a r a l e g a l s c h o o l s . I n a s m u c h as t h e B lu e b o o k is c o n i p o s e d
o f 312 p a g e s a n d t h e A I . W D 661 p a g e s , a d e t a i l e d d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e c i t a t i o n r ul es o f e i t h e r
text is b e \ ’o n d t h e s c o p e ot t h i s c h a p t e i ’. I h e l o l l o w i n g d i s c u s s i o n p r e s e n t s a b r i e t r e \ ’i ew ol
t h e m a i i ’i r u l e s o f c i t a t i o n w i t h r e f e r e n c e s t o r u l es f r o m b o t h t h e A L W D a n d t h e B lu e h o o k .
I h e goal o f t h e c h a p t e r is to p r i n i d e }’o u w i t h q i n c k a c c e s s t o t h e m a i i ’i rul es o f c i t a t i o n in
e i t h e r a u t h o r i t ) ’. I h e d i s c u s s i o n a n d e x a m p l e s a r e b a s e d o n H ie B lu e b o o k : .4 U iii fo n n .Sv>-
ten i ol C i t a t i o n ( 1 9 t h ed., 2 0 1 0 ) a n d t h e A I . W D C.itation M a n u a l : .4 P rofessio na l S y s t e m o f
C it a ti o n ( 4 t h ed., 2010).
I h e f o r m a t o f b o t h t e x t s b e g i n s w i t h a n i n t r o d u c t i o n , follow e d b ) ’ t h e basi c r ul es ot
c i t a t i o n , t h e n c i t a t i o n f o r m t o r p r i m a r } ’ s o u r c e s (c as e s, c o n s t i t u t i o n s , a n d s t a t u t es ) a n d s e c
o n d a r y s ou r c e s . B e c a u s e r e s e a r c h e r s m o s t I r e i j i i e n t h ’ r e t e r to t h e c i t a t i o n rul es t or p r i m a r ) '
a n d s e c o n d a r y a u t h o r i t )' , t h e c h a p t e i ’ p r e s e n t s t h o s e r u l es tirst, f o l k n s e d b \ ’ t h e g e n e r a l r ul es
o f c i t a t i on.
Ih e B lu e b o o k n o t e s d i t l e r e n c e s b e t w e e n t h e c i t a t i o n t o r m a t u s e d w h e n c it ing a u t h o r i t i e s
in c o u r t d o c u m e n t s a n d legal m e m o r a n d a a n d t h e c i t a t i o n f o r m a t u s e d in schol arl}’ p i ece s
s u c h as law’ r evi ew articles. M o s t o f t h e d i t l e r e n c e s i i n o l v e t h e u s e o f d if l e r e n t t}'pefaces. In t he
A I A V D , t h e s a m e f o r ni a t is u s e d t o r all t \ p e s ol d o c u m e n t s . I h e t \ ’p e ot t o r m a l legal w r i t i n g
usuall}’ e n g a g e d in b}’ p r a c t i t i o n e r s , law’ s t u d e n t s , a n d p a r a l e g a l s i n \ ’o l \ e s c o u r t d o c u m e n t s
a n d legal m e n i o r a n d a r a t h e r t h a n law re\ ie\\ art icl es. I h e r e f o r e , t h i s c h a p t e r foc us es o n t h e
c i t at i on t or i ’i’iat u s e d in c o u r t d o c i i i ’i i e n t s a n d legal m e m o r a n d a , a n d t h e e x a m p l e s are t o c i t a
t i o n t o r m s u s e d in t h o s e t} p e s o f legal w riting.
•Most o t ' t h e e x a m p l e s p r o \ ’i d e d in t h e w hi t e p a g e s ot t h e B lu e b o o k a r e l or c i t a t i on w h e n
w r i t i n g a law r e\ i ew. 'Ihe light b l u e p a g e s o f t h e B lu eb o o k , called “ B l u e p a g e s , ” p r o x i d e g u i d a n c e
o n how lo a d a p t t h e e x a m p l e s l o u n d t h r o u g h o u t t h e b o i h ol t h e B lu e h o o k lo t h e di a l l in g ot
legal m e m o r a n d a a n d c o u r t d o c u m e n t s . I h e r e a r e c r o s s r e l e r e n c e s to t h e Bl ue pages in t h e
m a r g i n s ol the B lueb oo k rules a n d tables. .Also, al t h e e n d ot the B lu e b o o k is a “C}uick Retei ence"
se c t i o n t h a t p r o v i d e s e x a n ’i pl cs ot c i t a t i o n l o r m s c o m m o i i K ’ u s e d in c o u r t d o c i m i e n t s a n d
legal n u Mn o r an d a .
II. PRIMARY A U T H O R IT Y
I b i s s e c t i o n p r e s e n t s a n o v e r \ iew’ o t r u l e s o t c i t a t i o n t o b e u s e d w h e n c i t i n g p r i m a r ) ’
a u t h o r i t ) ’, t h a t is, c a s e , c o n s t i t u t i o n a l , a n d e n a c t e d { s t a t u t o r } ) law. I h e c i t a t i o n t o r n i a l
f o r r u l e s , s u c h as p r o c e d u r a l a n d e \ i d e n t i a r \ ’ r u l e s , is a l s o i n c l u d e d in t h i s s e c t i o n. I h e
e x a m p l e s a r e t o c i t a t i o n t o r m s u s e d ii’i c o u r t d o c u m e n t s a n d legal m e n ’i o r a n d a r a t h e r t h a n
l a w r e \ ' i e w a r t i cl e s . See H x h i b i t 8-1 t o r a list o f t h e p r i m a r } ’ a u t h o r i t ) ’ s o u r c e s a n d t h e c i t a
t i o n r u l e r e f er e n c e s .
I h e rul es d i s c u s s e d in t h i s s e c t i o n a n d in t h e l ol low’i ng s e c t i o n s a r e r e f e r e n c ed as tol-
knvs: R e f e r e n c e s to I h e B lu e b o o k : ,4 i ’n i f o r m S y s t e m o f C i t a t i o n a r e B l u e b o o k R-___ ( r u l e
n u n ’iber) o r B lu e b i i o k B-___ ( B l u e p a g e s n u m b e r ) ; r e f e r e n c e s t o t h e A L W D ( s t a t i o n M an uiil:
.4 P rofessional S y s t e m o f C.itation a r e A L W D - ___ ( r u l e n u m b e r ) .
For Example Bluebook R-2 refers to rule 2 ofthe Bluebook. Bluebook B-1 refers to num
ber 1 of the Bluebook's Bluepages. ALWD-1 refers to rule 1 of the ALWD.
262
CHAPTER 8 LEGAL CITATION
E x h i b i t 8-1 Primary and Secondary Authority Citation Rule References.

Prim arY Authority Citation Rules
B lu e b o o k Rules and
Bluepages Notes ALWD Rules
R-10 and B-5 ALWD-12
R-12,8.3 ALW D-17
R-14 ALWD-19
Secondary Authority Citation Rules

R-16.6.5 ALWD-24
R-15.7 ALWD-25
R-15.7 ALWD-26
R-16 ALWD-23
R-12.8.5 ALWD-27
R-15 ALWD-22
N o t e t hat iilthoLigh m o s t ol t h e c i t a t i o n c o n \ ' e n t i o ! i s a r e t h e s a m e in b o t h m a n u a l s ,

t h e r e a r e d i t t e r e n c e s b e t w e e n liliic h o o k a n d A l W l ) . D o n o t a s s u m e t h a t y o u c a n s u b s t i t u t e
o n e t o r t he o t h e r .
' I h e g e n e r a l r u l e s g o v e r n i n g e a c h ty p e o f p r i m a r \ - a u t h o r i t y a r e li st ed f o l l o w i n g t h e
s u b s e c t i o n title. A d e t a i l e d d i s c u s s i o n o f e a c h r ul e is b e y o n d t h e s c o p e o f thi s text.
It t h e c i t a t i on r u l es ol t h e j u r i s d i c t i o n w h e r e y o u a r e h l i n g a hri el o r o t h e r c o u r t d o c u
m e n t r e q u i r e t h e use ol t h e B liich o o k, t h e n v o u n u i s t c i t e a c c o r d i n g to t h e B lu c h o o k rules. D o
n o t s u b s t i t u t e t h e . 4 / , l \ 7 ) f o r m a t if it di l fe r s f r o m t h e B lu c h o o k .
A. C ase Law— B luebook R-10, B-2, B-5; ALWD-12

L o l l o w i n g is a list ot t h e c o m p o n e n t s ot c a s e c i t a t i o n s w i t h e x a m p l e s a n d a s u n n n a r y ot t h e
a p p l i c a b l e r ul es. C i t a t i o n s t o f e d er a l a n d s t a t e c a s e s a r e s i m i l a r in t o r m .
1. C ita tio n C o m p o n e n t s — B l u e b o o k R -10.1; A L W D - 1 2 . 1

l h e c o m p o n e n t s o f a c a s e c i t a t i o n a r e as follows:
1. G a s e n a m e
2, R e p o r t e r in w h i c h t h e c a s e is p u b l i s h e d ( v o l u m e n u m b e r , a b b r e v i a t i o n o f t h e
r e p or t e r , a n d p a g e n u m b e r o n w h i c h t h e c a s e b e g i n s )
.^. P i n p o i n t p a g e if t h e c i t a t i o n is to a speci fi c p a ge
4. Parallel ( u n o f f i ci a l ) p u b l i c a t i o n , if a n y ( x ' ol ume n m n b e r , a b b re \ ' i a t i o n o f t h e p u b

li cati on, a n d p a g e n u m b e r o n w h i c h t h e c a s e b e g i n s )
.Abbre\' i ati on for t h e coiu' t i s s u i n g t h e o p i n i o n , u n l e s s t h e i s s u i n g c o u r t is i n

c l u d e d in t h e r e p o r t e r a b b r e \ ' i a t i o n
263
6. ol tiu' ciecision (in p ar o n t l i cs c s )
7. SuliscqLicnt histor\ - o t ' t h c ease, it'an\-
So n i c e x a m p l e s a r e p r e s e n t e d tirst witli a s p a c e (''') syml'iol i n d i c a t i n g w h e r e s p a c e s are

pl a c e d , f o l l o we d hy t h e e x a m p l e w i t h o u t t h e s p a c e s\ nibol .
For Example Federal Court D ecisions

United S ta te s S u p re m e C o u rt
United '' States ^ i/, ^ IVIatlocl<, 415 U.S. ^ 164 ^ (1974)

United States y. IVIatlocl<. 415 U.S. 164 (1974)
1. United States i/. Matlock is the case name.
2. 415 U.S. 164 is the reporter in which the case is published: 415 is the volume number,
164 is the page number, and U.S. is the abbreviation of the case reporter.
3. No parallel publication is included in this citation.
4. The court issuing the opinion is not identified because it is apparent from the cita
tion. U.S. Reports contains the opinions of the United States Supreme Court. Notice
that in the next two examples, the identity of the court issuing the opinion is in
cluded: 9th Cir. and N.D. III.
5. The year 1974 is the year the decision was issued.
United S ta te s C o u rt of A p p e a ls
United ^ States ^ i/, ^ Martinez-Jiminez, ^ 864 F.2d 664 (9th Cir.'' 1989)
United States v. Martinez-Jiminez, 864 F.2d 664 (9th Cir. 1989)
U nited S ta te s D istrict Court
United ^ States v. ^ Central R.R., ^ 436 F '' Supp. ^ 739 ^ (N.D. ÎII. ^ 1990)
United States v. Central R R 436 F Supp. 739 (N.D Ilf 1990)
State Court Decisions
Britlon ^ 1/. ^ Britton, MOO N.M. 424, ^ 671 P.2d M 135 ^ (1983)
Britton V. Britton, 100 N.M. 424, 671 P.2d 1135 (1983)
Burnon ^ i/. ^ State, ^ 55 S.W.3d 752 (Tex. ^ Crim. ^ App. 2001)
Burnon v. State, 55 S.W.3d 752 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001)
1. Britton V. Britton and Burnon v. State are the case names.
2. 100 N.M. 424 is the state reporter in which the case is published: 100 is the volume
number, 424 is the page number, and N.M. is the abbreviation of the case reporter;
55 S.W.3d 752 is the regional reporter in which the Texas cases are published. Texas
does not have a state reporter; therefore, there is no parallel citation,
3. 671 P.2d 1135 is the parallel (unofficial) publication: 671 is the volume number, 1135 is
the page number, and P.2d is the abbreviation ofthe parallel publication.
4. The New Mexico court issuing the opinion is not identified because it is apparent
from the citation. The decision was rendered by the New Mexico Supreme Court.
If a court other than the New Mexico Supreme Court issued the decision, the ab
breviation for that court would be included with the year ofthe opinion; for example:
(Ct. App. 1983). Tex. Crim, App, is the Texas court that rendered the decision,
5. The years 1983 and 2001 are the dates of the decisions.
264
2. C ase N a m e s — B lu e b o o k R-10.2; A L W D 12.2

'1 he Blitcbook'i rul es lor a b b r e v i a t i n g case n a m e s h a \ e m o r e e x c e p t i o n s t h a n t h o s e ot’the A I M ’D,
blit b o t h b o o k s h a \ e l u i m e r o i i s d e t a i l e d r u l es g i n e r n i n g c a s e n a me s . A h v a y s cliLxk the rules
w h e n p r e p a r in g ease citation s. F o l l o w i n g is a s u m m a r y o l ’ t h e rules o n case n a m e s . 'IFie c a s e
n a m e s ma \ ' be i t al i ci zed o r u n d e r s c o r e d . I h e n a m e s a r e i t ali cized in m o s t ot’ t h e e x a m p l e s in
t h i s chapt e r . ( T h e A I M ' D st at es t hat c ase n a m e s s h o u l d b e p r i n t e d | s t \ i e d | t h e s a m e in c o u r t
d o c u m e n t s as in o t h e r d o c u m e n t s . )
a. Individual Names
( i it e t he last n a m e s ot t h e i n d i \ idLials, n o t t h e first n a m e s .
For Example Correct: Clothier V. Guillez

Incorrect: Daniel J. Clothier V. M aryGuillez
b. Organization and Business Names

I n c l u d e an o r g a n i z a t i o n ’s I’ull n a m e . W ' h e n a b u s i n e s s h a s m o r e t h a n o n e legal d e s i g n a t i o n
(e.g., Co., Ftd. C' orp., o r Inc. ), Lise t h e lirst d e s i g n a t i o n a n d o m i t t h e ot h e r s .
For Example Correct: Clothier y. David Johnson Packing Co.

Incorrect: Clothier v. Johnson
Correct: Davis v. Sally Smits Co.
Incorrect: Davis v Sally Smits Co., Inc.
W h e n an o r g a n i z a t i o n o r a b u s i n e s s is c o m m o n l y k n o w n b\' its initials, y o u m a y s u b

s t i t ut e t h e initials l o r t h e n a m e . D o n o t u s e p e r i o d s w i t h t h e initials.
For Example Correct: ACLU I/. Houseivan

Incorrect: A.C.L.U. V. Houseman
c. Abbreviations
Ih e a b b r e v i a t i o n s u s e d in p a r t \ ’ n a m e s a r e p r e s e n t e d in Fable 'F.6 of t h e B lu e b o o k a n d in
A p p e n d i x 3 o f t h e A L W D . D o n o t a b b r e x i a t e n a m e s t h a t a r e n o t listed.
For Example Corporation— Corp.; Market— Mkt.
d. Multiple Parties
W' he n t h e r e are m u l t i p l e p l a i nt i t l s o r t i e f e n d a n f s , i n c l u d e o n l y t h e first p a r t y o n e a c h s i de ot
t h e case. D o n o t u s e et al. oi' et u .\. to i n d i c a t e a d d i t i o n a l part i es.
For Example Correct: Pugh V. Holmes

incorrect: Pugh, Smith, R e a so n e rv Holmes, Taylor, Johnson
Incorrect: Pugh, etal. V. Holmes, etal.
205
c. C o n s o l id a t e d C ases
W h e n a e ase c on s i st s o f m o r e tl ian o n e case c o n s o l i d a t e d t o g e t h e r , Hst o n h ' t h e first case.
For Example Correct: Davis I/. Outland

Incorrect: Davis I/. Outland, M cCray V. Whensal
f. L'nited States
W h e n t h e L’ni t ed States is a part v, b o t h fhe B lu c h o o k a n d t h e A I.W 'D st ate t ha t " o f A m e r i c a
s h o u l d b e o m i t t e d , l h e B lu ch o o k rec]uires t hat L 'nited S tates b e .spelled out . I h e A L W 'D states
that it s h o u l d b e a b b r e s iated.
For Example Bluebook fo m a t United States V. Leon

/ỈI1/1/Dformat: U.S. V. Leon
g. State or Cômnionvvcalth
W h e n c i t i ng a d e c i s i o n ot a c o u r t of \ ' o u r state in w h i c h t h e st ate o r c o m m o n w e a l t h is a p a r t y
re l er o n h ' to t h e slate, c o m m o n w e a l t h , o r pe o pl e . D o n o t a d d t h e st ate n a m e , s u c h as S ta te o'
C.oloratlo o r C .o m m o in vea lth o f M a ssa ch usetts.
For Example Correct: State i/. Benner

Incorrect: State of Maine 1/, Benner
Correct: Commonwealth \j. Shae
Incorrect: Commonwealth of M assachusetts v. Shae
W h e n \ o u a r e r el er r i nt ; to t h e d e c i s i o n ot a n o t h e r s t a t e in w h i c h fhe s t a t e o r c o m
m o n w e a l t h is a part}', r ef er to t h e p a rt y b\- s t a l e n a m e a n d d o n o t i n c l u d e Sta te o f o r ('.om-
m o in e c iilth o f
For Example Correct: Maine v. Benner

j Incorrect: State v. Benner
i Correct: Massachusetts v. Shae
' Incorrect: Commonwealth of M assachusetts \i. Shae
h. C icogra ph ical I'erms

I n c l u d e in t h e c i t at i on o n h ’ t h e tirst g e o g r a p h i c a l l o c a t i o n in a p a r t \ ’’s n a m e .
For Example Correct: Smith I/. City of Boston

Incorrect: Smith I/. City of Boston, M assachusetts
Correct: Smith y. County Commission
Incorrect: Smith I/. County Commission of Johnson County
266
i. Procedural Phrases— Iti re, f .v parte, aiui hx rel.

In /V refers to a n a c t i o n t ha t d o e s n o t iin'oK'e a d v e r s a r i a l par t i es, b ut s o m e t h i n g s u c h as an
e st at e. i'.\ piirtc refers to a n a c t i o n o n b e h a l f ' o f ’ o n e p a r t y w i t h o u t c o n t e s t by t h e o t h e r side,
s u c h as a d iv o r c e in w h i c h o n e p a r t \ ' d o e s n ot p a r t i c i pa t e . I'.x rcl. I'eters to a n a c t i o n by o n e
p e r s o n o n b e h a l f of ' ai i ot he r , s u c h as a p a r e n t o n b e h a l f of a chil d. W' he n u s i n g c x rel., i n c l u d e
t h e n a m e s o f b o t h pa r t i e s. I h e s e p h r a s e s a r e i n c l u d e d w h e n t h e y a p p e a r in c a s e n a m e s .
For Example In re Estate of Jo n e s: Ex parte Turner; New York ex rel. Smith I/. Hardworth;
Johnson ex rel. Casey I/. Carrington
j. The
D o n o t i n c l u d e th e in a c i t a t i o n w h e n it is t h e first w o r d of a part } n a me .
For Example Correct: Los A ngeles Times v. Jo n e s

Incorrect: The Los Angeles Times y. Jo n e s
k. Property
W h e n p r o p e r t y is a part}', s u c h as w h e n t h e g o v e r n m e n t is s e i z i n g p r o p e r t } , i n c l u d e o n l y t h e
f i r st -li st ed pi ece o f propert)-.
For Example Correct: Maine I/. One 1998 Cadillac Seville

Incorrect: Maine V. One 1998 Cadillac Seville, Serial No. 134998, and One
2001 Toyota Corolla, Serial No. 77564432
I. Punctuation
' I h e c a s e n a m e is f o l l o w e d b y a c o m m a ( t h e n t h e r e p o r t e r i n f o r m a t i o n ) ; t h e C i i m m a is not
i talici/.ed or u n d e r s c o r e d .
For Example Correct: Smith v. Jon es, or Smith v. Jones

Incorrect: Smith y. Jo n e s, or Smith v. Jones,
111.Citations as Part of a Sentence

See s c c t i on l \ ' . D. 2. f in thi s c h a p t e r.
3. V o lu m e , Reporter, a n d P a g e — B lu e b o o k R-10.3; ALVVD-12.3

to A L W D -1 2.3
f o l l o w i n g the case n a m e in a c i t a t i o n is t h e r ef erence to the r e p o r t e r in w h i c h t he case is pri nt ed.
' I h i s r ef er e n c e i n c l u d e s t h e \ ' o l u m e n u m b e r o f t h e r e p o r t e r a n d t h e p a g e o n w h i c h t h e case
be gi n s . I h e \ ’o l u m e n u m b e r p r e c e d e s t h e a b b r e \ i at i on f'or t h e r e p o r t e r , f o l l o we d b)- t h e p a g e
n u m b e r o f t h e case. F o l l o w i n g is a s i m i m a r ) ’ o f t h e ru l es g o \ e n i i n g c i t at i on to r e p o r t e r s . N o t e
t h a t local coiu' t r ul e s ma) ' r e q u i r e d i f f e r e n c e s in c i t a t i on ; t h e r ef o r e , a l wa y s c h e c k t h e rules.
267
a. Abbreviations
D o n o t a s s u m e \ o u k n o w t h e a b b r e v i a t i o n s for t h e v a r i o u s r e p o r t e r s . Al wa y s c o n s u l t B lu eb o o k
Table T. 1 o r A L W D C h a r t 12 . 1 a n d Appendi. v 2. Al s o refer to t h e g e n e r a l rul es g o v e r n i n g a b
b r e v i a t i o n s p r e s e n t e d in s e c t i o n IX'.O in t hi s chapt e r.
b. Spacing
Re f e r to t h e g e n e r a l rul es g o v e r n i n g s p a c i n g p r e s e n t e d in s e c t i o n IV.D.2 in t h i s c h a p t e r .
c. United States Supreme Court

U n l e s s r e q u i r e d b\' local rule, c i t a t i o n to d e c i s i o n s o f t h e U n i t e d States S u p r e m e C o u r t s h o u l d
b e to t h e official r e p o r t e r only, t h e U nite d States Reports. A parallel c i t a t i on to a n o t h e r r e po r t e r ,
s u c h as t h e S u p r e m e C o u r t R e p o r te r o r U n ited Stiites S u p r e m e C o u r t R eports, L a w y e r s ’ E d itio n ,
s h o u l d n o t b e i n c l ud e d .
For Example Correct: United States i/. Matlock, 415 U.S. 164 (1974)
Incorrect: United States v. Matlock, 415 U.S. 164,94 S. Ct. 988, 39 L Ed. 2d
242(1974)
Note thatthe second example would be correct if the court rule required or allowed
parallel citations.
W h e n t h e U n ite d S ta te s R ep o rts c i t at i on is n o t avail able, t h e n ci t e to a n o t h e r r e p o r t e r ,

s u c h as t h e S u p r e m e C o t n t R e p o r te r (S. C't.). I h e p r e f e r e n c e is to cite to t h e S u p r e m e C o u r t
Reporter: w h e n it is n o t available, cite to U n ite d States S u p r e m e C o u rt Reports, L a w ye rs' Edition.
For Example If the opinion in the previous example was not yet available in the United
States Reports, a proper citation would be United States v. Matlock,
U.S. ,94 S. Ct. 988(1974).
d. United States Court of Appeals

D e c i s i o n s o f t h e U n i t e d States c ; o u r t o f A p p e a l s are ci t ed to t h e Eederal R e p o r te r N o t e t h a t t h e
c i r c u i t t hat r e n d e r e d t h e d e c i s i o n is i n c l u d e d in p a r e n t h e s e s in t h e c i t at i o n .
For Example United States v. Martinez-Jiminez, 864 F.2d 664 (9th Cir. 1989)
e. United States District Courts

D e c i s i o n s o f t h e U n i t e d Stat es D i s t r i c t C o u r t s are c i t ed to t h e Eederal S u p p le m e n t. N o t e t h a t
t h e d i s t r i c t t h a t r e n d e r e d t h e d e c i s i o n is i n c l u d e d in p a r e n t h e s e s in t h e c it ati on.
For Example United States v. Central R.R., 436 F. Supp. 739 (N.D. III. 1990)
f. State Court and Parallel Citations

I h e f o r m a t a n d a b b r e v i a t i o n s f or c i t i n g st ate c o u r t d e c i s i o n s ar e p r e s e n t e d in Table T. 1 o f t h e
B lu e b o o k a n d in A p p e n d i x 1 o f t h e A I .W D . Aga i n, m a k e s u r e y o u c h e c k local rules. T h e g e n e r a l
r u l e f o r st ate c o u r t d e c i s i o n s is t o cite to t h e rel e\' ant r e g i on a l r e p o r t e r .
268
For Example Guilbearv. Guilbear, 326 So. 2d 654 (La. Ct. App. 1976)
iNUiny st at e c o u r t d e c i s i o n s a r e p u b l i s h e d in b o t h a r e g i on al r e p o r t e r a n d a st ate r e p o r t e r .
W h e n a c i t a t i o n i n c l u d e s a r e t e r e n e e to m o r e t h a n o n e r e p o r t e r , it is cal l ed a p a ra lle l c it a ti o n .
G e n e r a l l y , a paral lel c i t a t i o n is u s e d o n l y w h e n a c i t a t i o n to a st at e c o u r t c a se is u s e d in a
d o c u m e n t s u b m i t t e d to a c o u r t in t h a t state. C h e c k t h e st a t e c o u r t c i t a t i o n r ul e s t o d e t e r m i n e
w h e n paral lel c i t a t i o n s ar e r e q u i r e d .
W’h e n a parallel ci t at i on is r e q u i r e d , cite t h e oMicial r e p o r t e r betiire t h e unotficial r e p o r t e r
a n d s e p a r a t e e a c h c i t a t i o n w i t h a c o m m a a n d o n e space.
For Example Race Fork Coal v. Turner, 5 Va. App. 350, 363 S.E.2d 423 (1985)
g. Page Numbers
l h e p ag e n u m b e r o n w h i c h t h e c a s e b e g i n s fol lows t h e r e p o r t e r a b b r e \ i at ion. W h e n t h e r e f e r
e n c e is t o a speci t i c p a g e w i t h i n t h e case, t h e r e f e r e n c e to t h e specific p a g e {p in p o in t c ita tio n )
fol lows t h e initial p a g e r ef erence. See s e c t i o n IV.Ci in t hi s chapt e r.
For Example Guilbear v. Guilbear, 326 So. 2d 654, 658 (La. Ct. App. 1976)
Race Fork Coal v. Turner, 5 Va. App. 350, 352,363 S.E.2d 423, 425 (1985)
Note that in the second example, the pinpoint citation is included with both the state
and parallel regional reporter citations.
S o m e ot t h e W e s t r e p o r t e r s , s u c h as t h e S u p r e m e C o u r t Reporti:. i n c l u d e t h r oL i gh o u t t h e
text o f r e p o r t e d cases c r o s s - r e f e r e n c e s to t h e p ag e s in t h e otlicial r e p o r t e r. Ihi s c r o s s - r e f e r e n c e
s y s t e m is called Star paging. It saves y o u t i m e l o o k i n g u p a c a s e in m o r e t h a n o n e r e p o r t e r
w h e n c i t i n g p a g e n u m b e r s in paral lel ci t at i on s . I h e c r o s s - r e f e r e n c e a p p e a r s as a n u p s i d e -
d o w n 7 ' w i t h t h e p a g e n u m b e r (_L234) a n d is i n s e r t e d in t h e t ext to i n d i c a t e t h e b e g i n n i n g of
a p a g e in a n otlicial r e p o r t e r .
For Example "Thus, the tolling provision does 1234 not apply, and count two is sub
ject to the two-year statute of limitations and was properly dismissed."
Page 234 of the official reporter begins with "not apply."
I________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
h. Cases Not Yet Reported—Slip Opinions

A case m a y b e u n r e p o r t e d o r n o t yet p u b l i s h e d in a r e p o r t e r a n d m a y b e a\ ail able o n l y as a
s e p ar a t e slip o p i n i o n o r in l o o s e - l e a f f o r m. In t h i s s i t u a t i o n , t h e c i t a t i o n s h o u l d i n c l u d e t h e
case n a m e , d o c k e t n u m b e r , c o u r t a b b r e v i a t i o n , a n d d a t e ot d i s p o si t i o n .
For Example Jason 1/. Kelly, No. 22-231 (Colo. App. Aug. 15, 2002)
4. D a te an d C o u rt A b b r e v ia tio n — B lu e b o o k R-10.4, R -10 .5; A L W D - 1 2 .5,

A L W D - 12.6
In p a r e n t h e s e s f ol lo w i n g t h e r e p o r t e r a n d p a g e c i t a t i o n a r e t h e c o u r t a b b r e \ i a t i o n ( i t ' n e c e s -
sa-y) a n d t h e d a t e o n w h i c h t h e c a se wa s d e c i d e d . W h e n t h e d e c i s i o n is by t h e U n i t e d St at es
S u p r e m e Côurt o r h ig h e s t c o u r t of a state, y o u d o n o t h a v e to i n s e r t t h e c o u r t a b b r e v i a t i o n .
269
PART II LEGAL RESFARCH
llic d a t e a p p e a r s b\- itself in p a r e n t h e s e s , llie tact t ha t o n h t h e d a t e a p p e a r s in p a r e n t h e s e s

tells t h e r e a d e r t hat t h e o p i n i o n is Ir oni t h e higl iest c o u rt . I h e i n f o r m a t i o n in p a r e n t l i e s e s is
s e p a r a t e d tVcMn t h e r e p o r t e r p a ge b\- a space. N o c o m m a is used.
For Example United States V. Maf/oc^, 415 U.S. 164(1974)

Kline Angle, 216 Kan. 328, 532 P.2d 1093 (1975)
l-'or an\- o t h e r c o u r t d e c is i o n , i n c l u d e t h e c o u r t a b b r e x i at i on. ' I h e a b b r e \ i a t i o n s a r e in

B lu e b o o k Table I’. 1, Table T.7, a n d Table T. 10, a n d in A I. W’l ) A p p e n d i x 1 a n d . Ap p e n d i x 4.
For Example United States i/. Central R.R., 436 F. Supp. 739 (N.D. 111. 1990)
Burnon v. State, 55 S.W.3d 752 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001)
I h e c o u r t a b b r e \ ' i a t i o n is n o t r e q u i r e d w h e n t h e c o u r t t h a t d e c i d e d t h e ca se is a p p a r e n t
f r o m the n a m e o f t h e reporter.
For Example Race Fork Coal i/. Turner, 5 Va. App. 350, 353, 363 S.E.2d 423, 425 (1985),
It is apparent from the citation (Va. App.) thatthe court is the Virginia
Court of Appeals.
3. S u b s e q u e n t H is to r y — B lu e b o o k R-10.7; A L W D - 12.8
I h e B lu e b o o k a n d t h e A L W D st at e t h a t t h e s u b s e q u e n t histor\ - s h o u l d b e i n c l u d e d in the
c i t a t i o n u n l e s s it refers to t h e h i s t o r \ ' o n l e m a n d , a d e ni a l of r e h e a r i n g , o r a d e n i a l ol cer-
t i i ' r a r i o r s i m i l a r d i s c r e t i o n a r y a p p e a l s ( w h e r e t h e ci t e d case is mc' re t h a n t w o y e a r s old).
/ M. W' n 12.iS(a) i ncl udes an exhaustiv e list of s u b s e q u e n t h i s t o r v ac t i on s that s h o u l d b e incl uded.
I h e s u b s e q u e n t histor\- is p l a c e d af’t ei' t h e lull c i t a t i on. Place a c o m m a a f i e r t h e c o u r t a nd
d a t e p a r e n t h e t i c a l ; t h e n i n c l u d e t h e i t al i c i / ed hi s t or \ ' d e s i g n a t i o n , a c o m m a , a n d t h e cit ati on.
For Example Jackson y. State, 225 Ga. 790,167 S.E.2d 628 (1969), rev'd, Furman i/. Georgia,
408 U.S. 238(1972)
6. P rio r H is to r y — B lu e b o o k R-10.7; A L W D -1 2.9

I h e p r i o r h i s t o r y o f a c a s e is n o t r e q u i r e d a n d s h o u l d b e i n c l u d e d in a c i t a t i on o n h ’ w h e n it is
s i gn i f i ca n t to a p o i n t p r e s e n t e d in \ ' o u r wr i t i n g . Place t h e p r i o r h i s t o r \ ' aft er t h e full ci t at i on.
For Example Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972), rev'g Jackson \/. State, 225 Ga. 790,
167S.E.2d 628(1969)
7. P a ren th e tica l In fo rm a tio n : C o n c u r r in g , D is s e n tin g , an d P lurality

O p i n i o n — B lu e b o o k R-10.6; A L W D - 1 2 . 1 1
If t h e r e f er e n c e in \ o u r w r i t i n g is to p a r t o f a n o p i n i o n o t h e r t h a n t h e m a j o r i t y o p i n i o n , you
m u s t so i n di ca t e in a p a r e n t h e t i c a l f o l l o wi n g t h e full cit ati on, "^’o u a lso m a y i n c l ud e , w i t h i n
270
p a r e n t h e s e s , i i i l o r m a l i o n a bo u t t he we i ght ot ' t h e case, s u c h as t he si / e ot t h e inaiority. Ins e r t o n e

s p a ce , w i t h o u t a c o m m a , b e t w e e n tiie c o u r t a n d d a t e p a r e n t h e t i c a l ot t h e lull ci t at i on a n d t h e
p a r e n t h e t i c a l c o n t a i n i n g t h e a d d i t i o n a l int ' ormat i on. W h e n th e i n l ' or ma t i o n in t h e p a r e n t h e t i c a l
i'^ n ot a lull s e n t en c e , d o n ot i n c l u d e Imal p u n c t u a t i o n , s u c h as a p e r i o d in t h e p a r e n t h e t i c a l .
For Example United States y. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984) (Powell, J., dissenting); United
States 1/. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984) (5-4 decision)
8. S h o r t C ita tio n F o r m a t— B lu e b o o k B-5.2; A L W D 12.21

C) n c e a case has b e e n c i t ed in lull, sever al s h o r t ci t at i on f o r m a t s m a y be u s e d d e p e n d i n g o n t h e
s i t u a t i o n . D o n o t i n c l u d e s ubs ec]uent o r p r i o r histor\ - w i t h a s h o r t ci t at i on . W h e n t h e u s e o t
iii. is a p p r o p r i a t e (see s e c t i o n l\^.l in thi s c h a p t e r ) , us e it as t h e p r e f e r r e d s h o r t c i t a t i o n f o r m a t .
For Example Id. at 755
W h e n id. c a n n o t b e u s e d a n d t h e case n a m e o r p a r t o t ' t h e c a s e n a m e is n o t i n c l u d e d in

t h e s e n t e n c e , u s e o n e p a r t y ’s n a m e , t h e \ o l u m e n u m b e r , t h e r e p o r t e r , a n d t h e p a g e r e f e r e n c e .
U s e t h e lirst p a r t y ’s nasi ie u n l e s s d o i n g so w o u l d be c o n f u s i n g .
For Example Full citation: Burnon v. State, 55 S.W.Sd 752 ('Tex. Crim. App. 2001)
Short citation: Burnon, 55 S.W.3d at 755
W h e n m a k i n g a r e f e r e n c e to t h e ca se in g e n e r a l r a t h e r t h a n to a speci li c p a ge , d o n o t
u s e nt.
For Example Full citation: Burnon i/. State, 55 S.W.Sd 752 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001)
Short citation: Burnon, 55 S.W.3d 752
W h e n t h e case n a m e o r p a rt o f t h e case n a m e is i n c l u d e d in t h e s e n t e n c e , u s e o n l y t h e
\ ’o l u m e n u m b e r , r e p o r t e r , a n d p a g e r ef e r e n c e.
For Example In Burnon, the court held that the defendant had the required intent.
55 S.W.3d at 755 (or 55 S.W.Sd 752 when the reference is to the case in general).
W h e n t h e case h a s a paral lel c i t a t i o n , t h e s h o r t c i t a t i o n i n c l u d e s t h e paral l el c i t a t i on s .
For Example Full citation: Race Fork Coal v. Turner, 5 Va. App. 350,363 S.E.2d 423 (1985)
Short citation: Race Fork Coal, 5 Va. App. at 355,363 S.E.2d at 427
The ALWD also allows reference to the regional reporter only: Race Fork Coal,3G3
S.E.2d at 427.
H l ue pa ge s B-;5.2 a l l o w s t h e u se o f /'</. as a s h o r t f o r m wi t h paral lel c i t at i on s . A L W ' D -

12 . 2 1 ( 0 st ates t ha t t h e u s e o f id. is n o t a p p r o p r i a t e w i t h paral lel c i t a t i o n s .
271
For Example Full citation: Race Fork Coal v. Turner, 5 Va. App. 350,363 S.E.2d 423 (1985)
Short citation: Bluebook: Id. at 355, 363 S.E.2d at 427
9. N e u tr a l/P u b lic D o m a i n C i t a t io n s — B l u e b o o k R -1 0 .3 .3; ALVVD-12.16

Inc r ea si ngl y, c o u r t d e c i s i o n s a r e a\ a il ahle t h r o u g h c o u r t W e b sites a n d t u h e r s o u r ce s , s u c h as
p u b l i c d o m a i n ci t at i on s (also r e f e r r e d to as n e u tr a l o r v c iu lo r -u c u tr a l citalioiis). I h e s e c i t at i ons
d o n o t ret er to a p a r t i c u l a r \ ' e n d o r s o u r c e , s u c h as a W'est r e p o r t e r . W' he n s u c h c i t at i o n s are
ax a i l ab l e in a j u r i s d i c t i o n , c h e c k t h e l ocal rLile to d e t e r m i n e w h a t t h e c i t at i on t o r m a t is a n d
w h e t h e r t h e n e u t r a l ci t at i on is re t ]ui r e d. See B lu e h o o k Fable F. 1 a n d .A IM 'D A p p e n d i x 2. I h e
s t a n d a r d n e u t r a l c i t at i o n i n c l u d e s t h e c a se n a m e , y e a r o f t h e d e c i s i o n , c o u r t a b b r e v i a t i o n , case
n u m b e r , a n d c it at i on to a r e p o r t e r o r o n l i n e so u r ce .
For Example State V. Foster, 1998-NMCA-163, 976 P.2d 852. The year published is 1998.
NM CA IS the court, the N ew M exico Court of Appeals. The last number,
163, is the case number. The reporter citation is 976 P.2d 852.
10. C a s e s — E lectron ic S o u r ces

See s e c t i o n IX'.M in thi s c h a p t e r t o r c i t a t i o n s to e l e c t r o n i c s o u r ce s .
B. C o n stitu tio n s—Bluebook R-11; ALWD-13

C o n s t i t u t i o n s u s u a l h ’ are c o m p o s e d ot a r t i c l e s a n d a m e n d m e n t s . A c c o r d i n g to t h e B luehook,
t h e c i t a t i on f o r m for a c o n s t i t u t i o n c o n s i s t s o f t h e a b b r e \ i a t e d n a m e o f t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n , tiie
a rt i c l e o r a m e n d m e n t n u m b e r , a n d t h e s e c t i o n n u m b e r . I h e A I M ' D r e q u i r e s t h e abbr e vi at e i l
n a m e o f t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a n d a p i n p o i n t r e f e r e n c e ( t h e ar t i cl e o r a m e n d m e n t n u m b e r a n d t he
s e c t i o n n u m b e r ) . Re g ar d l e ss (it t h o s e d e s c r i p t i s ' e (.litlerences, t he c i t at i on t o r m a t is t h e s a m e in
b o t h t h e B lu e h o o k a n d t h e A I M 'D . I h e B liu 'h o o k st a t e s that c o n s t i t u t i o n a l s u b d i \ isi ons s houl t l
b e a b b r e v i a t e d a c c o r d i n g to Fable F. 16; tiie A I . W D st ates that tiie ju r i s d i c t i o n a l a n d subdiv ision
a b b r e \ i a t i ons in A p p e n d i x 3 s h o u l d b e u s e d . F.ach e x a m p l e is p r e s e n t e d first wi t h a spa c e
s y m b o l i n d i c a t i n g wlier e s p a c e s a r e p l a c e d , t ol l o w e d by t h e e x a m p l e w i t h o u t the s p a c e s\ iiibol.
For Example U .S .C o n s t.a r t. M V M ^3
U.S. Const, art. IV § 3
Conn. ^ Const. a r t X II 1
Conn. Const, art. XII § 1
In t h e e x a m p l e s , t h e e l e m e n t s o f t h e c i t a t i o n a r e as fol lows:
1. U.S. C o n s t , a n d C o n n . C o n s t , a r e t h e a b b r e v i a t e d n a m e s .
2. art. IV a n d art. XII a r e t h e art i c l e n u m b e r s .
3. § 3 a n d § 1 i n d i c a t e t h e s e c t i o n n u m b e r s ( p i n p o i n t r ef e r e n c e s ) .
I n c l u d e in p a r e n t h e s e s i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t a n a rt i c l e o r a m e n d m e n t w h e n t h e p r o \ i s i on
has be en repealed or supers ed ed.
For Example U.S. Const, amend XV III (repealed 1933 by U.S. Const, amend. XXI)
272
T h e o n i \ ' s h i i r t - f o r n i c i t a t i o n a p p r o p r i a t e foi' u s e w i t h c o n s t i t u t i o n a l c i t a t i o n s is id.

\ \ l i en tlie use o \ id. is n o t a p p r o p r i a t e (see s e c t i o n l \ ' . I in thi s c h a p t e r ) , t h e lull c i t a t i o n
n n i s t be gi\ ' en.
C. S ta tu to ry Law—Bluebook R-12, B-6; ALWD-14

St a t ut e s m a y be cit ed to t h e o t h c i al o r u n o Hi c i a l c o d e , s e s s i o n law, o r s e c o n d a r y s o u r c e s . ' I h e
p r e f e r e n c e is to cite t o t h e official c o d e , t h e n to t h e unoff icia l c o d e if t h e ci t at i on is n o t a va i l
abl e in t h e official c od e . W ' h e n t h e c i t a t i o n is n o t a\ ai l abl e in e i t h e r t h e official t>r unofficial
cotí es, ci t e to t h e se s si o n law. ' I h e a b b r e v i a t i o n s a n d f o r m a t s tor c o d e s a n d s e s s i o n laws are
p r e s e n t e d in B lu c h o o k Tabl e 'I'. 1 a n d A [ . \ \ ' D A p p e n d i x I.
1. G e n e r a l Rules W h e n C itin g S tatu tes

I h e f o l l o w i n g rul e s a p p k w h e n c i t i n g b o t h f e der al a n d s t a t e statutes,
a. M ain Text and Su p p lem en ts

W h e n t h e ci t e d ma t er i al is t a k e n f r o m t h e m a i n text, t h e \ e a r o f t h e \ ’o l u m e o f t h e text is p l ac e d
in p a r e n t h e s e s at t h e e n d o f t h e c i t a t i o n ( t h e \' ear t h e \ ' o l u m e wa s p u b l i s h e d , w h i c h usu a l l y
a p p e a r s o n t h e s p i n e o f t h e \' oliinie). W h e n t h e c i t ed m a t e r i a l a p p e a r s o n h ' in t h e s u p p l e m e n t ,
\'t)U m u s t s o i n d i ca t e in p a r e n t h e s e s w i t h t h e da t e . W h e n t h e c it ed m a t e r i a l is t a k e n f r o m t h e
m a i n text a n d t h e s u p p l e m e n t , it m u s t b e i n d i c a t e d w'ith t h e date.
For Example Citation from main text: 15 U.S.C. § 7 (1988)
Citation from supplement only: 15 U.S.C. § 7 (Supp. 2002)
Citation from mam text and supplement: 15 U.S.C. § 7 (1988 & Supp. 2002)
Citation from main text and supplement, unofficial commercial publisher; 15 U.S.C.A. § 7
(W est 1988 & Supp. 2002)
b. S ectio n Sym bol (§) and M ultiple Sections

l h e s e c t i o n s y m b o l (§) is u s e d to i n d i c a t e a s e c t i o n o f a st atut e. Not e , h o w e \ e r , t ha t y o u m a y
no t u se t h e s\'iiibol to st a r t a s e n t e n c e . In s u c h cases, t h e w o r d Scctioii is used.
For Example Correct: Section 2253 ofthe A ct provides . . .
Incorrect: § 2253 of the Act provides . . .
R e f e r to s e c t i o n I \ M . in t h e c h a p t e r f o r t h e r u l e s o n c i t i n g m u l t i p l e s ec t i o n s ,
c. N a m e o f Act
.Al t hough it is n o t r e q u i r e d , t h e n a m e o f t h e act m a y b e i n c l u d e d in t h e ci t a t i on. A c c o r d i n g to
b o t h t h e B lu c h o o k a n d t h e A L W D , t h e n a m e s h o u l d b e in r e g u l a r type.
For Example BluebookfomaV. Robinson-Patman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 7 (1988)

273
2. Fed eral S ta tu tes— B lu e b o o k R-12; A L W D - 14.2

ll i e f e der al s t a t u t e s o f g e n e r a l p u b l i c int e r e st a r e p r i n t e d in t h r e e s e p a r a t e p u b l i ca t i on s :
U n ite d Slates C.ode t h e official c o d e
U n ite d States C o d e .A n n o ta te d I h o m s o n West
U n ite d States C.ode Servic e ('L'S'CS'j— Lexi sNe xi s

I h e c i t a t i on f o r m a t f o r f eder al s t a t u t e s c o n s i s t s o f t h e f o l l o wi n g e l e m e n t s :
1. Litle n u m b e r
2. C o d e a b b r e \ ’iat ion
3. S e c t i on s y m b o l (§)
4. S e c t i o n n u m b e r
3. P u b l i s h e r in p a r e n t h e s e s w h e n it is a c o m m e r c i a l p u b l i c a t i o n
6. Year o f t h e p u b l i c a t i o n o r s u p p l e m e n t ( y ea r t h e v o l u m e w a s p u b l i s h e d , w h i c h
u s u a l l y a p p e a r s o n t h e s p i n e of t h e v o l u m e ) , in p a r e n t h e s e s
For Example Official code: 1 5 U.S.C. M 7( 1988)
15 U.S.C. § 7(1988)
Unofficial codes: 15 U.S.C.A. § 7 (W est 1984)
15 U.S.C.S. §7 (LexisNexis 1984).
1. The number 15 is the title number.
2. U.S.C., U.S.C.A, and U.S.C.S. are the abbreviated names ofthe codes.
3. Section (§) 7 is the section symbol and number.
4. The dates (1988), (W est 1984), and (LexisNexis 1984) mark the years of
publication and the publishers for unofficial codes.
W h e n c i t i n g to t h e b i t c r n a l R e v e im e ('od e , s u b s t i t u t e l.R.C. for U. S. C. a n d o m i t t he

t i tl e n u m b e r .
For Example Correct: l.R.C. § 100(1994)
Incorrect: 26 U.S.C. § 100 (1994)
3. S h o r t C ita tio n Form at for State an d Federal S ta tu tes— B l u e b o o k R -12.9;

A L W D - 14.5
W h e n t h e use o f id. is a p p r o p r i a t e (see s e c t i o n IV.I in t h e c h a p t e r ) , it is t h e p r e f e r r e d s h o r t
c i t a t i o n f o r ma t . O t h e r w i s e , t h e s h o r t ci t at i on is t h e full ci t at i on f o r m a t w i t h o u t t h e p a r e n t h e t i
cal i n f o r m a t i o n .
For Example Full citations: 15 U.S.C. § 7 (1988 & Supp. 2002); Minn. Stat. § 519 (1990)
Short citations: 15 U.S.C. § 7; Id. § 7; Minn. StaL § 519; Id. § 519
274
4. State S tatu tes— B lu e b o o k R-12; A L W D - 14.4

I lie c i t a t i o n tcirni t o r state s t at u t es vari es t r o m st ate to state. B lu c h o o k Table 1.1 a n d A I M ' D
A p p e n d i x 1 p r e s e n t t h e a b b r e v i a t i o n s a n d f o r m a t s t o r st a t e s t at u t e s . A l s o n o t e t h a t s t i m e
s t a t e s h a v e local c i t at i on r u l es t ha t r e q u i r e a c it at i on t o r m a t diti' erent t r o m t ha t p r e s e n t e d in
t h e B lu c h o o k a n d t h e A L W D . l h e local c o u r t r u l es s h o u l d be c o n s u l t e d for t h e p r o p e r c i t a t i o n
t o r m a t . ' f h e local r u l es are i n c l u d e d in A p p e n d i x 2 ot t h e A L W D .
I h e c i t a t i on i ' or ma t f o r st a t e s t a t u t e s u s u a l l y i n c l u d e s t h e f o l l o w i n g e l e m e n t s :
1. N a m e o f t h e c o d e
2. S e c t i o n s y m b o l (§)
3. C ^ h a p t e r / t i t l e / s e c t i o n n u m b e r
4. P u b l i s h e r in p a r e n t h e s e s w h e n it is a c o m m e r c i a l p u b l i c a t i o n
3. Year o f t h e p u b l i c a t i o n o r s u p p l e m e n t ( y e a r t h e v t i l u me w a s p u b l i s h e d , w h i c h
u s u al ly a p p e a r s o n t h e s p i n e o f t h e v o l u m e ) , in p a r e n t h e s e s
For Example Official code; Minn. Stat. ^ ^ 519 (1990)
Minn. Stat. § 519(1990)
Unofficial code: Minn. Stat. Ann. § 519 (W est 1991)
1. Minn. Stat. is the name of the code.
2. The § is the section symbol.
3. Number 519 is the section number.
4. W est is the publisher ofthe unofficial code (in the second example).
5. The dates 1990 and 1991 mark the years of publication.
S o m e st ates, s u c h as G a l i t o r n i a , id e n t i t v p o r t i o n s ot t h e i r c o d e s b\' s u b j ec t m a t t e r r a t h e r
t h a n by title l-'or t h o s e states, t h e s u b j ec t m a t t e r c o d e is i n c l u d e d in t h e citv\ti('n
For Example Cal Corp. Code § 200 (W est 1986); Tex. Fam. Code Ann. § 2.101 (Vernon 1993)
5. S e s s io n Law s— B lu e b o o k R -12.4; A L W D -1 4 .6 to A L W D -1 4 .8
W h e n a c i t a t i o n is n o t avail able in t h e official o r unofficial c o d e s , it is a p p r o p r i a t e to cite to t h e
s e s s i o n law. You m a \ ' ha ve t o d o t hi s w h e n a r e c e n t l y p a s s e d law h a s n o t yet h e e n p u b l i s h e d
in t h e official o r unofficial c o d e s . As w i t h st ate s t at u t e s, t h e c i t at i on f o r m for se s s i o n l aws v a r
ies f r o m st at e to state. ' Ihe a b b r e v i a t i o n s a n d f o r m a t s f o r st ate s e s s i o n laws a r e p r e s e n t e d in
B lu c h o o k Table T. I a n d A L W D A p p e n d i x 1.
l h e b as i c e l e m e n t s o f a fe der a l s e s s i o n l aw c i t a t i o n are:
1. N a m e o r title o f t h e act ( o p t i o n a l ) — in t h e A I . W D e x a m p l e , t h e n a m e / t i t l e is i t a l i
ci ze d; in t h e B lu c h o o k Q u i c k R e f e r e n c e e x a m p l e s , t h e n a m e / t i t l e is n e i t h e r i t a l i
cized n o r u n d e rs c o re d
2. Law a b b r e v i a t i o n a n d n u m b e r
3. P i n p o i n t r ef er e n c e w h e n c i t i n g a speci fic s e c t i o n
4. \ " o l u me , st atut e, a n d initial p a g e n u m b e r
5. P i n p o i n t p a g e r e f e r e n c e w h e n r e f e r r i n g to a specific p a g e
6. D a t e ( y e a r in p a r e n t h e s e s ) o f t h e c i t ed v o l u m e o f t h e S ta tu te s at Large
275
For Example Uniformed S e rv ic e s Former Spouses Protection Act, Pub.

L No. 101-510, § 554, 104 Stat. 1569, 1572 (1993)
1 Uniformed Services Former Spouses Protection Act is the name or title of

the act(roman for Bluebookst^le] italicized or underscored for ALWDst^le).
2. Pub. L. No. 101-510 is the law abbreviation and number.
3. Section (§) 554 is the pinpoint reference to a specific section.
4. 104 Stat. 1569 is the volume, statute, and initial page number.
5. The number 1572 is the pinpoint page reference to a specific page.
6. The year of enactment (1993).
D. Rules of Evidence and Procedure—Bluebook R-12.8.3; ALWD-17

I h c B litcbook r ul e g o \ ' e r n i n g c i t a t i o n s t o c \ i d e n t i a r y a n d p r o c e d u r a l rul es d i He r s f r o m t he
A I . W D rule. I h e B lu e h o o k st ates t h a t t h e ci t at i on s h o u l d i n c l u d e t h e a b b r e x i a t e d n a m e o f t h e
r u l e a n d t h e n u n i b e r o f t h e rule.
For Example Fed. R. Civ. P 4 Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
Fed. R. Evid. 407 Rule 407 of the Federal Rules of Evidence
Fed. R. Crim. P 18 Rule 18 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure
I h e A L W D r ul e st ates t h a t t h e c i t a t i o n s h o u l d i n c l u d e , in a d d i t i o n t o t h e a b b r e \ ' i a t e d
n a m e a n d rul e n u n i b e r , t h e n a m e o f t h e p u b l i s h e r w h e n t h e s o u r c e is o t h e r t h a n a n official
c o d e a n d t h e y e a r o f p u b l i c a t i o n , b o t h in p a r e n t h e s e s .
For Example Fed. R. C iv . P 4(2001) Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
Fed. R. Evid 407 Rule 407 of the Federal Rules of Evidence,
(W est 2002) published by Thomson W est
Fed, R. Cnm. P 18(2001) Rule 18 of the Federal Rules of Criminal
Procedure
E. A dministrative Law—Bluebook R-14; ALWD-19

I he c o m p o n e n t s o f c i t a t i o n s to a d i i i i n i s l r a t i \ e rul e s o r r e g u l a t i o n s are:
1. Tit le ( t o p i c o r a g e n c \ ) l u i m b e r in t h e c o d e p u b l i c a t i o n
2. , Ab b r e \ i at e d n a m e o f t h e p u b l i c a t i o n (e.g., ( 'o d e of T ederal R e g u l a tio n s — (d A i\

Federal R egister— Fed. Reg.)
3. Se c t i on n u n i b e r o r p a g e n u n i b e r o f t h e r u l e o r r e g u l a t i o n
4. Year of p u b l i c a t i o n
For Example 27 C.FR. § 20.235(1988)
48 Fed. Reg. 37,315 (1983)
1. The numbers 27 and 48 are the title (topic or agency) numbers.
2. C.F.R. and Fed. Reg. are the abbreviated names of the publications.
3. Section (§) 20.235 and 37,315 are the section numbers or page numbers.
4. The dates 1988 and 1983 mark the years of publication.
276
III. SE CON DA RY A U TH O R IT Y
Iliis s c c t i o n p re s e n t s an o\-ervie\v d t' t l i e r ul es o l ' c i t a t i o n to b e u s e d w h e n c i t i n g s e c o n d a r y
authority -soLU'ces a c o u r t m a y rely o n t h at a re n ot t h e law, t ha t is, n o t p r i m a r y a u t h o r i t y,
i h e e . xa mpl es ar e to c i t at i on I'ornis u s e d in c o u r t d o c u m e n t s a n d legal m e m o r a n d a r a t h e r
t h a n l a w r e v i e w articles. See Hxhibit S-l f'or a list o f ' t h e s e c o n d a r y a u t h o r i t y s o u r c e s a n d t h e
c i t a t i o n r u l e references.
.A d e t a i l e d d i s c u s s i o n o f ' t i i e c i t a t i o n r u l e s f'or e a c h t\ p e o f s e c o n d a r y a u t h o r i t y is
b e y o n d t h e s c o p e o f t h i s t e x t . I ' heref ' ore, t h i s s c c t i o n p r e s e n t s t h e c i t a t i o n f o r m a t f o r
t h e m o s t c o m n i o n h - u s e d s e c o n d a r y a u t h o r i t i e s . As w i t h t h e p r e v i o u s s e c t i o n s , th e r e a re
ili f f e r e u e e i b e t w e e n th e B l u e b o o k a i u l th e AI . W' I) . D o n o t a s s u m e y o n c a n s u b s t i t u t e o n e
fo r t h e o th e r .
A. A n n o t a t e d Law Reports—Bluebook R-16.6.5; ALWD-24

1. Full C ita tio n Form at
' I h e c o m p o n e n t s o f a n A L R c i t at i on are:
1. Hull n a m e of t h e a u t h o r
2. W o r d A n n o t a t i o n ( n o t e t h at t h e A L W D o m i t s t h e use o i A n n o t a t i o n f o l l o w i n g t h e
author name)
Title (i tal ici zed o r u n d e r s c o r e d )
■4. X' ol ume n u m b e r
.■i. . Abbreviat ed n a m e o f t h e p u b l i c a t i o n
6. Page n u m b e r o n w h i c h t h e a n n o t a t i o n b e g i n s ( t ol l owe d b y t h e p i n p o i n t p a g e
w h e n a specific p a g e is r e f e r r e d to, t o r e x a m p l e , 832, 860)
-. "I'ear o f p u b l i c a t i o n
For Example M ichael J. Weber, Annotation, Application of Statute of Limita

tions to Actions for Breach of Duty in Performing Services of
Public Accountant, 1 A.L.R.5th 852 (1992)
1. M ichael J. W eber is the full name ofthe author.
2. The word Annotation is included when using Bluebook, but not when
using ALWD.
3. Application of Statute of Limitations to Actions for Breach of Duty in Per

forming Services of Public Accountant\sthet\t\e{\taWc\zed or mderscored).
4. The number 7 is the volume number.
5. A.L.R.5th is the abbreviated name of the publication with no spaces.
6. The number 852 is the page number on which the annotation begins.
7. The year 1992 is the year of publication.
2. S h o rt C ita tio n Format

I ’se i ii w h e n a p p r o p r i a t e (see s e c t i o n IX'.l.l in t h i s c h a p t e r ) . W h e n id. is n o t a p p r o p r i a t e ,
i n c l u d e tiie autl ior ' s last n a m e , v o l u m e n u m b e r , A L R series, at, a n d t h e p i n p o i n t r e f er e n ce .
For Example Id. at861; W eber,7 A.L,R.5th at 861

277
B. Legal Dictionary—Bluebook R-15.7; ALWD-25

A legal d i c t i o n a i ' ) ' c i t a t i o n s h o u l d inc ki dc :
1. A u t h o r (i t' any)
2. Full n a m e ot t h e d i c t i o n a r y ( u n d e r s c o r e d o r it ali cized)
3. Pa ge c o n t a i n i n g t h e d e f i n i t i o n ( n o c o m m a aft er t h e n a m e o f t h e d i c t i o n a r y anil
t h e pa g e )
4. E d i t o r ( r e q u i r e d o n l y in t h e A I.W I') i ' o r ma t ) — b e g in p a r e n t h e s i s
5. E d i t i o n
6. P u b l i s h e r ( r e q u i r e d o n l y in t h e A I M ’D f o r m a t )
7. Year o f p u b l i c a t i o n — e n d p a r e n t h e s i s
For Example 6/uefaoo/c format: Black's Law Dictionary (7th ed. 1992)
1. Black's Law Dictionary is the full name of the dictionary

(in italics or underscored).
2. The number 451 is the page number of the definition.
3. (7th ed. 1992) is the edition and the year of publication.
For Example ALWDiormaV. Black's Law DictionaryAb] (Bryan A. Garner ed.,

7th ed.. W e st 1992)
1. Black's Law Dictionary is the full name of the dictionary (in italics or
underscored).
2. The number 451 is the page number of the definition.
3. Bryan A. Garner ed. is the name of the editor.
4. 7th ed. is the edition number
5. W est is the publisher
6. The year 1992 is the year of publication.
2. S hort C ita tio n Form at

Use id. w h e n a p p r o p r i a t e (see s e c t i o n IX'.l.l in t h i s c h a p t e r ) . W h e n id. is n o t a p p r o p r i a t e ,
repeat the n a m e a n d the page n u m b e r
For Example Id. at 451; Black's Law Dictionary at 45
C. Legal Encyclopedia—Bluebook R-15.7; ALWD-26

A full c i t at i on to a legal e n c y c l o p e d i a s h o u l d c o n t a i n :
1. ' Vol ume n u m b e r o f t h e e n c y c l o p e d i a
2. A b b r e v i a t e d n a m e o f t h e e n c y c l o p e d i a , u s u a l l y e i t h e r A m . )ur. 2 d o r CI S ( n o u n
d e r s c o r e o r italics)
3. Title o r t o p i c n a m e ( i t al i ci zed o r u n d e r s c o r e d )
27 8
4. S ec t i on s y m b o l (§) a n d s e c t i o n n u m b e r w i t h i n t h e art icl e
5. M' ar ol p u b l i c a t i o n in p a r e n t h e s e s
For Example 88C .J.S. Trials 105(1980)
59A Am. Jur. 2d Partnership § 925 (Supp. 1995)
1. The numbers 88 and 59A are the volume numbers ofthe encyclopedias.
2. C .J.S. and Am. Jur. 2d are the abbreviated names ofthe encyclopedias.
3. Trial an6 Parfners/!;p are the topic names (italicized).

4. Section (§) 105 and § 925 are the section symbols and section numbers
within the article.
5. The dates (1980) and (Supp. 1995) indicate the year(s) of publication.
2. S h o r t C ita tio n Form at

Use id. w h e n a p p r o p r i a t e (see s e c t i o n l\'.l. 1 in t h e c h a p t e r ) . W’h e n id. is in)t a p p r o p r i a t e , r e pe a t
t h e full c i t a t i on w i t h o u t t h e date.
Id. § 925; Id. § 105; 59A Am. J u r 2d Partnership § 925; 88 C .J.S. Trials 105
D. Periodicals—Law Review/Journal Citations—Bluebook

R-16; ALWD-23
I. Full C ita tio n Form at
I' ol lowiii g ar e t h e c o m p o n e n t s ol a lau' re\ ie\\, i o u r n a l, o r a n o t h e r p e r i o d i c a l c i t a t i on:
1 . Will n a m e o i t h o a u t h o r
2. Title o f t h e a rt icl e ( i t a l i c i / e d o r u n d e r s c o r e d )
3. X'oTume n u m b e r
4. A b b r e v i a t e d title o f t h e p e r i o d i c a l
3. P a g e n u n i b e r o n w h i c h t h e ar t i c l e b e g i n s (f o l l o we d by t h e p i n p o i n t p a g e w h e n a
speci fic p a g e is r e f e r r e d to, f or e x a m p l e , 139, 163)
6. e a r o f p u b l i c a t i o n in p a r e n t h e s e s
For Example Patricia W. Bennett, W hite v. Illinois.' Fundamental Guar

antees to a Hollow Flight to Confront Witnesses, 40 W ayne L.
Rev. 159(1993)
1. Patricia W. Bennett is the full name of the author.
2. Aftery\Jh\Xe v. Illinois.' Fundamental Guarantees to a Hollow Right to Con

front Witnesses is the title of the article (note that the case name, nor
mally italicized, is in roman to distinguish it from the italicized article title),
3. The number 40 is the volume number.
4. W ayne L. Rev. is the abbreviated title of the periodical.
5. The number 159 is the page number on which the article begins.
6. The date (1993) is the year of publication.
279
2. Short Citation Format

U s e id. w h e n a p p r o p r i a t e (see s e c t i o n IX'.l.l in t h i s c h a p t e r ) . W h e n id. is n o t a p p r o p r i a t e ,
i n c l u d e t h e a u t h o r ’s last n a m e , t h e \ ’o l u m e nimTber, t h e p e r i o d i c a l a b b r e v i a t i o n , at, a n d the
p i n p o i n t r e f erence.
For Example Id. at 165; Bennett, 40 W ayn e L. Rev. at 165
E. Restatements —Bluebook R-12.85; ALWD-27

A c i t a t i o n to a R e s t a te m e n t s h o u l d i ncl ude ;
1. Full n a m e a n d e d i t i o n o f t h e R e s ta te m e n t (i n t h e A L W D , t h e full n a m e a n d e d i t i o n
is in italics o r u n d e r s c o r e d , i n c l u d i n g a su b t i t l e w h e n t h e r e f e r e n c e is t o a subt i t le )
2. S e c t i on s y m b o l (§) a n d n u m b e r o f t h e R e s t a te m e n t
3. ' l c a r o f p u b l i c a t i o n in p a r e n t h e s e s
For Example BluebookôrmaV. Restatement (Second) of Judgments §28 (1982)

/4^1/l/Dformat: Restatement (Second) of Judgments^ 28 (1982)
Bluebookiomal Restatement (Second) of Torts: Products Liability § 52(1989)

ALWD format: Restatement (Second) of Torts: Products Liability % 52 (1989)
1. Restatement (Second) of Judgm ents is the full name ofthe Restatement
and the edition; Restatement (Second) of Torts: Products Liability is the
full name ofthe Restatement, edition, and subtitle.
2. Section (§) 28 and § 52 are the section numbers.
3. The dates (1982) and (1989) indicate the year of publication.
2. S h o r t C ita tio n Form at

Use id. w h e n a p p r o p r i a t e (see s e c t i o n IX’.l.l in thi s c h a p t e r ) . O t h e r w i s e , r e p e a t t h e full c i t a
t i o n w i t h o u t t h e date.
For Example Id. § 28; Restatement (Second) of Judgments § 28
P. Treatises/Books—Bluebook R-15; ALWD-22

Freat ise a n d b o o k c i t a t i o n s s h o u l d inc l ude;
1. X' ol ume n u m b e r w h e n t h e r e is m o r e t h a n o n e v o l u m e
2. Full n a m e o f t h e a u t h o r o r e d i t o r w h e n a n a m e is given
3. Full title o f t h e p u b l i c a t i o n as it a p p e a r s o n t h e title p a g e ( i t al i c i z e d o r u n d e r s c o r e d )
280
4. N u m b e r o f t h e s e c t i o n , p a r a g r a p h , o r p a g e w h e n y o u a re r e f e n ini’ to a spe c i f i c
iiLiniber, p a r a g r ap i i , o r p a g e
5. Editt)!' w h e n tlicrc is o n e , t h e e d i t i o n o r ser ies n u m b e r o t ' t h e b d o k w h e n it is n o t

t h e first e d i t i o n , a n d t h e p u b l i sl i e r (tlie B lu e b o o k d o e s no t r e q u i r e t h e i n c l u s i o n o f
the p ublishe r)— begin parenthesis
6. Vear o f p u b l i c a t i o n — e n d p a r e n t h e s i s
For Example ALWDformat 6A Richard R. Powell, Powell on Real Property^

899 (Patrick J. Rohan ed., M atthew Bender 1994)
1. The number 6A is the volume number.
2. Richard R. Powell is the full name ofthe author.
3. Powell on Real Property\s the full title of the publication as it appears on

the title page.
4. II 899 is the number ofthe paragraph.
5. (Patrick J, Rohan ed., M atthew Bender 1994) is the editor, publisher, and
year of publication. This is the first edition; therefore, no edition number,
such as "3d ed.," is used.
2. S hort C ita tio n Form at

U s e ni. w h e n a p p r o p r i a t e (s ee s e c t i o n 1\'.1.1 in t hi s c h a p t e r ) . W h e n id. is n ot a p p r o p r i a t e ,
i n c l u d e t h e a u t h o r ’s last n a m e , t h e title, at, a n d t h e p i n p o i n t reference.
For Example Id. TI 899: Powell, Powell on Real Property^ 899
IV. GENERAL RULES OF CITATION

I h i s s e c t i o n p r e s e n t s a n o v e r \ i e w o f basi c r u l es o f c i t at i on for c it i n g m o s t legal s o u r c e s . I h e
g e n e r a l r ul e ( s ) g o v e r n i n g e a c h a r e a a re listed aft er t h e s u b s e c t i o n title. See E x h i b i t cS-2 t o r a
list o f t h e g en e r a l r u l e s o f c i t a t i o n a n d t h e c i t a t i o n r u l e re f e re nc e s. A d e t a i l e d d i s c u s s i o n o f
e a c h rul e is b e y o n d t h e s c o p e o f t hi s text.
A. Typeface—Bluebook R-2, B-2; ALWD-1.1

B lu c h o o k R-2 ret ]uires d i f ferent t y p e f a c e c o n v e n t i o n s a n d t h e u se o f l ar ge a n d s ma l l c a p i t al
l et t er s for c i t at i o n s in law r e v i e ws a n d o t h e r w r i t i n g s s u c h as b o o k s . B l u e p a g e s B-2 c o v e r s t h e
u s e o f i t a l i c s / u n d e r s c o r e s in c o u r t d o c u m e n t s a n d legal m e m o r a n d a . A I . W D - 1.1 d o e s n o t
d i s t i n g u i s h b e t w e e n t y p e s o f d o c u m e n t s a n d st at es t ha t o r d i n a r y t y p e a n d italics o r u n d e r
s c o r e s s h o u l d be u s e d in al! legal wr i t i n g . ' I h e u s e o f italics o r u n d e r s c o r e s is d i s c u s s e d in t h e
next subsection.
B. Italics a n d U nderscores—Bluebook B-2; ALWD-1.3

I h e s e r ul es p r e s e n t a s u m m a r y o f t h e i t e m s t h a t s h o u l d be u n d e r s c o r e d o r italicized. ' I h e ru l es
g o v e r n i n g e a c h t y p e o f i t em s h o u l d b e c h e c k e d for o t h e r p r o v i s i o n s t ha t m a y g o v e r n t h e u s e
of u n d e r s c o r e s o r italics.
281
E x h i b i t 8 - 2 Rule References to General Rules o f Citation.
General Rules of Citation
B l u e b o o k Rules and
Bluepages Notes A L W D R u le s
Abbreviations R-6TablesT5 toT.16 ALWD-2 A p p end ices 3, 4, 5

and B-T1
Capitalization R-8 and B-10.6 ALWD-3
Electronic Sources R-18 ALWD-38 to ALWD-42
Internal Cross-References R-3.6 ALW D -10

(supra and infra)
Italics and Underscoring B-2 ALWD-1.3
Page Numbers (Pinpoint R-3.3, R-3.4, R-3.5 ALWD-5.2, ALWD-5.3,

Citations) ALWD-5.4
Placement of Citations B-2 ALW D-3.1

in Sentences and Clauses
Quotations R-5 ALWD-47 to ALWD-49
Sections (§) and R-3.4 ALWD-6

Paragraphs (D)
Short Citations (id., supra, R-4, B-5.2, B-6.2, ALWD-11.2, ALWD-11.3,
hereinafter) 8-8.2, B-9.2, B-10.5 LWD-11.4
Signals (eg. see, R-1.2, R-1.3, ALWD-44 to ALWD-46

accord, etc.) R-1.4, R 1.5
String Citations R-1.2 ALWD-43.3(a)
For Example W hen citing cases, in addition to these rules, check the separate rules gov
erning case names for other requirements, such as what names are used.
T h e r u l e s are r e f e r e n c e d ne.xt to t h e s u b j ec t below.

I h e f o l l o w i n g i t e m s s h o u l d b e itiilicizcd o r u n d e r s c o r e d :
1. C a s e n a m e s — B l u e b o o k R-10.2; ,AI.\VI)-12.2 a n d A1, \VI)-12.21
2. Titles o f p u b l i c a t i o n s a n d m o s t d o c u m e n t s — B l u e b o o k R-13, R-13, R-16; A I . W D -

13.7(c), A l , \ V D - 2 2 . l ( b ) , A L \ V n - 2 3 . 1(b), A T \ V l ) - 2 6 . 1(c)
3. I n t r o d u c t o r y s i gnals, s u c h as .See a n d ( " o / i i / v i - B l u e b o o k R - 1,2; A L \ \ ' [ 0 - 4 3

I. I n t e r n a l c r o s s - r e f e r e n c e s a n d s h o r t f o r m s , s u c h a s 5 » / > n i — B l u e b o o k R - 4 ; A I A V D - 10,
A L W D - 11
3. P h r a s e s i n d i c a t i n g s u b s e t i u e n t o r p r i o r h i s t o r v ’, s u c h as uff'cl a n d /’e v i / - B l u e b o o k
R-10.7.1; A L W D - 1 2 . 8 , A L W D - I 2 . 9
282
6. W o r d s o r p h r a s e s i n t r o d u c i n g r el ated a u t h o r i t y, s u c h as aviula hlc (ji— B l u e b o o k

R-1.6, R-13.3, IM.S.2, R-1H.6, R-20.1.3
7. X'anies ol‘ I n t e r n e t s i t es — A I . W n - 4 0 . 1(b)
S. W o r d s u s e d for e m p h a s i s , w o r d s itali cized in t h e m a t t e r q u o t e d , a n d f o r e i g n

w o r d s t ha t ar e n o t c o m m o n — B l u e b o o k R-3, R-7
C. Citation P la c e m e n t in Sentences a n d Clauses—Bluebook

B-2; ALWD-43.1
C i t a t i o n s a r e p l a c e d in legal d o c u m e n t s b\' i n c l u d i n g t h e m as s e p a r a t e c i t a t i o n s e n t e n c e s o r
cl aus es o r b\- i n c o r p o r a t i n g t h e m w i t h i n a s e n t en c e .
1. C ita tio n S en te n c e
W h e n a s t a t e m e n t a b o u t t h e l aw is a c o m p l e t e s e n t e n c e , t h e c i t a t i o n i m m e d i a t e l y fol l ows t h e
s t a t e m e n t as a s e p a r a t e s e n t e n c e t ha l b e g i n s wi t h a capi t al let ter a n d e n d s wi t h a p e r i o d , hi t hi s
s i t u a t io n , p l a c e m e n t o f t h e c i t at i on i n d i ca t e s t ha t t h e c i t at i on s u p p o r t s t h e e n t i r e s t a t e m e n t
a b o u t t h e l aw i n c l u d e d in t h e s e n t e n c e .
For Example It ¡swell established that a defendant has a right to counsel at a preliminary
hearing, Coleman v. Alabama, 399 U.S. 1 (1970).
2. C ita tio n C la u se
W h e n t h e c i t a t i o n s u p p o r t s o n l y p a r t o f a s e nt e n c e , t h e c i t at i on is p l a c e d as a c l a u s e i m m e d i -
atel\ aft er t h e s t a t e m e n t it s u p p o r t s a n d is set off b\- c o m m a s .
For Example Although the "good faith" exception to the exclusionary rule has been adopted
bythe United States Supreme Court, United States v. ¿eon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984),
it has not been adopted by all ofthe states. State u. Gutierrez, 116 N.M. 431,863 P.2d 1052(1993).
In t hi s e.vample, th e first c i t a t i o n s u p p o r t s t h e first c l a u s e o f t h e s e n t e n c e a n d t h e s e c o n d

ci t a t i o n s u p p o r t s t h e s e c o n d clause.
3. E m b e d d e d C ita tio n s
W’h e n t h e authorit }- is m e n t i o n e d in t h e s e n t e n c e , t h e c i t a t i on m a y b e i n c o r p o r a t e d w i t h i n
t h e s e n t e n c e.
For Example In the case of Coleman v. Alabama, 399 U.S. 1 (1970), the Supreme Court
held that a defendant has a right to counsel at a preliminary hearing.
P la c i n g t h e c i t a t i o n in t h e s e n t e n c e a d d s \ ’a ri et \ ' t o t h e wr i t i n g . N o t e t h a t t h e c i t a t i o n is
n o t r e p e a t e d at t h e e n d o f t h e s e n t e n c e .
28 3
D. Abbreviations—Bluebook R-6, Tables T.5 to T.16, B-T.l,

B-T.2; ALWD-2, A ppendix 3 to Appendix 5
1. In G en eral
V a r i o u s t e r m s a n d s o u r c e s , s u c h as c o u r t n a m e s , legal p e r i o d i c a l s , a n d c a s e n a m e s , a r e
a b b r e v i a t e d in legal cit at i ons.
For Example Abbreviation

Southern Reporter So.
United States Supreme Court U.S.
Cumberland Law Review Cumb. L. Rev.
Case name— Corporation Corp.
I h e lists o t ' a b b r e v i a t i o n s a r e i n c l u d e d in t h e B lu e b o o k tabl es a n d t h e A I . W I ^ a p p e n d i c e s

r e f e r e n c e d at t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h i s s u b s e c t i o n .
2. S p ac in g
In t h e B lu e b o o k s e ct i on, “ Typical Legal C i t a t i o n s A n a l y z e d ” (pages 5 - 9 ) , d o t s ( • ) are i n s e r t e d in
t h e e x a m p l e to i n d i ca t e a si ngle s p a c e in t h e c i t at i o n . In t h e A L W D , a g r e e n t r i a n g l e (a ) indi
cat e s a si ngle space. L'ollovving is a s u m m a r y ot t h e r u l es g o v e r n i n g s p a c i n g .
a. Single Capital Letters and Ordinals

D o not pl a c e a s p a c e b e t w e e n s i ngl e capi t al letters o r s i ngle capi t al letters a n d a n o r d i n a l . ,'\n
o rd in a l is a n u m b e r u s e d to d e s i g n a t e a p o s i t i o n in a series, s u c h as lOth ( l i r c u i t . (' )r dinal s
s u c h as 2d a n d lOth are t r e a t e d as a si ngl e capit al letter.
For Example F.R.D.— Federal Rules Decisions; P.2d— Pacific Reporter Second Series.
There are no spaces between the single capital letters or between the
single capital letter(s) and the ordinal.
b. Single Capital Letters and N o n sin g le Capital Letters

W h e n an a b b r e v i a t i o n i n c l u d e s o n e o r m o r e capit al l et ters a n d w h e n a n a b b r e x ’i at i o n d o e s not
i n c l u d e a si ngl e capi t al letter, i n c l u d e a s p a c e b e t w e e n t h e si ngl e capit al l e t t e r a n d t h e o t h e r
abbreviation.
For Example R Supp.— Federal Supplement. There is a space between F. and Supp.
because Supp. is not a single capital letter.
N.D. Miss.— Northern District of Mississippi. There is a space between D. and Miss.
because Miss, is not a single capital letter. There is no space between N. and D. because
each is a single capital letter.
c. Abbreviated and N onabbreviated Words

W' he n a n a b b re \ ' i a t e d w o r d is c i i m b i n e d w i t h a n o n a b b r e v i a t e d w o rd , p l a c e a s p a c e o n eacl
s i d e o f t h e n o n a b b r e \ ' i a t e d vsord.
28 4
For Example J Real Est. Tax'n— Journal of Real Estate Taxation. There is a space on
each side of Real because it is a nonabbreviated word combined with
abbreviated words.
d. Legal Periodicals
In a legal p e ri o d i c a l , u.se a .space to s e p a r a t e t h e i n s t i t u t i o n a l o r g e o g r a p h i c a b b r e \ ’i a t i on t r o m
t he o t h e r p a r t s o f t h e a b b r e v i a t i o n .
For Example U.S.F. L. Rev.— University of San Francisco Law Review. U.S.F. is separated
with a space from the L. because U.S.F is the institutional abbreviation.
L. is set off by a space from Rev. because Rev is not a single capital letter.
e. Section Sym bol (§), Paragraph Sym bol ( 5), and A m persand (&)
Pl ace a s p a c e aft er t h e s e c t i o n a n d p a r a g r a p h s y m b o l s a n d t h e a m p e r s a n d .
For Example 18 U.S.C. § 2113 — A space is placed on each side of the section symbol.
t. A utho rities Included in the lext o f a Sentence

I he n a m e o f an a u t h o r i t y is n o t a b b r e v i at e d w h e n it is use d in a se nt e nc e. A c c o r d i n g to B lu e b o o k
I M 0.2.1, wideK' k n o w n a b b r e \ iatioiis s u c h as (,o. a n d Inc. c o n t i n u e to be u se d.
For Example The case citation is Bachman Chocolate Mktg. Co. v. Leigh Warehouse &
Transp. Co., 1 N .J. 239, 62 A.2d 806 (1949). W hen used in a sentence, Mar
keting, ar\óTransportationa\:e not abbreviated; The court ruled against the manufacturer
in Bachman Chocolate Marketing Co. v. Leigh Warehouse & Transportation Co., 1 N.J.
239, 62 A.2d 806(1949).
E. Capitalization—Bluebook R-8, B-10.6; ALWD-3

I. G e n e r a l R u le
In a h e a d i n g , title, o r subtitle, c a p i t al i / e t h e initial letter o f t h e first wo r d , t he first w o r d fo l l o wi n g
a c o l o n , h\ p h e n , o r d a s h , a n d all o t h e r w o r d s e x c e p t articles, p r e p o s i t i o n s , a n d c o n i u n c t i o n s .
For Example M ichael Asimow, Bad Lawyers in the Movies, 24 Nova L. Rev. 533 (2000)
2. C o u r t a n d P a r ty D e s i g n a t i o n s
Hl u e p a g e s H 10.6 st a t e s t h a t in a d d i t i o n to c a p i t a l i z i n g t h e w o r d C.ourt w h e n r e f e r r i n g t o a
speci fic coLU't ( s u c h as t h e (California S u p r e m e (Court), also capi t a l i z e C.ourt w h e n t h e c o u r t
recei \ i ng t h e d o c u m e n t is r ef er r e d to in t h e d o c u m e n t .
285
For Example This Court has already denied defendant's petition on two previous occasions.
B l u e p a g e s B - 1 0 . 6 a l s o st at es t h a t t h e part}- d e s i g n a t i o n s (pl aint it f, d e f e n d a n t , a pp e l l a n t ,

etc.) s h o u l d b e c a p i t a l i z e d w h e n r e f e r r i n g t o t h e p a r t i e s in a m a t t e r be f o r e t h e c o u r t .
For Example The Appellant claims that the letter should not have been admitted attrial.
On six occasions, Plaintiff attempted to contact Defendant regarding

Defendant's failure to answ er the interrogatories.
3. S pecific W ord s
Rule 8 o f t h e B lu e b o o k i n c l u d e s a p a g e - a n d - a - h a l t list o t speci fic w o r d s a n d r u l e s g o v e r n i n g
c a p i t al i z a t i o n .
For Example Capitalize ,4cf only when referring to a specific act; capitalize Code only
when referring to a specific code, such asth e 1990 Code; capitalize Judge
only when it is the name of a specific judge or a justice ofthe United States Supreme Court.
4. All O th e r C a p ita liz a tio n s

B o t h m a n u a l s ref er to t h e (.’..S', ( io v e r n iiu 'iit P r in tin g O ffice S ty le M a n u a l for t h e c a pi t al i za t i on
of o t h e r w o r d s . I h e A I . W D a l s o ref e r s to I h e (Jiic a g o M a n u a l of Style.
F. Q u o ta tio n s —Bluebook R-5; ALWD-47 to ALWD-49

Q u o t a t i o n s a r e s t r o n g e r t h a n s u m m a r i e s o r p a r a p h r a s e s . Too m a n y c]uot ati ons, ho w e v e r , m a y
c a us e t h e w r i t i n g to b e c o m e d i s j o i n t e d a n d l ead t h e r e a d e r to c]uestion w h e t h e r t h e wa i t e r h a s
a n a l y z e d t h e m a t e r i a l o r u n d e r s t a n d s t h e m a t e r i a l well e n o u g h t o a n a l y z e il. Use q u o t a t i o n s
for e m p h a s i s . Use q u o t e s p r i m a r i h ' for st a t u t or } ' l a n g u a g e , t h e law o r legal p r i n c i p l e p r e s e n t e d
by a c o u r t , o r k e y pt>rti ons o f a c o i u t ’s r e a s o i i i n g .
1. Q u o t a tio n M arks
Q u o t a t i o n s o f f e w e r t h a n 30 w o r d s s h o u l d b e p l a c e d in q u o t a t i o n m a r k s (“ ”); t h e q u o t a t i o n s
a r e n o t i n d e n t e d o r o t h e r w i s e se t off'. T h e c i t a t i o n is u s u a l l y p l a c e d aft er t h e s e n t e n c e t h a t
contains the quotation.
For Example The United States Suprem e Court gave the following guidance when
interpreting treaties: "In construing a treaty, as in construing a statute,
we first look to its terms to determine its meaning." United States Alvarez-Machain,
504 U.S. 655, 663(1992).
The court noted that the text of the treaty must be "interpreted in good faith in a c
cordance with the ordinary meaning to be given to the terms ofthe treaty in their context
in light of its object and purpose." Kreimerman y. Casa Veerkamp, S.A. de C.V., 22 F.3d
634, 638 (5th Cir. 1994).
286
Place per i ods a n d c o m m a s i n s i d e t h e c l o s i n g c] uot ati on m a r k s . O t h e r p u n c t u a t i o n m a r k s ,

s u c h as s e m i c o l o n s , c o l o n s , t ] u e s t i on m a r k s , a n d e x c l a m a t i o n p o i n t s , a r e p l a c e d o u t s i d e t h e
closing q u o ta ti o n m a r k s unless t hey are a pa rt o t' t h e q u o ta t io n .
For Example The court defined publication as "communication to a third party";

therefore.. . .
The victim then shouted, "I'v e been hit!" [The exclamation point is part of the quote;
therefore, it belongs within the quotation marks.]
2. I n d e n te d Q u o t a tio n s
Q u o t a t i o n s o t ' 50 w o r d s o r m o r e (ca l l e d block q u o ta ti o n s ) are set otf' f r o m t h e rest ot t h e text
by a fi ve- space i n d e n t a t i o n ( o n e t a b) t r o m t h e leti a n d r i gh t m a r g i n s a n d ar e si ng l e s p a c e d ,
i h e y ar e n o t set otl b y q u o t a t i o n m a r k s . Pl ace t h e c i t a t i o n at t h e left m a r g i n ot t h e li ne ot text
f o l l o w i n g t h e q u o t a t i o n . D o n o t p l ac e t h e c i t a t i o n w i t h t h e b l o c k q u o t a t i o n , ' l h e b l o c k q u o t a
t i o n s h o u l d be set o t f ' f r o m t h e rest o f t h e t ext w i t h a d o u b l e space.
For Example In regard to the individual rights of tenants in common, the court noted
the following:
However, numerous other elements of control do follow the percentage of ownership.

For example, if a cotenant obtains a loan and mortgages the property, he is able to
mortgage only his percentage of ownership interest. If one cotenant rents the whole
property to a third party, he must share the proceeds with his cotenants in accordance
with their respective percentages of ownership....
Garcia v. Andrus, 692 F2d 89, 92 (9th Cir. 1982).
Bl ock q u o t a t i o n s a r e p Li n c t ua t e d as t h e y a p p e a r in t h e o ri g i n a l q u o t e .
3. Q u o t e W ith in a Q u o t e
Hnck)se q u o t a t i o n s w i t h i n a b l o c k q u o t a t i o n in d o u b l e q u o t a t i o n m a r k s (“ ” ). As m e n t i o n e d in
t h e p r e \ ' i o u s s u b s e c t i o n , b l o c k q u o t a t i o n s a r e p u n c t u a t e d as t h e y a p p e a r in t h e o r i g i n a l q u o t e .
E n c l o s e q u o t a t i o n s w i t h i n a s h o r t q u o t a t i o n in si ng l e q u o t a t i o n m a r k s .
For Example "The statute requires thatthe annual statement 'must be filed within thirty
(30) days of the end of the fiscal year.'"
4. C itin g a Q u o te W ith in a Q u o t e
W h e n t h e s o u r c e o f a q u o t e w i t h i n a q u o t e is i n c l u d e d w i t h i n t h e q u o t a t i o n , d o n o t r e p e a t it
in t h e ci t at i on.
For Example "The state corporation statute, section 57-9-21, requires th a tth e annual
statement 'must be filed within thirty (30) days ofthe end ofthe fiscal year.'"
In this situation, you do not cite section 57-9-21 at the end of the quotation.
287
W'lien tiu' s o u r c c o t a q u o t e wi t l i i n a q u o t e is n o t c i t ed w i t h i n t h e q u o t a t i o n , p l ace the

: i t a t i o n in a p a r e n t h e t i c a l t h a t l o l l o w s t h e c i t a t i o n t o r t h e e n t i r e q u o t a t i o n .
For Example In discussing the time limits for appeal, the court in El Dorado noted
"'[jlurisdiction of the matters in dispute does not lie in the courts until the
statutorily required administrative procedures are fully complied with,'" El Dorado Utils.,
Inc. y. Gallisteo Domestic Water Users Ass'n, 120 l\l,M, 165,167, 899 P,2d 608, 610 (Ct, App,
1995) (quoting In re Application of Angel Fire Corp.,%N.M.Q5],552,634 P.2d 202,203(1981)),
5. A lterin g Q u o t a tio n s
I h e r e a d e r m u s t b e a l e r t e d to an\- c h a n g e s m a d e to a q u o t a t i o n , l-'ollowing are t h e r ul es go\'-
e r n i n g al t e r a t i ons,
a. Altering a Letter Case

W h e n y o u c h a n g e t h e c a s e o t ' a l e t t e r t r o m u p p e r c a s e t o l o w e r c a s e o r \'ice \ ' ersa, e n c l o s e the
l et t e r in bracket s.
For Example Original quote: The court does not have jurisdiction until the administra
tive procedures are complied with.
Alteration: The Supreme Court noted that "[t]he court does not have jurisdiction until the
administrative procedures are complied with."
b. Adding, D eleting, or (Changing Letters

ICnclose t h e a d d e d , d e l e t ed , o r c h a n g e d let t er (s) in b r a c k e t s.
For Example Original quote: Jurisdiction ofthe matter in dispute does not lie in the court.
Alteration: Jurisdiction of the matter[s] in dispute does not lie in the court.
c. Substituting or A d d in g W ords
Pla c e s u b s t i t u t e d o r a d d e d w o r d s in b i a c k e t s .
For Example Original quote: Jurisdiction of the matters in dispute does not lie in the
courts until the administrative procedures are fully complied with.
Alteration: Jurisdiction of the matters in dispute does not lie in the courts until the [statu
torily required] administrative procedures are fully complied with.
d. Mistakes in Original Q u o te
I n d i c a t e a m i s t a k e in q u o t e d m a t e r i a l b\' p l a c i n g [sicl a f t er t h e mi s t a k e .
For Example The preliminary hearing is a stage at w hich the defendant have [sic] a
right to counsel.
288
e. A dding Emphasis
An\' c h a n g c in t h e t y p c t a c e o f t h e q u o t a t i o n , s u c h as w h e n a d d i n g eni pl i asi s, s h o u l d b e n o t e d
in p a i ' c n t he s e s f ol lowi n g t h e ci t at i on .
For Example Original quote: "If one cotenant rents the whole property to a third party, he
must share the proceeds...." Garcia v. Andrus, BS2 F.2d 89,92 (9th Cir. 1982).
Alteration: "If one cotenant rents the whole property to a third party, he must share the
p ro ce ed s.. . . " Garcia \j. Andrus, 692 F.2d 89, 92 (9th Cir. 1982) (emphasis added).
6. O m it t in g W ord s or C ita t io n s
O n o cc a s i o n , y o u ma \ ' w a n t t o q u o t e o n h ' t h e p a r t s o f a q u o t e d p a s s a g e r e l ev a n t to t h e issue
b e i n g d i s c u s s e d r a t h e r t h a n t h e e n t i r e pa s s a g e . W h e n y o u a r e o m i t t i n g o n e o r m o r e w o r d s ,
t h e t o l l ow i n g rul e s apph'.
a. O m issio n o f O ne or M ore W or d s— Ellipsis (. . . )

A\n ellipsis is th r e e pe ri otl s p l a c e d t oget hei ' to i n d i c a t e t h e o m i s s i o n o f ma t er i al f r o m t h e m i d d l e
ot a q u o t a t i o n .
For Example "No w ill. . . shall be revoked, unless . . . by subsequent will or codicil."
I'o i n d i c a t e t h e oiiiissiini of w o r d s at t h e e n d o f a q u o t a t i o n , u s e a n ellipsis a n d t h e final

p u n c tu a t io n o f t h e quote.
For Example The statute provides that a will may be revoked by "cutting, tearing, burn
ing, obliterating, canceling. . . . "
D o n o t use a n ellipsis to i n d i c a t e t h e o m i s s i o n of w o r d s at t h e b e g i n n i n g o f a q u o t a t i o n
w h e n t h e q u o t a t i o n is p a r t o f a s e n t e n c e .
For Example Correct omission: The court noted that a testator may revoke a will by
"cutting, tearing, or cancellation with the intent to revoke."
Incorrect omission: The court noted that a testator may revoke a will by " . . . cutting,
tearing, or cancellation with the intent to revoke."
W' hen l a n g u a g e at t h e b e g i n n i n g o f a q u o t a t i o n is o m i t t e d , c a p i t al i ze t h e first l et t er a n d

p l a c e it in b r a c k e t s if t h e q u o t e d n i a t e ri a l b e g i n s \ ’o u r s e n t e n c e .
For Example Original quote: "This court has held in several cases that a defendant
need not brandish the firearm in a threatening manner."
Correct omission: "[D]efendant need not brandish the firearm in a threatening manner."
289
To i n d i c a t e t h e o m i s s i o n ot o n e o r m o r e p a r a g r a p l i s t r o m a b l o c k q u o t e , p l a ce a n e l
lipsis o n a li ne b y itselt. Also, to i n d i c a t e t h e o m i s s i o n ot l a n g u a g e t r o m t h e b e g i n n i n g of a
s u b s e q u e n t p a r a g r a p h , use a n ellipsis.
For E x a m p u However, numerous other elements of control do follow the percentage of

ownership. For example, if a cotenant obtains a loan and mortgages the
property, he is able to mortgage only his percentage of ownership interest.
... If one cotenant rents the whole property to athird party, he must share the pro
ceeds with his cotenants in accordance with their respective percentages of ownership.
hi t h i s e x a m p l e , t h e ellipsis o n a s e p a r a t e li ne i n d i c a t e s t h e o m i s s i o n o f a p a r a g r a p h
f r o m t h e b l o c k q u o t a t i o n , ' l h e ellipsis at t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h e s e c o n d p a r a g r a p h i n d i c a t e s t h e
o m i s s i o n ot l a n g u a g e f r o m t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h e s e c o n d p a r a g r a p h .
b. O m is s io n o f C itations or F ootnotes
A q u o t a t i o n m a y c o n t a i n n u m e r o u s c i t a t i o n s o r f o o t n o t e s t h a t \ ’o u di ' n ot w a n t to i n c l u d e in
\ ' o u r w ri t i n g . I nd i c a t e t h e o m i s s i o n ot a c i t at i on o r t o o t n o t e in a p a r e n t h e t i c a l .
For Example "It is clear, however, that in the United States, civil liability for assault and
battery is not limited to the direct perpetrator, but extends to any person
who by any means aids or encourages the act." Rael u. Cadena, 934 N.M. 684, 684, 604
P.2d 822, 823 (Ct. App. 1979) (citations omitted).
7. Paragraph Structure
W ' h e n a q u o t a t i o n o f l e w c r t h a n 5Ú w o r d s is t h e f us t s e n t e n c e o f a p a r a g r a p h t r o m t h e q u o t e d
text, t h e p a r a g r a p h is e n c l o s e d in q u o t a t i o n m a r k s b u t is n o t i n d e n t e d . W h e n t h e t | Uo l a t i o n
is 30 w o r d s o r m o r e (a b l o c k q u o t a t i o n ) a n d t h e q u o t a t i o n b e g i n s wi t h t h e lirst s e n t e n c e ol a
p a r a g r a p h t r o m t h e q u o t e d text, i n d e n t a s e c o n d t a b o n t h e left s i d e ot t h e b l o c k q u o t a t i o n .
All s u b s e q u e n t p a r a g r a p h s a r e l i ke wi s e i n d e n t e d as t h e y a p p e a r in t h e q u o t e d text. In o t h e r
w o r d s , i n d e n t t h e rest o f a b l o c k q u o t e like t h e p a r a g r a p h o r p a r a g r a p h s f r o m t h e q u o t e d text.
For Example In regard to the individual rights of tenants in common, the court noted
the following:
However, numerous other elements of control do follow the percentage of

ownership. For example, if a cotenant obtains a loan and mortgages the property, he
is able to mortgage only his percentage of ownership interest. If one cotenant rents
the whole property to a third party, he must share the proceeds with his cotenants in
accordance with their respective percentages of ownership....
In t h i s e x a m p l e , t h e tirst w o r d . H o w e v e r , is i n d e n t e d in t h e b l o c k q u o t e b e c a u s e it is t h e
b e g i n n i n g o f a p a r a g r a p h in t h e q u o t e d text.
290
G. Page N u m b ers (Pinpoint Citations)—Bluebook R-3.3, R-3.4,

R-3.5; ALWD-5.2, ALWD-5.3, ALWD-5.4
\ \ ' h e n e \ c r \ (iu q u o t e ma t er i al I r o m a s o u r c e , \' ou m u s t i n c l u d e a r e t e r e n c e to t h e e.xact p a g e o r
l o c a t i o n ot t h e i n f o r m a t i o n . .Also, w h e n you p a r a p h r a s e o r o t h e r w i s e refer to speci fic i n t o r m a
t i o n r a t h e r t h a n q u o t e it, \ o u s h o u l d i n c l u d e a r e f e r e n c e to t h e e x a c t p a g e o r l oc a t i o n . That
r e f e r e n c e is cal l ed a p in p o in t citc o r a j u m p cilc. It al l o ws t h e r e a d e r to go to t h e e x a c t p a g e o n
w h i c h t h e q u o t a t i o n a p p e a r s r a t h e r t h a n s ea r ch t h r o u g h t h e e n t i r e s o u r c e t o t i n d t h e q u o t e .
I h a t r u l e a p p l i e s to all r e t e r e n c e s o u r ce s , a n d i n l o r m a t i o n o n h o w to cite specific s o u r c e s is
s c a t t e r e d t h r o u g h o u t t h e r u l e s r e g a r d i n g p r i n i a r \ ' a n d s e c o n d a r }' so u r ce s. Die r ul e s c o \ ' e r i n g
p i n p o i n t c i t a t i o n s in g e n e ra l are d i s c u s s e d here.
Pl ace t h e p a g e n u m b e r o n w h i c h t h e q u o t e o r r e f e r e n c e a p p e a r s i m m e d i a t e h ’ aft er t he
p a g e o n w h i c h t h e soui ' ce begins.
For Example "[l]t is not a search by a federal officer if evidence secured by state au
thorities is turned over to federal authorities on a silver platter." Lustig v.
United States, 338 U.S. 74,79 (1949). [Page 79 is the page on which the quote appears.]
The Eighth Circuit addressed the derivative nature of proceedings brought on be
half of limited partnerships. Allright Inc. \j. Billeter, 829 F.2d 631, 638 (8th Cir. 1987).
[Page 638 is the page on which the Eighth Circuit addressed the matter.]
It has been noted that those trained in the law are confused by the topic. Terry
Christlieb, Note. Why Superseding Cause Analysis Should Be Abandoned, 72 Tex. L. Rev.
161, 162. [Page 162 is the reference page ]
W h e n t h e c i t a t i o n i n c l ud e s a paral lel c i t a t i o n , y o u m u s t i n c l u d e a r e t e r e n c e to t h e pa g e
in t h e paral l el c it at i on . Parallel c i t a t i o n s a r e d i s c u s s e d in s e c t i o n 11.A . 3. 1 in t hi s c h a p t e r .
1 Commonwealth i/, Appleby 380 Mass. 296,300,402 N.E.2d 1051,1054 (1980)
W h e n t h e q u o t a t i o n o r r e l e r e n c e is f r o m t h e first p a g e ot t h e r e t e r e n c e s o u r c e , r e p e at
t h e initial p a g e n u m b e r .
For Example Lustig V. United States, 338 U.S. 74, 74 (1949)
W’h e n t h e q u o t a t i o n o r r e f e r e n c e c o v e r s m o r e t h a n o n e page, s e p a r a t e t h e p a g e s b y a
h y p h e n , e n d a s h , oi' to.
For Example Lustig 1/. United States, 338 U.S. 74, 74-79 (1949)
Lustig V. United States, 338 U.S. 74, 74-79 (1949)
Lustig V. United States, 338 U.S. 74, 74 to 79 (1949)
291
A l w a y s r e t a i n at least t h e last t w o d i g i t s o f t h e s e c o n d n u m b e r .
For Example Correct: 74-79
Incorrect: 74-9
Correct: 104-09
Incorrect: 104-9
W ' h e n t h e q u o t a t i o n o r r e f e r e n c e is t r o m m u l t i p l e p a g e s t h a t a r e n ot c o n s e c u t i \ e, list
e a c h p a g e s e p a r a t e d b y a c o m m a a n d o n e s pa c e . D o n o t u s e tiiid o r & b e f o r e t h e final page.
For Example Lustig K United States, 338 U.S. 74, 74, 76, 79 (1949)
W ' h e n t h e q u o t a t i o n o r r e f e r e n c e is f r o m a p u b l i c d o m a i n f o r m a t ( al so r e f e r r e d to as
v e n d o r - n c u t r a ! f o r m a t ) , t h e p i n p o i n t c i t a t i o n m a y b e t o a specific p a r a g r a p h r a t h e r t h a n a page.
For Example State y. Anaya, 1997-NMSC-OlO, f 28, 123 N.M. 14, 20, 933 P.2d 223, 229.
[The quote is located in paragraph 28.)
C o n s u l t t h e r ul e o f t h e i u r i s d i c t i o n g o \ e r n i n g n e u t r a l c i t a t i on s . Bo t h t h e liliu'l’ool< a n d
t h e A L W D h a v e t a b l e s / a p p e n d i c e s t ha t set o u t e a c h s t a t e ’s c i t a t i o n rul es a n d f o r m a t s .
H. String Citations—Bluebook R-1.1, R-1.2; ALWD-43.3(a)

W ' h e n a p r o p o s i t i o n is s u p p o r t e d hy m o r e t h a n o n e a u t h o r i t y in a c it at i on clai ise o r s e n t e n c e,
t h e ci t a t i o n is r e f e r r e d to as a strin g c ita tio n . Us e a s e m i c o l o n to s e p a r a t e e a c h a u t h o r i t } cited.
For Example The sudden emergency doctrine tends to elevate its principles above what
is required to be proven in a negligence action. Knapp y. Stanford, 392 So.
2d 196 (Miss. 1980); Simonson v. White, 220 Mont. 14, 713 P.2d 938 (1986).
I h e u s e o f s t r i n g c i t a t i o n s in c o u r t d o c u m e n t s a n d legal m e m o r a n d a is g e n e r a l l y d i s f a
v o r e d , b u t t h e i r u s e is n o t p r o h i b i t e d , l l i e p r e f e r e n c e is t o p r e s e n t o n l y t h e s t r o n g e s t a u t ho r i t }'
in s u p p o r t o f a p r o p o s i t i o n . S t r i n g c i t a t i o n s a r e s e e n m o r e f r eq u en t l }' in p e r i o d i c a l p u b l i c a
t i o n s s u c h as law r e v i ew articles.
I. S hort Citation Forms (Id., Supra, a n d H ereinafter )—

Bluebook R-4, B-5.2, B-6.2, B-8.2, B-9.2, B-10.5; ALWD-11.2
to ALWD-11.4
O n c e t h e full c i t a t i o n to a n a u t h o r i t y is p r e s e n t e d in a d o c u m e n t , s u b s e q u e n t c i t a t i o n s to t h e
a u t h o r i t y m a y b e s h o r t e n e d . T h o s e s h o r t e n e d c i t a t i o n s u s u a l h ' a r e r e f e r r e d to as s h o r t cita tio n s
o r s h o r t - fo r m citations. S h o r t c i t a t i o n s a re u s e d p r i m a r i h ' b e c a u s e t h e \ ’ s a \ e s p a c e a n d ar e less
d i s r u p t i v e to t h e flow o f t h e text. Bluchool< B-3. 2 s t a t e s t h a t s h o r t c i t a t i o n s ma}' b e u s e d w h e n
292
it is (.Icar t r o m tiie s h o r t l o r m w h a t is b e i n g I' el e re nce d, t h e e a r h c r full c i t at i on is in t h e s a m e

g e n e r a l discLission, a n d t h e r e a d e r c a n e a s i k l o c a t e t h e lull ci t a t i o n .
l h e r ul es i n c l u d e d in t h e title t o t h i s s u b s e c t i o n a r e t h e g e n e r a l rul es g o \ e r n i n g s h o r t
c i t a t i o n s , l h e rul es l o r e a c h t\ p e ot c i t a t i o n h a \ e s e c t i o n s o n s h o r t c i t at i on s ; t o r i n s t a n c e , t h e
r u l e goN' er ni ng c a s e c i t a t i o n s h a s a s e c t i o n o n s h o r t c i t a t i o n s a n d t h e rul e g o \ e r n i n g b o o k
c i t a t i o n h a s a s e c t i o n o n s h o r t c i t a t i o n s , l h e d i s c u s s i o n o f e a c h t \ p e o l ' c i t a t i o n in s e c t i o n s 11
a n d 111 ol t hi s c h a p t e r i n c l u d e s t h e s h o r t c i t a t i o n t o r m a t . I hi s s u b s e c t i o n a d d r e s s e s g e n e r a l
r u l e s g o \ e r n i n g all s h o r t c i t a t i o n s a n d p r o \ i des s o m e e x a m p l e s .
1. h i. as a Short C ita tio n

Id. m e a n s “t h e s a m e ” a n d is u s e d t h e s a m e wa \ ' ibid. is us e d . 'I'ou use id., n o t ibid., in legal
w r i t i n g . It is i t ali cized o r u n d e r s c o r e d . W’h e n it is u n d e r s c o r e d , t h e p e r i o d is u n d e r s c o r e d as
well ( i i i ) . Id. is u s e d in c o u r t d o c u m e n t s a n d legal m e m o r a n d a w h e n \' ou a re r e t e r r i n g t h e
r e a d e r t o t h e i n i m e d i a t e K ’ p r e c e d i n g c i t a t i o n . In o t h e r w o r d s , y o u m u s t b e r e t e r r i n g to t h e
s a m e c i t a t i o n as t h e last c i t a t i o n p r e s e n t e d .
For Example Numerous other elements of control follow the percentage of ownership.
Garcia i/. Andrus, 692 F.2d 89, 92 (9th Cir. 1982). For example, if a cotenant
obtains a loan and mortgages the property, he is able to mortgage only his percentage
of ownership interest. If one cotenant rents the whole property to a third party, he must
share the proceeds with his cotenants in acco rd ance with their respective percentages
of ownership. Id. at 94.
I h e u s e o f i i / . i n d i ca t e s t h a t t h e s o u r c e o t t h e s t a t e m e n t is the p r e c e d i n g c i t a t i i m , (j'd/i/ii i ’.
.Aiidni.<. It t h e s o u r c e is o n t h e s a m e p a g e as t h e p r e v i o u s c i t a t i o n ( p a g e 92), iust Id. is u s e d ,
n o t Iil. ill 9/ . I t ' a n o t h e r c i t a t i o n t o l l o w e d ( i u i r i d r. .Aiulnis, t h e u s e o\ id. l o l l o w i n g t h a t c i t a
t i o n l o r e t e r t o ( i a n i a v, .\'id''u> w i ' u l d b e i m p r o p e r
For Example Incorrect use of Id.'. Numerous other elements of control follow the per
centage of ownership. Garcia v. Andrus, 692 F2d 89, 92 (9th Cir. 1982). For
example, if a cotenant obtains a loan and mortgages the property, he is able to mortgage
only his percentage of ownership interest. Appeal of Schramm, 414 N.W.2d. 31, 32 (S.D.
1987). If one cotenant rents the whole property to a third party, he must share the proceeds
with his cotenants in accordance with their respective percentages of ownership. Id. at 94.
l h e u s e oi Id. a t 9-/ to r e t e r t o (uirciii r. A i u l n i i is i m p r o p e r . N o t e t h a t w h e n id. is u s e d

w i t h s t a t u t o r y ’ o r p a r a g r a p h c i t a t i o n s , t h e w o r d a t is n o t i n c l u d e d w h e n r e t e r r i n g t o a d i l l e r -
e n t statLitorv se c t i on.
For Example The full citation of the statute referred to is 18 U.S.C. § 1112 (1994). W hen
I the reference is to § 1113, the short citation is W. § 1113, not Id. at § 1113.
Id. ma \ ' be u s e d t o r a n \ ' legal a u t h o r i t } ' e.Kcept i n t e r n a l e r o s s - r e l e r e n c e s . I n t e r n a l c r o s s -

r e f e r e n c e s ar e t l is c u s s e d in secti(Mi 1\' .| .
293
2. Supra as a Short Citation

S iip n i a.s a sluirt citaticin m e a n s “a b o \ e” a n d is u s e d to refer to a r e f e r e n c e s o u r c e t h a t w a s pre-
\ i o us l y fully c i t e d in a d o c u m e n t . It c a n n o t b e u s e d in p l a c e o t iil In o t h e r w o r d s , iit p n i is n o t
u s e d w h e n r e f e r r i ng to a n i m m e d i a t e h ' p r e c e d i n g cit ed sour ce. It is u s e d to refer to a pre\-iously
c it ed soiu'cc in a d o c u m e n t w h e n t h e r e ha\' e b e e n o t h e r i n t e r v e n i n g cit ed sour c es. Sup ra c a n n o t
b e u s e d to r e t e r to cases, st at ut es, ses si o n laws, o r d i n a n c e s , legislative m a t e r i a l s ( o t h e r t h a n
h e a r i n g s ) , c o i i s t i t u f i o n s , a n d a d n i i n i s t r a t i v e r e g u l at i on s . It is it ali cized o r u n d e r s c o r e d ; w h e n
it is u n d e r s c o r e d , d o n o t u n d e r s c o r e an\' a c c o m p a n \ i ng p u n c t u a t i o n . W' he n u s i n g supra , p u t
t h e a u t h o r ' s last n a n i e first ( o r t h e title w h e n t h e n a m e is n o t a vail able) f o l l o w e d by a c o m n i a ,
t h e n supra. W' he n t h e r e f e r e n c e is t o a p a g e o t h e r t h a n t h e p a ge in t h e ear l i e r ci t at i on , fol kiw
s u p r a w i t h a c o m m a , t h e n at a n d t h e p a g e n u m b e r .
For Example It is clear that a mixed motive does not invalidate zoning restrictions on
adult entertainment as long asthe predominant concern ofthe zoning body
IS legitimate. See Alfred C. Yen, JutJicial Review of the Zoning of Adult Entertainment: A
Search for the Purposeful Suppression of Protected Speech, 12 Pepp. L. Rev. 651, 655
(1985). Courts have noted that respect must be given to the community's need to preserve
the quality of life. Las Vegas i/. Nevada Industries, Inc., 105 Nev. 174,772 R2d 1275 (1989).
The key question is what is the predominant concern ofthe zoning body. Yen, supra, at 657.
In thi s e x a m p l e , s u p r a is u s e d b e c a u s e a d i f f e r e n t c i t a t i o n a p p e a r s b e t w e e n t h e Yen
c i t a t i o n a n d t h e s e c o n d r e f e r e n c e to t h e Yen article. If t h e s e c o n d Yen r e f e r e n c e i m m e d i a t e l y
l o l l o w e d t h e first full c i t a t i on , /</. w o u l d b e used.
For Example It is clear that a mixed motive does not invalidate zoning restrictions on
adult entertainment as long asthe predominant concern ofthe zoning body
IS legitimate. See Alfred C. Yen, Judicial Review ofthe Zoning of Adult Entertainment: A
Search for the Purposeful Suppression of Protected Speech, 12 Pepp. L. Rev. 651, 655
(1985). The key question is what is the predominant concern ofthe zoning body. Id. at 657.
3. H e r e i n a f t e r as a S hort C itatio n
H e r e in a fte r m a \ ' b e u s e d in c e r t a i n c i r c u m s t a n c e s to s h o r t e n a l o n g title t h a t is c u m b e r s o m e
to cit e r epeat edl y, s u c h as w h e n t h e s o u r c e h a s n o a u t h o r a n d t h e title is l ong. H e r e in a fte r is
a l s o u s e d w h e n tw'o o r m o r e a u t h o r i t i e s a p p e a r in a f o o t n o t e a n d t h e u se o i su p ra w o u l d b e
c o n f u s i n g . Place t h e h e r e i n a f t e r d e s i g n a t i o n in o r d i na r y ' t y p e in b r a c k e t s ([ ]) i m n i e d i a t e l y
f o l l o w i n g t h e e n d o f t h e first full ci t at i on to t h e a u t ho r i t y. ' I h e s h o r t e n e d f o r m s h o u l d cl earl y
i d en t i f \ ' t h e aufhorifx'.
For Example Assume here that the article in the previous example does not have an
I author: It is clear that a mixed motive does not invalidate zoning restric-
I tions on adult entertainment as long as the predominant concern ofthe zoning body is
I legitimate. See Judicial Review of the Zoning of Adult Entertainment: A Search for the
I Purposeful Suppression of Protected Speech, 12 Pepp. L. Rev. 651 (1985) [hereinafter
! Adult Entertainment Zoning].
294
J, In te rn a l Cross-References (Supra an d ỉn/ra)—Bluebook

R-3.5; ALWD-10
o f t e n , es p e c i al l y w h e n a d o c u m e n t is loiii; o r i n c k i d c s m a n \ ' t o ol i i ut e s , \()11 will w a n t to r e l er
t h e r e a d e r to s o u r c e ma t e ri a l o n a s p c á t ì c paííc, s e c t i o n , o r f o o t n o t e ot t h e d d c u m e n t . Fh)|-
t h a t p u r p o s e , s u p ra is u s e d t o refer to m a t e r i a l lliat a p p e a r s e a r l i e r ill t h e d o c i i n i e n t a n d in fn i
is u s e d t o r e t er t o m a t e r i a l t h a t a p p e a r s later. W h e n u s e d in lliis Lontcxt , h a s a d i f i e rc n t
f u n c t i o n f r o m its u s e as a s ho r t ci t at i on. W' h e n u s e d as a s ho r t c i t at i on, iiip n i refers II) a speci fic
s o u r c e , s u c h as a l a w r e v i ew article'. As i n t e r n a l c r o s s - r e f e r e n c e s , siiprti a n d iiựra refer to p a r t s
o t ' t h e d o c u m e n t , n o t speci fic so u r c e s . T h e t e r m s a i e e i t h e r it ali cized (ir u n d e r s c o r e d , a n d it
m a y b e n e c e s s a r \ ’ t o a d d a n e x p l a n a t o r \ - p a re n t l i e t i c a l t o i d e n t i t \ ’ t h e r et cr e n c e .
For Example See supra pp. 9-11 (discussing the rights of third parties)
Supra n. 7 (cases supporting third-party claims)
Supra Section III.B-F
Infra notes 8-9 and accompanying text
Infra pp. 23-25 and note 16
Infra Part II. A and B (discussing interrogatory questions)
K. Signals— Bluebook R-1.2 to R-l .5; ALWD-44 to ALWD-46

S ig n a ls a r e t e r m s o r w o r d s u s e d to I n d i ca t e t h e m a n n e r in wiiicli t h e ci t ed a u t h o r i t ) s u p p o r t s
o r c o n t r a d i c t s t h e te.xt. A si gnal is n o t u s e d w h e n t h e c i t a t i on i d e n t i h c s t h e s o u r c e o f a ciut)la-
t i on, d i r e c t l y s u p p o r t s a s t a t e m e n t , o r i d e n t i t i e s t h e a u t h o r i t )' in rcl e r e nc c.
For Example The United States Supreme Court has adopted the "good faith" exception
to the exclusionary rule. United States i/. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984).
1. T y p e s o f S ign a ls
F o l l o w i n g is a list o f c i t a t i on s i g na l s wi t h e x a m p l e s o f t h e i r use:
/-.'.^. — I n d i c a t e s t ha t t h e c i t e d au t h o r i t ) - is r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f ( o r ai-| e x a m p l e of) n-ian\-

o t h e r a u t h o r i t i e s t h a t s t a n d for t h e s a m e p r o p o s i t i o n . It m a y b e u s e d w ith o t h e r s i g
nals, s u c h as see, e.g. a n d b u t sec, e.g.
S e e — U s e d to i n d i c a t e t ha t t h e c i t e d aut h o r i t ) - c l e a rh ' s u p p o r t s a p r o p o s i t i o n b u t d o e s
n o t d i r e c t l y st ate t h e p r o p o s i t i oi i .
S ee a lso — U s e d t o show- a d d i t i o n a l a u t h o r i t y t ha t s u p p o r t s a p r o p o s i t i o n .
See g e n e r a lly — U s e d to identif)- a u t h o r i t )- t h a t p r e s e n t s h e l p f u l b a c k g r o u n d i n f o r m a t i o n
re l at e d t o t h e s t a t e d p r o p o s i t i o n .
A c c o r d — U s e d to i n d i c a t e o t h e r c a s e s t h a t st a t e o r s u p p o r t a p ropositi t) ii . It is p l a c e d
aft er t h e c i t a t i o n g i v e n in s u p p o r t o f t h e p r o p o s i t i o n .
(J/. — I n d i c a t e s a u t h o r i t ) t ha t s u p p o r ts a p r o p o s i t i o n (lifferent fron-| b u t ai' i alogous to t h e

p r o p o s i t i o n st ated.
C o m p a r e ... w i t h — U s e d t o c o n i p a r e a u t h o r i t i e s t h a t ma)- il lustrat e o r r e a c h a r esult dil'

fer ent f r o m t h e s t a t e d p r o p o s i t i o n . T h e IV n e b o o k a n d t h e A L W D d i t f e r s o n i e w h a t in
t h e i r u se o f co m p are.
295
B u t .H’i’— U s e d ti) i d e n t i t y a ut hor i t }' t h a t c o n t r a d i c t s t h e s t at e d p r o p o s i t i o n .

B ut if. — I de nt i t i e s au t h o r i t }' t h a t s u p p o r t s a prt>pt)sition ai' ialogous to t h e c o n t r a r \ ’
ol t h e s t at e d p r o p o s i t i o n .
— U s e d t o identit}' autht>rit}' tliat d i r e c t h ' c o n t r a d i c t s t h e st at ed p r o p o s i t i o n .
2. P resen ta tio n
Câpitalize t h e tirst l e t t e r ol a si gnal t h a t b e g i n s a s e n t e n c e . Italicize o r u n d e r s c o r e s i g n a ls a n d
s e p a r a t e t h e m f r o m t h e rest o f t h e c i t at i on w i t h a space. Use a s e m i c o l o n t o s e p a r a t e e a c h
au t h o r i t }' w i t h i n a signal. B o t h t h e B lu e b o o k a n d t h e A L W D s t r o n g h ' r e c o m m e n d t h e u se o f
p a r e n t h e t i c a l e . x p l an a t i o n s to d e s c r i b e t h e r e i e \ a n c e ol t h e ci t ed authorit}' . S o m e e x a m p l e s o f
t h e u s e o f si gn a l s a r e p r e s e n t e d here.
For Example See, e.g., Renton V. Playtime Theatres, Inc., 475 U.S. 41, 55 (1986); Young V.
American Mini Theatres, Inc., 427 U.S. 50, 59 (1976).
Goldstar (Panama) s.A. I/, United States, 967 F.2d 965, 968 (4th Cir. 1992); accord
Argentine Republic M. Amerada Hess Shipping Corp., 488 U.S. 428, 442 (1989) (Supreme
Court determining thatthe convention setforth only substantive rules of conduct and did
not create a private right).
Contra Knapp 1/, Stanford, 392 So. 2d 196, 198 (Miss. 1981) (sudden em ergency
doctrine confuses the principle of comparative negligence).
3. O rd er o f P resen ta tio n
F o l l o w i n g is a s u m m a r } ' ot t h e o r d e r o f p i ' es e n t a t i o n ot a u t h o r i t i e s , ( o r a d e t a i l e d hst, r e t er to
t h e B lu e b o o k a n d t h e A I M 'D . P r e s e n t c i t at i on s iii t h e l o l l o w i n g o r d e r :
a. ( ' o n s t i t u t i o n s — t e de r a l c o n s t i t u t i o n , t o l l o w e d b\' st ate c o n s t i t u t i o n s ( a l p h a b e t i -

call}' b\' state), t h e n t o r ci g n c o n s t i t u t i o n s ( a l p h a b e t i c a l h ' b\' c ount r }' )
b. S t a t u t e s — t e d e r a l s t a t u t es ( c h r o n o l o g i c a l h b}' title n u m b e r ) , f ol l owe d b\' st ate

s t at u t es ( a l p h a b e t i c a l l y b}' state), t h e n f o r e i gn st at u t es ( al phabeti cal!}' b}' countr}-)
c. ( ' a s e s — t ed e r a l c a se s ( s t a r t i n g w i t h t h e h i g h e s l c o t n t t o t h e l owest coLirt), t o l

l o w e d by st a t e c as e s ( a l ph a b e ti c a l h - by st ate I r o m t h e h i g h e s t t o t h e lowe st c o u r t s ) ,
t h e n f o r e i g n c a ses ( a l ph a bc t i c a l h - b}- c o u n t r } )
d. A d m i n i s t r a t i v e a n d e x e c u t i v e m a t e r i a l s — s u c h as t h e CJ R or executi\-e o r d e r s
0. Legisl ati ve m a t e r i a l s — s u c h as bills a n d legislative histor}-
f. Secondar}- a u t h o r i t y — see B l u e b o o k R-1.3 o r A l . \ \ ' l ) - 4 6 . 4 ( c ) t o r t h e o r d e r o f p r e

sentation of se c o n d a r y authority
L. Sections (§) a n d Paragraphs (H)—Bluebook R-3.4; ALWD-6

F o l l o w i n g is a s u m m a r y o t c i t a t i o n r u l e s w' h e n ai-i a u t h o r i t y is o r g a n i z e d by s e c t i o n s o r
paragraphs.
Ins e r t a spa c e b e f o r e a n d aft er t he se ct i on o r p a r a g r a p h ss n i b o l — 1<S U.S.C. § 2 1 1 1 (1994).
D o n o t u s e a t w h e n r e f e r r i n g t o a p a r a g r a p h o r s e c t i on.
For Example Correct: Id. § 2111
Incorrect: /Ơ. at § 2111
296
W'licn lilt' a u t h o r i t \ ' is dix idcd i nt o s u b s e c t i o n s o r s u b p a r a g r a p h s , us e tiu' p u n c t u a t i o n o f

t h e o r i g i n a l s o u r c e to s e p a r a t e s e c t i o n s a n d s u b s e c t i o n s . W' he n t h e s o u r c e d o e s n o t h a v e a n y
p u n c t u a t i o n , p l a c e t h e su b d i s i s ions in p a r e n t h e s e s — 18 U.S.c;. 8 4 2 ( a ) ( I ). N o t e t h a t t h e r e is
n o s p a c e b e t w e e n t h e m a i n s e c t i o n 8 1 2 a n d t h e s u b s e c t i o n s (a)( I ).
A s e c t i o n m a y i n c l u d e a let ter as pa r t o f t h e d e s i g n a t i o n . In t ha t case, t h e le t t e r d o e s n o t
r e f e r t o a s u b s e c t i o n . I h e r e t o r e , d o n o t s e p a r a t e it w i t h p u n c t u a t i o n ; for e x a m p l e , 42 U.S.C.
$ 2()0()e- 1(a) ( 1 9 9 4 ) , n o t 42 U.S.C^ § 2()00(e)( 1 )(a) ( 1994) . ' I h e c is p a rt o f t h e s e c t i o n d e s i g n a
t i o n a n d d o e s n o t ref e r to a s u b s e c t i o n .
W’h e n c i t i n g c o n s e c u t i v e s e c t i o n s o r p a r a g r a p h s , i n c l u d e t h e first a n d last s e c t i o n s a n d
s e p a r a t e t h e s e c t i o n s wi t h a h y p h e n , a en d a sh , o r to. Ret ai n all di gi t s o n b o t h si des o f t h e s p a n .
U s e c o n s e c u t i v e s c c t i o n o r p a r a g r a p h s\ i n b o l s to r e f e r e n c e m u l t i p l e s e c t i o n s o r p a r a g r a p h s .
For Example Correct: TIU 115-123; §§ 15 to 17
Incorrect: 115-23; §§ 15 to 7
W' he n c i t i n g m u l t i p l e s e c t i o n s o r p a r a g r a p h s t ha t a r e n o t c o n s e c u t i v e , p l a c e a c o m m a
b e t w e e n t h e s e c t i o n s o r p a r a g r a p h s a n d d o n o t pl a c e d u d o r 6' b e f o r e t h e h n a l s e c t i o n o r
paragraph.
For Example Correct: HHl 15, 123, 129; §§ 15, 17, 19
Incorrect: 1111115, 123, and 129; §§ 15, 17, & 19
W’h e n c i t i n g m u l t i p l e s u b s e c t i o n s o r s L i b p a r ag r a p h s ot a si ngl e s e c t i o n o r p a r a g r a p h ,
u se o n e s e c t i on o r p a r a g r a p h s\ nibol .
For Example § 231 (a)-(t); II 22(g)-(k) (multiple consecutive subsections and subparagraphs)
§ 231(a), (f), (k); 1| 22(a), (g), (k) (multiple nonconsecutive subsections and
subparagraphs)
M. Electronic Sources—Bluebook R-18; ALWD-38

to ALWD-42
Bot h t h e B liic lw o k a n d t h e .■M.W'D st at e t h at if t h e a ut hor i t }' is r ea di l y a va i l ab l e in p r i n t , t h e
c i t a t i on s h o u l d b e to t h e p r i n t s o u r c e . It is n ot necessar}' to r ef er e n c e t h e e l e c t r o n i c s o u r c e ,
s u c h as W'estlaw' o r I.exisN'exis. I h a t r u l e a p p l i es u n l e s s t h e d o c u n i e n t s a r e n o t axa i l abl e as
p r i n t e d s o u r c e s o r a re difficult to obt ai i i , s u c h as u n p u b l i s h e d cases. I h e B lu e b o o k a n d t h e
A l . W n di i fer as to e le c t r o n i c c i t at i on details; t h e r ef o r e , }'ou s h o u l d c h e c k t h e r u l es w' hen c i t
i ng t h o s e s o u r ce s . I-'or e x a m p l e , in t h e A I.W D , c i t a t i o n s to W’est l a w a n d I.exisN'exis a r e p l a c e d
in p a r e n t h e s e s w i t h t h e w o r d s iiviiilciblc in W L o r a va ila b le in L exisN e xis, t ha t is, a va i l ab l e in
I exisN' exis in t h e I.egal N e w s d a t a b a s e . In t h e B lu e b o o k, W' estlaw a n d L ex i s N e x i s c i t a t i o n s ar e
not p l a c e d in p a r e n t h e s e s a n d a r e n ot p r e c e d e d by availa ble in. T h e e x a m p l e s in t h i s s u b s e c
tion f'ollow t h e B lu e b o o k f o r ma t .
Ill g e n e r a l , a c i t a t i o n t o a n a u t h o r i t \ ' s h o u l d i n c l u d e i n t o r n i a t i o n t h a t clearl}' i n d i c a t e s
t h e s o u r c e . I h e r ul e s g c n e r n i n g e l e c t r o n i c sovu'ces a r e t]uite d e t a i l e d , a n d it is b e y o n d t h e
s co p e o f thi s text to p r e s e n t a d i s c u s s i o n o f e a c h rule. I h e r e f o r e , t hi s s e c t i o n c o n t a i n s a b r i e f
s un i ni a r x ' ol t h e ke\' p o i n t s for c i t i n g e l e c t r o n i c soin' ces.
297
1. Commercial Sources
D u e t o t h e rel iabi li ty o f d a t a b a s e s , B lu e b o o k R~ 18.1 r e c o m m e n d s t h e u se ot c o m m e r c i a l e l e c
t r o n i c d a t a b a s e s o v e r o t h e r I n t e r n e t s o u r c e s . In a d d i t i o n to t h e u s u a l i n t o r m a t i o n gi\ e n in a
c i t at i on , s u c h as a c as e n a m e o r s t a t u t e n u m b e r , t h e d a t a b a s e i de n t i f i e r m u s t be i n c l u d e d in
t h e c i t a t i o n . ' I h e i d e n t i f i e r u s u a l h ' i n c l u d e s t h e d a t a b a s e nai i i e “L EX I S ” (B lu eb o o k ) a n d “ Lexis"
( A L W D ) f or L e x i s N e x i s a n d W L for W e s t l a w ; \'ear; a n d d o c u m e n t n u ni b e r . .Some e x a m p l e s
o t c i t a t i o n s to W e s t h u v anci L e x i s Ne x i s are p r e s e n t e d here.
For Example Unpublished cases: Christians v. Stafford, No. 14-99-00038-CV, 2000 Tex.
App. LE X IS 6423 (Tex. Ct. App. Oct. 26, 2000)
Devji V. Keller, No. 03-99-00436-CV, 2000 Tex. App. W L 1862819, at *2 (Tex. Ct. App.
Dec. 2L 2000)
Note: W h e n y o u a r e r e f e r r i n g to a speci fic s c r e e n o r p a g e n u m b e r , pl a c e a n a s t e r i s k be f o r e

t h e n u m b e r (nt *2 in t h e p r e c e d i n g e x a n i p l c ) . W' h e n t h e r e f e r e n c e is to a specific p a r a g r a p h
n u m b e r , p r e c e d e t h e n u m b e r w i t h t h e p a r a g r a p h s \ ' m b o l a n d d o n o t use at 15). I h e pre\' i-
o u s e x a m p l e r e f e r e n c e s a s peci fi c s c r e e n p a g e n u n i b e r .
C o n g r e s s i o n a l bills; H. R. 1167, 106th C o n g . ( 19 9 9 ) W'l. 1999 C Q L'S H R 1167;

H. R. 301, 107t h C o n g . ( 20 0 1 ) I.HXIS A r c h i v e d Bill Text a n d Tracki ng l ibrary, 106th
C o n g r e s s file
N e ws l e t t e r ; K i m Biello, S u s a n Beck, . An d r e w l . o n g s t r e t h . B a r Tidk, I h e A m e r i c a n Taw-

\'er, Sept. 20 0 1, a\' ai labl e iii LKXIS I.egal N e w s Tibrar y, I h e A m e r i c a n T a w \ e r file
I,aw r ev i ew: A l f r e d C. Yen, Judiciid R cv icn ' o f th e Z o n i n g o f A d u lt E n te r ta in m e n t:

A Search fo r th e P u r p o s e fu l S u p p re ssio n o f P ro te cte d Speech, 12 I’epp. T. Re\'. 651
( 1 9 8 5 ) , WT, 12 F H P L R 6 5 1
2. W orld W id e W eb S o u r ces
A n o n l i n e c i t a t i o n s h o u l d i nc l ud e ; t h e full n a m e of t h e a u t h o r o r o w n e r ; t h e title in italics;
p i n p o i n t r e f e r e n c e s s u c h as p a r a g r a p h n u n i b e r s , if a n \ ; t h e L'RI. ( W e b ad d r e s s ) ; a n d t he d at e
e n c l o s e d in p a r e n t h e s e s .
For Example M SN B C , M SNBC Home News, Oil Prices Sink after OPEC Dithers, <http://
www.msnbc.com/news/657546.asp ■(Nov 15, 2001).
A L W ' D - 12.5 s t a t e s t h a t if a c as e is a v a i l a b l e in a r e p o r t e r o r t h r o u g h a n o n l i n e d a t a b a s e
s u c h as W e s t l a w , o t h e r I n t e r n e t s o u r c e s s h o u l d n o t b e cit ed.
V. KEY POINTS CHECKLIST: legal Citation

y' W h e n c h e c k i n g c i t a t i on s , a l w a y s c o n s u l t a n a u t h o r i t y , s u c h as t h e B lu e b o o k o r t h e
A L W D C ita tio n M a n u a l.
/ M a k e s u r e t h e a p p r o p r i a t e w o r d s in a c i t at i on , s u c h as ca se n a m e s a n d art i cl e titles,
a r e p r o p e r h ' i t al i ci zed o r u n d e r l i n e d .
/ C h e c k t h e r u l e s a n d t a b l es o r a p p e n d i c e s to e n s u r e t h a t w o r d s , s u c h as In co rp o ra te d
a n d S o u th E a ste rn R e p o rte r, ar e p r o p e r l y c a p i t al i ze d , a b b r e \ ' i a t ed , a n d sp a c e d .
298
W h e n signals, s u c h as See u lio , arc i n c l u d e d in a c i t a t i o n , c h e c k t o e n s u r e t h a t y o u

a r e u s i n g t h e m p r o p e r K ’.
( ^heck t he use ol id. a n d o t h e r s h o r t c i t at i on s . Is t h e u s e ot a s h o r t c i t a t i o n p r o p e r ? II

so, is t he ci t a t i on t o r m a t p r o p e r ?
C' heck case c i t a t i on s t o e n s u r e tiiat all t h e e l e m e n t s a r e p r e s e n t — c a s e n a m e , r e p o r t e r

\- okmi e, a n d page, p i n p o i n t p a g e i t ' t h e c i t a t i o n is t o a speci fi c p a g e , p aral l el c i t at i on
(i f a ny) , c o u r t a b b r e \ i a t i o n if n e c e s s a r y , y e a r o f t h e d e c i s i o n in p a r e n t h e s e s , a n d
s u b s e q u e n t hi s t ory, if an \ \
M a k e s u r e all t h e e l e m e n t s o f s t a t u t o r y c i t a t i o n s a r e p r e s e n t . St a t ut or \ - c i t a t i o n s u s u
al h' i nc l ud e t h e n a m e o f t h e c o d e o r c o d e a b b r e \ i a t i o n ; t h e s e c t i o n s \ i n b o l (§); title,
c h ap t e r , o r s e c t i o n n u m b e r s ; a n d , in p a r e n t h e s e s , t h e p u b l i s h e r it it is a c o m m e r c i a l
p u b l i c a t i o n a n d t h e \ e a r t h e x ' ol u me w a s p u b l i s h e d .
I' or an\- o t h e r c i t at i on , s u c h as a s e c o n d a r ) ' c i t a t i o n , c h e c k t h e r u l es to e n s u r e t h a t all

the elements o f t h e citation are pres ent a n d p ro p e r h ' used.
VI. APPLICATION
M i k e ’s r e s e a r c h m e n i o is b a s e d o n t w o c a s e s a n d a ( i e o r gC*i a s t at u t e . .As h e r e s e a r c h e d , h e w r o t e
t h e m d o w n as follows: In t h e I n t e r e st o f M. N. I. . \'ol. 221 ( i e t t r g i a A p p e a l s C o u r t p a g e 12.^
a n d v o l u m e -170 S o ut h l i as t e r n R e p o r t e r 2 d p a g e 753, ' 9 9 6 ; In t h e I n t er e s t o f Cj.L.II. vol. 209
( l e o r g i a A p p e a l s Côlu'I p a g e 146 a n d v o l u m e 4 3 3 S o u t h l i a s t e r n R e p o r t e r 2 d p a g e 357, 1993;
S ec t i on 15-] 1-94 o f t h e ( i e o r g i a ( ^ o d e A n n o t a t e d 2()00. B\' r e f e r r i n g e i t h e r t o B lu c h o o k Rule
10, P r a c t i t i o n e r s ’ N o t e P. 1 a n d Table I'.l, o r to A I.W 'D Rule 12 a n d Ap p e n d i . x 1, M i k e wi>uld
c o n x e r t his ca s e not es to t h e l o l l o w i n g c i t at i on s : In ih c In lcrc il of M . S . I . . , 221 Cl a . Ap p . 123,
4 70 S.i;.2d 753 (1996); In th e Interest o fC ,.I..H .. 2(,I9 ( i a. Ap p . 146, 4 3 3 S.I'..2 d 3 5 7 ( 1 9 9 3 ) .
Aftei' c o n s u l t i n g B lu c h o o k Rule 12 a n d Table T. I ov A I.W 'D Ru l e 11 a n d , -\ p p e n d i x I , h e w o u l d
p r o p e r l v ci t e t he s t at ut e as (i a. C o d e A n n . «j 15 11 -94 ( 2000) .
Sum m ary
w h e n e v e r a r e t e r e n ee is m a d e in legal w r i t i n g to a p r i m a r y o r s e c o n d a r ) ' legal a u t h o r i t ) , t h e
s o u r c e ot t h e r e f e r e nc e m u s t b e i d e n t i l i e d . Ihi s r e f e r e n c e is c a l l e d a c i t at i on . .A c i t a t i o n p ro -
\ ides t h e i n f o r m a t i o n n e c e s s a r \ ’ to a l l o w t h e l e a d e r t o l o c a t e t h e r e f er e n c e , t h u s a l l o w i n g t h e
r eat l er t<' c h e c k its c o n t e n t , ( . ' i tati ons a r e usual !)' r e q u i r e d in m o s t legal w r i t i n g , s u c h as olt ice
legal m e m o r a n d a , a n d ma)' b e i n c l u d e d in g e n e r a l legal c o r r e s p o n d e n c e o r o t h e r d o c u m e n t s
whei'i t h e r e is r e f e r e nc e to a legal a ut hor i t ) ' .
It is ess ent i al t h a t t h e i n f o r m a t i o n i n c l u d e d in a c i t a t i o n b e c o r r e c t . It is us el e s s to ref er
a r e a d e r t o a s o u r c e ol i n f o r m a t i o n a n d i n c o r r e c t h ' identit')' t h e l o c a t i o n o t t h e s o u r c e .
l h e m a i n g u i d e s a n d s o u r c e s o f a u t h o r i t ) ' o n legal c i t a t i o n s a r e l h e B lu c h o o k : A U n ifo r m
S y s te m o f C ita tio n ( B lu c h o o k ) a n d t h e A l . W 'D C 'itation M a n u a l : A P ro fe ssio n a l S y s te m o f C i t a
tio n. ' Ihi s c h a p t e r p r e s e n t s a b r i e f r e \ ' i e w o f t h e m a i n r u l es o f c it at i on .
l h e c h a p t e r b e g i n s wi t h a n o v e r \ ' i e w o f t h e n u m e r o u s r u l e s o f c i t a t i o n u s e d w h e n c i t i n g
p r i m a r ) ' a u t h o r i t ) , t hat is, case, c o n s t i t u t i o n a l , a n d e n a c t e d ( s t a t u t o r ) ' ) law. ' I h e n e x t s e c t i o n
s u m m a r i z e s t h e c i t at i on I ' ormat f o r m a j o r s e c o n d a r y s o u r c e s s u c h as legal e n c ) ' c l o p c d i a s ,
.A n n o ta te d L a w R ep orts ( A L R ) , law re\ ' iews. R e s t a te m e n ts , a n d t r eati ses.
l h e c h a p t e r c o n c l u d e s w i t h a n o \ ’e r\ ' i e w o f b a s i c r u l es o f citatioi'i to b e I' ollowed w h e n
c i t i n g m o s t legal sour ces. A m o n g o t h e r t o p i cs , t h e s e c t i o n c o v e r s t h e u s e o f italics, a b b r e \ ia-
ti ons , c a p i t a l i z a t i on , q u o t a t i o n s , p i n p o i i i t c i t a t i o n s, s h o r t c i t a t i o n s , s i g n a l s, a n d c i t a t i o n s t('>
e l e c t r o n i c s o ur c e s .
299
In a s i mi cl i as b o t h B lu e b o o k a n d .4/. \ \ 7 ) c o n s i s t o f h u n d r e d s ot p a ges, a d e t a i l e d d i s c u s
si on o f t h e c i t at i on r ul es o f e i t he r text is b e s ' o n d t he s co p e o f thi s c h a p te r . Ihi s c h a p t e r i n c l u d e s
l e l e r e n c e s to r u l es f r o m b o t h AI.W'I') a n d B lu e b o o k w i t h t h e goal o f p r o \ i d i n g q u i c k a ccess t o
t h e m a i n l■Llle.^ o f c i t a t i o n in e i t h e r a u t h o r i t y .
Abbre\'iations 284 P i n p o i j i t c i t a t i on s 291
A I.R 277 Proced ur al phrases 267
(Capit ali zati on 285 Quotations 286
(Case law 263 R e s t a te m e n ts 280
(Citation 261 Short citations 292
(ConstitLitions 272 Si gnal s 295
FClectronic s o u r c e s 297 Slip o p i n i o n s 269
Id. 293 St a r p a g i n g 269
I n t e r n a 1 Lr o s s - I'e fe r e n c e s 295 S t a t u t o r y law 273
Italics 281 String citations 292
Legal e i i c\ ' cl o p e d i a 278 Supra 294
N e u t r a l c i t a t i on s 272 Treatise 280
I’eri otl ical s 279
In t e r n e t R e s o u r c e s
http;//www.ahvd.org
Ihis W'eb site for the AI.W'I) C.iiation M a n u a l incl udes m a n y features such as ad d i t i onal
material, exampl es, a n d updates.
http;//w ww.iegalbluehook.com
Ihis W'eb site incl udes i n f o r ma t i o n on the n i n e t e e n t h edi t i on o f t h e Bluebook.
Exercises
A d d i t i o n a l as.îgninent.^ are a viulab le on the C ourie.M ate. 'Ihe A m e r i c a n C ivil L iberties U n io n v. M ic r o n M a iu ig e -

F o r t h e fol lo w in g exercises, use e it he r B lu e b o o k i n c n t C o r p o r a tio n d b a 'Taylor .M a n a g e m e n t
o r A I.W D .
ASSIGNMENT 2
ASSIGNMENT! Ciive t h e c o r r e c t c i t a t i o n for t h e f o l l o w i n g c ase, i n c l u d e
F r o \ i d e t h e c o r r e c t c it at io n n a m e for th e fol lo w in g t h e p a r a l l el ci t a t i o n s: I h e U n i t e d St at es o f A m e r i c a v e r
cases: s us M a t l o c k , x’o l u m e 94, p a g e 9 8 8 o f t h e S u p r e m e C o u r t
'¡he U n ite d Stiites of A n u 'r ie a i'. 'Ihoina s Terry R epo rter, v o l u m e 39, p a g e 2 42 o f t h e U n ite d States S u p r e m e
C o u r t R ep orts, L a w y e r ’s E d itio n , \ ' o l u m e 41 5 , p a g e 164 o f
M a r y K a y Kraft, M a r k lo ln iio n . a n d \'a n e iia H a y i v.
t h e U n ite d States R ep o rts, d e c i d e d F e b r u a r ) ' 20, 1974.
jo se p h B e a z le y a n d the C ity ol ('h ie a g o
K e r r y H a n d l e et al v. 'Ihe ¡a in e sto w n (A ioperative ASSIGNMENTS
K a lley I n s titu te v. CiU-rington In su ra n c e C o m p a n y , ( i i \ e t h e c o r r e c t c i t at i on for t h e f o l l o w i n g case, i n c l u d e the
I n c o r p o r a te d p aral l el c i t a t i o n s; D o u g l a s D. R o b b e r t s v e r s u s C a r r o l l E.
S w a i n , v o l u m e -487 S o u th R a s tc n i R e p o r te r p a g e 760, Ncirth ASSIGNMENT 10
C a r o l i n a A p p e a l s C o u r t 1997. I h e c i t a t i o n is tii p a g e 766. Ciive t h e c o r r e c t c i t a t i on to s e c t i o n 40 o f t h e t r e a t i s e I h e L a w
ASSIGNMENT 4 ol I'orts b\- D a n B. D o b b s p u b l i s h e d b\- We s t G r o u p in 2000.

C o r r e c t t h e t o l l o w i n g c i t a t i on : H o a n g N g u y e n v l a s a n o ASSIGNMENT 11
8 4 R S u p p . 2 d 1099, ( S . D. Ca l . 20 0 0 ) . ( i i \ ’e t h e c o r r e c t c i t a t i o n f o r t h e f o l l o w i n g l a w j o u r n a l
ASSIGNMENTS a rt i cl e: A n a r t i c l e b y D o u g l a s |. ( i u n n e n t i t l e d Torts —
N e g l i g e n c e — I h e S u d d e n K m e r g e n c y D o c t r i n e is a b o l i s h e d
C o r r e c t t h e f o l l o w i n g c i t a t i on : l.\ n d a H e r n d o n \'. lacki e
in Mi ssi ssi ppi , v o l u m e 31, p a g e 301 o f t h e Mi s s i s s i p p i l.aw
B a r r e n , 101 N . C. A p p . 636; 4 0 0 S.E. 2d 769 ( N. C. Ap p . 1991).
I o u r n a l p u b l i s h e d in 1980.
ASSIGNMENTS W h a t is t h e s h o r t c i t a t i on ?
G i v e t h e c o r r e c t c i t a t i o n f o r t h e f o l l o w i n g st at ut es: Title
ASSIGNMENT 12
e i g h t e e n o f t h e U n ite d States C o d e s e c t i o n 1112 t h e 1999
Cii\e t h e c o r r e c t c i t a t i o n to t h e R e s t a t e m e n t o f t h e L a w o f
e d i t i o n . Ti t l e e i g h t e e n o f t h e U n ite d S ta tes C o d e A n n o t a t e d
Torts ' I h i r d , A p p o r t i o n m e n t o f Liabilit}' S e c t i o n s 8 t h r o u g h
s e c t i o n 1112 by We s t G r o u p 2 0 0 0 a n d title e i g h t e e n o f t h e
10, 1999.
U n ite d S tates C o d e S e rvic e by Le.xisNexis 2000.
ASSIGNMENT 13
ASSIGNMENT?
G i v e t h e c i t a t i o n to a n A m e r i c a n La w R e p o r t s T' ederal a n
Gi ve t h e c o r r e c t c i t a t i on for t h e fol lowing: t h e fifth A m e n d
n o t a t i o n p u b l i s h e d in 1999 in t h e 133 \ ' o l u m e at p a g e 533.
m e n t t o t h e U n i t e d States C ' o n s t i t u t i o n ; a r t i c l e f o u r s e c t i o n
' Ih e a n n o t a t i o n is e n t i t l e d "Htiect o f Use, o r .-Vlleged Use, o f
t h r e e o f t h e U n i t e d Stat es C o n s t i t u t i o n .
I n t e r n e t o n P e r s o n a l l u r i s d i c t i o n in, o r W n u e of, F e d er a l
ASSIGNMENTS (A)urt c; as e” b\- l a s o n 1 1. lùUon.
C o r r e c t t h e f ol l owi ng c it ati ons: 26 U. S. (;. §112; U. S. Cônst.
ASSIGNMENT 14
A m e n d 4.
W h a t is t h e s h o r t c i t a t i on f o r m a t for a s s i ^ n n i e n t s 12 a n d 13?
ASSIGNMENTS
C o r r e c t t h e f o l l o w i n g c i t a t i o n : \' ol . 6 . A m e r i c a n |ui'.
( s e c o n d ) , A s s a u h a n d B a tte ry , §2( 1999).
^ ^ tools, including flash cards, quizzes, and more. To learn more about this resource and access
f CourseMate free demo CourseMate resources, gotowww.cengagebrain.com, and search forthis book.
PART III
Th e Spec ific s
r?
OF L e g a l A n a l y s i s
OVERVIEW
Part III covers matters essential to the analysis of a legal
problem. It begins w ith a chapter on a principal component
of a legal question (legal issue), the key facts— facts critical
to the outcome of the case.
Next are tw o chapters on identifying and writing legal
issues;
1. Identifying the legal issue presented by a fact
situation or in a court opinion
2. Stating or presenting the issue
303
PART III THE SPECIFICS OF LEGAL ANALYSIS
Part III concludes w ith tw o chapters on topics fundamental to legal analysis:

1. Case law analysis— the analytical process used to determine if a court
opinion applies to a legal question
2. Counteranalysis— the process of discovering and considering the
counterargument to a legal position or argument
304
Legal Analysis— Key Facts
Alice- w as r i’co n tly h ire d hv K in s c \ I.aw l in n an d placo d u n d e r the g u id a n c e an d supervisii)|-|
O u tlin e
ot K a re n , a 13-ye a r veteran p aralegal. K a re n d id an ii-iitial in te rv ie w w ilh a c lie n t, .Mr. .Aper, and
.M ice sat in on the interv iew to o lis e r\ e the p ro ce ss an d g a in e.\perienee. .-\lter the in te rvie w , 1. liitroductioii
K a re n told .A lice, “ I'n i g o in g lo p re p are a s in iin ia r y ot the in te rvie w , then p re p a ie a list ot'the II. I'acts iti ( i e n e r a l — nefi rti li on
po te n tial issues. I want yon to id e n t ily the key tacts that sh o u ld be in c lu d e d in the staten-ient III. 1n-iportai-ice o f I'acl.s
ol the issues."
1\’. Types ot T'acls it-t (joticral
.A lices notes ot the lnter\ iew in d ic a te that ,\lr. .Aper o w n s a 1,0()l)-acre ta rn i on the o u t
\'. Kev- i' act s— Defn-tilion a n d
s k irts ol to w n. I le has li\ ed on the ia r n i lo r the past 20 years. .About 200 acres ol the p ro p e rty
Types
are lo rested, an d deer lre(.|uent the loi-est. .\li-. .Aper retuses to a llo w h u n tin g on h is p ro p e rty
a n d , to d isc o u ra g e h u n tin g , has le n ce d an d p osted the p ro p erty. \ ' I . Kev’ Taels klet-ilificalion—
O n e i.la\, tw o w eeks ago, ,\lr. .Xi-êr n o tice d a new path e n te rin g the forested p o rtio n ol (;iiei-it's (Case
the lari-ii. So m e o n e hatl rem oved part ol the w o o d lence s u ri-o u n d in g the torest an d a p p a re n tly \ ' l l . Kev' T'acls k l en l i f i c al i on—
entered the p ro p e rty several tim es. H e fo llo w e d the trail and fo u n d several sm a ll p in e trees C a s e Taw
cut d o w n an d a cru d e lean to c o n stru c te il Iro m the trees. In fron t ol the lean to was a sm a ll X'llT Key Point s (Checklisl: Key Tacts
tire pit w here there had been a lire (,|uite recen tb -, the co a ls were s till w arm . So m e ot the w ch kI
IX. Applical ion
reniov eil Iro n i the fence was still s m o ld e rin g in the lire. ,\ lr .Aper got up earl\- the ne.xt m ornn-ig,
before d a w n , anti w atched the le a n -to Iro m a h id d e n spot in the b u sh e s. S h o rth alte r su n rise ,
he saw h is n e ig h b o r, l^ric R a sco n , an avid ho\\ liu n te r, co m e d o w n the trail c a r r y in g a hatchet
a n d loaded d o w n w ith b ow h u n tin g gear. L e a r n in g O b ie c tiv e s
I vi^ p v vK ccd cJ. lo sol I ic sl.w lc d a iive vvuh w o o d fron-i ih c and som e o ld
Alter c o m p l e t i n g this chapter, you
tree b ran ch e s an d cut d o w n an o th e r sm a ll tie e and addei.1 it to the lean to. .\lr. .Aper stepped
should understand;
out lion-i b e h in d the b ushe s aiitl c o n fio n te d I ’ric. “ W'hat are \(u i (.loing heie? 'i'ou k n o w you
can't h un t here. W h o told vou it's okav- to cut d o w n m\- trees? (je t oft mv- p r o p e r t v !" I ’. ric
• W h a t key facts are
a n g rily rep lie d , "X bu s tin g v old m an. i hese ile e r sh o u ld be h un ted : it's nature's wav. I'll leave, but VA'hat b a c k g r o u n d a n d irrelevant
I II be b ack and start ag ain ; vou can't w atch this forest e v e rv h o u r of everv da\-.” K r ic then left. facts are
.M r .Aper w ants to take xvhatev er legal a ctio n he can again st l-.ric. .Alice's a ssig n m e n t is to
• The role a n d i m p o r t a n c e o f key
id e n tify the kev facts in the case. Ih e .A p p licatio n se ctio n of th is ch a p te r a d d re sse s h o w .Alice
facts
p e rfo rm s h er a ssig n m e n t. Ih e ch a p te r d isc u sse s facts in g e n e ral an d e n ip h a si/e s the c r itic a l
role of the kev- facts in a case.
• H o w to ident ify key facts in
a cli ent’s case
• H o w to ident ify key facts in

a court opinion
305
PART III THE SPECIFICS OF LEGAl ANALYSIS
Mo s t , ¡1 n ot all, a t t o r n c v - c l i c i i t r e l a t i o n s h i p s b e g i n w i t h t h e ini ti al i n t e r v i e w w i t h t h e client.
D u r i n g t h e i nt er \ ie\v, th e cli ent p r e s e n t s i n l o r m a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g a s i t u a t i o n t h e client beli eves
r e q u i r e s a legal so l ut i on . It’ a l aws u i t is u l t i m a t e K ’ filed, t h e p r o c e s s b e g i n s h e r e. Tlie role o f
t h e attorne}' , o f t e n p e r f o r m e d b\' t h e p a r a l e g a l o r l a w cl er k, is to sift t h r o u g h t h e tact s a n d
d e t e r m i n e w h a t relief, it an\', t h e law m a y p r o v i d e t o r t h e p r o b l e m r ai s e d b\' t h e tacts. ,'\n\' legal
s o l u t i o n to a c l i e n t ’s p r o b l e m i nv ol ve s t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e law t o t h e facts o f t h e c l i e n t ’s case.
I ’sualK', s o m e o f t h e factual i n f o r m a t i o n t h e c li ent p r o v i d e s in a n i nt er \ 'i ew is n o t rel evant
to t h e o u t c o m e o f t h e case. S o n i e t i m e s i m p o r t a n t fa c t ua l i n f o r m a t i o n is left o u t . Be t o r e a legal
so l u t i o n to t h e c l i e n t ’s p r o b l e m c a n b e f o u n d o r a d e t e r m i n a t i o n m a d e as to w h e t h e r a l awsui t
s h o u l d b e tiled, it is n ec e s s ar \ ' t o identit')- t h e fact s cri t i c a l to t h e o u t c o m e o f t h e c a s e — t h e key
facts. To e n s u r e t h a t all t h e k e y fact s a r e i d e n t i f i e d — t h a t is, t o m a k e s u r e n o n e a r e m i s s e d —
all t h e t a ct u a l i i i f o rn i a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g t h e p r o b l e n i m u s t b e i d e n t i f i e d at t h e o u t s e t . Ihi s is
a c c o m p l i s h e d b\- a t h o r o u g h a n d c o m p r e h e n s i v e i ni ti al interview-.
O f t e n t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f c e r t a i n fact s nia\- n o t b e d e t e r m i n e d u n t i l t h e legal i s sues a n d
t h e g o x e r n i n g law a r e i de nt i f i e d.
For Example In regard to the hypothetical atth e beginning ofthe chapter, assume that
the researcher, based on her experience, concludes that the burning of
the fence may give rise to a cause of action for conversion (an improper act that deprives
an individual of the rightful possession of the individual's property). Upon conducting
subsequent research, she learns that conversion requires that the person suing be in
possession ofthe property.
It is an important fact, therefore, that Mr. Aper not only owns the land but also w as
in possession of the land when the events took place. If the land w ere rented out to a
tenant, the tenant would be in possession of the land. The tenant, being the person in
possession ofthe land, would have the right to sue for conversion. The landlord, Mr. Aper,
would not be in possession ofthe land and, therefore, would not have a right to sue Eric
Rascón fur conversion. The importance of the fact that Mr. Aper not only owned the land
but w as also in possession of it may not become apparent until the legal question and
governing law are identified.
I h i s e x a m p l e i l l u s t r a t es a n o t h e r i m p o r t a n t p o i n t c o n c e r n i n g facts. W h e n a l a w s u i t
p r o c e e d s to trial, t h e lacts p r e s e n t e d at trial a r e t h o s e fact s i d e n t i f i e d a n d c o n s i d e r e d i m p o r
t a n t p r i o r to trial. Ident i f \ - i ng a n d g a t h e r i n g t h e t ac t s d e p e n d e n t i r e l y o n t h e t h o r o u g h n e s s
a n d q u a l i t y o f t h e p r e t ri a l p r e p a r a t i o n . If t h e r e s e a r c h e r p e r f o r m s a s l o p p y j o b , t h a t is, tails
to g a t h e r a n d e x a m i n e all t h e facts, t h e n a p o o r o u t c o m e a n d a lost c a s e m a y be t h e result.
For Example Referring to the previous example, assum e that the land w a s leased.
Mr. Aper did not reveal this fact during the interview because, being the
owner of the land, he did not think it mattered who w as in possession. The interview was
not thorough because Mr. Aper w as not asked who w as in possession ofthe land. Assume
also thatthe researcher believed thatthe "possession" requirement of conversion is met
if the party suing owns the property. The researcher did a sloppy job of research and did
notthoroughly research w hat constitutes "possession" underthe law.
If a lawsuit alleging conversion against Mr. Rascón w en t to trial and this key fact
w as not identified, Mr. Aper would lose because he w as not in possession ofthe land
and did not have a right to sue. The key fact of who w a s in possession of the land was
not identified prior to trial and, therefore, would not be presented at trial. The poor quality
of the interview and subsequent research resulted in a poor outcome.
306
CHAPTER 9 LEGAL ANALYSIS KEY FACTS
Ethics
Tliis m a y a p p e a r to b e a n e x t r e m e e x a m p l e , b u t it IlkLstrates a n i m p o r t a n t p o i n t : I h e l act s
p r e s e n t e d at t r i a l a n d t h e o u t c o m e o t ' t h e t r i al d e p e n d e n t i r e l y o n t h e q u a l i t \ ol w o r k p r i o r
to t r i al . As n o t e d in ( . ' h a p t e r 2, R u l e l . l ot t h e . A m e r i c a n Bar A s s o c i a t i o n ’s M o d e l Rul es o f
P r o f e s s i o n a l C o n d u c t r e q u i r e s t h a t a c l i e n t b e p r o v i d e d c o m p e t e n t r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . I'ail-
u r e t o c o n d u c t a p r o p e r i n t e r \ ie\v a n d i d e n t i f } ’ t h e k e \ ’ l a c t s d e i i i e s t h e cl i ent c o m p e t e n t
representation.
T h e f o cu s o f t h i s c h a p t e r , a n d t h e t a s k a s s i g n e d t o m a n } ’ p a r a l eg a l s a n d law clerks, is to
i d e n t i f ) ’ t h e f act s t h a t g i ve rise t o t h e legal d i s p u t e in e i t h e r a c l i en t ' s case o r a c o i u i o p i n i o n .
I h e fact s t h a t gi ve ri se t o t h e legal d i s p u t e a r e o f t e n r e f e r r e d t o as iig iiiticd n t. m a te r ia l, o r k e y
facts. In t hi s c h a p t e r , a n d t h r o u g h o u t t h e text, t h e s e facts a r e r e f er r e d to as k e y tacts.
A s n o t e d in CTi ap t e r s 10 a n d 1 1, k e y fac t s a n d i s s u e s a r e i n t e g r a l h ’ r el at e d . I h e ke}’
f act s a r e a n e s s e n t i a l e l e n i e n t o f t h e i s sue. ’I h e \ ’ a r e e s s e n t i a l in i d e n t i f } i n g a n d s t a t i n g t h e
i s s u e b e c a u s e t h e y gi ve ri se t o t h e legal d i s p u t e . D i s p u t e s a r i s e a n d t a k e p l a c e iri t h e c o n t e x t
o f facts.
II. F A C T S IN G E N E R A L — D E F I N I T I O N
A fact is s o m e t h i n g t ha t is real, t ha t a c t u a l h ’ exists, ai’i a c tu a l e v en t as o p p o s e d to a n o p i n i o n
o r s o n i e o i i e ’s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f w h a t t o o k place. In a law’suit, a fact is i n f o r m a t i o n p r e s e i ’it in
a c a s e c o n c e r n i n g s o n ’ie t h i n g , a c t i o n , e v e n t , o r c i r c i n i ’istance.
For Example In the hypothetical at the beginning of the chapter, the presence of the
lean-to, Mr. Rascon's actions of entering the property, and M r Rascon's
statements are all facts.
I’ac t s shi)uW\ iii>l h e c o n l u . s cd w i t h a rule of law. . \ l u l c ot law is a s t a n d a r d , e>lah-

li sh e d b}' a g o \ e r n i n g a u t h o r i t } ’, t h a t p r e s c r i b e s o r d i r e c t s a c t i o i ’i o r f o r b e a r a n c e . It ma} b e a
c o n s t i t u t i o n a l p r o v i s i o n , s t a t u t e , o r d i n a n c e , r e g u l a t i o n , o r c a s e law d o c t r i n e . Its a p p l i c a t i o n
d e t e r m i n e s t h e o u t c o m e o f t h e q u e s t i o n r a i s e d by t h e facts o f a d i s pu t e .
For Example Title 23, section 1991, of the state statutes provides that the maximum
speed limit in a school zone is 10 mph while school is in session. W hen an
individual proceeds through a school zone at 12 mph, this statute governs the question of
w hetherthe individual is speeding,that is,the outcome ofthe question raised bythefacts.
Bef or e d e f i n i n g a n d di.scu.ssing key facts, it is h e l p f u l t o c o n s i d e r t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f facts

in g e n e r a l a n d t o i d e n t i f y a n d d i s t i n g u i s h t h e v a r i o u s t \ p e s o f facts p r e s e n t in a c l i e n t ’s case
and a court opinion.
III. IM P O R T A N C E OF F A C T S
' I h e i m p o r t a n c e o f g i v i n g d u e c o n s i d e r a t i o n to t h e t ac t s o f a d i s p u t e c a n n o t b e o v e r e m p h a s i z e d .
O f t e n ri i i ni ma l a t t e n t i o n is g i v e n to t h e facts. I b i s is s u r p r i s i n g , si nc e o u r legal SN'steii’i r e \ o l v e s
a r o i u ’id r e s o l v i n g d i s p u t e s b \ ’ a p p h ' i n g t h e r u l es o f l a w to t h e facts o f a case. N o ti c e t h e t w o m a j o r
f a c t or s here; rules o f l a w u n d f a c t s o f t h e case. B o t h a r e e q u a l l y i m p o r t a n t . N o v i c e r es ea r c h e r s ,
h o w e v e r , o ft en f o c u s p r i n i a r i h ’ o n t h e r u l e s o f l a w .
307
Ilic listic is t h e p r ec i s e q u e s t i o n r a i s e d h\' tlie speci fic facts of t he c l i e n t ' s case. T h e r e f o r e ,

t h e facts a r e a n ess ent i al e l e n i e n t of t h e issue. R u l e s of l aw a r e g e n e r a l p r i n c i p l e s d e s i g n e d
to a p p l y to m u l t i p l e fact s i t u a t i o n s , a n d a d e t e r n i i n a t i o n o f w h i c h l aw g o \- e r n s t h e i s sue is
c o n t r o l l e d p r i ma r i h - b\- t h e facts o f t h e c l i e n t ' s case. C;onsec]uently, facts pla\' a role o f pr i ni ar \ -
i n i p o r t a n c e in d e t e r m i n i n g w h a t is in d i s p u t e in a c a s e a n d w h i c h l aw a pp l i es . C' lients o f t en
h a v e little k n o w l e d g e o r ccMicern a b o u t g e n e r a l legal p r i n c i p l e s , b ut t h e y a r e very c o n c e r n e d
w-ith h o w t h e law a p p l i e s to t h e facts o f t h e i r case.
Facts ar e also i m p o r t a n t b e c a u s e d e t e r m i n i n g l n) w o r if a law a p p l i e s to t h e c l i e n t ’s case
t)ften d e p e n d s o n t h e p r e s e n c e o r a b s e n c e o f c e r t a i n facts.
For Example Tom is stopped at a light at a four-way intersection in the city, waiting for
the light to change. Mary, stopped behind him, accidentally lets her foot
slip off the brake, and her vehicle bumps into Tom's vehicle. After exiting their vehicles
and examining them, they discover that there is no visible damage to either vehicle. Tom,
however, complains of neck pain from whiplash.
Tom sues M ary for negligence. The researcher working for M ary's attorney knows
thatthe elements of negligence are duty, breach of duty, proximate cause, and damages.
Based on her research and education, she also knows that to state a claim, Tom must
present facts establishing each of the elements of negligence. Although there are facts
to support the first three elements, there w as no damage to the vehicle; thus, it is ques
tionable whether the impact w a s severe enough to cause whiplash neck injuries. Also,
if the impact did not cause whiplash injuries and there is no damage to Tom's vehicle,
there are no facts that establish the element of damages.
This hypothetical is referred to as the "m inor im pact" example throughout this
chapter.
In the m i n o r i m p a c t e. xampl e, as in ever\- case, t h e r e a r e t w o equalK' i m p o r t a n t f a c t o r s —

t h e law a n d t h e facts. T h e l aw e s t a b l i s h e s t h e c o n d i t i o n s t h a t m u s t b e m e t to s t at e a c l a i m
for ne g l i ge n c e , t ha t is, t h e e l e m e n t s o f n e g l i g e n c e . T h e o u t c o m e o f t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e law-
d e p e n d s o n t h e e x i s t e n c e o f facts, a n d o n t i ne lact in p a r t i c u l a r in t h e case; W a s T o m ' s i n i iuT
c a u s e d b\- t h e i m p a c t ? Like t hi s e x a m p l e , all legal p r o b l e m s a r e tact s en s i t i v e ; t h a t is, t h e o u t
c o m e d e p e n d s o n t h e e x i s t e n c e o r n o n e x i s t e n c e o f a p a r t i c u l a r fact o r facts.
A n o t h e r r e a s o n facts a r e i m p o r t a n t is th a t t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f w h e t l i e r a c o u r t o p i n i o n
is o n p o i n t is l a r ge h ' g o v e r n e d b\- t h e siniilarit}' b e t w e e n t h e facts o f t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n a n d
t h e facts o f t h e c l i e n t ’s case. T h e r e m u s t b e a su f l i c i en t si mi l ari t \ - b e t w e e n t h e key fact s of t h e
c o u r t o p i n i o n a n d t h o s e o f t h e c l i e n t ’s c a s e b e f o r e t h e c o u r t ( i p i n i o n c a n b e c o n s i d e r e d o n
p o i n t a n d ap p h - as p r e c e d e n t in t h e c l i e n t ’s case.
IV. T Y P E S OF FA C T S IN G E N E R A L
In e i t h e r a c l i e n t ’s c a s e o r a c o u r t o p i n i o n , t h e r e m a y b e h u n d r e d s o f f ac t s , s o m e o f w h i c h
a r e c r i t i c a l l y i m p o r t a n t , s o m e n o t . T'o i d e n t i f y t h e l egal i s s u e , t h e r e s e a r c h e r m u s t s o r t
t h r o u g h t h e f act s a n d d e t e r m i n e w h i c h f a c t s gi\-c r i s e t o t h e legal q u e s t i o n a n d a r e e s s e n
tial t o its r e s o l u t i o n . I l e l pf u l t o t h i s p r o c e s s is a n u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e b a s i c c a t e g o r i e s o t
f a c t s p r e s e n t in a c a se . I' he f a c t s o f a c a s e nia\- b e p l a c e d w i t h i n t h e t h r e e b r o a d c a t e g o r i e s
p r e s e n t e d in E x h i b i t 9-1.
30 8
CHAPTER 9 LEGAL ANALYSIS - KEY FACTS
E x h ib it 9-1 Types of Facts.

Irrelevant Facta Facts co inciden tal to the event but not of significant legal
im portan ce in the case
Background Facts presented in a court opinion, case brief, or legal

Facts m em o ran d u m that put the key facts in context; facts that
give an o v e rv ie w of a factual event and provide the reader
with the overall context w ithin which the facts occurred
Key Facts The legally significan t facts of a case that raise the legal
question of h o w or w h e th e r the law governing the d is
pute applies; the facts that establish or satisfy the e le
m ents of a cause of action and are n ecessary to prove
or d isp ro ve a claim ; a fact so essential that, if it w ere
changed, the ou tco m e of the case w ould be affected or
changed
A. Irrelevant Facts
Irrelevant facts ar c t a c t s c o i n c i d e n t a l t o tlie e v e n t tliat a r e n o t ot legal s i g n i f i c a n c e in
t h e case.
For Example In the minor impact example, the race or gender ofthe parties, the day of
the week, and whether M ary's car w as insured are all irrelevant facts. They
are irrelevant because they are facts that are not necessary to establish or satisfy the
elements ofthe cause of action in the case. They are not necessary to prove or disprove
the claim. The race or gender ofthe parties is irrelevant to the question ofw h ether M ary
w as negligent. W hether it w a s Sunday or W ed n esd ay when the accident occurred does
not affect the outcome of the case, M ary's insurance status will not affect a determ ina
tion of whether she is liable.
Bewar e! Cêrtain t act s m a y b e r e l e \ a n t in o n e s i t u a t i o n a n d n o t r e l e v a n t in a n o t h e r .
In the minor impact example, w hether it w a s snowing is probably not a

relevant fact. Both vehicles w ere stopped at a light, and the existence of
snow should not affect M ary's duty to keep her foot from slipping off the brake pedal. If
the facts, however, were that she w a s approaching the stoplight and failed to apply the
brakes in a timely fashion, the existence of snow conditions becomes a relevant fact. The
nature of her duty to exercise care while driving varies with the weather conditions, and
the existence of snow conditions requires h erto exercise greater care when braking.
B. Background Facts
Background facts are t h o s e i r r e l e v a n t fact s t h a t p u t t h e l<.ey facts in c o n t e x t . ' I h e y give a n
o v e r v i e w o t ' t h e fact ual e v e n t a n d p r o v i d e t h e r e a d e r w i t h t h e o veral l c o n t e x t w i t h i n w h i c h t he
l<ey t act s o c c u r r e d . ' I h e y a r e n o t k e y fact s b e c a u s e t h e y a r e n o t e ss e nt i a l t o a d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f
t h e i ssues in t h e case, b u t t h e y a r e u s u a l h ' n e c e s s a r y a n d o f t e n helpf ul b e c a u s e t h e y p r o v i d e
int ' orniat ioi i t ha t h e l p s t h e r e a d e r g a i n a n o v e r a l l p i c t u r e o f t h e e n \ ' i r o n n i e n t w i t h i n w h i c h
t h e k e v facts o c c u r r e d .
309
For Example In the minor impact example, the location and type of intersection are
background facts that provide the reader with an overview of the context
and scene ofthe collision. The reader is aw are thatthe impact took place at an intersec
tion in the city, rather than in the country. This information is not essential, but it may be
helpful for many reasons. The reader, for example, may w a n tto visit the scene at a later
date to investigate and determine if individuals working in the area witnessed the accident.
C. Key Facts
Key fact s a r e o f t e n r e f e r r e d to as sig n ific n n t, m a te r ia l, o r u lt i m a t e faets. ' I h e y are fact s t h a t are
cri ti cal to t h e o u t c o m e o f t h e case. I h e f o l l o w i n g s e c t i o n d i s c u s s e s t h e d e f i n i t i o n a n d t \ p e s
o f k e v facts.
V. KEY F A C T S — D E F I N I T I O N A N D T Y P E S
A. Definition
Key facts a r e t h e legal ly s i g n i f i c a n t fact s o f a c a s e t h a t rai se t h e legal q u e s t i o n o f how or
w h e t h e r t h e l a w g o v e r n i n g t h e d i s p u t e appl i es. Ihe\- ar e t h o s e fact s u p o n w h i c h t h e o u t c o m e
o f t h e c ase is d e t e r m i n e d — t h e fact s t h a t e s t a b l i sh o r satist\- t h e e l e m e n t s o t a c a u s e ot a c t i o n
a n d a r e n e c e s s a r v t o p r o v e o r d i s p r o v e a c l a i m. A ke\' fact is a fact so ess ent i al t ha t , if it w e r e
c h a n g e d , t h e o u t c o m e o f t h e c a s e w o u l d p r o b a h K ' c h a n g e . In fact, a u s e l ul test in d e t e r m i n i n g
w h e t h e r a fact is k ev is t o a s k t h e q u e s t i o n , “ If t h i s fact is c h a n g e d , w o u l d t h e o u t c o m e o f t h e
a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e l a w b e a f f ec t ed o r c h a n g e d ? ”
For Example Law enforcement officers are sued for battery based on the following facts.
Law enforcement officers pursued a suspect on foot for five blocks after
observing him snatch a woman's purse. W hile making the arrest, the officers encountered
resistance, used force to overcom e that resistance, and continued to use force for more
than a minute afterthe resistance ceased. The law provides that law enforcement officers
may use the amount of force n ecessary to overcom e resistance when making a legal
arrest. This hypothetical is referred to in this chapter as the "resisting arrest" example.
W h a t a r e t h e k e y fact s in t h e r e s i s t i n g a r r e s t e x a m p l e ? W ' h i c h o f t h e facts, if c h a n g e d ,

w o u l d c h a n g e t h e o u t c o m e in t h i s case? If t h e s u s p e c t h a d n e \ ’e r re s i st e d, t h e use o f for ce
w'ould cl earl y h a v e b e e n i m p r o p e r . If t h e s u s p e c t n e \ e r c e a s e d r e s i s t i n g , th e officers’ c o n t i n u e d
u s e o f f o r ce w' oul d h a v e b e e n p r o p e r . If t h e officers s t o p p e d u s i n g f o r c e w h e n t h e r e s i s t a n c e
c e a s e d , t h e u s e o f f o r c e p r o b a b l y w o u l d h a v e b e e n p r o p e r . If t h e a r r e s t w a s illegal, t h e u s e o f
f o r c e w' oul d h a v e b e e n i m p r o p e r , 'The k e y fact s follow:
A l a wf u l a r r e s t w a s b e i n g m a d e .
T h e r e w a s r e s i s t a n c e t o t h e arr est.
F o r c e w a s u s e d to o v e r c o m e t h e r e s i st a n c e.
The resistance ceased.
T h e u s e o f for c e c o n t i n u e d f o r m o r e t h a n a m i n u t e a f t er t h e r e s i s t a n c e c e a s e d.
Ea c h ot t h e s e facts is a key fact. Ea c h tact, if c h a n g e d , w o u l d affect t h e o u t c o m e o f t h e case.

O t h e r facts, h o w e v e r , a r e n o t k e y facts, f i cnv far t h e o f f i c er s p u r s u e d t h e s u s p e c t o r
t h e fact t h a t t h e p u r s u i t w’as o n f o o t a r e n o t k e y facts. T h e s e facts, if c h a n g e d , w o u l d n o t c h a n g e
t h e o u t c o m e o f t h e case.
310
CHAPTER 9 LEGAL ANALYSIS KEY FACTS
For Example In the minor impact example, the lack of damage to Tom's automobile is
a key fact. It is a fact that, if changed, would affect the outcome of the
case. If there had been damage to Tom's vehicle, he clearly would have a claim. Damage
is an element of negligence, and the existence of damage is a fact that is essential to
establishing a negligence claim.
B. T)/pes of Key Facts

I h e r e a r e t w o c a te g o ri e s ot' ke\- tacts:
Iiu1i\ idual key lacts
Tacts c o n s i d e r e d as a g r o u p — g r o u p s o f tact s
1. I n d iv id u a l Key Facts
O t ’t e n a n i n d i \ idual o r s e \ ’cral individual facts a r e key t a c t s in a case. A ke\' fact is an in-
div i dual ke\' fact if it m e e t s t h e follow i n g test: If t h e fact is ch a n g ec i , t h e o u t c o m e ol t h e case
will be a t f e c t e d o r c h a n g e d .
For Example T In the resisting arrest example, all the facts identified as key facts
are individual key facts: A lawful arrest w a s being made, there w a s resis
tance to the arrest, force w a s used to overcome the resistance, resistance ceased,
and the use of force continued after the resistance ceased. Each of these individual
facts, if changed, would change or affect the outcome of the case.
Consider a breach-of-contract case in w hich the claim of breach is founded on

the fact that payment w a s received nine days late, and the contract specifically
provided that late payments constituted a breach of contract. The lateness of the
payment is a key fact. This individual fact, if changed, would change the outcome
of the case.
2. ( i r o u p s o f Facts
In s o m e la c t s i tu a t io n s , n o i n d i \ i d u a l lact s t a n d i n g a l o n e is a ke\' fact — t h a t is, iKi si ngl e lact
is so s i g ni l i c a n t t hat , ¡1 c h a n g e d , it w o u l d c h a n g e t h e o u t c o m e .
For Example An inmate is challenging the conditions of his confinement as cruel and
unusual punishment. He alleges the following: There are cockroaches in
his jail cell, the recreational periods are too short, his mail is improperly censored, his
visitation rights are too restricted, and the temperature in his cell is too low in the winter
and too high in the summer. It may be that no single fact by itself meets the test of a key
fact, that is, no single fact is so critical that, if changed, the outcome of the case would
change. The factth atth ere are cockroaches in his cell may not be sufficient, by itself, to
constitute cruel and unusual punishment; the fact that the recreational periods are too
short, by itself, may not constitute cruel and unusual punishment; and so on.
All the individual facts, however, when considered as a group, may determine the
outcome ofthe case and, if changed as a group, would change the outcome. This may be
identified in a court opinion when the court states, "N o single fact of plaintiff's allegations
constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. W hen taken as a whole, however, the individual
allegations combine to establish a violation ofthe Eighth Amendment's prohibition against
cruel and unusual punishment."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 311
Rocdgiii/ing groups of facts is i m p o r t a n t b e c a u s e , w h e n a n aKv . in g a case, \-ou m u s t

be a w a r e tliat i n d i \ i d u a l t a c t s tliat s e e m to b e i n s i g n i f i c a n t m a y b e k e y facts w h e n c o n s i d e r e d
a n d w e i g h e d as a g r o u p . W’h e n a d d r e s s i n g a p r o b l e m t h a t i n \ ' ol v es k e y facts as a g r o u p , first
r e \ ’iew t h e facts i n d i v i d u a l K ' to d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r an\- i n d i v i d u a l fact, s t a n d i n g a l o n e , is a
key lact. If t h e r e is n o i n d i x i d u a l fact t h a t , if c h a n g e d , w o u l d c h a n g e t h e o u t c o m e o f t h e case,
lo o k to t h e fact s as a g r o u p .
I h e r e is n o m a g i c f o r m u l a f o r d e t e r m i n i n g h o w m a n y o r w h a t t y p e s o f facts are r e q u i r e d
t or facts to b e c o n s i d e r e d as a g r o u p , o r w h a t is n e c e s s a r y f o r a g r o u p o f facts to b e c o n s i d e r e d
a k e \ ’ fact. L'sualK', it is nece ss a r \ - t o c o n s u l t c a se l a w a n d l o c a t e a ca s e in w h i c h t h e c o u r t a d
d r e s s e d a s i m i l a r legal p r o b l e m i n v o h ' i n g a g r o u p o f facts.
I h e ne.xt s t e p , a f t e r d e f i n i n g a n d c a t e g o r i z i n g k ey facts, is t o d e t e r m i n e h o w to l ocat e
t h e m in b o t h a c l i e n t ’s c a s e a n d a c o u r t o p i n i o n . B e c a u s e t h e k e y fact s a r e a n e l e m e n t o f t h e
issue, the st e p s i n \ ' ol \ e d in i d e n t i f y i n g a n d s t a t i n g t h e i ssue n e c e s s a r i h ' i n c l u d e , in pa r t , s o m e
of t h e st ep s ne c ess ar } ' f o r l o c a t i n g ke\' facts. ' I h e r e f o r e , t h e i n f o r m a t i o n f r o m thi s c h a p t e r
t h r o u g h ( ' h a p t e r 1 1 o v e r l a p s s o m e w h a t r e g a r d i n g t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f k e y facts.
VI. KEY F A C T S I D E N T IF IC A T IO N — C L IE N T ’S CASE

A c l i e n t s fact s i t u a t i o n u s u a l h ' i n c l u d e s a mi.x of f a c t s — s o m e i r r e l e v a n t , s o m e b a c k g r o u n d ,
a n d s o m e ke\'. /V r e s e a r c h e r ’s a s s i g n m e n t m a \ ' b e to i d e n t i f y t h e k e y fact s in t h e case. T h e f our -
st ep p r o c e s s p r e s e n t e d in Hxhibit 9- 2 is r e c o m m e n d e d for d e t e r m i n i n g w h i c h o f t h e c l i e n t ’s
facts are ke\' lacts.
E x h ib it 9 - 2 Steps in Key Fact Identification C lient's Case. —
Identify eacfi cause of action p ossibly raised by tfie facts.
D eterm ine tfie elem ents of eacfi cause of action identified in

step
STEP 3 List all the facts p ossibly related to the elem ents of the causes
of action identified in step 2.
ÎSTEP4 D eterm ine w hich of the client's facts ap p ly to establish or

satisfy the elem ents of each cause of action — the key facts.
I h e f o l l o w i n g e x a m p l e is r e f e r r e d to in t h i s s e c t i o n ’s d i s c u s s i o n of t h e o p e r a t i o n of thi s
four-step process.
For Example The researcher is assigned the task of identifying the key facts in a case.
A review ofthe file reveals the following facts. Je rry and Ann are neighbors.
They have lived on adjoining half-acre lots in a rural subdivision for the past 15 years.
Their children are close friends and ride the school bus together. Four years ago, Je rr y
put in a hedge and planted several trees along his property line with Ann. Every year since
then, Je rry rakes the leaves from the hedge and trees into a big pile close to the shared
property line and burns it. The prevailing wind carries the smoke and soot across Ann's
property, preventing her from working in her garden and usually soiling the clothes that
are drying on Ann's clothesline. Every year she asks him notto burn the leaves, and every
year he ignores her request and burns the leaves.
Ann wants Je rr y to stop burning the leaves and pay her for the clothes that have
been "ruined" by the smoke. This hypothetical is referred to as the "trespass" example
in this chapter.
312
CHAPTER 9 LEGAL ANALYSIS - K E Y FACTS
A. Step 1: Identify Each C ause of Action

' I h e first st ep r e q u i r e s d e t e r n i i t i i n g t h e p o s s i b l e c a u s e ( s ) o l ' a c l i o n r a i s e d h \ t h e tacts. D e p e n d
i n g o n t h e e d u c a t i o n a n d legal e x p e r i e n c e o f t h e r e s e a r c h e r t h i s ini ti al s t e p m a y n o t r e q u i r e
an y research.
In t he t r e s p a s s e x a m p l e , u p o n r e v i e w i n g t h e facts, t h e r e s e a r c h e r m a y c o m e to a p r e l i m i
n a r y c o n c l u s i o n t h a t t h e p o s s i b l e c a u s e s o f a c t i o n i n c l u d e t r e s p a s s to l a n d , p r i \ ate n u i s a n c e ,
a n d n e g l i ge n c e .
B. Step 2: D e te rm in e th e E lem ents of Each C a u se of Action

' I h e s e c o n d st ep, d e t e r m i n i n g t h e e l e m e n t s o f e a c h c a u s e o f a c t i o n , u s u a l K ’ r e q u i r e s s o m e r e
se a r c h . S u c h r e s e a r c h m a \ ’ b e n e c e s s a r ) - e i t h e r to d e t e r n i i n e t h e e l e m e n t s o f t h e po ss i b le c a u se
o f a c t i o n o r t o e n s u r e t h a t t h e l a w h a s n o t c h a n g e d s i n c e t h e last t i m e r e s e a r c h w a s c o n d u c t e d .
' Ih i s s t e p is n ec e s s a r ) ' b e c a u s e , to s t a t e a c l a i m a n d t h e r e b )' o b t a i n relief, t h e p l ai nt i l f m u s t
p r e s e n t facts t h a t e s t a b l i s h o r p r o \ e t h e e x i s t e n c e o f e a c h e l e m e n t o f t h e c a u s e o f a c t i on . '1 líese
fact s a r e t h e k e v fact s o f t h e case.
For Example The paralegal's research reveals thatthe elements of trespass to land are
as follows:
1. An act
2. Intrusion on land
3. In possession of another
4. Intent to intrude
5. Causation of the intrusion
llie r e s e a r c h e r a l s o w o u l d i dent i f )' t h e e l e n i e n t s o f e a c h o f t h e o l h et ' p o t e n t i a l c a u s e s ot

a c t i o n i d en t i f i e d in s t ep I.
C. Step 3: List All Facts Related to th e E lem ents

' ] h e t h i r d s t ep is t o list all t h e fact s p o s s i b l y r e l a t e d t o t h e e l e m e n t s ot t h e c a u s e s ol a c t i on
i d e n t if i e d in s t e p 2. I h i s i n c l u d e s g a t h e r i n g t h e f act s f r o m t h e c l i en t i n t e r \ iew, a n d an\ ' i nt er
view's th a t ha\-e b e e n c o n d u c t e d w i t h w i t n e s s e s , a n d r e \ ' i e w i n g a t n doc i . mi e t i t s in t h e case file
t h a t m a y c o n t a i n f a c t u a l i n f o r m a t i o n . I h e c h e n t tiles m u s t b e c h e c k e d to e n s u r e th a t the)' are
c o m p l e t e . At t h e initial s t ag e s o f a case, t h e c l i e n t i n t e r v i e w m a y b e t h e o n k a\ ai l abl e s o u r c e
ot inf orm at ion .
W' h e n l i st in g t h e facts, i n c l u d e all facts t h a t m a y p o s s i b h ' b e r e l a t e d t o a t u ' ot t h e c a u s e s
o f a c t i on . E r r o n t h e s i de o f l i st i n g t o o m a n y facts. Y o u w a n t It) h a \ e all p o s s i b h ' re l at e d facts
at h a n d w h e n y o u p r o c e e d t o s t e p 4, t h e s t e p in w h i c h t h e i r r e l e \ a n t t a c t s a r e e l i n i i n a t e d a n d
t h e ke v tact s a r e i d e n t i f i e d .
For Example The fact that the children ride the school bus probably is not related to
any of the potential causes of action. The nature of w hat is being burned
may be related. The number of years Je rr y has burned the leaves may be related. The
w eather conditions when the leaves are burned may be related.
313
( Consi der t h e e l e m e n t s ol e a c h c a u s e ol a c t i o n ¡ n d i \ i dual l\ ' w h e n p e r t o n i i i n g t h i s task.
For Example Using trespass to land as a cause of action, take each element and d e
termine w hat facts from the client's case possibly establish or are related
to that element. W hich of the facts relate to intrusion? W h ich of the facts relate to "in
possession of another"? W hich of the facts relate to the intent to intrude? W hich of the
facts relate to causation ofthe intrusion? After completing this process forthe elements
of trespass, do the same for each potential cause of action identified in the previous steps.
N o t e t h a t s o m e t a ct s m a \ ’ e s t ab l i sh o r re l at e to m o r e t i i a n o n e c a u s e ot a c t i on . S o m e
c a u s e s o f a c t i o n o v e r l a p , I h e r e f o r e , all t h e fact s m u s t b e r e \ ' i e w e d w h e n c o n s i d e r i n g t he
ele m en ts o f each cause o f action.
For Example The fact that smoke from the burning leaves crosses onto Ann's property
may establish or relate to both trespass to land and private nuisance. The
smoke crossing to Ann's land may be the act of trespass, and the crossing coupled with
the interference to Ann's enjoyment of her gardening may relate to nuisance. The fact
that smoke crosses the property line relates to elements of both of these causes of action.
D. Step 4: D e te rm in e W h ich Facts Apply

I h e f o u r t h st e p is to d e t e r m i n e w h i c h o f t h e cli ent' s fact s a p p K to e s t ab l i s h o r sat i sf y the
e l e m e n t s ol e a c h c a u s e ot a c t i o n . I b e facts i d e n t i f i e d in t h i s s t ep are t h e k e \ ’ lacts. Be sur e
to c o n s i d e r e a c h fact listed in s t ep 3 a n d d e t e r m i n e if it is e ss e n t i a l to e st a b l i sh o r satisfy an
e l e m e n t o f an\' p o t e n t i a l c a u s e o f a c t i o n . Il is i m p o r t a n l lo c o n s i d e r all t h e facts i denl it iei l in
st ep 3. St ep -I c o n s i st s p r i m a r i l y o f t h e p r o c e s s o f e l i m i n a t i n g t h o s e facts listed in st ep 3 that
a re not e ss e n t i a l o r ke\' facts. I h i s is a c c o m p l i s h e t l by t a k i n g e a c h e l e mei i l o f e a c h c a u s e o f
a c t i o n a n d identify ing t h e facts e ss e n t i a l to e s t ab l i sh o r sat isfy t h a t e l e m e n t .
For Example Referring to the trespass-to-land cause of action, the key facts follow;
1. Act— the burning ofthe leaves produces smoke.
2. Intrusion on land— the smoke crosses over Ann's land.
3. In possession of another— Ann owns and lives on the land.
4. Intent— Je rry built the fires (they w ere not caused by lightning or theacts of
another), and he continued to build fires after he w as notified ofthe problem.
5. Causation of the intrusion— the fire produced the smoke that passed over Ann's
property, and there is no evidence that it came from another source.
W ' h e n d e t e r m i n i n g w h i c h t a ct s i d e n t i f i e d in s t e p 3 e s t a b l i s h o r satisfy an e l e m e n t , a p p l y
t h e f o l l o w i n g test;
“ W h i c h ot t h e s e tact s, it c h a n g e d , w o u k l c h a n g e t h e o u t c o m e ol the a p p l i c a t i o n o f
th a t e l e m e n t ? ” In o t h e r w o r d s ,
“W h i c h o t t h e s e tact s, if c h a n g e d , w o u l d atfect t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n ol w h e t h e r t h e r e is
p r e s e n t a fact o r fact s t h a t e s t ab l i sh o r satisf\' t h a t e l e m e n t ? ”
314
C H A P T E R S LEGAL A N ALYSIS— KEY FACTS
For Example Referring to the trespass-to-land cause of action, if the smoke did not
pass over Ann's land, there would be no facts to support the element
of intrusion. If the smoke crossing her land came from a source otherthan Jerry's
land, Je rry would not be responsible for the causation of the trespass.
O t h e r facts i dent if iet l in s t e p 3 as r e l a t e d to a n e l e m e n t , b u t t ha t d o n o t e st a bl i sh o r

s at i s f y a n c l e m e n t , a r e n o t k e y facts.
For Example In step 3, the facts of what w as being burned, the weather conditions when
the burning took place, and the numberof years Je rry had burned the leaves
w ere considered as possibly related to the trespass cause of action. If it is determined
that these facts, if changed, would not tend to establish or satisfy an element of trespass,
they are not key facts and can be eliminated from further consideration.
All t h e facts i d e n t i f i e d in s t ep 4 a r e t h e ke\- facts. I h e y a r e e s s en t i a l t o t h e o u t c o m e o f

t h e case.
E. Multiple Issues
S t e p s 2 t h r o u g h 4 s h o u l d b e a p p l i e d t o e a c h p o t e n t i a l c a u s e o f a c t i o n i d e n t i f i e d in s t e p 1.
S o m e c a u s e s o f a c t i o n m a y b e e l i m i n a t e d b e c a u s e t h e r e n o tact s a r e p r e s e n t t ha t s u p p o r t t h e
exis tence o f an element.
For Example If the smoke passes harm lessly over Ann's land and does not interfere
with her use or enjoyment of the land, there may be no cause of action for
private nuisance.
A d d i t i o n a l c a u s e s o f a c t i o n ma\ - b e i d e n t i f i e d as r e s e a r c h a n d i n v e s t i ga ti on c o n t i n u e .
Be s u r e to a d d r e s s e a c h e l e m e n t o f e a c h p o s s i b l e c a u s e o f a c t i o n a n d d e t e r m i n e if t h e r e is a n y
fact in t h e ca s e t h a t t e n d s t o e st a b l i sh o r sa t isf y t h e e l e m e n t .
N O T E : I h e s e s t ep s a re u s e f u l t o o l s a n d h e l p f ul g u i d e s w h e n i d e n t i f y i n g key I'acts. I h e y will

u s u a l l y he l p yo u q u i c k l y i d e n t i f y t h e ke\- tacts. N o t h i n g , h o w e v e r , is f o o l p r o o f You m a y n o t
b e c e r t a i n a b o u t w h e t h e r a fact m e e t s t h e s t a n d a r d r e q u i r e d o r is n e c e s s a r ) ’ to s u p p o r t t h e
exi.stence ot an e l e m e n t . In s o n i e i n s t a n c e s , t h a t d e t e r m i n a t i o n m a y n o t be m a d e unt i l trial.
For Example The court may rule that the smoke crossing Ann's land is not a sufficient
intrusion to constitute trespass.
lus t m a k e s u r e t h a t t h e r e is s o m e fact t h a t a r g u a b h ’ m e e t s t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s o f e a c h
e l e m e n t o f t h e c a u s e o f a c t i on .
VII. KEY FA C TS I D E N T IF IC A T IO N — C A S E L A W
E v e r y c o u r t o p i n i o n i nvol ves t h e c o u r t ’s a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e l a w to t h e facts o f t h e case. ' I h e key
f a ct s are t h o s e fact s in t h e c a s e t h a t t h e l aw a p p l i e s to a n d t h a t a r e ess ent i al t o t h e d e c i s i o n
r e a c h e d by t h e c o u r t . If t h e k e y fact s h a d b e e n d it f e r e n t , t h e o u t c o m e ot t h e ca se p r o b a b h ’
w o u l d h a v e b e e n di t fe re nt .
315
PART III THE SPECIFICS OF LEGAL A N ALYSIS
S i t u a t i o n s in w h i c h tlic c o u r t c l c a r h ' p o i n t s o u t t h e kev tacts arc n o t a d d r e s s e d in tliis

chapter.
For Example The court states, "The critical facts in the resolution of this dispute are___ "
I h e t o c u s h e r e is o n t h o s e s i t u a t i o n s in w h i c h t h e key tact s a re n o t so easilv d e t e r m i n e d ,

s u c h as in ca ses w h e r e t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n i n t e r s p e r s e s m a n y i r r e l e v a n t a n d b a c k g r o u n d tacts
w i t h t h e k e y facts.
T h e s t ep s r e c o m m e n d e d in C h a p t e r 10 for i d e n t i f y i n g t h e issue in a c o u r t d e c i s i o n are
s i m i l a r , in p ar t , t o t h e st ep s for i d e n t i f y i n g t h e key facts p r e s e n t e d here. As w i t h d e t e r m i n i n g
t h e k e y fact s in a c l i e n t ’s case, t h e r e is n o m a g i c f o r m u l a for i d e n t i f y i n g k e y facts in a c o u r t
o p i n i o n . ' I h e t h r e e - s t e p p r o c e s s p r e s e n t e d in E xh i b i t 9- 3 is r e c o m m e n d e d , h o w e v e r , a n d m a y
p r o v e he l p f u l .
In t h i s s e c t i o n , t h e f o l l o w i n g e x a m p l e is r e f e r r e d to w h e n d i s c u s s i n g t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f
t h e s e st eps. N o t i c e t h a t t h e e x a m p l e is tactualK- s i m i l a r to t h e case o i R ael v. ( ia d c n a , p r e s e n t e d
in E x h i b i t 4-1.
E x h ib it 9 - 3 Steps in Key Fact Identification— Case Law.

Read the entire case with the follow ing general question in
mind: W h a t w as decided about which facts?
Look to the holding. W h a t is the court's answ er to the legal

question? H ow does the court apply the rule of law to the legal
question raised?
Identify the facts necessary to the h o ld in g —the key facts.

Part 1: List all facts in any w a y related to the holding.
Part 2: Identify w hich of the listed facts are key facts and
determ ine the key facts.
For Example In the case of Joins v. Stevens, the court summarized the facts as follows:
Ja s o n Stevens and his nephew Allen Stevens have known Mark Jo in s for
several years. The three occasionally engaged in recreational activities, such as attending
baseball games and going on fishing trips. On these outings, they usually drank alcoholic
beverages, often to excess. On some occasions, their spouses joined in the activities.
On one ofthe fishing trips, on a Sunday afternoon in July, they w ere standing under
a tree, drinking beer, and waiting for the rain to stop so they could resume fishing. They
had been drinking since morning and were a little drunk. Mark w a sth e only one who had
caught any fish earlier in the day. Mark had an annoying habit of bragging, especially
when he drank. Ja s o n and Allen became increasingly angry as Mark claimed that he
w a s th e only "real fisherman" ofthe group. He continued bragging for an irritatingly long
period. W hen he claimed that he w as actually the "only real man" ofthe three, Allen lost
control and beat him up. W hile the beating was going on, Ja s o n yelled to Allen, "Hit him
harder! Kick him! Kick him!"
Mark suffered two broken ribs and w as hospitalized. He sued Ja s o n and Allen
for the tort of battery. In deciding that Jaso n had committed a battery, the court stated,
"Although liability cannot be based upon one's mere presence at a battery, a person
may be held liable for the tort of battery if he encourages or incites by words the act of
the direct perpetrator. Becau se he yelled encouragement to his nephew while the latter
w a s beating Mark Joins, Ja s o n Stevens is jointly liable with his nephew forthe battery."
316
C H A P T E R S LEGAL A N A L Y S I S - K E Y FACTS
A. Step 1: Read th e Entire Case

'1 h e tirst s t e p is to r e a d t h e e n t i r e case wi t h t h e f ol l owi ng g e ne r a l q u e s t i o n in m i n d : “W' ha t wa s
d e c i d e d a b o u t w h i c h t ac t s ? ” B e c a u s e th e key facts in a c o u r t o p i n i o n are t h o s e facts n e c e s s a r y
to t h e d e c i s i o n r e a c h e d by t h e c o u r t , y o u m u s t h a v e a g e n e r a l o \ ’e r v i e w o f t h e c a s e b e f o r e
y o u c a n f o c u s o n d e t e r m i n i n g w h i c h o f t h e facts a r e key facts. \ ' ou m u s t r e a d t h e e n t i r e ca se
to d e t e r m i n e t h e legal q u e s t i o n a d d r e s s e d a n d t h e d ec i s i o n r e a c h e d by t h e c o u r t , k e e p i n g in
m i n d t h e q u e s t i o n : “ W' hat w a s d e c i d e d a b o u t w h i c h facts in thi s c a s e ? ”
“ W' ha t w a s d e c i d e d . . .” k e e p s t h e m i n d f o c u s e d o n t h e h o l d i n g o r d e c i s i o n
reached.
“A b o u t w h i c h facts . . k e e p s t h e m i n d f o c u s e d o n speci fic facts, t h o s e speci fic

fact s n e c e s s a r y to t h e r e s o l u t i o n o f t h e legal q u e s t i o n — t h e key facts.
By t h e t i m e y o u fi nish r e a d i n g t h e e n t i r e case, y o u u s u a l k r eal i ze t h a t t h e d e c i s i o n

res t s o n o n l y s o m e o f t h e facts m e n t i o n e d in t h e o p i n i o n . If at thi s p o i n t y o u h a v e n o t cl e a r l y
i d e n t i f i e d w h i c h o f t h e facts a r e t h e key facts, p r o c e e d to st e p 2.
B. Step 2: Look to th e Holding

l h e h o ld in g is t h e c o u r t ’s a p p h c a t i o n o f t h e r ul e o f l aw to t h e legal q u e s t i o n ra i se d b y t h e fact s
ot t h e case. It is t h e c o u r t ’s a n s w e r to t h e legal qii est i on. A s k t h e f o l l o w i n g q u e s t i o n s t o h e l p
i d e nt i f y t h e h o l d i ng :
“W' hat is t h e c o u r t ’s a n s w e r to t h e legal q u e s t i o n ? ”
“ H o w d o e s t h e c o u r t a p p l y t h e r ul e o f law to t h e legal q u e s t i o n r a i s e d ? ”
In t hi s e x a m p l e , t h e last t w o s e n t e n c e s a r e t h e c o u r t ’s p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e rLile o f l a w a n d
t h e h o l d i n g — t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e r ul e o f law to t h e facts:
Rule o f l a w — “A l t h o u g h liabilit}' c a n n o t b e b a s e d Lipon o n e ’s m e r e p r e s e n c e at a b a t

ter)', a p e r s o n m a y b e h e l d liable l o r t h e t o r t ot b a t t e r y it h e e n c o u r a g e s o r i nc i t e s bv
w o r d s t h e act o f t h e d i r ec t p e r p e t r a t o r . ”
H o l d i n g — “ B ec a u s e h e yelled e n c o u r a g e m e n t to his n e p h e w w h i l e t h e l a t t e r w a s
b e a t i n g M a r k (oins, l a s on St e v e n s is j oi ntl y liable w i t h his n e p h e w for t h e ba t t er y. ”
C. Step 3: Identify th e Key Facts

I de nt i f y t h e facts n e c e s s a r y t o t h e h o l d i n g . ' Ihis s t e p is c o m p o s e d o f t wo part s:
1. List all facts in a n y w a y r el at ed to t h e h o l d i ng .
2. I de nt i f y w h i c h o f t h e listed facts a re key facts.
1. List Al! Facts Related to th e H o ld in g

List all t h e tact s p r e s e n t e d in t h e ca se r el at ed to t h e h o l d i n g . ' Ihis m a y r e q u i r e g o i n g t h r o u g h
t h e c a s e a n d l i st ing ail t h e f act s p r e s e n t e d by t h e c o u r t . T h e c o u r t m a y p r e s e n t a m u l t i t u d e o f
b a c k g r o u n d a n d i r r e l e v a n t fact s t h a t in n o w a y affect t h e o u t c o m e o f t h e case. If t ha t is t h e
s i t u a t i o n , i d e n t if y a n d li.st o n l y t h e f acts t ha t a r e p o s s i b l y rel ated o r nece.ssary to t h e d e c i s i o n
reached.
In t h e p r e c e d i n g e x a m p l e , it is n o t n e c e s s a r y to list all t h e f act s p r e s e n t e d b y t h e c o u r t .
S o m e facts, s u c h as t h e fact t h a t t h e s p o u s e s s o m e t i m e s a c c o m p a n i e d t h e m e n , cl e a r l y a r e n o t
r e l e v a nt . S o m e fact s— for e x a m p l e , it was a S u n d a y in l u l y — a re m e r e l y b a c k g r o u n d fact s t h a t
p r o v i d e t h e r e a d e r w i t h t h e t i m e c o n t e x t o f t h e e v e n t . All t h e facts r e l a t i n g t o t h e a r g u m e n t
s h o u l d b e i n c l u d e d , s u c h as t h e l o c a t i o n o f t h e a r g u m e n t , t h e fact t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s h a d b e e n
d r i n k i n g , a n d w h a t w a s said.
317
2. D e t e r m i n e the Key Facts

I r o n i i h e lact s listed, d e t e r m i n e Ihe k e y t a ct s b\- i d e n t i f y i n g t h o s e lact s n e c e s s a r y o r essential
l o t h e d e c i s i o n r e a c h e d . W' hi c h fact s d e t e r m i n e t h e o u t c o m e of t h e case? ' I h e r e a r e s e \ c r a l
w a y s to i d e n t i f y t h e s e I'acts.
1. O n e test to d e t e r m i n e t h e o u t c o m e is t o a s k y o u r s e l f w h e t h e r t h e d e c i s i o n w o u l d
h a v e b e e n t h e s a m e if a fact h a d n o t o c c u r r e d , o r if t h e fact h a d o c c u r r e d difi'er-
ently. If l a s o n h a d m e r e l y s t o o d b y a n d w a t c h e d , w o u l d h e b e liable f o r bat t er y?
In t h e p r e v i o u s r e s i s t i n g a r r e s t e x a m p l e , if t h e i n d i v i d u a l h a d n e v e r c e a s e d active
re s i st a nce , w o u l d t h e p o l i c e b e li able f o r b a t t e r y ? A p p l y t hi s test to e a c h fact listed.
2. If thi s test is a p p l i e d to e a c h fact a n d n o s i n g l e fact, w h e n c h a n g e d o r o mi t t e d ,

w o u l d alfect o r c h a n g e t h e d e c i s i o n , a s k w h e t h e r t h e d e c i s i o n w a s g o v e r n e d by
t h e c o u r t ’s c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f t h e fact s as a g r o u p .
For Example The court may state, "No single act ofthe defendant is sufficient
to constitute breach of contract. The defendant's various acts,
however, when taken as a whole, are sufficient to establish breach,"
3. II t h e coLirt hst s in its r e a s o n i n g t h e e l e m e n t s o f a c a u s e ol a c t i on , a s k \ ’our s el l

w h i c h o f t h e facts a p p h ’ t o e s t ab l i s h t h e e l e m e n t s . In t he bat t e r ) ' e x a m p l e , the
c o u r t s t at e d t h a t an i n d i v i d u a l m a ) ' b e liable if t h a t i n d i v i d u a l “ i nci tes by w o r d s ”
t h e acts o f t h e p e r p e t r a t o r . l a s o n ’s i n c i t i n g w o r d s are t h e facts t hat rel ate to this
element.
4. .Ask \- oursel i w i i e t h e r t h e c o u r t i n d i c a t e s t h a t a c e r t a i n fact is a key fact:
a. D o e s t h e c o u r t d e s c r i b e a fact as “e ss e n t i a l , " “ k e y , ” o r “ i m p t ) r l a n t ”?
b. Is a fact r e p e a t e d t h r o u g h o u t t h e o p i n i o n , espe c i a l l y in t h e r e a s o n i n g s u p p o r t
i ng t h e d e c i s i o n ?
c. D o e s t h e c o u r t a g r e e w i t h a p a r t y ’s d e s c r i p t i o n ol a lact as cri ti cal oi' k e\ ?
For Example The court may state, "W e agree with plaintiff's position that
the failure to make timely payment is key to a determination
of whether a breach of contract occurred."
3. D o e s a c o n c u r r i n g o r d i s s e n t i n g o p i n i o n i d e n t i f y t h e k ey facts? Be a w a r e , h o w
ever, t h a t t h e c o n c u r r i n g o r d i s s e n t i n g j u d g e ma ) ' ha\' e a d i t f e r e n t v i e w o f w h i c h
lact s are key facts a n d m a y i d e n t i f y as k e y fact s s o m e facts t h e m a j o r i t y d i d no t
c o n s i d e r key.
D. Multiple Issues
I h e f o r e g o i n g d i s c u s s i o n f o c u s e s u p o n l o c a t i n g t h e k e y f a c t s re l at e d to a s i ng l e issue a n d
h o l d i n g in a case. O f i e n , t h e r e a r e se v e r al i s sues a n d h o l d i n g s in a c o u r t o p i n i o n . A ppl y t h e
s t e p s p r e s e n t e d to d e t e r m i n e t h e k e y fact s r e l at e d to e a c h i s sue a n d h o l d i n g . Fo l l ow e a c h st ep
c o m p l e t e l y for ea c h issue a n d h o l d i n g .
N O T E ; I h e st e ps p r e s e n t e d in t hi s s e c t i o n a r e u s e f u l t o o l s a n d g ui d e l i n e s . F o l l o w i n g t h e m
h e l p s y o u i d e n t i l y t h e key t ac t s of a case. In s o m e i n s t a n c e s , h o w e v e r , t h e c o u r t m a y o m i t
ke)' facts. Also, as y o u r e a d m o r e c a s e s a n d b e c o m e m o r e f a m i l i a r w i t h c a s e law, \'ou m a y
a u t o m a t i c a l h ' f o c u s o n t h e k e y fact s w i t h o u t u s i n g an)- o f t h e st e ps p r e s e n t e d he re .
318
C H A P T E R S LEGAL A N A L Y S I S - K E Y FACTS
VIII. KEY POINTS CHECKLIST: Key Facts

D o not cn c r l o o k tlio i i n p o r l a i i c c o f t h e lacts. l-'acts »i\'c rise to tlie legal d i s p u t e a n d ,
tl i cr ct ore, arc an i nt eg r a l p a r t ol it. D i s p u t e s l i a \ c little i n c a n i n g o u t s i d e t h e c o n t e x t
ot t h e tacts. H o w niaii\' c o u r t o p i n i o n s liave y o u r e a d that d i d n o t h av e a n v tacts?
Kc\' iacts arc t h o s e l act s t h a t e s t a b l i s h o r satisix' t h e e l e m e n t s 1)1 a caLLsc (it a c t i o n a n d

are necessar\- to p r o v e (ir d i s p r o \ ' e a c l a i m. '1 h e ret ore, t h e n a t u r e a n d p r e s e n c e o r
a b s c n c e (il c e r t a i n facts d e t e r m i n e t h e o u t c o n i c o t ' a case.
A use f ul lest lor d c t e n n i n i n g w h e t l i e r a fact is a kc\- kict is to ask t h e q u e s t i o n , “ II

thi s fact is c h a n g e d o r o m i t t e d , \s' ould t h e (Hit conie o f t h e appl i ci i t i on o t ' t h e law be
changod?”
l-'ollow t he st eps r e c o n i i n e n d c d for t h e d e t e r n i i n a t i o n o f k e \ facts in a client' s case.

Be a w a r e t ha t t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f c e r t a i n facts ina\- not b e c di i i e a p p a r e n t u n t i l legal
r es e a r c h is condLict ed a n d t h e e l e m e n t s (it a c a u s e ot a c t i o n are d e t e r m i n e d .
W h e n i d e n t i ụ i i m kc\- fact s in a c o u r t o p i n i o n , k e e p in m i n d t h e q u e s t i o n , “W l i a t
w a s clecidcd a b o u t w h i c h lact s in t h i s c a s e ? ”
D o not gel d i s c o u r a g e d , ' llie p r o c e s s o f i d e n t i K ' i n g ke\ tact s b c c o n i e s e a s i e r w i t h

p r act i ce, a n d p a i t s o l ' t h e p r o c e s s b o cDi n e i n t u i t i \ e .
IX. APPLICATION
lliis s c ct i on p r es ent s e x a m p l e s ol'ko\' iact i d c n t i t ì c a t i d n in a client's casi' a n d in a c o u r t o p i n i o n .
Eacli e x a m p l e il luslrat cs t h e a p p l i c a t i o n ol t h e pri ncipl e' s d i s c u s s e d in thi s c hapt c r.
A, Client’s Fact Situation

I h e lollciwing c xai npi c iikistratcs tlu' a p p l i c a t i o n ot' tlie p r i nc i p k ' s to tlic livpotlictica! pi t ' seniod
at tlic b e g i n n i n g t)t tills ẽliaptcr.
1. Id en tify Each C au se o f A c tio n

llic first s t ep is to idont it \' c a c h c a u s e of a c t i o n poss i bK' ra i sed b\' till' tacts. Iktsed o n Al i c e ’s
r e c e n t iv c o m p l e t e d e d u c a t i o n a n d l i m i t e d j db e x p e r i e n c e , s h e i d c n t i h e s t h r e e p o t e n t i a l cause's
^ f a c t i o n Mì'. A p e r i na \ ’ lia\L' ag n i n s l Mr. R a s cmi : t r e s p a s s to hiiid, t r e s p a s s to cliiittels, a n d c o n -
\ cr si oi i . Iliis pi ' ol i mi nar\ idciitificiition m a v h e e x p a n d e d o r r e d u c e d u p o n ad d i t i o n a l r e s e ar c h .
Case law may reveal that Mr. Rascon's conduct also constitutes a private
nuisance.
Step 1 provide.s a s t a r t i n g j i oi n t f o r i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f tiu' i<ey facts in t h e case.
2. D e t e r m in e the E lem en ts
I h e s e c o n d st ep is to d e t e r m i n e t h e e l e m e n t s o f e a c h c a u s e ot a c t i o n i d e n t i f i e d in s t e p 1. F o r
e a c h p o t e nt i a l c a u s e o f a c t i on , ident it }' t h e e l e m e n t s n e c e s s a r y to st ate a c l a i m. R e s e a r c h is
usuall}' r e t jui re d to d e t e r n i i n e t h e e l e m e n t s . F a c t s m u s t b e p r e s e n t t h a t e s t ab l i sh o r sat isf y
e a c h e l en i en t o f e a c h c a u se o f a c t i o n . ' I h e s e facts a r e t h e ke\' tacts oi t h e case. F o r i l lu s t r a t i o n
p u r p o s e s , w e w ill a p p h ' st ep 2 t o t h e conx e r s i o n c a u s e o f a c t i on .
Al i c e ’s re s e a r c h r eveal s t h a t t h e e l e m e n t s o f c o i n ' e r s i o n are as follows:
Persoiial p r o p e r t y
Plaintili is in p o s s e s s i o n ot t h e p r o p e r t \ ' o r is e n t i t l e d to i m m e d i a t e p o s s e s s i o n
319
I n t e n t to excix'isc d o m i n i o n o r c o n t r o l o v e r t h e p r o p e r t \ ' b\ t h e d e t e n d a n t
S e r i ou s i n t e r f e r e n c e w i t h plaintiff' s p o s s e s s i on
C a u s a t i o n of t h e s e r i o u s i n t e r f e r e n c e
3. List All Facts Related to th e E lem en ts

l h e t h i r d st e p is to list all t h e facts p o s s i b l y rel at ed to t h e e l e n i e n t s o t t h e c a u s e s ot acticiu
i d e n t i f i e d in s t ep 2. List all facts t h a t m i g h t relate in s o m e w a y tt) e a c h o f t h e e l e n i e n t s o f each
c a u s e o f a c t i on . In thi s fact s i t u a t i o n , t h e facts i ncl ude:
1. Mr. .Aper o w n s a f a r m wi t h a 2 0 0 - a c r e a r e a t hat is f'orested a n d i n h a b i t e d by deer.
2. l h e p r o p e r t y is f e n c e d a n d p o s t ed .
3. Mr. A p e r di s co\ -er ed a ii ewK’ t r a \ ’eled p a t h t h r o u g h t h e p r o p e r t y .
4. Part o f t h e f e n c e h a d b e e n r e m o v e d , s e \ e r a l s m a l l tr ees h a d b e e n cut d o w n , a n d a

l e a n - t o h a d b e e n c o n s t r u c t e d f r o m t h e trees.
3. A tire h a d b e e n built, a n d s o m e o f t h e wo o i l f r o m the fe n c e w a s still s m o l d e r i n g

in t h e fire.
6. M r A p e r o b s e r \ e d liric R a s c ó n , a n e i g h b o r , e n t e r i n g t h e p r o p e r t y w i t h h i s h u n t
i n g g e a r , b u i l d i n g a tire, a n d CLitting a tree.
7. Mr. A p e r s aw M r R a s c ó n a d d a t r ee to t h e l ean- t o.
N o t e t hat s o m e o f t h e facts i n c l u d e d nia\- n o t be r e l at e d to a n y e l e m e n t , s u c h as t h e fact

t h a t d e e r i n h a b i t t h e forest o r t h a t Mr . R a s c ó n is a n e i g h b o r . In this st ep, h o w e \ e r , it is b et t e r
to i n c l u d e all p o t e n t i a l l y re l at e d facts r a t h e r t h a n o m i t t h e m . Later r e s e a r c h m a y d e m o n s t r a t e
t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f a fact ini ti alh' t h o u g h t to b e i n s i gni f i ca nt .
4. D e te r m in e W h ic h Facts A p p ly
l h e f o u r t h st e p is to d e t e r m i n e w h i c h ol t h e c l i e n t ’s t act s aj i ph' to e s t ab l i sh o r sat isf y the
e l e m e n t s of e a c h c a u s e of a ct i o n , l h e lacts i dent i f i e d in t h i s st ep are t h e ke\' lacts. I ’s i ng the
c o m e r s i o i i c a us e ol a c t i o n as a n i l lus t r a t i on, t h e ke\' facts a re as follows:
P er s o n a l p r o p e r t y t h e w o o d f r o m t h e fe nc e a n d t h e t r ee s that w e r e c ut are
Mr. A p e r ’s p e r s o n a l p r o p e r t v R e s e a r c h n i a \ ’ reveal t hat t h i n g s g r o w i n g o n t h e l and
a r e real p r o p e r t y a n d , t h e r e f o r e , arc not c o v e r e d b y thi s t or t. It m a y b e t h o u g h , that
o n c e c u t d o w n , a t r ee b e c o m e s p e r s o n a l p r o p e r t y . Ihi s fact s h o u l d b e i n c l u d e d unti l
r e s e a r c h d e t e r m i n e s t h e s t a t us of this p r o p er t y .
Pl a i nt i ff is in p o ss e s s i o n o f t h e p r o p e r t y o r is e n t i t l e d to i n i m e d i a t e p o s s e s s i o n —
Mr. A p e r o w n s a n d o c c u p i e s t h e land.
I n t en t t o e.xercise d o m i n i o n a n d c o n t r o l o\-er t h e p r o p e r t y —M r . R a s c o n ’s a c t i o ns
i n c l u d e a d d i n g t h e f en c e w o o d a n d tr ees to t h e h r e a n d c u t t i n g d o w n t h e t r ee s for
t h e lean- t o.
S e r i o u s i n t e r f e r e n c e w i t h p l a i n t i t i ’s p o s s e s s i o n — t h e c u t t i n g of tr ees a n d t h e b u r n i n g
of w o o d se r i o u s l y i n t e r f e r e w i t h M r Aper' s r i ght s of p o s s e s s i on .
C' ausat i on o f s e r i o u s i n t e r f e r e n c e — Mr. R a s c o n ’s a c t i o n s o f c u t t i n g a n d b u r n i n g are

cl ea r h ' t h e c a u s e of t h e i n t er f e r e n c e . N o o t h e r fact ual caLise is pr e s e nt .
N o t e t h a t thi s s t ep res ul t s in t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f t h o s e facts re l at e d to t h e e l e n i e n t s o f

t h e c a u s e o f a c t i o n a n d t h e e l i m i n a t i o n of all facts t hat a r e n o t n e c e s s a r y to es t ab l i sh a cl a i m.
V o u m u s t appl\- thi s st e p to i de n t i f y t he key facts for e a c h p o t e n t i a l c a u s e o f ' a c t i o n i d e n t i
fied in s t ep I. O n c e thi s is d o n e , all t h e key facts for e a c h c la i m a r e i dent if ied. N o t e t h a t t he
r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n key tacts, i s sue i d e n t i f i c a t i o n, a n d s t a t i n g t h e issue is d i s c u s s e d in t he
n e x t t w o c h a p t e r s , (Chapter 10 a n d (Chapter 11.
320
C H A P T E R S LEGAL A N A L Y S IS — KEY FACTS
B. C ourt Opinion
' I h i s e x a m p l e il l us t rat es t h e o p e r a t i o n o t ' t h e p r i n e i p l e s l o r i d e n t i f y i n g t h e ke y t ac t s in a c o u r t
o p i n i o n . R e a d t h e F lowers i’. C.ampbell case p r e s e n t e d in t h e t' ollowing text a n d a p p l y t h e st ep s
d i s c u s s e d in t hi s c h a p t e r t o d e t e r m i n e t h e key tacts ot t h e col l at er al e s t o p p e l issue.
N o t e t h a t t h e d o c t r i n e o t coll ater al e s t o p p e l is d i s c u s s e d in t h e case. ' I h e d o c t r i n e ot
co l l at e r a l e s t o p p e l p r e v e n t s a p a r t y in a la wsui t t r o m r e l i t i g a t i n g a n i ssue t ha t w a s d e c i d e d in a
p r e v i o u s l awsui t . In t h e case, t h e trial c o u r t r u l e d t ha t t h e q u e s t i o n o f w h e t h e r t h e d e f e n d a n t ,
C a m p b e l l , u s e d exce ss i ve f o r c e in re s i s t i n g t h e ass aul t o f F l o w e r s h a d al read\- b e e n l i t i g a t e d in
a n e a r l i e r c r i m i n a l case. Based u p o n thi s rul i ng, th e trial c o u r t d e t e r m i n e d t h a t t h e d o c t r i n e ot
co l l at e r a l e s t o p p e l a p p l i e d a n d d i s m i s s e d F l o w e r s ' s c l a i m t ha t C a m p b e l l u s e d e x c ess i v e force.
' I h e a p p e a l in F low ers v. C a iiip h e ll is f r o m thi s r u l i n g b\- t h e trial c o u r t .
CASE 275 (1977). He c o n t e n d s , however, that t he dis posi t i ve issue

in this ci\ il acti on is w h e t h e r d e f e n d a n t r e s p o n d e d to his o w n
FLOWERS v.CAMPBFI,I, a d mi t t ed aggression with excessive force. He c o n t e n d s that
72 5 R 2 d 0 1 2 9 5 (Or. Ct. App. 1986) that issue was n o t litigated at his c r i mi na l trial.
L' nder the d o c t r i n e o f collateral e st oppel, a p a r t y to an
R O S S M A N , Judge. acti on ma y be p re v e n t ed f r o m relitigating issues that were
actual!)- d e c i d e d a n d n e c e s s a r y to t h e j u d g m e n t in a p r e v i
Pl ai nti rt ' br ought this assault a n d bat t ery acti on ti> recover ous action. State F a r m v. CCentury H o m e , 275 Or. 97, 550
d a m a g e s for injuries allegedly sus t ai ned in a s k i rmi sh with R2d 1 185 (1976); Bahler v Fletcher, 257 Or. 1, 474 P 2 d 329
d e f e n d a n t C a m p be l l ( d e t en d a n t ) , w h o was, at the lime, an (1970). Plaintiff was c o n v i c t ed in t h e c r i mi n a l a ct i on ot a s
e mp l o y ee o f d e f e n d a n t M o n t g o m e r y Wa rd iS: C o mp a n y . sault a n d ha r a s s me n t . ' Ihe v i c t i m ’s use o f m o r e force t h a n was
Plaintirt alleges that d e f e n d a n t used excessive torce to repel justified to repel t h e a t t a c k e r ’s c r i m i n a l acts is n o t a d ef ens e
his o w n aggressive behavior, tor whi c h plaintifl was c o n lo ei t her o f t h o s e cri mes. It follows that d e f e n d a n t ’s r e s p o ns e
vict ed o f assault in the f our t h degree a n d h a r a s s me n t . Ihe lo plainliff's a c l i ons c o u l d nol have b e e n a n issue t ha t was
trial c o u r t di s mi ss e d the a c t i on after rLiling, on defendant ' s necessarlK- d e c i d e d in p l a i nt i f f ’s c ri mi n a l trial. Accordi ngl y,
m o t i o n for a d i r ect ed verdict, that all mat eri al issues o f fact because an a g g r e s so r ma v r e c o v e r in an a c t i on tor b a t t e r y it
wer e d e c i d e d against plaintifl at his c ri mi na l trial a n d that he proves that the d e f e n d a n t u s e d m o r e t orce t h a n was j u s t i
h e was p r e c l u d ed fr o m relitigating t h o s e issues. W’e reverse. fied in rejielling t he a ggr e s si on, L i n k h a r t v. Savely, 190 Or.
'The viol ence e r u p t ed after plaintiff a ccused de f e n d a n t ot 484, 497, 227 P 2 d 187 (1951 ), th e trial c o u r t e r r e d in h o l d i n g
cha r g i ng h i m $12.99 for a lock that ha d be e n a ds e r t i s e d for that plaintilf was p r ec l ud e d f r o m litigating all issues “e s s e n
$9.97.' Plaintiff a d mi t s that he b e c a m e involved in a \ erbal e x tial” to Iiis recover y by r e a s o n o f t he j u d g m e n t e n t e r e d in his
ch a n g e wi t h def e n d a n t i m m e d i a t e k before the tight a n d that c r i mi n a l trial.
h e “t hr e w t h e first p u nc h. ” He also c o n c e d e s b o t h that t he j ur y Reversed a n d r e m a n d e d .
at his c r i mi n a l trial necessarily fo u n d that his use of torce was 'plaintilf w.ii 62 yc.irs old at fight time; ilefendant was 33. Plaintiff
no t justified a n d that he is collaterally e s t o p p ed t r o m relitigat allegedly .sustained a broken artii and a detactied retina. Defendant’s jaw was
ing that issue. See Ro sh ak v. Leathers, 277 O r 207, 560 P.2d liroken.
1. R ead th e Entire C ase

' t h e first s t ep is t o r ea d t h e e n t i r e case wi t h t h e f o l l o w i n g g e n e r a l q u e s t i o n in m i n d ; “W h a t
w a s d e c i d e d abt ) ul w h i c h f a c t s ? ” Ihi s st ep h e l p s y o u k e e p t h e fact s in m i n d w h i l e o b t a i n i n g
an o v e r v i e w o f w h a t legal q u e s t i o n s w e r e a d d r e s s e d a n d a n s w e r e d .
2. L o o k to th e H o ld in g
I h e h o ld in g is t h e c o u r t ’s a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e r u l e o f l a w to t h e legal q u e s t i o n r a i s e d b y t h e fact s
o f t h e case. “W h a t is t h e c o u r t ’s a n s w e r to t h e legal q u e s t i o n ? H o w d i d t h e c o u r t a p p l y t h e r u l e
o f l a w t o t h e legal q u e s t i o n ( s ) r a i s e d ? ” ' I h e s e ar e q u e s t i o n s to ask w h e n l o o k i n g to t h e h o l d i n g .
321
In thi s ease, tiie CDurt s t a t ed tiiat t h e d o e t r i n e (i fc o l l at e r a l e s t o p p e l p r e v e n t s a part y f r o m

r c H t i ga t i ng i ssues t h a l w e r e aetiialK d e c i d e d in a p r e \ i o u s a c t i o n . I h e c o u r t n o t e d t h a t t he
N'ictim’s use o f m o r e force t h a n w a s justified to r epel t h e a t t a c k e r ’s c r i m i n a l acts is n o t a de f e n s e
t o a s s a u l t o r h a r a s s m e n t . I h e r e f o r e , t h e i ssue o f t h e x' ic t i m’s u s e o f e x c e s s i \ e for ce t o repel t he
pl a i nt i f f ' s a t t a c k w a s n o t li t i gat ed in t h e p l a i n t i f f s c r i m i n a l trial. I h e c o u r t c o n c l u d e d that the
trial c o u r t e r r e d in a p p l y i n g t h e d o c t r i n e o f c o l l at e r a l e s t o p p e l t o p r e c l u d e t h e p l a i n t i t l ' f r o m
l i t i ga ti ng t h e q u e s t i o n o f t h e v i c t i m ’s use o f e x c e s s i v e f o r c e t o r e p e l t h e p l a i n t i f f s a g g r e s s i o n .
3. I d e n tify th e Key Facts

I h e t h i r d s t e p is to identif}- t h e f acts necessar}- to t h e h o l d i n g — t h e ke\- facts.
a. Part 1: List All Facts Related to the H o ld in g

W' hat facts are p o s s i b k rel ated to the h o l d i n g ? ' I h e p l a i nt i f f filed a n assault a n d b a t t er y ci\'il
a c t i o n against t h e d e f e n d a n t to reco\-er d a m a g e s for i n j u r i e s s u s t a i n e d in a s k i r m i s h with the
d e f e n d a n t . ' I h e plai nti ff a n d the de fe nda r i t b e c a m e in\-olved in a fight as a result o f a d i s p u t e over
a n a m o u n t t h e plai nti ff wa s c h a r g e d for ai-i it em. I h e plaintiff t h r e w t h e first p u n c h . He clainis
t h a t t h e d e f e n d a n t r e s p o n d e d with excessive force to t h e p l a i n t i f f ’s aggres si on. ' I h e pl ai nti tf was
t r i e d in a s e p a r at e c r i m i n a l a c t i on a n d c o n \ i ct ed o f assaultii-ig a n d h a r a s s i n g t h e d e f e n d an t . I h e
trial c o u r t r u l ed that “all n-iaterial issues o f fact w e r e d e c i d e d a g a i n s t plaintiff at his c r i mi n a l trial
a n d h e wa s p r e c l u d e d fr oni relitigating t h o s e issues.” All o f t h e s e facts a re poss i bl y related to
t h e h o l d i ng . S o m e o f t h e facts o f t h e case, su c h as w h a t the}- w e r e fi ght i ng a b o u t , are clearl}- not
r el a t e d a n d are e l i m i n a t e d in this p a r t o f step 3.
I h e trial c o u r t in t h i s a c t i o n r u l ed t h a t t h e p l a i n t i f f w a s p r e c l u d e d f r o m r e l it i gat i ng his
c l a i m in thi s a c t i o n b e c a u s e t h e i s sues of fact r e g a r d i n g t h e fight w e r e d e c i d e d in t h e c r i m i n a l
a c t i o n . I h e trial coLU't, therel' ore, d i s m i s s e d his c l ai m.
b. Part 2: D ete r m in e the Key Facts

W h i c h o f t h e lacts listed in p a r t 1 a re iiecessar\- o r e s s e n t i a l t o t h e d e c i s i o n r e a c h e d ? W' hich
of t h e facts, if c h a n g e d , w o u l d c h a n g e t h e o u t c o m e o f t h e case?
I h e trial c o u r t ’s r u l i n g that t h e issue ol t h e v i c t i m ’s r e s p o n s e w a s li ti gated in t he

c r i m i n a l ca se is clearh- a ke\- lact. I l ad t h e t rial coi u' t r u l e d o t h e r w i s e , t h e c ase w o u l d
n o t h a \ e b e e n d i s m i s s e d a n d t h e a p p e a l filed. N o t e t h a t a “fa c t ” in thi s i n s t a nc e is
h o w t h e trial c o u r t rul ed.
I h e tact that t h e plaintiff w a s c o n \ ic l ed of a s s a u l t a n d h a r a s s m e n t in a n e a r l ie r c r i m

inal ca se is clea rly a ke}- fact. H a d t h e r e b e e n n o c r i m i n a l trial, t h e civil trial c o u r t
c o u l d n ot h a \ e a p p l i e d t h e d o c t r i n e o f c o l l at e r al e s t op p e l.
I h e fact t h a t t h e d e f e n d a n t ( vi c t i m) u s e d f o r ce in r e s p o n s e to t h e p l a i n t i f l ’s a g g r e s
si o n is a k e y fact. I h e p l a i n t i f f ’s l a ws u i t res t s u p o n t h e n a t u r e o f t h e d e f e n d a n t ’s
r es po n s e .
' I h e fact t ha t t h e \ -ict im’s al l eged u se o f e xc e s s i v e f o r c e to repel a n a t t a c k e r ’s acts o f

ass aul t o r h a r a s s m e n t is n o t a d e f e n s e to t h o s e ac t s in a c r i m i n a l ca se is a l s o kev. H a d
thi s b e e n a d e f e n s e to t h o s e acts, t h e q u e s t i o n o f t h e v i c t i m ’s u se o f e xcessive force
w o u l d h a v e b e e n li ti gated in t h e c r i m i n a l case, a n d t h e trial c o u r t ’s r u l i n g w o u l d
h a v e b e e n c o r r e ct .
N o t e t h a t in thi s case, a key fact is a rul e o f l a w : ' I h e v i c t i m ’s u se o f f o r ce in r e s p o n s e t o

a s s a u l t a n d h a r a s s m e n t is n o t a d e f e n s e to e i t h e r c r i m e .
' I h e fact t h a t t h e p l a i n t i t f t h r e w t h e first p u n c h in h i s fight w i t h t h e d e f e n d a n t is

p r o b a b l y n o t a ke}- fact. It is n o t n e c e s s a r y to e s t a b l i s h o r satisfy a n y e l e n i e n t o f t h e
col l at er al e s t o p p e l issue.
322
C H A P T E R S LEGAL A N A L Y S IS — KEY FACTS
lliis c as e is s o m e w h a t d i f f e r e n t f r o m s o m e o t h e r cases b e c a u s e t h e ke\- facts o n a p p e a l

i n v o l v e t h e facts o f w h a t o c c u r r e d b e t w e e n t h e pk \ i nt i t f a n d t h e d e f e n d a n t , t h e a c t i o n s o f t h e
trial c o u r t , a n d t h e l aw g o v e r n i n g d e f e n s e s t o a ssault a n d h a r a s s m e n t .
Sum m ary
All law' suits a r i se as a r es u l t o f d i s p u t e s i n v o k i n g facts. O u r legal s y s t e m revt)lves a r o i m d
r e s o l v in g d i s p u t e s t h r o u g h t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f r ul es o f law to t h e facts tif a case. T h e r e f o r e , t h e
t w o m a j o r c o m p o n e n t s o f t h e d i s p u t e r e s o l u t i o n p ro c e s s are t h e a p p l i c a b l e l aw a n d t h e fact s
o f t h e dispute. Each c o m p o n e n t de se r ve s app rop ri at e attention.
S o m e facts a r e m o r e i m p o r t a n t t h a n o t h e r s , a n d t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t facts a r e t h e ke y
t a c t s — t h o s e facts u p o n w h i c h t h e o u t c o m e o f t h e case d e p e n d s . Ke\- facts a r e t h o s e facts
n e c e s s a r y t o p r o v e o r d i s p r o v e a c l a i m . A key fact is so ess ent i al t ha t if it w e r e c h a n g e d , t h e
o u t c o m e o f t h e case w o u l d b e d i f f e r e n t . K e y facts a r e an e l e m e n t o f a legal issue, a n d t h a t r o l e
is d i s c u s s e d in C h a p t e r s 10 a n d 11.
I h e f o u r r e c o m m e n d e d s t e p s t o f o l l o w w h e n d e t e r m i n i n g t h e k e \ ’ facts ot a c l i e n t ’s
case are:
St ep 1: I de n t i f y e a c h c a u s e o f a c t i o n po s s i b l y r a i se d by t h e tacts.
St ep 2: D e t e r m i n e t h e e l e m e n t s o f e a c h c a u s e o f a c t i o n i d e n t i f i e d in st ep 1.
St ep 3: List all t h e fact s p o s s i b l y re l a t e d to t h e e l e m e n t s o f t h e c a u s e s ot a c t i o n i d e n t i

fied in st ep 2.
St ep 4: D e t e r m i n e w h i c h o f t h e c l i e n t ’s facts a p p k to e st a b l i sh o r satisf}’ t h e e l e m e n t s
o f eacli c a u s e o f a c t i o n — t h e k e y facts.
I h e t h r e e r e c o m m e n d e d s t e p s f o r i d e n t i f y i n g t he ke\' facts in a c o u r t o p i n i o n are:
St ep 1: R e a d t h e e n t i r e c a s e w i t h t h e k i l l o w i n g g e n e r a l q u e s t i o n in m i n d : “W h a t w a s
dec ide d about which facts?”
St ep 2: L o o k to t h e h o l d i n g .
St ep 3: I den t i f y t h e fact s n e c e s s a r y ’ to t h e h o l d i n g — t h e key facts.
These r e c o m m e n d e d s t e p s a r e u s u a l l y h e l p f ul in i d e n t i f y i n g t h e key tacts. Y o u m a y

d e v e l o p s h o r t c u t s o r d i f f e r e n t m e t h o d s as y o u b e c o m e m o r e p ro f i c i e n t in a n a l y z i n g a c l i e n t ’s
case o r a c o u r t o p i n i o n .
B a c k g r o u n d facts 309 I r r e l e va n t facts 309
Et hi c s 307 Key facts 310
Lact 307 Key fa c t s— c a s e law 315
G r o u p s o f facts 312 Key f a c t s— c l i en t ' s case 312
I n d i v i d u a l facts 311 Rul e o f law 307
Internet Resources
As o f t h e d a t e o f p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s text, t h e r e a r e n o W e b sites d e d i c a t e d speci fi cal l y t o k e y
tacts. How' ever, u s i n g a s e a r c h e n g i n e s u c h as h t t p : / / w w w . g o o g l e . c o m a n d “ I R A C ke y t a c t s ”
o r “legal anal ys i s a n d k e y fa c t s” as a t op i c, v ou will t i n d a w i d e r a n g e o f W e b sites r e l a t e d
to t h e t o p i c o f legal a n a l y s i s a n d k e y facts. M o s t o f t h e s e sites p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n w i t h o u t
char ge. A s n o t e d in C h a p t e r 7, t h e t w o m a j o r f e e - b a s e d o n l i n e r e s e a r c h s e r v i c e s a r e W e s t l a w
323
a n d l. exisNcxis. I h c p u b l i s h e r s closcly m o n i t o r tl iese s e r v i c e s. I n t o r m a t i t ) n y o u o l i t ai n tree
t r o m (itlier sites m a y n o t b e closely m o n i t o r e d a n d m a y n o t b e as a c c u r a t e o r h a \ e t h e s a m e
qualit\- o t ' m a t e r i a l as t ha t o b t a i n e d f r o m t e e - b a s e d s e r \ ices. t h e r e f o r e , e x erci se c ar e w h e n
u s i n g free!}’ o b t a i n e d ma t e r i a l .
Exercises
A d d i t i o n a l a s s i g n n ic n ti arc a v a ila b le on th e C o u rseM a te. ASSIGNMENTS

F ac t s : I'err\', a bill c o l l e c t o r , h a s b e e n a t t e m p t i n g to c o l
ASSIGNMENT 1
lect a bill f r o m C l i e n t . E v e r y o t h e r e v e n i n g f o r t h e pas t
De t a i l t h e s t e p s f or d e t e r m i n i n g t h e k ey facts in a c l i e n t ’s
t w o we e k s , h e h a s c a l l e d C l i e n t at h o m e af t e r 8:30 p . m.
case.
a n d t h r e a t e n e d t o call h e r e m p l o y e r a n d i n f o r m h i m t hat
ASSIGNMENT 2 s h e r e f us e s to p a y h e r bills. O n e v e r y M o n d a y , W e d n e s
De t a i l t h e s t e p s f or d e t e r m i n i n g t h e key facts in a c o u r t day, a n d F r i d a y d u r i n g t h e t w o - w e e k p e r i o d , h e h a s
opinion. c a l l e d (Client at w o r k . S h e r e p e a t e d l y r e q u e s t e d t h a t he
q u i t c a l l i n g h e r at w o r k . O n t h e p a s t t w o S a t u r d a y s , he
ASSIGNMENTS
h a s c o m e by h e r h o m e a n d t h r e a t e n e d to s u e h e r a n d
I d e nt i f y t h e b a c k g r o i m d t a c t s in t h e t ol l o w i n g cases: t h r o w h e r in jail.
Flowers I’, ( 'a in p b c ll ( p r e s e n t e d in t hi s c ii apter )
U n ite d S ta te s r. L eo n ( s e e A p p e n d i x A) R u l e o f L a w: I n t l i c t i o n o t e m o t i o n a l d i s t r e s s — e x t r e m e
or outrageous c o n d u c t that causes se\ere emotional
ASSIGNMENT 4
d i s t res s.
I dent i f y t h e key tacts in a s s i g n m e n t s 3 a n d 6 in the Exercises
s e c t i o n o f CChapter 10. A s s i g n m e n t : t h e r e s e a r c h e r ’s a s s i g n m e n t is to d e t e r m i n e
if t h e a c t i o n s o f t h e bill c o l l e c t o r c o n s t i t u t e “e x t r e m e o r
ASSIGNMENTS
o u t r a g e o u s c o n d u c t . ” D i s c u s s t h e a s s i g n m e n t t r o m t he
I de nl i f y t h e key fact s In e a c h o f t h e h y p o t h e t i c a l s p r e s e n t e d
p e r s p e c t i \ e ot m d i \ i d u a l k ey tact s a n d t r o m t h e p e r s p e c
at t h e b e g i n n i n g ot (Ch a p t e r s 10, 1 i , a n d 12.
ti\ e o f a g r o u p o f tacts.
ASSIGNMENTS
ASSIGNMENTS
I d en t i f y t h e key fact s in tiio c a s e s listed in A, B, (C, a n d H
I de n t i t }’ t h e ke \ ' t a c t s in a s s i g n m e n t s 16 a n d 17 in t h e
o f a s s i g n m e n t 10 in t h e E xe r c i s e s s e c t i o n ot (Chapter 4.
Exerci ses s e c t i o n ot (Chapt e r 17.
ASSIGNMENT?
I d e n t i f y t h e k e y f a c t s in a s s i g n m e n t s 3, 6, a n d 7 in t h e
Ex e r c i se s s e c t i o n o f C h a p t e r 17.
^ ^ tools, including flash cards, quizzes, and more. To learn more aboutthis resource and access
# CourseMate free demo CourseMate resources, go to www.cengagebrain.com, and search for this book.
Legal Analysis: Issue Identification-
Spotting the Issue
Il wa'' llic la t f a ftcrn iH in o l nn li I ic m i K' lu iij; dn\ w h en K c\ in iv a li/o ti lie -.till had a lot o l w o rk
O u tl in e
lo liiiis li ix -lo rc he c o u ld yo h o n ic. K c \ in has boon R a iid i N k C iu iiv 's p arale gal I'or the' past live
years. I Ic a d m ire s h er tor her te n acit) a n d ap p re cia te s the r e s p o n s ib ilitv am ! in d c p e n d e iic c she I. Introduction
g ive s h im in the p c r lo n iia n c e ol h is assii^ n n ien ts. K evin 's p rin ia r \ role is to c o n d iic ! the in itia l II. De f i ni t i on a n d Tv-pes
interv iew w ith the clie n t, p rep are a s u n in ia r \ ot the in tervie w , an d a sscn ih le a legal n ic iiio -
III. HlemtMits
ran d u m c o n ta in in g an id e n tilic a tio n o f the legal issue s and an a n a ly s is o l'th e a p p lic a b le knv.
I \ ’. Issue Ide nt i t i c at i on —
Id c n tih in g the leg.il issue is o lten the trick ie st part ol Kev in's job. It d id n ol seem , however,
C l i e n t ’s Ca s e
that il w o u ld be too m u ch o l a p ro b le m in Ida Cârrv's c,ise, I le had jiisl lin is h e d h is in te rvie w
\'. Issue I d e n t i f i ca t i on — C a s e I.av\’
with ,\ls. ( !arr\’, xvhose hom e IS acro ss the street Iro m Roosevelt l le in e n ta rv Sch o o l. .\ls. ( 'arr\ s
best Irie n d , K a re n , live s a b lo ck aw ,i\. K aren 's ~ \e a r-o ld son attends sch o o l al R i'o se v e lt. \' I . Key Poi nt s Checkli st: S po t t in g
l ast m o n th , on .April I ), Ida w as m her tro nt vard p la n tin g tu lip s. It was lu n ch tim e , t h e Issue
an d i.iiild re n were p la y in g on the pla\ g ro u n d . Sh e heard the c ro s s in g guard 's w h istle blow and \ ’II. App l i c a t i o n
tires s q u e a lin g . She lo o ke d up and saw a car a p p ro a c h in g a c u rv e in the sch o o l /o ne at a ver\
h ig h rale o f speed. Il lu m p e d the c u rb , c ra sh e d ih ro u g h the s h a m lin k tence s u r r o u n d in g the
I'la v g ro u iu k an d hit the seesaw. Ih e Iirst t h in g she re c o g n i/e d w,is the ca r - i t was Hob Hat ton's
h o t-ro d (k im a ro . It lo o ke d lik e he w as g o in g too fast, lost co n tro l on the c u rv e in the sch o o l
/one, and crash e d th ro u g h ih e le iK e . After c o m p l e t i n g thi s chapter, yo u
Hob, a lo Lal teen, to iU n u ia llv ra cctl iii the n e ig h b o rh o o d . Se ve ral teachers c o m p la in e d should understand:
to h is p aren ts, w h o i.iii.1 n o th in g B o b hac.1 rei.eivei.1 several s p e e d in g tickets.
• W’hat a legal issue is a n d t he
II h ' se c o iu i t h in g Ida n o tk e d \\as thal iw o ih ild r e n p la v iiig o n the seesaw i\ere in iu re d .
v a r i o u s t y p e s o f issues
O n e o l them w as Karen's so n, 1 im . W h e n Ula re a lize d it was I im w h o was in ju re d , she becam e
e xtre n ie K ' upset. • I h e e l e m e n t s o f an issue
S in ce the w re ck, Ida has h.ul severe in s o m n ia atul e x tie n u ' a n x ie t v W h e n she can sleep, • Mow to ident i f y ( s p o t ) t h e issue in
she has n ig h tm a re s. 1lei d o c to r p re s c rih c d in e d ica tK m lo r her n e r\c s a iu l lo help her sleep, and a cl i e n t ’s case
he recently referred her to a p s v c h o lo g is t. Ida cam e to Ms. .\lc (iu ire 's othce s e e k in g to r e c o w r
• H o w to ident i f y t h e issue in a
the exp e nses she h as in c in retl.
c o u r t case
A lte r s u n im a r i/ m g ih c in tervie w , K e \ in loc uses on the next task and asks h inrselt, "What
is the legal issue iii th is case ''” Ih e ('ro c c s s o l id e n lilv in g the issue is the sub ject ol th is c h a p le r
Ih e \ p p lic a tio n se ctio n ot th is c h .ip tc r (.hsLiisses the an sw er lo Kev iiis q u e stio n .
325
PART III THE SPEC IFICS OF LEGAL ANALYSIS
I. INTRODUCTION
l h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t tasi< a re s e a r c l i er faces w i i e n e n g a g i n g in legal a n a h s i s is t o c o r r e c t l y
i d e n t i t \ ’ t h e legal issue. I d e n t i f y i n g t h e issue, c o m m o n h ' referreil to as “s p o t t i n g t h e i s s u e , ” is
t h e first st ep o f t h e legal a n a h ’sis p r o c es s. I d e n t i f y i n g t h e legal issue(s) p r e s e n t e d by t h e tact
s i t u a t i o n is t h e f o u n d a t i o n a n d ke y to efl'ectixe legal a n a h sis. It g u i d e s t h e r e s e a r c h e r to t he
speci fic legal p r o b l e m r a i se d b \ ’ t h e u n i q u e facts of t h e c l i e n t ’s case. Vou m u s t k n o w w h a t t he
p r e c i se legal p r o b l e m is b e f o r e yo u can b e g i n to stiKe it. I d e n t i f y i ng t h e issue d e t e r m i n e s w h i c h
d i r e c t i o n t h e r e s e a rc h will take. It is like s e l e c t i n g a r oa d: If \’o u c h o o s e t h e w r o n g r o a d , you
will w a s t e a lot o f t i m e b e f o r e v o u get to y o u r d e s t i n a t i o i i , o r yo u m a y get lost a n d n e \ ’er get
t he r e . H a l f t h e b a t t l e o f legal r e s e a rc h a n d a n a l y s i s is k n o w i i i g w h a t \ ’o u ar e l o o k i n g t or ; that
is, w h a t is the issue?
If y o u m i s i d e n t i f y t h e i ssue (as k th e w r o n g legal q u e s t i o n ) , y o u w a s t e t i m e a n d c o m m i t
legal e r r or . If y o u ask t he w r o n g quest ioi i, \ ’o u will get t h e w r o n g a n s w e r to t h e cli eii t’s p r o b l e m .
For Example If you incorrectly identify the issue as a contrdct law issue when it is really
a corporation law issue, you will waste time researching contract law, and
the answ er you find will not apply to the client's case.
' I h e cl i ent d o e s n o t r et ai n c o u n s e l to fi nd t h e a n s w e r to t h e w r o n g q u e s t i t i n . I h e client

p a y s to h a v e a p r o b l e m s o h ’ed. If t h e issue is nii si dent i fi ed, th e p r o b l e m r e m a i n s u n s o l v e d , tinie
is w a s t e d , a n d y o u a r e n o b e t t e r o f f t h a n w h e n y o u s t a r t e d . If t he e r r o r is n ot c a u g h t . \ ’o u m a y
h a v e c o m m i t t e d n i a l p r a c f i c e b e c a u s e t h e cl i ent is bil led for a se r \ ice t h a t w a s n o t r e q u e s t e d .
N o t o n l \ ’ is i d e n t i f y i n g t h e issue t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t st ep in t h e a n a K ’tical p r o c e s s , it is
o f t e n t h e m o s t difficult. W' h e n y o u a s k a p r o f e s s i o n a l h o w to spot a n issue, t h e r e s p o n s e oft en
is. “ 1 j u s t k n o w ” o r “ A f t e r a w h i l e it b e c o m e s int ui t i s e . ’’ I n d e e d , it d o e s b e c o m e i n t u i t i \ e after
o n e h a s r e a d a n d w o r k e d o n h u n d r e d s of cases. Ihis, h o w e \ ’er, d o e s n ot h e l p t h e b e g i n n e r .
A l t h o u g h n o s i m p l e r u l e o r ni agi c f o r m u l a e.xists, c e r t a i n lechniqLies a n d s t ep s a r e hel pf ul
w h e n i d e n t i f y i n g t h e issue in a c l i e n t ’s fact sitLiation o r a c o u r t o p i n i o n , l h e s t a r t i n g p o i n t is
to kiKiw w h a t a n issue is — h o w it is delineel.
II. DEFINITION A ND TYPES

In t h e b r o a d e s t s e ns e, t h e issue is a q u e s t i o n : t h e legal q u e s t i o n r a i se d by t h e d i s p u t e . It is t h e
legal q u e s t i o n t ha t m u s t b e a n s w e r e d b e f o r e a c ase c a n b e resolved. It o c c u r s w h e n e v e r t h e r e
is d i s a g r e e m e n t o r u n c e r t a i n t y a b o u t w h e t h e r o r h o w a r u l e of law a p p l i es to a c l i e n t ’s facts.
In a n a r r o w e r sens e, it is t h e p r e c i s e legal q u e s t i o n r a i se d by t h e speci fic facts o f a d i s pu t e .
I s su e s m a y be b r o k e n i n t o t h r e e b r o a d c a t e g o r i e s :
1. A q u e s t i o n o f w h i c h l aw a p p l i e s
For Example Do the traffic code provisions ot Municipal Code § 2254 or state
statute § 35-6-7-28 apply when an individual is stopped in a
municipality for driving under the influence of intoxicants'^’
2. A q u e s t i o n o f h o w a l aw app l i e s
For Example Under the provisions of Colorado battery law, does an individual
commit a battery when the individual, present at the scene
of a battery, encourages others to commit the battery but does not actively
participate in the actual battering of the victim?
32 6
CHAPTER 10 LEGAL ANALYSIS: ISSUE IDENTIFICATION— SPOTTING THE ISSUE
3. A q u e s t i o n ot w h e t h e r a law a p p l i es at al
For Example Does M unicipal Code § 2100, Public Sales/Auctions, govern

garage sales held on private property?
R e g a r d l e s s o t ' t h e t y p e o f legal q u e s t i o n r ai s e d b\' a d i s p u t e , t h e d e f i n i t i o n i.s t h e s a m e :

' I h e i s s u e is t h e p r e c i s e legal q u e s t i o n r a i se d b y t he specific facts o f t h e d i s p u t e .
N o w' t h a t y o u k n o w w h a t a n i s s u e is, t h e n e x t s t e p is t o d e t e r n i i n e w h a t it is c o m
p o s e d o f — t h e e l e m e n t s . H \ e r y i s s u e is c o m p o s e d o t e l e m e n t s , a n d t h e s e e l e n i e n t s m u s t
b e d e t e r m i n e d t o i d e n t i t y t h e i s s u e . I d e n t i t x i n g t h e e l e m e n t s is ke\' t o t h e p r o c e s s o f
i d e n t i f y i n g t h e i s sue. In fact , o n c e } o u h a v e d e t e r m i n e d t h e e l e n i e n t s , y o u c a n i d e n t i f y
t h e i s s u e q u i t e easi ly.
III. ELEMENTS
A cl i en t e n t e r s t h e law otfice w i t h a u n i q u e tact s i t u a t i o n t h a t nia\- o r nia\- n o t h a v e a legal
r e m e d y , ' f h e a t t o r n e ) ' ’s rol e is to i d e n t i t y t h e q u e s t i o n r a i se d by t h e tact s a n d d e t e r m i n e if a
legal r e m e d y is avail able a n d , if so, w hat legal r e m e d \ - is a \ ’ailable. B e c a u s e t h e issue is d e t i n e d
as t h e p r e c i s e legal q u e s t i o n r ai s ed by t h e speci li c tact s ot t h e c l i e n t ’s case, a c o r r e c t h ' i d e n t i
fied i s s ue is c o m p o s e d o f t h r e e el e n i en t s : t h e a p p l i c a b l e law, t h e legal q u e s t i o n , a n d t h e k e y
fact s ( s e e Hxhi bi t 10-1).
A. Applicable Law
Applicable law is t h e s p e c i f i c l a w t h a t g t ) \ e r n s t h e d i s p u t e . This nia\- b c a c o n s t i t u
t i o n a l p r o v i s i o n , s t a t u t e , o r d i n a n c e , r e g u l a t i o n , o r c a s e l aw d o c t r i n e , p r i n c i p l e , r u l e ,
test, o r g u id e .
For Example Under Indiana Code § 35-42-3-2, kidnapping . . .
According to Florida's law governing breach of co n tract,,
B. Legal Question
I h i s p o r t i o n o f t h e i n q u i r \ ' re f er s to t h e legal question c o n c e r n i n g t h e law' g o \ ' e r n i n g t h e
d i s p u t e , r a i s e d by t h e facts o f t h e d i s pu t e .
E x h ib it 10-1 Elements of an Issue.
Applicable Law The specific law that governs the dispute, (e.g., a con sti
tutional provision, statute, regulation, ordinance, or case
law doctrine, principle, rule, test, or guide)
Legal Question The question concerning the law governing the dispute
raised by the facts of the dispute
Key Facts The legally significant facts that raise the legal question
of h o w or w h eth er the law governing the dispute applies;
facts that, if changed, w ould change or affect the outcom e
of the application of the law
327
For Example . does kidnapping occur when
. is a contract breached when .
C. Key Facts
Key facts a re tiie l<ey o r legal!}’ signi l i cant facts t ha t raise t h e legal questii)ii o f h o w o r w h e t h e r
t h e l a w g o v e r n i n g t h e d i s p u t e applies.
For Example . .. when the individual is held against her will but is not held for ransom?
. . . when the product delivered is grade A- and the contract calls for
grade A?
D. Examples
' l h e t h r e e e l e m e n t s o f t h e i s s u e — t h e a p p l i ca b l e law, t h e legal q u e s t i o n c o n c e r n i n g t h e law,
a n d t h e key facts t hat raise t h e legal q u e s t i o n — a r e r e f e r r e d to in t h i s text as a c o m p r e h e n s i v e ,
narrow (specific) statement of the issue. A n issue i n c l u d i n g t h e s e e l e m e n t s is c o m p r e
h e n s i v e b e c a u s e it I n c l ud e s t h e specific law a n d ke}’ facts. It is a n a r r o w s t a t e m e n t o f t h e issue
b e c a u s e t h e m o r e tact s }’o u i nc l u d e, t h e m o r e specific (o r n a r r o w ) t h e legal q u e s t i o n b e c o m e s .
I d e n t i f y e a c h e l e m e n t as precise!}' a n d comp l e t e ! } ’ as possible. ' I h e f o l l o w i n g are e x a m p l e s ot
s t a t e m e n t s o f issues c o n t a i n i n g tlie t h r e e e l e me n t s :
L’n d e r t h e h o l o g r a p h i c will st atut e, (ôlo. Re\'. (Applicable Law)

Stat. § 1 1 I -303, is a h o l o g r a p h i c will \ alid if it is (Legal Question)
h a n d w r i t t e n b}' a n e i g h b o r at t h e d i r e c t i o n o l ' t h e
testator, but not w r i t t e n in t h e t e s t a t o r ’s h a n d w r i t i n g ? (Key Facts)
L’n d e r A r i z o n a tort law', d o e s a b a t t e r \ o c c u r w h e n (Applicable Law)

law e n l o r c e m e n t o l h ce r s , w h i l e m a k i n g a lawt ul (Legal Question)
arr est, e n c o u n t e r re s i st a nc e , Lise force to o \ e r c o m e
t ha t res i st ance, a n d c o n t i n u e to use force aft er
re s i s t an c e ceases? (Key Facts)
D o e s M u n i c i p a l Côde § 3362 p e r m i t t h e (Applicable Law)

i ns t a l l a t i o n o f a si gn t hat is 20 feet h i g h b}' -IO feet (Legal Question)
wi de, is m o r e t h a n 15 feet f r o m t h e p r o p e r t y line,
a n d d o e s not b l o c k t h e \ iew’ of traffic? (Key Facts)
Hach o f tiiese e x a m p l e s c o n t a i n s t h e pr e c i se law, legal q u e s t i o n , a n d t h e k e y facts e s

s e n t i a l to r e s o l u t i o n of t h e d i s p u t e . N o t e t h a t t h e issue is narrovvl}- f o c u s e d u p o n t h e kuv a n d
speci fic facts o f t h e c l i e n t ’s case.
Lai l ure t o i n c l u d e t h e s e e l e m e n t s r esults in a n a b s t r a c t q u e s t i o n , a broad statement
of the issue t h a t is m i s s i n g t h e legal ( a p p l i c a b l e law ) a n d f act ual c o n te x t .
For Example If the three previous examples were stated broadly, and did not include
the specific elements discussed in this section, they would appear,
respectively, as follows:
W as the will valid?
Did the police commit a battery?
Is the sign in violation ofthe municipal ordinance?
328
CHAPTER 10 LEGAL ANALYSIS: ISSUE ID E N T IF IC A T IO N -S P O T T IN G THE ISSUE
Hach b r o a d s t a t e m e n t ol t h e issue in thi s e x a m p l e coLiid a p p K to a m u l t i t u d e ot c as e s

i n v o h ' i n g wills, bat t eri es, o r si gn o r d i n a n c e viol ati ons. Each issue tails t o i n f o r m t h e r e s e a r c h e r
o f t h e speci f i c fact ual c o n t e x t o f t h e d i s p u t e , t h e p r e c i s e l aw i nxoU' ed, a n d t h e q u e s t i o n t h a t
m u s t b e r e s o l v e d to d e t e r m i n e if a r e m e d y is ava i l a bl e to t h e cli ent ( a n d if so, w h a t r e m e d \ ).
A b r o a d l y s t a t e d issue is n o t a p p r o p r i a t e in legal r e s e a r c h a n d w r i t i n g f or se ver a l r e a s o n s :
1. It is n o t h e l p f ul o r use f ul f o r t h e r e a d e r w h o is n o t f a m i l i a r w i t h t h e fact s o t t h e
case. Thi s m a y b e a j u d g e in t h e i n s t a n c e o f a b r i e f in s u p p o r t o f a m o t i o n , o r a n
a t t o r n e y in t h e otfice w h o is r e f e r r i n g to a n ol d m e m o r a n d u m f r o m t h e office files.
2. It d o e s n o t g u i d e t h e r e a d e r to t h e speci fic law in q u e s t i o n . In t h e p r e \ ’i o u s e x a m

ples, w h a t speci fic wills o r b a t t e r y st at u t es are we t a l k i n g a b o u t ? W h a t m u n i c i p a l
o r d i n a n c e d o e s t h e s i gn viol ate? W h a t is t h e p r e ci s e legal c o n t e x t o f thi s d i s p u t e ?
3. It is n o t u s e f u l t o t h e i n d i v i d u a l d r a f t i n g a n d r e s e a r c h i n g t h e issue.
For Example The question, "Did M r Smith commit a battery?" is such a broad
formulation ofthe issue that it is of little value. Stated this way,
the issue applies to all battery cases. So stated, it is useless. It fails to focus
the researcher's inquiry or guide the researcherto the specific area of battery
law in dispute.
In W ' e s t ’s di ge s t s, w h i c h a r e u s e d t o h e l p l o ca t e c as e law, legal t o p i c s a r e i d e n t i f i e d by

ke\' n u m b e r s . T h e r e a r e m o r e t h a n 100 k e y n u m b e r s u n d e r t h e t o p i c “a s s a u l t a n d b a t t e r y . ” A
b r o a d s t a t e m e n t o f t h e is sue for ce s t h e r e s e a r c h e r to s c a n all t h e s u b t o p i c s l o o k i n g f or t h e o n e
t h a t a p p h e s . If re s e a r c h is c o n d u c t e d el e c t r o n i ca l l y, as w i t h W e s t l a w , t h e s e a r c h will l o c a t e
h u n d r e d s (i f n o t t h o u s a n d s ) o f c a s e s — far t o o m a n y for t h e r e s e a r c h e r to r evi ew. By s t a t i n g
t h e i s s u e c o m p r e h e n s i \ ’ely, o r n a r r o w l y , t h e r e s e a r c h e r n a r r o w s tlie i nq u i r\ '.
For Example "U nder California's tort law, is a battery committed w hen a bystander
encourages and convinces a perpetrator to beat another individual, and
that individual is beaten as a result of the encouragem ent?" This narrow statement of
the issue directs the researcher's attention to that specific area of the digest involving
individuals liable for battery, that is, Assault and Battery— Key Number 18, Persons Liable.
If electronic research is conducted, the search is focused enough so that only cases
involving the liability of individuals encouraging a battery will be located.
As t h e p r e c e d i n g e x a m p l e il lustrat es, a c o m p r e h e n s i v e s t a t e m e n t f o c u s e s t h e r e s e a r c h e r ’s
i n q u i r y o n a specific s u b t o p i c in t h e digest, a n d t h e r e b y saves r e s e a r c h t i me . Also, t h e q u e s t i o n
is n o t a b s t r a c t . T h e r e a d e r d o e s n o t h a v e to r e f er t o t h e facts in s o m e o t h e r d o c u m e n t o r file
t o u n d e r s t a n d w h a t is in d i s p u t e .
In s u m m a r y , a s h o r t h a n d / b r o a d s t a t e m e n t o f t h e issue fails to i n f o r m . It p r o d u c e s a n
a b s t r a c t q u e s t i o n t h a t f o r ce s t h e r e a d e r t o e n g a g e in f u r t h e r i n q u i r y to d e t e r m i n e w h a t s p e
cifically is in d i s p u t e in t h e case. It is usel e ss e x c e p t in c a su a l c o n \ e r s a t i o n o r c o n v e r s a t i o n s
in w h i c h t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s a r e f a m i l i a r w i t h t h e case. In s h o r t , an issue b r o a d l y i d e n t i f i e d is an
i s sue n o t t r uh - i de nt i f i e d at all.
A p a ra l e ga l o r a n a t t o r n e y b e c o m e s i n v o h ’e d in issue i d e n t i f i c a t i o n in t w o d i f f e r e n t b u t
r e l a t e d s i t u a t i o n s:
1. I d e n t i f y i n g t h e i s sue(s) in a c l i e n t ’s case
2. I d e n t i f y i n g t h e is sue( s ) in a c o u r t o p i n i o n
329
In ciK'h situati(Hi, it is necess ar)' to d e t e r m i n e t h e t h r e e e l e m e n t s ot t h e issue t o c o rr ec t l y

i d e n t i h ' t h e issue. I h e next t w o s e c t i o n s r e c o n i m e n d st e p s fo r i d e n t i f y i n g t h e issue in a c l i e n t ’s
c a s e a n d in a c o u r t o p i n i o n .
IV. ISSUE IDENTIFICATION— CLIENT’S CASE

I h e c l i e n t ’s tact s i t u a t i o n p r e s e n t s a legal q u e s t i o n ( i s s u e ) o r set o f q u e s t i o n s t h a t m u s t be
i d en t i f i e d b e f o r e t h e ca s e c a n b e r e s o h ed. A h e l p f ul q u e s t i o n t o k e e p in m i n d t r o m t h e o u t s e t
is, “ W h a t m u s t b e d e c i d e d a b o u t w h i c h f a c t s ? ” or, “ W’h a t q u e s t i o n c o n c e r n i n g w h i c h law is
r a i s e d b\' t h e s e f a c t s? ” Thi s q u e s t i o n i n g k e e p s y o u f o c u s e d o n t h e e l e m e n t s o f t h e i s s u e — t he
law, q u e s t i o n , a n d key fact s o f t h e case. It h e l p s y o u a \ o i d b e i n g s i d e t r a c k e d b y re l at e d o r
i n t e r e s t i n g q u e s t i o n s r a i se d by t h e fact s t h a t ar e n o t n e c e s s a r y to re s o l v e t h e legal q u e s t i o n ( s )
o f t h e case. T h e \ a l u e o f k e e p i n g t h e s e q u e s t i o n s in m i n d will b e i l l u s t r a t e d t h r o u g h o u t thi s
section.
I d e n t i f y i n g t h e legal i s s u e ( s ) in a c l i e n t ’s c a s e is p r i m a r i l y a t o u r - s t e p p r o c e s s (see
h x h i b i t 10-2). N o t e t h a t s t ep s 1 t h r o u g h 3 a r e e s s e n t i a l h ' t h e s a m e as s t ep s 1 t h r o u g h 4 in
C h a p t e r 9, s e c t i o n \ T . Th e y a r e s u m n i a r i z e d h e r e w i t h d i f f e r e n t e x a n i p l e s so t h a t y o u will not
h a \ ' e to ref er to t h a t c h a p t e r .
E x h ib it 10-2 Steps in the Identification or Spotting o f the Issue in a Client's Case.

STEPl Identify each type of cause of action and area of law possibly
involved.
STEP 2 Determ ine the elem ents of each cause of action identified in
step 1.
STEPS Determine which of the facts of the client's case apply to establish
or satisfy the elements of each cause of action—the key facts.
STEP 4 A ssem ble the issue from the la w and key facts identified in
steps 2 and 3. Follow the form at presented in Chapter 11:
relevent law + legal question + key facts.
A. Step 1: Identify Each Type of C a use of Action

T h e tirst st e p is to i d e n t i t y e a c h t y p e o f c a u s e o f a c t i o n a n d a r e a o f l a w p o ss i b l y inx'olved. This
m e a n s t o i d e n t i t y t h e p o t e n t i a l c a u s e ( s ) o f a c t i o n a n d a r e a ( s ) o f l a w r a i s e d b\' t h e c l i e n t ’s fact
s i t u a t i o n , i n c l u d i n g a b r o a d i d e n t i t i c a t i o n o f p o t e n t i a l issues, t h e g e n e r a l a r e a s o f l a w , a n d t he
c l i e n t ’s facts rel at ed to e a c h a re a o f law'. Thi s p r e l i m i n a r y i d e n t i f i c a t i o n is b a s e d u p o n e d u c a
tion an d e xp erience an d usually do es not require research.
For Example Mary is stopped at a stoplight waiting forthe lightto change. She is drinking
a soft drink. She has been stopped for about 10 seconds when a pickup,
driven by Sam, slams into the back of her vehicle. Fler automobile is knocked into the
intersection and narrowly misses being struck by a vehicle passing through the intersec
tion. Sam jumps out of his pickup, runs to M ary's vehicle, and scream s at her that she
should not have been stopped and she caused the w reck. M ary thinks he is either crazy
or drugged. She is afraid he might hit her. He yanks open her vehicle door and pulls her
out ofthe automobile, screaming, 'Tt's all yourfault, it's all yourfault." He pulls out a knife
and w aves it around. A couple of pedestrians approach, and Sam runs backto his pickup.
330
CHAPTER 10 LEGAL ANALYSIS: ISSUE IDENTIFICATION— SPOTTING THE ISSUE
As a result of the Incident, M ary suffered whiplash Injuries and bruises on her
arm, she experiences anxiety w h enever she is stopped at a light, and she has developed
severe Insomnia. This hypothetical is referred to as the "rear-end collision" example
throughout this chapter.
Based upon experience and tort classes, the researcher identifies four possible
causes of action involving four broad areas of law; Did Sam's failure to stop constitute
negligence? Did he commitan assault? Did he commita battery? Did his actions constitute
intentional infliction of emotional distress?
i h i s initial i den t i f i c a t i o n o f t h e Inroad issues a n d a r e a s o f law m a y h e e x p a n d e d o r r e

d u c e d f o l l o w i n g s u b s e q u e n t r e s e a r c h , l h e p u r p o s e is twofol d:
To i de n t i f y in ge n e r a l t e r m s t h e issues i n \ ' o l \ e d
fo proN'ide a s t a r t i n g p o i n t for t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n a n d c l ar i f i ca t i o n of e a c h s p e c i h c
issue t h a t m u s t b e r e s o K e d in t h e case
B. Step 2: D ete rm in e t h e E lem ents of Each Cause of Action

l h e s e c o n d st ep is to d e t e r m i n e t h e e l e m e n t s o f e a c h c a u s e o f a c t i o n i d e n t i f i e d in st ep i. Ap
pl\' s t eps 2, 3, a n d 4 s e p a r a t e h ' to e a c h p o t e n t i a l issue or c a u s e o f a c t i o n i d e n t i f i e d in ste| i I.
In o t h e r wor ds :
C h o o s e o n e p o t e n t i a l issue i d e n t i l i e d in st ep 1.
•AppK s t eps 2, 3, a n d 4 to t h a t issue.
c:oi i i pl et e t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f t h a t issue b e f o r e a d d r e s s i n g t he n e x t p o t e n t i a l isstie.
For Example In the rear-end collision example, four broad issues and areas of law
are mvolved: negligence, assault, batterv, and emotional distress.
Choose one area, such as negligence, and complete steps 2 through 4. Be careful
to identify and finish with that issue before addressing the next issue.
I ' o c us i n g o n o n e issue at a t i m e a \ o i i l s t h e c o n f u s i o n t h a t I'nay o c c u r w h e n d e a l i n g w i t h

n i u l t i p l e c a u s e s of a c t i o n t h at o f t e n h a v e o v e r l a p p i n g e l en i en t s . In t hi s e x a m p l e , s o m e ol
,Sani’s c o n d u c t m a y c o n s t i t u t e e l e m e i i t s ol b o t h assault a n d i n t ei i t i o n al inf l i ct i on o t e m o t i o n a l
di s t r e s s . R e s e a r c h i n g b o t h issues at t h e s a m e t i m e c o u l d c a u s e c o n f u s i o n .
St e p 2 r e q u i r e s r e s e a r c h i n g t h e a r e a of law to d e t e r m i n e t h e e l e m e n t s i i ec e ssa r y to e s
t a b l i s h a c a u s e of ac t i on . To k i i o w w h e t h e r t h e law prov ides relief for t h e cli ent, it is n e c e s s a r \ '
t o d e t e r m i n e w h a t t h e law r e q u i r e s to b e e s t a b l i s h e d ( t he e l e m e n t s ) in o r d e r to o b t a i n t h a t
r e l i e f l . ocat e t h e e l e m e n t s b\' r e s e a r c h i n g p r i n i a r \ ' author it }' , su c h as t h e st at u t o r } ' o r c a s e law.
If t h e r e is n o p r i m a r \ ' a ut hor i t }' in t h e j u r i s d i c t i o n , ref er to s e c o n d a r } ' a u t h o r i t }' , s u c h as t h e
R c iliU c in c u t o f th e L a w , g o v e r n i n g t h e t o p i c .
ForExampliB Using the rear-end collision example, suppose the researcher begins with
the issue involving intentional infliction of emotional distress. Research
reveals that the following elements must be established to prevail;
1. The defendant's conduct must be intentional.
2. The conduct must be extreme and outrageous.
{Continued) 331
P A R T III T H E S P E C I F I C S OF L E G A L A N A L Y S I S
3. T h e re m ust be a caus al c o n n e c tio n b e tw e e n the d e fe ndan t's c o n d u c t and the p la in

tiff's m en tal distress.
4. The plaintiff's m en ta l distress m ust be e x tr e m e or s evere.
N O T H : '[‘o h e l p y o u l ocat e t h e law at t h i s .stage of t he pr o c e s s , \ o u i na v rougliK- i de nt i f y t h e

i s s u e w i t h t h e facts y o u t h i n k are i m p o r t a n t .
For Example The a s s ig n m e n t is to d e te rm in e if a will w a s validly re vo k ed w h e n the t e s

ta to r w r o te , in pencil, a c ro s s the top of th e first p a g e of the will: "I h e reb y
re v o k e this w ill." To help guide the r e s e a r c h for th e re le v a n t statute (p rim a ry authority)
t h a t applies, a rough fo rm u latio n of the issue can be dratted: U n d e r the wills statutes,
is a will revoked w h e n the te s ta to r w r it e s in pencil a cro s s the top of th e first p a g e of
th e will, "I h e re b y revoke this w ill."? This rough fo rm u la tio n guides th e r e s e a r c h e r to
look for the s pecific wills s tatute th a t a d d re s s e s re v o c a tio n A fte r locating the statute
a n d identifying the re q u ire m e n ts of th e s tatute (e lem e n ts ), the r e s e a r c h e r applies step
3 to d e te rm in e w h ic h fa c ts are key facts. The r e s e a r c h e r then fo rm u la te s a c o m p le te
s ta t e m e n t of the issue th a t includ es th e s pecific rule of law, a fte r locating the la w and
p e rfo rm in g steps 3 and 4.
Af t er ident i f s' i ng t h e e l e m e n t s , p r o c e e d to s t e p 3.
C. Step 3: D e te rm in e th e K e y Facts
f h e t h i r d st ep is to d e t e r m i n e w h i c h o f t h e facts of t h e cl i e n t ’s ca se a p p l v to e st a bl i sh lir satisf\-
t h e e l e m e n t s o f e a c h c a u s e ot a c t i o n —t h e key facts. Steps 1 a n d 2 i d e n t i l y t h e law that m u s t
b e i n c l u d e d in t h e i ssue, a n d st ep 3 ident i f i es t h e facts that m u s t b e i n c l u d e i i in t h e issue t be
k e y facts.
Identif}' t h e k e \ ’ facts b}' d e t e r m i n i n g w h i c h facts of t h e c l i en t ' s c ase a ppK' to e st abl i sh o r
satisf}- t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s o f e a c h e l e m e n t of t h e c a u s e o f a c t i on . Ihis st e p is necessar}' b e ca u se ,
in o r d e r to st at e a c l a i m a n d thereb}' o b t a i n relief, tacts m u s t b e p r e s e n t e d t h a t es t ab l i sh o r
sa t i sf y t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s o f e a c h e l e m e n t .
For Example U sing th e r e a r - e n d collis ion e x a m p le , a p p ly th e c lient's fa c t s to th e

e lem ents:
1. Defendant's conduct must be intentional. In this c a s e , the d e fe n d a n t's running t o
w a r d the client s c re a m in g , opening he r car, pulling her out, and w a v in g his knife are
th e fa c ts s h o w in g intentional c o n d u c t th a t satisfy or apply to establish this e le m ent.
This c o n d u c t is c le arly in te n tio n a f
2. The conduct must be extreme and outrageous. The acts identified in n u m b e r 1 are
the fa cts s h o w in g e x tr e m e and o u tra g e o u s c o n d u c t th a t establish this e le m ent.
3. There must be a causal connection between the defendant's conduct and the plain
tiff's mental distress. S in c e the a c c id e n t, the c lient has b e en un a b le to s leep and is
anxious w h e n s topped at a light. T h e s e fa c ts satisfy the third e le m e n t.
4. Plaintiff's distress must be extreme or severe. E xp erie n cin g a n x ie ty w h e n e v e r
s topped at a light and s e v e re insom nia are fa c ts s h o w in g e x tr e m e or s e v e re distress
and are the fa cts th a t establish th e fourth e le m ent.
332
C H A P T E R 10 LEGAL ANALYSIS: ISSUE ID E N T IF IC A T IO N — S P O T T IN G THE ISSUE
By m a t c h i n g i h e f a c t s w i t h i h c r e q u i r e d e l e m e n t s , t h e k e y t a d s o f t h e e m o t i o n a l
d i s t r e s s i s s ue a r e i d e n t i f i e d . B e c a u s e t h e q u e s t i o n is. H o w d o e s t h e l a w a p p l y t o t h e fact s,
t h e s e f act s b e c o m e p a r t o f t h e i s s u e a n d m u s t b e i n c l u d e d . A t t e r s t e p is c o m p l e t e d , all t h e
e l e m e n t s n e c e s s a r y t o i d e n t i f y t h e i s s u e a r e in place. All t h a t is left is t o p r o c e e d to s t e p 4
a n d a s s e m b l e t h e issue.
N O T E : You m a y n o t b e c e r t a i n w h e t h e r a fact m e e t s t h e s t a n d a r d e s t a b l i s h e d for a n e l e m e n t .

O f t e n t h a t d e t e r m i n a t i o n is n o t m a d e u n t i l trial. F n s u r e t h a t s o m e fact a r g u a b l y m e e t s t h e
r e q u i r e m e n t s o f e a c h o f t h e e l e m e n t s o f t h e c a u s e o f a c t i on.
For Example A d e te rm in a tio n of w h e t h e r M a ry 's insomnia and a n xie ty a re e x tr e m e or

s e v e re eno u g h to w a r r a n t re lief m a y not be m a d e until trial. H e r sym ptom s,
h o w e v e r, are a rg u a b ly s u ffic ie n tto m e e t t h e re q u ire m e n t o f t h e f o u r t h e le m ent. If re s e a r c h
re v e a ls th at this harm is not sufficiently e x trem e fo r th e re quire m e nts of em otional distress,
h o w e v e r , th en th e r e is no e m o tiona l distress issue.
If t h e r e a r e n o facts t h a t sat isfy o r e s t ab l i sh a n e l e m e n t , t h e r e p r o b a b l y is n o c a u s e o f

a c t i o n o r issue. In t h i s e x a m p l e , if M a r y d i d n o t suffer a nx i e t \ ' o r i n s o m n i a , t h e r e w o u l d be
n o f act s t o m e e t t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s o f t h e f o u r t h e l e m e n t , a n d t h e r e m o s t likely w o u l d b e n o
e m o t i o n a l d i s t r e s s issue.
D. S tep 4: A s s e m b le th e Is s u e
' Ihe last s t ep is t h e easiest: G a t h e r a n d a s s e m b l e t h e e l e m e n t s o f t h e issue f r o m t h e law a n d k e y
facts i d en t i f i e d in s l e p s 2 a n d 3. ' Ih e law is e m o t i o n a l di stress, t h e legal q u e s t i o n is w h e t h e r
e m o t i o n a l d i s t r e s s o c c u r r e d , a n d t h e ke\' tacts a r e t h e tacts i d e n t i i i e d in s t e p 3. P u t t i n g it all
t o g et h e r , t h e issue is as follows:
U n d e r [ n a m e ot state] law o f e mo t i o n a l distress, does e mo t i o n a l distress o c c u r w h e n

t he d r i ver o f t h e r ear \ ehicle in a r e a r - e n d collision r u n s s c r e a m i n g t o w a r d the o t h e r
driver, o p e n s h e r car do o r , pulls he r out, a n d wa\ es a knife, a n d the o t h e r d r i v e r s u f
fers anxi et v a n d i n s o m n i a as a result o f t h e c on d u c t ?
E. S u m m a ry o f th e Four-Step Process
' Ihe f o u r st eps p r e s e n t e d h e r e s i mp l i f y t h e issue i d e n t i f i c a t i o n p r o c e s s by b r e a k i n g it d o w n
i n t o w o r k a b l e st eps. It m a y n o t b e n e c e s s a r y to g o t h r o u g h all t h e st eps. ' I h e i s sue m a y b e
a p p a r e n t in s t ep I o r at s o m e o t h e r p o i n t . Ihi s p r o c e s s , howe \ ' er , t a k e s s o m e of t h e m y s t e r y
o u t of issue i d e n t i f i c a t i o n a n d p r o v i d e s a u s e f u l tool w h e n t h e issues a r e n o t c l e a r o r e a s y to
i dent if y. It al l ows y o u t o a n s w e r t h e q u e s t i o n , “W' ha t q u e s t i o n c o n c e r n i n g w h i c h l a w is r a i s e d
by t h e c l i en t ’s f a c t s ? ”
I h e a n s w e r t o t h e e m o t i o n a l d i s t r e s s issue i d e n t i f i e d in t h e p r e c e d i n g e x a m p l e m a y b e
d e t e r m i n e d b y r e f e r e n c e t o c as e law. I h e i m p o r t a n t t h i n g to r e m e m b e r is t h a t b y c o n c i s e l y
ident i f s' ing t h e i s sue in t h e c o n t e x t o f t h e ke y facts, t h e key facts ar e less likel\- t o b e o v e r l o o k e d .
By i n c l u d i n g t h e ke y facts in t h e issue, t h e r e s e a r c h e r ’s f o c u s is n a r r o w e d , a n d t h e r e s e a r c h e r
is less likel\- t o o m i t a cri ti cal fact a n d t h e r eb \ - i g n o r e a c r u ci a l l i ne o f i n q u i r y , o r m i s i d e n t i f ) '
t h e i s s u e ent i rel }’. In t h e r e a r - e n d co l l i s i o n e x a i ’iiple, it n ’la}’ be t h a t .San’i’s a c t i o n s a r e n o t s u f
f i cient ly (Hi t ra ge ous to c o n s t i t u t e e n ’i o t i o n a l (.iistress — n i a y b e t h e r e is n o t s uf fi ci ent e v i d e n c e
to c o n n e c t t h e a n x i e t y a n d i n s o m n i a t o t h e acts, o r m a \ b e t h e h a r m is n o t t h e t y p e o f h a r m
t o r w h i c h relief is g r a n t e d in e m o t i o n a l d i s t r e s s cases.
333
N O T E : At t h e o u t s e t , \ ’o u iii.n- o n h k n o w t h e g e n e r a l a r e a ot law t hat appl i es a n d n o t t he

speci fic st atut e. B\' g o i n g t h r o u g l i t h e s t ep s a n d i d e n t i f y i n g t h e key t act s o r t e r m s a n d t he
q u e s t i o n c t ) n i p o n e n t s of t h e issue, y o u n a r r o w y o u r s e a r c h . A f t e r l oc a t i n g t h e law, y o u can
m a k e a c o m p l e t e s t a t e m e n t o f t h e issue that i n c l u d e s t h e speci fic r u l e o f law.
For Example An individual is a r re s te d by th e F e d e r a l B u r e a u of In v e s tig a tio n w h ile

robbing a bank w ith a toy gun. He is in fo rm e d th a t he will be c h a rg e d w ith
robbing the bank w ith a d e ad ly w e a p o n . By includ ing th e k n o w n facts, the issue can be
s tated as, " U n d e r t h e fe d e ra l bank ro b b ery s tatute, is th e re s uffic ient e v id e n c e to support
c h a rg e s of bank ro b b ery w ith a d a n g e ro u s w e a p o n w h e n th e w e a p o n is a toy gun?" By
identifyin g this m uch o f t h e issue, a r e s e a r c h e r is guided to s e a r c h f o r t h e s p ec ific bank
ro b b e ry statute th a t a d d re s s e s bank ro b b e ry w ith a d a n g e r o u s w e a p o n .
As m e n t i o n e d , st eps 2 t h r o u g h 4 a r e a p p l i e d to e a c h o f t h e issues b r o a d l y i d e n t i f i e d in
s t e p 1. C e r t a i n p os s i b l e issues m a y be e l i m i n a t e d as t b e o t h e r s t e p s a r e f o l l o wed , s u c h as w h e n
r e s e a r c h reveal s t h a t t h e r e a r e n o t suffici ent t act s p r e s e n t t o s u p p o r t a c a u s e o f a c t i o n . It m a y
al s o b e t h a t a d d i t i o n a l issues a r e i d e n t i f i e d as r e s e a r c h p r i )ceeds.
For Example In the "a rm e d " rob bery e x a m p le , it m a y be th a t em o tio n a l distress w a s not
c o n s id e re d until r e s e a r c h on a n o th e r issue, such as assault, r e v e a le d a
c a s e w ith similar fa c ts th a t includ ed a disc us sion of e m o tio n a l distress.
F. M u lt ip le Issues
O f t e n t h e r e are m u l t i p l e i s s u e s m a case. In t h e r e a r e n d c o l l i s i o n e x a m p l e , t h e r e w e r e t o u r
p o s s i b l e c a u s e s ot a c t i o n , e a c h o n e i n v o l vi n g a s e p a r a t e issue. Be s u r e to list all t h e lact s in the
c l i e n t ’s case a n d e x a m i n e e a ch o n e to d e t e r m i n e if'it rel ates to a n y ident i f i ed issue o r in a n \ ’ way
rai ses a n e w issue. In t h e r e a r - e n d c oll ision e x a m p l e , t h e fact t h a t M a r y wa s d r i n k i n g a s o d a
m a y n o t b e i m p o r t a n t , l h e fact t hat S a m r a n f r o m his c a r r a t h e r t h a n w a l k e d nia\- b e critical.
It is i n i p o r t a n t to e n s u r e t h a t all t h e facts a r e c o n s i d e r e d a n d n o t h i n g is o v e r l o o k e d . All p o t e n
tial issues s h o u l d b e i dent if ied, a n d t h e f o u r - s t e p p r o c e s s h e l p s e n s u r e t h a t n o t h i n g is mi ss e d.
N o t e also t h a t a si ngl e issue n i a \ ’ h a v e m u l t i p l e p a r t s o r s u b i ss u e s .
For Example In the re a r-e n d collision e x a m p le , th e in te n tio n a l infliction of e m o tio n a l

distress issue m ay have s e p a r a t e subissues:
W a s Sam's c o n d u c t sufficiently e x tr e m e and o u tra g e o u s ?
A re anxiety and s e v e re insom nia " e x t r e m e or s e v e re d istress" w ithin th e m e a n
ing of the law ?
Did Sam's c o n d u c t c a u s e the insom nia?
E a c h p a r t o r s u b i s s u e s h o u l d be s e p a r a t e l y c o n s i d e r e d a n d a d d r e s s e d .
N O T E : I h e st eps p r e s e n t e d in t h i s s e c t i o n a r e u s e f u l t oo l s a n d g u i d e s . I h e s e st eps will u s u a l ly

h e l p y o u q u i ck h - i d e n t i f y t h e issue. R e m e m b e r t h a t t h e p r o c e s s g e t s ea s i er wi t h e x p e r i e n c e .
334
C H A P T E R 10 LEGAL A N A L Y S IS : ISSUE I D E N T IF IC A T I O N SPO TTING THE ISSUE
V . IS S U E ID E N T IF IC A T IO N — C A S E L A W
Ihi s s e c t i o n f ocus es o n i d e n t i f y i n g , o r s p o t t i n g , tlie issue(s) in a c o u r t o p i n i o n . T h e is sue is
t h e legal q u e s t i o n a d d r e s s e d a n d a n s w e r e d by t h e c o u r t . It is w h a t t h e case is a b o u t . If y o u d o
n o t k n o w w’hat q u e s t i o n t h e c o u r t a d d r e s s e d , it is p o s s i b l e to m i s u n d e r s t a n d t h e r u l e o t l a w
a p p l i e d o r a d o p t e d in t h e o p i n i o n . As a result, it is likeh' t ha t y o u will m i s u n d e r s t a n d h o w o r
if t h e r u l e o t ' l a w app l i es in y o u r c l i e n t ’s case.
This s e c t i o n d o e s n o t a d d r e s s s i t u a t i o n s in w h i c h t h e issue is easi h' i d e n t i f i e d b e c a u s e
s o m e w h e r e in t h e o p i n i o n t h e c o u r t c l e a r l y s t a t e s t h e issue.
For Example "In tfiis c a s e w e d e c id e w f ie t fie r an individual's Fourtfi A m e n d m e n t righitto

b e f r e e f r o m u n r e a s o n a b le s e a r c h e s is vio lated w h e n officers, e x e c u tin g a
s ea rc h w a r r a n t f o r a stolen television, s e a rc h th e individual’s pockets and discover drugs."
Thi s s e c t i o n c o v e r s t h o s e s i t u a t i o n s in w h i c h i d e n t i f y i n g t h e is sue is difficult b e c a u s e

t h e c o u r t d o e s n o t i d e n t i f y t h e issue, s t at e s t h e issue in s u c h b r o a d t e r m s t ha t it is n o t he l p f u l ,
o r s t at es t h e is sue in t e r m s o f t h e p r o c e d u r a l c o n t e x t in w h i c h t h e c a se w a s b r o u g h t b e f o r e
t h e c ou r t :
Is sue n o t st a t e d — In s o m e o p i n i o n s , t h e c o u r t n e v e r clearly d i s c u s s e s w'hat t h e is sue

is in t h e case.
B r o a d s t a t e m e n t o f t h e i s s u e — “ T h e is sue in t h i s c a se is w h e t h e r t h e d e f e n d a n t
b r e a c h e d t h e c on t r ac t . "
C om m ent-. Th i s is a b r o a d s t a t e m e n t ol t h e issLie. It fails to i n f o r m t h e r e a d e r w h a t
t h e cas e is a b o u t , in t h e u l t i m a t e s e n s e , t he c o u r t d e c i d e d w h e t h e r t h e d e f e n d a n t
b r e a c h e d t h e c o n t r a c t . In reality, b ow e \ ' e r , it r e a c h e d t h a t c o n c l u s i o n by m a k i n g a
s u b s t a n t i v e d e c i s i o n c i ) n c e r n i n g t h e speci fic facts o f t h e d e f e n d a n t ’s c o n d u c t .
For Example T h e c o u r t m a y have c onclude d th a tt h e defendant's tim ely delivery

of th e order, 95 p e r c e n t of th e tim e, w a s substantial c o m p lia n c e
w ith the c o n tra c t and, th e r e fo r e , not a bre ac h .
Is sue st at e d in t h e p r o c e d u r a l c o n t e x t — “ T h e issue in t hi s c a s e is w h e t h e r t h e trial

c o u r t e r r e d w h e n it g r a n t e d t h e m o t i o n to s u p p r e s s t h e e\ ' id e n ce . ”
C o m m e n t: T h e c o u r t st at ed t h e issue in t he c o n t e x t o f h o w t h e case c ar n e b e f o r e the

c o u r t procedur al l y, n a m e l y an a p p e a l o f a trial c o u r t o r d e r g r a n t i n g a m o t i o n t o s u p
press. To a n s w e r t hi s q u e s t i o n , t h e c o u r t actually a d d re s s e d a s u b s t a n t i v e q u e s t i o n
rai sed by t he facts o f t h e case, a n d t h e s u b s t a n t i ve issue is w h a t t he case is actually a b o u t .
For Example T h e s u b s ta n tiv e issue d e c id e d w a s , " U n d e r t h e provisions o f t h e

e x c lu s io n a ry rule, s hould e v id e n c e be s u p p re s s e d w h e n l a w e n
fo r c e m e n t o ffice rs o b ta in e d th e e v id e n c e as a result of requiring th e d e f e n d a n t
to a llo w th e m to in s p e c t th e glove box w h e n th e y w e r e m aking a routine stop
fo r speeding?"
B e g i n n i n g s t u d e n t s o f t e n m a k e t h e m i s t a k e o f i d e n t i f \ ’i ng t h e issue in t h e p r o c e d u r a l
c o n t e x t s t a t e d b y t h e c o u r t w h e n , in real it y, t h e issue i n v o h es a s u b s t a n t i v e d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f
t he a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e law to t h e fact s o f t h e case.
335
Ih e goal w h e n r e a d i n g a c ase s h o u l d h e to i d e n t i t y t h e s u b s t a n t i v e issue(s) in t h e case.

. \ s k y o u r s e l t ' w h e n r e a d i n g t h e case, “W' hat wa s d e c i d e d a b o u t w h i c h facts in t h i s c a s e ? ” o r
' W' ha t q u e s t i o n c o n c e r n i n g w h i c h law a n d key tact s w a s d e c i d e d b y t h e c o u r t ? ” Like a c l i e n t ’s
case, a coLirt case is a b o u t a d i s p u t e c o n c e r n i n g h o w t h e law a p p l i es t o t h e facts. H a d t h e r e
b e e n n o d i s p u t e i n v o l v i n g h o w t h e law a p p l i e d to t h e facts, t h e case w o u l d n o t h a v e g o n e to
trial. If y o u r i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f t h e i s sue in a c o u r t o p i n i o n fails to i n c l u d e t h e rul e o f l a w a p
p l i ed a n d t h e key facts, y o u h a v e failed to i d e n t i f y t h e issue c or r ec t h ' .
H o w , t h e n , is issue i d e n t i f i c a t i o n in a c o u r t o p i n i o n a c c o m p l i s h e d ? .Again, t h e r e is n o
m a g i c f o r m u l a . I h e t h r e e - s t e p p r o c e s s p r e s e n t e d in E x h i b i t 10-3 is su g g e s t e d as a u s ef ul tool.
St e ps 1 a n d 2 i n c l u d e t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s o f s t ep s 1 t h r o u g h 3 in C h a p t e r 9, s e c t i o n \ ' II .
l h e \ ' a r e s u m m a r i z e d h e r e wi t h a f o c u s o n t h e i s s u e -i d e n t i f i c a t i o n a s p e c t ot e a c h step.
E x h i b i t 1 0 - 3 Step s in the Identification or Spotting of the Issu e in a Court Opinion.
STEP 1: General R ead th e e n tire o p in io n b e fo re a tte m p tin g to id e n tify

Q uestion t h e i s s u e . W h i l e r e a d i n g , k e e p in m i n d t h e q u e s t i o n ,
" W h a t w a s d e c i d e d a b o u t w h i c h f a c t s in t h i s c a s e ? "
STEP 2; Look to F o c u s o n th e h o ld in g a n d ask th e fo llo w in g

th e Holding q u e s tio n s :
To id e n tify th e la w a p p lie d ask, " W h a t s ta tu te ,
ru le o f la w , o r p rin c ip le d id th e c o u rt a p p ly to
r e a c h its d e c i s i o n ? "
To id e n tify th e q u e s tio n a d d re s s e d b y th e c o u rt
ask, " W h a t leg a l q u e s t io n w a s a d d r e s s e d a n d
a n s w e r e d by th e h o ld in g ? "
T o i d e n t i f y t h e k e y fa c t s ask, " W h i c h o f t h e fa c t s
p r e s e n t e d in t h e c a s e , if c h a n g e d , w o u l d a lt e r o r
a ffe c t t h e q u e s t i o n a d d r e s s e d in t h e h o l d i n g ? "
STEP 3: A ssem ble A s s e m b l e t h e is s u e f r o m t h e a n s w e r s t o t h e q u e s t i o n s

th e Issue in s t e p 2. S t r u c t u r e t h e is s u e in t h e f o r m a t p r e s e n t e d in
C h a p t e r 11: R u l e o f l a w ^ l e g a l q u e s t i o n * k e y fa c t s .
A. Step 1: G e n e ra l Q u e s tio n
i h e first p a r t o f t h i s st e p is to r e a d t h e e n t i r e c o u r t o p i n i o n be f o r e a t t e m p t i n g to i d e nt if y t h e
issue. I m p o r t a n t i n f o r m a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g a n issue m a y b e s ca t t e r ed t h r o u g h o u t t h e o p i n i o n .
A n initial r e a d i n g o f t h e e n t i r e c a s e p r o v i d e s t h e r e s e a r c h e r w i t h an a w a r e n e s s o f w h e r e i n f o r
m a t i o n is l o c a t e d in t h e o p i n i o n a n d a n o v e r \ i e w o f t h e case. Ihi s is h e l p f u l w h e n y o u b eg i n
to a n a h v . e speci fic p o r t i o n s o f t h e o p i n i o n . Re a d t h e e n t i r e o p i n i o n at t h e o u t s e t , e \ ' en if t h e
c o u r t clearl}- i de nt if ies t h e issue.
W’hil e r e a d i n g t h e case, k e e p in n i i n d t h e q u e s t i o n , “W' ha t w a s d e c i d e d a b o u t w h i c h
facts in thi s c a s e ? ” Thi s q u e s t i o n h e l p s k ee p y o u r m i n d f o c u s e d o n w h a t y o u n e e d to l o o k t o r
w h i l e r e a d i n g t h e case in o r d e r to i d e n t i f y t he e l e m e n t s o f t h e issue:
I h e first p a r t o f t h e q u e s t i o n , “W' hat wa s d e c i d e d ? ” k e e p s t h e m i n d f o c u s e d o n

s e a r c h i n g for t h e legal issue t h a t wa s r e s o l v e d a n d t h e law necessar}- for its r e s o l u t i on .
I h e s e c o n d p a r t o f t h e q u e s t i o n , “a b o u t w h i c h fact s?” k e e p s t h e m i n d f o c u s e d o n
l o o k i n g for t h e facts e ss e n t i a l to t h e r e s o l u t i o n o f t h e legal q u e s t i o n .
I f y o u k e e p t h i s q u e s t i o n in m i n d as y o u r e a d t h e ca se , y o u r e m a i n f o c u s e d o n t h e
e s s e n c e of t h e case: t h e c o u r t ’s a p p l i c a t i o n o f a r u l e o f l a w t o t h e l egal q u e s t i o n r a i s e d b y
336
C H A P T E R 10 LEGAL ANALYSIS: ISSUE IDENTIF IC ATION SPOTTING THE ISSUE
t h e l a d s . A s k i n g i hi s q u c s l i o n i o r c c s \ o u l o k e e p l h e l ac t s in ini i ul as v o u r e a d b e c a u s e
y o u a r e a w a r e t h a t y o u m u s t d e c i d e \vliicli o l ' l h e l a c i s r e l a l e lo l h e h o l d i n g . W ' h e n \-ou
get t o t h e e n d ol llie o p i n i o n , y o u nia\- r e a l i z e t h a t l h e h o l d i n g re l at e s to o n l y a l e w ol t h e
tacts p r e s e n t e d .
D o n o t identil' y t h e i s su e( s ) I r o m t h e s y l l a b u s o r h e a d n o t e s o l ' l h e o p i n i o n . As n o t e d in
( Cha pt e r 4, t h e s e a re p r e p a r e d b\' t h e p u b l i s h e r o i t h e o p i n i o n . l h e \ ' a r e n o t p a r i o t ' t h e c o u r t
o p i n i o n a n d a r e not i n t e n d e d to be u s e d to i d e n t i h ' t h e is sue(s ) a d d r e s s e d in t h e o p i n i o n ,
h l e a d n o t e s m a y , h o w e \ ’er, b e r e h e d o n to h e l p \ ' ou l oc a t e t h e issue w i t h i n t h e o p i n i o n .
l t ' \ ( H i h a v e n o l i d e n t i l i e d t h e i s s u e b\- t h e l i m e y o u h a \ e t i n i s h e d r e a d i n g t h e c a s e ,
p r o c e e d t o s t e p 2.
B. S tep 2: Lo o k to th e H o ld in g
As n o t e d in CTiapter 4, t h e h o ld i n g is t h e c o u r t ’s a p p l i c a t i o n o l ' t h e r u l e o l ' l a w to t h e legal issLie
r a i s e d b\' t h e t a c t s ol t h e case. It is t h e coluI ' s a n s w e r l o t h e issue. In a c o u r t o p i n i o n , t h e ke\'
l acts, legal q u e s t i o n , a n d h o l d i n g ar e all r el ated, l-'inding o n e will hel p y o u t i n d t h e o t h e r s.
I h e r e l o r e , o t i e n t h e tastest wa\- lo t r a c k d o w n t h e issue is to f o c u s o n t h e h o l d i n g a n d a s k t h e
following questions:
1. “ W h a t wa s d e c i d e d in t h e h o l d i n g ? ” In o l h e r w o r d s , “ W h a l issue w a s a d d r e s s e d
a n d a n s w e r e d by t h e h o l d i n g ? ’” I h i s i de n t i t i e s t h e s e c o n d e l e m e n t ol t h e issue, t h e
legal q u e s t i o n a d d i e s s e d by t h e c o u r t .
2. “ W h a t st at ut e, r u l e o f law, p r i n c i p l e , anc.1 so o n d i d t h e c o u r t appK' t o r e a c h this

h o l d i n g ? ” Ihi s q u e s t i o n h e l p s i d e n t i f ) l h e r el e\' ant r u l e ol law, l h e lirst e l e m e n t ot
t h e issue.
,V “ W h i c h o f t h e facts p r e s e n t e d in t h i s c ase ai'e re l a t e d aiul n e c e s s a r y t o t h e d e t e r
m i n a t i o n o f t h e q u e s t i o n i de n l i f i e d as a d d r e s s e d in t h e h o l d i n g ? ”' o r “ W h i c h ot
t h e facts, i f c h a n g e d , w o u l d c h a n g e t h e o u t c o m e o f t h e h o l d i n g ? ” ' I h e s e q u e s t i o n s
h el p iilentit} t h e t h i r d e l e m e n t ol t h e issue, t h e key lacts.
By a n s w e r m g t h e s e q u e s t i o n s y o u i d e n t i l \ t h e e l e m e n t s ol t h e issue: t h e r u l e ol law.
q u e s t i o n , a n d ke\' lacts. Y o u c a n s l a t e t h e i ssue b\- a i k l i n g t h e rul e ol law a n d k e y l act s to t h e
h o l d i n g a n d r e t o r n u i l a t i n g t h e h o l d i n g in q u e s t i o n l o r m . It s o u n d s c o m p l i c a t e d , b u t it is not.
For Example In a w o r k e r s ' c o m p e n s a tio n c a s e , the c ourt pre se nts s e v e ra l f a c t s c o n

c e rn in g th e plaintiff b e fo re and a fte r she joined a m o n a s te ry , including
th e fo llo w in g :
1. H e r d u tie s as a m o n a stic
2. H e r w r it te n a p p lic a tio n for adm ission as a v o lu n te e r to the s erv ice of God
3. T h e w r it te n invitation fro m the m o n a s te ry , w h ic h includ ed an offer of spiritual g u id
a n c e and room and b o a rd in e x c h a n g e fo r v o lu n te e r s ervice
4. In fo rm a tio n c o n c e rn in g her previou s c a r e e r
5. T h e f a c t th a t she did not re c e iv e a p a y c h e c k
6. H e r spiritual m otivation
7. H e r da ily duties
8. T h e f a c t t h a t she w a s injured w h ile m o p p in g th e floor
9. H e r fa m ily re la tio n sh ip s
10. T h e f a c t th a t th e re w a s no c o n tra c t of e m p lo y m e n t
{Continued}
337
P A R T I II T H E S P E C I F I C S OF L E G A L A N A L Y S I S
T h e plaintiff a p p e a le d th e trial court's d e c is io n granting the d e fe n d a n t's m otion

to dismiss for failu re to state a claim. T h e issue is not stated in the opinion. Th e holding
in th e c a s e w a s : "Plaintiff re n d e re d s e rv ic e s out of religious devotion as in d ic a te d by
h e r a pplication as a volu nteer, lack of e m p lo y m e n t a g re e m e n t, and lack of a pa yc h ec k ;
th e re fo r e , she w a s not an e m p lo y e e w ithin the m ea ning of the law, and th e trial court's
dism issal of th e c o m p lain t is affirm ed." This e x a m p le is re fe rre d to in this c h a p t e r as "the
m o n a s te ry " exam ple.
A q u i c k \va\- to i d e n t i t y t h e is.sue in t h e n i o n a s t e r \ ' e x a m p l e i.s to f o c u s o n t h e h o l d i n g

a n d k e e p in m i n d t h e q u e s t i o n , “ W' hat w a s d e c i d e d a b o u t w h i c h tacts to r e a c h t hi s h o l d i n g ? ”
I h e n , i de n t i f y t h e e l e m e n t s o t ' t h e issue b\- aski ng:
1. "W' hat q u e s t i o n w a s d e c i d e d in t hi s h o l d i n g ? ’’ ' f h e q u e s t i o n d e c i d e d is w h e t h e r

t he pl a i nt i f f ' wa s a n e m p l o y e e . I h e a n s w e r to thi s q u e s t i o n prcn i des t h e legal q u e s
t i o n e l e m e n t o t ' t h e issue.
2. “W' hat r u l e of law o r p r i n c i p l e d i d t h e c o u r t a p p l y to rea c h t h i s h o l d i n g ? ” I h e

a n s w e r to t h i s q u e s t i o n p r o v i d e s t h e r u l e o t ' l a w e l e m e n t of t h e issue. It m a y be a
st atut e, case law p r i n c i p l e, d o c t r i n e , a n d so o n. A s s u m e h e r e th a t it is t h e W o r k e r s ’
C o m p e n s a t i o n Act § 36-9- 7.
3. “W h i c h tacts m e n t i o n e d in t h e o p i n i o n are related a n d necessar}' t o t h e d e t e r m i n a

t i on ot t h e q u e st i o n of w h e t h e r t h e plaintilf is aii e m p l o y e e ? ” I he a n s w e r to this q u e s
t i on p n n ides t he ke\' facts e l e m e n t of t he issue. In this case, the c o u r t f oc u s ed o n t he
wr i t t e n a ppl i c a t i on as a \' olunteer, t h e a b s e n c e of an eniplo}'n'ient a g r e e m e n t , a n d t he
lack o f a paycheck. ' Ih e se facts, if c h a n g e d , w o u l d probabi}' c h a n g e t h e o ut c o n i e . If
t r eated as a g r oup, t he c h a n g i n g ot'all t hes e facts w o u l d c h a n g e the o u t c o m e .
C. S tep 3: A s s e m b le th e Iss u e
■Assemble tlie i d e n l i f i e d e l e m e n t s in t h e r e l e \ a n t law ■ legal q u e s t i o n t k e \ t a ^t s t o r m a t
p r e s e n t e d in C h a p t e r i f . I h e r u l e of law is t h e W o r k e r s ’ ( C o m p e n s a t i o n Act 36- 9- 7. I he
q u e s t i o n is w h e t h e r t h e pl a i nt i ff wa s a n e m p l o } e e . I h e ke}' lacts a re t he w r i t t e n a p p l i c a t i o n
f or a d m i s s i o n to t h e m o n a s t e r } ' as a \ ' ol un t e e r , t h e a b s e n c e o f an e m p l o y m e n t a g r e e m e n t ,
a n d t h e l ack o f a p a y c h e c k , ' f h e issue, w h e n a s s e m b l e d , is: “ U n d e r t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f W o r k e r s ’
( C o m p e n s a t i o n Act § 36 - 9 - 7 , is a n iiidi\ i dual a n e m p K n ee w h e n t h e i n d i \ i d u a l is a d mi tt ec t to
a m o n a s t e r } ' u p o n a w r i t t e n a p p l i c a t i o n as a x' olunteer, d o e s n ot receiv e a p a y c h e c k , a n d d o e s
not have an agreenient of eniployment?”
D. O t h e r A id s — Case L a w Is s u e Id e n tific a tio n
1. C on cu rring or D issen ting O pin ion

In a c o n c u r r i n g o r d i s s e n t i ng o p i n i o n , th e issue m a y b e set ou t m o r e clear!}' t h a n in t h e ma j or i ty
o p i n i o n . Tlierefore, d o n o t o v e r l oo k these o p i n i o n s w h e n ident ifying t he issue. Be aware, however,
t h at t h e c o n c u r r i n g o r d i s s e n t i ng j u d g e m a y ha ve a different view o f w h a t t he issue is, especi all y in
t he case o f a dissent. Neverthel ess, even if t he f o r mu l a t i o n is different, t he di s cussi on o f t h e issue by
t h e c o n c u r r i n g or d i s se nt i ng j u d g e nia\- be helpful in d e t e r m i n i n g the issue in the inajorit)- opi n i on .
2. O ther O pin ions

R e a d i n g o t h e r o p i n i o n s cited in t h e case m a y prcn' ide g u i d a n c e c o n c e r n i n g t h e issue in t h e c a s e at
h a n d . Also, readi ng a later c o u r t ’s discussi on o f t h e case m a y prove helpful, as it m a y s u m n i a r i z e an d
clarif}’ t h e issue in t h e case you ar e readi ng. Shcpani's (jtiilio n s will g u i d e y ou to s u b s e q u e n t cases.
338
C H A P T E R 10 LEGAl A N A LY S IS ISSUE ID EN TIF IC ATIO N S PO TTIN G THE ISSUE
E. M u lt ip le Issues
I h c l o r e g o i n g d i s c u s s i o n l o c u s e s o n l o c a t i n g a si ngle issue. O l t e n t h e r e a i v m u l t i p l e is s u e s in
a coLirt o p i n i o n . / \ pp l \ ' t h e st ep s p r e s e n t e d in I n h i b i t 10-3 to all t h e issues in t h e case, o n e at a
t i me . Be siu'e to fol l ow all t h e s t e p s p r e s e n t e d in thi s s e c t i o n c o m p l e t e K w h e n ident it x i n g an
issue b e f o r e p r o c e e d i n g to ident it \- t h e next issue. R e m e m b e r , lor e a c h issue, \ ( U i m u s t i d e n t i t y
t h e relex’a n t r u l e of law, speci fic q u e s t i o n , a n d key lacts.
V o u ma\- r ead a c as e to l i n d t h e a n s w e r t o a s i n g l e q u e s t i o n r e l ev a n t t o \(HU' c l i e n t ' s
lact s i t u a t i o n , o r y o u m a y b e l o o k i n g for a speci li c legal p r i n c ip l e , d o c t r i n e , o r r u l e of l a w
a d d r e s s e d b\- t h e c o i n i .
For Example You are re s e a r c h in g a c ourt opinion th a t involves s e v e ra l torts, but you
are only in te re s te d in the court's discussion o f t h e e m o tio n a l distress is
sue F ollow th e steps p r e s e n te d in Exhibit 10-3 to identify the e m o tiona l distress issue,
but e n s u r e th a t the c o u r t’s resolution of th e o ther issues does not in so m e w a y a f fe c t its
t r e a t m e n t o f t h e e m o tio n a l distress issue. You can a c c o m p lis h this by re ad in g th e entire
opinion and c h ec kin g for a ny overlap o fth e issues or in te rc o n n e c te d n e s s o f th e reasoning.
N O T E : .-\s in s e c t i o n l\', c o n s i d e r t h e st eps p r e s e n l e d in t hi s s e c t i o n as Lisetul t o o l s a n d h e l p -

lul g u i d el i ne s . W’h e n fo l l o we d , t h e \ ’ will u s u a l h ' h e l p y o u to q u i c k K ’ i d e n t i h ’ t h e i s sue in a
c o u r t o p i n i o n . In c e r t a i n i n s t a n c e s , t h e o p i n i o n ma \ ' b e so o b s c u r e t h a t y o u ar e u n a b l e to
i d e n t it y t h e issue. .Also, as y o u r ea d m o r e a n d m o r e cases, a sor t o f i n t u i t i o n d e s e l o p s , a n d
\ ' ou nia\' i m m e d i a t e h ' s p o t t h e issue w i t h o u t g o i n g t h r o u g h a n \ ol t h e steps.
V I. K E Y P O IN T S C H E C K L IS T ; S p o ttin g the Issue

W’h e n d e t e r m i n i n g t he issue(s) in a client's case, it is h e l p t ui to k e e p in m i n d t h e
qLiestion, "W' hat imisl b e d e c i d e d a b o u t w h i c h lacts in thi s ca se ? " I h i s q u e s t i o n
h el p s k e e p t h e m i n d l oc i i s e d o n t h e r u l e ot law in coniLuu t i on wi t h t h e lacts.
W ' h e n i d e n t i f y i n g tlie issue(s) in a c o u r t o p i n i o n , as yo u r ead, k e e p a s k i n g t h e q u e s

t i on, “W' hat wa s d e c i d e d aboLit w h i c h lacts in thi s o p i n i o n ? ” .Ml c a s es ar e a b o u t h o w
t h e l aw a pp l i e s to facts. B\’ k e e p i n g l o c u s e d o n t h e law a n d l act s o f t h e case, \ ' o u ar e
less likely t o b e s i d e t r a c k e d by issues a n d q u e s t i o n s t hat n e e d n o t b e a d d r e s s e d .
•Address o n e issLie at a t i me , l o r e a c h issue u n d e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n , fol low e a c h o i t h e

s t eps p r e s e n t e d in t h i s c h a p t e r b e f o r e p r o c e e t l i n g to t h e next issue. In n iu l t i p l e - i s s u e
cases, s e p a r a t e t h e issues a n d i d e n t i t y o n e c o m p l e t e k b e f o r e a d d r e s s i n g t h e n e x t o n e .
W' h e n r e a d i n g a c o u r t o p i n i o n o r w o r k i n g o n a c l i e n t ’s case, k e e p in m i n d t h e t h r e e
e l e m e n t s of t h e issue; r u l e ol law, q u e s t i o n , a n d ke\' lacts. Ihi s h e l p s y ou s t a \ ’ f o c u s e d
o n w h a t y ou n e e d t o d e t e r m i n e to i d e n t i t y t h e issue.
D o not be c o n c e r n e d it you c a n n o t i m m e d i a t e h ' identits' the issue(s) in a client’s case. '1 he

c o mp l e t e identilicatioii o f t he issue nia\' not take place until you c o n d u c t t h e re.search,
read laws a n d cases, a n d identifx' t he requirei.1 elemeiHs o f t h e cause o f action. Likewise,
t he existence ot addi t i onal issues ma\ ' not be kiiow n until research re \ e a l s thei r presence.
/ I )o no t st op w h e n \' ou ha\ e ident it ied o n e issue. Mo s t cases in\'ol\ e m o r e t h a n o n e legal

q ue s t ion. S e p a r a t e areas ol law, su c h as torts a n d c on t r a c t s , nia\' b e a r o n o n e fact s i t u a
tion. .Alway s l ook t’o r all poss i bl e causes of ac t i on that c ou l d arise f r om a tact si tuat ion.
/ Use a n v t e c h n i q u e t h a t w o r k s t o r \'ou. I h e st eps s u g g e s t e d h e r e a r e d e s i g n e d as

g u i d e l i n e s to assist you. L'se a n\' o r all ot t h e m a n d anx t h i i i g else t h at w'lM'ks.
339
VII. A P P L I C A T I O N
I h i s scct ioi i p r e s e n t s t w o e x a m p l e s 1)1 issue idci it il icat ii ' n. I' ach c x a i n p l c il lus t rat es tlie p r i n
c i pl e s discusscci t h r o u g h o u t tills I.iiaptcr a n d i nc k i do s a d i s c u s s i o n o t ' t h c a p p l i c a t i o n (it t h o s e
p ri nc i p l es .
A, C lie n t ’s Fact S itu a tio n

' I h e f o l l o w i n g e x a m p l e iii\'ol\'os th e a p p l i c a t i o n (ilThc p r i n c i p l e s to t h e In pothet ici il p r c s o n t c d
at t h e b e g i n n i i i ” o f t h e c hapt e r.
1. Identify Each Possible Cause o f Action and Area o f Law Involved

I h c tìr.sl s t e p is t o i d e n t i h ’ cacli t \ ' pc o f c a u s e o f a c t i o n a n d a r e a o l ' h i w tliat nia\- he ra i se d
bv t h e client' s tact s i t u a t i o n . Kevi n, b a s e d u p o n his t r a i n i n g , real izes t h a t t h i s is a ci\'il, n o t a
c r i m i n a l , ma t t e r . N o c r i m e h a s b e e n C d n i i i i i t l o d a g a i n s t Ms . (;arr\-. Ho a l s o k n o w s t h a t t he
a p p l i c a b l e a re a ot ci\'il l aw is tort. B\' a p r o c c s s ot e l i m i n a t i o n , b a s e d u p o n e x p e r i e n c e , he
tocLises o n i n t l i ct i on o r e i i i o t i o n a l di s t r e s s . I h e r e is n o as s a u l t o r bat t cr\ - c l a i m b e c a u s c t h e r e
w a s n o act d i r e c t h ' o r indii'CLth' a i m e d at i h c cli cnt. Step 1 ma\ ' r e q u i r e IK ) r e s e a rc h. Ke\' in
ma\ - a n i\’c at thi s p o i n t ba st ' d soIcK' o n his e d i i c a t i o n a n d e x p e r i e n c e , altlioLigh lie i n a \ i cal-
izc, as h e c o n d u c t s r e s e a r c h i n t o tlic o m o t i d u a l d i s t r e s s issLio, t ha t o t h e r c a u s e s (ít'a c t i o n arc
p r e s e n t as well. It m o r e t h a n o n e c l a i m is i d e n t i f i e d , s t e ps 2 t i i r o u g h 4 s h o u l d b e t o l lo w e d
separatel\' tor cad i.
For Example If a part from the car fle w off and hit M s. Carry, there are potential b a tte ry or
ne glig enc e issues, and Kevin w ould fo llow steps 2 through 4 for e a c h issue.
2. D eterm ine the Elements o f Each Cause o f Action Identified in Step 1

K e v i n ’s r es e a r c h rexeal s that e m o t i o n a l d i s t r e s s is a c a se l aw d o c t r i n e , l h e l e gi sl a t ur e h a s not
a d o p t e d a s t at u t e c o n c e r n i n g e m o t i o n a l ilistress. l h e state's h i g h e s t c o u r t h a s r e c o g n i z e d the
t or t o f i n t e n t i o n a l i n l l i c t i o n o i e m o t i o n a l distress, l h e c o u r t r e q u i r e s t h a t t h e I' ollowing e l e
m e n t s h e e s t a b l i s h e d to st ate a claim:
1. I h e d e f e n d a n t ' s c o n d u c t m u s t b e e i t h e r i n t e n t i o n a l o r gr o s sl y o r r eckl essl y

negli gent.
2. I h e condLict m u s t b e e x t r e m e a n d o u t r a g e o u s .
3. I h e r e m u s t b e a c a u s al c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n t h e d e f e n d a n t ’s c o n d u c t a n d t he
p l a i n t i f f ’s m e n t a l distress.
4. ' I h e p l a i n t i f f ’s m e n t a l d i s t r e s s m u s t b e e x t r e m e o r se\'ere.
3. D e term in e W hich o f the Facts Apply

I h e t h i r d s t e p is to d e t e r m i n e w h i c h o f t h e facts of t h e c l i e n t ’s case a p p k to e st a bl i sh o r satisfy
t h e e l e m e n t s o f e a c h c a u se o f a c t i o n — tiie key tacts.
1. D e f e n d a n t ’s c o n d u c t of d r i \ i n g at a v e r y h i g h r a t e o f s p e e d , c r a s h i n g t h r o u g h
t h e fence, h i t t i n g t h e sees aw, a n d i i ii ur i ng t h e s o n o f t h e p l a i n t i f f ’s f r i e n d a r e
t h e fact s t h a t a p p h - to satisf'y- t h e first e l e m e n t o f i n t e n t i o n a l o r g r o s s l y n e g l i g e n t
conduct.
2. Dri\ -ing t h r o u g h a s c h o o l z o n e at a n e x t r e m e h - h i g h r at e o f s p e e d is t h e fact t h a t

satisfies t h e s e c o n d e l e m e n t o f e x t r e m e o r o u t r a g e o u s c o n d u c t .
340
C H A P T E R 10 LEGAL ANALYSIS . ISSUE IDENTIFICATION SPOTTING THE ISSUE
3. Ms . CCarrx ’s i n s o m n i a a n d anxict\- i m m e d i a t e l y a l t er t h e e v e n t ar e tacts that a pp l y

t o t h e t h i r d e l e m e n t ol c a u sa t i o n .
4. Ms. C a r r y ’s anxietx- a n d i n s o m n i a ar e e x t r e m e a n d a p p h to e s t ab l i s h t h e l o u r t h
element.
If K e v i n c o u l d n o t f i nd a fact t h a t w o u l d a r g u a b h ' a p p l y t o e a c h e l e m e n t , t h e r e w o u l d
be lU) i s s ue i n v o l v i n g t h a t a r e a o t law, a n d t ha t c a u s e of a c t i o n w o u l d h a \ e to b e a b a n d o n e d
as a p o t e n t i a l a v e n u e o f r e d r e s s f or Ms. C a r r \ ’.
For Example If M s . Carry did not suffer any a nxie ty or inso m nia, th e re p ro b ab ly w o u ld
be no c a u s e of action for e m o tio n a l distress.
N O T K : As d i s c u s s e d in s e c t i o n I \ ' o f t hi s c h a p t e r , \ ' ou ma \ ' n o t b e c e r t a i n w h e t h e r a tact

m e e t s t h e e s t a b l i s h e d s t a n d a r d for a n e l e m e n t . O f t e n t ha t d e t e r m i n a t i o n c a n n o t be m a d e
u nt i l trial, ’^' our t a s k is to e n s u r e t h a t s o m e fact a rg u a b l y m e e t s t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s o f e a c h o f
t h e e l e m e n t s o f t h e c a u s e o f a c ti on .
For Example A d e te rm in a tio n of w h e t h e r M s . Carry's insom nia and anxie ty are e x tr e m e

eno u g h to w a r r a n t relief m ay not be m a d e until trial; h o w e v e r , h e r s y m p
to m s a re a rg u a b ly s u ffic ie n t to m e e t the re q u ire m e n ts of the fourth e le m e n t. If re s e a r c h
re v e a ls t h a t this harm is not suffic iently e x tr e m e to m e e t th e re q u ire m e n ts of e m o tio n a l
distress, th e n th e re is no e m o tio n a l distress issue.
4. A ssem ble the Issue

A s s e m b l e t h e e l e m e n t s a n d st a t e t h e issue. Kevin n o w has all t he e l e m e n t s n e c e s s a r y to identif}-
a n d st ate t h e issue: t h e a r e a ol law, t h e legal q L i e s t i o n , a n d t h e k e \ ’ lacts. H e ident i f i es t h e is-
sv\e as: “ U n d e r I n a m c o f state', tovt law, d o c s i n t e n t i o n a l i nt l i cUo n u i c mo \ \ o n . \ l disU'Css o c c u v
w h e n a p e r s t t n suffers se\ ' ere i n s o m n i a a n d an x i e t \ ' as a result o f w i t n e s s i n g a f r iend' s chi l d
b e i n g i n j u r e d by a \-ehicle t h a t is o u t o f c o n t r o l d u e to b e i n g d r i \ e n at a h i g h rat e ot speeil
t h r o u g h a school zone?"
i?y f o l l o w i n g t h e t o u r st e ps, m o \ i n g I r o m a b r o a d i d e n t i f i c a t i o n ol t h e po s s i b l e c a u s e s ol
a c t i o n to t h e specific e l e m e n t s o f a n d facts i n v o l v e d in ea c h c a u s e o f a c t i o n , Ke\ in h a s i de nt i
tied a n i ssue. H e k n o w s w h a t m u s t b e d e c i d e d a b o u t w h i c h facts for thi s c a u s e of a c t i on . His
r e s e a r c h is f o c u s e d o n c a ses in w h i c h t h e c o n d u c t i n \ ' o l \ e d a c c i d e n t s in s c h o o l /. ones w h e r e
w i t n e s s e s s u f f e r e d h a r m s i m i l a r t o t h a t e x p e r i e n c e b \ ’ Ms. C a r r y .
If o t h e r p o ss i b l e c a u s e s o f a c t i o n w e r e i d e n t i f i e d m s t ep f , t h e n st ep s 2 t h r o u g h 4 w o u l d
be f o l l o w e d for ea ch p o t e n t i a l cause.
B. C o u rt O p in io n
T h e f o l l o w i n g e x a m p l e il l us t r a t es t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e p r i n c i p l e s to t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f t h e
issues in a c o u r t o p i n i o n . ' I h e t h r e e st eps to fol l ow are:
St e p I: G e n e r a l Q u e s t i o n — W h i l e r e a d i n g t h e case, k e e p in m i n d t h e g e n e r a l q u e s
t i o n , “W' hat was d e c i d e d a b o u t w h i c h facts in t h e c a s e ? ”
St e p 2: L o o k to t h e H o l d i n g — I d e n t i f y t h e r u l e o f l a w a n d key tact s r e l e v a n t t o t h e
holding.
St e p 3: A s s e m b l e t h e Issue
R e a d t h e f o l l ow i n g c a s e o f .Aùk'/ii M i t t u a l Life I i i i u n u i e e C o it ip a n y r. A i n e r i e a n C ,en en d

Life Ii ii u r a u e e C o m p a n y .
341
P A R T III T H E S P F C I F I C S OF L E G A l A N A L Y S I S
CASE estiiiiated value of Sl'Pfd- II was eventually d e t e r m i n e d to

be negative S I . 4 ii'iillion, e q u a l i ng a loss to the liniited p a r t
A C A C IA ML Tl-AI I II 1-: I X S L ' R A N C i ; C O M l ' A W , ners of $8.4 mi llion. .Aside fr o m checks writ ten to the general
ol al., I’laintilis, p a r t n e r s in excess o f SI mi llion, the balance of t h e liniited
\.
p a r t n e r s ' c o n t r i b u t i o n s r e m a i n s u n a c c o u n t e d tor.
Cl ar k d e t e r m i n e d the a m o u n t necessary to settle all c r e d i
a m i : r k : a \ C i H N H R A l , 1.11 i-: i N S i ' R A N ' c : ! - :
tors' cl ai ms a n d o n that basis m a d e a third, partial capital
cox I P A W , ct al.,
call to l i mi ted p a r t n e r s to w i n d up affairs a n d t e r m i n a t e the
ln\' oluiitar\- l^laintil], pa r t ne r s h i p. .At this poi nt s o m e o f the liniited p a r t n e r s re
111 N . M . 106, 8 0 2 P.2 d I 1 ( 1 9 9 0 ) fused to pa\' a t hi r d partial capital call, cl ai mi ng o t h e r liniited
p a rt n e r s h a d not \'et paid o n the second call.
O l’lX lO N
■Approximateh' a year after the request for confi rmat i on of
l U C A , lusticc dissolution was filed, the dispute finally was settled, t^lark ar
rived u p o n a global set tl ement a greement that allowed c r edi
tors to be paid a n d the recei\'ership to be termi nated. L nder
Appellant l ) a \ i d SiKer was the general part ner o f the Santa I'e
the settlement the liniited p a r t n e r s were to contribut e a final
Pri\ate l'A)Liit\' l u nd II, L.P. (SI PI-.I- II), a limited partnership. He
S I . 3 million. Ihe s ettlement a greement also p rovi ded for pay
appeals Irom a court order that allirnis a settlement agreement
men t ofcr edit ors, distri buti on o f anv' remaini ng liquid assets to
arrived Lipon h\- the limited partners through their recei\er, | ohn
the limited partners, a n d ass i gnment of all o f t h e p a r t ner shi ps
Clark, appellee. Ihe order distributes the assets o f t h e limited
claims against the general p ar t n e r s to one liniited partner. .Ap
part nershi p in order ot prioritx' mandat ed b\’ the legislature in
proval o f the settlement b\' the court would bar all clainis ot
Section 54-2-23 ot the L'nilomi l.iniited Partnership .Act. See
creditors wh o had not asserted a claim. ' Ihe mot i on for c o n
NMS A I97(S, 34-2 1 to -3(J (Repl. Pamp. I98S). SiKer claims
firmation was served on Silver, w h o objected and asserted his
that this order unjuslK' bars his contractual indemnification
indemnificat ion claim f rom SPPr.I' II. Ihis was over a year atter
claim as set out in the partnership agreement. Ihe right to c o n
notification of dissolution a n d the letter written by Silver to the
tract is iealously guarded by this court, but it a contractual clause
receiver in .March o f 1 9 8 7 —the o n h notice o f Silver's i n d e m
clearly cont r a\ enes a positi\e rule ol law, it cannot be enlorced,
nilication claim. Ihe district court held that Silver’s claim was
(icitcnil lilcclric ( jvilil (.lorp. r. Tidciilwrg, 78 \..\1. 39, 428 P.2d
u n t i m e h a nd a pproved the settlement that foreclosed Silver’s
33 (1967). Ihe indemnilication clause clearh' c ont r a \ e ne s the or
indemnificat ion claim. Ihis appeal is taken from that order.
der of prioritx in the tlistribution of assets o f a dissoK'etl limited
pai'tnership as set out by the legislature. We, therelore, allirm.
ISSUHS— A N D N O N ISSUES
FACTS Silver p h r as e s the six piiints of his apjêal in t e r ms ot his
III I-'ebruary 1987 the limited p a r t ne r s u n a n i m o u s h ' s'otetl ti mel y noti ce of a clai m against the p a r t ne r s h i p a n d o f an
to t e r mi n a te t hei r tailing pa r t ne r shi p, which ha d s h o w n a loss i m p r o p e r “b a r ” to this clai m for i n de mni l i c at i on, al ong with
t r o m t h e outset, a nd tiled in district court lor a co n t i r ma t i o i i related clai ms o f p ro c e d u r a l d u e process, equal p r ot ect i on
o f t h e di s sol ut i on o f SFPHl- II. Ihey also \ o t e d to r e m o ve Sil violations, a n d laches. W’e identifv' the issues differently.
ver as general part ner, but allowed h i m to resign. C^lark was W’e are deali ng here with the ti me - wo r n principles u n d e r
n a m e d a.s receis’er a n d publi shed a notice o f di s sol ut i on ot' lying liniited p a r t ne r s h i ps that restrict the potential liability
the p a r t n e r s h i p in 'Ihc Siiiitii Fc N ew M cxican on Ma r ch 23, o f a “liniited” p a r t n e r a n d hold a “general” p a r t n e r to g e n
1987. Ihis noti ce reques t ed credi tors to r e s p o n d with clainis eral, personal liability. “ | 1.limited part ners ” ‘ * take no part
against the p a r t n e r s h i p withi n four teen da ) s . SiKer wr o t e a in m a n a g e me n t , share profits a n d do not share losses beyond
letter wi t hi n this time, asserti ng his claim u n d e r the p a r t their capital contributions to the firm " A. Bromberg, (j'a n e &
ne r s hi p a g re e m e n t for i ndemni f i cat i on a n d r e i m b u r s e m e n t Bromberg on Partnership, § 26 at 143 (1968) (emphasis added).
t r o m t he p a r t n e r s h i p tor any p a r t ne r s h i p d e b t s he pâid. In d e mn i f y i ng a general p a r t n e r for pa rt ne rshi p debts l-)y e s
Afier the notification o f dissolution, Cdark b e g a n n e g o sentialh' forcing limited p a r t ne r s to pay for t h e m violates the
ti ati ons with k n o w n credi tor s o f the l imited p a r t n e r s h i p a n d general public policy o f limited part nershi p law. However, it
a d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f t h e status o f t h e SI-’PPl- II. hi anaKv.ing is not necessary to decide this case on general policy g r o u n d s
the assets a n d liabilities o f Sl' Pi if II, Cdark d e t e r m i n e d that a lone because such g r o u n d s are incor porat ed into specific
the li mi ted p ar t n e r s had c o n t r i b u t ed in e.xcess o f $7 million, statutorv' provisions that control the o rde r of priority o f d i s
but he coul d d o c u m e n t on h ' $2.4 million in in\ ' estments. ' Ihe tr ibut ion o f assets in these circumst ances, a nd the general
342
C H A P T E R 10 LEGAL ANALYSIS: ISSUE I D E N T IF IC A T I O N - S P O T T IN G THE ISSUE
p ar t ne r is stalutorih' the last in pi ioi ily. A idui'l e a n n o t depart (2) t h o s e to li m i te d p a r t n e r s in r e s p e c t to

Irom the express language ol an act, but can oiiK say what the their share o f the profits a n d o t h e r c o m
legislature intended. S a ui ily liscrow Corp. r. TiL\tilion Rev pensation by wa y ot income on their
cniie D cp’t, 107 N.M. 340, 760 l>.2d 1306 (Ct.-App. 1988); ,S7,iie r. contributions;
Michael R„ 107 N..\I. 744, 763 P.2d 767 (Ct..-\pp. 1988).
The p a r t ne r s h i p a gr e e me n t itselt s u p p o r t s o u r i n t e r p r e t a (3) t h o s e to li m i te d p a r t n e r s in r e s p e c t t o t h e
tion. Silver argues that in the p a r t n e r s h i p a g r e e m e n t a clause c a pi t a l o f t h e i r c t t n t r i b u t i o n s ;
existed, 13(b), which p n n i d e s that the “ I’a rt n e r s h i p ' ' '
shall i n d e m n i t y * ‘ ’ the Cieneral P a r t n e r | a n d | its p a r t n e r s (4) t h o s e to g en era l p a r t n e r s o t h e r t h a n for
‘ ’ against all claims ‘ ' ' i nc u r r e d b\ t h e m in c o n n e c t i o n capit al a n d prot'its;
with t hei r acti\ities on behalt ol t h e P a r t ne rs h i p ’ ' Ihis
clause, however, is subject to p a r a g r a p h 6(1) ot the p a r t n e r (5) t h o s e to g e n e r a l p a r t n e r s in r e s p e c t to
shi p a gr ee m e n t , which deals with liabilitv ot’li mi t ed p a r t n e rs profits;
a n d states in per t i ne nt part: “ No l i mi ted P a rt n e r shall be li
able for any debts or obli gati ons o f t h e P a r t ner shi p, i nc l ud i ng (6) t h o s e to g en e r a l p a r t n e r s in r e s p e c t t o c a p
obli gat i ons in respect of i n d e mn i f i c a t i o n prcn ided in p a r a ital. ( I - m p h a s i s a d d e d . )
g r a p h 13, in excess o f its u n p a i d Clapital CAintribution ’ '
Ihe par t ner shi p was t e r mi na t e d, p u r s u a n t to its r e q u i r e l h e law ol N e w .Mexico m a n d a t e s that in a di s sol ut i on
ments, w h e n the limited p ar t n e r s u n a n i m o u s l y \ o t e d to ter o f a limited p a r t ne r s h i p, the li mi ted p a r t n e r s are to be pai d

minate. At this point the part nershi p, aU)iig with potential ol f before the general part ners. The i nt er p r e t a t i on o f t h e i n
re ma i ni ng capital calls, went into receix ership a n d dissolution, de mn i fi ca t i on clause in the c o n t r a c t u r g e d by Silver w o u l d
and this dissolution c a me u n d e r the Ne w Me.xico Limited P a r t h a \ e the general p a r t ne r s paid of! hy the li mi t ed par t ner s.
nership Act. NMSA 1978, Section 34-2-23(Repl. Pamp. 1988) Since there are n o assets lelt in this t e r m i n a t e d pa r t ne r s h i p,
sets out the order of priority tor the distri buti on ol assets: to i n d e m n i t y the general p a r t n e r w o u l d r equi re t he l i mi ted
p a rt n e r s to c o n t r i b u t e e \ ’en mo r e f u n d s to a d e a d entity. Ihe
A. In set t l i ng a c c o u n t s aft er d i s s o l u t i o n t h e liabili clear l anguage o f a statute mus t be g i \ e n its lull m e an i n g .
ties o f t h e p a r t n e r s h i p shall b e e n t i t l e d t o p a y Schoonovcr v Caudill, 63 \ . M . 335, 337 P.2d 402 (1959);
m e n t in t h e l o l l o w i n g o r d e r : W'ciscr r. .Albucjuenjuc Oil C' Cnisoline i'.o., 64 N. M. 137, 325
P.2d 720 (1938). lb i nde ni ni f \ the general p a r t n e r s w o u l d
(1) t h o s e to c r e d i t o r s , in t h e oreler ol p r i o r i t y co n t r a v e n e this statute a n d is therefore une n f o r c e a b l e . V\’e
as p r o v i d e d b \ law, e x c e p t t h o s e to li mi tei l AILIR.M.
p a r t n e r s o n a c c o u n t ol t h e i r c o n t r i b u t i o n s ,
a n d to g e n e r a l p a r t n e r s ; IT IS SO O R D E R E D .
1. (ieneral Question
Read t h e e n t i r e case. W’hile r e a d i n g t h e case, ask y o u r s e l f “W' hat (.lid t h e c o u r t d e c i d e a b o u t
w h i c h f a c t s ? ” 'Lo a n s w e r t h i s q u e s t i o n , it is n e c e s s a r y lo k e e p in m i n d t h e e l e m e n t s o f t h e
i s s u e — t h e rul e ot law, legal q u e s t i o n , a n d key lacts. K e e p i n g t h i s q u e s t i o n in m i n d h e l p s you
focus on t h es e e l eme n t s .
2. Look to the Holding

You p r o b a b l y c a n n o t i d e n t i h t h e issue a l t er c o m p l e t i n g s t ep 1. l h e c o u r t d i d n o t sp e c i f i c a l h
s t ate t he issue, n o r is t he issue c l e a r f r o m a s i m p l e r e a d i n g ol t h e case. Loll ow s t ep 2 a n d find
t h e h o l d i n g . Here, t h e h o l d i n g is p r e s e n t e d in t h e n e x t - t o - l a s t s e n t e n c e : “I ' o i n d e m n i f y t h e
g e ne r a l p a r t n e r s w o u l d c o n t r a v e n e t h i s s t a t u t e a n d is t h e r e f o r e i m e n t o r c e a b l e . ” O n c e i d e n t i
lied, l o cat e t h e e l e m e n t s o f t h e issue re l ev a n t to t hi s hi) ldi ng. .Ask t h e fi il lowing q u e s t i o n s :
“ W’hat was d e c i d e d in t h e h o l d i n g ? ” In o t h e r w o r d s , “W h a t legal q u e s t i o n o r issue

w a s a d d r e s s e d a n d a n s w e r e d bv t h e c o u r t ? ” D e t e r m i n e t h e a n s w e r to t h i s q u e s t i o n
by l o o k i n g io l h e h o l d i n g a n d d e c i d i n g w h a t q u e s t i o n w a s a n s w e r e d b y t h e h ol d i ng .
343
l l or o, S i K c r , a g e n e r a l p a r t n e r a n d a n a p p e l l a n t in the ease, a r g u e d tliat s e c

t i o n 13( b) ot t h e p a r t n e r s h i p a g r e e m e n t a l l o w e d h i m to be r e i m b u r s e d , by a dd i t i o n a l
eontribLitioiis t r o m t h e l i mi t ed p a rt n e r s , t o r p a r t n e r s h i p d e b t s he paid. In o t h e r wor ds,
s e c t i o n 13(b) w o u l d r e q u i r e l i m i t e d p a r t n e r s t o s h a r e losses bes’o n d t h e i r capit al c o n
t r i b u t i o n s to t h e p a r t n e r s h i p a n d r e q u i r e l i mi t e d p a r t n e r s to pa y oti g e n e r a l p a r t n e r s .
I he coLu t liekl t h a t t he sect ion, so i nt e r p r e t e d, w o u l d c l e a r k c o n t r a v e n e t h e pr ovi si ons
ol t h e s t a t u t e . I h e legal q u e s t i o n , t h e n , is w h e t h e r a n i n t e r p r e t a t i o n ot t h e s ect i on ot
t h e a g r e e m e n t t ha t w o u l d r e q u i r e s l i c Ii pax’m e i i t s by l i mi t e d p a r t n e r s is e n f o r ce a b l e .
In t hi s case, it is dif li cult to i d e n t i t y t h e i s su e w i t h o u t this st ep b e c a u s e t h e
o p i n i o n i n c l u d e s i n l o r m a t i o n t ha t t e n d s to m i s l e a d t he r ea d e r .
For Example T he last tw o s e n t e n c e s in th e " F a c ts " section o f t h e opinion indi

cate th a t t h e a ppeal w a s ta k e n from a trial court ruling th at Silver's
i c laim w a s untim ely. B as ed upon th o s e s ta te m e n ts , the re a d e r is led to believe
I t h a t t h e c a s e involves a tim e lin e s s issue and looks for the court's discussion of
th a t question. T h e court, h o w e v e r, n e v e r m e n tio n s tim eliness in the rest of the
opinion. By lookin g to the holding and fo llo w in g this step, the re a d e r is dire cted
to th e issue a c tu a lly d e c id e d b y t h e court.
“W hat statute, l ule ol la\s, o r pri ncipl e did t he c o u r t ap p h ' w h e n it reached this h ol di ng? ”
in this case, t he c o u r t lo o k ed to § 3 4-2- 23 o f t h e N e w Me.\ico l i m i t e d P a r t ne r s hi p Act.
“W h i c h lact s m e n t i o n e d in t h e o p i n i o n a r e r el at ed a n d nec ess ar\ ' to t h e d e t e r m i n a

ti on ol t h e q u e s t i o n a d d r e s s e d in t h e h o l d i n g ? ” W' hat are t h e ke\' facts? In this case,
as in m a n y cases, t h e c o u r t p r e s e n t s sex'eral facts t h at have n o t h i n g to d o wi t h t he
h o ld i ng . L’sualK' t h e s e facts ar e p r e s e n t e d t o gi\'e t h e r e a d e r t h e b a c k g r o u n d a n d con-
te.\t ot t h e h o k l i n g . I h e p r e s e n t a t i o n ol t o o n i a n \ ' b a c k g r o u n d tacts, howe\' er, nia\'
m i s l e a d t h e r e a d e r a mi m a k e it dilficult to t i e t e r m i n e wh a t t h e case is a ct ua l l y about .
Ih i s is es[iecialK' t r u e in t hi s case. I h e o p i n i o n c o n t a i n s se\' eral p a r a g r a p h s
t i is cu s s i ng t h e l i na n c i a l s t a t u s ol t h e p a r t n e r s h i p a n d t h e de tai ls ol t h e gl obal s e t t l e
m e n t . i g r e e m e n t ai r a n g e d b\- t h e i ecei\' er. So m u c h is p r e s e n t e d c o n c e r n i n g t hes e
lacts t h a t t h e r e a d e r t e n d s to fo c u s o n t h e m , a n d n o t o n t h e key tacts t h a t invol ve
t h e proN' isions ol t h e p a r t n e r s h i p a g r e e m e n t .
W h e n t h e h o l d i n g , h o w e v e r , is r e f e r r e d t o a n d the q u e s t i o n is a sk e d , “W’h i c h
tact s a r e necessai' \' o r r e l a t e d t o thi s h o l d i n g ? ” it is clea r that t h e tacts r e l e \ a n t to
t h e h o l d i n g a r e t h e l act s c o n c e r n i n g s e c t i o n 13(b) o f t h e p a r t n e r s h i p a g r e e m e n t a n d
S i h e r ’s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h a t s e ct i o n . I h e key facts a r e t h e s e c t i o n o f t h e p a r t n e r s h i p
a g r e e n i e n t prox ' id i n g t ha t t h e p a r t n e r s h i p shall i ndeni nif }' t h e g e n er a l p a r t n e r agai ns t
all c l a i ms , a n d SiK e r ’s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o t t ha t s e c t i o n t o r e q u i r e l i mi t e d p a r t n e r s , u p o n
d is so lu ti o n o f t h e p a r t n e rs h i p , to r e i m b u r s e ge ner al p a rt n e rs with c o n t r i b u t i o n s
b e y o n d t h e i r c a p i t al c o n t r i b u t i o n s .
3. A ssem ble the Issue

llie final st ep is to a s s e m b l e t h e issue. All t h e e l e m e n t s h a \ e b e e n ident i f i ed in st ep 2:
I h e r u l e o t law is § 5 4 - 2 - 2 3 ot t h e N e w M e x i c o L i m i t e d P a r t n e r s h i p Act.
I h e q u e s t i o n is w h e t h e r a n i n d e m n i f i c a t i o n p r o v i s i o n o f t h e p a r t n e r s h i p a g r e e n i e n t
is e n l o r c e a b l e .
I h e key tact is a n i n t e r p r e t a t i o n ol t h e i n d e m n i h c a t i o n prcn ision that r e q u i r e s l i m

i ted p a r t n e r s , u p o n d i s s o l u t i o n o f t h e p a r t n e r s h i p , to r e i m b u r s e g e ne r a l p a r t n e r s
w i t h a d d i t i o n a l c o n t r i b u t i o n s b e y o n d t h e i r ca p i t a l c o n t r i b u t i o n s .
344
C H A P T E R 10 LEGAL A N A L Y S IS ISSUE ID EN TIF IC ATIO N S P O T T I N G THE ISSUE
ll ie a s s e m b l e d issue is: " U n d e r t h e p r o v i s i o n s ot ' § 3 4 - 2 23 ol t h e N e w M e x i c o L i m i t e d

P a r t n e r s h i p Act, is a n i n d e m n i f i c a t i o n p r o v i s i o n ol a p a r t n e r s h i p a g r e e n i e n t e n l o r c e a b l e w h e n
it is i n t e r p r e t e d to r e q u i r e l i mi t e d p a r t n e r s , u p o n d i s s o l u t i o n ol t h e p a i ' t n e r s h i p , to r e i m b u r s e
g e n er a l p a r t n e r s wi t h a d d i t i o n a l c o n t r i b u t i o n s b e y o n d t h e i r c a p i t a l c o n t r i b u t i o n s ? ”
Sum m ary
I h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t t ask in e i t h e r a n a l y z i n g a c l i e n t ’s c a s e o r r e a d i n g a c o u r t o p i n i o n is to
c o r r e c t h ’ i d e n t i t y t h e issue(s). '»'on m u s t identitx' t h e p r o b l e m b e f o r e it c a n b e s o K’ed. A niis-
i d e n t if i e d issue c an result n ot o n h ' in w a s t e d t i m e b u t a l s o in m a l p r a c t i c e .
I h e i ssue is t he p r ec i s e legal q u e s t i o n r a i s e d b y t h e facts o f t h e d i s p u t e . I h e r e f o r e , e a c h
i ssue is u n i q u e b e c a u s e t h e facts o f e a c h c a s e a r e d i f f e r e n t , a n d e a c h i s su e m u s t b e n a r r o w l y
s t a t e d w i t h i n t h e conte.xt ol t he facts o f t h a l case, llie i s sue is c o m p o s e d ot t h e a p p l i c a b l e law,
t h e legal q u e s t i o n r e l e v a n t to t h e law, a n d t h e fact s t h a t r ai se t h e q u e s t i o n . I h e s e e l e n i e n t s
m u s t be preciseU- i d e n t i f i e d tt) d e t e r m i n e t h e issue.
l l i e r e is n o m a g i c f o r m u l a , b u t t h i s c h a p t e r i n c l u d e s s t e p s t h a t h e l p in i s sue i d e n t i t i c a
t i on. W' ii en w o r k i n g o n a c l i e n t ’s case, f o u r s t e p s a r e r e c o m m e n d e d :
f . I de nt i f y e a c h a r e a o f l a w t h a t m a y p o s s i b h ' b e i n\ ' ol\ ed.
2. I de nt i f y t h e e l e m e n t s necessar}' for a c a u s e o f a c t i o n u n d e r e a c h law i d e n t i f i e d in

t h e first step.
3. Appl}' t h e e l e n i e n t s o f t h e law to t h e c l i e n t ’s fact s to d e t e r n i i n e t h e ke}' facts.

4. A s s e m b l e t h e issue t r o m t h e law, e l e m e n t s , a n d k e y fact s i d e n t i f i e d in tiie first
t h r e e steps.
I h e r e a r e t h r e e s t e p s to f o l l o w to identif}' t h e i s sue ( s ) in a c o u r t o p i n i o n :
1. ( i e n e r a l q u e s t i o n - w h i l e r e a d i n g t h e case, k e e p in m i n d t h e q u e s t i o n , “ W' hat was

decide d about which facts?”
2. Look to t h e h o l d i n g to identif\' t h e rul e ol law, legal q u e s t i o n , a n d ke\' facts ot t h e case.
3. A s s e m b l e t h e issue.
I h e s e a r e t he r e c o m m e n d e d st eps. Ihe}' u s u a l h ' w o r k w h e n c o r r e c t l y f o l l o w e d a n d a i e

al w a y s h e l p f ul in f o c u s i n g t h e p r a c t i t i o n e i ’s a t t e n t i o n o n t h a t w h i c h is e ss e nt i a l : t h e r u l e o f
law, legal qLiestion, a n d facts.
Quick R eferences
Applicable law 327 Ke y fact s 328
B r o a d s t a t e m e n t o f issue 328 Legal q u e s t i o n 327
Lll ement s o f issue 327 M u l t i p l e i s sue s 334
Issue 326 N a r r o w s t a t e m e n t iif i s sue 328
Issue s t a t e m e n t — pro ced ur al 333
As o f t h e d a t e o f p L ib lic a t io n o f t hi s text, t h e r e a r e n o W 'eb s ite s d e d ic a t e d s p e c if ic a lh ' t o is s u e
i dent i f i c at i on. Howex'er, u s i ng a s e a r c h e n g i n e a n d “legal a n a h sis s p o t t i n g i s sue s” as a t o p i c will
r etLi rn a w i d e r a n g e of W 'eb sites t h a t a d d r e s s s o m e a s p e c t o f l e g a l a n a l y s i s a n d i s sue sp o t t i n g .
S o m e sites d is c L is s identif} ing legal i s sues in speci fic a r e a s o f t h e law, s u c h as l a b o r law, w h e r e a s
o t h e r s d i s c u s s the t opi c in r e l a t i o n to t a k i n g e x a m s . I h e r e a r e n u m e r o u s o t h e r r e l at e d sites.
345
Exercises
A d d i t i o n a l a s s ig n m e n ts arc a'cailiibic on the CiourscMiitc. h e r h e w o u l d g i ve h e r t h r e e fr ee r i d e s to t h e cit} ti' he l p

repa} t h e l oa n . O n o n e ol t h e t r i p s , .Allei’i w a s n o t p a y i n g
ASSIGNM ENT 1
a t t e n t i o n , lost c o n t r o l o f t h e car, a n d w r e c k e d it. Bet h
Det ai l t h e s t ep s tor iden t i t ' yi n g t h e i ssue(s) in a c l i e n t ’s case.
sul Tered sev ere i n j u r i e s a n d w a n t s lo su e Al l en to r e c o v e r
ASSIGNM ENT 2 damages.
D e t a i l t h e s t e p s f or i d e n t i l y i n g t h e issiie(s) in a c o u r t I h e st at e a u t o n i o b i l e gue st s t a t u t e b a r s s ui t s agai n s t
opinion. d r i v e r s bv’ a u t o m o b i l e guest s. ' I h e s t a t u t e d o e s n o t a p p h ’

if t h e p a s s e n g e r c o n f e r s a s u b s t a n t i a l b en e f i t o n t h e tlriv er
ASSIGNM ENTS a n d t h a t is t h e r e a s o n t h e d r i v e r prov i ded t h e ride.
S t a t u t e s : C r i m h i a l C o d e S e c tio n ¡8-76 0. Koi>hcrv. per P a r t B l o m a n d .Alex are n e x t - d o o r n e i g h b o r s . W’hile a r g u
s o n w h o k n o w i n g l y t a k e s a n \ t h i n g o f \-alue f r o m t h e ing w ith I'oiii, Alex b r e a k s 'I'oni’s l a wn chair, a n d as Alex
p e r s o n o r p r e s e n c e o f a n o t h e r b\- u se o f force, ti ireats, or b e g i n s to b r e a k m o r e law n f uriii ture, T o m m a k e s a ci t i z e n ’s
in t im id a t io n c o m m i t s robbery. arr est o f .Alex. Toni’s s o n s h e l p Tom, a n d afi er Al ex is s u b
C r i m i n a l C o d e S e c tio n IH-773, Larceny. A n y p e r s o n d u e d , t h e y c o n t i n u e to hit a n d k i c k h i m for a few m o m e n t s .
w h o w r o n g f u l l y t akes , o b t a i n s , o r w i t h h o l d s , b\' a n y m e a n s , .Alex w a n t s t o s u e T o m.
t r o m the p o ss e s s i o n o f t h e o w n e r o r o f a n y o t h e r p e r s o n a n y llie st ate' s ca se law d e f i ne s b at t e r } ’ as u n a u t h o r i z e d
mo n e\ ', pe rs o na l pr o pe r ty , o r article o f \ alue o f an y kind, h a r m l u l c o n t a c t ; it also a l l o ws a c i t i z e n ’s a r r e s t w h e n t he
with intent p e r m a n e n t h ’ to de p ri v e a n o th e r pe rson o f t h e pLirpose is to pi’ev e n t t h e d e s t r u c t i o n ot p r o p e r t } ’.
u s e a n d be n e f i t o f p r o p e r t \ - is gui l t }’ o f larcen}-.
ASSIGNM ENTS
Fa c t s : O v e r t h e }'ears, l . a r r y b o r r o w e d several t o o l s f r o m Part Rea d Ih 'iin i’. D ic k e y in . Appendi x ,A. Identif'v’ t he
h i s n e x t - d o o r n e i g h b o r . U s u a l K ’ h e r e t u r n e d t h e itenis, issue r e g a r t l i n g t h e validitv of t h e will.
b u t oil occasi(Mi h e for got . O n e of t h e t ool s h e d i d n ot re I’a r t H Reail C nitcil States i’. .M a r tin e z -lim c n c z in . Ap p e n
t u r n is a drill, l h e n e i g h b o r g o e s t o l.arr}’’s h o u s e a n d tells d i x .A. Identifv’ t h e issue c o n c e r n i n g w h e t h e r t h e w e a p o n
h i n i t h a t if h e d o e s n ’t r e t u r n t h e drill t h e n e i g h b o r w ill file w a s a dangeroLi s w e a p o n .
c r i n i i n a l c h a r g e s , l . ar r}’ sa} s, ' T’m k e e p i n g y o u r drill a n d if P a r t C; Re ad Wolcott i'. Wolcott in . Appendix .A. I denl ifv’ the
}’o u tr}’ t o c o m e get it o r file c h a r g e s I'll beat \’o u u p . ” issue c o n c e r n i n g t h e m o d i f i c a t i o n of c hi l d s u p p o r t di,ie to
c h a n g e of c i r c u m s t a n c e s .
Q u e s t i o n : I d e n t i f v t h e issLie(s) inv’o K i n g c r i m i n a l law
P a r i D Read People r. Siniilcrs in .Appendix .A. I dent ifv’ the
r a i s e d b}' t h i s fact s i t u a t i o n .
issue c o n c e r n i n g t h e e xi s t e nc e of sp o u s a l priv ilege for c o m
ASSIGNM ENT 4 m u n i c a t i o n s m a d e in t h e p r e s e n c e of l he c h i l d r e n .
Perf ' or m a s s i g n m e n t 3 u s i n g }’o u r state's larcen}’ a n d r o b
ASSIGNM ENT?
b e r y st a t ut es.
Read the fol lowing case o ( M e tr o p o lita n Life In s a n in cc C o m
ASSIGNM ENTS p a n y r. S v n te k I-'inancc C o rp oratio n, l h e p r o c e d u r a l issue
I d e n t i t y t h e i ssue in t h e follow i ng tw’o fact si tuat ioi is. is w h e t h e r t h e trial c o u r t p r o p e r h ’ d e n i e d S} n t e k ’s m o t i o n
P a r t A Beth l o a n e d A lle n $3, 000. T h e a g r e e m e n t was for di s qua l i f i c a t i on o f counsel . W’hat issue c o n c e r n i n g tbe
o r a l . .Allen c o m m u t e s t o a n e a r b y cit}’ t o w o r k . B e t h substantiv e disquali ficat ion o f co u n se l is raised b}’ t h e facts
n e e d s t o g o t o t h e cit}’ t h r e e t i m e s in .\la}’. A l l e n t o l d of t he case?
CASE | 1| Rule 1.09 o f the I’e xas Di s ci p l i n ar y Rules o f P r o f es
sional C o n d u c t prcn ides that a l a w \ e r shall not t ake a r e p r e
MH r R O P O L I T A N l.ll'l-; I X S L ' R A N C H ( X ) M P A X V , sent at i on that is adv erse to a f o r m e r client if t he new' m a t t er
Petitioner “ is t he same or a s u b s t a n t i a l h related matter.” Lex. D i s c i p l i n
ary' R . Pnif. C o n d u c t 1.09(a)(3)( 1989), reprinted in 'Lex. G o v ’t
C.ode .Ann., tit. 2, subtit. G. app. (X’e r n o n S u p p . 1 993) (State
SYNTEK FIN A N C E C O R P O R A T IO N ,
Bar Rules art. X, § 9). In S'C .SB Tex. X a t ’l B a n k v. Coker, 765
l ^ e s p o n d e n t.
S.\V.2d 398, 400 ( lex. 1989), we st ated t hat to satisfv t h e s u b
881 ,SAV.2d 3 19 (Tex. 1994) P ER C U R I A M . stantial rel ati onship test as a basis lor di s qua l i fi c at i on a m o v
ant mus t prove that the facts o f t h e prex'ious r e p r e s e n ta t i o n
' 32 1 are so related to t h e facts in t he p e n d i n g li tigation that
' Ihis case t u r ns o n the a ppli cati on o f t h e “substanti al r e
a g e n u i n e threat exists that c o n f i de n c e s reveal ed to t o r m e r
lat i ons hi p” test for a t t o r n e y disquali li cation b ased o n pri or
c ounsel will be div ulged to a p r e s e n t adversarv'. Id.
r e p r es e n t a t i o n o f the s a m e o r a related client. Foll owi ng a
[2] 'Ihe dis qual i fi cat i on h e a r i n g c o n s u m e d five days. I he
lengt hy hear i ng, the trial c o u r t o\-erruIed a m o t i o n to d i s
trial coui't h e ar d live a n d d e p o s i t i o n t e s t i m o n y t r o m f o u r
quali fy c ouns e l filed by Syntek Fi nance C o r p o r a t i o n . .After
teen lact wit nes ses c o n c e r n i n g t he p r e v i o u s a n d p e n d i n g
a i u r \ ’ trial, a j u d gm e n t for a p p ro x i m a t e h ' S6.7 mi ll ion wa.s
r ep r e s en t at i o n s , a n d f r o m five e x p e r t wi t n e s s es c o n c e r n i n g
r e n d e r e d in favor o f Met ri) poli tan Life I n s u r a n c e Clonipanv'.
t he (A)ker s t an d a r d . I he r e was t e s t i m o n y t hat t h e i n f o r m a
Ihe c ou r t o f appeal s rever sed that judgmei'it a n d r e n i a n d e d
tion at issue was b o t h avail able in t h e pu b l i c d o m a i n a n d
the case for a ne w trial, ho l d i n g that the trial c ourt a bu s e d it.s
p r o v i de d to .Met ropoli tan bv' Svntek t h r o u g h discover}'.
di s cret i on w h e n it d e n i e d S\' nt ek’s m o t i o n tor disqualitica-
' I h e r e was also testimonv' t hat t he i n f o r m a t i o n u s e d in the
tion o f counsel . 880 S.\V.2d 2 6 . W’e reverse the judgi nei i t ol
a m e n d e d p l e a d i n g s was available to the publ i c t h r o u g h an
t he c ou r t o f appeal s a n d r e m a n d the case to that court for
e x a mi ne r s ' r e p o r t f r om a b a nk r u p t c } ' p r o c e e d i n g against
c o n si d e r a t i o n o f poi n t s o f e r r o r not previ ously addressed.
o n e I't the c o m p a n i e s c o n t r o l l e d b}' Phillips. I he trial c o u r t
G e n e Phillips o w n s a c o n t r o l l i n g interest in S\ ntek a n d
also ci ' iui uct e d an in c a m e r a rev iew ol d o c u m e n t s t r o m t he
several o t h e r related c omp a n i es . In 1986, t he law li rm ol
f o r m e r r epr e se nt a t i on.
H u g h e s & Luce r epr e se n t e d Phillips in a divorce a n d subse-
Ihe test lor a b u s e ol di s c r e t i on is w h e t h e r t he trial c ou r t
q u e n t h d r a f t e d a pr enupt i a l a g r e e me n t . In the c o u r s e o f that
acted without reference to an}' g i n d i n g rules o r pri nci pl es, or
r e p r es ent at i o n, Phillips discl osed his pe r s ona l tinancial s t a
ac t e d in an arbitrar}' o r u n r e a s o n a b l e ma n n e r . .See D o w n e r
tus to H u g h e s & Luce, i n cl ud i n g t he intricate s t r u c t u r e o f his
_AijUiiDjiii im {)peuito}:>, S.W.Zii 2j>8, 241-42
var i ous c o m p a n i e s . 'Ihis suit, tiled hy Syntek in April 1989,
Cl'ex.1983), eerl. denied, 4 7 6 U.S. I 159, 106 S.Ct. 2279, 90
arises o u t o f a hotel Syntek p u r c h a s ed f r om Me t r o p o l i t a n ,
I..F!d.2d 721 (19 8 6 ) . W'e h o l d that o n t he e v i d e n c e pr e s e n t e d ,
f l ug h e s & Luce at t or n e y Ri cha r d Nelson re p r e s e n t e d M e t r o
b a s e d on the C oker s t an d a r d , it was not an a b u s e of di s c r e t i on
politan. Ne l s o n m a d e an initial conll ict s c hec k a n d d e t e r
for t he trial c ou r t to c o n c l u d e that n o s u bs t ant i a l r e l at i ons hi p
m i n e d to his satisfaction that ther e was n o conllict o f interest
existed b e t wee n t he f o r m e r aiul c u r r e n t r e p r e s e n t a t i on s a n d
d ue to t h e fi r m’s previ ous r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f Phillips.
to deii}' the m o t i o n to disqualif}'.
After nearl y t wo years o f pretrial activity. Nelson acqui r ed
W'e t her efore c o n c l u d e that t h e coui't o f a p p e a l s im-
i nt or ni at i on a bout Phillips’ possible i nvol vement in Syntek’s
prtiperlv su b s t i t u t e d its j u d g m e n t for that ot t h e trial
decision to st op loan p a y m e n t s to Met ropoli tan. Nelson again
c ourt . See Flores i’. Fourth C ou rt o f Appeals, 111 S.\\' .2d 38,
revi ewed t he c i r c ums t an c e s o f his firm’s f o r me r r e p r es e n t a
41-42 ('Lex. 1989). .Accordingh', a majorit}' ot t he c o u r t g r a n t s
tion o f Phillips a n d o nce m o r e satisfied h i ms e l f that there
M e t r o p o l i t a n’s a ppl i c a t i on for writ ot error, a n d w i t h ou t
was no substanti al rel ati onship be t wee n the t wo r e pr e s e n
h e a ri n g oral a r g u m e n t , rever ses t he j u d g m e n t of t he c o u r t ot
tations. Ne l s on t h e n a m e n d e d Me t ro p o l i t a n ’s pleadi ngs to
a ppe a l s a n d r e m a n d s t h e case to that c o u r t for c o n s i d e r a t i o n
incl ude nevv allegations c o n c e r n i n g Phillip.s’ i nvol vement .
o f Syntek’s o t h e r poi nt s o f e r r o r w h i c h it d id n ot pr evi ous l y
In response, Syntek a n d Phillips filed a m o t i o n to disqualify
address. 'Lex. R. App. P. 170.
Hug he s & Luce. I h e trial c o u r t d e n i e d the mo t i o n .
ASSIGNM ENTS
R e a d t h e f o l lo w i n g c ase o i M o r g a n v. G r e e n w a ld t. I h e p r o c e d u r a l is sue is w h e t h e r t h e trial
c o u r t p r o p e r l y g r a n t e d a d i r e c t e d ve r d i ct o n t h e false i m p r i s o n m e n t clai m. W' hat is sue r e g a r d
i ng t h e s u b s t a n t i v e false i m p r i s o n m e n t is r a i se d b y t h e facts o f t h e case?
CASE was h er pract ice to b r u s h h e r teet h with I n d r o g e n peroxide.
N'urse Susan B r o t h e r t o n l o o k e d for the h v d r o g e n peroxi de
M O R c i A X V. ( . R i : i ; \ \ V A i i n but c o u l d not locate it. M e l i n d a Leah Lewis, a psychiatric
7S6 So. 2d 1037 ( M is s . 2001) t ec hni c i a n, a n d B r o th e r t o n c h e c k e d .Morgan's personal b e
l ongi ngs checklist, wh i c h is tilled out u p o n a patient's a d
S.\H 111, lustiee, l o r tlie (ôiirt: mi t t an c e to the Hospital. I h e h y d r o g e n p eroxi de was not
listed o n the sheet as o n e o f t he it ems b r o u g h t in by M o r
1. C.eiiia .\. Mo r g a n (“.\I('igan") sued St. Doiiiiiiic- gan. B r o t h e r t o n told M o r g a n that she woul d call Dr. (ioti to
jaekson .Memorial 1iospital (“ 1 lospit al” ), a n d t wo ot' the 1los- get an o r d e r lor the h y d r o g e n peroxide. Br ot he r t on called
pital's nurses, Br e nda (¡reeii wal dt a n d Susan Brot her t on, a nd Dr. (i olf' s olfice a n d left a me s sa ge r e gar di ng the peroxi de
a psychiatric techni ci a n , .Melinda Leah Lewis, o \ e r an inci- a n d its i n t e n d e d use b \ ’ M o r g a n as a m o u t h rinse. Dr. Goff
dent that o c c u r r e d in luiie 1996. Mo r g a n alleged that she ha d stated that .Morgan c o u l d not have the p e r o x i de but could
be e n assaulted a n d bat t ered, talselv imp r i so n e d , an d treated h a \ e C;epacol n m u t h w a s h instead. Br o t h e r t o n i nf or med
negligently while she was a patient. She also sued for i n t e n .Morgan o f t h e doctor ' s o rder s. .Morgan b e c a m e upset a n d left
tional intliction ot e m o t i o n a l distress. Ihe trial c ourt g r a n t ed the unit. Ihereatter, she r e t reat ed to h e r r o o m cry ing.
a di r ect ed verdict lor all t h e d e t e n d a n t s on the issues ol as- 4. B r o t h e r t o n , Lewis, a n d t echni cian ] eanni e Smi th
saLilt a nd batters', lalse i m p r i s o n m e n t , gross negligence, a n d wa l k e d t o w a r d Morgan' s r o o m to see what was wrong. B r o t h
int enti onal inlliction o f e mo t i o n a l distress, but allowed the e r t o n a n d Lewis e n t e r e d M o r g a n ’s room. Mo r g a n was lying
iur\' *1040 to d e t e r n i i n e it the d e t e n d a n t s were negligent in across the be d crying. In a n etl ort to calm h e r d o wn, B r o t h
thei r t r ea t m e n t ot Mo r g an . Alter l our tl a\s ol trial, the iur\- e r t on told M o r g a n that e ve n t h o u g h there was no recor d of
r e t ur n e d a \' erdict in ta\’or ol the d ef e nda nt s, an d the trial her b r i n g i n g the h y d r o g e n p e r o x i de into the Hospital, the
c our t ent e r e d ¡udgmei i t accordingU' . Morgan's mo t i o n lor a I lospital co u l d r e i m b u r s e h e r if she believed t h e I lospital was
ne w trial was d e n i e d l a n u a r y 4, 2()()(), a nd thereafter she a p res ponsi bl e for the loss. A c c o r d i n g to Brotherton' s testimony,
peale d to this Clourt. We find no reversible er r o r a n d atlirni •Morgan b e g a n yelling pro f a n i t y a n d o r d e r ed the nurses out
the iudgnieiit o f t h e trial court. ol h e r r o o m . Ihe nurs es r e t u r n e d to their station.
.1 . Short ly thereafter, .Morgan c a m e out o f her r o o m and
a p p r o a c h e d the n u rs e s ’ station. .According to Brot her t on
FACTS
a n d Lewis, M o r g a n yelled, used profanity, a n d d e m a n d e d
2. ( l eni a M o r g a n st art ed seei ng a ps\ c hiat rist in 1990 liei' hydi' ogen peroxi de. Slie wal ked to the nurs e m a n a g e r ’s
for depressii'ii. In eailv l une | 9 ‘)6, .Morgan's p s\ chiat rist. d o o r a n d b e g a n p o u n d i n g he r list o n the door. .\l this point.
Or. Barbara (loff, suggested that Mo r ga n \’olunt ari l\ check Dr. Go f f was again called, a n d Br o t h e r t o n left a message with
into the psychi atri c unit of t h e I lospital d u e to her severe the doctor ' s secretai y that M o r g a n was out of ' 1041 control
depr es si on a n d sleep disorder. Dr. (iotf wa nt e d Mo r ga n in aiul was a ct i ng in a hostile ma n n e r . Due to the escalating
a m o n i t o r e d e m i r o n m e n t while she worked on adi us t i ng si tuat ion, B r o t h e r t o n called the n u r s i n g supervisor, Brenda
Morgan' s m e d i ca t i on . At the t i me o f her admi ssi on, Mo r ga n (i r e e n wa l d t . W h e n G r e e n w a l d t a rr i ve d a n d i n t r o d u c e d h e r
was havi ng suicidal thoLights, a n d her depression h a d a d se l f .Morgan st arted r a n t i n g a n d ravi ng that she d e m a n d e d
v a n c e d to the stage w h e r e she ha d given up her job. Also, an apology. Mo r g a n t he n p r o c e e d e d to p o u n d h e r fist on
Mo r g a n was e.xperieiicing h a l l u ci n at i o n s a n d trances wh i c h the n u r s e s ’ st ati on desk a n d p o i n t h e r finger in nur s e (ire-
requi r ed an a d j u s t m e n t in h e r a nt i -psychot ic medi cat i on. e n w a l d t ’s face. Ac c o r d i n g to Cireenwaldt, Brot her t on, and
D u r i n g h er a d m i s s i o n a ss essme n t , Mo r g a n r e p o r t e d h a v i n g a Lewis, the pati ent a p p e a r e d totally o u t o f c ont r ol a n d b e c a m e
met aphysi cal e.xperience. M o r g a n descr i be d this e.xperience a t hreat to the saf'ety o f h e r s e l f a n d others.
to the a d m i t t i n g n u r s e as o n e w h e r e “ | shej was lying in bed 6. . . . [Ci| reenwal dt wr o t e an o r d e r that stated “ | p]l ace in
w h e n s o m e t h i n g g r a b b e d [her] nec k a nd t hen it let go w h e n secl usion for t h r e a t e n i n g start for four to six h o u rs until calm
[she] st ar t ed to pras.” U p o n h e r a d m i t t a n c e into the H o s p i and nonthreatening.”
tal, M o r g a n si gned a Cînsent to ' Lreatment L'oriii a u t h o r i z 7, Several witnesses testified that Mo r ga n was escorted,
i ng tlie Hospit al t o treat h e r for illness. She was placed on the wi t h o u t any physical cont act , to the seclusion area. Even M o r
i n t e r m e d ia t e w a r d w h e r e p at i e nt s were free to walk a r o u n d gan stated in h e r t e s t i mo n y that she walked to seclusion on
t he floor a n d mi n g l e with o t h e r patients. her o w n accord. .According to Mo r ga n , she was strip searched
3. O n l une 1<S, 1996, M o r g a n went to the nurses' station a n d forced to c h a n g e i nto a Hospital g own in front ot several
a n d asked for a bot t l e o f h \ d r o g e n peroxi de that she said people. However, vari ous start’ n i e mb e r s o f t h e Llospital testi
she h a d b r o ug ht to the Hospit al with her. She clai med that it fied that it was s t an d a r d p ro c e d u r e for s o m e o n e in seclusion
to be sear ched for d a n g e r o u s instrLiinentalities an d to cliange 1. \ \ i i i : i i i i ; r i i i l : i r l a i . c ;o u r i ' p r o p h r l y d i -
int o a Hospital gown , l u rt he r, a c c o r d i ng to Hospital pe rs on R LCTi . i ) .\ \ í : r i ) k : l o n a i . l c; o u n t s o l i n t e n
nel, I.eah Lewis s t oo d in front o f t h e w i n d o w to tlie seclusion tion . \ i I N I T . I C I T O N OL L MO ' LI O N A I . DIS'LRHSS,
d o o r so t here w o ul d be pri\ac\' . M o r g a n was left in seclusion I'ALSL; I. MP RI S ONMLNT, g r o s s NLX'.LKÍHNCH, A N D
tor a bout two hours , t r om 4;30 P.M. until 6:43 P..\I. .ASS.AlT.f A N D B.AL'I LRY?
§ 8. M o r g a n raises t he f ol lowing issues o n appeal:
A NALYS I S e v a l u a t i o n t ha t c o n c l u d e d s h e w'as s u f f e r i n g f r o m p e r s o n
I. ality d i s o r d e r s . She h a d a h i s t o r ) ’ o f m e n t a l il lness d a t i n g
§ 9, At t h e c l o s e o t t h e t e s t i m o n y , l h e d e l e n d a n t s b a c k to 1990 a n d w a s d i a g n o s e d as h a v i n g b e e n .severely
m o \ e d t or a d i r e c t e d \ e r d i c t o n all c o u n t s e x c e p t t h e m e d i d e p r e s s e d u p o n h e r a d m i t t a n c e t o t h e H o s p i t a l in | u n e
cal m a l p r a c t i c e n e g l i g e n c e c l a i m, l h e trial coiu' t g r a n t e d t he o f 1996. She also s uf f e r e d f r o m h a l l u c i n a t i o n s a n d c r y i n g
m o t i o n , t h e r e b y t a k i n g f r o m t h e ju r y t h e c l a i m s o f i n t e n episodes, . \ l o r e o \ e r , o n t h e m o r n n i g o f t h e all eged i n c i d en t ,
t i o n a l i nl l i ct i on o f e m o t i o n a l d i s t r e s s , talse i m p r i s o n m e n t , M o r g a n ' s d o c t o r n o t e d in t h e m e d i c a l r e c o r d s t h a t s h e
g r o s s n e g l i ge n c e, a n d a s s a u l t a n d b a t t e r ) ’. . Mo r g an a r g u e s was e x p e r i e n c i n g t r a n c e s t h a t l a s t e d u p to fifteen m i n u t e s .
t h a t t h er e was s ut hc ie n l evi der i ce to m a k e o u t a j u r \ ’ q u e s t i o n 14. M o r g a n a r g u e s t h a t t h e n i e r e fact t h a t s h e w a s
o n all o f t h es e clai nis, a n d t h u s , t h e d i r e c t e d \ e r d i c t t o r t he u i i d e r g o i i i g t r e a t m e n t in a LTospital d o e s n o t m e a n t h a t t h e
d e f e n d a n t s w as r e v e r si b l e e r r o r . 1lospit al is justified in p e r f o r n i i n g a n ) ’ m e d i c a l p r o c e d u r e s
111|2][3| ^ 10. Ihi s Cc)iu1 c o n d u c t s a d e n o \ o r e \ ’iew o f it d e e m s w a r r a n t e d . A l t h o u g h s u c h a n a r g u m e n t is a vali d
a n i o t i o n for d i r e c t e d v e r d i c t . S ' o i i h c n i Elcc. (,'o. i'. o ne, it is n o t w a r r a n t e d in t h e c a s e s u b j udi c e. ' I h e cas es
6 6 0 S o. 2d 1278, 12S1 ( M i s s . 1 9 9 3 ) . If w e f m d t h a t t h e e v i M o r g a n cit es as s u p p o r t f o r s u c h a n a r g u m e n t a r e n o t a p
d e n c e ta\’o r a b l e to t h e n o n - m o \ ’i ng p a r t \ ’ a n d t h e re a s o n a b l e pli cable to t h e ca se at b a r . S u c h c a s e s d e a l w'ith s i t u a t i o n s
i n f e r e n c e s d r a w n t h e r e f r o m p r e s e n t a q u e s t i o n f o r t h e i i u \ ’, w h ere the a p p e l l an t d i d not c o n s e n t to t h e t r e a t n i e n t o r was
t h e m o t i o n s h o u l d no t b e ' 1 0 4 2 gi a n t e d . [tl. ( c i t i n g Pittiiiiiii d e t a i n e d u p o n a r e q u e s t o r a t t e m p t o f t h e p a t i e n t to leave
V. H o n t c I n d e n t. Co., 41 1 S o . 2d 87, 8 9 ( M i s s . ! 9 8 2 ) ). ' Ihi s the H o s p i t a l . L elton v. C oyle, 9 5 I I I . Ap p . 2 d 202, 23 8 N. K. 2d
Cioi nt has also h e l d t h a t a n i s sue s ho u l i l o i i l \ ’ b e p r e s e n t e d 1 9 1 ( 1 9 6 8 ) ; Pox 1 ’. S m i t h , 594 So . 2 d 596 (Mi ss . 1 9 9 2) . ( i e n i a
t o t h e i u r \ ’ w h e n t b e ev i d e n c e c r e a t e s a q u e s t i o n o f fact o n . \lorgaii s’o l i mt ar i l v s i g n e d an . A u t h o r i za t i on t o r ' L r e a t m e n t
w hi c h r e a s o n a b l e j u r o r s c o u l d d i s a g r e e . II c r r i iii'lon v. Spell, f o r m w h e n she w a s a d m i t t e d to t h e H o s p i t a l . i\ U) reover,
6 9 2 So . 2 d 93, 9 7 ( M i s s . l 9 9 7 ) . t h e r e w a s s u b s t a n t i a l t e s t i n i o n y l o s u p p o r t t b e fact t h a t
M o r g a n was o u t of c o n t r o l a n d w a s p o s i n g a t h r e a t t o t h e
A. l alse I m p r i s o n m e n t e n \ ’i r o n m e n t , i r i c l u d i n g h e r s e l f C o n f i n e m e n t i n a s e c u r e d
e n \ ’i r o n m e n t is a c o m m o n m e t h o d o f t r e a t n i e n t in p s y c h i
[4| § 11. Lalse i n i p r i s o n m e n t h a s o n l \ ’ t w o e l e m e n t s :
atric w a r d s a n d H o s p i t a l s . Llie H o s p i t a l is c h a r g e d w i t h
“d etention o f t h e plaintiff a n d the unlaw fulness o f such
the d u l \ ’ o f m a i n t a i n i n g a safe a n d s e c u r e e n \ ' i r o n r n e n t t o r
d e l e i i l i o n . ” L ee r. A l e x a n d e r , 6 0 7 S o . 2 d 30, 35 ( Mi s s . 1992)
all p a t i e n t s , l h e e v i d e n c e s h o w e d t h a t M o r g a n w a s a c t i n g
( c i t i ng Page t'. W iyg ins, 5 9 5 So. 2 d 1291 ( M i s s . 1992); Ih o r n -
hill V. W ilson , 504 S o .2 d 1205. 1208 ( Miss. 1987) (citiiig .S'fiifc in a wa) t h a t c l e a r h ’ c o n \ e y e d t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f vi o l en c e .
§ 15. M o r g a n relies o n F o x r. S m i t h , 5 9 4 So . 2 d 5 96
C’A- rel. P ow ell v. M o o r e , 2 5 2 Mi ss. 471, 174 S o . 2d 352, 354
( M i ss. 19 9 2 ) , to b o l s t e r h e r a r g u m e n t t h a t t h e m e r e fact
(1965) ; H a rt v. W a lker, 720 L.2d 1436, ] 139 (5 th C ir. 198 3 ) ) ) .
| 5| § I 2. . Mor ga n c o n t e n d s t h a t t h e trial c o u r t ei’r e d in that s h e wa s u n d e r g o i n g t r e a t m e n l in a H o s p i t a l d o e s n o t
m e a n tlial the I lospit al is justified in p e r f o r m i n g a n y m e d i
g r a n t i n g a d ir ec t e d s’erdi ct b e c a u s e she wa s lo ck e d u p aga i ns t
cal p r o c e d u r e it d e e m s w a r r a n t e d . In Fox, t h e p a t i e n t w a s
h e r will, anti t h e d e t e r n i i n a t i o n o f w’h e t h e r h e r d e t a i mr . e r i t
a d m i t t e d to t h e H o s p i t a l f or a l a p a r o s c o p y a n d a l l eg e d t h a t
w a s a r e a s o n a b l e o n e s h o u l d h a v e b e e n a q u e s t i o n o f fact
f o r t h e j u r \ ’. ' Ihi s Cànirt f i n d s t h a t s u c h a n a r g u m e n t lacks t he r e m o v a l of a n i n t r a u t e r i n e d e \ ’ice w a s d o n e w i t h o u t h e r
c o n s e n t . Id. at 5 9 6 . T h i s c a s e c a n c l e a r h ’ b e d i s t i n g u i s h e d
m e r i t . M o r g a n c o n s e n t e d t o t h e t r e a t m e n t at t h e H o s p i t a l ,
f r om the case at b a r si n c e t h e p a t i e n t in F ox initiallv r e f u s e d
a n d s u c h I r e a t m e n t i n c l u d e s p la c i n g p a t i e n t s w h o a r e oiU o f
to si gn t h e con. sent f o r m b e c a u s e s h e o b j e c t e d t o a ’* 1043
c o n t r o l in a seciu' e e n \ i r o n r n e n t for t h e p r o t e c t i o n o f b o t h
cl aus e in t h e f o r m w h i c h a u t h o r i z e d t h e H o s p i t a l t o d i s
t h e p a t i e n t a n d t h e o t h e r s at t h e H o s p i t al .
pose o f se\ e r e d ti ssues o r s p e c i m e n s . Id. at 5 9 9 . ' I h e C o u r t
ÎÏ 13. I h e e \ ’i d e n c e i n d i c a t e s t h a t p r i o r to t h e 1996 i n
.stated t h a t I'ox t u r n e d o n t h e i s s u e o f con. sent , o r n o t , for
c i d e n t in q u e s t i o n , . Mo r ga n h a d m i d e r g o n e a psx c h o l o g i c a l
t h e rc’iiiox'iil o t ' t h e p a t i e n t ’s iiilraiitei iiie ilex iee. U , at 597. properlv- p r e s e n t e d to t h e ti'ier o f lact to d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r
'Ihi.s ('(Hirt iiKuic cl e a r t h a t a p a t i e n t ’s i n l o r i i i e d c o n s e n t the patient was im p r(' p er ly detaineil. U .
t o t r e a t m e n t is a p r e r e q u i s i t e to t r e a t m e n t , a n d b e c a u s e a «Í 18. U n l i k e F e l t o n , h e r e t h e r e w e r e nc' efforts b y t h e
m a t e r i a l d i s p u t e e.xisted o n i m p o r t a n t facts c o n c e r n i n g t he H o s p i t a l to p r e v e n t M o r g a n f r o m l e a v i n g t he H o s p i t a l at
p a t i e n t ’s c o n s e n t , tiie q u e s t i o n s h o u l d h a \ e b e e n p r e s e n t e d h e r will. M o r g a n d i d n o t l eave t h e I l o s p i t a l unti l t w o d a y s
t o t h e iur\-. Id. at 6 0 4 . a f t e r th e al l eged i n c i d e n t . Hven a f t e r t h a t t i me , s he c o n t i n
§ 16. In c o m p a r i s o n , M o r g a n clearl}- c o n s e n t e d to u e d to a t t e n d c lasses at t h e H o s p i t a l .
t r e a t m e n t b y t h e d o c t o r s a n d p e r s o n n e l at t h e H o s p i t a l § 19. I h e trial c o u r t p r o p e r k d i r e c t e d a v e r d i c t o n
by si g n in g th e c o n s e n t to rm . M o r e o v e r , M o r g a n ne\'er t h e i ssue o f false i m p r i s o n m e n t . I h e r e is s i mp l y n o p r o o f
r e t r a c t e d h e r c o n s e n t to r ecei ve t r e a t m e n t . She n e v e r i n in t h e r e c o r d o f t h e u n l a w f u l n e s s ol M o r g a n ’s d e t e n t i o n .
f o r m e d t h e n u r s e s t h a t s h e r e f u s e d t h e i r t r e a t m e n t o r that She v o lu n t a r i l y s i gn e d an a u t h o r i / a t i o n f o r t r e a t m e n t for m.
s he w a n t e d to le ave t h e f t os p i t a l . I n d e e d , sh e e \ e n v o l u n She h a d a hi storv’ of ps}' chol ogi cal p r o b l e m s , a n d t h e r e vvas
t ar i l y w a l k e d t o t h e i.solation r o o m . s u b s t a n t i a l testi monv- to s u p p o r t t h e fact t ha t sh e w a s o u t
§ 17. M o r g a n also relies Lipon h e llo n r. (.’ov/c’, 95 III. o f c o n t r o l a n d w a s p o s i n g a t h r e a t to h e r s e l f a n d to o t h e r s .
A p p . 2 d 202, 238 N. H. 2 d 191 ( 1 9 6 8 ) , for h e r a r g u m e n t that
C O N C L U S IO N
s he w a s fal seh' i m p r i s o n e d . I h i s ca.se is n o t o n h ' tactuall}'
§ 29. In s u m , t h e trial c o u r t d i d n o t e r r in g r a n t i n g a
d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e t r o m t h e case at b a r , b u t is a lso I r o m a n
d i r e c t e d v e r d i ct o n t h e i s s u e s o f a s s a u l t a n d b a t t e r y , false
o t h e r j u r i s d i c t i o n a n d , t h e r e f o r e , n o t c o n t r o l l i n g o n thi s
im prisonment, gross negligence an d intentional inthction
CoLirt. In I'clloih t h e p a t i e n t s u l f e r e d a b r o k e n clav icle a n d
o f e m o t i o n a l di s t r e s s. Cienia A. M o r g a n s i m p h ' tai led to
w a s t a k e n to a Cdii cago H o s p i t a l l o r t r e a t m e n t . Id. at 192.
m e e t h e r b u r d e n o f p r o o f in s h o w i n g t h e n e c e s s a r y e l e
A f t e r a n a l t e r c a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e p a t i e n t a n d I l o s p i t al p e r
m e n t s ot t h e s e c a u s e s of a c t i o n . . . . I ' o r t h e s e r e a s on s , w e
s o n n e l , p a t i e n t ' s d o c t o r o r d e r e d h i m t)ut o f t h e Ho sp i t a l .
a f i i r m the j u d g m e n t o f t h e H i n d s Côunt}- ( a r c u i t Côurt.
W. W ' h e n t h e p a t i e n t a t t e m p t e d to leave t h e H o s p i t al , t h e
d o c t o r g r a b b e d t h e p a t i e n t b}’ t h e shoLilders a n d tol d h i m
§ 30. A F F IR M E D .
h e w a s g o i n g to call t h e police. I d. at 193. I h e d o c t o r t h e n
s ent t he p a t i e n t t o a ps} c h i a t ri c 1 los pi t a l . /</. I h e trial c o u r t PH I M A N , C.J., BANKS, I'.|., MII I,,S, WALLER, COBB
i s s u e d a d i r e c t e d v e r d i ct in f a v o r o f t h e d e f e n d a n t , a n d o n ANI) DIAZ, )J., C ONCUR. .McRAE, I’.)., CONCURS IN
a p p e a l t h e p a t i e n t ai g u e d t h a t h e w a s e n t i t l e d to a d i r e c t e d RKSUI 1 ONLY. EASLEY, L, DISSEN LS WEI HOUT SEP-
AR.ATE WRITTEN OPINION.
v e r d i c t. (ii._.at l ^ l, I h e a p p e l l a t e c o u r t d i s a g r e e d , hi>lding
t h a t i m d e r t h e lact s a n d c i r c u m s t a n c e s ot t h e case, it was
ASSIGNM ENT 9
I d e nt i fy t h e issue in a s s i g n m e n t s 16 a n d 17 o f ( d i a ( ' t e r 17.
^ The available C ours eM a te for this text has an interactive eBook and interactive learning
0 * tools, including flash cards, quizzes, and more. To learn more about this resource and access
CourseMate free demo CourseMate resources, goto www.cengagebrain.com, and search forthis book.
To access C ourseM ate m a te ria ls th a ty o u have purchased, g o to login.cengagebrain.com.
Legal Analysis: Stating the Issue
" M . u y , I w a n t x'cui to d c t c r i n i n c it w c c u n got l l i c (.'v idciK i.' M i p p r c s s c d i n t h i s ea s e. I l u x x i a
n i c n u i o n t i l l s b \ t l i c d a \ a f t e r t o m o r r o w , it p o s s i b l e . I a n h a i i i l c d . \ l a r \ ' t h e e a s e file a s s h e g a \ e
Outline
t h e s e i n s t r u c t i o n s . M a r v S t r a t e is a l e g a l a s s i s t a n t w o r k i n g i n a n O r e g o n l a w f i r m th a t s p e c i a l I. I n t r o d u c t i on
i / e s i n c r i m i n a l d e f e n s e . I n n H r i t e is h e r s u p e r v i s i n g a t t o r n e y , a n d a c c o r d i n g to I a n , . M a r y is II. S h o r t h a n d o r inroad S ta t eme n t
h e r “r i g h t h a n d . " o f t h e Issue
.After rex i e w i n g t h e c a s e a n d c o n d u c t i n g s o m e r e s e a r c h , . \ l a r \ 's l o c u s t u r n s to t h e s i g n i t i -
111. C o m p r e h e n s i \ ’e o r N a r r o w
c a n t l a c t s r e l e \ a n t to t h e s u p p r e s s i o n - o f - e \ i d e n c e i s s u e . S h e d e t e r m i n e s th a t t h e r e a r e s e \ c r a l
St a t ement o f Issue
k e y f a c t s . I h e st a te p o l i c e s e i z e d t h e e v i d e n c e d u r i n g t h e e . x e c u t i o n of a s e a r c h w a r r a n t . .A st a te
I \ ’. Issue— Law C o m p o n e n t
c o u r t i u d g e i m p r o p e r K ' i s s u e d t h e w a r r a n t . I h e u a r r a n t \v a s i m p r o p e r l v i s s u e d , a n d t h e r e f o r e
\'. Issue— Q u e s t i o n Cômponent
def'ectiN'e, b e c a u s e t h e s ta te p o l i c e d i d n o t p r e s e n t t h e c o u r t s u t i i c i e n t p r o h a h l e c a u s e to i u s t i f \ -
t h e s e a r c h . I h e o p p o s i n g s i d e , t h e s ta te , c o n c e d e s th a t t h e w a r r a n t w a s i m p r o p e r l y i s s u e d . I h e \ ’I. Issue— Significant o r Key Facts

o f f i c e r s d i d n o t k n o w t h e w a r r a n t w a s d e f e c t i \ e a n d e x e c u t e d it i n t h e g o o i l l a i t h b e l i e f th a t Component
it w a s \ a l i d . \'II. Ethi cs— Obj ec t i vel y St at i ng the
•Marv’s r e s e a r c h i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e r e s o l u t i o n of t l i e Is s u e Is g i n e r n e d b \ ( I r e g o n s e x c l u Issue
s l o n a r \ ' ru le , h i c i i p r o \ I d e s th a t e \ u l e i K e i l l c g a l K s e i z e d m a v n o t h e a i l m l l t e i l a l t r i a l . I h e r u l e X'lll. Ge n e r a l C o n s i d e r a t i o n s
w a s a d o p t e d b v th e s t a l e s u p r e m e c o u r t a i u l is no t s l a l u t o r \ . , \ s . M a r v b e g i n s t h e a s s i g n m e n t ,
IX. Key Points Checkl i st : Stat ing
h e r f ir s t q u e s t i o n is h o w tc) p h r a s e t l i e i s s u e . " W ' h a t is t h e p r o p e r f o r m a t ? W h a t is t h e b es t \ s a v
t h e Issue
to e l k \ t i \ e l y c o m m u n i c a t e p r e c i s e l y w l i a t is m d i s p u t e i n t h i s c a s e i ' ” l l i e . \ p p l i L a l i o n s e c t i o n
X. Appl icat ion
o l t h i s c h a p t e r p r e s e n t s t h e a n s w e r to t h e l a t t e r c.|ue stio n. I h e m a t e r i a l d i s c u s s c i l in t h i s i. h a p t e r
p r i o r to t h e . A p p l i c a t i o n s e c t i o n a d d r e s s e s . M a r v ' s o t h e r c ) u e s t i o i i s
Learning Obiectives
After c o m p l e t i n g thi s c ha pt e r , you
sh o u l d u nd e r s t a n d :
The e l e me n t s o f a wel l - craft ed

issue
• I h e value a n d i m p o r t a n c e of
p h r a s i n g t he issue n a r r o w l y a n d
c o mp r eh e n s i ve l y
• Th e best way to as.semble
t he e l e me n t s to eft'ectively
c o m m u n i c a t e t h e issue
• The i m p o r t a n c e o f st at i ng t h e
issue objectively
351
(Cliaptcr 10 p o i n t s o u t t ha t t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t s t ep in t h e ea s e a n a h ' s i s p r o c e s s is c o r r e c t l y
i d e n l i l v i n g t he issue. II t h e issue is m i s i d e n t i l i e d , t i m e is w a s t e d r e s e a r c h i n g a n d wr i t in g a b o u t
t h e w r o n g q u e s t i o n . O n c e t h e issue is i d e n l i l i e d , it is e q u a l k i m p o r t a n t to c o r r e c t k st ate it. O f
w ha l va l ue is it to corr ect K' itientilx' t h e q u e s t i o n , t h e n Tail to a c c u r a t eK' c o m m u n i c a t e w h a t
y o u h a v e i d e n t i i i e d ? I h e r e l o r e , h o w . \ l ar\ ' st ates t h e issue is ol cri ti cal i mp o i ' l a n c e , b e c a u s e
t h e issue g o \ e r n s t h e d i r e c t i o n o t ' t h e r e s e a r c h a n d c o m m u n i c a t e s t h e n a t u r e ot t h e di s put e.
.\ w e l l - cr a t t e d issue i n f o r m s t h e r e a d e r o t t h e s c o p e ol t h e m e m o by i d e n t i t \ i n g in a
s e n t e n c e t h e p r e c i se legal q u e s t i o n r a i se d b v t h e key tact s o t ' t h e case. It i n f o r m s t h e r eai l er o f
t h e rel e\’a n t law, t h e ke\- facts o f t h e case, a n d t h e legal q u e s t i o n r a i s e d b\- t h e law. I h e e.xact-
ness a n d t h e d e g r e e ol speci ti cit \' w i t h w h i c h t h e q u e s t i o n is p o s e d d e t e r m i n e its u s e l u l n e s s
to t h e readei' a n d r e s e a r c h e r .
I h e goal is to i n f o r m t h e r e a d e r ot w h a t \ o u hax’e i d e n t i f i e d as t h e legal q u e s t i o n r ai s ed
b\- t h e d i s p u te . Ihi s goal is a c h i e \ e d b\' I' ocusi ng \o L ir a t t e n t i o n o n d r a f t i n g t h e issue cl earh' ,
concisely, a n d c omp l et e l y. B e c a u s e so m u c h h i n g e s o n c o r r e c t p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e issue, several
dr a f t s m a y be r e q u i r e d . D o n o t get d i s c o u r a g e d , i h e final d r a f t m a \ n o t e m e r g e unti l well i n t o
t h e p r o c e s s, a n d o f t en n o t u n t i l af t e r e x t e n s i \ e r e s e a r c h a n d w r i t i n g .
( Chapter 10 i dent ifies t h e issLie as b e i n g c o m p o s e d o f t h e l aw, t h e q u e s t i o n , a n d t h e key
facts. I h e t o c u s of t ha t c h a p t e r w a s o n h o \ \ to i d en t i f \ ' t h e s e e l e m e n t s in a cli ent' s s i t u a t i o n
a n d a c o u i t o p i n i o n . H e r e t h e f o c us is o n h o w lo p r e s e n t t h e s e e l e m e n t s w h e n f r a m i n g t he
issue: h o w lo wr i t e t h e issue to e n s u r e t h a t t h e r e a d e r k n o w s t h e p r e c i s e legal q u e s t i o n at t h e
c o r e ol t h e dispLite; a n d h o w to p r e s e n t t h e law, q u e s t i o n , a n d ke\' l act s to e l l ec t i \ e l y c o m
m u n i c a t e t hal q u e s t i o n .
L' lti mat ely, t h e issue is t h e legal q u e s t i o n rai.sed b y t h e fact s o f t h e di s p u t e . B e caus e it is
a q u e s t i o n , il s h o u l d b e d r a f t e d as a q u e s t i o n r a t h e r t h a n a s t a t e m e n t .
. Although t h e r e a re n o e s t a b l i s h e d r u l e s g o \ e r n i n g w h a t t h e i s sue m u s t c o n t a i n o r h o u
t o a s s e m b l e il, t h e law, q u e s t i o n , a n d k e \ fact elem ents s h o u l d b e i n c l u d e d to a c h i e \ e t he
goal o f clearly, c onc i s e l y, am.! c o m p l e t e K c o m m u n i c a t i n g t h e n a t u r e o f t h e d i s p u t e . .A s i m p l e
test to d e t e r m i n e if' the s t a t e m e n t of t h e issue is c o m p l e t e ( w h e t h e r it d o e s its iob) is t he foi
l owing: If s o m e o n e r e a d s t h e issue a l o n e if t h e l est of t h e m e m o r a n d u m o r brief is lost o r
n o t referreil l o — w o u l d t h e r e a d e r k n o w w h a t speci fic legal q u e s t i o n , c o n c e r n i n g w h a t law,
a n d iin' oK' i ng w h a t tacts is in (.lispufe in thi s case? ( ¡i\ e n t h i s test, t h e r e a r e t w o wax s to st at e
t h e issue, o n e e f i e c t i \ e a n d o n e not:
Sh o i' t h a n d , o r b r o a d , s t a t e m e n t
C o m p r e h e n s i x e, o r narroxv, s t a t e m e n t
II. S H O R T H A N D O R B R O A D S T A T E M E N T O F T H E I S S U E
,A shorthand statem ent is a b r o a d f o r m u l a t i o n o f t h e i s sue t h a t u s u a l l y d o e s not i n c l u d e
t h e specific facts o r laxv.
For Example Did Mr. Sm ith c o m m it a battery?

Can Mr. J o n e s r e c o v e r d a m a g e s fo r n e g lig e n c e ?
Did the c ourt err w h e n it g ra n te d the m otion to dismiss?
Did the c h air of the b o a rd v io la te his fid u c ia r y duty?
.\ broad statement of issue is o ft e n n s e d in conx e r s a t i o n o r oral c o m m u n i c a t i o n s

w h e n t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s a r e f a m i l i a r x\ ith t h e facts a n d k n o w t h e laxv t h a t a p p l i es to t h e case.
It is a p p r o p r i a t e in thi s i n f o r m a l c o n t e x t , it m a v also b e a p p r o p r i a t e initiallx' in t h e analyt ic
cal p ro c e s s b\- h e l p i n g to f o c u s a t t e n t i o n o n t h e g e n e r a l a r e a o f t h e laxv to be r e s e a r c h ed ; f o r
352
C H A P T E R 11 LEG AL A N A L Y S IS : S T A T I N G THE ISSUE
e x a m p l e , in t h e p r e c e d i n g list, t h e first t w o i l l u s t r a t i o n s f o c u s t h e r e s e a r c h e r ’s . i t t e n t i o n o n t he
g e n e r a l a r e a s o f ' b a t t e r y a n d n e g l i g e n c e . As n o t e d in s e c t i o n 111 ol C h a p t e r 10, a b r o a d l y s t a t e d
i s sue m a \ ' b e p r o p e r in s u c h s i t u a t i o n s , b u t it is n o t a p p r o p r i a t e in legal r e s e a r c h a n d w ri ti ng.
III. COMPREHENSIVE OR NARROW STATEMENT

OFTHE ISSUE
l h e m o s t eifecti ve f o r m u l a t i o n o f t h e issue is a c o m p r e h e n s i v e , narrow statem ent of issue.
In o n e s e n t e n c e , t h e sp e ci f i c law, legal t ] ue s t i on , a n d k e y fact s ar e p r e s e n t e d . I h i s f o r m c o m
m u n i c a t e s t h e s peci t i c l a w t h a t m a y h a v e b e e n v i o l a t e d in a speci fic fact s i t u a t i o n , o r w h e t h e r
a n d h o w t hat l aw ap p li e s in a sp e ci f i c s i t u a t i o n , it C (in\'eys, in t h e t e r m s a n d c i r c u m s t a n c e s o f
t h e case, t h e p r e c i se law a n d c]ues t i on in d i s p u t e .
For Example U n d e r th e re q u ir e m e n t s of Florida to rt law , can a claim fo r n e g lig e n t

m fliction of e m o tio n a l d istre ss be m a d e by a w itn e s s , not re la te d to th e
victim, w h o w it n e s s e s a s e v e r e b e a tin g o f t h e victim ?
A c c o rd in g to N e w W a s h in g to n 's p ro b a te c o d e , N. W a s h . Code § 29-1-5, is a will
valid if th e w i t n e s s e s a re b ro th e rs of th e te s ta to r?
N o te t h a t t h e s p e c ific l a w a nd qu e stio n invo lv ed in th e dispute are p re s e n te d in the

c o n te x t of the fa c ts of th e dispute.
lhe \alue and i n i p o r t a n c e o f p h r a s i n g t h e i s s u e c o m p r e h e n s i \ ’el\- c a n n o t be

o\eremphasized.
1. i' or a r e s e a r c h e r , it d i r e c t s t h e r e s e a r c h to t h e s p e c i h c ar e a o f t h e law t hat c o n t r o l s

t h e q u e s t i o n r a i s e d by t h e fact s o f t h e d i s p u t e . I h i s n a i r o w i n g of’ f o c u s s a \ e s r e
s e a r c h t i m e b e c a u s e t h e r e s e a r c h e r is i m m e d i a t e h ’ d i r e c t e d t o t h e speci fic a r e a o f
t h e law, a n d n e e d o n k r e a d c as e s w i t h s i m i l a r k e \ ’ facts.
1. In a n m t e r o t t i c e m e m o r a n d u m o r a c o u r t bri ef, a c o m p r e h e n s n e , o r n a r r o w , tor

m u l a t i o n of t h e i s sue s e t s t h e s c o p e of t h e m e m o b\- i n f o r m i n g t h e r e a d e r at t h e
o u t s e t w h a t p r e c i s e k is in d i s p u t e . It d o e s n o t f o r c e th e r e a d e r to t r \ t o d e t e r m i n e
w h a t t h e q u e s t i o n is f r o m t h e a n a l y s i s s e c t i o n . It t h e r e b y m a k e s it less likely t hat
t h e r e a d e r will m i s u n d e r s t a n d w h a t is in d i s p u t e .
.V In a l a w - o l t i c e s e t t i n g , a n a r r o w k f r a m e d i s sue s a \ e s t i me . I'utiu-e r e s e a r c h e r s , b\-

m e r e l y r e a d i n g t h e issue, will k n o w p r e c i s e h ’ w h a t law a n d facts a m e m o r a n d u m
a d d r e s s e s . ’l h e \ ' a r e n o t f o r c e d to r e a d t h e a n a k s i s s e c t i o n to d e t e r m i n e if t h e
m e m o is r e l a t e d o r m a y a p p l y t o t h e c a s e at h a n d .
W' it h t hi s in m i n d , t h e i s s u e s h o u l d i n c l u d e t h e f o l l o w i n g e l e m e n t s , as p r e s e n t e d in
F x h i b i t 11-1:
1. ' l h e speci fi c l aw o r r u l e t h a t c o n t r o l s t h e d i s p u t e ( t h e n'lcvaiit Iinv}
2. l h e legal ijn estio n r e g a r d i n g t h e l a w r a i s e d b\- t h e facts
3. l h e k e y facts t h a t d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r o r h o w t h e l a w o r p r i n c i p l e a p p l i e s
T h e c h a l l e n g e is to i n c l u d e all t h r e e e l e m e n t s in o n e s e n t e n c e ; t he r e f o r e , f o c u s on:
1. C ^ omp l e te n e s s — I n c k i d e t h e p r e c i s e law, q u e s t i o n , a n d ke\' facts.
2. C o n c i s e n e s s — I n c l u d e no more than is a b s o l u t e k necessar\' to guarantee

completeness.
3. C l a r i t ) — CT'atf t h e c o m p l e t e a n d c o n c i s e k a s s e m b l e d m a t e r i a l in t h e m o s t etfec-
ti\e manner.
353
l o r o a r e s e \ e r a l \ \ a \ s t o m e e t t h i s cl i al l L' i i uc:
I. I’r es e n t tlie t'aets first, f o l l owe d b\' t h e legal q u e s t i o n a n d t h e law.
For Example "C an a w it n e s s , not re la te d to th e v ic tim , w h o w it n e s s e s a

s e v e re b e atin g of th e vic tim , esta b lish a c la im for n e g lig e n t
infliction of e m o tiona l distress u n d e r Florida tort law ?"
"If th e bro thers of th e te s ta to r w itn e s s the will, is th e will valid under
the provisions o f t h e California wills a tte s ta tio n statute?"
2. P r e s en t t h e law first, t o l l o w e d b\- t h e facts, a n d t h e n t h e legal q u e s t i o n .
For Example "U n d e r Florida's tort law, can a witness, n o t r e l a t e d t o th e victim,

w h o w itn e s s e s a s e v e re beating o f th e victim, establish a claim
for n e g lig e n t infliction of e m o tio n a l distress?"
" U n d e r th e C alifo rn ia w ills a tte s ta tio n s ta tu te , if th e b ro th e rs of th e
te s ta to r w it n e s s the will, is th e will valid?"
3. P re s e n t t h e legal q u e s t i o n first, f o l l o w e d b\- t h e law a n d t h e facts.
For Example "C an a claim for n e g lig e n t infliction of e m o tio n a l distress be

e s ta b lis h e d u n d e r Florida tort l a w w h e n a w itn e s s , not re la te d
to the victim , w i t n e s s e s a s e v e re be atin g of th e victim ?"
"Is a will valid u n d e r t h e California wills attestation statute if the brothers
of the te s ta to r w itn e s s the will?"
P r e s en t t h e l ule of law fn st, lol lowetl h\ t he legal q u e s t i o n a n d t h e facts.
For Example " U n d e r Florida's tort law , c an a claim for n e g lig e n t infliction of
e m o tio n a l distress be e s ta b lis h e d w h e n a w itn e s s , not re la te d
to th e victim, w it n e s s e s a s e v e re be atin g of th e victim ?"
" U n d e r t h e California w ills atte statio n statute, is a w ill valid if th e b ro th
ers of the te s ta to r w itn e s s the will?"
.Aii\’ of t h e s e s t r u c t u r e s n i a \ ’ be u se d, i h e r e a r e n o h a r d - a n d - f a s t r u l e s t h a t m a n d a t e
t h e s e l e ct i o n of o n e f o r m o \ ’e r a n o t h e r . l i o w e \ e r , t h e f o r m a t p r e s e n t e d in n u m b e r 4 in t h e
p r e c e d i n g list is r e c o m n i e n d e d . Itie f o r m u l a for t h i s f o r m a t is p r e s e n t e d in Hxhi bi t 11-1.
In s e n t e n c e f o r m , t h e f o r m u l a in lixhi bi t 1 f - f is, “ U n d e r thi s law, w h a t legal q u e s t i o n is
r ai s e d by t h e s e f act s ?” ' i h e r e a r e sever al r e a s o n s f or r e c o m m e n d i n g tliis f o r m a t :
1. it fol lows t h e s t a n d a r d legal a n a h ' si s f o r m a t , w h i c h p r o c e e d s f r o m t h e g e n e r a l to

t he sp e c i fi c — t h e g e n e ra l law fol l owed by a p p li ca t i on o f t h e law to t h e specific facts.
For Example In a c ourt brief or an in te ro ffice legal r e s e a r c h m e m o r a n d u m ,

the a pplicab le la w is pre se nted first, fo llo w ed b y th e applic a:ion
of the l a w to th e s pecific facts.
354
C H A P T E R 11 LEGAL ANALY SIS STATING THE ISSUE
E x h i b i t 7 7-7 Relevant Law Legal Q u e s t i o n K e y Facts.

R elevant Law T h e s p e c i f i c l a w t h a t g o v e r n s t h e d i s p u t e (e . g . , " U n d e r
I n d . C o d e § 2 9 - 1 - 5 - 5 , l e g a l e x e c u t i o n o f a w i l l . . ." )
Legal Q uestion T h e q u e s tio n c o n c e rn in g th e a p p lic a tio n of th e la w

g o v e r n i n g t h e d i s p u t e to t h e f a c t s o f t h e d i s p u t e
( e . g . , " Is a w i l l v a l i d l y e x e c u t e d . . ." )
Key Facts T h e l e g a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t f a c t s t h a t r a is e t h e l e g a l q u e s t i o n
o f h o w o r w h e t h e r th e la w g o v e r n in g th e d is p u te a p p lie s ;
f a c t s t h a t , if c h a n g e d , w o u l d c h a n g e o r a f f e c t t h e o u t c o m e
o f th e a p p lic a tio n o f th e la w (e .g ., " W h e n o n e o f th e
w i t n e s s e s is t h e b r o t h e r o f t h e d e c e a s e d . " ) Iâ
I h c . suggested l i i r m a t l o r l o r m u l a t i o n ot t h e i s sue p r e s e n t e d in F.xhibit 11-1

fol lows t h e s a m e f o r m a t : l h e g e n e r a l legal conte.xt is p r e s e n t e d tirst, l o l l o w e d b\'
t h e .specific facts t)f t h e di s p u t e .
P re s en t t h e r u l e first k>r r e a d a b i l i t y p u r p o s e s . A r e a d e r u n d e r s t a n d s t h e i m p o r
t a n c e t)f t h e fact s in a d i s p u t e in t h e c o n t e x t o f t h e law. If t h e facts ar e p r e s e n t e d
first a n d t h e l a w last, t h e r e a d e r m u s t r e r e a d t h e t act s t o p u t t h e m in t h e prt>per
legal c o n t e x t b e c a u s e th e legal c o n t e x t ( t h e law tliat ap p l i es) is n o t k n o w n u n t i l t h e
e n d of t he issue.
l h e last a n d p r o b a b k m o s t i m p o r t a n t r e a s o n is t hat it is usual K' cusicr to w rite

the issue lo llo w ing this fo n iu it. It is a m o s t e f f ec t i \ e tool w h e n c o n f r o n t i n g t h e
c o m p l e x c h a l l e n g e s p r e s e n t e d by mu l t i p l e - f a c t issues. .\l ult i| Te facts ar e gc nc r a l K'
e a s i e r to wr i t e a n d r ea d w h e n p l a c e d at t h e e n d ot a s e n t e n c e . 1V\' it. O n c e t h e
specific law a n d s i g n i f i c a n t o r ke\- lacts are ident i f i ed, it is m u c h e a s i e r to craft t h e
issi:e in t h e s e q u e n c e o f rele\ a n t law • legal q u e s t i o n • ke\ tacts.
F o r t h e s e r e a s o n s , t h e e x a m p l e s u se d t h r o u g h o u t IS cl p t e r a m i t h e text f o l l o w t he
relex a n t law + legal q u e s t i o n ♦ k e \ facts t o r ni a t .
IV. ISSUE—LAW COMPONENT

O b \ i ous l y \’o u m u s t i n c l u d e t h e rel e\' ant law in t h e s t a t e m e n t of t h e issue, b e c a u s e e \ ’e r \ ' case
i i n o K e s w h e t h e r o r h o w a l a w a p p l i e s in a speci fic fact s i t u a t i o n . If t h e law is not i n c l u d e d , \ o u
ar e a s k i n g t he r e a d e r to e i t h e r g u e s s o r i n t e r w h a t law a p p l i e s o r c o n d u c t r e s e a r c h t o f i nd t h e
a p p h c a b l e law. To a v o i d p o s s i b l e c o n t u s i o n aiitl save e x t r a woi'k, e st a bl i sh t h e r e l e\ ' ant legal
c o n t e x t at t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h e issue.
V o u ma\- p r e s e n t t h e l a w in a b r o a d c o n t e x t , s u c h as “c o r p o r a t i o n s , " o r a n a r r o w o n e ,
s u c h as a specific s e c t i o n o f a s t at u t e . I n c l u d e t h e specific i u r i s d i c t i o n a n d t h e a r e a o f law.
Forfxample (jurisdiction) (area)

Under N e w W a s h in g to n C o n tra c t l a w
Under N. W a s h . Code § 35-4 2 -7 K idnapping la w
l h e law c o m p o n e n t o f th e issue c o n si s t s o f e i t h e r e n a c t e d l a w o r case law. As d e f i n e d

in ( Chapt er I, t h e t e r m e iia eteil la w i n c l u d e s a i u ’ c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l a w o r rul e o r e n a c t m e n t of a
l e g i s l a t i \e h o d \ \ s u c h as a s t a t u t e , o r d i n a n c e , o r r e g u l a t i o n . C'use la w refers t o a n y c o u r t - m a d e
d o c t r i n e , law, rule, p r i n c i p l e , test, o r gui de.
355
A. Issue Based on Case Law

W h e n an issue is b a s e d o n ease law, d o not cite o n l y a si ngle ease, b e c a u s e th e case law is usual ly
b a s e d o n a g r o u p oi' b o d \ ' ol cases, a n d ge ner a l h' , n o si ngle c ase e i i c o n i p a s s e s t h e relev a nt law.
It is sul li cient to pr e s e n t t h e law w ith a s hor t i n t r o d u c t o r x p h r a s e that i n c l ud e s th e j u r i s d i c t i o n
a n d t h e a rea ot t h e law. I h e easiest l o r ni a t Iollows:
(jurisdiction) (area)
Under X e w Me x i co C o i ' p o r a t i o n law'
.Applvnig U t a h ’s FiiKitional d i s t r e s s law
. Accordi ng to Indi ana' s D o c t r i n e o f res ipsa l oc]uitur
In h g h t ot Câlifornia’s D e h n i t i o n ot c o n f i n e m e n t in
false i m p r i s o n m e n t a c t i on s
I I o w e \ ' er \' ou s t a t e it, t h e desci i p t i o n s h o u l d b e as f o c us e d a n d speci fic as poss i bl e. ' Ih e

goal is to inlorii't t h e re a d e r , as p r e c i se h ' as possible, ot t h e a r e a ot law i n \ ' o h e d in t h e d i s p u t e .
I h e r e l o r e , s u c h b r o a d s t at e n i e i i t s as, “ . Accordi ng to t h e (Color ado c ase la w . . . " o r “ U n d e r the
c a s e law . . . " are g e n e r a l l y not a cc e p t ab l e . S u c h st aterne iHs a r e so b r o a d as to be m e a n i n g l e s s .
I h e r e a d e r is gi\ ' en n o d i r e c t i o n abi ui t w h i c h a r e a o f t h e law is i n \ ' o l \ e d in t h e d i s p u te .
.Aloiig t h e s e s a m e lines, a specific d e s c r i p t i o n is p r e f e r a b l e to a b r o a d one.
For Example "U n d e r W y o m in g 's definition of oppressive c o n d u c t by m ajority s h a r e

holders . . . " is p re fe ra b le to "U n d e r W y o m in g corp o ra tio n l a w . . . . "
"A pplying Georgia's definition of con sid e ra tio n . . ." is p re fe ra b le to "A pplying
G eorgia c o n tra c t l a w . . . . "
"U n d e r California's la w of tres p as s to ch atte ls . . . " is p re fe ra b le to " U n d e r Cali
fornia tort l a w . , . . "
.Again, the ke\ is to be as specific a n d l o c u s e d as p o s s i b l e w h e n d e s c r i b i i i g t h e a r e a o f

t h e law. Ihe greatei' t h e specificit\' of t h e legal d e s c r i p t i o n , t h e b e t t e r t h e r e a d e r u n d e r s t a n d s
w h a t p r e c i s e h is at issue iii t h e d i s p u t e . If \ o u a r e usiiig a b r o a d d e s c r i p t i o n , s u c h as “t o r t s , "
reexai'i'iine the issue to deteri' iiine if a r i a r r o w e r focus, su c h as false i n i p r i s o n n ' i e n t , b a t t er y ,
a n d so o n , c a n be a p p l i e d .
B. Iss u e Based on E n a c te d Law

You ma \ ' preserit an issue b a s e d o n e n a c t e d law', s u c h as a c o n s t i t u t i o n a l p r o v i s i o n o r st at ut e,
ill se ve r a l ways. I h e v'ariinis w a \ s ii'iav' i n c l u d e a s pecific ci t at i on, a title, a n d / o r a d e s c r i p t i o n .
For Example (citation) (title)

"A c c o rd in g to N. W a s h . Code § 20-40-1, k id n a p p i n g . . . . "
(title p a r a p h r a s e d ) (d es criptio n)
" U n d e r t h e N e w W a s h in g to n kidnapping statute, w h ic h in clu d es in te n tt o co n fin e
as an e le m e n t of k id n a p p i n g . . . . "
(title p a r a p h r a s e d )
"In light of the provisions of the involuntary dissolution of c o rp o ra tio n s . . . "
(citation)
.. statute, N. W a s h . Corp. Code § 5 6 - 7 - 1 4 , . . . "
356
C H A P T E R 11 LEGAL A N A LY S IS : STATING THE ISSUE
I h c goal ol clearly, c o m p l e t e l y , anei c o n c i s c K' c o m m u n i c a t i n g t h e i s s u e g o \ c r n s t h e

c h o i e e o r c o m b i n a t i o n ol c h o i c e s sel ect ed. Ihis, in t m n, is gov e r n ee l b\' t h e c o mp l e x i t x' ol t h e
is s ue a n d t h e d e g r e e to w h i c h tiie d e s c r i p t i o n c o n v e y s t h e necessar\- i n l o r m a t i o n .
1. Enacted Law—Citations
is it n e c e s s a r y o r ads isable to i n c l u d e t h e citation in tlie s t a t e m e n t ol t h e issue? S o m e b e i i ex e
t h e i n c l u s i o n ol t h e c i t a t i on c l u t t e r s t h e issue, a r g u i n g tliat it is not n e c e s s a r \ ' b e c a u s e t h e
c i t a t i o n c a n b e d e t e r m i n e d by r e i e r r i n g to t h e a n a l y s i s s e c t i o n of t h e m e m o r a n d u m . O t l i e r s
b e l i e v e t h e i n c l us i on o l ' t h e c i t a t i o n is, if licit r e q u i r e d , at least adxi sabl e. il f o c u s e s t h e r e a d e r
o n t h e e x a c t s e c t i o n ol tiie law in d i s p u t e , a l l o w i n g tiie r e a d e r to i m m e d i a t e U ’ r e l er t o t ha t
s e c t i o n if necessar}' . in a law o t h c e , a s u b s e q u e n t r e s e a r c h e r wi i o is rex i e w i n g a m e m o f r o m
t h e m e m o hies ca n, b\' r e f e r r i n g t o t h e issue, lell wlial speci li c law is d i s c u s s e d in t h e ineiiio.
1^}' iiierel}’ r e i e r r i n g to t h e issue, tlie r e s e a r c h e r Ixiiows it t h e m e m o i i nc i K e s t h e s a m e l a w as
the law bei ng researched.
For Example A r e s e a r c h e r is c h e c k in g th e office m e m o ra n d u m files to d e te r m in e if a ny

re s e a r c h has b e e n c o n d u c te d on section 956.05(b) of the state's c o r p o r a
tion s tatute s. If the citation is in c lu d e d in th e issue, a m e re g la n c e at th e issue tells th e
r e s e a r c h e r if th e m em o involves the s a m e statute. The re s e a r c h e r's tim e is s av ed by not
h a vin g to re ad the body o f t h e m e m o to d e te rm in e if it is on point.
i n s o m e i n s t a n c e s , tiie l i r n i n i a \ ’ r e q u i r e o r p r e l e r tlie ¡ n c i u s i o n o r exciiisiciii o l t h e

c i t a t i o n in t h e issue, i n tlie c a s e o f a c o u r t brief, t h e c o u r t rul es nia\- d e t e r n i i n e tiie a n s w e r l o
t h a t q u e s t i o n , if tlie c li oice is y o u r s , d o w h a t w o r k s , i f t h e lengtli o r c o m p l e x i t y o f tlie i s sue
p r e c l u d e s us e ot t h e ci t at i on , t h e n leave it out.
K e e p in m i n d t h e l o l l o w i n g rul es w h e n u s i n g a c i t a t i on:
1. Us e t h e p r o p e r c i t a t i o n l o r m . A s u m m a r v ol c i t at i on l o r m is p r e s e n t e d in
C^liapter 8.
2. 1)o not use a c i t a t i on a lo n e . In a d d i t i o n to a ci t at i on , a title or d e s c r i p t i o n is n e c e s

s a r y to a d e q u a t e l y i n l o r m t h e r e a d e r ol t h e legal c o nt e x t ol llie issue.
For Example I n c o r r e c t : " U n d e r Ind. Code § 2 9-1 -5 -5 , does. . . ." W it h o u t a

d e sc rip tio n or title, one does not k n o w w h ic h a re a of th e l a w
is being c o n s id e re d T h e r e a d e r will be fo rc e d to stop a nd look up th e
citation unless he or she is fa m ilia r w ith th a t p a rtic u la r sec tion.
C o r r e c t : " U n d e r Ind. C ode § 2 9-1 -5 -5 , legal e x e c u tio n of a will, . . ." T h e
specific a re a of l a w c o v e re d in th e citation is provided.
2. Enacted Law—Titles and D escriptions

W h e r e a s c i t a t i on s s h o u l d n o t lie u s e d w i t h o u t a title o r d e s c r i p t i o n , you c a n u s e a title o r d e
s c r i p t i o n w i t h o u t a c i t a t i o n w h e n d e s c r i b i n g e n a c t e d law. T itle s and d e scrip tio n s provide
t h e a n u H i n l o f i n f o r m a t i o n s u t i i c i e n t t o i n f o r m tlie r e a d e r o f tlie legal c o n t e x t o f t h e issue.
A l t h o u g h t h e ci t at i on is n o t r e q u i r e d , its i n c l u s i o n m a y be adv isable for t h e r e a s o n s d i s c u s s e d
in s e c t i o n i \ ’.ii. 1.
title o f a c o n s t i t u t i o n a l s e c t i o n , staUile, a n d so o n, is a l i e a d i n g tliat p r o v i d e s t h e n a m e
by w h i c h a n act o r s e c t i o n is i n d i v i d u a l l y k n o w n . A d e s c r i p t i o n is a bri e l s u m m a r y o l t h e
r e l e \ a n t p o r t i o n s o f t h e act a n d m a y i n c k i d e p a r t o f t h e title.
357
For Example Exam ples o f titles:
Ind. Code § 29-1-5-2. W ritin g re q u ire d — w itn e s s e s , c o m p e te n c y , interest

Cal. Corp. Code § 1800. Verified com plaint; plaintiffs; grounds; inte rv entio n by
s h a re h o ld e r or creditor; e x e m p t corp o ra tio n s
E x a m p l e s o f d e s c rip tio n s :
"U n d e r the Indian a statute th a t go v ern s th e w riting and w itn e s s in g of w i l l s , . . . "

"In light o f t h e provisions o f t h e California c o rp o ra tio n statute th a t a p p lie s to l a w
suits a g ain s t c o rp o ra tio n s and interventio n by s h a r e h o l d e r s , . . . "
W h e n u s i n g a title o r d e s c r i p t i o n ot e n a c t e d law, t h e g u i d i n g p r i n c i p l e is w h e t h e r it
p n n ' i d e s t h e readei ' wi t h e n o u g h i n t o r n i a t i o n to k n o w t h e legal c o n t e x t o f t h e issue. I h e title
a l o n e ma \ ' p r o \ ide suffici ent i nt oi' i ii ation. I h e t e r ni s t r o n i t h e titles in t h e f o l l o w i n g e x a m p l e
a r e in italic.
For Example "A pplying the provisions of M a ry la n d 's k id n a p p i n g s t a t u t e , . . . "

" U n d e r C alifo rn ia ’s holographic wills s t a t u t e , . . . "
Occasi onal l }' , t h e title m a y r e q u i r e mo t l i l i ca f i o n . 'I'ou m a y n e e d to a d d o r de l e t e w o r d s

t o e n h a n c e cl a r i t \ a n d r e a d a h i l i t \ . In the f o l l o w i n g e x a m p l e s , t h e title is p r e s e n t e i l t o l l o w e d
h y t h e mot l i fi e d s t a t e n i e n t of t h e issue c o n t a i n i n g a d t i i t i o n a l l an g u a g e .
For Example Limitation of actions. (Title of N .M . Stat. Ann. § 4 1-1-2.) " U n d e r t h e lim-
ita tio n -o f-a c tio n provisions of N e w M e x ic o 's w ro n g fu l d e a th s t a t u t e , . . . "
H ologra phic wills; re q u ire m e n ts. (Title of Cal. Prob. C ode § 6111.) " A c c o r d in g to
the re q u ire m e n ts o f t h e holographic wills section of the California s t a t u t e s , . . . "
S o m e t i m e s it is n e c e s s a r \ ' to d e l e t e l a n g u a g e f r o m t h e title b e c a u s e it is n o t relex'ant to

t h e i s sue o r n e e d e d to e n h a n c e clarit}'. in t h e f o l l o wi n g e x a m p l e s , t he title is p r e s e n t e d first,
f o l l o w e d b\' t he m o d i f i c a t i o n c o n t a i n i n g f e wer w o r d s .
For Example V erified com plaint; plaintiffs; grounds; intervention by s h a r e h o ld e r or

creditor; e x e m p t corpora tions . (Title of Cal. Corp. Code § 1800.) " U n d e r t h e
California c o rp o ra tio n s tatute th at allo w s s h a re h o ld e r interventio n in dissolution
a ctio n s,. . ."
W ritin g re q u ire d — w itn e s s e s , c o m p e te n c y , interest. (Title of Ind. C o d e § 2 9-1 -5 -2 .)
"In light of the re q u ire m e n ts of the Indian a wills statute th a t g o v e r n s w itn e s s
c o m p e te n c y ,. . . "
C o m m e n t : In th e s e e x a m p le s , " e x e m p t corp o ra tio n s , interest" and o th e r w o r d s

w e r e d e le te d b e c a u s e th e s e te rm s , although includ ed in the title, are not r e le v a n t to the
issue in the case.
358
CHAPTER n LE G A L A N A L Y S I S : S T A T I N G THE IS SU E
If t h e title o t ' a s t a t u t e o r l aw d o e s n o t p r o \ ide th e r e q u i r e d i n t ' or n i a t i o n , o r if it is n e c e s

sar \ t o e m p h a s i z e a p a r t i c u l a r a s p e c t o r e l e m e n t of t h e s t a t u t e o r law, t h e u s e o f a d e s c r i p t i o n
ma \ ' b e a p p r o p r i a t e . In t h e f o l l o w i n g e x a m p l e s , t h e title is p r e s e n t e d h r s t , f' ollowed b\' a n
example.
For Example N u n c u p a tiv e wills. (Title of Ind. Code § 29-1-5-4.) " U n d e r t h e Indiana s ta t
ute providing th a t an oral will does not revoke an existing w ritte n w i l l , . . . "
Limitations of actions. (Title of N .M . Stat. Ann. § 4 1-1 -2 .) " U n d e r N e w M e x ic o 's
w ro n g fu l d e a t h s tatute, w h ic h re q u ire s th a t an action be b ro ught w ith in th re e
y e a rs of th e d a te of d e a t h , . . . "
Ski area sign re q u ire m e n ts . (Title of W a s h . Rev. Code § 70.117.010.) " U n d e r th e
W a s h in g to n s tatu te th a t re q u ire s a re so rt to post a notice at th e top of clos e d
tra ils ,..."
As m en tio n ed , there are no rules m a n d a t in g use o f a particular fo rm at w hen c o m

p o s i n g t h e legal c o m p o n e n t o f t h e i s sue , ' l h e l u i w r i t t e n r u l e, h o w e \ ' e r , is t o k e e p f o c u s e d
o n t h e goal:
Is t h e i n f ' o r m a t i o n i n c l u d e d suffici ent to p r o \ i d e t h e r e a d e r w i t h t h e speci fic legal

c o n t e x t o f t h e i.ssue?
Is t h e legal c o m p o n e n t o f t h e i s sue s t at e d n a r r ow K ' e n o u g h t h a t t h e r e a d e r will n o t

h a v e to l o o k e l s e w h e r e (in t h e a na l y s i s p o r t i o n o f t h e m e m o r a n d i m i o r in t h e s t a t
ut es ) to d e t e r m i n e w h a t p r e c i se a r e a o f t h e law is in d i s pu t e ^
C. F o rm a t o f th e L a w C o m p o n e n t
I h er e ar e t w o basi c f o r m a t s to c hiH' se f r o m w h e n p r e s e n t i n i ; t h e law co m p o n e n t of the
issue:
t . ' t h e j u r i s d i c t i o n o r c i t a t i on f o l l o w e d by t h e title o r t le s c r i p f i o n
2. l h e title o r d e s c r i p t i o n f o l l o we d by t h e j u r i s d i c t i o n o r citati(' n
For Example Ju risd ic tio n or citation fo llo w e d by title or description:
(jurisdictio n) (title)
" U n d e r th e N e w M e x i c o w r o n g fu l d e ath s t a t u t e s , . . . "
(jurisdictio n) (d es criptio n)
" U n d e r th e W a s h in g to n s tatute th a t re q u ire s a resort to post a notic e
a t t h e top of clos e d tra ils ___ "
(cita tio n ) (title)

" A c c o rd in g to Ind. Code § 3 5 -4 2 -3 -3 , k id n a p p i n g , . . . "
(c ita tio n ) (d es crip tio n )

" U n d e r Cal Civ. Proc. Code § 340, w h ic h e s ta b lish e s a o n e - y e a r s t a t
ute of limitations in s la n d e r c a s e s , . . . "
359
P A R T I I I T H F S P E C I F I C S OF L F G A L A N A L Y S I S
For Example Title or d e sc rip tio n fo llo w e d by jurisd iction or citation:
(title) Ijurisdiction)
"A ccording to the wrongful death provisions o fth e Colorado s ta tu te s ,.,
(d e s c rip tio n )
"In light o fth e requirement that drivers carry proof of insurance u n d e r ..
(jurisdiction)
. . California l a w , ..
(title) (citation)
U n d e r t h e k idn apping statute, Ind. C ode § 3 5 - 4 2 - 3 - 3 , . . . "
(d e s c rip tio n )
" U n d e r th e s tatute th a t re q u ire s skiers to ski w ithin th e ra n g e of th eir
a b il i t y . . . . "
(c ita tion)
" . . . ability, W a s h . Rev. Code § 7 0 . 1 1 7 . 0 2 0 , . . . "
V. ISSUE—QUESTION COMPONENT
I h c q u e s t i o n c o m p o n e n t is l eal ly w h a t t h e i ssue is a b o u t . W' hat legal q u e s t i o n is b e i n g rai sed
by t h e lacts? In t h e l o r n i u l a a d o p t e d in t h i s ch a p t e r , t h e qu estion co m p o n e n t l o l l ows t h e
law c o m p o n e n t . It m u s t d o t h e lollow ing:
I . Relat e to o r c o n c e r n t h e specific law n i c k u l e d m t h e law c o m p o n e n t
1. I’r e s ent t h e speci fic legal q u e s t i o n ra i se d by t h e facts
.V Link t h e law wi t h t h e facts
In t h e f o l l o w i n g e x a m p l e s , t h e q u e s t i o n c o m p o n e n t is i t al i c i / e d . I h e l i n k i n g v e r b s ar e
boldfaced.
For Example U n d e r N e w York la n d lo rd -ten a n t law, d o e s a landlord b r e a c h his duty

to provide a habitable residencew hen he fails to provide air conditioning?
U n d e r Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 340, w h ic h e s ta b lis h e s a o n e - y e a r s tatute of lim ita
tions in s la n d e r c a s e s , d i d the statute o f lim itations b e g i n to run w h e n th e
n e w s le tt e r w a s printed or w h e n th e n e w s le tt e r w a s distributed to the c us to m e rs ?
A c c o rd in g to the statute governing o ppressive c o nduc t, Cal. Corp. Code § 1800,
d o e s a m ajonty sh areh old er e n g a g e in o p p re ssiv e c o n d u c f w h e n he refuses
to issue dividends w h ile providing himself w ith bonu ses equal to tw ic e his salary?
U n d e r the C olorad o la w gov ern in g ski resorts, i s a re so rt r e s p o n s i b l e for
w arning skiers of h a z a rd o u s a re a s b e t w e e n ski runs?
N o t e that in ali t h e pi ' ecedi ng e x a mp l es , tlie q u e s t i o n specifically relates to t h e law i n c l u d e d

in t h e issue. Not e , also, that tlie q u e s t i o n links t h e law to t h e facts, ' i hi s c o n n e c t i o n m a y be cr e a t ed
t h r o u g h tiie use o f linking verbs, i h e r e a r e m a n y p o s s i b l e l i n k i n g \ e r b s , s uch as c o n stitu te ,
esiitblisli, a n d \ a r i o u s f o r m s o\ to he (e.g.. is, was), i n d r a f t i n g t hi s c o m p o n e n t o f t h e issue, the
360
C H A P T E R 11 LEGAL ANALYSIS: STATING THE ISSUE
m a i n t o c u s is to e ns u r e that the legal qu e s t i o n raised by t h e tacts is i ncl uded, hi o t h e r wo r d s , u n d e r

t h e l aw i n c l u d e d in t h e issue, is t h e preci se legal q u e s t i o n rai sed b y the tacts clea rly pr e s e n t e d ?
VI. ISSUE—SIGNIFICANT OR KEY FACTS COMPONENT

I h e last sc' ction ol t h e l o r n u i l a lor w r i t i n g a n issue is t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n of t h e si g n i f i ca n t o r
k ey facts. It is e spe c i a l l y i m p o r t a n t to k e e p in m i n d t h e g o a l s of' cl ari t y, c o m p l e t e n e s s , a n d
c o n c i s e n e s s , b e c a u s e c ases w i t h m u l t i p l e o r compl e. x t act s of t e n m a k e t h e s e g o a l s di t ti cult to
achieve. Ihe facts co m p o n e n t of the issu e m u s t d o t h e fol lowing:
f . Be r e a da b l e
2. I n c l u d e key facts l e g a l h relev a n t t o t h e law c o m p o n e n t
.^. Set t h e fact ual s c o p e ot t h e legal q i i e s t i o n
I h e tact s c o m p o n e n t s h o u l d n o t be so c o m p l e x t h a t t h e r e a d e r h a s t r o u b l e u n d e r s t a n d
i n g t h e issue.
It is alwax s pr e f e r a b l e to i n c l u d e all key facts. H o w e v e r , w h e n t h e r e a r e m u l t i p l e k e y facts,
it m a v be n e c es s a r v for th e s a k e of claritx to t a k e o t h e r st eps, s u c h as c a t e g o r i z i n g , co n c i e n s i n g ,
o r l i st in g t h e facts, l i x a m p l e s o f t h e key fact c i ) m p o n e n t follow.
For Example All key ta cts included:

A c c o rd in g to th e provisions of W a s h in g to n 's ski s afe ty act, d o e s a r e
sort ha ve a duty to w a r n skiers of ice h a za rd s on e x p e rt runs?
U n d e r the h o lo g rap h ic will statute, Colo. Rev. Stat. § 15-11-503, is a h o lo g rap h ic
will valid if It is h a n d w ritte n by a n e ig h b o r at the directio n of th e te stator, but not
w r itte n in the testator's h a n d w ritin g ?
C o m m e n t : N o te th a t the fa cts a re p re s e n te d c le a rly and in a logical s e q u e n c e .
For Example Key fa c ts c o n d e n s e d — s o m e includ ed and som e re fe rre d to generally:

U n d e r Ohio's c o rp o ra tio n la w governing o ppres siv e c o n d u c t, do e s o p
p ressive c o n d u c t o c c u r w h e n a m ajo rity s h a re h o ld e r of a clo s e ly held c o r p o r a
tion e n g a g e s in s e v e ra l a cts th a t m a y be ha rm ful to a m inority s h a re h o ld e r, such
as refusing to issue dividends and firing the m inority s h a r e h o ld e r from h e r posi
tion in the c o rp o ra tio n w ith o u t a s ta te d c a u s e?
U n d e r N e w York's constitution al provision pro hib iting cruel and u n u s u a l p u n is h
m ent, are conditions of c o n fin e m e n t cruel and unusual w h e n th e c o n fin e m e n t
m a y be u n h e a lth y in s e v e ra l w a y s , such as the total c alo ries s e rv e d e a c h inm ate
daily being less than the r e c o m m e n d e d m inim um and th e jail cells being k ep t at a
t e m p e r a t u r e u n d e r 60 d e g re e s in th e w in te r?
K ey fa cts p re s e n te d in g e n e r a l cate g o rie s:

U n d e r In d ian a c o rp o ra tio n law , d o e s o p p res siv e c o n d u c t o c c u r w h e n
a m ajority s h a re h o ld e r e n g a g e s in s e v e ra l a ction s th a t are b e n e fic ia l s o le ly to the
m ajority s h a re h o ld e r and d e trim e n ta l to th e inte re sts of th e m inority s h a re h o ld e rs ?
U n d e r A rizona's constitution al provision pro hib iting cruel and un u s u a l p u n is h
m ent, are c onditions of c o n fin e m e n t cruel and unusual w h e n th e y are unsan itary,
uns afe, and in violation of v arious he alth codes?
iA nin)iciit: T a k e c a r e t o a v o i d d i s t o r t i n g o r m i s s t a t i n g t h e issue w h e n c o n d e n s i n g (ir

c a t e g o r i z i n g t h e ke\- facts. In t h e p r e v i o u s t w o e x a m p l e s , a s s u m p t i o n s a re c o n t a i n e d in t h e
361
c a t e g o r i z a t i i i n s . As s t a t ed , tlic first i s s u e loi n u i l a t i o n a s s u m e s t h e a c t i o n s ot t h e ni a i or i t\ '

s h a r e h o l d e r a r e solely be nefi c i a l t o t h e m a j o r i t y s h a r e h o l d e r , a n d t h e s e c o n d a s s u m e s t h e
c o n d i t i o n s o f c o n f i n e m e n t a r e u n s a n i t a r \ ' . f o a \ ’o i d t h e s e p r o b l e m s , p r e s e n t m u l t i p l e o r
c o m p l e x facts in t h e f o r m o f a list.
For Example Key fa cts listed:

A c c o rd in g to th e provisions of C alifornia c o rp o ra tio n law, Cal. Corp.
Code § 1800, does o p p re s s iv e c o n d u c t o c c u r w h e n a m ajority share holde r:
1. Fires a m inority s h a r e h o ld e r fro m her job w it h o u t stating a reason;
2. R efuses to issue d ivid e n d s w h e n th e c o rp o ra tio n has a cas h surplus of more
th an 81,000,000 and th e r e a re no plan s for use o f t h e m o n e y by th e business;
3. Triples his s alary th r e e tim e s w ith in one y e a r and his s a la ry a lre a d y w a s tw ic e
the a m o u n t of sim ilarly situ ated e m p lo y e e s w h e n the ra is e s w e r e given; and
4. Gives him self a 510 0,00 0 c a s h bonu s w it h o u t a stated re a s o n for the bonus?
U n d e r the United S ta te s Constitutio n's prohibitions a g a in s t cruel and unusual
punishm ent, are c o n d itio n s of c o n fin e m e n t c ru el a nd unusual w h e n :
1. The food is nutritionally d e fic ie n t in th a t th e total c a lo rie s per m eal a re less
th an the re c o m m e n d e d m inim um ;
2. Jail cells d e sig n e d for one in m ate c u rre n tly hous e th re e inmates;
3. Jail cell t e m p e r a t u r e s a re rou tinely k ept b e lo w 60 d e g re e s in the w in te r; and
4. Jail cells are r o a c h - a nd a n t-in fe s te d ?
R e m e m b e r , it is al\va\ s best t o i ncl ui l e all key o r s i g n i t i c an t tacts in t h e fact c o m p o n e n t o f

t h e issue. II d o i n g so wo u l i l m a k e t h e issue u n r e a d a b l e o r l a c k i n g in c l a r i t \ , h o \ v e \ e r , e m p l o y
o n e ot t h e o p t i o n s p r e s e n t e d in t h e p r e c e i l i n g e x a m p l e s insteail.
VII. ETHICS—OBJECTIVELY STATING THE ISSUE

I h e p r e c e d i n g se c t i o n s d i s c u s s t h e s t r u c t u r e ot t h e issue. A n adi i i t i onal m a t t e r to k e e p in m i n d
w h e n c o m p o s i n g t h e issue is to s t at e t h e issue obiecli\' el\'. To State objectively m e a n s to
c o n s t r u c t o r wr i t e t h e issue in a m a n n e r t h a t t a i r h ’ a n d c o m p l e t e h - p r e s e n t s all t h e key tact s
wi tho ut favoring an outco me .
Rtile 3.3(a)( 1) ot’t h e M o d e l Ru l e s o f P r o f e s s i o n a l ( Ai n d u c t p r o \ ides t h a t a laws' er s h o u l d
n o t m a k e false s t a t e m e n t s o f l a w o r fact to a t r i b u n a l . B r o a d l y i n t e r p r e t e d , t hi s m e a n s t h a t
m a t t e r s s h o u l d n o t b e p r e s e n t e d in a m a n n e r t h a t ma\- m i s l e a d t h e c o u r t . I h e r e f o r e , w h e n
w r i t i n g for t h e cli ent, for t h e s i i p e r \ i s i n g a t t o r n e y , a n d o f t e n t o r t h e c o u r t , s t at e t h e i s sue
o b i e c t i \ ely so t h a t a c o n c l u s i o n is n o t s u g g e s t e d , a n d t h e r e a d e r is n o t mi sl e d, l h e p u r p o s e o f
legal a n a h sis, w h e t h e r in a l e t t e r t o t h e c l i e n t , a n office legal m e m o r a n d u m , o r a c o u r t brief,
is t o i n f o r m t h e r e a d e r ht)w t h e l a w a p p l i e s to a p a r t i c u l a r legal p r o b l e m , n o t to p r e j u d g e o r
d i s t o r t t h e l aw a n d its a p p l i c a t i o n .
I h e r e a r e se \ ’eral a d d i t i o n a l r e a s o n s win- \' ou s h o u l d st ate t h e issue obiecti\' ely:
1. A o n e - s i d e d p r e s e n t a t i o n of t h e fact s o r e l i m i n a t i o n of s o m e u n f a v o r a b l e key fact s

c an m i s l e a d t h e r e a d e r — a n d m a \ ' r esult in di s ast e r . Hi t her t he o p p o s i n g si de o r
t h e c o u r t will d i s c o \ ' e r a n d p o i n t o u t t h e m i s r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o r o m i s s i o n .
2. L ' l t i m a t e h ’, t h e law will g o \ ’e r n t h e issue, a n d u s u a l k n o a m o u n t o f c r e a t i v e p h r a s

ing will c h a n g e t h e o u t c o m e . I’r o\ ide t h e r e a d e r w i t h a n o b j e c t i v e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f
t he facts, a n d let \ ' o u r legal a r g u m e n t d o t h e p e r s u a d i n g .
3. If t h e issue is p r e s e n t e d in a b i a s e d o r s l a n t e d m a n n e r , t h e r e a d e r m a y q u e s t i o n t h e
362 a u t h o r ’s abilit\- a n d c r e d i bi l i t \ ' a n d d i s c o u n t t h e legal a r g u m e n t t hat follows.
C H A P T E R 11 LEGAL A N A LY S IS : STATING THE ISSUE
For Example "Applying Colorado's la w of conversion, does conversion o c c u r

w h e n an individual, w ith a k n o w n reputation as a thief and a bur
glary conviction, takes and uses his neighbor's electric s a w without permission?"
C o m m e n t: T h e s t a t e m e n t is not o b je c tiv e . T h e fa c ts re la ting to th e
individual's re p u ta tio n and c o n vic tio n are p rejudicial and n o n rele va n t. R e a d
ers will c o n c lu d e e it h e r th a t you do not k n o w w h a t th e re le v a n t fa c ts are or
th at you are trying to in flu e n c e th em .
R e sta te d o b jective ly: "A p p lyin g C olorado's l a w of c onve rs io n, does
conve rs io n o c c u r w h e n an individual ta k e s and uses his neighbor's ele ctric
s a w w ith o u t pe rm iss io n ? "
For Example " U n d e r t h e C o lo rad o ski act, d o e s a resort have a duty to w a r n

of an obv iously d a n g e ro u s ice hazard?"
C o m m e n t: In this e x a m p le , a s s u m e th e s e additional fa c ts are left out:
The s kier w a s a n o v ic e s k ie r using an e x p e r t ski run, and th e n a tu re and
d e g re e of the ice h a za rd ha ve , not has d e te rm in e d . T h e issue is not stated
ob je ctiv ely fo r tw o reasons:
1. The ice condition is d e s c r ib e d in such a w a y as to lead the re a d e r to a
conclus ion th a t it w a s d a n g e ro u s .
2. A key fa c t is om itted: A no v ice s kier w a s on an e x p e rt ski run. This f a c t
could very w e ll g o v e rn th e o u tc o m e of th e cas e. It m ay be th a t the ice
condition is h a z a rd o u s only to n o v ic e skiers, and since the run is an e x
pert run, the re s o r t d o e s not h a v e a duty to w a r n . Omission of this fa ct,
w h ic h will c o m e to light as th e c a s e pro gres se s , only s erv e s to m islead.
The re a d e r will c o n c lu d e e ith e r th a t you are misstating the question w ith
the intent to m is le a d or th a t you do not u n d e rs ta n d the law.
R e sta te d o b jective ly: "U n d e r the C olorad o Ski act, does a resort have
a dutv io 3 n o v ic e s kier oi ic e c o n d itio n s on an e x p e r t ski run?"
For Example " U n d e r th e U n ite d S ta te s C onstitution's prohibitions a g a in s t

c ruel and unu s u a l p u n is h m e n t, are conditions of c o n fin e m e n t
cruel and unusual w h e n th e con d itio n s a re u n s a n ita ry and unhealthy? "
C o m m e n t: T h e issue is s tated both pre ju d icia lly and too broadly. It is
prejudicial b e c a u s e it a s s u m e s th a t con d itio n s a re un s a n ita ry and unhealthy.
W h e t h e r the con d itio n s are u n s a n ita ry and u n h e a lth y is in dispute and has
yet to be d e cid e d . T h e s ta t e m e n t is to o bro ad b e c a u s e the fa cts c o n c e rn in g
j the c onditions a re not includ ed; in s te a d , re a d e r s are just given c o n clu s io n s
about the facts. W h a t are th e fa c t u a l con d itio n s th at a re a lle g ed ly un s a n ita ry
and unhealthy? A r e th e jail cells u n c le a n ? Is the w a t e r un s afe to drink?
R e sta te d o b jective ly: " U n d e r the U nited S ta te s Constitution's pro hib i
tions a g a in s t cruel and u n u s u a l p u n is h m e n t, are conditions of c o n fin e m e n t
cruel and unusual w h e n a j a i l c e l l i s c l e a n e d o n c e a month, its to ilet o v erflo w s
daily, and its tap w a t e r is not p o ta b le ? "
. \ K v a \ s st ate t h e issue o h i e e t i \ e l y . W’lien in d o u b t , e r r (in tiie side iif c o m p l e t e n e s s , i f

c o n d e n s i n ” o r c a t e g o r i z i n g key lact s re s u l t s in a b i a s e d o r distoi ' t ed s t a t e m e n t ol t h e t ] u e s t i o n ,
d o not c o n d e n s e o r c a t e g o r i / e . It is b e t t e r to h a v e a l o n g o r c o m p l i c a t e d i ssue s t a t e m e n t t i i a n
a loss o f c r e d i bi l it \ o r i n i s i e a d i n g t o r m u l a t i o n o t ' t h e issue. 363
In m a n v i n s t a n c e s , w h e n t h e q u e s t i o n is t o h e p r e s e n t e d t o a c o u r t in a c o u r t bri et, it
ma\- b e d e s i r a b l e t o s t at e t h e i ssue in a p e r s u a s i \ e m a m i e r . T h i s m a y b e a d v a n t a g e o u s w h e n
y o u a r e t r y i n g t o p e r s u a d e t h e c c u u l to a d o p t a legal p o s i t i o n o r c o n c e p t t h a t is f a v o r a b l e t o
t h e cl i ent . In l i ght o f t h e p r o v i s i o n s o f M o d e l Ru l e 3 . 3 ( a ) ( 1 ) , g r e a t c a r e m u s t b e t a k e n w h e n
c o n s t r u c t i n g a n i ssue p e r s u a s i v e k t o ax’o i d m i s l e a d i n g t h e c o u r t o r m i s r e p r e s e n t i n g t h e issue,
i h e e. xa mp l es p r e s e n t e d in t h i s s e c t i o n p o i n t o u t s o m e o f t h e h a z a r d s .
P e r s u a s i v e i s sue w r i t i n g is g e n e r a l l y a p p l i c a b l e in t h e c o u r t r o o m in o r a l a r g u m e n t or in
trial a n d a p p e l l a t e briefs. It usual l y is n o t a p p l i c a bl e in r e s e a r c h a n d w r i t i n g p r o j ec t s s u c h a s t h e
p r e p a r a t i o n o f a n i n t e r of f i ce legal m e m o r a n d u m . T h e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s i n v o l v e d in p e r s u a s i v e
i s sue w r i t i n g a n d p e r s u a s i v e w r i t i n g in g e n e r a l a r e a d d r e s s e d in C h a p t e r 18.
VIIL GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

T h e r e a r e se ve r al g e n e r a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s t o k e e p in m i n d w h e n d r a f t i n g a n issue.
A. N a m e
D o n o t i d e n t i f y p e o p l e o r e v e n t s spe c i f i c a l h' b\' n a m e . Specific n a m e s h a v e n o m e a n i n g to
r e a d e r s u n l e s s t h e y a r e f a m i l i a r w i t h t h e c a s e o r u n le s s t h e y h a v e r e a d t h e b o d y o f t h e m e m o
r a n d u m . A r e a d e r w h o r e t r i e \ e s a r e s e a r c h m e m o f r o m t h e otfice m e m o files p r o b a b l y will
n o t b e t a m i l i a r wi t h t h e n a m e s ot t h e p e o p l e o r e\' ents.
For Example I n c o r r e c t : U n d e r . . . , did o p p re s s iv e c o n d u c t o c c u r w h e n Tom H ard in

re fu s e d to issue a S3 dividend and g a v e h im se lf a S20,000 bonus?
C o r r e c t : U n d e r . . . , do e s o p p res siv e c o n d u c t o c c u r w h e n a m ajo rity s h a r e h o ld e r
r e fu s e s to issue dividends and gra nts him se lf a $20,000 bonus?
B. A p p ro a c h
W'rite t h e issue sev’eral t i me s . H a v e a n issue p a g e in \ ' o u r r e s e a r c h o u t l i n e o r m a t e r i a l , a n d
k e e p t h a t p a g e ne ar by. WTien \ o u t h i n k o f a wa\- to st ate t h e issue ( r e g a r d l e s s o f h o w b ro a d l y
o r p o o r h ’ p h r a s e d ) , w r i t e it d o w n o n t h e issue p a g e s o s o u r i d ea s a r e n o t lost.
1-A'en y o u r p o o r h ' d r a f t e d c o n s t r u c t i o n s o f t h e i ssue m a y c o n t a i n s o m e t h i n g val uabl e.
V o u m a \ ' u l t i m a t e l y h a v e a p a g e tull o f \ a r i o u s f o r m u l a t i o n s o f t h e issue. T h e final d r a l i m a y
r e q u i r e a c o m b i n a t i o n o f t h e \ a r i o u s initial dr a f t s, a n d h a v i n g t h e m all in o n e p l a c e m a y h e l p
\ ()u p u t t o g e t h e r t h a t c o m b i n a t i o n . See (Cha pt e r 13 t o r a d i s c u s s i o n o t t h e u s e ot a n o u t l i n e
w h e n d r a f t i n g t h e i ssue.
T h e f o l l o w i n g is a b a si c a p p r o a c h to d r a f t i n g a n issue:
1. Stat e t h e q u e s t i o n in t h e c o n t e x t o f t h e g e n e r a l a r e a o f law', fo r e x a m p l e , “W'as

t h e r e false i m p r i s o n m e n t ? ”
2. I d e n t i f y t h e speci fic l a w t h a t appli es.
3. l.i.st all t h e k e y facts.
4. P u t t h e e l e m e n t s in t h e s e q u e n c e r e c o m m e n d e d in t hi s ch a p t e r .
LAW Q UESTION FACTS
Under is when
In light o f did exist W'hen
A c c o r d i n g to does constitute when
Applying w as required when
Under does e stablish when

364
C H A P T E R 11 LEGAL AN A LY S IS ' STATING THE ISSUE
C. M u lt ip le Issues
S e p a r a t e t h e issues. It t h e researcli invol ves s ever al re l a t e d o r c o m p l e x q u e s t i o n s m ultiple
is s u e s — b r e a k t h e q u e s t i o n s i n t o i n d i v i d u a l issues. A d d r e s s i h c n i o n e at a t i me , a p p l \ iny l h e
p r i n c i p l e s p r e s e n t e d in thi s c h ap t e r , l l i e law a n d facts m a y b e c o m e c o n t u s e d ii ' \ ' ou a t t e m p t
t o w o r k o n m o r e t h a n o n e issue at a t i me .
IX. KEY POINTS CHECKLIST: S ta tin g the Issue

[ ) o n o t e x p e c t to a c c u r a t e h ' st at e t h e issue o n t h e hrs t d r a t l o r e a r k in t h e reseai' ch
a n d anal ys i s p ro c e s s . A b r o a d s t a t e m e n t m a y b e all y o u c a n d e v e l o p u n t i l y o u r e
s e a r c h a n d s t u d y s t a t u t o r y a n d ca se law. l h e key t ac t s m a y n o t e m e r g e u n t i l y o u h a \ e
s t u d i e d t h e case in d e p t h .
A l w a ys p r e p a r e a c o m p r e h e n s i v e o r n a r r o w' p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e issue. I n c l u d e in t h e
s t a t e m e n t o f t h e issue t h e spe ci t i c law, t h e legal q u e s t i o n , a n d t h e key tacts.
R e m e m b e r t h e f o r m a t r e c o m m e n d e d in t h i s c h a p t e r fo r p r e s e n t i n g t h e issue: r e l
e v a n t law + legal q u e s t i o n + key facts. It is e a s i e r to dr a f t t h e issue in t hi s f o r ma t .
If y o u get st u ck , start. If y o u c a n n o t s e e m to get s t a r t e d w r i t i n g , ju s t w r i t e a n y t h i n g

a b o u t t h e issue o n t h e issue p a g e — t h a t is, just st art.
S o m e t i m e s w h e n y o u are s t uc k , it m a y be t h a t y o u n e e d to s/op. Ot' ten t h e b r a i n

n e e d s t i m e to a s s i m i l a t e i n f o r m a t i o n , "^lake a b re a k . Sleep o n it. ' llie b r a i n will c o n
t i n u e to w o r k w h i l e you rest, a n d aft er y o u wa k e , it nia\' all tall i n t o place.
R e m e m b e r , t h e issLie is t h e legal q u e s t i o n in d i s p u t e in t h e ca se a n d s h o u l d b e p h r a s e d
as a q u e s t i o n , n o t a s t a t e m e n t , e v e n l h t ) u g h w h a t y o u are drat ' ti ng is tVequentl y c a l l ed
a n issue s t a t e m e n t .
X. APPLICATION
l h e lollow m g are t w o e x a m p l e s tlial i l l us t r a t e t h e p r m c i p l e s disLUssed m t h i s c h a p t e r, l . a d i
e x a m p l e i n c l u d e s a d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h o s e pri nc i p l es .
I h i s e x a m p l e is h a s e d o n t h e m e m o r a n d u m a s s i g n m e n t i n t r o d u c e d at t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h e
c h ap t e r , hi t h e a s s i g n m e n t , \ h i r y Strate, t h e legal as s i s t an t , h a s d e t e r m i n e d t h a t t h e tol l owi i i g
a r e t h e key tacts:
1. ' l h e st at e p o li c e w e r e a c t i n g in g o o d fai th w' hen t h e\ ' rel ied o n t h e vali dit \' ot t h e
search warrant.
2. l h e e v i d e n c e w a s s e i ze d p u r s u a n t t o t h e e x e c u t i o n o f t h e w a r r a n t .
3. l h e w a r r a n t w a s i m p r o p e r l y i s s u e d d u e t o j udi cial err or.
\ h i r \ ’s r e s e a r c h r e v ea l s t h a t t h e l a w g o v e r n i n g t h e i ssue is t h e s t a t e c o u r t ’s a d o p t i o n o\
t h e e x c l u s i o n a r y rule.
I h e r e a r e sever al w a y s t o f r a m e t h e issue:
a. “S h o u l d t h e e v i d e n c e b e s u p p r e s s e d ? ”
b. “ D o e s O r e g o n ' s e x c l u s i o n a r y r u l e r e q u i r e t h e s u p p r e s s i o n o f t h e e v i d e n c e ? ”
ConiDictit: B ot h issues (a) a n d (b) a r e t o o b r o a d , i h e y a r e e x a m p l e s o f a s h o r t h a n d s t a t e

m e n t o f t h e issue. Is sue (a) is so b r o a d l y p h r a s e d t h a t it is o f little v a l u e to t h e r e a d e r . W' ha t
law' is i n v o h e d ? W h a t facts? ' I hi s s t a t e n i e n t o f t h e issue c o u l d a p p l y to a n v ca s e i n v o l v i n g t h e
s u p p r e s s i o n o f e vi d e n c e . Is s u e (b) i n f o r m s t h e r e a d e r o f t h e a p p l i c a b l e law h u t o m i t s t h e facts
365
nccossar\- t o r r e s o l u t i o n (.il'the q u e s t i o n . Bot h i s sue s r e q u i r e a d d i t i o n a l r e a d i n g a n d r eseareli

to d e t e r n i i n e t h e l aw a n d laets i n v o k e d in tlie d i s p u t e in t h e ease.
e. “ D o e s O r e g o n ’s exel us i onar x' rLile reqLiire t h e s u p p r e s s i o n o t ' e \ i d e n e e s e i ze d hy

otlieials a c t i n g u p o n a w a r r a n t i n i p r o p e r k ' i s s u e d d u e to judi cial e r r o r ? ”
C.oiniiiciit: Ihi s c o n s t r u c t i o n o t ' t h e issue is n e i t h e r ohiectix e n o r c o m p l e t e . It l eaves o u t a

key fact: I h e ot l i c e r s w e r e a c t i n g in g o o d t'aith w h e n t h e y r e l i ed o n t h e \ a i i d i t y o f t h e w a r r a n t .
Iliis key fact is critical if t h e s t a t e ’s e x c l u s i o n a r y r u l e h a s a n e x c e p t i o n t h a t a l l ows t h e a d m i s
si on o f e s ' i d e n c e w h e n olfieers e x e c u t e a w a r r a n t in t h e g o o d - t a i t h belief th a t it is valid, f a i l u r e
to i n c l u d e thi s ke\' fact m i s l e a d s t h e r e a d e r a n d s l a n t s t h e q u e s t i o n in t a \ ' o r ot s u p p r e s s i o n .
c.1. “ U n d e r O r e g o n ’s e x c l u s i o n a r \ ' rule, m u s t e \ ' i d e n c e b e s u p p r e s s e d w h e n it is sei zed

by law e n k H ' ce n i en t officers a c t i n g in t h e g o o d - t a i t h b e l i ef in t h e \ a l i d i t \ ' ot a w a r
r a n t t h a t w a s i i n a l i d d u e to j udi cial e r r o r ? ”
(kviiiiu 'iit: I h i s s t a t e m e n t o f t h e i s su e is c o m p l e t e . It i d e n t i f i e s t h e law in q u e s t i o n ,

i n c l u d e s all t h e si g n i f i c a n t o r ke\' tact s necessar\- t o r r e s t ) l ut i on o f t h e issue, a n d i nk>r ni s t h e
r e a d e r o f w h a t legal q u e s t i o n m u s t b e r e s o k ed. It m e e t s t h e test p r e s e n t e d at t h e b e g i n n i n g
o f t h e c h a p t e r : D o e s th e r e a d e r , by r e a d i n g t h e i ssue a l o n e , k n o w w h a t specific t a c t ua l d i s p u t e
c o n c e r n i n g w h i c h law is i n v o l v e d in thi s case?
B. False Im p ris o n m e n t
Ihe cli ent, Steve, h a s a h i s t o r y ot’ r e s p i r a t or \ ' p r o b l e m s . Tom is an a c q u a i n t a n c e o t ' S t e s e w h o
is secr et l y j e al ous o f h i m . B o t h Steve a n d I'om \ i e for t h e a f f e c t i on s ot Ka r e n. O n e co l d wi n
ter e \ ’e n i n g , b e l o r e l e av i n g t o r a part}' at I'oni’s h o u s e , Ste\' e t o o k s o m e c o u g h m e d i c i n e tor
a c o l d h e h a d b e e n l i ghti ng. Aft e r a t ew d r i n k s at t h e part}', h e t oki I'om h e ilid n o t teel well
a n d wa n t e t l to he d o w n t o r a fiiiuLite. I'om d i r e c t e d h i m to a b a c k b e d r o o m . S t e \ e w e n t to the
r o o m a n d p r o mp t l }' tell i nt o a d e e p sleep.
I h e b e d r o o m h a d r e c e n t k ’ b e e n c o n v e r t e d f r o m a s t o r a g e r o o m . It h a d n o w i n d o w s , atui
l o i i i s h u t t h e he a t oft w h e n h e diti n o t h a \ e g u e s t s . I h e d o o r to t h e r o o m wa s Lisualk' kept
o p e n , so t h e r o o m s t a } e d r e a s o n a b k ' w a r m , it q u i c k k ' b e c a m e \er}- c ol d, h o w e \ e r , w h e t i t he
d o o r was sliut. 1 oni , k n o w i n g K a r e n was c o m i n g to t h e p a r t w c h e c k e d o n Steve. W' h e n he saw
tliat S t e \ e w a s asl eep, h e cl o s e d atui l o c k e d t h e b e d r o o m d o o r a n d d i d n o t tLirn o n tlie heat.
i i i r ee h o u r s l at er, a l t e r K a r e n left, lie u n l o c k e d tlie b e d r o o m d o o r . S t e \ e w o k e up
sl i o r t k' t l i e r e a f t e r a n d let't. H e w a s n o t a w a r e t h a t h e i i ad b e e n l o c k e d in tiie r o o m initil
i o n i t o l d h i m se ver a l d a \ s later. As a r e s u l t ot b e i n g in t h e c o l d r o o m , S t e \ e ' s c o l d got
w o r s e a n d h e i f i c u r r e d m e d i c a l e xpe f i se s. S t e v e w a n t s t o k t i o w if lie c a n s u e i ' o m l o r false
i m p r i s o n m e n t . A s s u m e tliis t o o k p l a c e in M o n t a n a . S o m e o f tlie wa} s t h e i s s u e cati be
f r a m e d a r e as fol lows:
a. “t ] a n Steve r e c o x e r his m e d i c a l e x p e n s e s ? ”
b. “ U n d e r M o n t a n a law, d i d false i m p r i s o n t i i e n t o c c u r ? "
(AViiiiiciit: ' i h e s e issLies a r e i n c o m p l e t e at i d t o o h r o a d k f r a m e d , i ssue (a) is o f little \ alue,

as it pr c n ides t h e r e a d e r w i t h n o i n t o r n i a t i o n o r g u i d a n c e as to tlie tact s ot t h e case. St at ed
this wa\', tlie i ssue c o u l d appl}' to a t l i o u s a n d cases. Is s u e (b) prox ides tiie law b u t n o tacts; it
t o o c o u l d appl}' to ail}' false i m p r i s o n m e f i t case. N e i t h e r i ssue c o m n i u n i c a t e s t h e speci fic law
o r facts in d i s p u t e ifi thi s case.
c. “ U n d e r Mc)iitana law, d o e s false i m p r i s o n m e n t o c c u r w h e n a n i n d i \ i du al nia-

liciousl}' l ocks a n o t h e r in a r o o m a n d t u r n s o f f t h e heat, i n t e n d i n g to c a u s e t he
person h a rm ? ”
366
C H A P T E R 11 LEGAL ANALY SIS: STATING THE ISSUE
C.oniniCHt: I hi s i s sue is i n e o i n p l e t e , i n a c e u r a t e , a n d n o t o h j e e t i \ e . It l e a v e s o u t t h e
c ri t i ca l k e y t ac t s t ha t Ste\ ' e w a s Linawai' e o t ' t h e c o n h n e n i e n t a n d w a s h a r m e d . It is i n a c
c u r a t e b e c a u s e it s t a t e s t h a t T o n i i n t e n d e d to c a u s e Ste\ ' e h a r m , a n d t h e r e a r e n o f a c t s t o
s u p p o r t thi s. It is n o t o b j e c t i v e b e c a u s e it c h a r a c t e r i z e s T o m as m a l i c i o u s a n d i n t e n d i n g
t o c a u s e h a r m . It is a p r e j u d i c i a l f o r n u i l a t i o i i o f t h e i s s u e t h a t m i s l e a d s t h e r e a d e r a n d is
slanted against Tom.
d. “ U n d e r . Mo n t an a t o r t law, d o e s false i m p r i s o n m e n t o c c u r w h e n a n indiv idual ,

s u f f e r i ng t r o m a c ol d, is l o c k e d in a r o o m w h i l e a s l ee p a n d is u n a w a r e o t t h e c o n
f m e m e n t , b u t suf fers p h y s i c a l h a r m as a r esult o f a w o r s e n i n g o f t h e c o l d d u e t o
the co nfin emen t?"
C.o iunicnt: I ssue (d) is c o m p l e t e . ' I h e r e a d e r is p r o v i d e d w i t h t h e q u e s t i o n , t h e law', a n d

all t h e ke\- t act s necessarv' t o d e t e r m i n e w h a t m u s t b e d e c i d e d u n d e r t h e law. W i t h o u t a n y
a d d i t i o n a l r e a d i n g o r r e s ea r c h , t h e r e a d e r is i n f o r m e d o f t h e specific legal a n d f a c t u a l c o n t e x t
ot t h e d i s p u t e .
Sum m ary
W r i t i n g t h e i ssue is o n e o f t h e m o s t cri t i cal t a s ks in t h e legal r e s e a r c h a n d w r i t i n g p r o c e s s . It
s h o u l d c o m m u n i c a t e w h a t is in d i s p u t e . I'o a c c o m p l i s h t h i s task, it is necessarv' t o c o mp l et e l y,
c onci s eh' , a n d clearly identifv t h e q u e s t i o n ti) be r e s o l v e d . A p o o r h ' c r a f t e d i s sue e i t h e r fails
t o i n f o r m b e c a u s e it is t o o b r o a d , o r m i s l e a d s b e c a u s e it a d d s i m p r o p e r i n f o r m a t i o n o r o m i t s
ci'itical i n f o r m a t i o n .
' i h e r e a r e t w o w a y s t o s t at e a n issue:
1. A s h o r t h a n d o r b r o a d s t a t e n i e n t p r e s e n t s t h e q u e s t i o n in t h e c o n t e x t o t t h e g e n
eral a r ea of’ t h e law.
2. A c o n i p r e h e n s i v e o r n a r r ow' s t a t e n i e n t p r e s e n t s t h e speci t i c q u e s t i o n in t h e c o n
text of t h e r e l e v a n t law a n d speci fic facts.
A b i ' o a d s t a t e n i e n t niav' b e a p p r o p r i a t e w h e n t h e r e a d e r s a r e t h o r o u g h l y f a m i l i a r w i t h
t h e case. ,A c o n i p r e h e n s i v e , o r nari'ovv, s t a t e n i e n t is t h e a p p r o p r i a t e f o r m f or u s e in r e s e a r c h
a n d w r i t i n g . It speci f i c a l h' i d e n t i f i e s all t h e e s s e n t i a l i n f o r m a t i o n n e c e s s a r y t o u n d e r s t a n d
a n d re s o l v e t h e d i s p ut e .
Several d i l ie r en t f o r m a t s m a v b e f o l l o w e d w h e n c r a f t i ng t h e issue, b u t t h e r e c o m m e n d e d
f o r m a t is as follows:
re l ev a n t l a w ^ q u e s t i o n kev' facts
I h e r e a r e s e v e r a l r e a s o n s f or t h i s r e c o m m e n d a t i o n . F i r s t , it f o l l o w s t h e s t a n d a r d l e ga l
a n a l y s i s f o r n i a t in w h i c h t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e l aw is f o l l o w e d b\' t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e
l a w t o t h e s p e c i f i c facts. S e c o n d , it is e a s i e r to d r a f t a n i s s u e w h e n t h e f a c t s a r e i n s e r t e d
at t h e e n d .
W ' h e n d r a f t i n g t h e issue, a l w a y s i n c l u d e t h e j u r i s d i c t i o n a n d a r e a o f t h e l aw in t h e l aw
c o m p o r i e n t . I h e q u e s t i o n p o r t i o n m u s t i n t r o d u c e t h e speci fic law' p r e s e n t e d in t h e law c o m
p o n e n t . I h e fact s e c t i o n s h o u l d p r e s e n t all kev' facts if pos s i b l e , a l t h o u g h it m a y s o m e t i m e s
b e n e c e s s a r y t o c a t e g o r i z e o r c o n d e n s e t h e kev' facts.
P r e s e n t t h e i ssue objectivelv' a n d d o n o t phi ase it so as to m i s l e a d t h e r e a d e r o r m i s r e p
r e s e n t t h e n a t u r e o f t h e d i s p u t e . A vvell -crafted issue m e e t s t h e f o l l o w i n g test: D o e s t h e r e a d e r ,
bv' r e a d i n g t h e issue a l o n e , k n o w w h a t spec i fi c legal q u e s t i o n , c o n c e r n i n g w h a t law, i n v o l v i n g
W'hat facts, is in d i s p u t e in t h e case?
367
Quick R eferences
B r o a d s t a t e m e n t o f issue 332 L i n k i n g \' er bs 360
Hl eme nt s 352 .Multiple issues 365
linacted law— citations 357 N a r r o w s t a t e m e n t o f issue 353
H n a c t e d l a w — titles a n d O b j e c t i v e s t a t e m e n t — issue 362

descriptions 357
Q u e s t i o n c o m p o n e n t o f issue 360
Hthics— obj e c t i v e s t a t e m e n t 362
Shorthantl statement 352
f acts c o m p o n e n t o t issue 361
Law c o m p o n e n t o f issue 359
I n te r n e t R esources
As ol t h e d a t e o l ' p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s text, t h e r e w e r e n o W e b sites d e d i c a t e d specifically to
s t a t i ng t h e issue. 1 i o w e v e r , b e c a u s e t h e t o p i c ot h o w t o st ate t h e issue is o l t e n d i s c u s s e d a l o n g
wi t h issue i de n t i f i c a t i o n , t h e sites m e n t i o n e d in t h e I n t e r n e t R e s o u r c e s s e c t i o n ot C h a p t e r 10
m a y p r o v e helpful. Also, t h e la\s' sc h o o l W’e b sites listed in (Chapt er 7, s e c t i o n 111.1), ot'ten have
mat eri al o n legal w r i t i n g t op i cs s u c h as s t a t i n g t h e issue.
Exercises
A d d i t i o n a l Íiíí ig n n i e n tí m r iiviiiluhlc on llic C o ii ii c M n lc . ASSIGNM ENTS

l h e st atut e is ( ieor gia Ciode ,-\nn. 1 I -2-31 I. t h e title ot the
ASSIGNMENT 1 statute is "I mp l i e d warrant )' : mer chantabi li t)' ; usage ol trade.”
P i s t i n g u i s h b e t w e e n a b r i ' a d a n d n a r r o w l o r m u l a t i o n ot l h e q u e s t i o n is w h e t h e r t h e r e is a n i m p l i e d w a r r a n t ) ' I'f
a n issue. P e s c r i b e t h e e l e m e n t s o f a n a r r o w s t a t e m e n t ot m e r c h a n t a b i l i t ) . In t h e l ol l o w i n g p r o b l e m s , ili alt a c o m p r e
a n issue. W h y is it i m p o r t a n t to p h r a s e an issue n a r r o w l y hensi \ ' c o r n a r r o w s t a t e m e n t ol t h e issue in t h e rele\ ant law
w h e n e n g a g e d in legal wr i t i ng? * legal q u e s t i o n • k e \ ' t a c t s l o r ma t ; lor t h e law c o n i p o n e n t ,
use t h e ( i e o r g i a statute. W h e n di' afting t h e law c o m p o n e n t ,
ASSIGNMENT 2 i n c l ud e t h e c i t at i o n a n d a r e l e \ a n t p o r t i o n o f t h e title.
I h e s t at ut e is Cal. Côrp. C o d e 1800. l h e title o f t h e st a t ut e Part A Alice p u r c h a s e s a n e w t o a s t e r f r o m a b o o t h at t he
is, “Verif ied c o m p l a i n t ; plaintilf; g r o u n d s ; i n t e r v e n t i o n b\' Ilea m a r k e t . I h e m a r k e t is o p e n y e a r r o u n d a n d t he s a m e
s h a r e h o ld e r or creditor; exemp t corporations.” Ihe statute p r o d u c t s ar e a l wa) s sol d at t h e b o o t h .
a p p l i es in d i s s o l u t i o n c a se s a n d i nc l ud e s t h e g r o u n d s for Part B Alice p u r c h a s e s a n e w t o a s t e r at a g a r a g e sale.
d i s s o h i ng a c o r p o r a t i o n , l h e d i s pu t e i i n o l v i n g t h i s c o r p o Part C Alice b e c o m e s ill I r o m a soft d r i n k p u r c h a s e d at a
r a t i o n s t a t u t e is w h e t h e r t h e r e are g r o u n d s lor d i s s o l u t i o n local f a st-f tiod r e s t a u r a n t .
o f t h e c or p o r at i ci n . Part D Alice, w h i l e s h o p p i n g at t h e Ilea m a r k e t , p u r c h a s e s
Part A Dr a f t t h e l aw c o m p o n e n t o f t h e issue, i n c l u d i n g t h e a soft d r i n k t r o m a \ ' e n d o r at t h e m a r k e t . She b e c o m e s sick
r e l ev a n t p o r t i o n o f t h e title. from the drink.
Part B Dr a f t t h e law c o m p o n e n t o f t h e issue a n d i n c l u d e ASSIGNMENT 4
t h e r e l e \ a n t p o r t i o n o f t h e title a n d t h e cit ati on.
P e r f o r m a s s i g n m e n t 3 u s i n g a d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e title w h e n
Part C Draft t h e law c o m p o n e n t o f t h e issue usi ng a d e s c r i p
d r a f t i n g t h e law c o m p o n e n t , r a t h e r t h a n a relex ant p o r t i o n
t i o n t ha t f o c u s e s o n a n e l e m e n t o f t h e statute, l h e c l e m e n t
o f t h e title.
in q u e s t i o n is t h e r e q u i r e m e n t o f s h a r e h o l d e r d e a d l o c k .
A s s u m e t h e s t a t u t e p r o \ ’ides that a c o u r t ma \ ' d i s s o K e a ASSIGNM ENTS
c o r p o r a t i o n in t h e ev e n t o f a di s pu t e a m o n g t h e s h a r e h o l d F e r k i r m a s s i g n m e n t 3 u s i n g y o u r st a t e c o m m e r c i a l c o d e
ers o n l y it t h e r e is s h a r e h o l d e r d e a d l o c k . st at u t e g o v e r n i n g t h e w a r r a n t y o f m e r c h a n t a b i l i t y a n d t h e
Part D To t h e a n s w e r in p a r t C, a d d t h e s t a t u t o r y c i t at i on . sale ol gt)ods.
ASSIGNMENT 6 Part A
11 1 the iollowing p roblems: Key l-acts: . \ n indis i du ai o n a radio talk s h o w states that
all t h e t o w n ’s p s y c h i a t r i s t s a r e iVaLids.
Draft a s t i o r t h a n d o r b r o a d s t a t e m e n t o l ' t h e issue.
Question: Is t h e s t a t e m e n t “c o n c e r n i n g ” t h e p l a i n t i f f (a
Draft a e o m p r e h e i i s i \ ’e oi' n a r r o w s t a t e m e n t ol’ tlie
local p s \ c h i a t r i s t ) ?
i ssue in tlie r e i e \ a n t l a w - legal q u e s t i o n " key
I.aw: . As s u me t h e l aw ot s l a n d e r in \ ' o u r j u r i s d i c t i o n is
laet s t o r m a t . i-or tlie law c o m p o n e n t in p i ' o b i e m s .\
ca se l a w (coLirt m a d e ) a n d o n e ol t h e e l e m e n t s is t h a t t h e
t h r o u g l i C, u s e e i t h e r t h e r e l e\ ’aiit s e c t i o n o f y o u r
s t a t e m e n t m u s t c o n c e r n t h e plaintili'.
state's p r o b a t e c o d e o r N e w W a s h , i^rob. Côde § 60,
i ' Ace pt i on i V r t a i n i i i g to H o l o g r a p h i c Wil ls. A s s u m e Part I?
thi s StatLite a p p l i e s to all t h e fact sitLiatio iis p r e s e n t e d Key Facts: L'se t h e s a m e facts as in t h e p r e c e d i n g p r o b
in p r o b l e m s A t h r o u g h C . Fcir eacli p r o b l e m , drat't l e m, w i t h t h e a d d i t i o n a l fact t ha t t h e p l a i nt i f l is t h e o n l y
t h e i s sue twice. O n e d r a i t s l i o u l d c o n t a i n tiie title o r p sy c h i a t r i s t in t h e t o w n .
a d e s c r i p t i o n o f tlie title. O n e d ra f t s l i o u l d c o n t a i n Question: S a m e as in p a r t A.
t h e title o r d e s c r i p t i o n a n d t h e c i t a t i o n . Law: S a m e as in p a r t A.
Part A ASSIGNM ENTS

Key Facts: will is i i a n d w r i t t e n . C' )ne-lialf is in tiie t e s t a R e d r a f t t he l o l l o w i n g i s s u e s in t h e f o r m a t p r e s e n t e d in
t o r ’s h a n d w r i t i n g , a n d tlie o t h e r li aif is in tlie h a n d w r i t i n g this c hapt e r.
ot a wi t nes s , i h e will is p r o p e r l \ - w i t n e s s e d . Part .A t ; a n a b v s t a n d e r w h o wi t n e s se s t h e d e a t h o f a v i c t i m
Question: is t h e will \ aiid? I r o m t h r e e b l o c k s awa\- r e c o s e r for n e g l i g e n t i n t l i c t i o n o f
e m o t i o n a l d i s t r e s s u n d e r O h i o law?
Part H Part H Do e s o p p r e s s i v e c o n d u c t o c c u r , a c c o r d i n g t o t h e
Key Facts: A will is l i a n d w r i t t en . O n e - i i a l t is in tlie testa
prov i sions of t he '1 e.xas O o r p o r a t i o n Clode, w h e n a m a j o r i t y
t o r ’s l i a n d w r i t i n g , a i ul t h e o t i i e r ha l t is in tiie h a n d w r i t i n g
s h a r e h o l d e r r el u s e s to issue dis i d e n d s , t r i p l e s hi s sal ary,
ol a witness, it is w i t n e s s e d by tl iree wi t nes ses, t w o ol w lioni
a n d g r a n t s h i ms e l f e x c e s s i \ ’e b o n u s e s ?
will i nh e r i t Linder tlie will.
Part C ilie issue is w h e t h e r a n e w s p a p e r t h a t p L i b l i s h e s a n
Question: is t h e will \ alid?
article in d i c a t i n g t h at I' om S mi t h has c r i m i n a l c o n n e c t i o n s
lias c o m m i t t e d libel a c c o r d i n g to F l o r i d a t o r t law.
I'art C
I’art I) Do law enlorcenient oliicers c o m m i t a b a t t e r y w h e n ,
Key Facts; A will is h a n d w r i U c n . O n e h.'.lf is in t h e t e s t a
w liilc m a k in g .i l awful a r r e s t , t h e y e n co Lin te r r e s i s t a n c e ,
t o r ’s h a n d w r i t i n g , a n d t h e otliei' hall is in t h e l i a n d w r i t i n g
Lise force to o w rc o m e t ha t r e s i s t an c e , a n d c o n t i n u e to use
ol a w i t n e s s . .\ w i t n e s s , at tl ie c i i r e c t i o n ol tlie t e s t a t o r ,
force after t h e r e s i s t a n c e ceases?
si gned t he t e s t a t o r ’s n a m e , i h e will wa s p r o p e r h ' w it nessed.
Question: is t h e will vali d? FOR FURTHER READING
ASSIGNM ENT? Ra\', M a r \ B a r n a r d , a n d B a r b a r a |. C o x . B e y o n d tlic Busies.
St. Paul, M N : West , 1991.
In t h e l o l l o w i n g p r o b l e m s :
Ihis text p r e s e n t s a n e x c e l l e n t a n d e x p a n d e d d i s c u s
Draft a s h o r t h a n d o r b r o a d s t a t e m e n t o f t h e i s sLi e.
si on o f t h e rel e xa nt law i legal q u e s t i o n + k e y facts f o r m a t
D r a l t a c o m p r e h e n s i \ ' e o r n a r r o w s t a t e m e n t ol tlie r e c o m m e n d e d in thi s c h a p t e r .
issue ill t h e r e l e \ a n t l aw • legal q u e s t i o n ’ ke \ facts
lormat.
The available C o u rs e M a te for this text has an interactive eBook and interactive learning
tools, including flash cards, quizzes, and more. To learn more aboutthis resource and access
CourseMate free demo C ours eM a te resources, go to www.cengagebrain.com, and search forthis book.
To access C o u rs e M a te materials that you have purchased, go to login.cengagebrain.com.
Case Lau; Analysis— Is a Case On Point?
“ I h a t h u m h a s c h c a t c d u s t o r t h e last t i m e , ” D a v i d S i m m s s a i d a s h e w a l k e d o u t t h e o t h c e d o o r .
D a v i d S i m m s a n d h i s b r o t h e r , D o n , h a d i ust h n i s h e d t h e i r i ni t i a l i n t e r v i e w w i t h . \ls. B o o t h ,
Outline
t h e a t t o r n e y w h o w o u l d h a n d l e t h e i r ease. T h e i r tale w a s o n e ol fina nc i a l a b u s e hv t he i r o l d e r I. I n t r o d u c t i on
b r o t h e r , Steve. II. Oe f i n i t i on — O n Point
F h e i r l a t h e r , D i l h e r t S i m m s , d i e d i n [ D e c e m b e r 1 9 9 7 a n d Iefi h i s p l u m b i n g b u s i n e s s ,
III. Oti Point — Iiiiportaiice
S i m m s I’l i m i b i n g , Inc. , t o hi s t h r e e s o n s - St e ve , D o n , a n d D a v i d . St e\ ' e, w h o h a d h e e n r i ui -
I\'. n e t e r t i i i i i j n g If a (i ase Is titi
n i n g t h e b u s i n e s s s i n c e ls)9.'i, w a s Iefi 52 p e r c e n t o t t h e s t o c k . D a v i d a r i d D o n , w h o h a d n e \ e r
Point
w o r k e d at S i m n i s I’l u m b i n g a n d w e r e e m p l o y e d in o t h e r o c c u p a t i o n s , w e r e e a c h Iefi 21 p e r c e n t .
\ ’. Kev' Points Checklist: Is a Case
. \ s t h e m a j o r i t y .shareholder, S t e \ e c o m p l e t e l y c o n t r o l s t he b us ines s. To date, he r etuses
O n Point?
t o i s s u e s t o c k d i v i d e n d s e \ e n t h o u g h t h e c o r p o r a t i o n h a s a n a c c u m u l a t e d c a s h s i n p l u s ol
S.^l)(l,()l)0 H e h a s g i v e n h m i s e l t t h r e e v e r \ ' l a r g e s a l a r y i n c r e a s e s a n d s e v e r a l c a s h b o n u s e s s i n c e \' I . Applicatjoii
hi s l a t h e r ' s d f a t h . W ' h e n q u e s t i o n e d h y D a v i d a n d D o n a b o u t s t o c k d i v i d e n d s , h e tells t h e m ,
" Y o u d o n ' t w o r k i n t h e b u s i n e s s . You d o n ' t d e s e r v e a n v m o n e \ ' o u t ol it. It v o u w a n t a n \ n K ' n i ' e
Mi u ' r e g o i n g t o h a \ e l o w o r k al t h e s t o r e , e v e r v d a v, j ust l i ke I do. ”
Learning Obiectives
. \ f i e r t h i s c o n \ e r s ; \ t i o n , D a v i d a n d D o n c o n s u l t e d t h e s u p e r v i s i n g a t t o r n e y . \ls. B o o t h .
I h e v s e e k r e d r e s s t o r t h e w r o n g t h e y leel t h e i r b r o t h e r h a s c o m m i t t e d i n r e l u s i n g t o i s s u e After conipl eti ii g this chapter, you
di\ idends, s ho u l d u n d e r s t a n d :
I h e p a r a l e g a l t a s k , a s s i g n e d h y , \ls. B o o t h , is t o f i n d t h e a p p l i c a b l e s t a t u t e a n d t h e l e a d • W'hat on p oin t m e a n s in rel ati on
i n g c a s e o n p o i n t in t h e i u r i s d i c t i o n . I h e s t a t u t e , § 9 6 - 2 5 - 1 6 ot t h e B u s i n e s s ( C o r p o r a t i o n .Act, to case law
p r o v i d e s t h,U ,\ c o u r t m , \ y o r d e r t h e U q u i d a t i o n o t corpor.xtion w h e n r\v,\ioriU s h . w e h o l d c v
I h e role a nd i m p o r t a n c e o f a case
h a s e n g a g e d in o p p r e s s i v e c o n d u c t . Ih e statute, however, do e s not define what c on stitutes
b e i n g o n p o i n t in legal analysis
oppressiv e e o ndu ct .
I h e h a r t ! p a r i o f t h e a s s i g n m e n t is l o c a t i n g a e a s e o n p o i n t i n t h e j u r i s t l i e l i o n t h a t e l el i nes • 1l ow to d e t e r m i n e if a case is on
o r p r o v i d e s t h e e l e m e n t s o l ' o p p r e s s i v e c o n d u c t , .-\fter a n e x t e n s i v e s e a r c h , t h e p a r a l e g a l l oc. i t es point
o n b o n e c a s e d e a l i n g w i t h o p p r e s s i v e c o n d u c t , K a r l r. H c r a U . In t h i s c a s e , a h u s b a n d a n d wi l e
o w n e d a s m a l l c o r p o r a t i o n in w h i c h t h e h u s b a n d o w n e d 7 5 p e r c e n t o f t h e s t o c k a n d t h e wi l e
o w n e d 25 p e r c e n t . W h e n t h e \ d i v o r c e d , h e f i r e d h e r f r o m h e r s a l a r i e d p o s i t i o n ol b o o k k e e p e r ,
l o o k a w a \ h e r c o m p a i u ' car , a n d r e l u s e d t o i s s u e s t o c k d i v i d e n d s . Ihe c o m p a n v u a s ver\
p r o f i t a b l e , h a d a l a r g e i . as h s u r p l u s , a n d w a s c l e a r l y i n a f i n a n c i a l p i i s i t i o n t o i s s u e d i v i d e n i l s .
Afier t h e div orc e, t he h u s b a n d gave h i m s e l f a hefiy s a l a ry increase. I h e c o u r t held thal he h ad
e n g a g e d in o p p r e s s i v e c o n d u c i in f r e e z i n g h i s w i t e o u t o f t h e c o r p o r a t i o n . It d e f i n e d o p p r a s iw
c o u iU u l as " a n y u n t a i r o r f r a u d u l e n t a c t b y a m a j o r i t y s h a r e h o l d e r t h a t i n u r e s t o t h e b e n e f i t ol
t h e m a i o r i t y a n d to t he d e t r i m e n t ol t h e minority."
L p ol l f i n d i n g t h i s c a s e , s e v e r a l q u e s t i o n s r u n i h r o u g h t h e p a r a l e g a l ’s m i n d . Is i h i s c a s e
o n p o i n l ? H o w d o e s o n e d e t e r m i n e it a c a s e is o n p o i n t ? W h v d o e s it m a t t e r ?
371
P A R T III TH E S P E C I F I C S OF L E G A L A N A L Y S I S
Legal r e s e a r c h , a na l y s i s , a n d w r i t i n g ar e all re l at e d a n d a r e o ft en p a r t o t a s i n g l e pr oc e s s .
Re se a r c h l oca t e s t h e law, a n a l y s i s d e t e r m i n e s h o w t h e law appli es, a n d legal w r i t i n g a s s e m b l e s
a n d i n t e y r a t e s t h e res ul t s i nt o a usa bl e l o r m .
l h e l o c u s o f t hi s c h a p t e r is o n t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f case law to a legal c]uestion. It c o \ ers
case law ana lysis--th e a n a h tical p r o c e s s \-ou e n g a g e in to d e t e r n i i n e if a n d h o w the deci
si on in a c o u r t o p i n i o n e i t h e r g o \ e r n s o r al i ect s t h e o u t c o m e ot a c l i e n t ’s case. .A case tliat
g o v e r n s o r affects t h e outciMiie o f a cl i e nt ' s cas e is c o m m o n k r e f e r r e d t o as b e i n g “o n p o i n t . "
t h r o u g h o u t t hi s c h a p t e r , r e f e r e n c e is m a d e to si n g l e issues a n d si ng l e r ul e s of l aw o r
legal p r i n c i p l e s w h e n d i s c u s s i n g coiu' t o p i n i o n s a n d c l i e n t s ’ cases, l h e f o c u s is o n h o w to
d e t e r m i n e if a si n g l e issue, a d d r e s s e d in a c o u r t o p i n i o n , is o n p o i n t a n d , t h e r e f o r e , nia\- al
feet o r g o v e r n a n issue in a c l i e n t ’s case. Al wa \ ' s h e a w a r e t ha t t h e r e a r e o f t e n m u l t i p l e issues
a n d legal r ul es o r p r i n c i p l e s inx’o h ed in c o u r t o p i n i o n s , s o m e of w h i c h m a y b e o n p o i n t a n d ,
t h e r e f o re , g o \ e r n t h e t ) u t c o n i e o f ' a n issue in t h e c l i e n t ’s case, a n d s o m e o f w h i c h ma\- not
b e o n p o i n t . W’h e n d e t e r m i n i n g it a n o p i n i o n is o n p o i n t , tol k)w t h e s t ep s d i s c u s s e d in thi s
c h a p t e r s e p a r a t e k for ea c h issue in a c l i e n t ’s case.
l h e c h a p t e r o p e n s w i t h a d e fi n i t i o n o f t h e t e r m ou p o in t , f ol l o w e d by a d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e
i n i p o r t a n c e ot l o c a t i n g a c a se o n p o i n t a n d t h e p r o c e s s of d e t e r m i n i n g it a c a s e is o n p o i n t .
II. D E F I N I T I O N — O N P O I N T
t h r o u g h o u t t hi s c h a p t e r, t h e t e r m on p o in t is u s e d to d e s c r i b e a c o u r t o p i n i o n t hat ap p l i es
to t h e c l i e n t ’s case. W' hat d o "on p o i n t " a n d ‘‘a p p l i es to t h e c l i e n t ’s c a s e ” m e a n ? .A c ase is on
point if t h e s i mi l a r i t y b e t w e e n t h e key facts a n d t h e r u l e o f law o r legal p r i n c i p l e o f t h e c o u r t
o p i n i o n a n d t h o s e o f t h e client's c a se is sut i i ci ent for t h e coin' t o p i n i o n to g o v e r n o r p n n i d e
g u i d a n c e to a lat er c o u r t in d e c i d i n g t h e oLit come ot t h e c l i e n t ’s case. In o t h e r w o r d s, tloes
t he c o m t o p i n i o n g o \ e r n o r guii le t he l e s o l u t i o n ol an issue in t h e c l i e n t ’s case? Is t h e coiu' t
o p i n i o n p r e c e d e n t ? 11 a case is o n p o i n t , it is p r e c e d e n t . I he t e r m s on p o in t a n d pi'cicilcnt are
oft en u s e d i n t e r c h a n g e ab h ' .
III. O N P O I N T — I M P O R T A N C E
Before d i s c u s s i n g t h e p r o c e s s i n \ - o h e d in d e t e r m i n i n g if a c ase is o n p o i n t , it is hel pf ul to
u n d e r s t a n d w h \ ' \ o u m u s t e n g a g e in t h e p r o c e s s ot f i n d i n g past c o u r t d e c i s i o n s that atfect t h e
c l i en t ’s case. W hy is it i m p o r t a n t ?
As d i s c u s s e d in C h a p t e r 1. case law is a m a i o r s o u r c e o f law in t h e legal s \ s t e m . t h r o u g h
case law, c o u r t s c r e a t e l aw a n d i n t e r p r e t t h e l a n g u a g e o f c o n s t i t u t i o n s , legi sl ati ve acts, a n d
r e g u l a t i o n s , l h e d e t e r n i i n a t i o n o f w h e t h e r a c a se is o n p o i n t is i n i p o r t a n t b e c a u s e of t w o
d o c t r i n e s c o v e r e d in ( T i a p t e r 1: p r e c e d e n t a n d st ar e decisis, l h e d o c t r i n e s of p r e c e d e n t a n d
st a r e de c i s i s g o v e r n a n d g u i d e t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f c a se l aw a n d t h e r e b y p n n i d e un i f or ni i t\ -
a n d c o n s i s t e n c ) ’ in t h e c a s e l aw s y s t e m. ' l h e \ ' h e l p m a k e t h e law m o r e p r e d i c t a b l e . .A brief'
re v i si t i n g o f t he s e d o c t r i n e s is helpf ul in o b t a i n i n g a n u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e p r o c e s s inx o l v ed
in d e t e r m i n i n g w h e t h e r a c a se is o n p o i n t .
A .P re c e d e n t
Precedent is a n e a r l i e r coiu' t d e c i s i o n o n a n issue t h a t g o v e r n s (ir g u i d e s a s u b s e q u e n t coLirt
in its d e t e r n i i n a t i o n o f an i d e n t i ca l o r s i m i l a r issue b a s e d o n i de n t i c al o r s i m i l a r k e \ facts. '1 hi s
c h a p t e r i d en t i f i e s t h e s t e p s in\ -oh' ed in d e t e r m i n i n g w h e n a c ase nia\- b e e i t h e r m a n d a t o r ) ' o r
p e rs u a s i \ ' e p r e c e d e n t . A c a s e is p r e c e d e n t ( o n p o i n t ) if t h e r e is a sufficient si mi l a ri t ) ' b e t w e e n
t h e k e \ ’ t act s a n d r u l e of law o r legal p r i n c i p l e ot t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n a n d t h e m a t t e r b e f o r e t h e
sub se qu en t court.
372
C H A P T E R 12 C A S E L A W A N A L Y S I S — IS A C A S E O N P O I N T ?
For Example T he state colle ctio n s statute pro vid e s th a t efforts to c o lle c t p a y m e n t for
a debt m ust be m a d e in a r e a s o n a b le m an ner. The s tatute does not d e fin e
" r e a s o n a b le ." In the c a s e of M a r k 1/. C ollections, Inc., the s u p re m e c o u rt o f t h e s ta te held
th a t It is not r e a s o n a b le , w ith m the m e a n in g of the c o lle ctio n s tatute, for a bill c o lle c to r
to m a k e m ore th an one t e le p h o n e cal! a day to a debtor's re s id e n c e , nor is it r e a s o n a b le
to m a k e calls b e fo re sunrise or a fte r sunset.
T h e fa c ts o f t h e c a s e w e r e t h a t t h e c o lle c to r w a s m aking s ev en calls a day, s o m e
of w h ic h w e r e a fte r sunset.
T h e fa c ts of the client's c a s e are th a t a bill c o lle c to r is calling th e clie nt six tim e s
a d a y b e t w e e n the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. T h e ruling in M a r k v. C ollections, Inc.
a p p lie s as p r e c e d e n t to th e issue of w h e t h e r th e fr e q u e n c y of th e c o lle c to r's c alls is
u n r e a s o n a b le and, th e re fo r e , in violation o f t h e act. T h e M a r k c a s e is suffic iently sim ilar
to th e c u rre n t c a s e to apply as p re c e d e n t. Both c a s e s involve:
The s a m e l a w — th e c o lle ctio n s statute
T h e s a m e q u e s tio n — a d e te rm in a tio n of w h e n th e fr e q u e n c y of th e t e le p h o n e
calls c onstitutes u n re a s o n a b le c o n d u c t w ith in the m e a n in g o f t h e a c t
S im ilar key fa c t s — six t e le p h o n e calls p e r d a y and s ev en calls per day
T h e a p p lic atio n of M a r k as p r e c e d e n t guide s th e c o u rt in its resolution o f t h e q u e s
tion, p re s e n te d in the client's c a s e , of w h e t h e r six calls a d a y c onstitute a v iolation o f t h e
act. T h e court in M a r k held th a t m ore th a n one call a d a y is u n r e a s o n a b le . T h e r e fo r e ,
the six calls a day in th e client's c a s e are u n r e a s o n a b le in light o f t h e holding in th e M a r k
c a s e . This e x a m p le is re fe rre d to as th e " c o lle c tio n s " e x a m p le in this chapter.
B. M a n d a to ry P re c e d e n t
M andatory precedent is prcccclL'nt f r o m a h i g h e r c o u r t in a j u r i s d i c t i o n . If a c o u r t o p i n
ion IS o n p o i n t - t hat is, il it is p r c c c d L ' n t - - t h e d o c t r i n c o t st ar e de c i s i s m a n d a t e s t h a t t h e
l o w e r c o u r t s in t h e j u r i s d i c t i o n i ol l o w it. In t h e prex i o u s e x a m p l e , if t h e d e c i s i o n in M a r k v'
Collections, Inc. is t h e r u l i n g o f t h e h i g h e s t c o u r t in t h e j u r i s d i c t i o n , t h e l o w e r c o u r t s in t h e
j u r i s d i c t i o n m u s t i ol l ow it.
C. P e rs u a s iv e P re c e d e n t
P e rsuasive precedent is p r e c e d e n t t hat a c i ni r t m a y l o o k to fo r g u i d a n c e w h e n r e a c h i n g a
d e c i s i o n hu t is n o t b o u n d to iollow. In t h e c o l l e c t i o n s e x a m p l e , c o u r t s in o t h e r j u r i s d i c t i o n s
are n o t b o u n d to t ol l ow t h e M a r k d e c i s i o n . Also, it t h e d e c i s i o n w a s hy a l o w e r c o u r t in t h e
j u r i s d i c t i o n , s u c h as a trial c o u r t , t h e n a h i g h e r c o u r t , s u c h as a c o u r t o f a p pe a l s , is n o t b o u n d
to f ol low t h e de c is i o n . A h i g h e r c o u r t may, h o w e v e r , c h o o s e t o refer to a n d u s e a l o w e r c o u r t
d e c i s i o n as g u i d a n c e w h e n d e c i d i n g a s i m i l a r case.
D. S ta re D e c isis
The d o c tr i n e of Stare decisis is a b a s i c p r i n c i p l e o f t h e c a s e l aw s y s t e m t h a t r e q u i r e s a c o u r t
to fol l ow a p r e v i o u s d e c i s i o n o f t h a t c o u r t o r a h i g h e r c o u r t in t h e j u r i s d i c t i o n w h e n t h e c u r
r ent d e c i s i o n i n v o h es issues a n d k ey facts s i m i l a r to t h o s e i n v o l ve d in t h e p r e v i o u s d e c i s i o n ,
hi o t h e r w o r d s , t h e d o c t r i n e o f st ar e de c i s i s r e q u i r e s t h a t s i m i l a r c a s e s b e d e c i d e d in t h e s a m e
way; it m a n d a t e s t h a t c a s e s t h a t a r e p r e c e d e n t s h o u l d b e fo l l o wed , l l i e d o c t r i n e a p p l i e s u n l e s s
t h e r e is izood r e a s o n n o t to fol l ow it.
373
For Example In re g ard to the M a r k c a s e dis c u s s e d in th e co lle ctio n s e x a m p le , s tare

d e cis is is th e d o c trin e holding th a t o n c e it is d e te rm in e d th a t th e M a r k
case IS p re c e d e n t, the lo w e r courts in th e jurisdiction must fo llo w it unless good c a u s e
is s h o w n for not doing so. It is m a n d a to ry p re c e d e n t.
E. T h e R ole o f P re c e d e n t
W i t h o u t t h e d o c t r i n c s of .stare de ci s i s a n d p r e c e d e n t , t h e r e Wdul d mo.st l i k c h ’ he c h a o s in t h e
(.OLU t d e c i s i o n m a k i n t ; p r o c e s s . Ịiidnes a n d a t t o r n e \ ' s w o u l d n ot ha\'C ” uic l a nc e a b o u t h o w
mat ter. s .should h e d e c i d e d . S i m i l a r ca se s c o u l d b e d e c i d e d dit f' crcnl h' b a s e d u p o n t h e w h i m s
a n d d i v e r s e beliet's o f j ud g e s a n d jur i e s. ' I h e se d o c t r i n e s proN’ide stahilit}’, prc d i ct a h i li ty, a n d
i i u i d a n c c t o r court.s a n d a t t o r n e \ s. A n i n d i \ i dual c a n r e h ’ o n a f u t u r e c o u r t t o r c a c h t h e .same
d e c i s i o n o n a n issue as an e a r l i e r c o u r t w h e n t h e ca ses a r c s u t f i c i e n t h ' s imilar.
W i t h t hi s in m i n d , it h e c o n i e s cl e a r wh\- d e t e r m i n i n g w h e t h e r a ease is o n p o i n l is i n v
p i i r t a n t a n d \vh\' a r e s c a r c h e r n e e d s to fi nd a c as e t ha t is o n po i n t :
1. I h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n niu.st he m a d e het'ore t h e case ma \ ' apph- a.s pi ' cc c d c nt a n d ho

u s e d a n d relic'd (in by a c o u r t in it.s d c t e n n i n a t i o n ol ’h o w a n issue will b e d c c id c d.
N o t e t hat if t h e c o u r t is u n a w a r e (if' the case, it m a y be nccossarx' to b r i n g it to t h e
c ourt ' s a t t en t i on .
2. I n a s m u c h a.s t h e ccuirt will c o n s i d e r p r e c e d e n t in rcachiiii; its ileci.sion, a r e s e a r c h e r

n e e d s t o find casc.s th a t are o n p o i n t to u u i d e t he a t t o r n e y as to ln)\s- the issue in t h e
clicMit s c a se m a v he d e c i d e d . (;ase.s l hal a rc o n p o i n t m u s t h e l o c a t ed a n d anah' /.cti
1( 1 d e t e r m i n e w h a t i ni pa c t t he y m;i\- hiu'c o n t h e d e c i s i o n in t he c l i en t ’s ca.sc. Also,
t h e y imist h e a i i a h ’zcd to he l p t h e a t t o r n c \ ’ d o t c r m i n e wh a t c o u r s e ot'cK'tioii to take.
11'a e a se that is o n p o i n t i n d i ca t e s t hat t h e d e c i s i o n will m o s t likciv be agiiinsl t h e
client, it Iiia \ h e a p p r o p r i a t e to p u r s u e s c t t k - mc n t o r oi l i e r o p t i on s .
IV. D E T E R M I N I N G IF A C A S E IS O N P O I N T
I h c p r o c e s s ol d e c i d i n g if a c o u r t o p i n i o n is o n p o i n t i n v o h e s d e t e r m i n i n g li ow s i m i l a r t h e
o p i n i o n is t o t h e c l i e n t ’s case. I h e m o r e s i m i l a r t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n is to t h e c l i e n t ’s case, t h e
m o r e likely it is to h e c o n s i d e r e d p r e c e d e n t ; t hat is, th e m o r e likely it is t hat t he rul e o r p r i n c i p l e
a p p l i e d in t h e o p i n i o n will g o v e r n o r a p p h ’ to t h e c l i e n t ’s case.
In section II o f this c ha pt e r , aca.se is defi ned as h e i n g o n p o i n t if ther e is a sufficient similarity
b e t w e e n t h e key tacts a n d rule o f l a w o r legal p ri nc i p l e o f t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n a n d t ho s e o f t h e cl i
e n t ’s case. 1heref ore, for a ca.se to b e o n p o in t a n d a p p l y as p r e c e d e n t , t h e r e are t w o r e q u i r e m e n t s :
1. I h e si g n i f i ca n t o r ke y facts o f t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n m u s t h e sul fi ci ent l y s i m i l a r t o t h e

key facts o f t h e c l i e n t ’s case; or, if t h e fact s a r e n o t si mi lar, t h e r u l e o f l a w o r legal
p r i n c i p l e a p p l i e d in t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n m u s t b e so b r o a d t h a t it a p p l i e s to m a n y
d i v e r s e fact si t u a t i o n s .
2. ' I h e r u l e o f l a w o r legal p r i n c i p l e a p p l i e d in t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n m u s t b e t h e s a m e
o r suf fici entl y s i m i l a r to t h e r u l e o f l a w o r legal p r i n c i p l e t hat a p p l i e s in t h e c l i
e n t ’s case. R u le o f l a w a n d legal principle, as u s e d h e r e , i n c l u d e a n y c o n s t i t u t i o n a l ,
legislative, o r c a se law p r o v i s i o n , act, d o c t r i n e , p r i n c i p l e, o r test rel ied o n by t h e
c o u r t in r e a c h i n g its d e ci s i o n .
If t h e s e t w o c r i t e r i a a r e n o t m e t , t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n is n o t o n p o i n t a n d m a y n o t be u s e d
as p r e c e d e n t for t h e c l i e n t ’s case. ' I h e t w o - s t e p p r o c e s s p r e s e n t e d in E x h i b i t 12-1 is r e c o m
m e n d e d for d e t e r m i n i n g if t h e tw'o r e q u i r e m e n t s a r e me t .
374
C H A P T E R 12 CASE L A W A N A L Y S IS - I S A CASE ON POINT?
E x h i b i t 1 2 -1 Steps in Determining if a Case Is On Point.

For a court opinion to be on point and apply as precedent,
the following requirements must be met:
Are the key facts sufficiently sim ilar for the case to apply as
precedent?The k e y f a c t s o f thie c o u r t o p i n i o n m u s t b e s u f f i
c i e n t l y s i m i l a r t o t h e k e y f a c t s o f t h e c l i e n t 's c a s e . If t h e f a c t s
a r e n o t s i m i l a r , t h e o p i n i o n w i l l s e r v e as p r e c e d e n t o n l y if t h e
r u l e o f l a w o r l e g a l p r i n c i p l e is b r o a d e n o u g h to a p p l y t o o t f i e r
fa c t s i t u a t i o n s , i n c l u d i n g t h e c lie n t's .
Are the rules or principles of law sufficiently sim ilar for the
case to apply as precedent?The r u l e o f l a w o r l e g a l p r i n c i p l e
a p p l i e d in t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n m u s t b e t h e s a m e o r s u f f i c i e n t l y
s i m i l a r t o t h e r u l e o f l a w o r le g a l p r i n c i p l e t h a t a p p l i e s in t h e
c li e n t 's c a s e .
A. S tep 1: A re th e K e y Facts S u ff ic ie n tly S im ila r? ’

' Ihc first st ep ill t h e a n a k s i s p r o c e s s is to d e t e r m i n e i t ' th e s i gni l i ca nt o r key ta c t s in t h e c o u r t
o p i n i o n ar e sut li ci ent l y s i m i l a r to t h e k e \ ’ tacts in t h e client's case t or t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n t o a p p h '
as p r e c e d e n t , lliis is a c c o n i p l i s h e t l b\' c o m p a r i n g t h e ke\' tacts ot’t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n wi t h tl i os e
ol t h e c l i e n t s case. . \ ke\' tact is so e s s e n t i a l t h a t it atl ec t s t h e o u t c o m e ol t h e case. Vou m u s t
i d e n t i t y t h e key facts het' ore \'o l i c a n d e t e r n i i n e if a cas e is o n p o i n t . 11' t h e r e is n o t a suf fici ent
s i mi l a r i t y b e t w e e n t h e ke\' lact s o t ’t h e client' s case a n d t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n , t h e o p i n i o n u s u a l l y
c a n n o t b e u se d as p r e c e d e n t — that is, it is not o n po i n t .
V o u ma \ ' e n c o u n t e r t w o s i t u a t i o n s w h e n c o m p a r i n g t h e ke\ lacts ol a c l i en t ' s c a s e a n d
a court opinion:
1. l h e k e y tacts ar e dii ectl } o n p o i n t - - tliat is, t he y are ident i ca l o r nearK' i de nt i ca l .
2. '1 he ke\' t act s a r e di Herent .
1. Identical or Nearly Identical Key Facts

W' lien tlie key facts in a gixeii c ou i t o p i n i o n a n d t h e client's case a r e identical (or iiearh'
i d e nt ic a l ) , t h e o p i n i o n is o n p o i n t tact ual K' a n d c a n b e a p r e c e d e n t t hat a p p h e s to t h e client' s
cas e it t h e r e t i u i r e n i e n t s o f ' s t e p 2 a r e m e t . l h e p h r a s e on all fours is of t en u s e d to d e s c r i b e
s u c h o p i n i o n s : t h o s e in w h i c h t h e facts o f t h e o p i n i o n a n d o f t h e client' s c ase, a n d t h e r u l e o f
law t h a t appl i es, ar e i d e n t i c a l o r so s i m i l a r tiiat t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n is clearly o n p o i n t . W' li en
s u c h a n o p i n i o n is t h e o p i n i o n of a h i g h e r cotirf in a j u r i s d i c t i o n , it is m a n d a t o r } ' p r e c e d e n t
that t h e l o w e r c o u r t s in t h e j u r i s d i c t i o n m u s t t'ollow.
For Example In the c a s e of D av is i/. Davis. M s . Davis had sole custody of h e r t w o d a u g h

ters, a g e s 8 and 10 y e a rs . M s . D avis had a boyfriend w h o o c c a s io n a lly
s ta y e d o v e rn ig h t at h e r hom e. The c hildren w e r e a w a r e o f t h e o v e rn ig h t visits. Mr. Davis,
h e r fo r m e r h us ba nd, filed a motion w ith the c o u rt asking for a c h a n g e of custody. He
b a s e d his cla im solely upon his e x -w ife 's alle g ed "im m o ra l c o n d u c t." N o e v id e n c e w a s
p re s e n te d indicating h o w the overn ig ht visits a ffe c te d the children. The trial c ourt gra n te d
a c h a n g e of custody.
375
PART T H E S P E C I F I C S OF L E G A L A N A L Y S I S
Th e c o u rt of a p p e a ls o v e rtu rn e d the trial c ourt, ruling th a t " m e r e a lle g a tio n s of

im m o ra l c o n d u c t are not su ffic ien t g ro unds to a w a r d a c h a n g e of custody." The c ourt
re q u ire d th e p re s e n ta tio n of e v id e n c e s h o w in g t h a t t h e alle g ed im m oral c o n d u c t h a rm e d
th e c hildren.
A s s u m e , for the sake of this e xa m p le , t h a t t h e c lie nt w a s divo rce d one y e a r ago and
g ra n te d sole c u sto d y of his t w o m inor d a u g h te rs , a g e s 8 and 12 y ears. On o c c a s io n , his
girlfriend stays overn ig ht, and th e children are a w a r e of th e o v e rn ig h t visits. T h e client's
f o r m e r s p o u s e has filed a motion for c h a n g e of c u sto d y alleging th a t his im m oral c o n d u c t
is g ro unds fo r a c h a n g e of custody. She doe s not ha v e e v id e n c e th a t th e c hildren h ave
b e e n h a rm e d or a ffe c te d negatively.
Clearly, the re q u ire m e n ts of step 1 are met. D avis \/. D a w s i s f a c t u a l l y on point, and is
th e re fo r e a p r e c e d e n t th a t applies to the client's case. N o te th a t t h e re q u ire m e n ts of step 2
are also met. The s a m e legal principle is being applied in th e c o u rt opinion and the client's
case: M e r e a llegatio ns of im m orality are not s uffic ient gro unds for granting a c h a n g e of
custody. S te p 2 a d d re s s e s the r e q u ire m e n t t h a t t h e legal principles be sufficiently similar.
A lth o u g h s o m e of th e fa c ts are d iffe re n t— in th e client's c a s e, it is th e fa th e r w h o
ha s c u s to d y and his girlfriend w h o stays o v e rn ig h t, w h e r e a s in D a v is \j . D a v is it w a s
th e m o th e r w h o had c u sto d y and her boyfriend w h o s tay e d o v e rn ig h t— th e s e fa c ts are
not key fa cts. T h e g e n d e r of th e c ustodial p a r e n t and th e g e n d e r of th e pe rso n staying
o v e rn ig h t a re not key facts. T h e key fa c ts are identical: o c c a s io n a l o v e rn ig h t visits, th e
c h ild ren a re a w a r e of th e visits, th e children a re p re te e n (the a ge of th e ch ild ren is a l
w a y s an im p o rta n t c o n s id e ra tio n ), and no e v id e n c e w a s p re s e n te d t h a t t h e children are
h a rm e d by th e visits. This e x a m p le is re fe rre d to as th e "c u s to d y " e x a m p le th ro u g h o u t
th e r e m a in d e r of this chapter.
It is r a r e to h n d i n s t a n c e s in wi i i cb t h e ke\' t a c t s a r e i de nt i ca l . UsualK' t h e r e i.s at least

s o m e d i t i e r e n c e in t b e key facts. W h e n y o u ti nd a case w i t h i d e n t i ca l tact s t ha t y ou d e t e r m i n e
is m a n d a t o r \ ' p r e c e d e n t , b e t h a n k t u l it t h e h o l d i n g s u p p o r t s v o u r c l i e n t ’s p os i t i on . It Is dit-
licult t o r a l o w e r c o i u t n o t t o lollow t b e h i g h e r c o u r t ’s d e c i s i o n w h e n it is so clearly o n poi n t .
2. D iffe ren t Key Facts

W ' h e n t h e ke\' I'acts o l ' t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n a n d t h e ke y ta ct s o l ' t h e c l i e n t ’s c a s e a r e n o t i d ent i cal ,
t h e o p i n i o n iiuiy b e o n p o i n t a n d m a y a p p h ' as p r e c e d e n t . It d e p e n d s o n t b e d e g r e e o t t h e dil-
t er en c e . W ' h e n y o u h a v e different key facts, you m us t d et er n ii n e w h e t h e r the ditierences
ar e ot s u c h a n a t u r e o r d e g r e e t ha t t h e y r e n d e r t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n u n u s a b l e as p r e c e d e n t . Us e
t b e f o l l o w i n g t h r e e - p a r t p r o c e s s w h e n m a k i n g t h i s d e t e r m i n a t i o n . (See E x h i b i t 12-2.)
Pa r t I: I d e n t i t y t h e s i mi l a r i t i es b e t w e e n t h e ke)' facts.
Pa r t 2: Idei it ify t h e d i t i e r e n c e s b e t w e e n t h e ke y facts.
Pa r t 3; D e t e r m i n e if t h e difl' erences ar e o f s u c h a si g n i f i ca n t d e g r e e t h a t t h e o p i n i o n
c a n n o t a p p h ' as p r e c e d e n t .
' I h r o u g l i o u t thi s di s c u s s i oi i of d i fl ' er e n t ke y facts, a s s u m e t ha t t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s o t s t ep 2

h a v e b e e n n i e t — t h a t is, t h e r u l e o f l a w a p p l i e d in t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n is t h e s a m e o r suf fici entl y
s i m i l a r t o t h e r u l e o f l a w t ha t a p p l i e s in t h e c l i e n t ’s case.
For Example T h e client's c a s e is the s a m e as th e c u sto d y e x a m p le e x c e p t th a t in stea d

of o c c a s io n a l o v e rn ig h t visits by th e girlfriend, th e girlfriend has m o v ed in
w ith th e client. Is th e c a s e of D a v is v. D av is on point?
376
C H A P T E R 12 CASE LA W A N A LY S IS IS A C A S E ON P O I N T ’
E x h ib it 1 2 -2 Three-Part Process for Addressing Different Key Facts.

Three-part process for determining if a case is on point when
the key facts of the court opinion differ from the
i key facts of the client's case
PARTI ; Id e n tify th e s im ila r itie s b e t w e e n th e k ey facts.
PART 2 ■ Id e n tify th e d iffe r e n c e s b e t w e e n th e k e y facts.
PART 3 . D e t e r m i n e if t h e d i f f e r e n c e s a r e o f s u c h a s i g n i f i c a n t d e g r e e
th a t th e o p in io n c a n n o t a p p ly as p re c e d e n t.
I'o a n s w e r t hi s q u e s t i o n , p e r f o r m t h e f o l l o w i n g steps:
a. Fa r t 1: ldent if \- t h e s i mi l a r i t i es b e t w e e n t h e ke\- facts. In b o t h t h e c l i e n t ’s c ase a n d

t h e D a v i i case:
I h e m i n t i r c h i l d r e n a r e u n d e r t h e a g e o t 12 years.
S o m e o n e o f t h e o p p o s i t e sex is s t a \ ’i n g o v e r n i g h t w i t h t h e c u s t o d i a l p a r e n t .
I h e r e is n o s h o w i n g t h a t t h e c h i l d r e n h a \ e b e e n h a r m e d b \ t h e c o n d u c t .
b. P a r t 2: Id e n t i t )' t h e d i f f e re n c e s b e t w e e n t h e ke y facts. I h e d i t f e r e n c e in t h e ke\'

facts is t h a t in l^ n v is r. D a vis, t h e o v e r n i g h t visits w e r e o c c a s i o n a l , hi t h e c l i e n t ’s
case, t h e r e is c o h a b i t a t i o n r a t h e r t h a n o c c a s i o n a l o \ e r n i g h t \ isits.
c. Pa r t 3: D e t e r m i n e it t h e d i f f e re n c e s a r e o t s u c h a si gn i l i c a n t d e g r e e t h a t t h e o p i n
i on c a n n o t a p p h as p r e c e d e n t . I'o d e t e r m i n e t h e s i gn i f i c a n c e ot t h e di f ferenc e s ,
substitLite t h e c l i e n t ’s ke\' facts for t h o s e o f t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n . It t h e s u b s t i t u t i o n o f
t h e k e \ fact s w o u l d result in a c h a n g e in t h e o u t c o m e o f t h e case, t h e c o u r t o p i n
i on c a n n o t b e u s e d as p r e c e d e n t .
In t hi s e x a m p l e , w o u l d t h e c o u r t in Da\'is i’. D a v is h a v e r e a c h e d tlu' s a m e c o n c l u s i o n

if Ms. D a v i s ’s b o y f r i e n d h a d m o \ e d in w i t h h e r ? ' I h e a n s w e r i.s p r o h a b h , b e c a u s e t h e s a m e
legal p r i n c i p l e appl i e s: .‘MI e g a t i o n s o f i n u n o r a l c o n d u c t a l o n e a r e n o t s u l l i ci e n t g r o u n d s to
awan.1 a c h a n g e ol c u s t o d y ; t h e r e m u s t b e a s h o w i n g t h a t t h e condLicI h a r m e d t h e c h i l d r e n .
.As i n d i c a t e d in l ^ i v i s i'. Davis, a n e ss e n t i al e l e m e n t necessar)' b e f o r e a c h a n g e ol CListod\
is g r a n t e d is a s h o w i n g o f h a r m t o t h e c h i l d r e n . A ke\' fact in t h e D a v is d e c i s i o n w a s t h e lack
of a n y s h o w i n g of h a r n i t o t h e c h i l d r e n . Bo t h t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n a n d t h e c l i e n t ’s ca s e lack a
s h o w i n g o f h a r m t o t h e c h i l d r e n ; t h e r e f o r e , t h e p r i n c i p l e a p p l i e d in D a v is s h o u l d a p p l y to
t h e cl i eri t ’s c as e e v e n t h o u g h t h e D a v is o p i n i o n i n v o l v e d o v e r n i g h t visits a n d t h e c l i e n t ’s case
i n v o h es c o h a b i t a t i o n .
V o u m u s t b e c a r e f ul , h o w e v e r . I h e r e m a y b e a n o t h e r s t a t u t e o r ca s e l a w d o c t r i n e p ro -
\ ' i di ng t h a t c o h a b i t a t i o n is p e r se h a r m f u l t o c h i l d r e n ; t h a t is, in c o h a b i t a t i o n c a s e s s u c h as
t h e c l i e n t ’s case, t h e l a w p r e s u m e s t h a t c o h a b i t a t i o n is h a r m f u l t o t h e c h i l d r e n . If t h i s w e re
t h e s i t u a t i o n , t h e p l a i n t i f f w o u l d n o t n e e d t o e s t a b h s h h a r m in c o h a b i t a t i o n c a s es s u c h as t h e
c l i e n t ’s, a n d t h e D a v is o p i n i o n w o u l d n o t b e o n p o i n t a n d c o u l d n o t b e u s e d as p r e c e d e n t .
' I he d i f f e r e n c e in t h e k ey facts w o u l d b e so s i g n i f i c a n t t h a t t h e s u b s t i t u t i o n o f t h e c l i e n t ’s
c o h a b i t a t i o n fact f or t h e D a v is o p i n i o n ’s o c c a s i o n a l o v e r n i g h t visits fact w o u l d c h a i i g e t h e
d e c i s i o n r e a d i e d b)' t h e c o u r t b e c a u s e a d i f f e r e n t s t a t u t e w o u l d a p p h ' .
F o u r v a r i a t i o n s m a y b e e n c o u n t e r e d w h e n d e a l i n g wi t h d i f f e r e n t ke)' facts. ' I h e s e \ ari a-
t i o n s a r e s u m m a r i ' / e d i n F x h i b i t 12-3.
1. M i i n) r d i f f e r e n c e s in k ey fa c t s — S o m e key fact s are so ins i gni fi cant !)' d i f f e r e n t that

t h e y cl ea rl y d o n o t affect t h e u s e o f a c o u r t d e c i s i o n as p r e c e d e n t .
377
E x h ib it 1 2 -3 Different Key Fact Variations

Variations that may be encountered when dealing
with different l(ey facts
1. M i n o r d i f f e r e n c e s in k e y f a c t s — c a s e o n p o i n t
2. M a jo r d iffe re n c e in k e y fa cts — c a s e n o t o n p o in t
3. M a jo r d iffe re n c e in k e y fa cts — c a s e o n p o in t
4. M a jo r d iffe re n c e in k e y f a c t s — c a s e o n p o i n t , b r o a d le g a l p r i n c i p l e
I f in the custody exam ple, the client's children w e r e ages 9 and

11 years as opposed to 8 and 10 years, Davis u Davis would still cleariy
apply as precedent. Although the age ofthe children is a key fact, a minor difference
of one year in the ages ofthe children is not a significant difference in the key facts.
If the client's children w e re several years older than the children in Davis i/. Davis,
such as ages 17 and 18, the age difference could be a major difference in the key
facts, because a different standard might apply if the children w e re in their late teens.
2. M a i o r d i t f e r c n c e in ke\' tacts, a n d t h e ca se is n o t o n p o i n t — t h e t o l l o w i n g e.xample

pre.sents a s i t u a t i o n w h e r e t h e ke y facts ot t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n a n d t h e ke\' tacts ot
t h e c l i e n t ’s c a s e a re s ut l i c i e nt l y d i t l e r en t that t h e o p i n i o n is n ot o n p o i n t a n d d o e s
n o t a p p h ’ as p r e c e d e n t , t h e f o l l o w i n g e x a m p l e is r e t e r r e d to in t h i s c h a p t e r as the
“a r r e s t ” e x a mp l e .
In the court case of State v. Thomas, M r Thom as w a s handcuffed

and ta k e n to the police station afte r officers broke up a fistfight.
T h o m a s w a s not read his rights a t t h e s c e n e o f th e fight. He w a s read his rights
and form ally a rres te d at the police station 30 m inutes later. The court, ruling
th at he w a s unde r a rrest w h e n h a n d c u ffe d at the s c e n e , stated, "An a rrest
ta ke s p lace w h e n a re a s o n a b le person does not believe he is free to leave."
In th e client's c a s e ,th e client explains th at the police h a ndc uffed him and
told him to stay in the hallw ay o fthe house while th ey executed a sea rch w a r r a n t
He w a s n o t a llo w e d to leave. It a p p ea rs th a tt h e key facts regarding w h e t h e r an
arrest has ta ke n p lace are nearly the sam e. In both the court opinion and the
client's c ase, the individual w a s h a ndc uffed and not free to leave. The critical
differe nc e in the facts is the c ontext of th e seizure o f th e individual. In Thomas,
the seizure took p lace a tth e sce ne of a fight. No w a rra n ts w e r e involved. In th e
client's case, the seizure took place during the execution of a s e a rc h w a rra n t.
In regard to th e question of w h e t h e r th e client w a s u nde r a rres t w h e n
h a n d c u ffe d and d e ta in ed in the hallw ay, is S ta te v. Thom a s on point? Th e a n
s w e r is no. A lthough the fa cts o f t h e de tention are similar, th e d iffe re n c e in the
co n te xt of the seizure is a critical key fa c t d iffe re n c e . T h e re is o th er c a s e la w
holding th a t a seizure during the e xecutio n o f a s e a rc h w a r r a n t is an e xception
to th e rule stated in Thomas, and th at such seizures do not constitute an a r r e s t
The other case law provides that a search w a rra n t implicitly carries with it the
authority to detain an individual forthe purposes ofthe officer's safety and to determine
if there is cause to make an a rrest Therefore, such detentions do not constitute an
arrest within the meaning ofthe law. Because of this authority, the difference between
the key facts of Thomas and the client's case is critical, and the case is not on point
378
,v M a j o r d i H c r e n c o in kc\- h u t s , b u t c a s e is o n p o i n t - A m a j o r d i l l c r e n c e in t h e
ke\- l act s d o e s n o t n e c ess ar i h - r esult in a d e t e r m i n a t i o n t h a t t h e c a se is n o t o n
p o i n t . Ihe o p i n i o n m a y still h e o n p o i n t , h u t t h e o u t c o m e ma\- h e di f ferent . T h e
legal p r i n c i p l e a p p li e d by t h e c o u r t m a y still a p p h ' to t h e c l i e n t ’s case, a l t h o u g h its
a p p l i c a t i o n ma\- lead to a d i l i e r e n t result.
For Example Suppose that jn the custody example, there w e r e an additional key
fact in the client's case that the spouse seeking custody had evi
de nce showing that the children w e r e being harmed by exposure to the overnight
visits. Davis V. Davis could still be on point, even though no evidence of harm to the
children w a s presented in the Davis case. Although there is n ow a major difference
betw een the key facts ofthe court opinion and the client's case, the court opinion may
still apply as precedent and govern the outcome ofthe change-of-custody question.
The co u rt in th e D a v is c a s e c o n c lu d e d th a t th e re w e r e not s u ffic ie n t
grounds to a w a r d a c h a n g e of custody b e c a u s e no e v id e n c e \Nas p re se nted
showing harm to the children. The s am e principle governing Davis governs the
fa cts here: th at is, allegations of immorality, standing alone, are not sufficient for
an a w a rd of a change of custody; there must be a showing of harm to the children.
A c o ro llary of the rule, h o w e v e r , is th a t if th e re is a s h o w in g o f h a r m t o
the children, th e re m ay be s u ffic ie n t g ro u n d s for a c h a n g e of custody. It can
be a rg u e d th a t w h e n th e key f a c t of e v id e n c e of harm is p re se n t, th e c o ro llary
o f t h e rule a pplies. Even th o u g h th e fa c t s o f t h e c ourt opinion and th e client's
c a s e are different, th e c orollary a p p lie s to s u p p o rt a c h a n g e of th e cu sto d y
a w a r d — a result diffe re n t from th e result r e a c h e d in the c o u rt opinion.
4. M a j o r dif f e r e n ce in ke\' I'acts, hut c ase is o n p o i n t , b r o a d legal p r i n c i p l e — Ge n e r a l l y,

it key lacts ar e s i g n i l i c a n l h ’ dif ferent , it is h i g h k p r o b a b l e t h a t a d i f f e r e n t r u l e o r
p r i n c i p l e appl i es a n d a c o u r t c a s e will n o t a p p k as p r e c e d e n t . I h e r e are, h o w e v e r ,
i n s t a n c es in w h i c h t h e ke\- facts ar e di i f e r e n t , b u t t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n is o n p o i n t
b e c a u s e t h e ru l e ol law o r legal p r i n c i p l e is so b r o a d th a t it appl i es to m a n y di f f e r en t
lact s i t uat i o n s. Thi s s i t u a t i o n is a d d r e s s e d in g r e a t e i ' d e t a i l in s e c t i o n l\'.B, st ep 2.
For Example T h e c lient w a s d e ta in e d as p a rt of a group of e xotic d a n c e r s in

a bar. T h e o ffice rs w h o d e ta in e d the c lient w e r e not e x e c u tin g
a s e a r c h or a rre s t w a r r a n t . B e fo re inform ing the d a n c e r s th e y w e r e u n d e r a r
rest, or in a n y w a y inform ing th e m w h a t w a s taking p lac e , th e offic e rs m o v ed
th e m to a s e p a r a t e room w h e r e t h e y w e r e d e ta in e d for m ore th a n an hour.
T h e y w e r e c le a rly not fr e e to leave. T h e y w e r e fo rm a lly a rre s te d t w o hours
later, th en ta k e n to jail.
For Example In re g a rd to the question of w h e t h e r the client w a s u n d e r a r

rest w h e n detained in the room prior to arrest. S tate v. Thom as
(p resen ted in the a rrest e xa m ple ) is probably on point. The definition of a rre s t
p resented in r/io m a s applies to the client's c ase even though the fa ctu a l c ontext
o f th e seizure is different (h andcuffing at a fist fight versus detention w ith a group
of exotic d a n c e rs at a bar). Applying th a t definition to the client's c as e results in
the conclusion th at an arrest o c cu rred w h e n the client w a s moved to a s e p a ra te
room and detained for m ore than an hour. A reasonable person in the client's situ
ation w ould not believe she w a s free to leave. The definition of arAesf presented
in Thom as is so broad that it applies to a w id e range of detention situations.
379
N O T E : Be e aret ul. Il is al wa \ s p r e l er a b l e lo l o c a l e a n o p i n i o n tlial is as t a c t u a i h ’ si m i l a r to t he

client' s case as possible. I h e m o r e d i s s i m i l a r t h e k e \ taels, t h e easi er it is loi- t h e o l h e r si de to
a r g u e that i h e d i t l e r e n c e s ai'e critical, t h e o p i n i o n is n o l o n p oi n t , a n d t h u s d o e s n o t a p p h ' as
p r e c e d e n t to t h e case at h a n d .
d i t f e r e n c e in ke\' (act s s h o u l d a l e r t \ o u l o b e c a r e f u l a n d c a u s e \ ' ou to e x p l o r e all

p o t e n t i a l legal a \ ' e n u e s t h a l m a \ ' o p e n d u e t o t h e fact d i f f e r e n c e s . Fcicus o n t h e di f’fer-
e n c e s . A s k y o u r s e l f , “ A r e t h e \ ' i m p o r t a n t ? ” I-’n g a g e in c o u n t e r a n a k s i s ( s ee C h a p t e r 13).
( C o n d u c t t ' u r t h e r r e s e a r c h a n d S h e p a r d i z e t h e c a s e t o d e t e r m i n e it t h e r e a r e o t h e r c a s e s
m o r e on point.
Ill s u m m a r y , if t h e key facts a r e t h e s a m e a n d t h e s a m e rul e of law a p p l i e s ( s t e p 2),
t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n is u su a l l y o n p o i n t a n d c a n be c o n s i d e r e d p r e c e d e n t t h a t a p p l i es to y o u r
c l i e n t ’s case. If ' t he k ey facts a r e dift'erenl, e i t h e r in p a r t o r totally, y o u m u s t perf' orni caref ul
a n a l y s i s to e n s u r e t h a t t h e t act ual d i f f e r e n c e s a re n o t so si g n i f i ca n t t h a t t he y are fatal to use
o t ' t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n as p r e c e d e n t .
B. Step 2: A re th e R u le s o r P rin c ip le s
o f La w S u ffic ie n tly S im ila r;’
By a p p l y i n g t h e t echni t]ii es p r e s e n t e d in s t ep I, y o u d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r t h e key facts ot t h e
c o u r t o p i n i o n are sufficiently s i m i l a r to t h e k e y tacts o f t h e c l i e n t ’s case for the o p i n i o n to a p pl y
as p r e c e d e n t factually. O n c e t hi s is a c c o n i p l i s h e d , h a l f of t h e t a s k is c o n i p l et e d . N o t e t hat t hi s
is a t w o - s t e p p r oc e s s, a n d y o u m u s t c o m p l e t e b o t h s t ep s b e f o r e y o u c a n d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r a
c a s e is o n p o i n t a n d a p p l y it as p r e c e d e n t .
I h e s e c o n d s t ep is to d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r t h e r u l e o f l a w o r legal p r i n c i p l e a p p l i e d in
t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n is t h e s a m e rul e ol law' o r legal p r i n c i p l e t h a t a p p l i e s in t h e c l i e n t ’s case.
If it is n o t t h e s a m e rul e ot law, is it s uf fi ci ent l y s i m i l a r to t h e riile t h a t a p p l i es in t h e c l i e n t ’s
c a s e for t h e o p i n i o n still to a p p h ’ as p r e c e d e n t ? V o u n i a y e n c o u n t e r t w o s i t u a t i o n s w h e n
p e r f o r m i n g s t ep 2:
1. '1 h e r u l e o r p r i n c i p l e a p p l i ed in t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n is t h e san i e rul e o r p r i n c i p l e t hat

app l i e s in t h e c l i en t ’s case.
2. I h e rul e o r p ri nc ip l e a p p l i ed in t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n is d i t f e r e n t f r o m t h e rul e o r
p r i n c i p l e t ha t a p p l i e s in t h e c l i e n t ’s case.
1. Same Rule or Principle

I f y o u d e t e r m i n e t hat t h e key t act s are su f h c i e n t l y s i m i l a r s o t h a t t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n c a n a p p l y
as p r e c e d e n t a n d t h e s a m e r u l e o f l a w is i n v o l ve d in b o t h t h e o p i n i o n a n d t h e c l i e n t ’s case,
t h e n t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s o f st ep 2 a r e me t , a n d t h e c a s e is o n p o i n t . ' I h e r u l e o f l a w c o mp ar i . s o n
is siii'iple. I h e rul e o f ' l a w ap p l i es in t h e c l i e n t ’s c a s e in t h e s a m e w a y as it w'as a p p l i e d in t h e
c o u r t ’s o p i n i o n .
For Example In the c u s to d y e x a m p le , if th e client's c a s e involves th e s ituation o f th e

c lie n t ha ving o c c a s io n a l o v e r n ig h t visits by his girlfriend, th e s a m e rule
of l a w g o v e rn s th e c o u rt opinion and th e clie nt's f a c t s — th a t is, a lle g a tio n s of im m o
rality w it h o u t e v id e n c e of h a rm to the c h ild r e n a re not s u ffic ie n t g ro u n d s to s u p p o rt a
c h a n g e of custody. T h e rule a p p lie s in th e s a m e w a y in th e client's c a s e as in th e c o u r t
opinion: A c h a n g e of c u s to d y will not be g r a n te d w h e r e th e r e is no s h o w in g of h a r m
to th e children.
380
C H A P T E R 12 CASE L A W A N A L Y S IS IS A C A S E O N P O I N T S
T he c lient is c h a r g e d w ith e re c tin g a sign too close to th e s tre e t in v io la

tion of § 19(b) of th e M u n i c i p a l Code, w h ic h prohibits th e e re c tio n of a
sign " u n r e a s o n a b ly clos e " to a ny p ro p e rty line abuttin g a street. In yo u r r e s e a r c h , you
j c o m e a c ro s s the c a s e of City v. Guess, w h ic h in te rp re ts "u n r e a s o n a b ly c lo s e " as w ith in
10 fe e t of the p ro perty line. If th e k ey fa c ts of the c o u rt opinion are sufficiently sim ilar
to the client's key facts, then th e rule of l a w a n aly tica l p ro ce ss is sim ple. T h e s a m e rule
of l a w ap p lie d in th e opinion a p p lie s to th e client's c a s e, in th e s a m e w a y : If th e client's
sign is w ith in 10 fe e t o f t h e p ro p e rty line abu ttin g the stre et, it is in violation o f t h e s tatute.
N O T E ; I a c i i w h e n t h e s a m e r u l e ol ' l aw appl i es, ils a p p l i c a t i o n in t h e c l i e n t ’s ca s e m a \ ' r esult

in a n o u t c o m e d i t le r e n t t r o m t h e o u t c o m e in t h e c o u r t case. See t h e e. xampl e p r e s e n t e d in
t h e list in s e c t i o n l\'..-\.2 ( M a j o r d i i f e r e n c e in k e \ tacts, b u t case is o n p o i n t ) . In t ha t e x a m p l e ,
t h e s a m e legal p r i n c i p l e a p p l i e d in b o t h t h e client' s cas e a n d t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n , b u t t h e r e s ul t
was d i t le r en t .
2. Different Rule or Principle

W’h a t il t h e r e is n o c o u r t t l e c i s i o n in \ o u r i L i r i s d i c t i o n a p p h i n g o r i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e r u l e o r
legal p r i n c i p l e that a p p l i es to y o u r c l i e n t ’s c ase? W' hat it t h e r u l e o r p r i n c i p l e a p p l i e d in t h e
closest ci u i r t o p i n i o n yo u c a n l i nd is d i l i e r e n t f r o m t h e r u l e o r p r i n c i p l e t h a t a p p l i es in t h e
c l i e n t ’s c as e? C a n t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n a p p k as p r e c e d e n t ? l h e g e n e ra l rul e is no. L ' s u a l k t h i s
is o b v i o u s . For e x a m p l e , a c h i l d c u s t o d y o ( ' i n i o n c a n r arely b e p r e c e d e n t t o r a m u r d e r case.
. \ g a i n , t h e r e a r e e x c e p t i o n s , l h e c o u r t ’s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f a p r o s ision o f a legi sl ati xe act
o r case law r ul e o r p r i n c i p l e nia\' be so b r o a d in s c o p e t h a t it a p p l i es to t h e d i f l e re n t law o r r u l e
t h a t g i n e r n s t h e c l i e n t ’s case. K e e p in m i n d , t h o u g h , t h a t b e c a u s e t h e law o r r u l e a p p l i e d in
t he c o u r t o p i n i o n is d i f l e r e n t f r o m t ha t w h i c h a p p li e s to t h e c l i en t ' s case, t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n is
at best p c r s n u s i v c p r e c e d e n t , l h e c o u r t h e a r i n g t h e cl i ent ' s case d o e s n o t h a \ e t o t'ollow it — it
is iivH iiuiiiii.iuM) pvcv;ei.\eiU. llic covivl li as dis î cUo\i ati d n n i s l be p c v s u a d c d .
I h e r e a r e t w o a r e a s to e x p l o r e w h e n c o n s i d e r i n g t h e s e e x c e p t i o n s : l egi s l at i se ac t s a n d
c as e law r u l es o r [i rinci ples. In r e g a r d t o t h e s e t w o areas, it is i m p o r t a n t to r e m e m b e r t ha t t h e
d i s c u s s i o n i i n o l v e s o n l y t h o s e s i t u a t i o n s in w h i c h t h e r e is n o i O i i r l o p i n i o n in t h e j u r i s d i c t i o n
(.lirectK’ i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e s a m e l e g i s l a t i \ e act o r Lase law r u l e t h a t a p p l i es t o t h e c l i e n t ’s case.
a. L e g i s l a t i v e A c t s
A c o u r t o p i n i o n i n t e r p r e t i n g o n e l e gi s l at i se act m a \ b e u s e d as p r e c e d e n t t o r a c l i e n t ’s c a s e
t ha t iiu' oK' es t h e a i i p h c a t i o n o t ' a d i f f e r e n t l é g i s l a t i f act w h e n t h e r e is similarit}' in t h e f o l
l o w i n g ( s e e F x h i b i t 12-4):
f. l h e l a n g u a g e u s e d in t h e legi sl at i ve acts
2. l h e fLinction of t h e legislati\' e act s
E x h i b i t 1 2 - 4 Requirem ents W hen Different Legislative A cts Apply.
■ “ / Requirements that must be met for a case to be on point when ” , _=

^ \ the legislative act applied in the court opinion differs from the ■
legislative act that applies in the client's case

1. T h e r e is a s i m i l a r i t y in t h e l a n g u a g e u s e d in t h e l e g i s l a t i v e a c ts .
2. T h e r e is a s i m i l a r i t y in t h e f u n c t i o n o f t h e l e g i s l a t i v e a c ts .
381
For Example T h r e e s tatu te s h a v e b e en a d o p te d in th e jurisdiction:

S e c tio n 56 provides th a t an individual m ust be a re s id e n t of th e c o u n ty
to be eligible to run for th e position of c o u n ty anim a l control officer.
S e c tio n 3105 pro vide s th a t an individual m ust be a re s id e n t of th e c o u n ty to be
eligible to run for a s e a t on the c ounty schoo l board.
S ec tion 4175 pro vides th a t an individual m ust be a re s id e n t of th e s ta te to be
eligible to run for th e office of governor.
T h e te rm r e s i d e n t \ s not d e fin e d in a ny of th e s tatutes, and none of th e s ta tu te s e s t a b
lishes a length of re s id e n c y re q u ire m e n t. The only c a s e in th e jurisd ic tion th a t d e fin e s
th e te rm is Fra nk \/. Teague, a c a s e involving § 3 1 0 5 . In this c a s e, th e c o u rt ruled t h a t t o be
eligible to run for a s e a t on th e schoo l board, the c a n d id a te m ust ha v e b e e n a re s id e n t of
th e c o u n ty of the schoo l board district for a m inim um of th r e e m o nths im m e d ia te ly prior
to th e ele ction. This e x a m p le is re fe rre d to in this c h a p t e r as th e " r e s i d e n c e " e x a m p le .
Th e client, a re s id e n t of th e c ounty for th re e and o n e -h a lf m onths, w a n t s to run fo r
th e office of g o v e r n o r D oes th e Fran/i opinion a pply as p re c e d e n t and s u p p o rt th e client's
cla im of eligibility to run for th e office of go v ern o r? T h e a n s w e r is p ro b a b ly not.
A lth o u g h th e re is a sim ilarity in th e la n g u a g e of th e s tatutes, in t h a t both use th e
te rm resident, th e re is not a sim ilarity in th e ir fu nctio n. T h e c o n s id e ra tio n s invo lved in
d e te rm in in g th e length of re s id e n c e required as a pre re quisite for eligibility to run fo r e a c h
o ffice are quite different. T h e court's decision in Frank, imposing a t h r e e -m o n t h r e s id e n c y
re q u ir e m e n t for th e schoo l board position, m a y be b a se d upon th e court's d e te rm in a t io n
th a t this is th e a m o u n t of tim e an individual n e e d s to b e c o m e s ufficiently fa m ilia r w it h th e
county to perform the duties of a school board m em ber. The position of governor, h o w e v e r ,
involves d iffe re n t c o n s id e ra tio n s . T h e office is s ta t e w id e , and th e c o u rt could c o n c lu d e
th a t a longer re sid e n cy period is n e c e s s a ry for an individual to b e c o m e sufficiently fa m ilia r
w ith the s tate to a d e q u a te ly pe rform the duties of governor.
For Example T h e client w a n t s to run for th e position of anim a l control officer. He has
b e e n a re s id e n t of the co u n ty for fo ur m onths. In this s ituation, it is m o re
likely th a t F ra n k m W apply as p r e c e d e n t — th a t it is on point and supports th e position th a t
the c lie nt is eligible to run for anim a l control o f fic e r
A gain, both statutes use the s am e lang uage , r e s id e n t T h e y are m ore clos e ly re la te d
in fu nction, how ever, than the school board and governor statutes. Both involve c o u n ty w id e
positions w h e r e in th e duties are fo c u s e d on co u n ty c o n c e rn s . It c an be a rg u e d th a t no
m o re tim e is re quire d to b e c o m e fa m ilia r w ith th e co u n ty to pe rform th e d u tie s of a n im a l
control office r th an is re q u ire d to p e rform th e duties of a school board m e m b e r
The court, following this line of reasoning, could c o n clu d e th a t t h e re s id e n c y re q u ire
m e n t for th e position of anim a l c ontrol office r should not e x c e e d th e m in im u m re s id e n c y
s et fo r a s e a t on th e schoo l board. It could, th e r e fo r e , a d o p t th e t h r e e - m o n t h s ta n d a r d
e s ta b lis h e d in th e Fra nk c a s e as the s ta n d a rd fo r th e a n im a l control o ffic e r s tatute.
B e c a u s e th e s ta tu te s are differe n t, you a re a lw a y s o p e n to a c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t
pointing out s o m e critical d iffe re n c e in fu n ctio n b e t w e e n th e statutes.
In this e x a m p le , you could a rg u e t h a t t h e duties of anim a l control o f fic e r are m u c h
d iffe re n t from th o se of a s chool board m e m b e r T h e dutie s of th e anim a l c ontro l o ffic e r
re q u ire a g re a t d e g re e of fa m ilia rity w ith th e g e o g ra p h y o f t h e county; th e r e fo r e , a lo n g e r
period of re s id e n c y should be re q u ire d to en su re th a t a c a n d id a te ha s s u ffic ie n t tim e to
b e c o m e fa m ilia r w ith th e county.
382
C H A P T E R 12 CASE LAW ANALYSIS IS A C A S E O N P OI NT' ?
in cvc r v s i t u a t i o n in w h i c h t h e st at u t es dit fer in f u n c t i o n , e v e n i f t h o v h a v e s o m e s i m i l a r i

ties, y o u c a n a r g u e t h a t t h e d i i fe r o n c e , n o m a t l e r h o w sHght, d i c t a t e s t h a t a c o u r t ' s i n t o r p r e t a
t i o n ol o n e s t a t u t e in o n e c ase c a n n o t a p p h ' to a n o t h e r s t a t u t e in a d i t i e r e n t case.
I’h e p r e c e d i n g e x a m p l e s i n v o l v e s t a t u t e s tVom t h e s a m e st a t e . All t h e s t a t u t e s w e r e
p a s s e d hy t h e s a m e s t a t e l e g i s l a t u r e , a n d t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n c a m e i r o m a c o u r t in t h a t
s t a t e . W ' h a t it, in t h e r e s i d e n c y e x a m p l e , t h e r e is n o c a s e l a w in t h e s t a t e i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e
t e r m r e s id e n t, a n d t h e F r a n k v. T e a g u e o p i n i o n is a d e c i s i o n t r o m a n o t h e r s t a t e i n t e r p r e t
i n g a s t a t u t e o t t h a t s t a t e t h a t is i d e n t i c a l o r v e r y s i m i l a r t o § 3 1 0 5 ? Cân F r a n k a p p l y as
precedent?
I h e a n s w e r is t h e s a m e as t h e answ' cr d i s c u s s e d in t h e p r e v i o u s e x a m p l e s . If t h e r e is sut
fi ci ent s i mi l a r i t y in l a n g u a g e a n d f u n c t i o n o f t h e s t a t u t e s , t h e o p i n i o n c a n a p p l y as p e r s u a s i v e
p r e c e d e n t . It t h e r e is n o t s u l l i c i e n t si mi l a r i t y , it c a n n o t a p p K' as p r e c e d e n t . As l o n g as t he
c o u r t is c o n v i n c e d t h a t t h e s i m i l a r i t y is sut Hc i e nt , it c a n a p p l y .
B e a r in m i n d t h a t a d e c i s i o n f r o m a n o l h e r j u r i s d i c t i o n is o n l y p e r s u a s i v e p r e c e d e n t ,
a n d a c o u r t is m o r e li kely t o a d o p t p e r s u a s i v e p r e c e d e n t f r o m a c o u r t w i t h i n t h e i u r i s d i c
t i o n t h a n f r o m a c o u r t w i t h o u t . It is b e st t o l o c a t e a u t h o r i t y w i t h i n \ ' o u r j u r i s d i c t i o n . L o o k
o u t o f s t a t e t>nly if t h e r e is n o o p i n i o n t h a t c o u l d a p p l y as p e r s u a s i v e p r e c e d e n t w i t h i n y o u r
jurisdiction.
Realistically, it is a l w a y s ri sky to a r g u e t h a t a c o u r t ’s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n ol a p r o v i s i o n o f o n e
s t a t u t e a p p l i e s as p r e c e d e n t f o r t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f a p r o v i s i o n o f a d i t i e r e n t st at u t e. V o u
a r e a l w a y s o p e n to, a n d will p r o h a b h - h a v e io t e n d oti, c o u n t e r a r g L m i e n t s t h a t t h e s t a t u t e s
a r e f u n c t i o n a l l y d i l i e r e n t a n d t h a t r e l i a n c e o n a p a r t i c u l a r c o u r t o p i n i o n is m i s p l a c e d , ^ ' o u r
p o s i t i o n in s u c h a s i t u a t i o n is n e v e r solid. A l w a y s tr y t o t i nd a n o t h e r o p i n i o n o r p u r s u e o t h e r
a v e n u e s o f re s e a r c h.
b. Case Law Rule or Principle

I h e s a m e p r i n c i p l e s d i s c u s s e d in t h e p r e c e d i n g s e c t i o n a p p l y w h e n a t t e m p t i n g to u s e as prec
e d e n t a c o u r t o p i n i o n i n t e r p r e t i n g a ca se law r u l e o r pr i nc i p l e, (ân a c o u r t o p i n i o n i n t e r p r e t i n g
a c a s e l aw r u l e p r i n c i p l e a p p l y as p r e c e d e n t for a cl i ent s ca*ê t h a t a \ ] \ \ i r c ^ t h e applicati(>n
ol a d i l i e r e n t c a s e Uuv r u l e o r p r i n c i p l e ? I h e r e q u i r e n i e n t s a r e s i m i l a r to t h o s e m e n t i o n e d in
t h e p r e c e d i n g se c t i o n . A r e t h e c a s e law r u l es o r p r i n c i p l e s s i m i l a r in l a n g u a g e a n d function?
A c o u r t o p i n i o n i n t e r p r e t i n g o n e c a se law r u l e o r p r i n c i p l e m a y b e u s e d as p r e c e d e n t for a
client' s c a s e t h a t inv o l v e s t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o t a d i l i e r e n t c a s e law r u l e o r p r i n c i p l e w h e n t h e r e
is s i m i l a r i t y in t h e follcnving (see Hxhibit 12-5):
1. ' I h e l a n g u a g e u s e d in t h e c a s e law r u l es o r p r i n c i p l e s
2. I h e I ' unct ion t>f t h e c a s e law r u l es o r p r i n c i p l e s
E x h i b i t 1 2 - 5 Requirem ents W hen Different C o n im o n Law Rules/Principles Apply.

^ .................................................................- — --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- mtsmi
Requirements that must be met for a case to be on point when
the case law rule or principle applied in the court opinion differs
from the case law rule or principle that applies in the client's case
1. T h e r e is a s im ila rity in th e l a n g u a g e u s e d in th e c a s e l a w rules o r principles, a n d
2. T h e r e is a s i m i l a r i t y in t h e f u n c t i o n u s e d in t h e c a s e l a w ru le s o r p r in c i p l e s .
383
For Example The jurisdiction re c o g n ize s the torts of intrusion and public disclosure of a
private fact. Intrusion pro tects a g a in s t th e a c t of prying or probing into the
private affairs of an individual, and public disc losu re of a private fa c t pro tects a g a in s t the
a ct of publishing inform ation c o n c e rn in g the priv ate affairs of an individual. Both of th es e
torts have been e sta b lish e d b y t h e highest c ourt in th e jurisd iction. T h e re is no s tatuto ry
la w defining or governing the torts. One of the e le m e n t s of the tort of intrusion is an a ct
of prying or probing into the private affairs o f t h e plaintiff. One o f t h e e le m e n ts o f t h e tort
of public disc losu re o f a p riv a te fa c t \s the public d is c lo s u re of a f a c t c o n c e rn in g the
p riv ate a ffa irs of the plaintiff.
In the client's cas e, the c lient w a s having an a ffa ir w ith th e w ife of a city council
m e m b e r A c a m p a ig n rival of the client d isclosed th e e x is t e n c e of the relation ship at a
c a m p a ig n rally. The c a m p a ig n rival a c q u ire d th e in fo rm atio n from a c a m p a ig n a id e w h o
obtained the inform ation by peeking th ro u g h th e client's b e d ro o m w in d o w . T h e c lient
w a n ts to sue for public disc losu re of a private fa ct. T h e q u e stio n is w h e t h e r the a ffa ir is
a private fact.
The only c a s e in the jurisdiction is C laron i/. Clark, an intrusion c as e in w h ic h a
private investigator, by m e a n s of a w ire ta p , d is c o v e re d th a t th e plaintiff w a s e n g a g e d
in an a ffa ir The c ourt ruled t h a t t h e te rm p riv a te a ffa irs in c lu d e s any sexual activity th at
ta k e s plac e w ithin the c onfine s of an individual's re s id e n c e .
Is the Clark opinion an intrusion c ase on point? Can it be p r e c e d e n t in the client's
case, w h ic h involves a d iff e r e n t to r t (public d is c lo s u re of a priv ate fa ct)? M a y it be used
as p re c e d e n t in the client's c as e to guide the c o u rt in its in te rp re ta tio n o f t h e m e a n in g
of the term p riv ate a ffa ir s l T h e re is a sim ilarity in th e e le m e n t s of the torts; both use the
te rm p riv a te affairs. Both torts a re similar in fu nctio n, in th a t th e y a re d e sig n e d to p ro tec t
the private affairs and lives of individuals.
If the court is c o n v in c e d t h a t t h e sim ilarities a re sufficient, then the c ase m a y apply
as pre ce de nt. It can a lw a y s be argued, how ever, th a t b e c a u s e the torts are different, th ere
IS a d iffe re n c e in function, no m a tte r h o w slight, th a t d ic ta te s th a t a court's inte rpre ta tion
of the one tort c a n n o t apply to a differe n t tort. In this c a s e , it c a n be argued th a t prying
is d iffere nt from publication; th e re fo r e , the d iff e r e n c e in th e in te re st being p ro te c te d in
the torts is sufficient to p re ve n t an in te rp re ta tio n of a te rm in intrusion from being used
to in te rp re t the s a m e term in public disclosu re of a priv a te fact.
A g a i n , b e caret ul . I h e .same pitfalls exist h e r e as w h e n d i t f e r e n t l e g i sl a t i \ e a c t s apply.

A c o u r t o p i n i o n w i t h i n t h e j u r i s d i c t i o n i n t e r p r e t i n g a d i f f e r e n t r u l e ot law is on l y p e r s u a s i v e
p r e c e d e n t . It is n o t m a n d a t o r y p r e c e d e n t t ha t m u s t b e f ol l o w e d . It is \ e r y eas\' to p r e s e n t a
c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t t h a t t h e f u n c t i o n s ot t h e t w o d o c t r i n e s a r e c l e a r h ' di f f e r e n t , so t h e c o u r t
o p i n i o n c a n n o t a p p l y as p r e c e d e n t . Also, k ee p in m i n d t h a t w h e n t h e d e c i s i o n is f r o m a n o t h e r
j u r i s d i c t i o n , it is still o n h ’ p ers uasi \ -e p r e c e d e n t , a n d a c o u r t is m o r e likely to a d o p t p e r s u a s i v e
prece den t fr om within the iurisdiction than fr om w ithout .
N O T E : It is al ways p r ef er a b l e to l o ca t e a n o p i n i o n t h a t a p p l i e s a r u l e o r legal p r i n c i p l e t hat is

t h e s a m e as t h e rul e o r p r i n c i p l e t h a t appl i e s in t h e c l i e n t ’s case. If d i f f e r e n t rul es o r p r i n c i p l e s
are i n x o h ed, it is e a s i er for t h e o t h e r side to a r g u e t h a t t h e o p i n i o n is n o t o n p o i n t a n d , t h e r e
fore, d o e s n o t a p p k as p r e c e d e n t f o r t h e c ase at h a n d .
W h e n di f f e r en t rul es o r p r i n c i p l e s a r e i n\ t ) h e d , y o u s h o u l d c o n d u c t f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h
a n d S h e p a r d i z e t h e c ase to d e t e r m i n e if t h e r e a r e o t h e r cas e s m o r e o n p o i n t .
384
V. K E Y P O I N T S C H E C K L I S T : is a Case On Point?
I' ocus o n t h e key fact s a n d t h e r u l e of law o r legal p r i n c i p l e of b o t h t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n
a n d client's case.
W' hen t h e r e are d i f l e r e n c e s b e t w e e n t h e key facts o t ' t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n a n d t h e c l i

e n t ’s case, c a r e f u l h ’ d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r t h e d i f f e r e n c e s are si gni f i c a nt . Be a w a r e ,
ho we\ ' er , t ha t di f f er e nt ke\' fact s ma \ ' lead t o t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f an e n t i r e l y d i f f e r e n t
law or p r i n c i p l e d e s p i t e o t h e r ke\' fact s i mi l a r i t i es . I h e r u l e o f law o r legal p r i n c i p l e ,
h o w e v e r , m a y he s o b r o a d t ha t it a p p l i e s to m a n y di f f e r ent fact s i t u a t i o n s .
Cdearly i d en t i f y t h e r u l e o f l a w o r legal p r i n c i p l e t h a t a p p l i es in t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n
a n d in t h e c l i e n t ’s ca.se.
W’h e n t h e r u l e of l a w a p p l i e d in t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n is di f ferent f r o m t h e r u l e t h a t
a ppl i es in t h e c l i e n t ’s c ase, c o n s i d e r u si n g t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n as p r e c e d e n t o n ly w h e n
there is n o a u t h o r i t y i n t e r p r e t i n g o r a p p l y i n g t h e r u l e o r p r i n c i p l e t ha t a p p l i es in t h e
c l i e n t ’s case.
C o n s i d e r a u t h o r i t y t r o m a n o t h e r ji u' isdi ct i on o n ly w h e n t h e r e is n o a u t h o r i t y f r o m
t h e i u r i s d i c t i o n in w h i c h t h e c l i e n t ’s case aros e.
If in d o u b t a b o u t w h e t h e r a fact is a key fact, c o n t i n u e y o u r a na l y s i s u n t i l y o u a r e

ce r t ai n . R el e r to t h e s t e p s p r e s e n t e d in t d i a p t e r 9.
l o l l o w \ ' o u r i n s t i n ct s. If a n o p i n i o n d o e s n o t a p p e a r to b e o n p o i n t b u t y o u r i n t u
i tion tells \()u it is o n p o i n t , c o n t i n u e y o u r a n a l y s i s unt i l \ ’o u a r e c e r t a i n . If y o u n e v e r
r e a c h t h e p o i n t o f f e e l i n g c e r t a i n , s e a r c h e l s e wh e r e.
VI. A P P L I C A T I O N
I hi s s e c t i o n p r e s e n t s t wo e x a m p l e s i l l u s t r a t i n g t h e a p p l i c a t i o n of t h e p r i n c i p l e s p r e s e n t e d in
t hi s c h ap t e i' for d e t e i m i n i n g w h e n a c a s e is o n p o i n t .
Ihi s e x a m p l e is basec.1 o n t h e fact p a t t e r n p r e s e n t e d at t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t hi s c h a p t e r . R e t u r n
i ng to t ha t p r o b l e m , is t he c a s e of K arl H e ra ld o n p o i n t so t h a t it a p p l i es as p r e c e d e n t for
t h e c l i e n t ’s case?
1. Are the Key Facts Sufficiently Similar?

I h e lirst s t ep is to d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r t h e k e y fact s o \ K a rl H e r a ld a r e s u f f i c i e n t l y s i m i l a r
t o t h e c l i e n t ’s c a s e f o r H e r a ld t o a p p h ’ as p r e c e d e n t — t o b e o n p o i n t . A l t h o u g h t h e fact s in
H e r a ld ar e s o m e w h a t di f f e r ent , t h e \ ' a r e suf fici entl y si mi lar, in b o t h cases, t h e c o r p o r a t i o n was
in a p o s i t i o n t o p a y d i v i d e n d s . In b o t h c a s e s , w h i l e r e f u s i n g to p a y d i v i d e n d s , t h e m a j o r i t y
s h a r e h o l d e r al l eg e d h ' e n r i c h e d h i m s e l f t h r o u g h e xcess i \ ’e raises a n d b o n u s e s . In b o t h cases, t h e
m i n o r i t y s h a r e h o l d e r s we r e e t f e c t i \ ' e h ’ p r e v e n t e d f r o m b e n e f i t i n g by t h e c o r p o r a t i o n ’s success.
A dif f er ence in H era ld is t h e p l a i n t i f f ' wo r k e d in t h e busi ness. In the c l i e n t ’s case, t h e b r o t h
ers d i d n o t w o r k in t h e b u s i ne s s , i h i s d if f e r e n c e in t h e cases is n ot a key fact di f f e r e nc e. T h e
tact t h a t t h e pl a i nt i f f in H e r a ld w o r k e d in t h e b u s i n e s s rel ates to h e r s t at u s as a n e m p l o y e e , b u t
d o e s n o t relate to h e r s t at us as a sha r e l u^l der . In Herald, t he c o u rt d e f i ne d oppressix' e c o n d u c t as
c o n d u c t agai ns t s h a r e h o l d e r s , n o t e m p l o \ ' e e s . ' Ihe p l a i n t i f f s s t a t us as an e m p k w e e m a y give rise
to e m p l o y e e rights, b u t it is n o t r e l a t e d t o h e r r ight s as a s h a r e h o l d e r , a n d t h u s is n o t a k e y fact.
2. Are the Rules or Principles Sufficiently Similar?

Is t h e r e a sufficient simi lari t}' b e t w e e n t h e l a w t h a t a p p l i es in Karl v. H e r a ld a n d t h a t w h i c h
a p p l i e s in t h e c l i e n t ’s case for t h e c a s e t o b e c o n s i d e r e d o n p o i n t a n d a p p h ' as p r e c e d e n t ?
385
I h e s a m e st at ut e, § 9 6 - 2 3 - 1 6 ot t h e lUisiness ( ' o r p o r a t i o i i Act, a p p l i e s to b o t h llic c o u r t o pi n

i on anci t h e client's case. lUith c ases i nvol ve a l l e g a t i on s ot’ o p p r e s s i \ ' c c o n d u c t hy a m a j o r i t y
s h a r e h o l d e r agai ns t a m i n o r i t y s h a r e h o l d e r a n d are g o v e r n e d b\- t h e s a m e s e c t i o n ot’t h e statute.
In t h e H e r a ld o p i n i o n , o p p r c i i i w c o n d u c t was d e f m e d as “a n y u n f a i r o r f r a u d u l e n t act
b y a m a j o r i t y s h a r e h o l d e r t ha t i n u r e s to t h e b e n e f i t (if t h e m a j o r i t y a n d to t h e d e t r i m e n t o f
t h e m i n o r i t y . ” ' I h e c l i e n t ’s case also i n v o l ve s c]uestions o f o p p r e s s i v e c o n d u c t b\- t h e m a j o r i t y
s h a r e h o l d e r a n d is g o v e r n e d by t h e s a m e d e f i n i t i o n . )ust as in H era ld , t h e r e is al l eged u n t a i r
c o n d u c t by t h e m a j o r i t y s h a r e h o l d e r t ha t i n u r e s t o t h e bene f i t of’t h e ma j o r i t v ’ a n d to t h e d e t
r i m e n t o f t h e m i n o r i t y . ' I h e r e a r e n o m a j o r d i t l e r e n c e s b e t w e e n H e r a ld a n d t h e c li en t ' s case
t h a t r estri ct t h e a p p l i c a t i o n ot H e r a ld as p r e c e d e n t .
N O T E : W h a t i f y o u c o n c l u d e d t h a t H e ra ld w a s n o t o n p o i n t , b u t it w a s t h e o n l \ ' c a s e in t he
j u r i s d i c t i o n t ha t d i s c u s s e s o p p r e s s i v e ct)ii duct? You w o u l d n e e d to b e su r e t o a n a l y z e t h e case
in t h e m e m o r a n d u m to y o u r s u p e r v i s o r a n d e x p l a i n w h y t h e c a s e is n o t o n p o i n t .
B. L ib e l Case
' I h e follow' ing fact s i t u a t i o n a n d c o u r t o p i n i o n il lustrat e a n o t h e r e x a m p l e o f t h e use o f t h e
s t e p s d i s c u s s e d in thi s cha pt e r.
For Example J e rry lives in an a p a rtm e n t building. He often sees couples, and som etim e s
individuals, entering and leaving Eve's a p a rtm e n t in the late e ve n in g and
e a rly morning. C onvinced th at Eve is e n g a g e d in im m oral behavior, he p re p a re s a petition
re g u e s tin g th a t Eve be kicked out o f t h e building. He intends to pre s e n t c o p ie s o f t h e p e ti
tion to the oth er te n a n ts o f t h e building and subm it the signed petitions to th e landlord. In
th e petition, he refers to Eve as an im m oral person.
Early one e ve n in g , he d e c id e s to c o n fro n t Eve. In the en su in g c o n v e rs a tio n , he
d is c o v e rs th at Eve is a m a r ria g e c o u n s e lo r e m p lo y e d by a local business. T h e c o u p le s he
h as s ee n visiting he r a p a rtm e n t are w o r k e r s a t t h e business w h o , due to th e ir s c h e d u le ,
c a n c o m e to couns eling only during the late evening. S he has an a g r e e m e n t w ith her
e m p lo y e r th at a llo w s he r to counsel c ouples and individuals in her a p a rtm e n t.
Jerry, realizing he is m istak en ab o u t Eve, d e c id e s to de stroy the petitions. On the
w a y to the incinerator, he u n k n o w in g ly drops a copy of the petition. A n o th e r te n a n t finds
it and ultim ately c irc u la te s it a m o ng th e te n a n ts o f t h e building. Eve he ars a b o u t th e p e ti
tion and d e c id e s to sue J e rry for libel.
Th e state's libel s tatute de fin e s libel as "the intentional publication, in w ritin g , of
fa ls e s ta te m e n ts ab o u t a perso n." A leading libel c a s e in the jurisdiction is Cox v. Redd. In
this c a s e . Redd w r o te a letter, w h ic h he inte nde d to mail to Cox, w h e r e in he called Cox a
c ro o k and a thief. Th e s ta te m e n ts w e r e not true. Redd in te n d e d for Cox, and no one else,
to re a d the letter. Th e day b e fo re he plan n ed to m ail the letter, he invited s e v e ra l frie nds
o v e r to spend the evening. He fo rgot to put the lette r a w a y . He left it open on th e dining
ro o m ta b le, and som e of the guests re ad it. Redd w a s not a w a r e th a t his gu e sts had read
th e letter. Cox h e ard ab o u t it and sued Redd for libel.
Th e court, inte rpre ting the libel statute, ruled th a t "inte ntio nal pub lic atio n " m e a n s
e ith e r the actual in te ntto publish or, w h e r e th ere is no in te n tto publish, "reckless or grossly
n e g lig e n t c o n d u c t th at results in publication." The c ourt held th a t Redd's c o n d u c t of le a v
ing th e letter open w h e r e he k n e w his guests m ight see it w a s grossly n e g lig e n t c o n d u c t
a n d th a t he had th e re fo r e intention ally published the letter and had c o m m itte d libel. The
c o u r t c o m m e n te d th at Redd k n e w c o m p a n y w a s c om in g to his house, and his fa ilu re
to e x e rc is e c a re in s e c u rin g th e letter in light of th a t k n o w le d g e w a s gross n e g lig e n c e .
386
C H A P T E R 12 C A S E L A W A N A L Y S I S — IS A C A S E O N P OI NT' ?
In t hi s e x a m p l e , is Ca i \ r. R e d d tin p o i n t so t h a t it a p p l i e s as p r e c e d e n t in l e r r y ’s case?
1. Are the Key Facts Sufficiently Similar?

B o t h c a s e s i n\ ’ol ve false w r i t t e n s t a t e m e n t s t h at w e r e p u b l i s h e d . In b o t h cases, t h e r e is t h e
q u e s t i o n o f i n t e n t i o n a l p u b l i c a t i o n . In t h e (.o.v case, e v e n t h o u g h he ma \ ' n o t h a v e i n t e n d e d
to p u b l i s h t h e letter, R e d d ’s c a r e l es s n e s s in lea\ i n g it o u t r e s u l t e d in its p u b l i c a t i o n .
A r e t h e fact s c o n c e r n i n g i n t e n t i o n a l p u b l i c a t i o n in Hve’s c a s e s u t h c i e n t l y s i m i l a r ? It
is q u e s t i o n a b l e . I n t h e ('o.v case. R e d d w a s c a r e l cs s a n d t o o k n o st ep s t o s e c u r e t h e l et ter. In
Hve’s case, | e r r y w a s t a k i n g s t e p s to a\-oid p u b l i c a t i o n a n d a c c i d e n t a l l y d r o p p e d a c o p y o f t h e
p e t i t i o n . It c o u l d be a r g u e d t ha t s o m e key facts a r e c l e a r k d i f f e r e n t — t h a t his c o n d u c t w a s
s i m p l e n e g l i g e n c e a n d n o t g r o s s n e g l i g e n c e — a n d t h a t t h e ( ’o.v case is t h e r e f o r e n o t o n p o i n t .
It c o u l d al s o be a r g u e d t h a t d u e t o t h e e x t r e m e s e n s i t i vi t y o f t h e c o n t e n t s o f t h e p e t i t i o n , J er ry
s h o u l d h a v e t a k e n g r e a t c a r e t o e n s u r e t h a t all t h e c o p i e s o f t h e p e t i t i o n w e r e b u r n e d , a n d t h e
f a i l ur e t o ex e r c i se t h a t c a r e c o n s t i t u t e s g r o s s n eg l i ge n c e . U n d e r thi s a r g u m e n t , t h e Co.v cas e
c a n a p p l y as p r e c e d e n t .
It is i m p o r t a n t to n o t e t h a t t h e d i f f e r e n c e in t h e ke y facts m a k e s it q u e s t i o n a b l e w h e t h e r
t h e c as e is o n p o i n t . T o r e m o v e d o u b t , a d d i t i o n a l r e s e a r c h m u s t b e c o n d u c t e d t o d e t e r m i n e
w h a t c o n s t i t u t e s g r o s s n e g l i g e n c e a n d w h e t h e r l e r r y ’s c o n d u c t ri ses t o t h e level o f g r o s s
n e g l i ge n c e.
2. Are the Rules or Principles Sufficiently Similar?

If it is d e c i d e d t h a t t h e r e is a sufficient si mi l a r i t y in t h e facts, t h e n is t h e r e a suf tici ent s i m i l a r i t y
b e t w e e n t h e law t hat a p p l i es in t h e (,'<u o p i n i o n a n d t h a t w h i c h a p p l i es in t h e c l i e n t ’s c a s e for
t h e o p i n i o n t o b e c o n s i d e r e d o n p o i n t a n d a p p k as p r e c e d e n t ? B o t h c ases ar e libel c as e s t ha t
a p p h ' t h e s a m e libel st atut e. B o t h c ase s i i n o K e t h e e l e m e n t of i n t en t t o p u b l i s h . B o t h c a s e s
ar e c o n c e r n e d w i t h an a s p e c t ol t h at e l e m e n t : w h e t h e r t h e r e is “ i n t e n t i o n a l p u b l i c a t i o n ” w h e n
t h e c o n d u c t t h at r esults in p u b l i c a t i o n is u n i n t e n t i o n a l .
I h e r e f o r e , t h e r e is little q u e s t i o n t ha t (,'o.v is o n p o i n t w i t h r e g a r d to s t ep 2. If it is d e
t e r m i n e d t ha t I e r r \ ’s c o n d u c t is g ro s s n e gl i ge n c e , u n d e r t h e r ul e of law a p p l i e d in (.'o.v, J e r r y ’s
c o n d u c t is i n t e n t i o n a l p u b l i c a t i o n .
Sum m ary
C o u r t o p i n i o n s ar e i m p o r t a n t b e c a u s e u n d e r t he d o c t r i n e s o f p r e c e d e n t a n d st are decisis, j u d g e s
r e a c h d e c i s i o n s a c c o r d i n g t o p r i n c i p l e s laid d o w n in s i m i l a r cases. I h e r e f o re , a r e s e a r c h e r
s h o u l d fi nd a c a s e that is p r e c e d e n t ( o n p o i n t ) b e c a u s e it g u i d e s t h e a t t o r n e y as t o h o w t h e
issue in t h e c l i e n t ’s case ma \ ' b e d e c i d e d . A n o p i n i o n is o n p o i n t , a n d m a y b e c o n s i d e r e d as
p r e c e d e n t , if t h e r e is a suffici ent si mi l ari t ) ' b e t w e e n t h e ke\' tact s a n d t h e r u l e of l a w o r legal
p r i n c i p l e t ha t g o \ ’e r n s b o t h t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n a n d t h e c l i e n t ’s case.
W ' h e n c o n s i d e r i n g t h e k e y lacts, t h e h e a r t o f t h e p r o c e s s is t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f t h e
similarities a n d differences be tw een th em . Ih e m o r e p r o n o u n c e d the differences betw'een
t h e facts o f t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n a n d t h o s e o f t h e c l i e n t ’s case, t h e g r e a t e r t h e l i k e l i h o o d t h a t t h e
o p i n i o n is n o t o n p o i n t . Be ver\- critical in \ ' o u r a n a l y s i s w h e n t h e r e a r e d i f f e r e n c e s . A h v a y s
p u r s u e o t h e r a \ ' e n u e s o f r e s e a r c h w h e n t h e ke y facts a r e di f ferent .
W h e n t h e key facts a r e sul f i c i e nt l v s i m i l a r for t h e o p i n i o n to be c o n s i d e r e d o n p o i n t ,
l o o k t o t h e r u l e o f l a w t ha l g o \ ' e r n s t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n a n d t h e c l i e n t ’s case. If t h e s a m e r u l e
a p p l i e s in t h e s a m e way, t h e o p i n i o n is u s u a l h ' o n p o i n t . It a d i i f e r e n t r u l e a p p l i es , a c o u r t
o p i n i o n u s u a l ly c a n n o t a p p l \ ' as p r e c e d e i i t . W h e n t h e l a n g u a g e a n d f u n c t i o n o f t h e a p p l i c a b l e
r u l es o r p r i n c i p l e s a r e s u f t i c i en t h ' s i mi l a r , h o w e \ e r , it c a n b e a r g u e d t ha t a n o p i n i t ) n is o n
p o i n t a n d c a n b e u s e d as p r e c e d e n t .
387
Re l i a n c c o n a c o u r t o p i n i o n that a p p l i es a d i l k ’r c n t m i c o r p r i n c i p l e t h a n t h a t wl i cl i
a p p l i e s in t h e c l i e n t ’s c a s e is risk\- a n d s h o u l d b e a t t e m p t e d o n l y w h e n t h e r e is n o case f at
i n t e r p r e t s t h e r ul e o r p r i n c i p l e g o \ e r n i n g t h e c l i e n t ' s case.
Quick R eferences
C a s e law a na l ys i s 372 O n point 372
Ditt ' erent ke\- tacts 376 P e r s u a si v e p i ' ec e d e n t 373
381 Pi ' ecedent 372
I d e n t i c a l ke)' tacts 373 ,Sanie rul e o r legal p r i n c i p l e 380
M a ndator\' preceden t 373 St ar e deci s i s 373
O n all fo u r s
I n t e r n e t R esources
V a r i o u s VVeb sites d i s c u s s t h e s u b j ec t o t ' c a s e s o n p o i n t . M o s t sites ti iscuss speci ti c cases ¿-nd
topi cs. T h e s e sites m a y b e a c c e s s e d b\ u s i n g “case law o n all t'ours" o r “case.s o n all I'ours” i.s a
t o p i c in a s e a r ch e n g i n e . As m e n t i o n e d in C h a p t e r 9, m o s t sites pr os ide i n l o r m a t i o n w it hout
c h a r g e . I n f ' o r ma t i o n \ ' ou o b t a i n tree n i a \ not b e c l o s e k m o n i t o r e d a n d m a y n ot b e as a c c u
r at e o r ha v e t h e s a m e c]uality o t ' m a t e r i a l as that o b t a i n e d I'l'om t e e - b a s e d s e r \ ices. Iherel'i l e,
e x e rc i s e c a r e w h e n u s i n g t r e e k o b t a i n e t l mat eri al .
Exercises
A d ii it io n a l a s s ig n m e n ts are a v a ih ih le on the (io u rsc M a lc . ch a p t e r , that is, 9 6 - 2 3 - 1 6 a n d K tu i i'. Herald, l h e cliont

seeks r edr ess tor the o t h e r p a r t \ 's refusal t o issue ilividends.
ASSIGNM ENT!
In e a c h e x a m p l e , detei i n i n e il Karl i'. H erald is o n point.
W' hat d o e s it m e a n w h e n a c a s e is o n p o i n t ? W ' h e n is a
c as e o n p o i n t ? F.xaniple I
Client a n d his sister, lanice, are shai e h o l d e r s in a c or por at i on,
ASSIGNM ENT 2
lani ce is t he ma j or i t y s h a r e h o l d e r , t he sole m e m b e r o f t h e
D e s c r i b e t h e t w o - s t e p p r o c e s s t'or d e t e r m i n i n g w h e n a ca se
b o a r d ot dir ector s, a n d t h e m a n a g e r ot t h e c o r p o i ation. l o r
is o n po i n t .
the past fi\'e years, she h a s pa i d hersell a l u c r a t i w salar\; tw ice
ASSIGNM ENTS that p a i d to m a n a g e r s o f si mi l ar c o r po r a t i on s , l h e c o r p o r a
D e s c r i b e t h e t h r e e - p a r t p r o c e s s t o r d e t e r m i n i n g it'a c a s e is tion has a S4()(),()()() cash su r p l u s that lanice clainis is necessar\-
o n p o i n t w h e n t h e r e ar e difl' erent k e y facts. ft)r e me r g e n c i e s . \ o eni er genc\ - h a s t ) c c urre d in t h e past ti\ e
\ ears that w o u ld requi r e e x p e n d i t u r e o f m o r e thaii S?(),()0().
ASSIGNM ENT 4
D e s c r i b e t h e tw'o st ep s to fol l ow w h e n t h e d o c t r i n e o r r ul e Example 2
a p p l i e d by t h e c o u r t is di f f e r e n t f r o m t h e d o c t r i n e t h a t a p C l i e n t a n d C^laire o w n a f a b r i c st or e , l h e b u s i n e s s is a
pli es in t h e c l i e n t ’s case. c o r p o r a t i o n , a n d Cl a i re h o l d s 80 p e r c e n t ot t h e s t oc k a n d
m a k e s all t h e b u s i n e s s d e c i s i o n s . (Client, a n e m p l o y e e o f t he
ASSIGNM ENTS
b u si n e s s , o w n s 20 p e r c e n t o f t h e st ock, l h e b u s i n e s s has a
W h y is it i m p o r t a n t for a r e s e a r c h e r to find a case o n p o i n t ? lar ge c a sh s u r p l u s , b u t CTaire h a s ne\-er is sued div i dends .
ASSIGNM ENTS C l a i r e ’s salar\- is t h r e e t i m e s C l i e n t ’s. W h e n (T i e n t asks that
d i \ ' i d e n d s b e is sued, CTaire r e s p o n d s , “ '\'our div i d e n d f r o m
In th e f o l lo w in g ex am p l e s, u s e th e st a t u t o r y a n d case
thi s c o r p o r a t i o n is voiu' j o b . ”
l a w p r e s e n t e d in t h e h y p o t h e t i c a l at t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h e
Fxample 3 prcn ided b\' his p a r e n t s aiul his p a r t - t i m e i n c o m e e x c e e d e d
(.client a n d D o n a rc p a r t n e r s in a b u s i n e s s . !’) o n o w n s t he m a x i m u m a l l o w a b l e i n c o m c . Hi s a p p h c a t i o n f o r a n
70 p e r c c n t o f t h e p a r t n e r s h i p a n d (^heiit o w n s 30 p e r c e n t , appeal h ea ri n g was denied.
( l i e n t d o e s not w o r k lor t h e b u s i ne s s . D o n r u n s t h e b u s i
nes s a n d p a \ s h i ms e l l a large s a l a r \ t hat a l w a \ s s e e m s to
Part B
e q u a l t h e pi'olits. (Client t h i n k s thi s is fishv' a n d t h a t D o n
(Lieu t’s Facts: In t h e last s e s s i o n o f t h e s t a t e l e g i s l a t u r e ,
t he legislatLirc p a s s e d l e g i s l a t i o n p r o \ i d i n g t h a t w h e n a p
s h o u l d h a \ e a set salarv a n d t h e profit a b o \ e I')on’s s a l ar \
p l i c a n t s for g e n e r a l r e l i e f a r e d e n i e d r e l i e f b a s e d o n i n f o r
s h o u l d b e s h a r e d 70/ 30. I h e r e is n o p a r t n e r s h i p c a s e law
m a t i o n p r c n i d e d in t h e a p p l i c a t i o n , t h e y a r e n o t e n t i t l e d
in t h e i u r i s d i c t i o n a d d r e s s i n g t hi s q u e s t i o n .
to a n a p p e a l h e a r i n g . I h e p u r p o s e ot t h e l e g i s l a t i o n is t o
a s s ig n m e n t ; c u t costs.
Hach o f t h e f o l l o w i n g e x a m p l e s p r e s e n t s a b r i e f s u m m a r y .\lr. f a y l o r , a f i r s t - t i me a p p l i c a n t f o r g e n e r a l r e l i e f
ot t h e c o u r t t i p i n i o n , t o l l o we d b\' a c l i e n t ’s fact si t u a t i o n , f u n d s , w a s d e n i e d b e n e f i t s b a s e d s o l el y o n h i s a p p l i c a
l-'or e a ch client fact s i t u a t i o n , p a r t s .\ t h r o u g h (¡, d e t e r m i n e t i on. H e b e l i e v e s t h a t h e h a s sp e c i al c i r c u m s t a n c e s t h a t
t h e l o l l owi ng: e n t i t l e h i m t o b e n e f i t s . Hi s r e q u e s t f or a n a p p e a l h e a r i n g
1. W’hat ar e t h e tact si mi l ari t i es a n d di r t e r e n c e s b e t w e e n was d e ni e d .
t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n a n d t he c l i e n t ’s s i t u a t i o n ?
Part C;
2. Is t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n o n p o i n t ? W’h\' o r w h y n o t ?
C lie n t’s Facts: ('licnt has been receiving general relief
3. II t h e o p i n i o n is o n p o i n t , w h a t will t h e p r o b a b l e f u n d s for t h e pa st year. Last we e k , h e r e c e i v e d n o t i c e t h a t
d e c i s i o n b e in r e g a r d to t h e q u e s t i o n r a i se d by t h e his relief w o u l d b e t e r m i n a t e d d u e to i n f o r m a t i o n r e c e i \ e d
c l i e n t ’s facts? f r o m his e m p l o y e r i n d i c a t i n g t h a t h e h a d r e c e i \ ' e d a raise,
a n d his i n c o m e is n o w o \ c r t h e s t a t u t o r y m a x i m u m . H i s
Example 1 r e q u e s t for a n a p p e a l h e a r i n g o n t h e t e r m i n a t i o n ot relict
Court Opinion: S ld tc r. ¡ones. Mr. | o n e s , a t i r s t - t i m e was d e n i e d .
a p p l i c a n t for g e n er a l rel ief f u n d s , was d e n i e d relict w i t h
ou t a h ea r i n g . I h e d e n i a l was b a s e d o n i n f o r m a t i o n in Example 2
Mr. l o n e s ’s a p p l i c a t i o n i n d i c a t i n g that his i n c o m c was (;ourt Opinion: R c \ r. Ireland. Mr. R ex, t h e l a n d l o r d ,
a b i n e t h e t h r e s h o l d m a x i m u m set b \ ’ t h e a g e n c \ r egul a filetl an e x i c t i o n suit a g ai ns t his t e n a n t , Mr . I r el a n d .
ti ons. I h e r e g u l a t i o n p r o v i d e s that w h e n an a p p l i c a n t ’s Mr. Rex s e r \ e d n o t i c e ot defaLilt u p o n Mr . I r e l a n d b \ ’ r o l l
i n c o m e , o r t h e t i n a n c i a l s u p p o r t p r o \ i d e d to a n a p p l i c a n t i ng u p t h e n o t i c e ol d e f a u l t a n d p l a c i n g it m Mr . I r el a n d ' s
pl us i n c o m e , e x c e e d s $ 1 2 , 0 0 0 a \ ea r , t h e i n d i \ idual ma\- ma i l b o x . I h e m a i l b o x was s i t u a t e d n e x t t o t h e st reet.
be d e n i e d g e n e r a l reliel l u n d s . I h e r e g u l a t i o n is silent Mr. I r e l a n d r e t r i e v e d t h e n o t i c e t h e n e x t d a ) ’. Mr . I r e l a n d ,
a bot i t t h e right t o a h e a r i n g . in h i s d e f e n s e to t h e e \ ’i c t i on suit, s t a t e d t h a t h e w'as n o t
M r . l o n e s ’s a p p l i c a t i o n r e f l e c t e d t h a t t h e g r o s s i n g i v e n p r o p e r n o t i c e of d e f a u l t u n d e r t h e p r o v i s i o n s of
c o m e Irc'iii hi s t w o p a r t - t i m e i o b s e x c e e d e d by $ 2 , 0 0 0 t he § 5.S-6"-9 o f t h e l . a n d l o r d / ' r e n a n t .Act; t h e r e f o r e , t h e c a s e
m a x i m u m a l l o w a b l e i n c o m c t o r cligibilit}'. f i e b e l i e \ e i l sh ou ld be dismissed. 'Ihe statute provi des that notic e o f
t h e r e w e r e s p e ci a l c i r c u m s t a n c e s t h a t w o u l d a l l o w h i m d e f a u l t ma \ ' b e a c c o m p l i s h e d in o n e ot t h r e e ways:
t o be e l i gi bl e f o r g e n e r a l r e l i e f H i s d e m a n d for a n a p p e a l 1. Deliver)' b \ ’ ce r t i f i e d mai l
h e a r i n g t o e x p l a i n hi s s p e c i a l c i r c u m s t a n c e s w a s d e n i e d .
2. H a n d d e l i v e r ) ’ to t h e i n d i v i d u a l t o b e e v i c t e d
I he c o u r t h e l d t h a t t h e d u e pr o c e s s c l a us e o f t h e st ate
3. P o s t i n g at t h e m o s t p ub l i c p a r t o f t h e r e s i d e n c e
co ns t it u ti o n entitles a first-time ap plicant for general r e
lict l u n d s t o a h e a r i n g w h e n speci al c i r c u m s t a n c e s a r e a l ' Ihe s t a t u t e f u r t h e r p n n ’ides t ha t t h e c o u r t n i a y e n t e r
leged. I h c q u e s t i o n in t h e t' ollowing t h r e e fact s i t u a t i o n s an o r d e r o f e\ i c t ion if t h e no t i ce o f def;uilt is n o t r e s p o n d e d
is w h e t h e r t h e cl i ent is e n t i t l e d t o a h e a r i n g . to w i t h i n 30 days.
I he c o u r t , d e n y i n g t h e r e q u e s t f o r d i s m i s s a l , r u l e d
Part A t h a t th.e i n t e n t o f t h e s t a t u t e w’as to e n s u r e t h a t t e n a n t s
Client’s Facts; T o m li\ es at h o m e wi t h his p a r e n t s. H e h a s a r e c e i ve n o t i c e o f d e f a u l t . ' I h e c o u r t n o t e d t h a t a l t h o u g h
p a r t - t i m e iob. H e d o c s n o t p a y r e n t o r utilities. H e uses t h e t h e n i e t h o d o f d e l i v e r y u se d b y M r . Rex d i d n o t c o m p l y
m o n c \ t r o m hi s job to a t t e n d sc h o o l , a n d h e h a s \ er\' little wi t h t he s t a t u t e , t h e i n t e n t o f t h e act w a s a c c o m p l i s h e d ,
left over . Hi s a p p l i c a t i o n f o r g e n e r a l r e l i ef w a s d e n i e d , i h c i n a s m u c h as M r . I r e l a n d h a d a ct u a l n o t i c e o f d e f a u l t a n d
writ ten denial stated that the co mb in ati cm o f t h e su p p o r t was n o t p r e j u d i c e d b\' t h e i m p r o p e r n o t i ce .
Ilic q u e s t i o n in t h e t o l l m s i n g ti uu' lact s i t u a t i o n s is t^lient d i d not r e t u r n f r o m v a c a t i o n a n d l ea r n o f t h e d e f a u l t
w h e t i i e r t h e n o t i c e ol d e f a u l t is effective. unt i l a f t er t h e 3 0 - d a y d e f a u l t p e r i o d h a d p a s s e d .
Part D Part F
C lie n t’s Facts: T h e c l i en t is a t e n a n t . I h e l a n d l o r d t o l d Client’s Facts: L a n d l o r d sent t h e n o t i c e o f d e f a u l t b \ r e g u
t h e c l i e n t ’s d a u g h t e r t o i n t b r m t h e t e n a n t t h a t h e w a s in lar mai l, a n d t h e t e n a n t r e c e i ve d it.
d e f a u l t a n d , u n d e r t h e t e r m s o f t h e lease, w o u l d b e e \ i c t e d
it h e d i d n o t pa\' o r o t h e r w i s e r e s p o n d w i t h i n 30 d a \ s. I h e
Part G
d a u g h t e r i n f o r m e d t h e t e n a n t t h e n ex t da\'. W o u l d it m a k e
Client’s Facts: T h e l a n d l o r d s e n t t h e n o t i c e b y c e r t if i e d
mai l , b u t t h e c l i en t r e f u s e d to a c c e p t it.
an\- d i f f e r e n c e if t h e d a u g h t e r i n f o r m e d t h e t e n a n t aft er
30 d a \ ' s b u t b e f o r e t h e e\ i c t i o n sui t w a s filed?
Part E
C lie n t’s Facts: Cl i e n t , t h e t e n a n t , w a s o n \ a c a t i o n w h e n
th e la nd lo rd posted the notice o f default on the front door.
^ The available C o u rs eM a te for this text has an interactive eBook and interactive learning
^ * tools, including flash cards, quizzes, and more. To learn more aboutthis resource and access
CourseMate free demo C ourseMate resources, goto www.cengagebrain.com, and search forthis book.
To access C ours eM a te materials that you have purchased, go to login.cengagebrain.com.
Countemnalysis
O n a f r i g i d SatLirda\' i n n e c e n i b c r , Mr . I l e n r \ ' “ H o t P o g ” I h o i i i a s , a n i n c x p o r i o n L f c i s ki er , u a s
s k i i n g a n e x p e r t r u n at a k)cal re.sort. A s h o L a m e o \ e r a h i l k h e e n c o u n t e r e d a p a t c h ol iee, k>st
Outline
c o n t r o l , c r a s h e d i n t o a t r e e , a n d w a s s e v e r e l y i n j u r e d . I h c ski r e s o r t d i d n o t p o s t a w a r n i n g I. Inl rodii cti on
s i g n i n d i c a t i n g t h e p r e s e n c e o t t h e ice p a t c h . ,\Ir. I h o n i a s coiisultec.! w i t h ,\ls. B o o t h , a l ocal 11. ( i o u n t e r a n a l v s i s - -Deft iii li oti
a t t o r n e y , a n d r e t a i n e d h e r t o r e p r e s e n t h i m . S h o r t l y t h e r e a t t e r , .Ms. H o o t h t iled a n e g l i g e n c e sui t
111. (ioLinteraiialvsis - \\'hv>
a g a i n s t t h e r e s o r t . S h e s e n t h e r p a r a l e g a l a m e m o i n d i c a t i n g t h a t t h e r e s o r t ' s a t t o r n e y h a d t iled
l \ ’. Counl erana l ysi . s-- W h e n ?
a R u l e 12 ( b ) ( 6 ) n i o t i o n t o d i s m i s s t or l ai l ure t o state a cl a i m, l h e m e m o d i r e c t e d t h e pa ra l e gal
\ ’. ( l o u n l e r a n al v si s Research
t o p r e p a r e a legal r e s e a r c h m e m o a s s e s s i n g t h e l i k e l i h o o d I't t h e m o t i o n b e i n g g r a n t e d .
St >ur c c. s
l h e Ski S a f e t y .Act, w h i c h g o v e r n s t h e r i g h t s a n d l i a b i l i t i e s ol s k i e r s a m i ski r e s o r t s ,
p r o v i d e s that: \'l. ( AHtnlcranalysis— I'ccliñiques
\ 'll. ( AHintcranalysis Ic c liñiques—
l h e r e s o r t h a s a d u t v t o w a r n ol h a z a r d o u s c o n d i t i o n s .
(;o n in ie iits
l h e s k i e r h a s t h e d u t v a n d t h e r e s p o n s i h i l i t \ t o h e a w a r e ot s n o w a n d ice c o n d i t i o n s .
\ 'lll. ( ’, oi.interaiialysis— W’hc'ic?
l h e a c t a l s o p r ov i d e s t h a t s k i e r s h a v e a d u t v t o r e t r a i n t r o m s k i i n g b e y o n d t h e r a n g e ot
IX. Key Points (diccklist:
t h e i r abi l i t v. O n e o t t h e q u e s t i o n s t o h e a d d r e s s e d by t h e p a r a l e g a l is w h i c h ot t h e d u t i e s a p p b
Coutitc'ranalv'sis
i n t h e c l i e nt ' s c as e.
I h e m e m o t h e p a r a l e g a l p r e p a r e i l t o . . u s e d o n t h e r e s o r t s d u t \ t o w a r n a n d t h e s ki er ' s X. Applicat ion
d u t v i n r e g a r d t o s n o w a n d iee c o n d i t i o n s . Haseii o n t h i s l o c u s a n d t h e r e l e v a n t c a s e law, t h e
p a r a l e g a l c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e r e s o r t hai l t h e liutv t o w a r n ot t h e i ce p a t c h t h a t t h e c l i e n t e i K o u n
t e r e d . I h e r e l o r e , t h e 12(h) ((i ) m o t i o n w o u l d p r o h a b h n o l h e g r a n t e d .
Learning Objectives
At t h e m o t i o n h e a r i n g , t h e r e s o r t ' s c o u n s e l d i d n o t l o c u s o n t h e i s s ue ol t h e r e s o r t ' s
d u t y t o w a r n , h u t r a t h e r a r g u e d t h e i s s u e in t h e eont e . M ol p r o b a b l e c a u s e . I h e r e s o r t ' s ccuui se l \ f t e r c o m p l e t i n g this cliapter, you
c o n t t - n d e d t h a t t h e c a u s e ot t h e a c c i d e n t w a s t h e s ki e r ' s a d m i t t e d v i o l a t i o n ol h i s s t a t u t o r v liould u n d e r s t a n d :
d u t y t o r e f r a i n I r o m s k i i n g b e y o n d t h e r a n g e ot h i s a b i l i t y .As a n a t i m i t t e d i n e x p e r i e i K e d skier, W h a l couiiteraiialysis i.s
hi.s s k i i n g a n e x p e r t r u n v i o l a t e d t h e s t a t u t e a n d , t h c r e l o r e , w a s t h e c a u s e ol t h e a e c i i l e n t a s a
W h y co u n t e r a n al y s i s is i m p o r t a n t
m a t t e r o t law. l h e s k i e r ' s a t t o r n e y , r e i v i n g o n t h e p a r a l e g a l ' s m e m o , w h i c h t h d n o t a d t l r e s s t h e
p r o . \ i m a t e c a u s e i s s ue , w a s u n p r e p a r e d l o c o u n t e r t h i s a r g u m e n t . ( ' o n s e i . | u e n t l y , t h e m o t i o n i b e t e c h n i qu e s ol counleranalv' si s
was g r a n t e d a n d the case dismissed. W h e r e lo place c o u n t e r anal ys i s
in an inlerofiice research
m e n i o r a n d i i m or a c o u r t briel
391
W'liat w e n t w r o n g in t h e p r e c e d i n g In p o t h e t i c a l ? O l c o u r s e , t h e Mi p e r \ i s i n g at t orne}' slK' uld
li.iN'e m o r e carei ul K' r e \ i e w e d t h e pa r a l e ga l ' s i n e n i o , n o t i c e d t h a t t h e a s s i s t a n t h a d n o t a d
d r e s s e d t h e p r o x i m a t e c a u s e issue, a n d e n g a g e d in a d d i t i o n a l l e s e a i c h . O l ’t e n a n att orne}' is
t o o hus\- a n d , b a s e d o n past e x c e l l e n t a i ul re l i abl e p e r t o r m a n c e b\- a p a i a l e g a l o r law clerk,
ma}' rel}' lull}' o n t h e indiv i d u a l ’s w o r k p r o i l u c t a n d not suf t i c i e nt K' re\ i e w w h a t h a s b e e n
subniitted.
W' hat w e n t w r o i i g wi t h t h e p a r a l e g a l ’s r e s e a r c h ? I h e p a r a l e g a l t a i l ed to a n t i c i p a t e the
legal a r g u n ' i e n t t h e o p p o s i n g side w a s li keh' to m a k e . I le t ai l e d to a n a l \ ' / e t h e p o s i t i o n I'roni
t h e o thei' s i d e ’s p o i n t o f \ iew. In o t h e r w o r d s , h e failed to p r o \ ide a c o m p l e t e c o u n t e r a n a h sis
in t h e m e m o . A p a r a l eg a l o r Lnv c l e r k ' s role in c o n d u c t i n g legal r e s e a i c h , o r in a i u' s i t u a t i o n
t h a t rec]uires legal a n a K sis, in c k i d e s d e t e r m i n i n g t h e p o t e n t i a l w e a k n e s s e s o l ' a legal a r g u m e n t
a n d t h e c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t s t h e o t h e r s i d e ma}' p r e s e n t .
I h e p u r p o s e ol legal r e s e a r c h is n o t oiiK' to d i s c o x e r how' t h e l aw a p p l i e s to t h e cl i ent ' s
e a s e b u t also to d e t e r m i n e t h e s t r e n g t h ol t h a t case. I'o a c c o m p l i s h this, t h e s t r e n g t h o f t h e
o p p o n e n t ' s ca se m u s t be a n a h ' / . ed as well. I h e ca se m u s t b e l o o k e d al in its e n t i r e t } to d e t e r
m i n e its s t r e n g t h s a n d w e a k n e s s e s .
I h e l o c u s ol thi s c h a p t e r is t h e p r o c e s s ol ident i t x i n g t h e s t r e n g t h s a n d w e a k n e s s e s ol
a c l i e n t ’s ca se t h r o u g h a n a n a K s i s o l ' t h e ca se I r o m t h e p e r s p e c t i v e o l ’t h e o p p o s i t i o n , l h a l is,
t h e l oc u s is o n c o u n t e r a n a K sis. I h o r o u g h r e s e a r c h n u i s t b e c o n d u c t e d a n d all a p p l i c a b l e law
i d e n t i l i e d p r i o r to b e g i n n i n g t h e p r o c e s s .
II. C O U N T E R A N A L Y S I S — D E F I N I T I O N
II a n a l y s i s is t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o l ' t h e law' to t h e l a d s ol a case, w h a t is counteranalysis''’ At
o n e le\ el, it is a n e x p l o r a t i o n ol how' a n d wh}' a s p e ci l i c kuv d o e s o r d o e s n o t appK' to t he
lact s ol' a case. It is t h e pi' ocess o l ' a n t i c i p a t i n g t h e a r g i m i e n t t h e o p p o n e n t is likeh' to raise in
r e s p o n s e to }'our a n a K s i s o l ' a n issue the counterargum ent. In e s s e n e e , it is t h e p r o c e s s o f
discox e n i i g a n d c o n s i d e r i n g liie ^ . ou i Uc r a r g u n i e n t l o a legal p o s i U o n o r a r g u m e n t . It i n v oK e s
a n i d e n t i l i c a l i o n a n d ob i e c t i x e ex a l u a t i o n ot t h e s t r e n g t h s a n d w e a k n e s s e s ol e a c h legal a r g u
ment x'OLi i n t e n d to raise.
III. C O U N T E R A N A L Y S I S — W H Y ?
I h e role ol’t h e attorne}', par a l e gal , o r kuv clerk is lo r e p r e s e n t t h e c h e n t in t h e best wax' poss i bl e
a n d to p u r s u e a c o u r s e ol’a c l i o n t h at is in t h e b e s t i nt e r e st ol t h e c h e n t . I h i s is a c ôn i pl i s h e i l
b}' e n g a g i n g in r e s e a r c h a n d analx'sis t h a t t h o r o u g l i K' e x a m i n e s all t h e a s p e c t s ot t h e case. O n e
ol t h o s e a sp ec t s, c o u n t e r a n a K sis, is i m p o r t a n t t o r sev eral r e a s o n s ;
1. U n d e r Rule 3 . 3( a ) ( 3 ) ol t h e A m e r i c a n B a r A s s o c i a t i o n ’s Xhidol Rules ot I’roles-

si onal (Conduct, a n a tt ornex' h as a n ethical di.it\' to d i s c l o s e legal a u t h o r i h ' ad-
xers e to t h e p o s i t i o n o f t h e cli ent t hat is n o t d i s c l o s e d bx' o p p o s i n g co u n s el .
I h e goal o f t h e adve rs ar}' s}'stein is t h a t j u s t i c e b e s e r x e d . I h e e n d s o f j u s
tice r e q u i r e t h e d i s c o x e r } a n d p r e s e n t a t i o n ol all r e l e x a nt a u t h o r i t x' so t hat a just
r e s o l u t i o n o f t h e issues m a y b e achiex'ed. I h e r e f o r e , a legal r e s e a r c h e r , tt) p r o p e r k
i n f o r m t h e a t t or n e y, m u s t l oc a t e a n d prox ide t h e a t t o r n e} ' w ith all relex'ant a u
thoril}', i n c l u d i n g t h a t xvhich is a d x e r s e to t h e c h e n t .
2. I h e attorne}' , p a r a l eg a l , a n d law c l e r k h a x e a n e th i c a l dut}' lo d o a c o m p l e t e a n d

coii' ipelent job. See M o d e l Rul e 1.1. R e s e a r c h a n d a n a K s i s a r e n o t c o m p l e t e u n
less all si des o f a n issLie a n d all legal a r g u m e n t s hax e b e e n c o n s i d e r e d , f a i l u r e to
conipletelx' analx'/.e a p r o b l e m c an c o n s l i t u t e m a l p r a c t i c e .
392
C H A P T E R 13 C O U N T E R A N A L Y S I S
io represent the client c o n i p e t c n t h ’, \ o u must he p r ep a re d to r e s p o n d to any

legal argiinient raised h\' the o th e r side, (he iticntifieation o f o p p os i n g a r g u m e n t s
allows you to consider what the o th e r side’s position is likely to be. It allows you
to a n s w e r the questions:
"W'hat will thev d o ? ”
“ l i o w can we c o u n t e r their a r g u m e n t s ? ”
“W h a t pr ep a ra t i on is necessary- to r e s p o n d ? ”
In essence, count er analysis allows \-ou to anticipate o p p o s i n g a r g u m e n t s an d
p r e p a r e to coui-iter t he m. The last t h i ng you want is to be r esponsible for the su-
per \ ' isor y at tor ney bei ng u np r e pa r e d to r es p o n d to an a r g u m e n t .
(CounteranaK'sis aids in the p ro pe r e \ a l u a t io n ot the me r i ts o f a case a n d ca n assist
in selection o f t h e a ppr opr i at e cour se o f action.
For Example CoLinteranalysis may reveal a w eakness in the client's case that
leads to the conclusion that settlement should be pursued. Without
conducting a thorough counteranalysis, an improper course of action could be
followed, such astakingthe matterto trial ratherthan pursuing settlement options.
4. It is in-iportant to locate and disclose adverse authority to maintain credibility with

your super\'isor. 'I'ou ma\' ni)t be considered reliable, a nd the credibility, accuracy,
and t hor oughness of your research may be questioned, i f y o u ignore or fail to iden
tify a nd disclose ad\ er se authority. Ihe opposition or the court, if the issue comes
before a court, most likely will discover the opposing authority. Your failure to do so
indicates lack of ability, sloppiness, or intentional concealment. Your credibility and
trustworthiness will be enhanced it \'ou candidly reveal and meet head on unfavor
able authoritN'.
'“i. W h e n a legal br ief is subniitted to a cour t, if )'ou identity a n d addr ess adverse
aut hori t)' in the brief, you have an o p p o r t u n i t y to soften its imp a ct by di s crediti ng
or d i st i ng u is h in g it. \ o u have an o ppo r ti ni i ty to pr ov i d e reasons w'hy t h e adverse
a u t h o r i ty d o e s not apply, a n d ) o u r credibility is the r e by e n ha nc e d. This allows the
r ea de r to c o ns i d e r the adverse aut ho r i ty in t he cont ext o f y o ur response to it. 'Ihis
o p p o r t u n i t ) ' is niissed if )'ou fail to include the a d \ e r s e authority.
W' eaknesses in )’o u r posit ion or analysis will not go away it you i gnor e the m. N o ma t t e r
how' strong!)' you feel you are rigl'.t, you can c o u n t on tlie o t h e r side to raise s o m e co u n t e r -
a rg u n i e n t , a n d if )'ou have not c o ns ider ed a n d p r ep ar ed for the c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t s , y o u m a y
verv well lose in court.
IV. COUNTERANALYSIS—WHEN?
F'.mploy c ou nt er an a l ys i s whe ne ve r legal research is c o n d u c t e d or the strengt hs and weaknesses
o f a case are c o n s i d e r e d ~ i n o t he r words, alw ays. W' hen a ddr es s i ng a legal p r obl e m, l ook for
all pot e n t i a l c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t s to an)' position taken. Use count er ana l ysi s w h e n p r e p a r i n g an
interoffice legal m e m o r a n d u m or c o n d u c t i n g any research on an issue in a case. It is ce r t ai nh'
nec es sar y w h e n you are assisting in the pr eparation o f a r esponse to a b r i ef filed by t he o p p o s
ing part)'. Engage ui t he ¡-»rocess e\'en w he n you are c on s i d er i ng t he legal issues in t he client’s
case. CCounteranalysis ma y be r equir ed even in the initial stages o f a case.
393
For Example Some paralegals and law clerks co n du ctth e initial interview with a client
and provide the supervisory attorney with a sum m ary of the interview and
the applicable statutory and case law. The sum m ary of the applicable law should include
a counteranalysis section that points out any apparent w e a k n e sse s in the client's case.
V. COUNTERANALYSIS—RESEARCH SOURCES
W h e n c o nd u c t i n g legal re.search, c o u n t e r a n a h sis m e a n s loiiking tor legal authorit\' that sup
p or t s the a r g u m e n t the o p p o n e n t is likely to raise in r es pon s e to yiuu' a n a h s i s o f t h e issue.
There are se\'eral things to keep in m i n d a n d sour ces to look to w h e n c o nd uc t in g c oun t er
analysis an d legal research.
W h e n r esearching statutor}’ law, S h e p a r d i / e the statute o r check the a n n ot a ti o n s tor
cases analyzing or interpretirig the statute, l h e cases ma}’ pr ese nt c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t s to a
posit ion }’ou are taking in r egard to the i nt e r pr e t a t i on ol the statute.
W h e n researching case law’, if \’ou find a case that s u p p o r t s the clieiit's jiosilion, then
Shepar dize the case to d e t e r m i n e if a n o t h e r case anaK /e s the law differentl}'. Cases that tlis-
tinguish, criticize, a n d liiiiit the case }’ou are rese ar ch i n g are identified in .S'/u'/iii;•(/>’. Be sin'c
to check all these cases.
For Example Under the case you are Shepardizm g is the reference "c746P2d845." The
"c" means that the court opinion at 746 P.2d 845 disagrees with the reasoning/
decision of the case you are Shepardizing. Be sure to ch eck this opinion, because it may
present a counterargument to the legal argument in support of the client's position.
In addi tion to S hepar di z i ng the case that s u ppo i ls the c li e nt ’s posit ion, also check the
digest tor other cases that ma y a n a ly/ e the law ditferently. ShcpiU\i'> will only identifv tiiosc
cases that specilicalh’ ni e nt i on the case }ou are researchiiig. I her e nia} be o t h e r cases that
analyze the same question, but d o not m e n t i o n the s a m e case. CTieck the heailnot e o f t h e case
}’o u are researching, identity the ke}’ nuinbei' for the issue in ques t i on , a n d then check the
a p p r o p r i at e digest tor t)fher cases oii the topic.
W h e n reading a case that supp or ts the client’s position, al wa \ s check lor a dissent. If there
is a dissent, it will present the c o u n t e r a r g i m i e n t to the posit ion taken iii the majorit}’ o p ini on
a n d often include references to cases a n d o t h e r sour ces in s u p p o r t o f t h e counterargLmienl.
It is possible that the facts o f t h e cl ient ’s case are sufficient!}’ different froni the courl o pi ni o n
that the di ss en t e r ’s position ma}' a p p h .
There arc several o t h e r s o u r ce s to che ck w h e n c o n d u c t i n g c o u n t e r a n a K sis. .\ treatise
usually p rese nt s an analysis o f legal issues t ha t i n c l u d e s a r g u m e n t s a n d c o i m t e r a r g u m e n t s .
It t h e q u e s t i o n b ei n g r e s e a r c h e d lias an A I . R a n n o t a t i o n , t h e a n n o t a t i o n will i n c l u d e a
t h o r o u g h analysi s o f t h e issue. It will d i s c us s t h e \ a r i o u s w a \ s t h e c o u r t s have d e c id e d
t h e issue a n d t he a r g u m e n t s a n d c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t s in s u p p o r t o f t h o s e decisi ons. The
a n n o t a t i o n will also i n c l u d e r e f e r e n c e s to n u m e r o u s cases o n t h e q u e s t i o n a n d o t h e r
r es e ar c h sour ces.
A n o t h e r helpful s o u r c e w h e n c o n d u c t i n g c o u n t e r a n a h sis is a law re\'iew article. If
t he r e is a law review article that discusses the q ue s t i o n b ei ng rese ar che d, it will prox ide a
c o m p r e h en s i v e analysis a n d cr it ique of 't he legal posit ion(s) the c o u rt s have taken. Tike an
A L R ann o t a t i on , it will i nclude r ef erence to n u m e r o u s cases that a dd r e s s the question an d
o t h e r research sources.
394
VI. COUNTERANALYSIS—TECHNIQUES
A. In G eneral
Betöre c o u n t e r a n a K sis ca n begi n, a prerec]uisite is that \oi.i must anaK / e a n d tii oroughl y
researeli the issue o r legal posi t ion b e i ng addr e ssed , 'i’ou mu s t k now the law before you can
r e s p o n d to it. T h o r o u g h resear ch s ho ul d r e\ e al t he wea kn es s e s o f a legal posit ion a nd the
C(nmt e r ar g ument s to il.
For Example M ary Kay, a door-to-door sa le s representative for A ce Brush, sold Ella
Sm ith a set of b ru sh es at M s. Sm ith's resid en ce. Ms. Smith signed a
contract to purchase the brushes. The contract provided for three monthly payments.
Ms. Smith called two days later and can ce led the contract. When A ce Brush attempted
to deliverthe goods, Ms. Smith refused to acce p t the delivery. Ace Brush sued Ms. Smith
for breach of contract.
Tom, a law clerk with the firm representing A ce Brush, w as assigned the task of
determining w hether M s. Smith could legally can ce l the contract after it w as signed.
He determined that article II of the state Com m ercial Code governed the transaction.
His research indicated that the code had no provision allowing a cooling-off period for
door-to-door sales; therefore, he concluded that Ms. Smith's rejection of the goods w as
a breach of the contract.
Tom, however, committed a major error. He failed to thoroughly research the ques
tion. The state had another statute, called the Consum er S a le s Act, w hich provided that
in the event of a credit transaction involving a home solicitation sale, the buyer had a
right to cancel the sale within three days of the transaction.
I lad I ' om’s resear ch been t h o r o u g h , lie wt>uld ha\ e located the weakness m his legal
position based u p o n the ( Aimnierciai ( ' o d e a n d identified the count erargimi eiit to the c o n c l u
sion that the conti'act was br ea ched.
W'hen e m b a r k i n g on c oun t er ana l y si s, always a s s u m e that ihere is a coLinterargunient to
the posit ion \'ou have taken. Put \-ourself in t he o p p o n e n t ' s place a n d ask \ ourself:
“ 1 low d o 1 r e s p o n d to this a r g u m e n t ? ”
“W'hat is t h e a r g u m e n t in r e s po ns e lo this p o s i t i o n ? ”
Remember , c ount er ana K’sis consists o f identifying any possible c ou nt er ar gu me nt the o p po n e n t
may use to challenge y o u r legal posi t ion o r a r g u m e n t .
T'o d e t e r m i n e what t he c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t s to an a r g u m e n t or position are likeK' to be, it
is necessary to c o n s i d e r t he ways a legal a r g u m e n t is at tacked. After you are familiar with t he
l e ch ni q u e s used to cha l l e nge an a r g u m e n t , use t hos e t e ch n i qu es to seek out the weaknesses
in y o u r o w n a r g u m e n t a n d to a nt i ci p a t e t he likely c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t s .
A legal a r g u m e n t o r legal pos i t ion is usually b a s ed o n ena ct ed knv or case law, or both.
Ihe various a pp r o a c he s that \’ou m a y use to at tack o r c h a ne n g e an a r g u me n t based on enact ed
law o r case law are e xp l o r ed s epar ately in t he f ollowing t wo sections.
B. E n a c te d Law
W'a\s to challenge o r at tack a legal posi t ion o r a r g u m e n t bas ed on an e na ct ed law are d i s
c ussed here. E nacted law, as d ef in e d in C h a p t e r 1, i ncludes aii\' law passed o r ad o p t e d by
the peopl e t iirough a r e p r e s e n t a t i \ e bod\-, such as (Congress or a state legislatuie, cit\- council,
a n d so on. I h r o u g h o u t this section a n d t he r e m a i n d e r ol t he chapter, the t erm i t a t u t c is used
w he n discussing legal a r g u m e n t s o r pos i t ion s b a s ed on e n a c t e d law.
395
I liL're are st'\ cral approaclit's to cons i der wh en at tacking a legal position based on a s t a t
ute. So me ol these a p p r o a ch e s are listed in Hxhibit I 1. (Consider all o t ' t he m w h e n analyzing
an a r g u m e n t based o n a statute to identify e\ er\' possible wea kness a n d c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t .
E x h ib it 13-1 Counteranalysis Approaches to a Legal Position Based on a Statute.

1. The elem ents of the statute are not met.
2. The statute is sufficiently broad to permit a construction or application

different from that urged by the opposition.
3. The statute has been m isconstrued or does not apply.
4. The statute relied upon as a guide to interpret another statute does not
apply and, therefore, cannot be used as a guide in interpreting the other
statute.
5. The statute relied on has not been adopted in your jurisdiction.
6. The interpretation of the statute urged by the opposition is unconstitu

tional or violates another legislative act.
7. The statute relied on is unconstitutional.
1. E le m e n ts o f th e Statute Are N o t Met

I'Aery statute is c o m p o s e d o f el eme n t s (see (Chapter 3) that must be met before the statute can
apply. W'hen a client’s case is based on a statute, facts mu s t be present in the case that establish
or satisly each ot the el eme nt s ot the statute.
For Example Criminal Code § 1000 defines burglary as the breaking and entering ofthe
residence of another with the intentto commit a crime. The elem ents are:
1. Breaking and entering
2. The residence
3. Of another
4. With the intent to commit a crime
Facts must be present that establish each of these elements before an individual can be
convicted of burglary.
O n e w a \ ’ to at tack a legal position based on a statute is to ar gue that the e l e m e n t s of

t he statute ha\ e not been m e t — that is, tacts pr ese nt in the case fail to establish each el enient
o f t h e statute.
For Example Mary is charged under Criminal Code § 1000 with burglary of Steve's house.
Steve is a friend of Mary, and Mary often stays at Steve's house. On the
date ofthe alleged burglary, Steve's house w as unlocked. M ary came overto see Steve,
entered the house, saw money on the kitchen table, took it, and left.
The counterargum ent to the prosecution's reliance on the statute is that there are
no facts present in the case to establish two elements ofthe law:
1. M ary did not break into the house; it w as unlocked.
2. M ary did not enter with the intent to comm,it a crime. She entered with the intent to
visit Steve. The intent to commit a crime w as not formed until after entry had taken
place.
396
W h e n LondiiLting couiilL'iaiialysis o l \ ni i u g u n ic nt bascti o n a statuk', closcK e x a m i n e

t he tacts relied on to estabhsh citch oi t he required elements, ,\sk yourselt, “ Ha\ e the e l e me nt s
ot t he statute been me t' ' ’ Look tor an\' possible a r g u m e n t that t he lacts d o not establish oi'
satisfy an el eme nt or elements.
2. Statute Is Sufficien tly Broad to Perm it D itferent C o n s tr u c t io n

In nian\' situations, a statute m a \ ’ be sufficiently br oad to allow an interpi etation or a p p hc at i on
different from that relied on by the o p p o s i n g side.
For Example Section 54-9-91 of the state domestic relations statute provides that custody
shall be determined in the best interest of the children. Gerald contends
that he should be granted custody of the children because he lives in a small town, and
his former spouse lives in a large city. He argues that a small town is a better environment
because it is safer and free from the pressures of gang violence and drug use.
A counterargum ent can be made that the benefits of the city, such as greater a c
c e ss to the arts, museums, and universities, offset the alleged disadvantages of a large
city. The phrase "best interest of the children" can be interpreted in a manner different
from that urged by the opposing side.
W'hen the language relied on in a statute is b r oadl y craifed, sucii as in the pr e\ lous e x
amp l e, look tor the c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t that a dilierent int e r pr e t at io n is permi'' sible b ec au s e ol
the b r oa d n e s s o f t h e language. ,-\sk the question, “Is the statute stilficienth' b ro a d to pei ni i t a
c o ns t r uc t i on or a p phc at io n ditferent t r o m that m g e d by the opp osi t ion' ' "
3. S tatu te M is c o n s tr u e d or D o e s N ot Apply
L!xplore t he possibility o t ' a c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t that t he st a t ut e is b ei n g misconstiuei.1 oi'
misapplied.
For Example Section 9(A) of the Deceptive Trade Practices A ct provides a rem edy in
tort for "deceptive practices in negotiation or perform ance" of a contract
for the sale of goods. Tom and Larry have a contract for the delivery of goods. Underthe
contract, Tom is to deliverthe goods on the fifth of each inonth. Every month, Tom com es
up with some excuse for not delivering the goods on the fifth, and the goods are alw ays
delivered between the seventh and fifteenth of the month. Finally, Larry gets fed up and
sues Tom for violation ofthe Deceptive Trade Practices Act, claiming that Tom is engaging
in deceptive practices in violation of § (9)A of the act.
A review ofthe legislative history and case law clearly indicates thatthe Deceptive
Trade P ractices Act is not designed to apply to simple breach-of-contract case s. The
Sale of Goods provisions of the Com mercial Code statutes govern breach-of-contract
situations. The courts have consistently held that when there is an adequate rem edy in
contract law, the tort remedy available under the act does not apply. Therefore, a co u n
terargum ent can be raised thatthe statute has been m isconstrued and does not apply in
a simple breach-of-contract case such as that of Tom and Larry.
W'hen a legal position or a r g u m e n t is based o n a statute, eng a ge in c o u n t e r a n a K sis to

e n s u r e that the statute is not being mi s c o ns t r ue d o r applied in a situati on to which it cleai'K
do es not apph' . Always cons ult case law to d e t e r m i n e if the cou r ts h a \ e i nt e i p r et e d o r app l i ed
t he st a t ut e in a m a n n e r difierent I r om that relied on. Ask the loll owi ng questions: “ 1 las the
s tatute been m i s c o n s t r u e d o r does not appl y?” “Does a n o t h e r statute a p p h ?”
397
4. Statute Relied on as a ( i u i d e D o e s N o t Apply

In soiiK' sitiuitioiis, the statute tliat governs does not have a p n n i s i o n atldressing a speeitie
question raised bv the tacts ol a cHent's case. In sucli instances, there niav be an a r g u m e n t that
a ditlerent statute, which lias a section g over ning a siniiiar tact situati('ii, can be used as g u i d
ance in inter preting the applicable statute. It is usually ar gued that the dilierent statute can be
used as gu i d a nce because the language aiul tun c t i o ns of the statutes are similar.
W’hen this occurs, vou can m a k e the c o u n t e r a r g u n i e n t that the statute relied o n to
interpret a n o t h e r statute is not i nt e nd ed to govern o r appl y to the t\ pe of'situation pr ese nt ed
by the client's case and, therefore, ca nn ot be used as a guide, lhe a r g u m e n t usually is that the
statute gover ns o r apph e s onlv to those limited fact sit uati ons covered b\' the l anguage of the
statute a n d ca nn ot be used as a g uide for the int e r pr e t at ion ol a n o t h e r statute.
For Example The jurisdiction has adopted the following statutes:

§ 59-1 provides that an individual must be a resident ofthe county to be
eligible to run for the position of animal control officer.
§ 200-1 provides that an individual must be a resident of the county for three
months to run for a position on the county school board.
Erin,a resident ofthe county forthree months, w ants to runforthe position of animal
control officer. She argues that since §59-1 is silent on the length of residency necessary to
be eligible to run forthe position of animal control officer, the three-month residency require
ment established in § 200-1 should be used as a guide to determine the length of residency
required under § 59-1. She reasons that because both statutes are similar in language (both
use the word resident) and both involve county elective offices, they are sufficiently similar
forthe residency requirement of § 200-1 to be used as the standard for § 59-1.
B ecause the statutes are different, however, a possible counterargument is the du
ties of an animal control officer are much different from those of a school board member.
The duties ofthe animal control officer require a degree of familiarity with the geography
of the county that cannot be acquired in three months. Therefore, the differences in the
requirements of the positions represent a factual difference that renders § 200-1 inap
propriate for use as a guide to interpret § 59-1.
In everv situation in which it is ar gued that a pr ovision of o n e statute m a \ appl\' o r be

used to interpret a provision o f a dilierent statute, a c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t can alwavs be m a d e
that no m at t e r h o w similar in language a nd luiiction, the statutes differ fLinctionalK' in s o m e
way. iheretor e, the provisions ot one statute c a n n o t be r ehe d on or applied to inter pret or
govern the o t he r statute.
W hen y ou r legal posi t ion o r a r g u m e n t is based on the use ol o n e statute as a g ui de to
int e r pre t a n o t h e r statute, c o n s i d e r the c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t tha t locuses on the d il l er en c es in
the statutes. Keep in m i n d the q ue s ti on , “ Is it possible that the s t atute relied on as a g u i d e
is so lun c t i o na l l y dilferent that it c a n n o t be used as a g u i d e to i n te rp r e t the st a t ut e b e i n g
analyzed?
5. Statute Relied on H as N ot B een A d o p ted in Ju risdiction

Ihe jurisdiction has no law or statute gover ning a lact situation, and x'our legal posit ion is
based on an a r g u m e n t that advocates the adopt io n o f t h e l anguage of, or principles e m b o d i e d
in, a statute from a n o t h e r jurisdiction. In such situations, you are at temp t i ng to p e r sua de the
court to adopt the law, or the principles e mb o d i e d in the law, ot a n o t h e r jurisdiction.
A c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t can be m a d e that a statute, o r p r inci ples that a p p h ' to facts in
a n o t h e r jurisdiction, sho ul d not be ad o p te d to a p p h to similar lacts in yoLir jurisdiction. It
398
is usualh- pdssibic to point out sonic ditVerenco bet we en the iurisdictions o r diHer ence in the
public polic}’ ot the jin isdictions a nd ar gue that the ditference pr ec l udes the a d o p t i o n ot the
l a n g u a g e o r principles o f t h e statute.
For Example Ida, a resident of state A, borrow s her next-door neighbor's lawn mower.
Due to a defect in the mower, Ida is injured. Ida su e s the m anufacturer, a
local com pany, for breach of warranty. The m anufacturer moves for dism issal, claim ing
that the w arranty does not extend to n onpurchasers. The com m ercial code adopted in
state A does not ad dre ss the question, nor is there any case law on point. Ida argu e s
that the court should adopt the language of the law of state B, a neighboring state.
Sectio n 2-389 of state B's com m ercial code provides that w arranties extend to the buyer
and any person who may be reasonably expected to use the goods, w hich in clu d e s a
n eigh bo r
The m anufacturer’s counterargum ent could be that the law of state B should not
be looked to because of policy differences between the states. State A, to encourage
and protect the growth of local industry, has traditionally adopted a policy that narrow ly
limits m anufacturer liability. State B's position represents an expansive view that broadly
extends m anufacturer liability, a position contrary to state A's traditional view.
W h e n c o n d u c t i n g count er analysis, l ook lor the argLiment that the s t atute relied o n has
no t been a d o p t e d a n d sho ul d not apply. .Ask tbe ques t i on, “W’her e a legal posit ion is based
u p o n a n a r g u m e n t that a d \ ’ocates the a d o p t i o n ol the language or princi ples e m b o d i e d in
a sta t ut e o f a n o t h e r jur isdiction, are there ditl er ences in the iurisdictions that p r ec l u d e the
a d o p t i o n o f t h e language o r principles o f t h e o t h e r i i u i s d i c t io n ’s st at ut e?” N o te that t he re is
always the addi tional c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t that such matters are o f legislati\ e c on c e r n a n d s ho ul d
be a d d r e s s e d by the legislature, not the courts.
6. Interpretation o f Statute Is U n con stitutional or Violates A nolher

L e g isla tiv e Act
Ik' alert for a n a r g u m e n t that the appl ication o r i nt e r pr e ta t ion ol the statute a d v o c a t e d is
u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l o r x iolates a n o t h e r statute.
For Example Section 22 of the state’s Secured Transaction Code allow s a creditor to
rep o ssess collateral after providing the debtor with notice of default and
allow ing the debtor 60 days to cure the default. A car dealer, after providing notice of
default and waiting more than 60 days for the custom er to cure the default, rep ossessed
the custom er's car from the custom er’s residence while the custom er w as at work. The
car dealer interpreted the statute as not requiring prior court approval, and therefore did
not seek a court order authorizing the repossession.
The custom er sued the car dealer, claim ing thatthe dealer illegally seized the car
b ecau se the due process clause of the state constitution requires a court order before
property can be seized. The dealer claimed thatthe seizure w as legal because he complied
with the statute: he provided notice of default and waited 60 days.
The counterargum ent is thatthe interpretation ofthe statute urged by the dealer is
unconstitutional because it allow s for prejudgment seizure— that is, it allow s the seizure
of property without prior court approval.
Always c o u n t e r a n a l y z e a legal posi t ion o r a r g u m e n t based o n an i n t e r p re t at i o n o f a

law' for t he possibility t hat the i nt e r pr e ta t ion violates a c on s ti t u t ion al o r s t a tu to ry pr ovision.
399
A s k N’ourscit, “ is tlie ¡iitcrprctation ol the statute urgcii b\' tlic opposi t ion uiicoiistitiitioiia! o r
d o e s it v iolate a n ot h e r legislati\ e act?"
7. S tatu te R elied o n Is U n c o n s titu tio n a l

A lt h ou g h statutes are not usualK' unconstitutional and, tliereloi e, aie not likcK to he \ uliiei anle
to constitut ional attack, c ons i der the constitutionalits' ol' the statute on \s'hich a legal position
is based. Has the constitutionalit\- ot’ tlie statute been c]uestioned in scholarly journals, Kuv
reviews, a nd so on? Tr\' to anticipate an\' a r g u m e n t bas ed on a constitul ional challenge.
For Example Ellen is prosecuted under a local ordinance prohibiting the sale of any material
that "show s genitalia or excites a prurient interest." Such a statute may be
subjectto challenge as being unconstitutional because the term prurient interest is too vague.
W h e n w o r ki n g with statutes, c ons id er a c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t based on a challenge to the

c ons t i t ut ional i ty o f t h e statute. C o n s i d e r tiie c]uestion, “ Is the statute u n cons ti t ut ional ? "
N O TE : W h e n a legal position or a r g u m e n t is based on a statute, c o n d uc t thoroLigh research

to e n s u r e that s ome o t he r law, prox’ision, or cour t decision does not apply that affects \(Hir
reliance on the statute.
C. C ase Law
To u nd er s ta n d how to counteranaKv.e a legal position oi' ar gu me nt based on or relying on ca s e
law, it is necessary to u n d e r s t a n d the process i inoK ed in d e t e r m i n i n g if a cour t o p in i on is on
point. Iherefore, it is helpful lo rev iew Ch a pt e r 12 before be gi nni ng this section. W h e n useil in
thi s section, the t e r ms rule of /inr and legul p riiu iplc inckule any constitut ional, legislalix e, or
case law pro\'ision, act, doctrine, principle, or test relied on by the court in reaching its liecision.
Iher e are se\’eral a p p r o a ch e s lor challenging a legal position basetl on a cour t opi ni on.
S o m e o f these a p p r o a ch e s are listed in l-Ahibit 1,^ 2. C o n s i d e r each o f t h em wh en c o n d u c t i n g
c o un te r an aKs is .
E x h ib it 13-2 Counteranalysis Approaches to a Legal Position Based on Case Law.

1. Reliance on the court opinion is m isplaced because the key facts in the
opinion and the key facts of the client's case are different to such a nature
or degree that they render the court opinion unusable as precedent.
2. Reliance on the court opinion is m isplaced because the rule of law or

legal principle applied in the court opinion does not apply.
3. The court opinion is subject to an interpretation different from that

relied on in support of a legal position.
4. The rule or principle adopted in the opinion relied on is not universally

followed.
5. The opinion relied on presents several possible solutions to the prob

lem, and the one urged by the opposition is not m andatory and is not
the best choice.
6. The position relied on no longer represents sound public policy and

should not be followed.
7. There are other equally relevant cases that do not support the position
adopted in the case relied on.
400
1. R e lia n c e on C o u rt O p in io n Is M isp la ced B eca u se Key Facts D iffer

A p p k tlie test tii)in (Chapter 12, section i\'. Substitute the client’s ke\' tacts tor t ho s e o f t h e
lOiu t o p i n i on . It the sLibstitution ot'the ke\' facts wo ul d result in c h a ng in g the o u t c o m e ot ' the
case, t he c o u r t op i n i o n c a n not be used as precedent .
For Example The plaintiff requests that a p sych o lo g ist's reco rd s be admitted into
evidence. The plaintiff bases his argument on the holding in the case of
Sm ith y. Jo n e s, w hich allowed the adm ission of a psychologist's records into evidence.
In that case , the evidence w as admitted because no claim w as raised thatthe evidence
w as privileged. The decision turned on the key fact that privilege w as not claim ed.
In the plaintiff's case, privilege is vigorously claimed. Therefore, Jo n e s cannot be
relied on as precedent to support the argum ent for adm ission of the records, because
J o n e s is not on point. There is such a sign ifican t difference in the key fa cts that the
case cannot be relied upon as precedent. In Jo n e s, privilege w as not claim ed, but in the
plaintiff's case, it is claimed.
Be c a u ti ou s w h e n \ d u r legal a rg u me n t relies on a co u rt o p in io n that has ke\- facts diifer-

ent f ro m t ho s e o f yo ur case. ('Conduct c o u n t e r a n a h ’sis to identity a possible c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t
that t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n relied on does not a p p h ’ bec aus e ot differences in t he key facts. Ask the
c]uestion, “ I.s the o p i n i o n relied on not o n poi nt bec aus e of ke\’ fact differences?"
2. R e lia n c e o n C o u r t O p in io n Is M is p la c e d B e c a u s e Rule o f Law or Legal

P r in c ip le D o e s N o t A pply
W h e n c o n d u c t i n g c m mt e r a naK sis, look lor a c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t that the legal princi ple applied
in the c o u r t o|->iiiion does not appU in the case at hand. Refer to (Chaptei’ I 2, secti on I\', w he n
c o n s i d e r i n g this appr oach.
For Example In the case of Davis v. Davis, Ms. Davis had sole custody of her two daugh
ters. Ms. Davis's boyfriend o ccasio n ally stayed overnight at her home, and
the daughters were aw are of the overnight visits. Mr. Davis, her former husband, filed a
motion with the court asking for a change of custody. He based his claim solely on his
wife's alleged "immoral conduct." He presented no evidence indicating how the overnight
visits affected the children.
The trial court granted a change of custody. In overturning the trial court, the court
of appeals ruled that "mere allegations of immoral conduct are not sufficient grounds to
award a ch ange of custody." The court stated that evidence must be presented show ing
that the alleged immoral conduct harmed the children.
In the client's case, the facts are the same as those in Davis v D avis except that
instead of o ccasio n al overnight visits, the custodial spouse is cohabiting with another
person. There is a statute in the jurisdiction providing that cohabitation is per se harmful
to children— that is, in cohabitation cases, evidence of harm to the children need not be
presented because cohabitation is presumed to be harmful to them.
If the custodial spouse relies on D avis for the proposition that the noncustodial
spouse's req uestfo r change of custody must be denied because he has failed to present
evidence of harm to the children, the reliance is m isplaced. The reliance is m isplaced
because the cohabitation statute does not require the presentation of evidence of harm
to the children. Therefore, the rule of law presented in Davis is not applicable in the c li
ent’s case , and the case is not on point.
401
W'lu'ii a cour t o p in i o n is used to s u p p o r t a legal position, ask the ques tion, “ Is reliance
on the o p i ni on misplaced because the pr inci ple appl ied does not a pp h' to the case at h a n d ? ”
3. C o u r t O p in io n Is Subject to a D ifferent In terpretation

' i h e cour t nia\' ha\’e interpreted a term in a m a n n e r that is subject to an inter pretat ion different
f ro m that relied on in s u p p o i t o f a legal position.
For Example Mr. Jo h n s is charged with violating M unicipal Code § 982, w hich prohib
its nude dancing. Mr. Jo h n s w as dancing in see-through bikini briefs. In
prosecuting Mr. Jo hns, the city relied on the court opinion of City v. Dew. In that case, the
court, in interpreting the term nude dancing, ruled that a dancer is nude when the breast
or genitalia are exposed. In Dew, the dancer w as completely nude.
In M r Jo h n s's case, the city contends that Mr. Jo h n s w as dancing nude because
his genitalia were exposed by his see-through bikini briefs. A counterargum ent could
be made that the term exposed, as used in the opinion, should be interpreted to mean
"uncovered." Therefore, a dancer is not nude under the definition adopted in D ew when he
is covered by any fabric, no matter how sheer. The counterargum ent is thatthe language
of the opinion is subject to an interpretation different from that relied on by the opposition.
( ’loselv scrutiiii/e the language ol the cour t o p in i o n to d e t e r m i n e il it is subject to a n

o t h e r i nterpretat ion. Be aware that the i nt e r pre t at ion \’ou a d opt ma y not be the o n h ' possible
mt er pretat ioii. .\sk the question, “Is the cour t o p i ni on subject to a different int e r pr e t at ion
f r o m that I'elied upon?"
4. Rule or P rin cip le A d o p te d in O p i n i o n Relied

o n Is N ot L'niversally F ollow ed
Ihis coLmterarguinent should be a consider at ion w he n the opiiiion relied on is not m a n d a t o r y
pr ec ed en t — that is, when there is no cour t o pi ni o n directly on point, an d a par ty is u r gi n g the
coiu't to lollow' a rule or principle a d op t e d by a n o t h e r cour t r uling ii'i a siniilar case in either
th e s ame or a tiiliereiil jurisdictioii.
For Example The counterargum ent could be, "Although the plaintiff relies on and urges
the adoption of the principle presented in Smith v. Jo n e s, and that opinion
IS followed by the Ninth, Fifth, and Seventh Circuits, several other circuits have chosen
not to follow it. The better position, presented in the case of Grape v. Vine, is followed by
the Fourth, Sixth, and Eleventh Circuits. The principle adopted in Vine more accu rately
reflects the policies of this jurisdiction."
Identify o t h e r rules o r legal principles that ma y appl y b \ ’ reading the o p i n i o n s o f c our ts

that ha\-e a d o pt e d ot h e r positioiis in siniilar cases. Keep in m i n d the ques tion, “Is t h e rule or
pr i nci pl e o f t h e case relied on universally follow'ed?”
3. O p i n i o n P resen ts Several P ossib le S o lu tio n s; O n e U rg ed by O p p o s i t i o n

Is N o t M a n d a to ry an d Is N o t Best C h o ic e
Cdieck the cour t opi ni on relied on in s u p po r t o f a legal position to de t e r ni i n e if t h e o p i n i o n
includes o the r solutions in addi ti o n to the one relied on. Also, check o t h e r c o u r t o p i n i o n s to
i dentity diflerent solutions that may have been a d o p t e d in ot he r cases. If it is not m a n d a t o r y
402
to tollow a single solution o r position, c o n d u c t coLuitcranalysis to identity the othei' possible

s olut ions a n d anticipate count ei ' ar guni e nt s that may be based on o n e ol these otiier solutions.
Ask N'ourselt, "It the o pi ni on relied on is not niandator\' precedent, does the opinion or a n o t h e r
c o u r t o p i n i o n allow for o th e r possible posi t ions?”
For Example A counterargument could be, "In the case of Smith y. Warns, the court stated
that the plaintiff could pursue several avenues of relief, including injunction
and damages. The defendant argues that Warns mandates the pursuit of injunctive relief when,
in fact, the court allowed the pursuit of several avenues of relief in addition to injunction."
6. P o s it io n R elied on N o L o n ger R e p resen ts S o u n d P u blic Policy

a n d S h o u ld N o t Be F o llo w e d
It t he c ou r t o p i ni on is niandatorx' pr ec edent and t hus must be followed, explore the possi bil
ity that it n o l onger repr esents s o u n d p ubh c polic\' a nd sh oul d be o \ e r r u l e d . Ihis a p p r o a c h is
available onl y if t h e c o u r t c on s ide r ing the question has the authorit}' to overrule the precedent.
A trial c ou r t does not have t h e p ower to o ver r ul e a h igh e r court decision. It'an i nt er medi a t e
c our t ot appeal set the pr ecedent , that cour t has t he p o w e r lo o x e r t u rn it. II the highest cour t
in the iur isdiction set the p r ec edent , o n k that cour t has the p ower to o v e r t ur n it.
Ihis a p p r o a c h is alwavs risk}’ because a court will not lighti}' choos e to ignore precedent.
A c ou r t usuallv requires a s t r o n g a r g u m e n t to s u pp o r t a decision to a b a n d o n or not lollow
pr ec ed en t . Nevertheless, w h e n a posit ion is based on a court o pi ni on , co n si de r the possibilit}
t hat the rule o r princi ple a d o p t e d in the o p i n i o n shou l d no longer be followed d u e to s o m e
c h a n g e in polic}' or o t h e r cha n ge. In such situations, it can be ar gu e d thal fairness d e m a i u K
that tlie c o u r t r e e xa mi n e the law.
For Example Mr. Clark w ish e s to niove into an apartment com plex that has restrictions
based on parental status. The restrictions provide that no individual or
couple may rent an apartment if they have children. The restrictions also provide that if
tenants have children after they rent an apartment, they must vacate the prem ises within
three months of the birth of a child. The only case on point is the 1935 case of Edw ards
y. Franl<. In that case, the court ruled that restrictions based on parental status did not
violate the constitution and, therefore, were enforceable.
A counterargum ent is current public policy strongly favors fam ilies with children,
current policy dictates that rental restrictions based on parental status are no longer
acceptable or desirable; and, therefore, Frank should no longer be followed.
C o n s i d e r the ques tion, “ Does the cour t o p in i o n relied on no longer repr esent s o u n d
public polic}' and, therefore, s h o u ld not be followed?”
7. O th e r E qu ally R ele v a n t C ases D o N o t S u p p o rt P o sitio n A d o p te d

in C ase R e lied O n
In s o m e instances, a ma t t e r has not been clearly settled b}' the highest cour t in the i u r i sd ic
tion, or t he o p i ni on s of the highest cour t a p p ea r to conflict. Look tor o t he r o pi n i o n s that nuu'
take a posit ion ditferent f rom the on e taken in the c ou r t op i ni on relied o n to s'Lipport a legal
p osit ion o r ar g ume nt . Ask v’oiirselt', “Are t here e q u a l k relevant cases that d o not sLipport the
posi t ion a d o p t e d in the case relied o n ? ”
403
For Example The client is seeking punitive dam ages in a negligence case. There are
three court opinions from the highest court in the jurisdiction. In the case
of Yaws \j. Allen, the court held that punitive dam ages may be recovered in a negligence
case when there is a showing of gross negligence on the part of the tortfeasor. In the
case of X-ray i/, Carrie, the court ruled that before punitive dam ages can be awarded in
a negligence case, there must be some demonstration thatthe tortfeasor had a culpable
state of mind. In the case of Casy 1/. Cox, the court held that the establishment of gross
negligence by itself does not indicate the existence of a culpable state of mind; it is also
n ecessary to demonstrate willful and wanton m isconduct by the tortfeasor.
Reliance on Yaws i'. Allen, in support of a legal position that the establishment of
gross negligence on the part ofthe tortfeasor is sufficientto obtain punitive dam ages, is
subject to challenge. A counterargument is that the Carrie and Cox cases, also from the
highest court in the jurisdiction, require more than gross negligence.
N O TE : W h e n a legal posilit)ii or ar gu me nt i.s based on a court opi nion, be sure to con du c t

t hor ou gh research to find an\- o t h e r law, pr o\ i si on, or court decision that nia\' affect \iHir
reliance on tbe opinion. Ihe research should identif}' all court opinions pr esenting possible
solutions and appr oaches to the problem being analy/ed.
VII. COUNTERANALYSIS TECHNIQUES—COMMENTS

W h e n e nga gi ng in legal research or a n a h s i s , re\ ie\v all the a pp r o a c he s p r es e nt ed in the
p r e c e d i n g sect i ons a n d d e t e r m i n e if the legal p os it ion or a r g u m e n t ma\' be c h a l l e ng ed
t hr o u gh any of’t hem. Be aware, howeser, that the t e chni qu e s an d con si de r at i o n s pr ese n t ed
here d o not cons t i t ut e all o l ' t h e a\ ail able ways to attack or challenge a legal posi t ion o r
ar g u m e n t liased on a legislati\e act or court o pi ni on. In .uiditioii to using the t e ch ni qu e s
listed, use an\' o t h e r ap pr o a ch that c o m e s to miiul. . Al s o , c o m b in a t i o n s of m e t h o d s nia\' be
utilized. Ihe par t i cul a r c i rc ums t a n ce s ol the case \sill (.letermine which, il an\', of the s u g
gested a pp r o a c he s are applicable or helpful. It is most i m p o r t a n t to r e m e m b e r that w he n
\' our posit ion or a r g u m e n t :s baseil on a legislati\e act i>r cour t opi ni on , you must engage
in t h o r o u g h c o un t er ana l y s i s to locate an\ weaknesses, ant ici pate any c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t s ,
and pr epa r e a r esponse s to each.
VIIL COUNTERANALYSIS—WHERE?
W h e r e d o e s c o un t e r an a l y s i s fit in an interoffice research m e mo r an d L im or c o u r t brief?
Because counteranalysis i i n o K e s analysis, it ob\ iousl\- fits in tbe anah'sis section. But wher e
in the a n a h s i s section does it belong? Ihere are no established guidelines or formal rules for
tbe placement of c ou nt e r an ah s i s . The following are r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s and considerations.
A. C ourt Brief
In a court brief, inasmuch as counteranalysis iiwoh es discussing potential c o un t e r ar gu me nt s
to or weaknesses in \'our anah'sis, it is r e c o m m e n d e d that c o u n t e r a n a h sis be pr esented in the
middl e of the analysis, that is, i mmediateh' atter the a n a h sis but before the conclusion. Present
your a r g u me nt and analysis hrst. Then present the ot h e r side’s position after \'our ar gunient,
in the middl e o f t h e anahsi s.
Presenting counteranalysis in the niiddle ol the a n a h sis keeps the focus on \' our position
r ather than on vou r o p p o n e n t ’s position. ,A r eader tends to r e m e m b e r the beg i nn i n g and en d
o f a pr esentat ion iiiore than the middle. Because you bel ie\ e \' our a n a h s i s or legal a r g u m e n t
404
is c o r r e c t amt shou l d prevail, v o li want the m e m o r y o t ' y o u r a n a h s i s to he f o r emo s t in the

r e a d e r ’s mind. Iherelore, you do not w ant to place t he c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t in a location w he r e
it is m o r e likely to be r e m e m b e r e d or e m p h a s i z e d , such as at the b e g i n n i n g or end. F-lence,
put it afier y ou r ow n a n a h sis a n d before the c onc l u s i on (i.e., in the middle).
For Example "It is appropriate for the court to allow the admission of DN A test results
based on the IM AK test. In this state, in the case of State v. Diago, the su
preme court ruled thatthe results of scientific tests are admissible when the test's reliability
and scientific basis are recognized by competent authorities. The IM AK test, developed in
1992, is universally accepted by all competent authorities as scientifically valid.
Defendant's reliance on the state case of A rc y. A rc is m isplaced. In that case, the
court's refusal to allow the adm ission of DNA evidence w as based on the disagreem ent
am ong experts about the reliability of the test being administered at the time, the ITAK
test. The ITAK test w as not universally accepted and w as not as accurate as the current
IM AK test. Indeed, IM AK test results have been admitted into evidence in all ca se s where
they have been submitted. Forthe reasons of universal scientific accep tan ce, reliability,
and court acceptance, the results of IM AK DNA testing should be admitted in this case."
B. Interoffice R e se a rc h M e m o r a n d u m
In an interoffice research m e m o r a n d u m , it is r e c o m m e n d e d that cou nt er ana l ys i s be
pl a ce d after the analysis of each issue. It logically follows the analysis, a n d this p la ce me n t
e n s u r e s that the superv ising at to r ney will l eview it before pr o ce ed in g to t he next issue(s). It
mav’ be useful, for the p u r p o s e of ma ki ng certain that it is not ov erlooked, to include a separate
c ounl er an a lv’sis subsecti on tor each issue addr essed in the nienio. O n e possible o utli ne ol the
a n a h ’sis por ti o n ol a legal research m e m o r a n d u m is as follows;
A n n ly sis .Si’c/Zoii— l he legal analvsis ol the issue(s)
Issue 1
A. Iiitroiliu to r y s c iitrn a '.
B. R u le of law. State the rule o f law that govei’iis the issue. Ihis m a y be a c o n s t i t u
tional provision, statutor y provision, coiu't doct ri ne, principle, a n d so on.
(;. ( a is c ( s ). Present t he case or cases that are on point a nd illustrate t he application, of

the rule ol law to the facts.
1). ( ’o u u tc r a ii a ly i if
T'. (A n u lu s io u
A s s u m e the i nf o r m a t i o n included in the pr e\ ious ex a mp le is p r es e n te d in an i n t e r o f

fice m e m o r a n d u m . .A p o r t io n ot the analysis a n d c o u n t e r a n a h sis section ol t he m e n i o m i gh t
a p p e a r as follows:
A^nalysis
It is likeh’ the cour t will allow the a dm i s s i on o f D NA test results b as ed on t he
IM.AK test, ' lhe state s u p r e m e courl, in the case o f S ta t e r. Diago, ruled t hat the results of
scientific tests are admissible when t he test's reliability a n d scientific basis are r ecognized
bv’ c o m p e t e n t authorities, l he I MA K test, d eveloped in 1992, is universally acce p t e d by
all c o m p e t e n t aut hori ti es as scientihcally valid.
■Although t he c o u r t s ol this state h ave not a d d r e s s e d the t] uest ion o f t h e a d m i s
sion o f D N A ev id en c e b as ed o n t he I M A K test, t he U n i te d States C o u r t o f A p p ea l s
405
tor the I’itth C i rc ui t has c o n s i d e r e d t he m a t t e r . In I- r i i v. I :ri c, the co u r t ol appeal s

stated, “l l i e t i m e has a r r i \ e d to a d m i t the lesLilts ol 1 ) \ . \ testing into e\ ii.lence. Ihe
I M A K test me et s the r e q u i r e m e n t s e s t a b l i s h e d b\ this co u rt toi' the a d m i s s i o n ot'
scientific e \ ' i de nc e . ” I MAK test result s h a \ ’e b e e n a dm i t t e t l into ex i de nce in all cases
w h e r e they ha \ e b ee n s u b m i t t e d . I'or t he r e a s o n s o f univ ersal scientific ac ce pt a nc e ,
reliabilit)’, a n d c our t a c ce p t a n c e , the result s of' I M A K DX.A testing s h o u l d be a d m i t
ted in this case.
C o u n te r a n a ly s is
D e f en da nt ma\- rely on the state case of.Arc r. A r c a n d ar gue that the resLilts o f t h e
test should not be admitted. In A rc , the c our t refused tc) allow the admission o f DX A test
results f rom the ITAK test. ' Ihe co ur t ' s refusal was based on the d i sa gr e ement anu' ii g
experts ab o u t the reliabilit)' o f t h e test. I he I TAK test was not universalK' accepted and
was not as ac cur at e as the c u r r en t I M A K test. Because the A r c op in i on inv'oK'ed a dif
ferent test that was n ei ther as unix-ersalh' acce pt e d n o r as accurat e as the IM.AK test, the
o p i n i o n is not on point a n d c a n n o t be relied o n as pr ec ede nt in this case.
For an i n- de pt h discussion o l ' t he a n a h s i s section o f an interoffice legal research
m e m o r a n d u m , see C h a p t e r 17.
IX. KEY POINTS CHECKLIST; Counteranalysis
/ A weakness in an argumeiit w'ill not go awa\ if')ou igiu)re il. 'i'ou caii co un t on eithei'
the o th e r side or the court to briiig it to light. It is mu ch better for )'ou to raise the
c o unt er ar gi mi en t and diffuse it.
/ For ever)' issue pr esented iii a legal research i i i e m o r a n d u m , co ns i d er how the ot he r
side is likely tt> respond.
/ Put )'ourself in s o u r oppoi' ients position. A s s u m e \'ou are the o p p o n e n t and con
sider all possible com'iterargLuiieiits, I'lo ma t t e r how ridiculous- be ruthless.
/ Ihe mo re strongK \'ou beliexe in the co r re c tne s s of )'our anaKsis, the greater the
likelihood that )'ou will miss o r c ne rl o ok the c oun t er ana Ks is to that anaKsis.
Beware: W'hen )'ou feel extreii'iel)' conf ident or sLire, take extra precautions. ( )\ e r -
confidence can seriousK' I'i'iislead \'ou.
/ Do not let )'our emot i o ns, p r ec o n c e i \ e d notions, o r st u bb o r nn e s s interfere with an
objective count er an a K sis ol \' our position.
/ W h e n analyzing cour t opi ni ons , a c o u n t e r a n a K s i s o f t h e majorit)' o pi ni on ma)' be
f oun d in the dissenting op i ni on o r o t he r o p i n i o n s that criticize or dist inguish the
majorit)' opinion.
/ W h e n c o n d u c t i n g c o u nt er ana Ks is , alwa)’s c o n s i d e r each o f t h e appr oa ches listed in
this chapter. Re me mber , niore tha n o n e a p p r o a c h nia\ applv, and appr oa ch es o t he r
t ha n t hose listed ma y be available.
/ Even it you find a case on point, alwavs research thorougliK'. Look tor o t h e r laws or
ct)urt op in io ns that nia\' also appK'.
X. APPLICATION
'Ihis section explores the application o f t h e pr inciples discLissed in this chapter. Ihree s i t ua
tions are expl ored in the tollowing examples.
406
A. C h a p t e r H y p o th e ti c a l
lU'view the example presented at the b e g i n n in g o f the chapter. In the Inpiithetical, the paralegal
tailed to ci induct a t h or o u gh counteranah'.si.s. Ihe a s s i g nme nt was to assess the likelihood that
a Rule 12(h)(6) mo t i on to dismiss for failure to state a claim would be granted. In a 12(b)(6)
m o t i on , t he movant is basically a r gu i ng that u n d e r t he facts o f t h e case, the plaintif l' cannot
state a claim. To state a claim in a negligence case, tacts must be present that establish or satisfy
each ot t he el eme nt s ot negligence: diit\', br each o f dut\', pro.ximate cause, a nd da ma ge s In t he
example, t he paralegal focused on diit\', that is, on whi ch dut v applied. In light o f t h e pro\'i-
sions ot t he applicable statute, t he Ski Satet\- Act, a n d the facts o f t h e case, there a p p e ar ed to
be a conflict o f duties. Ihe paralegal f ocuse d on w h ic h duty applied:
I he resort's dut\- to wai n ot hazar ds, or
I he skier ’s dut\- to k n ow o f a n d be r esponsi ble in s no w and ice c ondi ti ons
Ihe p ar alegal’s mi s t ake was in failing to c o n d u c t a com p l et e c o u n t e r a n a h s i s . A p r o p e r
c o u n t e r a n a h sis wo u ld ha\-e led t he paralegal to c o n si de r the o p p o n e n t ’s possible challenge
inx'oh’ing t he o t h e r areas ot negl igenc e— br ea c h e)t duty, p r oxi ma te cause, a n d damages. H ad
this h ee n d o n e, the paralegal w o u l d h a \ e r e c o g n i / e d that the o p p o s i n g side c oul d raise a
p r o x i m a t e cause a r g u me nt : Ihe cause o f t h e ac ci dent was the skier’s br each o fd ut \ - b\- skiing
be\ o n d the range o f his abilit\’, not the r e s o r t ’s failure to warn. Ha d the paralegal c o ns id er ed
this a r g u m e n t , a response coul d have bee n pr ep ar e d, and the nu)tion mi g ht not h a \ ’e been
gr ant e d.
Ihis e x a m p l e illustrates o n e ol the most i m p o r t a n t c ons id er at ions in count er ana h' si s:
W h e n a n a h v i n g a legal position, alwa\'s c o n d u c t t h o r o u g h a n d com p le t e research that c o n
siders e\’er\- possible attack, no m a t t e r h o w r emot e.
B. C o u n t e r a n a l y s i s — R e lia n c e on Legislative Act

Sectit)ii 33-6-6.A ol the (Construction I ndust r i es Licensing Act prox ides that c on t ra ct o r s mu st
be licensed. Ihe section reqiiires all licensed gener al con t ra ct or s to take r easonable steps to
ensvu e llial llie s u l x o n t i ai.loi s llie) h i r e a i e ViLCiised. llie secl’i on also pi m ides lhal l icensed
g ene r al c o n t r a c t o r s w h o hire u n l i c e n s e d s u b c o n t r a c t o r s are vicariously liable in br each-
ol c o nt ra ct suits tiled against the u n l i c en se d sub c on t ra ct ors.
In t he c l i e nt ’s case, the client (I’l a in t i t n is ac t i ng as his o w n gener al co n t r a ct or ; t he
s u b c o n t r a c t o r (S(C) is unlicensed. I ' o m ’s, Inc. (11), a licensed general cont ra ct or , has used
S(C on pr ojects in the past a n d has acted as an agent ('or S(C, often h el ping S(C obtain jobs with
o t h e r gener al cont ractor s. Plaintitf, a p r i \ a t e iiidi\ idual buildi ng his ow n h o me , c ont ac te d
11 Seeking assistance in locating a s u b c o n t r a c t o r . I I a r r an g ed the cont ra ct bet we en S(C a n d
Plaintitl. II r e c o m m e n d e d that S(C be hir ed a n d tulh- disclosed to Plaintitf that '11 was merely
an agent for S(C. '11 was not par ty to t he cont ra ct . S(C b r ea ched its con t ra ct with Plaintitf, a n d
Plaintitf su ed b ot h SC a n d LI.
In t he lawsuit, Plaintitl ar gu e s that § 3 5- 6 - 6A allows a cause o f action tor br each ot
c o nt ra ct against a general c o n t r a c t o r w h o is not a part\- to the contract. 'Ihis cause o f action
e.xists w h e n the general c o n t r a c t o r is acting as an age nt for an unlicensed c o n t r a c t o r w h o is
a part}' to t he cont ract. Plaintitf also c o n t e n d s ihat § 35-6-6A impo s es an impl ied dut}' on
licensed general con t ra ct or s to pr otect t hi r d parti es against all unlicensed cont ractors, not just
un l i c en s ed s ubc ont r a ct or s. Plaintitf r ea so ns that t he implied dut\- arises because the i ntent
ot the s t a t u t e is to place a d u t v o n licensed gener al c o n t r a c t o r s to assist in the e l imi na t i on ot
use o f u nl i c en s ed c o nt r a ct or s o n c o n s t r u c t i o n priijects.
Ihe c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t is that the sta t ut e is b e i ng too b r o a d h ' interpreted, t he statute, b}'
its l anguage, applies o nh ' to s u b c o n t r a c t o r s h i r ed b}' general cont ractors. In the case at h a nd,
'11 was merel}’ a disclosed agent. 'I I did not h i r e S(C, S(C was not a s u b c o n t r a c t o r o f LI, a n d '11
was not a par t \ to the contract. Iheret'ore, the sta t ut e does not apph'.
407
P A R T III T H E S P E C I F I C S OF L F G A L A N A L Y S I S
I'urthcr counteranalysis may rc\eal an additional ct )unl er ar gument : l h e law ot agency

gov erns the case rather than the contractor statute. .Agencv’ law prov ides that disclosed agents who
are niit parties to a contract are not liahle for breach o f contract. In this case, 7'1 fully disclosed
that it was acting o n h as an agent for S(' and, therefore, u n d e r the law o f agency, it is not liahle.
Ihis e x a mp le illustrates the appl ication o f two coun t er ana l y si s app r oa ch es :
l he legal position is hased on a mi s in t e r pr et a t i on o f t h e legislative act.
.Another legal principle gover ns rather t han the act relied on.
C. C o u n t e r a n a l y s i s — Reliance on C o u r t O p inion
Cûstomei' is suing Bank, cl ai mi ng that Bank’s debt collection calls to his place o f emplov’me nt
constitute intentional inlliction of e mot i ona l distress, ' lhe calls were placed daily for a two-
week per iod bet ween 11:()() a.m. a n d noon, ' lhe issue is w h e t h e r Bank’s c o n d u c t is “o u t r age ous
c o n d u c t ”— an essential el eme nt o f intentional inlliction o f e mo t i on a l distress.
Ihere are no cases in the jurisdiction a d dr es s i ng the c]uestion o f w h e t h e r co nt ac t with
a d eb t o r at the d eb t or ' s place ot e m p l o y m e n t co ns titut es o u t r ag eo u s c o n d u c t . In the case of
I'yw ii 1'. Rcll, a bill collector m a d e daily te l epho ne calls for three weeks to a d e b t o r ’s residence.
In that case, the highest cour t in the jurisdiction ruled that daily calls to a d e b t o r ’s residence
do not co ns t i t ut e o u tr ag e ou s c o n d u c t as k)ng as t)iilv' t>ne t e l ep ho n e call per day is m a d e and
the call is placed at a reasonable t i m e — bet ween 8:00 a.m. a n d 7:00 p.m.
Bank argues that Bell is ana l o gou s a n d o n poi nt because b ot h cases involve daily t ele
p h o n e calls to a debt or, m a d e at a reasonable time. Relying on this r easoning, Bank c o n t e n d s
that its c ond uc t, like the c o n d u c t in B c i i c an n o t be co n si de r ed outr ageous.
l he c o i m t e r a r g u m e n t is that the cour t o pi n i o n is c l e a r h ’ dist i n gui sha bl e and, therefore,
e a n n o t apply as pr ecedent , l e l e p h o n e calls lo an in d iv id u al ’s place o f e m p l o y m e n t are n’luch
m o r e t hr ea te ni ng than t e l e p hon e calls to the i ndi vi du al ’s residence, l e l e p h o n e calls to the
place o f e m p l o y m e n t d i s r u p t t he i n di v i d u a l ’s work, inter fere with job p e r f o r m a n c e , a n d
disi iipt the wor k ol ot he r s w h o have to an s we r the calls. Such persistent w o r k i n t e r r u p ti o n s
call cause the e m p l o v e r to tu'e the employee, ('alls to the w o r k pl ac e are o u t r a g e o u s because
thev pose a threat to the i ndi v i du al ’s livelihood. N o s uch threat exists w h e n the calls are tc) a
residence. Therefoi’e, calls to the workpl ac e are clearly dist inguishable, a n d t he c o ur t o p i n i on
is not ana logous, is not oii poiiit, a n d does not appl y as pr ecedent .
In this exaiiiple, the count er ana l ysi s challenges reliance o n a cour t opiTiion by focusing
on dillerences in the key tacts ol the o pi ni o i ’i a n d the case, l h e c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t is based o n a
c o m m o n sense co mp ar ison o f t h e facts o ( Bell and the facts o f t h e client’s case. 'Ihis c o m p a r i so n
leads to t he co nclusi on that the key tacts are so dilferent that Bell c a n n o t appl y as pr ec edent .
W h e n e v e r v’o u r legal posit ion o r a r g u m e n t is based on a c our t o p i ni on , be s ur e to c o n d u c t a
c ount er analysis o f t h e posit ion using all the a pp r o a c h e s pr es e nt e d in this c ha p t e r , as well as
any o t h e r a p p r o a c h that c om e s to niind.
Sum m ary
C' ounteranalysis is the process o f discovering and pr es e n t i ng t he c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t s to a legal
position or a r gu me nt . It is i mp o r t a n t because to adequat ely addr ess a legal p r ob l em , you m u s t
cons ider all aspects o f t h e pr obl em. '1 his iiicludes identifying all the potential wea kn esse s in a
legal posit ion a n d bei ng p re pa re d to r es pon d to all challenges to the position.
I’lnploy coun t er ana l y si s w h en e ve r you research a legal issue or ad dr es s a legal p r o bl em .
Always be alert a nd look for c o u n t e r a r g u me n t s .
A pr er equisite to e n ga gi ng in count er ana l ysi s is t h o r o u g h research o f t h e q u es t i o n or
legal ar gi nne nt . Ihis mav’ help vou identify s o m e c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t s a n d give c r ed e n ce t o or
dismiss t hose already identitied. O n c e the research is compl et e, you ca n c ho os e f r o m m a n y
408 ap p r o a c h e s to assist in count eranalysis.
Because mos t legal a r g u m e n t s ai e based on ei ther ena ct ed or case law, this c h a p t e r lo
cuses o n var ious c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t s that may be raised w he n at tacking r eha nce o n an ena ct ed
law' o r case law. Ihe list o f a p p r o a c h e s p r es e nt e d in this c h a pt e r is by no me a n s i n c l u s i \ e ot’
all the available ways to c hallenge a legal a r g u m e n t o r position. It is i m p o r t a n t to m a k e sure
that yo u enga ge in co unt er ana l ys i s using all t h e a \ e n u e s listed ( and anv oth.er possi ble ap
p ro a c h e s ) w h e n l ooking t or potential weaknesses in o r c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t s to a legal posit ion.
You can c o u n t o n the o p p o s i n g side to d i s c o \ e r weaknesses in \ ( u ir posit ion a n d use t h e m
against you. R e m e m b e r , w h e n e \ e r you are re\ iewing \( ui r cl ient’s case, you are negl igent if
you fail to eng a g e in count er analysis.
Quick R eferen ces

Case law 4t)() Côurt brief 404
C o u n t e r a n a l y s i s — definition 392 liiiacted law 393
C' oun t e r a nal y s is — t e chn i q ue s 393 LUhics 392
( A ) u n t e r a n a h s i s — wh er e 404 Interoflice research

memorandum 403
('ounte rargument 392
I n t e r n e t R eso urces
As o f t h e dat e o f publicat ion o f this text, t here are no W'eb sites dedi ca t ed specilicalK to c o u n
teranalysis. I lowever, using a search en gi ne an d “law c o un t er ana K sis” as a topic, you ma\- find
a limited r ange o f sites (21 sites w h en this text was dr at t ed) thal address s o m e aspect o fl aw
an d count er analysis. S o me sites nu ' oKe c o un t e r a n a K sis in specific areas ot the law, such as
militar\' law, wher ea s ot he rs discuss the topic in relation to taking law school exams. .Although
s o m e sites briefly mentiitn the lole of count eranalysi^ in t he aâlyîs process, no site addr esses
the topic in dept h.
W hen using “law c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t ” as the topic, \'ou ma\' fuul a muc h larger l ange of sites
( mo r e t ha n 2,()()() sites when this text was drafted). Most of these sites involve c o un t e r a r g u m e n t s
in specific cases o r do not discuss the role o f c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t in the legal anaK sis process.
Exercises
A d d i t i o n a l a siig iin icn ts arc ii\'ailahlc on the C .ouricM atc. Local o r d i n a n c e § 2231 pro\i(.les tha! an indiv iilual
must be a resident of the muni c i pa l i t y to r un foi' a p osi t ion
A SSIG N M EN T 1
on the cit\' council. Ihe o n l i n a n c e i.loes not tlefine rcsiitcni
W h a t is counteranaK' sis? W h e n sliould cou nt er ana l ys i s be
or rcsiilcncy.
conducted?
A SSIG N M EN T 2 Facts; lerrie wishes to r u n for the cit\ council. She has
V\'hy is coi interanalysis i mp o r t a n t ? been a resident o f t h e state f’o r two years an d n in e m o n t h s .

I he cit\' clerk i nf o r m s hei' that she is not eligible to r u n
A S S IG N M EN T S lor cit\' council b ec aus e she has not been a resident ol the
state for three \ e ar s. Ihe clerk s a \s th.at the city relies on
C o u n t e r a n a l y s i s — Legal P o s i t i o n o r A r g u m e n t B a se d
the resiliency r e qu i r en i ent est.iblished in ,V^y-23A.
o n a S ta t u te
Legislative Acts: Section 359-23.A of the state statutes p r o
vides that to be eligible tt) run for the state senate, an i n di A s s i g n m e n t : W'hat is the c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t to th.e
vidual mus t have been a resident o f t h e state for three years. clerk's position?
ASSIGNMENT 4 to r eturn the child, without good caiise, for a protract ed
per i o d of time."
C o i m t e r a n a l y s i s — L eg al P o s i t i o n o r A r g u m e n t B a s e d .Assume t here is no case law on point in the i ur isdic
on a C ourt O p in io n tion relevant to the following fact situation.
C a s e Law: in the case ot B u ld o iiih lo v. Stiitc, the plaintill' Facts: .Mary has primarv custodv' of her son. lhe father,
s u e d the state lor false arrest. In B a ld o n a d o . a police offi Tom, has legal custody for twi) m o n t hs in the su mmer . I'om
cer received i nf o r ma t i on f ro m the di spatcher c o n c e r n i n g takes the son for two m o n t h s in the s u m m e r but fails to tell
a \-iolent d o m e s t i c di s pu t e that specifically d es c r i be d the Marv’ where the son is and does not allow hei' lo ci'innuini-
plaintiff a n d his vehicle, l h e d i sp a t c her r ep or t e d that the cate with him. Before he leaves with the son, Tom tells .Mary
plaintiff h ad b e e n d r i n k i n g a n d was leaving the r esidence "I'm going to pun i sh you for the wav v o u ’ve treated me.”
with his t wo m i n o r chi ldr en. W’hen the officer ar r i ved at
the residence, he saw t h e plaintiff and the t wo chi ldr en A s s i g n m e n t : Ma ry pr esents the toll owing a r g u m e n t s in
in t he des cr ibed car. .At t h e scene, the plaintilV’s s p ou s e s uppo r t of her claim that l o m is in violation ot' the statute.
a n d n e i gh b o rs c o r r o b o r a t e d t h e dispatcher's informatic'ii WTiat are the c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t s to each a r g u me n t ?
that a violent di s p ut e h ad t a ke n place. W h e n the of hcer
Part A I'oni's actions constitute c o nc e a l me n t within the
r eque st ed t h e plaintiff to shut off the engi ne a n d sta\- at
m e a n i n g of the statute.
t he scene, the plaintiff a t te m p t e d to leave, l h e ollicer
s t op pe d the plaintiff f ro m leaving, lhe cour t n o te d that Part B Same lacts, but when I'om is leaving, he says,
d et e n ti o n by a police olficer is allowable t)iily w h en there "Since V'OU wouldn' t allow me to c o m m u n i c a t e with him
is r ea sonabl e suspi cion that a c r i m e has been c o m m i t t e d , when you had custodv'. I'm going to d o the same.” Marv'
l he co ur t c o n c k i d e d that the r e was reasonable suspi cion argues that Tom's actions constitute co nc ea l me n t .
that a c r i m e had be e n c o m m i t t e d , a nd that t he ofhcer's
d et e n ti o n o f t h e d e f e n d a n t was lawful. Part C Same lacts e.xcept that l om sav s n o t h i n g w he n he
picks up the son.
F a cts: l h e officer was d i s p a t c h e d to the plaintifl 's resi
d e n c e to i nvestigate a d o m e s t i c disput e. W h e n t h e o f Part I) l o m allows the son to c o m m u n i c a t e with .Mary,
ficer a r r i v e d , he saw a red vehi cle d r i v i n g awa y f ro m but he r eturns the son one day late. Ma r y ar gues that this
th e r esidence. .-\ n e i g h b o r w h o was s t a n d i n g on the constitutes tailing to r etur n the Lhild w i t hou t gooil cause
si de wa l k i n f o r m e d t h e otii cer that he t h o u g h t a d o m e s tor a protractC(.l per i o d of time.
tic d i s p u t e h ad t a k en place at his nei ghbor' s hoLise a n d
Part L Same facts as in part I) except that r om r etur ns the
t h e plaintill h ad just left in t h e red vehicle. I he o f hc e r
son two weeks late.
ptirsLied t h e plaintill a n d r e q u i r e d h i m to r e t u r n to t he
r esi de nce , l h e pl a i nt i f f is s u i n g the officer foi' illegalh' Part L' Same facts as m part 1’ except that Tom explains
d e t a i n i n g him.
that he was unabl e lo r eturn the son on t i me because his
car engi ne blev\ up, an d it look two weeks to fix it.
A s s i g n m e n t : ' Ihe state ar gue s that Biildotuido r. St<itc s u p
po rt s the posi t ion that t h e d e t e n t i o n was proper. W h a t is ASSIG N M EN TS
the c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t ?
C o u n t e r a n a l y s i s — Legal P o s it io n o r A r g u m e n t B a s e d
A SSIG N M EN T S o n C a s e Law
List seven ways to challenge an a r g u m e n t based on an e n In the follow ing example, as sume that the o n h ’ courl o p i n
acted law. ion on point is Í'nilí'íl Stdli'i i'. i c o n (see A p p en d i x A).
A SSIG N M EN T S Facts: Ollicer Iones submi ts lo Iudge Bean a request tor a

List seven ways to challenge an a r g u me nt based on case law. search war rant for the search of Steve’s a p a r t me n t . Officer
A SSIG N M EN T ? Iones kno ws lhal there is not sufficient pro bab l e cause lor
issuance ot’the w arrant, bul he also kno ws that Iudge Bean
C o u n t e r a n a l y s i s — L eg a l P o s i t i o n or A r g u m e n t B a s e d favors law enf or ce ment a nd will most likelv' issue the w a r
o n a S ta t u te rant anv'way. Iudge Bean issues the warrant. Officer ¡ones
L e g is l a t i v e Act: Sect ion 4 0 - 3 - 6- 9 A of the state c r i mi na l gives the war rant to o lhe r officers an d i nst ructs t h e m to
co d e pr ovides that a n o n c u s t o d i a l parent may be convi cted execute il. 1le ikies not tell t h e m that he k n o w s it is d e f e c
o f c u s t o d i a l i n t e r f er en c e w h e n the n o n c u s t o d i a l p a r e n t tive because of the lack of probable cause for its issuance,
“maliciouslv takes, det ains, conceals, entices awav, o r fails lhe o t h e r officers execute the war ra n t in t h e go od - fa i t h
belief that it is valid. Ihe oflicers find dr ugs, aiul char ge hand-deliver the letter to E n d er at a p a r t y at H n d er ’s house,
Steve with possession. (iault became intoxicated at t h e pa r t y a n d left t he letter
Steve nu n' es for su pp r es s io n t)f the ev idence, c l a i m on Hnder’s kitchen table. I he letter was in an u n s e a l e d e n
ing that t he search was illegal a n d the e\ idence m u s t be velope with Hnd er ’s n a m e on it. A business c o m p e t i t o r of
exc l ude d u n d e r t he exclusi onar v rule. W'hat is the c o u n Hnder, w h o was at t he party, o p e n e d a n d read the letter.
t e r a r g u m e n t to t he p r o s e c u t i o n ’s posit ion in each o f t h e Hnder sued Gault for d e f a m a t i o n . In its r u l i ng in f a
following sit uati ons? vor o f Ender, the co u r t stated t ha t “i n t e n t i o n a l p u b l i c a t i o n
as used in the statute inc l u des p u b li c at i o n t hat o c c u r s as a
P a r t A The pr osecution argues that because the officers result o f t h e gross negl igence o f t h e d e f e n d a n t . ” T h e c o u r t
executing t he war rant were acting in the good-faith belief held that Gau l t ’s act o f leaving the e nve l ope unse al e d o n the
that the war ra nt was valid. U n ited States v. Leon gox er ns the ki t c h en table d u r i n g a p a r t y c o n s t i t u t e d gr oss negl igence.
case. The g ood - tai th exception to the exclusionary rule a p
plies, an d therefore the evidence should not be suppressed. Facts: Tom is a business associate o f Allen. He believes
Allen is stealing f rom t he i r clients. T o m wr i tes a letter to
P a r t B S a m e facts except that Olticer | ones delivers the Allen stating that he k n o w s Allen is steal ing a n d t ha t he
w a r ra nt to m e m b e r s o f the (Citizens P rotect ion .Associa int e n ds to file c ri mi na l charges.
tion, a private g r o u p o f citizens t r ai ned b\- the police to
assist in t he p e r f o r m a n c e o f m i n o r police functi ons, t h e 'I'om, i nt e n di ng to h a n d - d e l i v e r t h e letter to Allen, goes to
g r o u p vol un t e er s its serx'ices a n d is not e mp lo ye d b \ ’ the a restaurant w h e r e Allen u sua lh' has l unch. After w a i t in g
police. T h ey execut e the w a r ra nt a n d ma ke a citizen’s a r an h o u r for Allen, o n e o f Allen’s f r i e n ds e n t e r s t h e r e s t a u
rest o f Steve. ' Ihe p r os ec ut i o n argues that U n ite d Sta tes r. rant. I'om folds t he letter a n d seals it with tape. H e gives
I.eon governs, a n d that case holds that the exclusi onar y t he letter to the f riend a n d asks h i m to del iver it to A l
rule is des i g n ed o nl y to protect against police mi s co n d uc t , len. He does not tell t h e f ri e nd n ot to o p e n t h e letter. Ihe
not miscondLict by private citizens. f riend peels back t he tape, r ea ds t h e letter, reseals it, a n d
delivers it to Allen. Allen finds o u t t hat t he f ri e nd r ead t he
ASSIG N M EN T 9 letter an d sues T om for d e f a m a t i o n u n d e r § 41 -1 -6-9.
Legi slat ive Act: Section -111 ot the state statutes d e
Assignment: l a k e into consider at ii) n t he statute, the
fines d e la n u i ti o n as the intentional publicat ion ol a false
c o ur t o[iinion, a n d the facts w h e n d o i n g t he follow'ing.
s t at ement a bo ut a per son . Ihe statute detines p u b li c a ti o n
as comniLinication to a t h i ni person. P a r t A Prepare an a r g u n u ' n t in s u p p o r t o f the p os i t i o n
that Tom d et ai n e d Allen.
C a se l.aw: l-juier v. Ciault is an o pi ni o n o f t h e highest cour t
in the state. In the case, (iault wrot e a letter to ICnder a c P a r t B Prepare a c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t to t he a r g u m e n t p r e
cusing F n d e r ot de f r au d i ng his clients. Cault inteiuled to p ar ed in part
^ The available CourseMate for this te.xt has an interactive eBook and interactive learning
0k tools, including flash cards, quizzes, and more. To learn more about this resource and acce ss
0 C O U r S 0 / \ A S t 0 CourseMate resources, goto www.cengagebrain.com, and search for this book.
To acce ss CourseMate materialsthatyou have purchased, goto login.cengagebrain.com.
PART IV
Legal W ritin g
OVERV IEW
The focus of Part IV is on legal w r itin g and the legal w r itin g
process. It covers the a p p lic a tio n of the p rin cip les presented
in the previous c hapters to the d ra ftin g of legal research
m em o ran d a, c o urt briefs, and legal corre sp on de n ce, w ith
c h ap te rs on the fo llo w in g topics:
■ Fund a m en ta ls of w r itin g
■ The legal w r itin g process in general
■ Office legal m e m o ra n d a ( tw o chapters)
■ Court briefs
■ Correspondence
413
Fundamentals of Writing
Outline Y o u r p r o t ’e s s i oi i a l r e p u t a t i o n a n d j o b p e r f o r m a n c e e v a k i a t i o n s a r e d e t e r m i n e d b y t h e q u a l i t y
o f y o u r w o r k . If t h e j o b i n v o l v e s l egal w r i t i n g , y o u r r e p u t a t i i i n a s a p a r a l e g a l o r l a w t l e r k is
I. Sentences p r i m a r i l y b a s e d u p o n t h e qua l i t \ - o f y o u r w r i t i n g . I h e v a l u e o f t h e f m i s h e d p r o d u c t d e p e n d s n o t
II. Paragraphs o n l y o n t h e a c c u r a c y a n d t h o r o u g h n e s s o t l egal r e s e a r c h a n d a n a l y s i s , b u t a l s o o n t h e m a n n e r
III. Word Selection and Usage ot its p r e s e n t a t i o n . Hx c e l l e n t r e s e a r c h a n d a n a l y s i s s ki l l s a r e u n d e r m i n e d i f y o u c a n n o t p r e s e n t

t h e r e s u l t s t)f y o u r r e s e a r c h a n d a n a l y s i s c l e a r l y a n d f r e e o f m e c h a n i c a l e r r o r s . T l i e r e l o r e , g o o d
IV'. G r am m a r
w r i t i n g s ki l l s a r e e q u a l l y a s i m p o r t a n t a s g o o d r e s e a r c h a n d a n a l y s i s skills.
V. Punctuation
W r i t i n g ski l l s a r e a l s o i m p o r t a n t b e c a u s e a p o o r h ’ w r i t t e n p r o d u c t a f f e c t s m o r e t h a n t h e
VI. General Considerations
p a r a l e g a l ’s o r l a w cl er k' s r e p u t a t i o n . It a l s o a f i e c t s t h e r e p u t a t i o n o f t h e l a w f i r m . .•X l a w f i r m ’s
VII. Key Points Checklist: r e p u t a t i o n is a f f e c t e d , e i t h e r p o s i t i \ e l y o r n e g a t i v e l y , w h e n a w r i t t e n p r o d u c t is d i r e c t e d t o a n
Fundamentals of Writing a u d i e n c e o u t s i d e t h e l a w l i n n , s u c h as t h e c l i e n t . writin g that contains gra m m a tic a l or olher
VIII. Application m e c h a n i c a l e r r o r s r e t k ’c t s p o o r l y o n t h e f i r m . T h e c l i e n t m a v w o n d e r if t h e e r r o r s e x t e n d t o
t h e q u a l i t y of t h e r e s e a r c h a n d q u e s t i o n t h e f i r m ’s c a p a b i l i t y t o h a n d l e t h e c a s e . O p p o s i n g
c o u n s e l m a y c o n c l u d e t h a t t h e f i r m is n o t c a p a b l e of n i o u n t i n g a n e t f e c t i v e o p p o s i t i o n a n d b e
less i n c l i n e d t o s e t t l e a c a s e t h e y o t h e r w i s e w o u l d h a v e s e t t l e d .
Learning Objectives '1 h e c r e a t i o n of a p r o f e s s i o n a l l y w r i t t e n p r o d u c t r e q u i r e s k n o w l e d g e ot t h e f u n d a m e n t a l s
After completing this chapter, you ot wr i t i n g . I h i s c h a p t e r s u m m a r i / e s s o m e of t h e s e f u n d a m e n t a l s a n d h i g h l i g h t s a r e a s w h e r e w r i t
should understand: i n g e r r o r s c o m m o n l y o c c u r In t h i s r e g a r d , t h e c h a p t e r p r e s e n t s g e n e r a l i n f o r m a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g
sentences, p a ra gr a p h s, w o rd selection a n d usage, g r a m m a r , p u n c tu a ti o n , a n d s o m e formal
Sentences and paragraphs
w vitiii g c o n v e n t i o n s . I h c c h a p l e r d ( ' e s n o t p r i w i d c a c o m p r e h e n s i v e , i n d e p t h e x p l o r a t i o n o f
Word selection and usage t h e s e t opi c s . .S o lh c c s y o u m a y r e l e r t o f or a i l d i t i o n a l g u i d a n c e a r e l i s t e d at t h e e n d o t t h e c h a p t e r
• G r a m m a r and punctuation
Formal writing conventions
414
C H A P T E R 14 F U N D A M E N T A L S OF W R I T I N G
I. SENTENCES
l h e s e n t e n c e is the luiHhuncnlal buil di ng block o f w r i t i n ” . It is usually a s t a t e me n t that
conx e ys an idea or ideas, ( m o d w riting skills ineluiie an Linderstanding ol' the basics o f p r o p er
s e nt en c e c on s t r uc t i on .
A. S e n t e n c e S t r u c t u r e or P a t t e r n
A s e n t e n c e is usLially a statement in whi ch t h e ac t or (the subiect) p e r f o rm s s o m e action or
des cr ib es a state o f bei ng (the predicate).
For Example S u b je c t Predicate

John w recked the car.
John is ill.
l h e pr edi c a t e is c o m p o s e d ot the verb a n d object ot the \'erb, such as a direct object (it
ne c es sa r \ ) . An object o f t h e verb ma\' be r eq ui r ed to receive the action o f t h e verb.
For Example S u b je c t Predicate

John w recked the car.
The c a r is a direct object that receives the action of the verb wrecked.
At a n i i n i n u m i , a s e ntence must have a subject a n d a predicate. In its simplest f o r m, a

s e nt e n c e reqLiires a n o u n a n d a verb.
For Example Ju d g e s rule.

Make sure your sentences have a subject and a predicate.
B. Basic Rules in S e n t e n c e W r i ti n g
' l he following subsecti ons int r odu c e basic rules involving sentences an d se nt en c e struct ure.
H.xhibit 14-1 lists the topics covered by these rules. Keep this list in m i n d w h e n drat'ting or
r eviewing sentences.
I. S u b je c t-V e r b D is ta n c e
Keep the subject an d verb as close t oge t her as possible. A sentence is easier to u n d e r s t a n d
if the subject an d verb are close together, i n t e r v e n i n g words, clauses, or phr ases di s r up t the
action a n d m a k e the sent enc e difficult to u nd e r s t a n d .
For Exemple Intervening w o r d s in italics: Joh n, apparently upset and in a bad

mood, hit Ja m e s.
R evision: Apparently upset and in a bad mood, Jo h n hit Jam es.
In terven in g c la u s e in italics: The argum ent that the good faith exception applies
b e ca u se the officers w ere acting in good faith and the warrant w as d efective due to
m agistrate error\s supported by the facts.
Revision: The argument that the good-faith exception applies is supported by the facts. The
officers were acting in good faith and the warrant w as defective due to magistrate error.
415
P A R T IV L E G A L W R I T I N G
E x h ib it 14-1 Topics to Keep in Mind When Drafting Sentences.

Subject-Verb Distance Keep the subject and verb as close together as possible.
Sentence Length A short sentence is easy to understand and concise.

A suggested average sentence length is 15 to 25 words.
Active/Passive Voice The general rule is to draft sentences using active

voice. Active voice is easier to understand and more
powerful than passive voice.
Active: Steve keeps the records.
Passive:The records are kept by Steve.
Action Verbs Select verbs that are active rather than verbs that
show a state of being or are passive.
Action: Mary keeps the books.
State of being:The bookkeeper is Mary.
Action: Mary concluded thatTom was guilty.
Passive:The conclusion that Mary reached w as that
Tom w as guilty.
'Itansitions Use transitional w ords and phrases to connect

sentences and to establish the relationship between
the subjects of sentences.
2. S en ten ce Length
Although t here i.s no har d- and- fast rule go\' crning sentence length, sliorter sentences are easier
to un de r st a nd . Ihe length ol a sent enc e will \ a r y ac co r di n g to t he nat ure ol the i n l o r m a t io n
it must con\ ey. A g o od a\'crage for sentence length is I to 23 words. II you fmd that your
sentences are t oo long, el iminate extra wor ds or break the s en t e nc e into s hor te r sentences.
For Example S e n t e n c e t o o long: The evidence should be suppressed becau se the

w arrant did not authorize unannounced entry, and there w ere no exigent
circum stances at the scene that provided justification for the officers' actions of
entering the residence unannounced.
Revision: The evidence should be suppressed because the w arrant did not authorize
unannounced entry In addition, the circum stances at the scen e did not provide ju s
tification for unannounced entry.
W a tc h out for r u n - o n sentences. Each s entence s houl d con t a i n o n e ma i n idea. It is often

t e m p t i n g to pack m o r e t ha n o n e idea i nto a sentence. Ihis usualh' o cc ur s w h e n the ideas b e
ing conve\' ed are related. If the sent enc e you are reviewing is \ er\' long, it ma y be that it is a
r u n - o n sentence, a n d y ou arc a t t eni pt i n g to c o n \ e\' t oo m a n y ideas in o ne sentence.
For Example Run-on s e n te n c e : Thom as does not dispute the fact that the court
properly resorted to estimating a plant quantity for the 1991 grow, his d is
pute concerns the basis for the court's estimation.
Note that this sentence conveys two related ideas: what he does not dispute and
what he does dispute. Each idea should be presented in separate sentences.
Revision: Thom as does not dispute the fact that the court properly resorted to estim at
ing a plant quantity for the 1991 grow. His dispute co n cern s the basis forthe court's
estimation.
416
3. A c tiv e and P assive V oice

a. Active Voice
'1 he gener al rule is that you should draft sentences using active voice. W'hen you a d opt active
voice, the subject o f t h e sent enc e b e c o m e s the actor. W'hen \ ou use passive \ oice, the subject
ot t he se nt enc e is acted u p o n
For Example Active voice; The automobile hit the child.

The construction w orkers built the dam.
P a ssiv e voice: The child w as hit by the automobile.
The dam w as built by the construction w orkers.
Active voice is easier to u n d e r s t a n d an d is m o r e powerful. It is easier to u n d e r s t a n d b e

cause t he d oe r o f t h e action is m e n t i o n e d at the beg i nn i n g o f t h e s e nt e n c e p r i o r to the action.
Re ade rs d o n o t have to read t he en t ir e s en t enc e before they are i n f o r m ed w h o is p e r f o r m i n g
t he action. Active voice is m o r e poxverfiil because, at the outset, it identifies the ac t or as the
p e r f o r m e r o f t h e action. 'Ihis focuses at ten t ion on the ac t or a n d em p h a s i z e s t h e a c t o r ’s a c
tions. W'hen passive voice is used, the ac t or is r e m o v e d f rom the action o r not identified at all.
For Example A ctive voice: The defendant breached the contract when he failed to
deliver the goods on time.
P a s s iv e voice: The contract w as breached when the goods were not delivered on
time. (The actor is not identified.)
b. Passive Voice
In cer t ai n sit uati ons it is appr opr iat e to use p a s s iv e voice. You ma\- use passive voice w h e n
the a c tor is u n k n o w n o r u n i m p o r t a n t o r w he n \'ou d o not want to em p ha s i z e the actor's c o n
duct . Sec C h a p t e r \ 8 for a discuss'ion oi lhe appr opr iat e Use ot passive \ olê in c our t briefs.
For Example Actor u nk n o w n : A portion of the transcript w as lost.

Actor u nim p ortant: The bank deposit w as found by a passerby.
Actor d e e m p h a s iz e d : The vase w as broken and the plaintiff injured when the vase
slipped from the defendant's hand.
4. A c tio n Verbs
W h e n possible, select action (active) verbs rather t han pas si w verbs that show a state of being.
For Example Passive: Mary reached the conclusion that Tom w as guilty.
R evision: Mary concluded that Tom w as guilty.
S t a t e o f b eing: The record keeper Is Steve Jo n e s.
Revision: Steve Jo n e s keeps the records.
5. T r a n s itio n s
Transitional w o r d s a n d phr ases c o n n e c t sentences a n d establish the relationshi p betw'een the
subject s o f t h e sentences. Transitions are i mpt ir t ant because they guide the r ea der a n d m a k e
t h e wri ti ng cohesi\ e.
417
For Example N o transition; The statute requires that fen ce s exceeding 5 feet in
height must be located no closer than 10 feet from the property line. Your
fence will be 6 feet high; you must build it at least 10 feet from the property line.
With transition—transition in italics: The statute requires that fences exceeding 5 feet
in height must be located no closer than 10 feet from the property line. Therefore, because
your fence will exceed 5 feet, you must locate it at least 10 feet from the property line.
The t'ollowing are e.xamples o f transitional w or ds a n d phrases:

ho wev e r even so but still
t ur t li e r mo r e nevertheless so a nd
a l t hou gh simplv' put for on t h e o t h e r h an d
conversely mor eo ve r that is in o t h e r wo r d s
c o n t r a r y to above all clearly m o r e i mpor ta nt l y
initially me a n w h i l e finally all t h e s ame
specificalh' therefore thus consequentlv'
arguably in cont rast instead to illustrate
likewise allegedly unlike subse quent l y
undoubtedh' in addi tion likewise in c onc l usi on
in SLUiimar}' nonet heless since wi t h out ques tion
II. PARAGRAPHS
A paragraph is a group ot' sentences that address the same topic. Paragraphs are i mpor tant
because they organize the writing according to topic, ihey ma ke it easier tor the reader to u n
der st a n d the material h\- separating it into manageable units. A reader may en co u nt e r dilficult\’
un de r st a n di ng the subject matter wh en it is not div ided into paragraphs. Start a new paragraph
when addressing a new idea cm' topic, l'se transiticnial phrases or sentences to link new paragraphs.
,A p a r agr a ph Lisualk consists ot' the t'ollowing elements:
A topic sentence
'Ihe b ody
A closing sentence
Hvery paragraph does not require each of thes e elements. A short par agraph, for example,
m a y not have a closing sentence. The following subsecti ons discuss t he e l eme n t s of a p a r a
g r a p h a n d o th e r c o ns ider at ion s to keep in m i n d w h e n wri ting p a r a g r a p h s (see Hxhibit 14-2).
E x h ib it 14-2 Topics to Keep in Mind When Drafting Paragraphs.

Topic Sentence Use a topic sentence to introduce the subject and
provide the focus of the paragraph.
Body The body of the paragraph should support or develop

the subject introduced by the topic sentence. Gener
ally, a paragraph should address a single idea or topic
rather than several different topics.
I2
Closing Sentence End with a closing sentence that sum m arizes or I O
I CN
9
applies the topic addressed in the paragraph.
TYansitiDn Sentence Include transitional words, phrases, or sentences to con

nect the subjects discussed in the different paragraphs.
418
A. Topic S e n t e n c e of a P a r a g r a p h
llu' to p ic s e n t e n c e Kicntilies the subject ol the p.iragraiih, it nit r od uc es the subject a n d
proN'ides tlie l ocus ol tlie paragiapli tor tlie reader, llie topic s entence is usually placed at the
b e g i n n i ng of t h e p ar agraph.
For Example Topic sentence of a paragraph that d iscu sse s w hy the exclusionary
rule is necessary: "The Suprem e Court has identified several reasons
w hy the exclusionary rule is necessary."
Topic sentence of a paragraph that d iscu sse s Mr. Smith's actions: "Mr. Smith's
actions do not constitute a breach of contract."
Topic sentence of a paragraph that ad dresses required conditions: "A w arranty
of fitness for a particular purpose is created when the following conditions are
present."
B. P a r a g r a p h Body
Ihe bod\- o f a p a r a g r a p h consists o f sentences that s up p o r t o r develop the subject i n t r o d u c e d
b\' the topic sentence. Ihe s entence(s) s ho ul d develop the subject c l e a r k a n d logically.
The topic sentence in this example is printed in italics to separate it from

the body:
To support a negligence claim against Mrs. Jo nes, four elements must be proven.
First, we must establish that she had a duty to keep the tree on her property trimmed.
Next, we must show that she failed to properly trim the tree. Then it is necessary
to prove that, as a result of her failure to trim the tree, a branch tell and struck
Mr. Thompson. Finally, we must establish that M r Thompson's injuries resulted from
the branch striking him.
Not i ce in this e x a mp le thal the s ent ences in the b o d \ are p re s e nt e d clearly a n d in l o g i

cal order. R e m e m b e r , w hen p r e p a r i n g the b o d y o f a p ar agr a ph , the goal is to dralt it c l e a r k ,
concisely, a n d logicalK'.
C. Closing S e n t e n c e of a P a r a g r a p h
A p ar a gra ph s houl d en d with a clo sin g s e n te n c e . Ihe cont ent ol the sentence \'aries a c c o r d
ing to the subject ma tt e r covered in the par a g r a ph. It s hou l d s u n i n i a r i / e the topic a d d r e s s e d
in the bod\- o r a pph ' the sLibiect di scussed to the lacts ot ' the case.
For Example S u m m ary : Therefore, to establish a claim for negligence, we must show
that Mrs. Jo n e s had a duty, the duty w as breached, the breach caused
the accident, and the accident caused the harm that resulted.
A p p lication of su b je c t to t h e fa c ts of t h e case: The rule of law adopted in the
Craig case clearly applies in this case because M r Smith failed to warn M r Jo n e s
that the brakes were defective.
D. T ra n s itio n S e n t e n c e s
Transition s e n t e n c e s (or words, phrases) c on n e c t the subjects di scussed in different p a r a
graphs. Ihe\ g ui de the reader b\- linki ng t he par agr a p hs, thereby p r o vi di ng c o h e r en ce to the
419
o\ e r a ! l writing. ' Ihc topic or clo.sing scntcncc o t ' a p a r a g r a p h ma\- inckidc the tr ansitional
language. 'I'ran.sitional words, phrases, and sentences are usualh' placed at either the b egi nning
or the en d o f t h e paragraph.
For Example Transitions at the Beginning ofa Paragraph:

The following transitional language is in italics:
If the above m entioned requirements are not met, breach of contract may not be
claimed.
There are, however, exceptions to this rule.
In addition to a cause of action for n egligence, Mr. Smith may allege ... (Note:
Use when the body of the paragraph ad d re sse s the other possible cau se s of a c
tion, and the previous paragraph d iscu sse s the negligence cau se of action.)
The se co n d element of the statute requires ... (Note; Use w hen separate para
graphs d iscu ss separate elements.)
Transitions at the End of the Paragraph:

The following transitional language is in italics:
The statute, however, does not define "publication"; therefore, case law must be
consulted. (Note: Use when the next paragraph introduces the case law.)
In addition to this case, other ca se s also d isc u ss the requirem ents of the statute.
(Note: Use when the following paragraph d isc u ss e s the other cases.)
E. P a r a g r a p h Length
.As with sentences, there is no rule that establishes a st a n da r d length tor paragraphs. Paragraphs
usuall}' are three to six sentences in length. Most p a r a g r a p h topics can be covered c o m t o r t a b h ’
in six to seven sentences, al t h ou gh a pa r ag ra ph ma y be as s hor t as o n e sentence or as long as
ten. n e t e r m i n e the length by keeping in m i n d the goal o f clearh' a n d completeK' covering the
topic oi the paragraph. 'Ihe r ea der may have dif hcul ty u n d e r s t a n d i n g o r be c om e c o n t u s e d b\'
e xt r e me h ' long paragraphs. A series o f e x t r e me h ' s hor t p a r a g r a p h s ma y lack transition and
distract the reader. Iheretore, ext re meh ' long a n d shor t p a r a g r a p h s sh ou l d be the except ion
in legal writing, ' lhe following are examples o f s h or t par agraphs.
For Example O n e -s e n te n c e paragraph: The second element of the rule requires

I thatthe w itness be present atthe signing.
!
I T w o -s e n te n c e paragraph: Section 2(b) of the statute ad d re sse s the requirement of
the number and presence of w itnesses. It requires that there be a minimum of two
w itn esses and both must be present atthe signing.
Notice that the p r e c ed i ng exa mpl e s lack t ra n s i ti o n la n guage o r sentences that c o n n e ct

the p a r a g ra p h s to the p ar a gr a p h s that follow.
IIL W O R D SELECTION A N D USAG E

Not onl}' is it necessar}' to be skilled in se nt enc e a n d p a r a g r a p h co n s tr u c ti o n , you must also
be skilled in selecting a nd using words. Ihis section pr ese nt s s o m e guidelines on w o r d selec
tion a n d usage.
420
A. Excessive or R e d u n d a n t W ords
Avoid iho use ot excessiw' or rcduiKlant words. (Chock each sentcncc tor wor ds that can be
el iminated. Simplif\- the finished p ro duc t .
For Example E x c e s s iv e w o rd s: The statute provides individuals protection against

the use of evidence obtained by w arrantless wiretaps.
Revision: The statute prohibits the use of evidence obtained by w arrantless wiretaps.
R ed u n d a n t w ords: The sole and exclusive remedy provided by the statute is crim inal
prosecution.
Revision: The exclusive remedy provided by the statute is criminal prosecution. OR
Revision: The statute establishes crim inal prosecution as the exclusive remedy.
' Ihe t’o l l o w i n ” lists c o m m o n K ' u se d r e d u n d a n t pairs. .An\- o n e ot t he t er ms can be used;

the use ot b o t h t e r ms is not r equ i r ed or a ppr opr iat e.
tul l /compl et e merged,-'together cease/desist

each/c\' er\' ioin/together null/ \’oid
t r ue / co r re ct due/owing e xa ct /same
end/ re sul t a l t er / ch an g e descend/down
aiul/nioreoN'cr sole/e\clusi\e specific/example
O t h e r unnec es sar y wor ds o c c u r in p hr ase s such as “te\s- in number, ” “green in color,” “c on t i nu e

on,” and “fix e a.m. m the m o r n i n g . ” it' omi ssion o f a wor d does not cha ng e the in te nd e d m e a n
ing ot' the sentence, leave it out.
B. N o u n - V e r b Scrings
.\ n o u n -v e r b string is a g r o u p of' related words used to con\ e\- inf or mat i on. It is a f o r m
ol r edundanc\ - that s hou l d be a\ ' oi ded w h e n a single descripti'.’e word will ac compl i s h the
s a m e end.
For Example Noun-Verb Strings:

The distributor is not responsible for failures to perform due to riots,
floods, earthquakes, and a cts of God.
A stockholder may not grant, give, sell, or assign her interest in the stock without
the consent of the other shareholders.
Revisions:
The distributor is not responsible for failure to perform caused by events beyond
the distributor's control.
A stockholder may not transfer her interest in the stock without the consent ofthe
other shareholders.
C. N o m i n a l i z a t i o n s
A n o m in a liza tio n is a n o u n cr eat e d f r o m a verb.
421
For Example Noun

determine determination
realize realization
p ossess possession
important importance
X o m i n a l i / a t i o n s weaken a s e nt enc e b\' taking the action away I ro m the actor. 'Ihey
ma k e the sentence passive a nd less torcetul.
For Example N om inalizations:
He cam e to the realization that the assignm ent required more work.
The importance ofthe opinion is that___
R evisio n s:
He realized that the assignm ent required more work.

The opinion is important b e c a u s e .. . .
D. Legalese
L egalese, as used here, relers to t e r ms ol art used in the legal prolession that are not g e n
erally k n o wn outsi de the profession. Ihe goal of legal wri ting is to elfecti\'el\- c o m m u n i c a t e
i ntor mation. W'riting in plain English usual!}' accomplishes this goal, anil plain hnglish should
bc used w h en possible.
Ihe aud i enc e g o \ e r n s the extent to which \ o u i n c o i p o r a t e legal terminolog}' in legal
writing. Legal t e r ms ai'e a p p r o p r i a t e when c o m m u i i i c a t m g with o the rs in the held. If the
r eader is trained in the law, the use ol'legal terms or phrases, such as res ipsn lo q u i tu r , is m uc h
easier t han p r o \ i d i n g a definition or explanation. W'hen the recipient is a nonlaw}’er, however,
}oii should a\'oid using legal terms. Be sure to define legal t e r ms w he n c o m m u n i c a t i n g with
no nl a wye r s il the m e a n i n g of the te rm is not ob\ ious.
For Example L eg a le se in italics: The constitution requires probable ca u se before

the police can conduct a search of your residence.
Revision: The constitution requires the police to have a valid reason before they can
search a house. An example of a valid reason would be if reliable persons informed
the police thatthey saw illegal drugs in the house.
E. A rchaic T e rm s
Archaic t e r ms are w o r d s or phr ases frequenth' used in the past that are bei ng p ha s ed ou t of
legal writing. Do not include such tern'is in }'our writing. Such t erms iiiclude saith, p a r t y o f
the first p art, aforesaid, hereiiihetore, hereinafter, h en e e fo rth , an d the s a i d p a r t y .
422
For Example Archaic and e x c e s s v er b ia g e in italics: Upon the signing of the

Agreem ent, the patty of the first parf will hereinafter ce a se and d e sist
from attending hearings where the party o fth e se co n d p arf acts as chairperson.
Revision: Upon the signing of the Agreement, Mr. Smith will nof attend hearings w here
Ms. Carson acts as chairperson. (Assum e that nam es, Mr. Smith and Ms. Carson,
are mentioned earlier in the agreement. Ratherthan use the phrase party o f the first
part and party o fth e se co n d part, simply repeat the names of the parties or use a
pronoun su ch as he or s/7e when it is clear w hich party is being referenced.)
F. Sexis t L a n g u a g e
In any t o r m of wri ting, using gender-.specific l anguage is prejudicial a nd i na pp r o pr i a t e unless
it refers to a specitic p e r s o n wh o se g e n de r is k now n . S e x i s t la n g u a g e has n o place in legal
writing, l h e following guidelines will help e ns ur e g en d er - n e ut r a l writing.
1. W ord s
(Change gende r -spe ci f i c t e r ms to g e nde r- ne ut r a l terms.
For Example G ender-Specific Gender-Neutral

chairm an chairperson
wife/husband spouse
draftsman drafter
forefathers forebearers
housew ife homemaker
mankind people, human beings, humanity
workm an w orker
anchorm an anchor
congressm an congressperson, representative
2. R e s t r u c tu r in g S e n te n c e s w ith He an d she
You can use h e o r s h e in place o f /ít’ to r e n de r a sent enc e g e nde r -ne ut ra l , l h e result, however,
ma v be awkw'ard.
For Example The rule requires the plaintiff to file his or her
response within 15 days.
You m a y a d o p t several alternatives to avoid the use ot his or her, he/sh e, a n d so forth,
a. Restate t he s entence so t he ant ec ede nt is plural.
For Ẹxạmpl« The rule requires the plaintiff to file his p le a d in g s.. . .
Revision: The rule requires plaintiffs to file their p le a d in g s... .
b. E l i m i na t e use o f the p r o n o u n ; subst itute t he definite article.
For Example The officer is responsible for the actions of his troops.
Revision: The officer is responsible for the actions of the
troops.
423
c. Repeat the name.
For Example Before the client may liquidate the asse ts ofthe company, he
m u st.. . .
Revision: Before the client may liquidate the asse ts of the company, the
client m u st.. . .
d. Use one, y o u , or y o tir w he n possible.
For Example Everyone has a right to his personal preferences.

Revisions: Everyone has a right to personal preferences.
You have a right to your personal preferences.
e. Rephrase t he sentence.
For Example A legal assistant should not com m unicate with the litigants he
knows we do not represent.
Revision: A legal assistant should not com m unicate with litigants we do
not represent.
3. A p p ro p ria te R eference to G en d e r
Re terence to g en d e r is appr opr iat e o n k when you intend to refer to a specific se.x.
For Example Each member of the women's basketball team had her name printed on
the back of her uniform.
G. Specific W ords— P ro b lem Areas

S o m e words are c o m m o n h ' misused, 'i’ou can a\'oid p ro b le m s ol misLise by lollowing s ome
basic rules.
1. AfFect/Eft'ect
A f f e e t is a verb m e a n i n g “to intluence." Hffeet is either a verb o r no u n. As a verb, it m e a n s “to
b r i n g a bou t or cause”; as a no u n, it me a n s “result.”
For Example "His actions will not affect [not effect] the outcome of the case." The
meaning of affect \s "to influence."
"He tried to effect [not affect an agreement." Here, the meaning of effect is "to bring about."
"The test did not bring about the desired effect ]no\. affect]." The meaning of effect
(used as a noun) is "result."
2. A m o n g / B e t w e e n
Use a m o n g w h e n referring to t hr ee or m o r e things, b e tw e e n w h e n r eferring to two.
For Example The jury award w as divided am ongthe six plaintiffs.

The jury award w as divided between Tom and Grace.
424
3. A i i d / O r
W’hen tlic w o r d uiiii is uscti in regard t(i a list ol W o r d s , all the items listed are in c l uded a n d
rci|uircd.
For Example "The case law requires the plaintiff to prove duty, breach of duty, proximate
cause, and dam ages." The use of and m eans that all four elements must
be proved. All the listed items are included in the requirement.
W’he n or is used, all the items listed are not r equ i r ed to be inckided. An\- o n e o r all ot'
the items are included.
For Example "The case law requires the corporate president to provide notice orally,
by mail, orby facsim ile." All the listed items are not required. Only one of
the items is required. The president has the choice of giving notice by one or all of the
m eans listed.
Ihc use ot'ii»i/'()»'creates an ambiguit\- a n d is not proper.
For Example "The statute requires that the notice be given orally, by mail, and/or by
facsim ile." What does the statute require? Are all the listed items required?
' so, and should be used. If only one of the items is required, oa should be used.
4. C o u n cil/C 'o u n scl

c o u n c il is a d el iber at ive o r a d m i n i s l r a t i \ e bod w .A c o u n c il o r is a m e m b e r ol such a b o d \ ’.
(.o/i/oc/, w h e n used as a \ c r b , me a n s to give a d \ i c c or gu i d a n ce , ( ' o u u s c l, w h e n u s e d as
a n o u n , is a d \ ice. A co u n s e lo r {co un scl) is a p er s on , such as a lawyer, w h o g i \ c s ad\ 'i ce o r
guidance.
J She presented the resolution to the city council.

The city councilor received the petition.
The school guidance officer provided counsel to the new student.
The counselor informed the shareholders of their legal rights.
5. Each O t h e r / O n e A n o th e r
W'hen r ef er ri ng to two nouns, use cacIi other. W'hen referring to mo r e tha n two n o u n s, use
o ne a n o t h e r
For Example Bob and Mary supported each other during the trial.
The members of the team supported one another during the tournament.
6. ( i o o d / W e l l
G o o d is an adiectivc (adiectives modif\' n o u n s a n d p r o n o u n s ) . It c an n ot bc used as an a d v e r b
( adxcrbs modilx' \ erbs, adiecti\ es, an d ad\'erbs). Well can act as an a d \ e r b or an adiecti\'e.
425
For Example In co rrect: "She worked good."

Correct: "She worked well." 1/1/e//is an adverb that modifies the verb
worked. The use of good is inappropriate, because good Is an adjective and should
not be used to modify a verb.
Correct: "She did good work." In this sentence, good'\s used as an adjective modifying
the noun work.
7. Lie/Lay
¡.ic i.s an intransitive verb that me an s “to rest or recline.” ( An in tra n sitive verb is a \ e r b that
d o es not take a direct object.) Its f orms are lie, lay, lain, lying.
For Example lie [not lay] down.

I think I will
He w as so tired he lay [not laid] down.
She has been lying [not laying] around all day.
L a y is a transitive \'erb that me a n s “to put or place.” (A tr a n s itiv e verb takes a direct
obiect.) Its f or ms are lay, laid, laid, a nd laying.
For Example I think I will /a/lnot lie] the paper down.

laid ]r\ot lay] the paper down.
He
He has been laying [not lying] brick all day.
8 . L ik e / A s
I.ike should be used as a preposit ion; it should be i'ollowed b \’ a n o u n or n o u n phrase. .4.< ma y
act as a c onj un ct i on or a pr eposit ion in a sentence.
For Example "In this contract he used the same technique as [not like] he did in the
other agreement." The use of ///cewould not be appropriate because here
a sfu n ctio n s as a conjunction, not a preposition.
"The legal assistant, like all the other participants, w as on time." This use of like is ap
propriate because ///ce functions as a preposition in the sentence.
9. Shall an d M ay
l h e wor d shall is used to i mp o s e a duty that is ma ndat or y. 'Ihe p e r f o rm a n c e ot t h e duty is
not optional.
For Example "Mr. Smith s/ia//terminate all contact with Mrs. Black." The duty to termi
nate all communication is mandatory. Mr. Smith has no option.
Ihe w o rd m a y indicates that the p e r f o rm a n c e o f an act is not ma n d a t o r y . The p e r f o r

426
m a n c e o f t h e act is optional.
For Example "Mr. Smith m aKterm inate all com munication with Mr. B lack." The act of
terminating all com munication is optional for Mr. Smith. He has a choice
as to w hether to terminate communication.
10. T h a t /W h ic h
Use t h a t tci i n t n x l u e e |-estrieti\e ehuises a n d w h ic h to intrciduce no nr es t r i c t i v e clauses. ,A
r c s t r i c t i w cla iiic is necessary to the n i e an in g o f t h e sentence.
For Example "You must perform all the steps that are listed in the statute." The italicized
clause IS a restrictive clause. It informs the reader thatthe required steps are the
steps listed in the statute. It is necessary to an understanding ofthe steps that must betaken.
,-\ iioni'cstrictivc cla iiic is not n eces sar \’ to t he m e a n i n g ot t he sentence. It can be set off
f r om t he rest o f t h e s e nt en c e with c o m m a s w i thou t c h a n g i n g t he m e a n i n g o f t h e sentence.
For Example "I always buy his products, which usually are of high quality" The italicized
clause IS a nonrestrictive clause. It is not n ecessary to the main meaning
of the sentence.
IV. G R A M M A R
Ihe rules o f g ram m ar govern the constriictii)n of sentences, 'ihis section i nt r odu c es basic
rules ol g r a m m a r to keep in m i n d wlien p e r l o r m i n g a writing assignment.
A. S u b je c t - V e r b A g r e e m e n t
i he subject a n d \ erb should agree in pe r so n and n umbe r , i his me a ns that s ingul ar subjects
r equ i r e s i ngu l ar \ e r b s aiul plural subjects require plural verbs.
For Example Incorrect; The decision in the case require the defendant to give notice
to the plaintitf. (This sentence has a singular subject, decision, and a plu
ral verb, require.)
Correct; The decision in the case requires the defendant to give notice to the plaintiff.
(The singular subject decision agrees with the singular verb requires.)
I he following basic rules c o n ce r n s u b j e c t- v e r b a g reem en t:
I . I'wo or mo r e subjects joined by iiiul u s u a i k require a plural \erb.
For Example M ary and Jo a n were present.

The president, secretary, and treasurer are going to the
conference.
2. Two o r nuire subjects joiiu’d b\ ’ or or n o r require a verb that agrees with the
subiect closest to the \ erb.
For Example are going to attend.

Tom or his brothers
Either the brothers or Tom isthe responsible party.
Neither Tom nor his brother is going to attend.
To accept the contract or to draft a new one /syour option. 427
3. Most indefinite p r o n o u n s require singul ar \ e i b s . Indefinite pronoLins are p r o

n o u n s that d o not refer to a s[iecifie p e r so n or tiling, sueh as ¡nivoiic, everybo dy,
no bo dy, ioincoiic, Ciuli, a n d io m c th i n g .
For Example Everybody Is responsible.

Each of the members has a specific task.
4. S o m e indefinite p r o n o u n s require a \ e r h tliat mat ches the n o u n to w hi ch they

refer. S o me ot these p r o n o u n s are oil, none, niosl, foitic, and any.
For Example All of the property Is distributed.

All of the Item s are m issing.
5. Plural indefinite p r o n o u n s such as both, few, m a n y , several, a n d others r equire a

plural verb.
For Example Few are selected.

Although there w ere multiple presentations, several w ere not
in attendance.
The others are not required to be present.
6. (',ollecti\e n o u n s usualh' r equire a singul ar verb. A eolleeti^’e n o u n is a n o u n that

refers to a g r o u p (e.g., jiu-y, family, erowil, m a io r ily ).
For Example The jury w as deadlocked.

The family is present.
N o u n s that are plural in form but h a \ e a singul ar m e a n i n g require a si ng ul ar \'erb

(e.g., p()//7/cs. news, m a th e n n itie s ).
For Example The news is bad.

The politics of the party is corrupt.
M athem atics is her strength.
8. I1ie title ot a w or k takes a singular \ erb.
For Example Military ta ctics ;'s wonderful reading.
9. A relative p r o n o u n requires a verb that agrees with its ant ecedent. A relative p r o
n o u n is on e that refers to a n o t h e r n o u n in the sentence (e.g., w hich, w h o, a n d
th a t). The a n te c e d e n t is the n o u n to w h i ch the relati\ e p r o n o u n refers. If the a n t e
ce de n t is singular, t he verb sh oul d be singular. If the a nt ec ede n t is plural, the ver b
s h o ul d be plural.
For Example Our client is one of the persons who has been indicted in the
case. ( Who is the relative pronoun, and clientls the antecedent.)
428
For Example Singular: Our client, who w as present at the scene, has been indicted.
The antecedent (c//enf) ofthe relative pronoun {who) is singular; therefore,
uv/70 takes a singular verb {has).
Plural: The clients, who w ere present at the scene, have been indicted.
The antecedent (c/zenfs) of the relative pronoun {who) is plural; therefore, who takes a
plural verb {have).
B. Verb T ense
Verb t e n s e is the time in which a \ erb's action occurs. F^-ents h a pp en i ng in the present use the
pr ese nt tense, events that o c c u r r e d in the past use the past tense, an d events that will t ake place
in t h e f ut ur e use the future tense. Usual!}-, sentences an d p ar agr a ph s are wri tten in t he s a me
tense. C h e c k to e n su r e that } o u r wri ting does not have i na p pr opr ia t e c ha nges in ver b tense.
For Example Inappropriate c h a n g e in verb te n s e : The com plaint was filed on

Ja n u ary 1, 2003. The defendants move to dism iss the complaint. The mo
tion was denied. (Notice that the verb tense in this sentence moves from past, to
present, then back to past tense.)
moved to dism iss
R ev isio n : The com plaint lAâsfiled on Ja n u a ry 1,2003. The defendants
the complaint. The motion w asd en ied. (Notice that all the verbs are in past tense.)
Ciuidelines c o n c e r n i n g correct \ erb tense follow:
1. W h e n p r es e n t i ng y o u r position o r legal analysis, use present tense.
For Example Plaintiff contends that the rule requires 30 days' notice.
2. W h e n a d d re ss i ng a c our t op i n i o n that has al ready been decided, use past tense.
For Example In Smith V. Jones, the court held thatthe rule does not require
30 days' notice.
3. W' hen discussing a law o r rule still in effect, use present tense.
The provisions of § 44-556 require a contractor to give 30 days'

notice.
C. Parallel C o n s t r u c t i o n
Parallel c o n s tr u c tio n m e a n s that items in a list are similar in g r amm a t i c al s t r uct ure . The
rule rec]uires that in sentences i ncluding a list, a g r o u p of acti\ities, a nd so on, each o f t h e items
m u s t use t h e s a me g r a n nn a t i ca l form; that is, ail the items or m e m b e r s o f t h e g r o u p sh ou l d
agr ee in ver b tense, n u m b e r , a n d so on.
429
For Example Lack parallel construction;

The defendant is a trained officer with 15 years' experience who has
won several service medals.
The goals of the association are the following:

a. educating the public about crime,
b. to provide support for the police, and
c. improvement of local neighborhood watch groups.
Most states have passed uniform law s for corporations, partnerships, and that allow
limited liability com panies.
The client gave consideration not only to the exclusion term but also the w aiver
clause.
R e v isio n s w ith parallel construction;
The defendant is a trained officer who has 15 ye ars’ experience and who has won
several service medals.
The goals of the association are the following;
a. fo ec/ucaie the public about crime,
b. to provide support for the police, and
c. to improve local neighborhood watch groups.
Most states have passed uniform laws for corporations, partnerships, and limited
liability com panies.
The client gave consideration not only to the exclusion term but also to the w aiver
clause.
D. S u p e rf lu o u s Verbs
Avoid the use o f verb c o n s t r u c t i on s that are unnece.ssarily wordy.
For Example S u p e r flu o u s v e r b s in italics:
perform an investigation into the matter.

He decided to
The arbitrator decided to give considerationXo the argument.
The judge reached a decision on the question.
The contractor made an atternptto complete the contract on time.
R e v is io n s w ith o u t s u p e r flu o u s verbs;
He decided to investigate the matter.

The arbitrator considered the argument.
The judge decided the question.
The contractor attempted to complete the contract on time.
430
E. Modifiers a n d Infinitives
M od ifiers arc w o r d s or ph r ase s that d cs cr i bc t he suhject, \ e r b , o r object in a se nt en c e.
I .xiiibit l -l-.i pr esents tlie four l\ pes o f c o m m o n pr ob l em s i inoK ing modiliers.
E x h ib it 1 4 -3 Problem Modifiers.
Misplaced Modifiers W ords or phrases that are placed in the w rong
location in a sentence and m ay create am biguity
or cause a loss of clarity. "If we contend that the
contract applies, it will be attacked by the defense."
(What will be attacked, our contention or the
contract?)
Dangling Modifiers M odifiers that do not m odify any other part of the
sentence. “ To determ ine w fiether tfie contract was
breached, the provisions of the statute must be re
ferred to." (The italicized m odifier does not refer to
or m odify any part of the sentence.)
Squinting Modifiers A m odifier located in a position in the sentence that

m akes it unclear whether it m odifies the word that
precedes it or the word that follow s it. "The report
that was prepared routinely indicates that the struc
ture was unsafe." (Was the report prepared routinely,
or did the report routinely indicate the structure w as
unsafe?)
Split Infinitives An adverb is placed in an infinitive after to and

before the verb. "Stephanie began to rapidly clim b "
(The adverb rapidly \s placed between the infinitive
ioand the verb climb.) Correct: "Stephanie began to
clim b rapidly."
I. M isp la ced M o d ifier s

.A m isplaccil im n iijic r is a word or ph r ase that is placed in the w r o n g location in a sentence.
Because ol its placement, it appears to modif\- one word or phrase when it is i ntended to niodif\'
another, 'i'ou nia\ create an ani biguit\ or cause a loss ot clarit\' b\- mis placing a modiliei'. ' Ihe
solution is to r ep hr ase t he sentence or to m o \ e the m o d i h e r to e n su r e clarit\'. U s u a l h ’ this
me an s placing t he modif ier bet ore or after t he w or d or p hr as e it modifies.
For Example M isp la ced modifiers:

If we contend that the contract applies, it will be attacked by the d e
fense. (What will be attacked, our contention or the contract?)
Present the client's counterargum ent only in the third section of the brief. (Does
this mean the counterargum ent should be presented in the third section and no
other section, or does it mean that the third section should co n sist only of the
counterargum ent?)
R evision —s e n t e n c e rephrased:
If we contend that the contract applies, the defense will attack the contention.
R evision —m odifier m o ved :
In the third section of the brief, present only the client's counterargum ent.
431
2. D a n g l in g M od ifiers
Modif iers tliat d o not m o d i f y any o t h er par t o f t h e s entence are d d n g lin g m odifiers.
For Example Dangling m odifier in italics: To determ ine w hetherthe contract w as

breached, the provisions of the statute must be referred to.
Ihe italicized mo dif ier does not refer to or modif y an\' part o f t h e sentence. It refers to
a c o nt r a ct m e n t i o n e d in a n o t h e r sentence. The p r o b l e m m a y be cor rec t ed by r e w r i t i n g the
s e n t en c e to m a k e sure modit ier s refer to a n o u n or n o u n s in the sentence.
For Example Dangling m odifier elim inated: To determine w hetherthe terms ofthe
contract violate the statute, the statutory provisions must be referred to.
3. S q u in t in g M o d ifier s
■A ii j u i n t i n g m o d ifi e r is a modif ier located in a posit ion in t he sentence that makes it un cl ea r
w h e t h e r it modifies the w or d that pr ecedes it or tiie wor d that follows it. Eliminate squ i nt i ng
modi f i ers w he n you edit \ o u r writing.
For Example Squinting modifier in italics: The report that w as prepared routinely
indicated thatthe structure w as unsafe. (W as the report prepared routinely,
or did the report routinely indicate the structure w as unsafe?)
Revision: The report that w as routinely prepared indicated thatthe structure w as unsafe.
Limiting modifiers such as only, even, alinosi, nearly, an d iust are often misplaced. T hese
mod i t ier s shoul d be placed in tr ont ol the wo r d the\' m o d i t \ .
For Example Incorrect: The lawyer only prepared the document.

A s the sentence reads, the lawyer prepared the document and noth-
' ing else. If the sentence is intended to mean that the law yer and no one else prepared
I the document, on/Kis m isplaced.
! Correction: Only the law yer prepared the document.
4. S plit In finitives
An in fin itiv e is a verb form that funct i on s as a n o u n o r as an auxiliary verb, such as to argu e,
to u n d e r s t a n d , a n d to consider. The general rule is that infinitives s ho ul d not be split; that is,
an a d ve r b s ho ul d not be placed after the to a n d before the verb.
For Example S plit infinitives: In each of the following exam ples, the infinitive is split:
"to com pletely understand," "to rapidly clim b," "to thoroughly test." An
adverb is placed between the to and the verb.
R evision s: "to understand completely," "to climb rapidly," "to test thoroughly."
432
Ihis general rule is not inv ariable; techniealK , split intinitives are not w r o n g e\ en t h o u g h
the\- are no t preterred. S omet i mes an infinitixe ma y be split to e m p h a s i z e t he modi f i c at i on
o f t h e \ erb (e.g., “to bet ter i m d e r s t a n d ” ) or to avoid an awkwarti p l a c e me n t o f t h e mo di f ie r
far I ro m t he verb il is modifv ing (e.g., “to best conve\' o n e ’s actual m e a n i n g " r at h e r t h a n “to
c o n v e \ ’ o n e ' s actual m e a n i n g best").
F. N o u n - P r o n o u n A g r e e m e n t
P r o n o u n s mus t agree in n u m b e r (singular./plural) a n d g en d e r ( t e m i n i n e / m a s c u h n e / n e u t e r )
with the l u n ms to which the\' reter— their ant ecedents. PronoLuis include /, m e , i n i m \ my, nv,
UÍ, our. y o u , yours, your, he. h im , lus, she. her, hers, it, its, they, th em , their, a n d theirs.
Iher e are several guidelines to follow to e n s u r e n o u n - proiKum ag r ee me nt .
1. P r o n o u n s must agree with their a nt ec ed e nt s (the n o u n to w hi ch the p r o n o u n

refers).
For Example The w orkers put on their helmets when they entered the
building.
The pronouns their and they aqree in number (plural) with the an teced
ent w orkers {plural).
M ary w as required to w ear /ier helmet.
The pronoun /ieragrees in number and gender with the antecedent Mary.
1. P r o n o u n s that d o not reter to a definite p er son or thing are in d e lin ite p r o n o u n s .

So me exa mpl e s of iiuietinite p r o n o u n s are uU, tinyone, iinyboiiv, eaeh, e ve ry o n e ,
so m e o n e , som eboilv. everyth in g , s o m e th i n g , and none. Indelinite p r o n o u n s are
usuallv- singular.
For Example Everyone has the freedom to select his or /?e/'candidate.
.V .Antecedents joined b\- lUid requir e a plural pronoiui.
For Example Tom and M ary are separating property.

Tom, Jon, and M ary are going f/ie/)"separate w ays.
4. A n t ec ed e nt s joined by or or n o r r equire a p r o n o u n that agrees iii n u n i b e r a n d

g e n d e r w ith the ant ec ede nt closest t(' t he p ro n o u n .
Fair Example Mary orthe other defendants must conduct f/)e//'investjgatjon.

The defendants or M ary must conduct /ier investigation.
W'hen a construction appear s awkwar d, as the second sentence does, c ons i der
r e p h r as i n g the sentence.
433
For Example M ary or the defendants must conduct an investigation.
3. Ihc nLimbcr o t ' a p r o n o u n tiiat refers to a collective n o u n is d e t e r m i n e d by the

fun ct i on ot tbe collecti\ e n oun. colh'ctivc iiouii is a n o u n that refers to a group.
If the collecti\’e n o u n f u n c t ions as a unit, the p r o n o u n is singular.
For Example The committee, after reviewing the matter, presented its conclu
sion. (In this sentence, the collective noun, committee, functions
as a unit; the review is the act ofthe committee as a whole and therefore the
pronoun its is singular.)
If t he collective n o u n does not funct i on as a unit, that is, the ni e mb er s o f t h e collective

n o u n are acting s epar ateh' a nd not as a unit, then a plural p r o n o u n is r equired.
For Example The team have stated f/7e/r various positions on the question of whether
they should w ear the new helmets. (In this example, the collective noun,
team, does not function as a unit. The reference is to the team as individual members;
therefore, the sentence takes the plural pronoun they.)
G. Adverbs, Adjectives, a n d C o n j u n c t i o n s
An (uijcciivc is a word used to mo di f y a n oi m or p r o nou n.
For Example She wore a red dress to the party.

The race car had vinyl seats.
An a d v e r b is a w o r d used to modif y a \ e r b , atljecfise, o r a n o t h e r a d\ e r b.
For Example John ran q uickly Into the house.
A c o n ju n c t io n is a w or d that c on ne ct s words, phrases, clauses, o r sentences.
For Example We can select the first clause orthe entire second paragraph.
All of the participants had heard of the agreement, butnone had seen it.
1. F o r m in g A d verbs a n d Im p r o p e r U se o f A d jectives
Many, but not all, adver bs are f o r me d b\- a d d i n g -ly to a word. A c o m m o n p r o b l e m o c c ur s
w he n an adjective is used i n c o r r e c t h ’ to niodifv a verb.
434
For Example In co rre ct: The plant supervisor must see that the factory m achinery runs
efficient.
C o rre c t: The plant supervisor must see that the factory m achinery runs efficiently.
In co rre ct: Joh n behaves conservative around his parents.
C o rre c t: "John behaves conservatively around his parents." In this sentence, conser
vatively is an adverb; it modifies the verb behaves.
"Jo h n 's consen/af/Ve behavior pleases his parents." In this sentence, conservative is an
adjective; it modifies the noun behavior.
2. A d jec tiv es, A d verb s, an d L in k in g Verbs

In s o m e situation.s it i.s difficult to d e t e r m i n e if the correct word to use is an adjective o r an
adverb. This often occurs with words that follow linking \ erbs, such as fccL look, believe, become,
grow , iiiicll. taste, an d appear. The l i nki ng \ e r b d oe s not sho w physical o r e mo t i o n al action;
rather, it suggest a state o f being. Use an a di ec ti \ e ii the wo r d follow ing the \'erb des cr ibes the
subject o f t h e sentence; use an a d \ e r b if the w or d refers to the \ erb.
For Example "The inspector felt careful." The adjective careful \s used because it d e
scrib e s the inspector (the subject),
"The inspector felt carefully when he searched the table." The adverb carefully is used
b ecau se it modifies the verb felt and thus show s action (that is, how the inspector
search ed the table).
"Joh n looked sad" Lookeddescr\bes Jo h n. Looked\s a linking verb because it does not
show action. The adjective sad is used because it modifies the noun John.
"Joh n looked quickly around the room." In this sentence, the verb looked show s action
and is therefore not a linking verb. The adverb quickly \s used becau se it modifies
(describ es) the verb looked.
3. C o m p a r a t iv e s an d S up erlatives
L'se a c o mp ar at i ve to indicate a c om p ar i so n b et ween two things (e.g., better, older, easier, faster,
w orse). Use a superlative to indicate a c o m p a r i s o n o f thr ee o r m o r e things (e.g., best, oUicst,
easiest, fastest, worst).
For Example In co rre ct: He isth e ¿e sf of the two applicants.

M ary is thefastest ot the two runners.
C o rre ct: He is the betterof the two applicants.
M ary is the faster o^ the two runners.
The comparatives better and fasterare used because two things are being compared.
In co rre ct: He is the betteroi the three applicants.
M ary is the faster oi all the runners.
C o rre ct: He is the ¿lesfof the three applicants.
M ary is the fastestoi all the runners.
The com paratives best and fastest are used because more than two things are
being com pared.
i'o loni) llic co ni par aU\ e and supciialiw' ol most one- a n d t\vo-s\ llablo adjcctiv os, add
- t T o r -t'si: big, bigger, biggest: olcl, older, ohlesl: liiiniv, ju \inier: fuiiiiiest.
1-or s o me two-syllable adj ecli\es a n d long adjecti\es, form the c o m p ar a t i \ ’e by using
m o r e a nd llie superlati\ e b\- using most: m o re ou trageous, luo st outrageous; m o r e e n te r ta in in g ,
m o s t e n ter ta iin n g .
i'o form lhe c o m p a r a l i \ e and superlati\ e of s ome o ne- s\ i labl e ad\ erbs, use - e r a n d -est:
faster, fastest: sooner, soonest. '1 o form the compar ali \' e a nd superlalive o f longer a d \ ’erbs and
those e n d i n g in -ly. use nuire/less lor the co mp ar al i \ e a nd m o s t/ le a s t tor the superlatix e: m o r e
a cu tely , m o s t acutely: n u n c likely, m o st likelv.
( ; o m p a r a l i \ e s are nol used with con c ept s that are absolute, such as perfect, u n iq u e ,
e m p t y , im possible, a n d excellent.
For Example Incorrect: it w as a most perfect story.

Correct: It w as a perfect story.
Incorrect: His viewpoint w as very unique.
Correct: His viewpoint w as unique.
4. A dverbs U sed for E m p hasis

Place adv erbs used for emph as i s immediately before the w o r d or phr ase they m o d i l \ ’. S ome
e.xamples ol words ot emphas i s are onlv, so, very, and quite.
For Example John intended only to influence the outcome ofthe meeting." On//modifies
the phrase that follows: "to influence the outcome of the meeting."
5. C o o r d in a tin g C o n ju n c lio n s
L'se a coo r di n a t i n g coniLinclion when joining clauses and w or ds of equal rank. Some coordi
iialing conj imctions are an d , o r but, fo r so, vet. n o r
For Example We have three selections available: section a, section b, orsection c." Or
joins equal words.
"The landlord had the option to seek restitution, but he did not choose this option." But
joins equal clauses.
6 . C orrelative C o n ju n c tio n s
C o r r e i a t n e co nj unct i on s are also used lo link items of equal rank. ( ;orr elati \c c o n j u n ct i on s
are used in pairs. Some corrclati\ e coniunctit)iis are either/or, n e ith e r nor, i f then, b o t h / a n d ,
since/theretore, on the o n e h a n d / o n th e o th er ha n d .
For Example f/f/ierthey will sign the agreement, orw e w ill select another vendor.
/f we are forced to pursue that option, then we will require additional
funds.
6of/) Thomson and Haynes are present.
436
V. P U N C T U A T IO N
Pu nctu ation is designed to make writing clear and easy to under stand. Poor p u n ct uat i on ma y
cause t he r ea de r to m i s u n d e r s t a n d the cont ext or be dist ra ct e d b\' the er r ors an d not t ocus o n
the context. I’o or p un c t u a t i o n usually causes the r ea d er to q ues tion the a u t h o r ’s c o mp et e n c e .
A c o m p r e h e n s i w ' discussion of all the rules go\ e r n i n g p u n c t u a t i o n woul d r equir e an en t ir e
text. ' Ihis secti on discusses the m a j or el eme nt s o f p u n c t u a t i o n a n d s u m m a r i z e s rules that a p
ply to c ( ' m m o n ! y e n c o u n t e r e d problems.
A. C o m m a (,)
' Ihe f un c t i o n of a c o m m a is to separate the par t s o f a sentence so that the m e a n i n g is clear.
It is t he m o s t f requenth' used p un c t u a t i o n niark. Basic rules that a pph' to c o n m i a s follow:
1. Use a c o n m i a before a coor dii iati ng c o n j u n c t i o n that joins two m a i n o r i n d e p e n

d e n t clauses. An i n d e p e n d e n t clause can st a nd al one as a c ompl et e sentence.
For Example The statute provides thatthe contract must be w itnessed, but it
does not require thatthe contract be in writing. (Note that each
clause of the sentence could be a complete sentence: The statute provides
that the contract must be w itnessed. It does not require thatthe contract be
in writing.)
2. Set off i n tr o d u c t o r y phr ases or clauses \\ itli a c o m m a .
For Example Introductory p h r ase in italics: Afterthe prosecutor con

cluded his opening statement, the court declared a recess.
3. Use a c o m m a after each item in a series of t hr ee or m o r e items, a n d place a c o n i m a

be t o r e tiini o r or at the end of the series.
For Example The defendant had no identification, money, or other

possessions.
B icycle s, tricycles, unicycles, and other nonmotorized ve hicle s are covered
bythe statute.
4. Use a c o m m a tci a\'oid a niis reading o f t h e subiect.
For Example Instead of rule A, rule B applies in this situation.
Separ ate co or di na t e adjectives with a co m n i a. (Coordinate adiectives i n d e p e n

dent ly mod i t \' the s a me noun . To d et e r n i i n e if the modifiers are c oor di na t e,
re\’erse t heir o r d e r o r insert nnci bet we en t he m. If the m e a n i n g is not cha ng e d ,
t he y are coordinate.
For Example Coordinating Adjectives in Italics:

The correct, concise interpretation is that.
The concise, co rre cf interpretation is that___
437
6. Set ort transition.il or intcr|irotive w o r d s or piirascs with a coni nia. I hese are
wor ds or phr ases that pr o\ ide qual if ication or clarification hut are not essential to
the ni e ani ng o f a sentence.
For Example The plaintiffs, however, have failed to comply.

r The correct course, therefore, is to settle the case.
Set olf nonr estr ictive clauses wi t h a coni ina. A nonr estr ictive clause is o ne that is
not necessarv- to the m e a n i n g o f t h e sentence.
For Example Nonrestrictive c la u se in italics: The court of appeals denied

the appeal, finding thatthe evidence was properly admitted.
8. Use a c o m m a to set oil appo s i t i \ es. .An a p p o i i t i v e is a n o u n or n o u n p hr as e that

f ur t he r identifies a n o t h e r n o u n or n o u n phrase.
For Example Appositives in Italics:

Ms. Smith, w as elected to the position.
The client,
The plaintiffs, Mr Evans and Ms. Thompson, w ere present at the hearing.
9. Set ot] c on t ra st i n g phrases with a c o m n i a o r c o m m a s .
For Example C on trastin g p h r a se in italics: Mr. Jo n e s, not Ms. Smith,

w as the guilty party.
10. l ' s e c o m m a s w he n requir ed to set o tf q uot a ti ons . Place the c o m m a be t we en the

q uo t a t i o n a n d the attribution.
For Example He said, "I did not do it."
11. Place a c o m m a inside the cl osing q u o t a t io n ma r k , not outsi de the quo ta t i on mark.
For Example "W itnessing is not required," he said.
12. Place a c o m m a before a n d after d escr iptive titles, such as M.D., Ph.D., a nd Esq.
For Example The doctor in th is c a s e is M ary Place, M.D., who attended

m edical school at Yale M edical School.
N O T E : Do not use a c o m m a b ef or e jr. II, a n d so on, after a per sonal name.
For Example M r Steven Jo n e s Jr. and Arthur Cleaver II delivered the closing
address.
438
13. Do not Lisc a coi nni a hct orc paiL'ntlu'sc''.
For Example All em ployees (executives and assistants) shall arrive at work
at 8:00 a.m.
14. In general d o not use a c o m m a al ter short pr eposit ional phrases. ,A preposit ional
ph r as e ciinsists of, at m i n i m u m , a pr eposi t ion a n d a n o mi that is t he object ot' the
preposit ion. II the p hr as e is short (usually thr ee wor ds or less) an d t he m e a n i n g ol
the s entence is clear, the c o m m a n u ty be omitted.
For Example Not Necessary— The Prepositional Phrase is in Italics:

In every situation, you should read the contract.
A fterth e test. I'm going to sleep.
Better:
In every situation you should read the contract.
After the test I'm going to sleep.
15. Place a c omm. i b et we en the da\' a n d vear il the lull date is w ritten.
For Example The hearing will be held on November 16, 2005.
W h e n only the m o n t h a n d \ ear are used, no c o m m a is used.
For Example There will be no hearings during November 2005.
16. L'se a c o m m a \s hen a w o r d or g r o u p ol words is omitteil but tbe m e a n i n g ol tbe

s entence is clear.
For Example M ary represents tbe northern and eastern districts; Arthur,
the southern district.
Mary prepared the opening and analysis; Ja n e , the closing.
B. S e m i c o l o n (;)
A s e mi c ol on is used pr imaril y in t wo situations:
I'o separ ate ma j o r el eme nt s ol comple.x sentences
Io separate items in a series il t be items are long or if on e o f t h e items has internal
commas
In r ega rd to these situations, n ot e the following rules:
1. Use a s e micolon to se par at e m a i n o r i n d e p e n d e n t clauses m a se nt enc e that are

n o t ioined b\- a c o o r d i n a t i n g c o ni u n c t i on . Both main a nd i n d e p e n d e n t clauses
ba\'e a subject and a \'erb. L.ach c o u l d be a separate sentence. A cniijiiiiction is a
w o r d that is used to c o n n e c t w o r d s a n d phrases. A co o n iiiia tin g co njiiiictio n, such
as iUtd, h u t, a nd or, is a c o n i i mc t i o n that c on n ec t s like elements.
439
For Example Incorrect: The shareholders held their meeting at noon, the
board of directors met immediately thereafter. (The use of the
comma is incorrect because there is no coordinating conjunction, such
as and, connecting the two clauses. The coordinating conjunction is in
italics in the following sentence.)
C o rre ct —c o o rd in a tin g co n ju n c tio n u se d : The shareholders held their
meeting at noon, and the board of directors met immediately thereafter.
C o rre ct —s e m ic o lo n used: The shareholders held their meeting at noon;
the board of directors met immediately thereafter.
2. Use a seniicolon w h e n i n d ep e n d e n t clauses are j oi ned by a conj uncti ve adverb.

So me examples o f conjuncti\-e adverbs are therefore, h o w e v e r fu r th e r m o r e , eoiise-
quently, h kew ise, and nevertheless.
For Example The rule requires that the will must be w itnessed in writing;
how ever, there are three exceptions.
.V W'lien a series of itenis is long or c o m m a s are already used in s o me ot the items in

lhe series, use a se mi c ol on to separate lhe items.
For Example L o n g item s: The plaintiffs must prove the following to e stab
lish that the will w as validly w itnessed:
a. there were two w itnesses to the will;
b. the w itnesses were present in the room when the will w as signed; and
c. the w itnesses were not related to the testator or were not bequeathed
anything in the will.
L is t of ite m s w ith internal c o m m a s: The stockholders present were
Mary Hart, the president; Tom Jo n es, the secretary; and M onica Murtón,
the treasurer.
■4. .At the e n d ol a sentence, use a semicolon to separ ate an appositive i nt r od uc ed by

sucTi t e rms as th at is, fo r e.xample, and n a m e ly.
For Example The plaintiff has not shown that the defendant violated all the
statutory requirements; for example, the requirements that a
firearm be used, that the firearm be in plain sight, and that the firearm be
loaded.
C. Colon (:)
Use a colon w h e n \ ’ou want lo i nt r o d u ce or call attention to i n f or m a t i on that follows, such as
lists, conclusions, explanations, a n d quotations. 'Ihe f uncti on o f a colon is to i nt r oduc e w'hat
follows.
I . W'hen \’ou use a colon to i ntr oduce a list or series, it must be preceded by a ma i n
clause that is a co m p le t e sentence.
440
For Example In co rre ct: The statutory requirements are: the will must be
w itnessed by two w itnesses, the w itn esses must be present
when the testator sign s the will, and the w itn esses must sign the will.
(The sentence is incorrect because the colon is not preceded by a main
clause that is gram m atically complete; the clause lacks an object.)
C o rre ct: The statutory requirements are the following: the will must be w it
nessed by two w itn e sse s___
For Example The statute provides thatthree steps must be performed before
the w ater right is established: (1) a permit must be obtained
from the state engineer; (2)the w ater must be applied to a beneficial use; and
(3) the beneficial use must be continuous for a period of three years.
2. A colon nia\- be Liscd to i n tr o d u c e t]uotations, or lo i nt r od uc e a shor t q u o t a t i o n

intrt)duced by an i n d e p e n d e n t claii.se.
For Example In tro d u ce s h o rt q u o ta tio n : Standing in open court, Smith

loudly entered his plea: "I am not guilty."
col on ina\' be used to e m p h a s i z e a quo t a t i o n.
For Example E m p h a s iz e a q u o ta tio n : The senator con clu ded his re

marks with the follow ing statement: "I do not choose to run
for reelection."
.A colon is iisuali\' used to introduce block quotations, transcripts, statutes, and so on.
For Example After review ing the matter at length, the court adopted the
following rule:
(Block Quotation)
3. A col on ma \ be u sed to join two s e p ar at e but related clauses. In this instance, the
col on is used to e m p h as i z e t he int' ormat ion that follows.
The client made a major mistake: he failed to file the annual

report.
L ________ . . _____________________________
D. A p o s t r o p h e (’)
An a p o s t r o p h e indicates possession or f orms a co nt ra ct i on. So me o f t h e basic rules g ov e r n i ng
the use o f a p o s t ro p h e s to indicate possession follow:
1. .Make singul ar n o u n s possessi\-e by a d d i n g an a p os t r o p h e a n d an .v
For Example the officer's car

Mr. Jo n e s's house
441
Singular n o u n s e nd i n g in > take an apos l ri i phe a n d an s just like an\' otiier

singul ar noun. N o t e the possessi\ e o l ' “Mr. Jones" in the pr ec edi ng example.
2. .Make plural n ou n s possessi\ e b\' a dd i n g an ap os t r o ph e alter t he <.
For Example the players' uniforms

the w orkers' organization
3. Use an a p o s t r o ph e and an aller the last word ol a c o m p o u n d w o r d or word

group.
For Example attorney general's office

Fred and Tom's car (where Fred and Tom own the sam e car)
Fred's and Tom's cars (where Fred and Tom own separate cars)
•1. Ihe possessi\-es ol' personal p r o n o u n s do not require an apostrophe.
For Example yours, his, hers, ours, /'fs (possessive of it), w/?ose (po ssessive
of who)
A n a p o s t r o p h e is a l s o Lised t o l o r m c o n t r a c t i o n s . ( C o n t r a c t i o n s a r e g e n e r a l K '
nt)l Lised i n I ' o r mal w r i t i n g . I'o m a k e a c o n t r a c t i o n , u s e a n a p o s t r o p h e in p l a c e o f
t h e o m i t t e d l e t t e r o r l et t er s .
For Example they're {they are), can’t {cannot), don’t {do not), who's {who
is), it’s {it is)
Not e the dilference between it's a n d its. It's is the co nt ra ct i o n for “it is.” Its
is the possessi\ e p r o n i u m lor m lor it.
E. Q u o ta ti o n Marks (“ ”)
Use qLiotation ma r ks to identit\’ and set oH q uot e d material. Note the loll owi ng guidelines
wh en qu ot i n g material:
1. Long qLiotations are not set oil by quot a t i on marks. Instead, t hey are set oH't'rom
the rest ol ' the text b\- a fi\e-space iiuientation (0.3 inch i nd e nt at ion ) f ro m the lel't
an d right margins. l h e \ ’ are also single spaced. ' Ihese q uo t a ti o ns are called block
ijitoitilioiii and, accor di ng to B lueb oo k an d A L W l ) , shoLild be used tor q u ot a ti o ns
ot 30 words or more.
For Example The court made the follow ing statem ents in regard to the
requirement of the presence ofthe witness:
The statute requires the witnesses to be present when the testator signs
the will. The witnesses must be in the same room with the testator, not in
a separate room from which they can see the testator. The w itnesses also
must actually see the testator sign the will. Their presence in the room is
not sufficient if they do not actually see the testator sign the will.
442
Because r eaders tend to skip o\'er o r skini long q uo ta ti on s , use t h e m spar-

i n g h ’ and o n k w h en the ent ire huiguage, \ e r b a t i m , is essentiak
2. Fhice per iods a n d c o m m a s inside t he q uo t a t io n marks.
For Example He w as described as "a dangerous individual.'
Ot he r punct uati on, sucli as semicolons, colons, question marks, a n d e.xclamation marks,
are placed outside the quotation ma rks unless they are a part o f t h e quotation.
For Example The court defined publication as "com m unication to a third

party": th ere fo re .. ..
The victim then shouted, "I've been hit!" (The exclam ation mark is part of the
quotation; therefore, it belongs within the quotation marks.)
3. You m a \ use qu ot a t i o n ma r k s to indicate that a w o r d is used in a special wa\- or

is a special term. (Note, th o u g h, that a t e rm bei ng d et med, or a “wo r d used as a
w o r d ” is usualh' indicat ed b\' setting in italics.) hi legal writing, par ti cularl y m a t e
rial that uses m a n y quotations, a proliferati on o f q uo t a t i o n ma rks can be cont u s
ing a n d visually irritating; therefore, use such ma rks sparing!}' to set off special
terms.
For Example The attorney acted as a "hired gun" in the case.

The term "oppressive conduct" has a special meaning in
corporation law.
4. W' hen q u ot i n g a q uot e within a quote, use single q u ot a t i on marks.
For Example The court held that "the term 'oppressive conduct' requires that
the shareholder engage in some wrongful conduct."
W h e n the q u o t e wi t hi n a q u o t e is par t ot a block q u o t a t i o n , use d o u b l e

q u o ta t io n ma r k s to set off tlie inter nal quote.
For Example The court made the following statements in regard to the re
quirement of the presence of the w itness:
The statute requires the w itnesses to be present when the testator signs
the will. The w itnesses must be in the same room with the testator, not
in a separate room from which they can see the testator. The witnesses
also must "actually see" the testator sign the will. Their presence in the
room IS not sufficient if they do not actually see the testator sign the will.
5. Q u o t a t i o n ma r k s ma}' also be use d to indicate that a t e rm is i nf or ma l or

questionable.
For Example W illiam "Wild Bill" Ja m e s.

The only "injury" sustained in this lawsuit w as the co st of the
litigation.
443
F. Ellipses (three s p a c e d dots: ... )

Ihc l u nc l i on ol an ellipsis is to indicate the omi s si on ot part ot a quotation.
For Example The statute provides that skiers are "responsible for ... sn ow and ice
co n d itio n s.. . . "
N o t e t he loll owing rules in regard to the use ot ellipses:
1. W'hen the omi s si on occ ur s inside a q uot a t i on , use t hree ellipsis dots (created e i
ther by insert ion o f t h e thr ee - d ot ellipsis s \ m b o l o n \’o u r compu t er , o r b\- typing
thr ee p er iod s in a row). L'se har d spaces after the last q u ot e d word, b e t we en each
ellipsis dot, a n d the ne.xt q u ot e d word.
For Example When I went on my trip, I first went to the tow er ... and saw
the mountains on the horizon.
Retain any p u n c t u a t i o n that a ppe ar s before or after the o m i t t e d material if

is gr a mm a t i c al l y necessary for t he r es t r uc tur e d sentence.
For Example W hen we went on the tour of the v illa ,. . . we also visited the
fam ous gardens.
2. W h e n the e n d o f a q uo te d sentence is omi t ted, a dd a p er iod for the p u n c t u a t i o n to

e n d the sentence, follow the last w or d with a space, the t hree ellipsis dots, a space,
a n d a period. Place a har d space bet we en t he last ellipsis dot a n d the period.
For Example The statute requires that "the majority shareholder must refrain
from engaging in oppressive co n d u ct...."
3. W h e n the o mi s si on is at the b e gi n n in g ot a quote, do not use an ellipsis; merely

indicate w he r e the q uo t e d material begi ns with the o p e n i n g q uo ta t i on marks, hi
legal writing, a br acketed first letter signals that you have ch an g ed the case o f t h e
initial letter ol the quotation.
For Example In co rre ct: In this case, the court stated that " . . . the act does
not require sp ecific intent."
C o rre ct: In this case, the court stated that "the act does not require sp e cific
intent."
In co rre ct: The court noted that "Ignorance ofthe law is no excuse."
C o rre ct: The court noted that "[¡Ignorance of the law is no excuse."
If the qu ot e is a p h r as e or clause, no ellipsis is required.
For Example In co rre ct: The state must establish " ... sp ecific intent."
C o rre ct: The state must establish "specific intent."
444
G. B rackets ([ ])
Bi ackcts arc used to per tor ni three separate functions:
To s how changes in or atid i n t or m a t i on to quotations, usnall\' lor the pm' pose ot
provi di ng cku-ification to the q uot a t i on
To indicate an er ro r in the original quo t a t i on
fo indicate a change ot case in the tirst letter ot a quotation.
For Example To s h o w c h a n g e s in a q u o ta tio n : "The privilege [against self-

incrimination] allows an individual to remain silent."
To in d ic a te an error in th e o rig in a l q u o te d m ate rial: "The herd [s/c] of directors
voted against the proposal."
To s h o w a c h a n g e of ca se : Acco rd in g to this court, "[¡Ignorance of the law is no
e xcuse."
In legal writing, d o not use brackets to indicate p ar ent hese s that tall williin parentheses.
For Example In co rre ct: (When the annual meeting w as held [June of 2004], the board
decided to call for a vote of the members.)
C o rre c t: (When the annual meeting w as held (June of 2004), the board decided to call
for a vote of the members.)
H .P arentheses ( )
Use p ar en th es e s to adil s u p p l e m e n t ar \ i n l or m a t i on to the sentence that is (uitside the main
idea ol t be s entence or ot lesser importanci.'.
For Example The cost of the paper (only S2) w as not included in the invoice.
W' hen ret e r r i ng the r eader to otliei' cases, a t tac hed material, or an appendi.x, or wh en
pro\-i ding smi imar\- i n t o r ma t i o n toll owi ng a case citation, \ ( h i nia\- use parentheses.
For Example R e fe re n ce to an a p p e n d ix : (See Appendix A.)

R e fe re n ce to o th e r c a s e s : See also Smith y. Jo n e s, 981 N.E.2d 441
(N. W ash. 1993) (where the court required sp e cific intent in a similar situation).
1. H y p h e n (-)
A h\-plieii is r equired to form c o m p o u n d modifiers a n d c o m p o u n d nouns. ' Ihere are n u me r o u s
words that nia\- o r nia\' not require h yp he na ti on.
For Example ex-judge

w ell-know n personality
self-defense
445
Cam isu U a diclionai x' w licn you arc u n s u r e w he t h e r a w o rd must he h yphe na te d. Be sur e
to consuU a recenth' published dictionar\'. Ihis area ot'the I .nglish l anguage changes t'rec]uently.
J. D ash (—)
Ihe true dash is ol'ten referred to as the e m dash or long dash. Use a dash in the f ollowing
situations:
To e m p h a s i / e s o m e t h i n g
To set off lists o r briefly s u m m a r i z e materials c o nt a i ni n g c o m m a s
To show an ab ru p t c ha nge ot t h ou g ht o r direction, o r an interiection
For Example To e m p h a s iz e : The child— only eight years old— w as clearly not c a
pable of understanding w hat he w as doing.
To se t off a list: The items found at the sce n e — the knife, the drugs, and the sc a rf—
have disappeared from the evidence room.
To s h o w a s u d d e n break: Basel Corporation— primarily known for its herbs— is
involved in the m anufacture of glassw are.
K. Slash (/)
Ihe slash is not f r e qu en t h ' used iii legal writing. Not e t he following w h e n using slashes:
1. Use a slash to separate o n e op t i on f rom a n o t h e r or iiuiicate alternatives.
For Example The either/or option is not acceptable.

The course w as offered on a pass/fail basis.
Ms. Darling w as the writer/producer.
1. L’se a slash w he n wri ti ng dates informalK'.
For Example His birthday is 9/6/86.
3. L'se a slash to s epar ate line br eaks in poetr\'.
For Example Yes! We can turn the tide / Break the w ave s that rush to the
shore / And undo the w ay of things.
L. Period (.)
Ihe per iod is probabi}' tlie most c o n i m o n h ' used p u n c t u a t i o n mark. It is used to m a r k t he e n d
of a sentence, in abbreviati ons, as a dec i ma l poi nt in nu ni be rs, an d after letters a n d n u n i b e r s
in an outli ne or list.
1. L'se a per io d to indicate the e n d o f a sent enc e that is not a qu es t i on or excl a mat ion.
For Example It is clear that the client is not telling the entire story.
Please tell us w hat you want.
446
2. Use a per iod witli letters an d n u m b e r s in an outli ne o r list.
For Example O u tlin e :

I. Introduction
A. Introduction
B. Body
1. Introductory SGntence
2. Body
L is ts: In a list, the number or letter is placed in parentheses or is follow ed by
a period, but not both parentheses and a period.
(1) Creditors
(2) Investors
(3) Debtors
C o rrect: (1) Creditors or 1. Creditors
(2) Investors or 2. Investors
(3Ị Debtors or 3. Debtors
3. Use a per i od after a he a di ng il the h e a d i n g is a c omp l et e sent enc e or r u n s in with

the text.
For Example C o m p le te s e n te n ce : I. The position relied on no longer rep

resents sound public policy and should not be relied on.
H e a d in g ru n s in w ith te xt: 1. The prew riting stage. The prewriting stage
begins with a review of the assignm ent.
4. Use a per iod in most abh r e \ iations.
For Example Mr. (for Mister)

Sept. (for September)
Co. (for Company)
Do not ad d a s eco nd per io d if a per iod falls at the e n d ot'a sentence.
For Example The meeting will begin promptly at 8:00 a.m.

L
.Abbreviations of ' corpor at ions, gcn e r n m e n t agencies, scientihc a n d technical
terms, or those c o m p o s e d of all capital letters d o not take per iods unless the initials
st a nd for a p er son ' s n a m e or a di ti er ent st\ le is specified.
for Example N A SA , DNA, FBI, CD-ROM

J. R. Smith (in a person's name, periods are used)
447
M. Q u e s t i o n Mark (?)
A ques tion n i a ik is useti at tlie etui ol a sentence that asks a direct question.
For Example Has the client made a follow-up appointment?

You filed the deed even when we told you not to, didn't you?
In r egard to t he use ot’q ue s ti on marks, note the loll owi ng guidelines:
1. In a c o m p o u n d sentence, use a ques tion m a r k if the e n d i n g clause is a question.
For Example Although we d iscu ssed this several times, do you still maintain
your innocence?
2. If t he re are mult iple en di ng s to a question, use a ques tion ma rk atfer each en di n g

wo r d or phrase.
For Example Isth e person re sp o n sib le fo rth isth e president?the secretary?

the treasurer?
NOTE: The first word of the ending phrases {the) is not capitalized.
3. Place a q ues tion m a r k in pai entlieses following a t e rm (usually a n u m b e r or date)

to indicate uncertaint\'.
For Example Mr. Thompson left his home town in 1988 (?), and moved to
New Orleans.
It appears that only one state, M ississippi (?), has adopted this position.
N. E x c l a m a t i o n Point (!)
, \ n exc l a mat ion m a r k is used to indicate the e n d of a s e nt e n c e that expresses e m o t i o n or
deserx’es special emphasis.
N O T E : lixclamation po i n t s are r a r e k used in legal wri ting unless they are part o f a quot a t i on.
Keep in m i n d the following w hen using ex c lamat ion points:
1. L’se an exckimation point to express a d e m a n d , surprise, e m o t i o n , a n d so on.
For Example Hurry up, he's coming!

Come here right now!
You must pay me immediately!
2. Use an exc l a mat ion point to empliasize an interiection o r c o m m a n d .
For Example No! Don't touch that!

Oh, my goodness! How could I have done that?
448
VI. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

'1 lirec addi ti ona l matters that require at tention w h e n you are p er f o r m i n g a w riling as si gn me nt
are spelling, use o f n u m b e r s , a n d formal wr i ti ng eon\ 'entions. ' Ihese matters are a d d r e s s e d in
the t oll owi ng subsections,
A, Spelling
Obviously, y ou mu s t correctly spell all t he w o r d s \'ou use. It you are in d o u b t a bo ut the spe l l
ing o f a w o r d, use a dictionary. Legal wri ting requires the use o f b ot h a regular a n d a legal
dictionar\' ; therefore, \ ou must ha\-e b ot h o f these dictionaries.
If you use a c o m p u t e r that checks spelling, you still m u s t c a ref ul h’ check tor w o r d usage
errors. I'hc c t ) m p u t e r ma\' catch a spelling error, b ut generalK’ it will not catch the use o f t h e
w r o n g w o r d o r t ypo gr aph i cal e r r ors t hat result in the use ot a w r o n g word.
For Example U se of a w ro n g w ord: You used the word io when you intended to use too.
A computer spell-check function will not catch the use ofthe wrong word.
T y p o g ra p h ic a l error th a t re su lts in th e u se of a w ro n g w o rd : You typed c a st
when you meant to type case. Cast \s a word, and sp e ll-ch e ck will not consider this
an error.
B. N u m b e r s
Ihe following rules gover n the pr ese nt at ion o f n u m b e r s in legal writing:
1. In text, the general rule is to spell out n u m b e r s f rom on e to n i ne t \ - n i ne (that is.

n u m b e r s tliat can be spelled out in o n e o r two words). Not e that a dilferent style
conv en t i o n, wh i ch r equires that l u i mb er s t r om one to nine be spelled out. is also
\ e r \ c o m m o n h ' used.
For Example one

tw enty-seven
ninety-nine
The contract has tw enty-seven clauses.
Use n u m e r a l s for n u m b e r s t hat are m o r e tha n two w o r ds long.
For Example 379

1,300
145,378
The contract has 379 clauses.
Ihere is o n e e.xception: if you h ave a list o f n u m b e r s a n d o n e ot the itenis

on t he list shoul d be wri tten with n u me ra l s , use nu me r a l s for all the itenis listed.
The numbers in the code are 16,44,397, and 1,001. (The numbers
sixteen and forty-four are not spelled out.)
449
As a gener al rule, d o not spell out t he {(allowing n u m b e r s : dates, statute

n u m b e r s , section n u m b e r s , \ o l u m e n u m b e r s , exact times, s u m s o f mone\' , a d
dresses, per centages, scores, i dentili cation n u m b e r s , ratios, statistics, dec i ma l s
a n d tractions, a n d m e a s u r e m e n t s with s \ ni b o l s o i abbreviations.
For Example Date: May 6, 2005

Statute: Title 18 of the code
Section: Section 3212, § 3212
Percentage: 75 percent, 75%
Score: The final score w as 2 to 1.
Exact sum of money: 834.21
Decimal: 9.38
Fraction: 9'/4
M easurem ent with symbol: 9
Exact time: 5:45 A.M., 7:23 p.m.
are spelled out w h e n the t i me is a c c o m p an i e d by o'clock.
For Example Incorrect; 11 o'clock

C o rre ct: eleven o'clock
lers that begin a sentence.
For Example Incorrect; 506 paralegals w ere present.

C o rre ct: Five hundred six paralegals w ere present.
ir tractions and n u m b e r s Irom t w e nt y- on e to n i ne t y nine.
Fifty-six of the stockholders w ere present. The thirty-seven

shareholders represented three-fourths of the outstanding
se m id w hen wri ting whole nu mb er s .
For Example In co rre ct: Two hundred and seventy-five dollars w a s needed
to pay the debt.
3 hundred seventy-five dollars w as needed to pay the debt.
te tractions that are spelled out.
For Example One-fifth of the student body attended the meeting.
ibe r plural, add .< ( wi thout an apostrophe) .
For Example 1990s

There were three 190s in the paragraph.
450
lôssessivc m i m b c r s arc not trcciiiently e n co u n t e r e d . i i \ ' o u liaw' to f or m tlie

posse.ssive ot a n u m l x ’r, a d d an a p os tr o( ' h e a n d .v
For Example Tlie instructor illustrated fiis point by referring to

the 1920's B lack Friday.
3. W’hen two n u m b e r s a p pe ar togetlier that are not ot the sa me kind, spell out the
tirst nuniber.
For Example In co rrect: There were 190 S50 bills.

C o rre ct: There were one hundred ninety S50 bills.
C. F o rm a l W r i ti n g C o n v e n ti o n s
Most legal wri ti n g is con s i der ed formal, an d l or mal w ritin g c o n v e n tio n s apply, especially
to legal briefs an d m e m o r a n d u m s . Two of these con\ 'e nt i ons c o n c er n the use of c ont ra ct i ons
a n d per sonal pr ono uns.
■As m e n t i o n e d in the subsecti on a d d r es s i ng t he use o f a po s tr o phe s , the use o f c o n t r a c
tions is not cons i der ed acceptable in tormal writing. Do not use c ont ra ct i ons unless inst ructed
to d o so,
l l i e general rule is that you s h oul d draft legal m e m o r a n d a or briefs in the third pei son.
.Also, unless inst ructed otherwise, use the t hir d p er so n in c o r r e s p o n d e n c e to clients.
For Example In co rrect: It is my position that the court should grant the motion.
We feel that the contract has been broken.
C o rre ct: The court should grant the motion.
It IS Ml. B la ck's position llia l llie co n lia c t lia s been bioken.
W h e n p r es e nt i n g \ o u r position or legal anaKsis, use present tense.
For Example Plaintiff contends that the rule requires thirty days' notice. It /sthe defen
dant's position that the contract is void.
W h e n a dd r es s i n g a c our t o p i n i o n that has alread}’ been decided, use past tense.
For Example In Smith \j. Jo n e s, the court h eldthat the rule does not require thirty days'
notice. The court listed three possible solutions to the problem.
W'hen di scussing a la\\' or rule still in effect, use present tense.
For Example The provisions of section 44-556 require a contractor to give thirty days'
notice. The statute provides that the notice must be signed by the owner
ofthe property.
451
V II. K E Y P O IN T S C H E C K L I S T : F u n d a m e n t a l s o f W ri t m g
Ihe goal ot legal w riting is to pr ep a r e a professional p r o d u c t — o ne that is tree ot sub-

stanti\'e a nd mechanical error. Perform the n u m b e r o f edits a nd redrafts necessary
to attain this goal.
L'se short, clear sentences w h en possible. I'ifteen to twenty-five wo rds is a g o o d aver
age length for sentences. I-xcessi\eh' long se nt e n ce s are difficult to u nd e r st a nd .
/ .A pa r ag r a ph should address o n e topic a n d s h o ul d u s u a l h ’ r ange f ro m thr ee to six
sentences.
Keep the reader in niind w he n drafting. A\’oid legalese w he n possible, especially
w h e n the reader is a per son not tr ai ned in t he law.
Make sure the writing is g r amm a t i c al h' correct. (Check t'or s u b j e c t -v er b agr eement,
parallel con s t r uc t i on, a n d so on.
(Check the p unct uat i on. L'se c o m m a s a nd o t h e r p u n c t u a t i o n de\'ices correctly.
(Check the spelling to ens ure tliat all words are spelled c o r r e c t h ’.
V III. A P P L IC A T IO N
C hecklist
I hc checklist pr esented in ICxhibit 1-4 nia\’ he used as a g ui de to help \ ’ou pr o of r ea d and
cor r ec t vour legal writing.
E x h ib it 7 4 - 4 Proofreading C hecklist.
Checklist to be used when Proofreading Legal Writing
G eneral C o n sid e ratio n s G ram m ar

Spelling Subject/verb agreem ent
Num bers Verb tense
Formal writing conventions Parallel construction
S e n te n ce Structure/Pattern Su p e rflu o u s verbs
Subject/verb distance M odifiers and infinitives
Sentence length Noun/pronoun agreem ent
A ctive/passive voice Paragrap h s
Action verbs Topic sentence
Transitions Body
Punctuation C lo sin g
CoiTimas Transition sentence
Sem icolons Paragraph length
Colons W ord S e le ctio n and U sa ge
A postrophes Excessive/redundant w ords
Quotations Noun/verb string
Ellipses N om inalizations
Brackets Legalese
Parentheses Archaic w ords
Hyphens S e xist language
Dashes S p ecific w ords —problem areas
452
Sum m ary
O n e r eq u ir e m e n t o f a legal w r i t i ng as si gnme nt is the pr epa ra t i on o f a final p ro d uc t that is
Iree f r o m mechanical errors, l he \ a l u e ol qualit\ research and a n a k s i s is u n d e r m i n e d it the
w r i tt e n pr esentat ion is po or ly assembl ed, ihis ch a pt e r pr esents an o \ e r \ i e \ v o f s o m e o f t h e
f i m d a m e n t a l wri ting skills essential for go od writing, l h e c ha pt e r ad dr esses sent enc e a n d
p a r a g r a p h st r uct ure , w o r d selection a n d usage, g r a m m a r , p u n c t u a t i o n , a n d o t h e r general
con s id er at io ns r egardi ng the m e c h a n i cs ol g oo d writing.
A s e ntence is t he f u n d a m e n t a l buildi ng block ol \sriting. It is usually a s t atement; at a
m i n i m u m , it must ha\'C a subject a n d a predicate.
lh e second f u n d a m e n t a l c o m p o n e n t o f writing is the par agraph. A p ar agr a ph is a g r oup
ot sentences that addr ess the s a m e topic. Paragraphs are usualK' c o m p o s e d ol a topic sentence,
a s e nt en c e or s ent ences disc u ssi n g t he topic, a n d a closing sentence.
lh e p r o p e r selection a n d use o f w o r ds are critical el eme nt s o f g o o d writing. 'ITie i m
p r o p e r use ot w o r d s or t he use o f sexist language o r legalese det racts I ro m the qual ity o f t h e
writing.
Rules o f g r a m m a r gLiide the drat'ting o f legal writing. S u b j e c t - \ ’er b a gr ee me nt , parallel
c o n s t r u c t i o n , p r o p e r verb tense, n o u n - p r o n o u n ag r ee me nt , an d o t h e r rules are necessary to
g o o d writing.
Spelling a n d p u n c t u a t i o n are t he fmal subjects a dd r essed in this c hapter. P ro p e r spell
ing is alwa\ s r equired. In like m a n n e r , p r o p e r p u n c t u a t i o n is a basic r e q u i r e m e n t o f p r o p e r
writing, lhe correct uses o f c o m m a s , semicolons, ap os t r oph e s, and o t he r p u n ct u a t i o n devices
are s u m m a r i z e d in t he chapter.
■All o f t h e rules a n d gui de l i ne s discussed in t he c ha pt e r are essential to g o o d wri ting
skills, 'i'ou mu s t learn a n d e m p l o y t he m w h e n e ng a ge d in legal writing, l he c h a p t e r onl y
brielK' addr esses the rules a n d gui de l i ne s that appK to legal w riling; you s h oul d refer to o t he r
r esour ce s for detailed c ove r age o f each topic.
Quick R eferen ces

Act i on \'erbs 417 Passiv e x’oice 417
Active \'oice 417 Pu nc t ua t i on 437
A nd/or 425 Sentence 415
Cl os i n g sent enc e 419 Sexist language 423
(i r am m a r 427 Shall/may 426
I.egalese 422 S u b j e c t - \ ’erb a g r e e me nt 427
Modi f i er 431 I hat / wh i ch 427
N o mi n a l iz a ti o n 421 'I'opic sentence 419
N o u n - v e r b string 421 I'ransition sentence 419
Numbers 449 Tr a n si t io ns 417
P ar a g r ap h 41<S \ ' e r b tense 429
Parallel con st ru c t i on 429 W'riting conv e nt ion s 451

In tern et R e so u r c e s
L'sing gr anini ar , p u n c t u a t i o n , w o r d se l ec t i on, se n te n ce s , a n d o t h e r topics, yo u will lind
\ a r i o u s Web sites (literally t h o u s a n d s o f sites) that reter to w r i t i n g l i mdani e nt a l s . S o m e
sites reter to books; s o m e p r o\ ide sell- help h a n d o u t s ; s o m e pr ese nt tips, guidelines, a n d
examples; s o me are ma t e r ia l s I rom \ a r i o u s I jigli sh courses; s o m e are articles o n specific
w r i ti ng topics; s o m e are tut or i al s or w o r k s h o p s ; a n d s o m e a d \ e r t i s e wri ting ser\'ices an d
cour ses. .Ks with m o st topics on the W'eb, t h e p r o b l e m is not t he lack o f sites but the abi m-
d a n c e o f sites. Probably the best strategy is to n a r r o w youi' search to a specific wr i ti n g topic
such as “p a r e n t h e s e s . ” II soli are g o i n g to d o a lot ol wri ting, ai u)t her strategy wo u l d be to
p u r c h a s e a c o mp r e hens i \- e text such as I h c C.hicugo M i u u i a l of S t y l e (listed in “ I'or I’m l h e r
Re adi ng" at the e n d o f this chapter) .
E x e rcise s
Additiouai assiguiucnts arc aviiiliihlc on the C.ouricMiilc. ' Ihe lawyer nuist tile his r esponse within 30 da\ s.
A S S IG N M E N T 1 Ihe c h a i r n u m ol the c o m m i t t e e c o n d uc t e d a private

hearing.
D i sc u s s t he e s sent i al r e c j u ir em e nt s ot a w e l l -c i at t e d
sentence. f.ach person nuist b rin g his records to the
conference.
lA 'ervone nuist b rin g h is records to the hearing.
Discuss the e l e me nt s a n d r e q u i r em e n t s ol a well-cralletl
par agraph. A S S IG N M E N T S
1)iscuss the pr oper use sluill niiiy, iiml. or, and that/which.
W'hat is the di tf erence b et we en actise \'oice a n d passive A S S IG N M E N T S
\'oice? Wha t are the basic rules c o n c e r n i n g subiect \ e r b agree
ment, p r o p e r verb tense, and n o u n - p r o n o u n agr eement?
Draft the l ollowing se nt enc es in active \’oice. A S S IG N M E N T 10
Ihe d ef en da n t was attacked b\' the plaintili at the W'hat is parallel c o n s t ru ct i o n ?
b eg i n n i n g o f t h e argimient. A S S IG N M E N T 11 ,
It is a r e q u i r em e n t of g o o d wri ting skills that acti\ e W'hat are s q u i n t i n g nuulif iers? ( i i \ e soiue e x a m p l e s of
\ oi c e be used. squiiUing nuidihers.
Payme nt must be m a d e b\' Mr. Smith no later tiian
May 15, 1997.
W'hat are t he rules c o n c e r n i n g the p r o p e r use ot c o m m as ,
A S S IG N M E N T S colons, semicolons, a n d a po s t r o phe s?
W'hat is a n o m i n a l i z a t i o n ? W'hat are s o m e e x a m p l e s ol
no mi nalizat ions?
Cor rec t the tollowing se nt enc es and identity wh\' t he \’ are
A SSIG N M E N T S i nc o n ec t .
W'hat is legalese? Give t hr ee ex a mp l e s o f legalese. 1. Ihe statute requires the witnesses to be present when
A SSIG N M EN T ? the t estator signs the will, aiuI the witnesses mus t be
in the sanu' r o o m with t he testator, not in a separate
Rephrase the following sentences using nimsexist language.
r oom, a n d wat c h tbe t estator sign the will.
A paralegal ma y draft a letter to the client i n f o rm i n g
2. Mar\- r e a ch ed the c o n c l u s i on that she ha d m a d e a
hi m ot an u p c o m i n g hearing.
mistake.
3. A rclati\'e p r o n o u n requires a \'erb whi ch agrees with ASSIGNMENT 16
its ant ecedent. (Correct the p a r ag r a ph s p r e s e n t e d in part a n d p ar t B.
•1. l u t h e r the cousins o r lOarryl ar c gi' ing to the party. l ' se the pr oof r ea d i n g checklist pr es e nt e d in I-xhibit 14-4.
5. Sara, atter giv ing careful c o n s i d e r a t i o n to tlie m a t
Part A
ter, r ea ched the c on c l u si o n that she s houl d bu\' the
I he g o v e r n m e n t s ’ first w i t n e s s at B e a n ’s s e n t e n c i n g
bLisiness.
we r e the DH.A Task I'orce Officer Ton\- Silva. H e t e st i
6. H e de c i d ed to t h o r o u g h l y a n d c o mp le t el y test the fies t h a t in his deb r ie f i ng I.uiz h a d told h i m a b o u t f ou r
theory. s e pe r at e m a r i j u a n a “g r o ws " in w h i c h I.uiz h a d p a r t i c i
7. N e i t h e r the m e m b e r s o f t he b o a r d n o r Steve h a d pat ed. I he first was in 1986 In I'ress, i'exas: t h is “g r o w ”
r ea ch e d their conclusi on. p r o d u c e d 700 m a r i j u a n a plants. ' Ihe s e c o n d was in 1987
cS. '1 he statute requires st o ck h o ld e r appr oval for me rg e r in the Tonto wilderness; a n d it p r o d u c e d a p p r o x i m a t l y
b u t it d o es not r e q u i r e a p p r o v a l for m u l t i p l e real 1500 m a r i j u a n a pl a nt s. I h e t h i r d “g r o w ” was in 1988
estate purchases. in Sies (Colorado an d they p r o d u c e d a p p r o x i m a t e h - 900

m a r i i u a n a plants.
9. Ihe key executives, ( pre si de nt , secretary, a n d t r e a
Ihe final “gr ow" was in 1991, also at the Sies site.
sur er ) are r equi r ed to a t t e n d the b o a r d meeti ng.
Before the plants in this g r o w had been har ve t ed, a
10. ' Ihe c o r p o r a t i o n statute requires: an a n n u a l b o ar d o f (Colorado State Police aircraft was s pott ed d o i n g a “flyover”
tlirectors meeti ng, an a n n u a l s h a r e h o l d e r meeti ng, ot' the propert}'. 'Ihis p r o m p t e d I.uiz to complet eK' destro}’
a n d t he tiling o f an a n n u a l report. the crop, only fiftv' two p l a nt s we r e seized. As they were
11. Tom a n d P am d ec i d e d t h er e go i n g to bu\' stock in seized the officers not e d that t wo o r three plants wer e in a
the cor por at i on. single gri)w site. .Approximately 1,000 “g r o w holes, ” with
12. I he law requires a p a r t n e r to “. . . sha r e p a r t n e r s h i p sprinkler heads connect ed to an extensive irritation system,
prolits equalK' with the o t h e r par tners . . . .” wer e f o u n d a n o t h e r o n e t h o u s a n d u ni n s t al l ed s p r i n k l e r
heatis, two water t anks a n d fertilizer also was f o u n d on
13. l os e p h a n d Claire de c i d e d they were g o i n g too there
the priipert}'.
cabin tor two weeks.
14. I'ilty five o f t h e p a r t n e r s a t t e n d e d the p a r t n e r s h i p Part B
meeti ng. Ihe trial court se nt en c ed S mi t h well within the s t a t ut or y
13. Ihe la\s pros ides tlial pi ofUs slu>uld be shared equally, limits Ihereti ' tv the s ent e nc e is legal
ho\ve\ er, the law allows t he p a r t n e r s to prov ide oth I he record thor oug hl y, clearly an d positive!)' s ho ws
erwise in the p a r t n e r s h i p a g r ee me nt . that Smith aiul his attorne)' have a m p l e time to t h o r o u g h ly
review S mi t h s’ sentence r ep or t p r i o r to sen t enc i n g. They
A S S IG N M E N T 14 did so a n d had: “no p r o b l e m s with it.” It is s h o w n by the
( 'o r re c t the tollowing se nt en c es b \ ’ p r o p e r h ' usi ng col ons r ec ord that Sniith ne\'er app ea l ed his conv iction o r s e n
an d semicolons, tence. His section 2255 M o t i o n w e r e his first a n d o nl y
Ihe court's i ns t ruc ti on s to the r e s p o n d e n t are: ti) at ten i pt to challenge his sentence. Aii)' o bj e ct i on s to the
retrai n from c o n t a c t i n g the plaintiff in per so n, by- sentence report as s ubmi tt e d were c l e a r k waived by Smith.
telephone, or b\' mail; to pay m o n t h l y child su p po r t , Ihe d e f en da n t have the responsibilit)' to advise t he C o u r t
a n d to pe r f or m o n e h u n d r e d h o u r s o f co mmu n it x ' ot an\' claimed errors in the s e nt e n c e report. His failure to
service. voice any objections waive an)' issue not pr oper ly presented.
Ihe tollowing statutes gover n the issue, section It has b ee n long held b)' this c our t that “Section 2255 is not
29-9-516, section 29-9-517, a n d secti on 29-9-544. available to test the legalit)' o f m a t t e r s whi ch s h o u l d have
been raised on appeal . ” Unless g o o d cause caii be shovvn
A S S IG N M E N T 15 wh)' a d e f end a nt did in)t appeal t>r raise a p ar t i c u l a r issue
S i m i m a r i z e t h e rules g o \ ' e r n i n g t h e use o f q u o t a t i o n s , on appeal; the d e f en da n t is b a r r e d f rom raisi ng tha t issue
ellipses, brackets, par ent heses, hyp hens , an d dashes. in a section 2255 Moti on.
For F u rth er R e a d in g
Block, Ciertrudc. ¡'.[iectivc I.egiil Writing. 4th ed. W’cstbiiry, W : F o u n d a t i o n Press, 1992.
llic CJiicago Maniitil of Style. 13th ed. Cdiicago a nd l.ondon: University ot’Cdiicago Press, 2003.
G o o d , Edward. Mightier lluin the Sword, (diarlottesville, \'A: Blue leans Press, 1989.
P u t m a n , W'illiam Fi. Ihnkct (iiiide to l.cgdl Writing. Cl ift on Park, N Y : ' I h o m s o n / D e l m a r
Learning, 2006.
S t r u n k , W i l l i a m , |r., a n d H. B. W h i t e , lhe Elenicnti of Style. 3 r d ed. N e w York:
Ma cmi ll an , 1972.
Fepper, Pamela R. Basic Legal Writing. Lake Forrest, IL: Cilenco, 1992.
The available CourseMate for this text has an interactive eBook and interactive learning
___ tools, including flash cards, quizzes, and more. To learn more about this resource and access
i CourseMate free demo CourseMate resources, goto www.cengagebrain.com, and search forthis book.
To acce ss CourseMate materialsthatyou have purchased, goto login.cengagebrain.com.
The W riting Process for Effective
Legal W riting
¡• or t h e p a s t f iv e y e a r s , R i i . k S t r o n i ; h a s b e e n t h e p a r a le g a l l o r S a r a l le t e h e r , a e r i n i i n a l d e f e n s e
Outline
a t t o r n e y . H e s t a r t e d la w s e h o o l la s t y e a r. R i e k n o w w o r k s p a r t t i m e d u r i n g t h e s e h o o l \ e a r a n d
l u l l t i m e In t h e s u m m e r . H e p e r l o r m s a w id e r a n g e o l la w e le r k a n d p a r a le g a l t a s k s l o r S a r a . I le I. Introduction
i n t e r v i e w s c li e n t s a n d w it n e s s e s , e o n d i ie t s le g a l i n \ e s l i g a t l o n s , a r r a n g e s a n d m a l iU a ln s c lie n t II. Importance o f Writing Skills
f ile s , c o n d u c t s le g a l r e s e a r c h , a n d o c e a s l o i i a l l y p r e p a r e s le g a l m e m o r a n d a . III. Cioal of l.egal Writing
K i c k e n jo y s le g a l r e s e a r c h a n d d e t e r m i n i n g t h e a n s w e r s lo le g a l i.| iie sti< m s. H e d r e a d s
I\'. l.egal Writing Process
th e a c tu a l w r it in g p r o c e s s ih e a s s e m h h ' o f t h e r e s e a r c h a m i a n a h s is in t o a w r it t e n l o r m a t .
\'. General Research Suggestions
( ârol B e c k r e c e n t h r e t a in e d S a r a to r e p r e s e n t h e r in t h e c a s e o t Sti iU' r. ! k \ k . In t h e c a s e ,
p o l i c e o f f ic e r s o b t a i n e d a s e a r c h w a r r a n t t r o m a m a g is t r a t e c o u r l j u d g e a u t h o r l / i n g a s e a r c h
\'I. Key Points Checklist:
o f .\ ls , l i e i k ' s h o u s e f o r d r u g s . O n t h e b o t t o m o l t h e w a r r a n t , t h e ju d g e w r o t e , "I n a n n o u i i c e d
l h e Writing Process
e n t r v is a u t h o r iz e d to e n s u r e o H i; e r s a le t \ .’ W h e n th e o f f ic e r s o b t a i n e d t h e w a r r a n t , t h e v t o ld \ ’1I. Application
t h e jL i d g c th a t In o t h e r d r u g s e a r c h c a s e s , II t h e o f f ic e r s a m i o i m c e d t h e ir p r e s e n c e p r i o r lo e n t r \ \
t h e p e r s o n s o c c u p v i i i g th e p r e m is e s b e in g s e a r c h e d o f t e n p o s e d a t h r e a t f o t h e o f ii c e r s . B a s e d
o n t h i s s t a t e m e n t , t h e Iu d g e a u t h o r l/ e d t h e o f f ic e r s lo e n t e r ,\ ls . B e c k 's h o u s e i m a n n o u n ^ e d .
Learn in g O b jectives
W 'h e n t h e o f ii c e r s e x e c u t e d t h e w a r r a n t , t h e \ d i d n o t a n n o u n c e t h e ir p r e s e n c e a n d p u r p o s e
p r i o r to e n t r v . I h e i r s e a r c h r e c o \ e r e d a p l a s t i c b a g c o n t a i n i n g a n o u n c e o l c o c a i n e , C a r o l B e c k After completing this chapter, you

w a s c h a r g e d w it h p o s s e s s io n w it h in t e n t to ( .lis t r lh u t e . should understand:
S a r .i a n d K i c k h a \ e lu s t b e g u n t h e p r e l i m l n a r s s t a g e s o l p r e p a r i n g .\ ls . B e c k s d e fe n s e .
• lhe impor tance o f wri ting skills
R i c k s a s s i g n m e n t is to p r e p .u e a le g .il m e m o r a i u l u m . k k l r e s s l n g t h e p o s s i b l l i l y o l o b t a i n i n g
• What a legal writing process
s u p p r e s s i o n o f lh e e \ k le n c e o n t h e b a s is th a t t h e s e a r c h w a s Il le g a l . S a r a t e lls R i c k l h a l a n y
is and ils importance in legal
s t i p p r e s s l o n m o l i o n m u s t b e t ile d in ."iO d a \ s. W h a t | 'r o i c s s s li o u U l K i c k l o ll o w w h e n |’ r e [ ' a n n g
writing
t h e n i o n i o r a n i . k u i i '' I h e le g a l w r i l l n g p r o c e s s Is p re se n te i.1 in i h i s c h a p l e r . I h e a n s w e r lo R U k 's
c | u e s t io ii Is d i s c u s s e d in t h e .A p p lii. a t io n s e c t io n o l t h i s c h a p t e r . • Tlie three stages o f the legal

writing process
• 'Ihe i mpor tance an d use o f an
expanded outline in the legal
writing process
457
I. INTRODUCTION
Ihis c h a pt c r pr esents a collection o l ' ge n er al c o n s i d e r a t i o n s in\'ol\'ed in legal analysis a n d
w riting, including an app r oa ch to the w riting process a n d guidelines to follow w he n e n g a g
ing in tlie process,
'Ihe legal issue I'aised by the lacts o f a client’s case mu st be researched and analyzed a nd
the results c o m mu n i c a t e d , usualK’ in written tor m. I.egal research, analysis, a nd writing are all
related. Hach is a step in a process designed to ans wer legal questions a n d lead to the resolution o f
disputes. I.egal analysis usually takes place w he n the research is conver ted into a written pr od uct
and is part ot’the writing prt>cess. Iherefore, legal anaKsis is i ncluded here in the discussion o f
legal writing. I.egal writing is the step wher e the research a n d anaK sis are assembled in a written
t'orm designed to concisely record and c o m m u n i c a t e the ans we r to a legal question or questions.
I'or \ arious reasons, ma ny people believe that most legal co m mu ni c a t i on is oral and takes
place either in the co ur tr oo m or in a law office, this is not the ca.se, howe\'er. 'the bulk o f legal
comniunicati on is written. Ihe \ ast majority o f cases never go to trial. They are settled, and the
settlements are reduced to writing. W'hen cases do go to trial, muc h of the trial work involves writing;
written motions, trial briets, iur\’ instructions, a nd so on. In ma n\ ' instances, the law firm’s practice
rarely iin oK es litigation, but instead locuses on the preparation o f contracts, wills, corporation
instruments, and other legal docunients. great deal o f time is spent in re.search and in c o m
municating the findings ot that research in the t or m ot legal m e m o r a n d a and legal instruments.
II. IMPORTANCE OF WRITING SKILLS

Ihere are s e \er al reasons w h \ ’ it is critical!} i m p o r t a n t for a paralegal o r law clerk to possess
good wri ting skills. Ihis section details s o m e ot the ma j o r reasons.
In n i a n \ ’ instances, \'ou ni a \ ’ s pe nd mo s t ot \ ’o u r t i me e n ga g ed in legal wri ting in o n e
l or m or anot her . If }(Ut possess g o o d wri ti ng skills, }'oii can p r o d u c e a finished p r o d u c t in
a s hor ter t ime t ha n an i n d i \ i d u a l w h o d o e s not possess such skills, ihis results in gr eater
p r o d u c t i v i t y which e nh an c e s } ou r \ alue to the law firm.
1 he qualits' ot a written pi'oduct d e p e n d s on wri ti ng skill: the gr eater the skill, the higher
the quaht}' ol the pi odLict. I’ai t ol }'our job ev al uat i on ma}' be bas ed o n the qualit}' of your
\s rilten pr oduct . In addi tion, a written p r o d u c t that lea\ es the tirni, such as c o r r e s p o n d e n c e
to a client, r epresents the law firm. sliodd}’ p r o d u c t rellects poorl}' o n (lie firm a n d may
da m a ge its reputation.
I.egal research and anaKsis are meaningl ess if the results c a n n o t be clearly a nd concisely
c o m m u n i c at e d . Ihe goal ot a legal research m e m o r a n i l u m is to i n f o r m a nd r ecord i n f o r m a
tion. An indiv idual who does not possess go od wri ti ng skills nia\' not be able to fulfill this goal.
Poor writing skills ma}' also leail to mi s co mm u n i c a ti o n . O n e ma}' intend the writing to
coin'e}' a certain me a n i n g when, in tact, it literalK' conve}'s a dilferent nieaning. Tills ma y lead to
disaster it the s up e n ising attorne}' relies on the literal mean i n g and thereby commits an error. C o r
respondence to a client mav be so unclear that the client does not u nde r st a nd the communicati on.
For Example The written com m unication reads, "Ind ividu als w ho file with the court
promptly receive consideration." T h is is am biguous. Does it mean that
individuals who file promptly with the court receive redress, or does it mean that those
who file with the court will receive prompt redress?
III. GOAL OF LEGAL WRITING

Before addr essing the cons i der at ions in\' oKed in the legal w r i ti ng process, it is i m p o r t a n t to
identif}' the goal o f legal writing. Haw offices are bus}- places, a n d t h e reader o f a par alegal’s
or law clerk’s wor k prodLict is usuall}' a busy p er s o n w h o does not ha\ e t ime to wad e t h r o u g h
Ôo
C H A P T E R 15 T H E W R I T I N G P R O C E S S FOR E F F E C T I V E L E G A L W R I T I N G
iliiwci y prose, e x t r a n e o u s o r un c l e a r material, or disorgani/.ed material. Ihe p r i m a r y goal ot

legal writing, therefore, is to elearh', concisely, and conipleteK con\'e\ legal i n t o r ma t io n in a
m a n n e r that a c comp l i s h e s b o th o t ' t he following:
l-'ulh' aclciresses t he topic in as few wor ds as possible
Allows t he r ea de r to gain a clear u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the i n f or ma t i on in as little t i me as
possible
Vou m a y feel that \' ou d o not possess g o o d writing skills o r that \'ou do not ha\'e the
capabi lity o f clearly, c o n c i s e h ’, a n d c o m p l e t e l y coii\ e\ ing i n f o r m a t i o n in a wr i tt e n t'orm.
W'riting m a y be a struggle tor \'ou. Take heart: W'riting skills can be deve l o pe d a n d wri ti ng
nuule easier t h r o u g h pr act i ce a n d the use ot a wri ting process.
IV. LEGAL WRITING PROCESS

A legal w ritin g p ro ce ss is a syst ematic a p p r o a ch to legal writing. It is an o r gan i z ed a p
pr oa c h to legal research, analysis, a n d wr i t i n g that helps \(ui develop wri ti ng skills. It ma ke s
legal wri ti ng easier a n d is necessarv tor t he following reasons:
1. Legal wri ti ng is h i gh h' o r g a ni z ed a n d struct ured. Ihe organi z ed s t r uc t ur e helps
ensLire that c o m p l e x subject m a t t e r is clearh c o m mu n i c at e d .
For Example The IR A C (issu e , rule, an alysis, co n clu sio n ) legal a n a ly sis
p ro ce ss d iscu sse d in Chapter 2 is a structured approach to
problem solving. The IRAC format, when followed in the preparation of a legal
memorandum, helps ensure the cle ar communication ofthe com plex subject
matter of legal issue analysis.
'¡he use ot a legal wri ting process h.elps v’ou conduct research and analysis within
t he s t r u c t u r e a n d f o r ma t ot the t\ pe of legal wri ting assigned. A wri ting pr ocess
saves l i me by p r o v i d i n g tlie m e a n s lo o r g an i / e voui legal analvsis a n d r esearch
material as it is gat her ed.
2. If V'OU d o not have a wr i ti ng pr oce ss a n d m e r e k gat her research material a n d im-

mediatelv' b egi n to write, you will waste a great deal of time. You are not ready
to write. If you b egi n to \s rite w i t h o u t or ganizing V'our research a n d analysis, or
w it ho ut t h i n k i n g t h r o u g h what vou are going to write, vou will flounder. It you
g a t h e r a m o u n t a i n o f r esearch that rec]uires a great deal of anaK sis, you will waste
t ime in t he st r uggl e to d e t e r m i n e w hat goes wher e a n d h o w I ' si ng a wri ti ng p r o
cess forces V’OU to t h i n k bet ore you write. It forces vou to follow an o r gani z ed
s tr uc t ur e I r o m t he b e gi n n i ng . Bv’ using a process, wh e n vou actually begin to
write, V’OU will be read}’, '^'our project, then, will be t h o r o u g h a n d organized.
3. W' hen you are r es e ar chi ng o r a na l yz i n g an as si g nme n t or en ga g i n g in legal writ
ing, a wr i ti ng pr oce ss helps you c a p t u r e ideas as thev’ c o m e to you. A process pro-
v’ides a f r a m e ' v o r k w i thi n w hich to ca pt ur e ideas a n d r ecord t h e m in their p r o p er
place as they occur. W i t h o u t a process, ideas niay be lost. See section I\'.A.3 in this
c ha pt e r for a d i sc us s i on on c r ea t i n g an outline.
4. A wri ti ng p r oce ss also helps y ou ov e r c o me the difficult areas o f legal writing. You
ma y get stuck in a difficult a n a h tical area oi’ e n c o u n t e r writer's block. A wri ti ng
process helps v’ou avoid these p r o b l e m s bv’ prov iding a s t e pped a ppr oa ch. Oft en
you b e c o m e .'.tuck o r blo ck e d b ec au s e you hav’c missed a step o r left s o m e t h i n g
out. A process is a gu i de that inc l udes all the steps a n d helps en su r e thal n o t h i n g
is left out.
459
Ihis sccliiMi presents a general o\er\'ie\s- ot the wi'iting process and discusses matters that
\()u slioLild consider at each stage ot the process, lliere are ma ny dilterent processes and c o m
binations ot'processes that \ o u ma\' adopt wiien engaging in legal writing. W'hat works tor one
person may not work i'or another. 'I'ou ma\' ultimate]}- adopt a process that includes steps t r om
\ arious approaches to legal writing, including some ot thcise presented in this chapter. It does not
matter which process }'ou ultimatel}- adopt, but it is essential that you adopt some writing process.
'Ihe legal writing process consists ot’the three basic stages p r esented in Exhibit 13-1. l h e
tollowing sections discuss each ol these stages. A prerec]uisite to the tirst stage— to the b e g i n
ning ot'an}' wri ting p r oc e ss — is the assembi}- ot'all a\ ailable i n t o r m a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g the case.
E x h i b i t 15-1 Stages of the Legal Writing Process.
Prewriting Stage T h e s t a g e w h e r e t h e a s s i g n m e n t is o r g a n i z e d ,
researched, and analyzed.
Writing Stage T h e s ta g e w h e r e research, analysis, a n d ideas are

a s s e m b le d into a w ritte n product.
Postwriting Stage T h e s t a g e w h e r e t h e a s s i g n m e n t is r e v i s e d , e d i t e d ,
a n d a s s e m b l e d in f i n a l f o r m .
For Example The assignm ent is to prepare an office legal memorandum addressing
the question of when the statute of limitations runs in a client's medical
m alpractice case. Gather all information concerning the case before you begin. This
m cludes the client's file, depositions, interrogatories, w itness interviews, any other d is
covery information, and so on.
A. Prewriting Stage
llie p re w ritin g sta g e is the stage in the legal wr i t i ng pr ocess w h e r e an a s s i g n m e n t is
organized, researched, ami a n a l w e d . N'o\ ice writers otten begin to write without ade qu a t e
preparation. O n e ot the most i mp or t a nl aspects oi the writing process is the p e r l o r m a n c e o f
the steps necessar} to b e c o me a d e q u a t e h pr epa re d to begin. Drafting be c ome s m u c h easier
if }’ou are iulh' p r epared wh en }ou begin to write. Ihis stage of the wri ting process ma y be
divided into the three sections p r esented in Hxhibit 15-2.
E x h i b i t 1 5 - 2 Sections of the Prewriting Stage.
1. Assignment An identification of the type and p u rp o s e of the w ritin g

assignm ent
2. Constraints A co n sid e ra tio n of any constraints placed on the

assignm ent
3. Organization The organization o f t h e w ritin g a s s ig n m e n t
1. Assignment
l he writing process begins with an identification o f t h e type and p u r p o s e o f t h e assign m ent.
' Ihree questions must be c o ns ider ed when reviewing the assignment:
Is the as si gn me n t cleaii}' u nder st ood ?
W'hat type ot legal wri ting ( d o c u me nt ) is required?
W h o is the audience?
460
C H A P T E R 15 THF W R I T I N G P R O C E S S FOR E F F E C T I V E L E G A L W R I T I N G
a. Is the Assignm ent C le a rly Understood?

ôu ma y rcccivc tlie a s s i gn me nt in the t or m o f a wri tten m e m o r a n d u m or t h r o u g h oral in-
s'.rLictioiis t r o m the su p er v is in g attorney. An early anti i m p o r t a n t step in the prewritiiig stage
i.- to be s u r e that you u n d e r s t a n d the task you have b een assigned. lt'\’ou h a\ ’e any qu es t i on s
c o n c er n i n g t he general nat ur e o r specifics o f t h e as si g nme n t , ask.
■A m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e a s s i gn me nt can result in a great deal o f t i m e bei ng wasted
in t he p e r f o r m a n c e ot t he w r o n g task. Mo st a t to r ney s w e l c o m e inquiries a n d prefer that a
paralegal o r law clerk ask q ue s ti on s r at he r t h a n p r oce ed in a w r o n g dir ection. In this regard,
i! t h e a s s i g n me n t is u nc l ea r in an y way, s u m m a r i z e the a s s i gn me nt o r a l k with the attorne)'.
A n o t h e r appixiach c o u l d be to draft a b r ief r ecapitul ati on o f t h e a s s i gn me nt a n d s u b mi t it for
the a t t o r n e y ’s review a n d signature.
h. W'hat Type of Legal W riting (Docum ent) Is Required?

Ihe ne.xt step is to det er ni i ne the type o f legal writing the assignment requires. 'Ihis is i mpo r ta nt
because each t\ pe of legal wri ting has a different f u nc t i on a n d different r equi r emen t s . Before
\ o u begin, \’ou must kntiw what f or m o f legal wri ti ng is required.
I her e are varitius types o f legal wr i ti n g a n d n u m e r o u s w a \ ’s to categorize t he t\ pes.
Ihe focus o f this text is o n legal research a n d analysis a n d the types ot wri ting related to legal
research a n d analysis, such as t he following:
1. Law-office legal research a n d analysis m e m o r a n d a . A r esear cher ma y be assigned

the task o f rese ar chi ng an d analyzing t h e law that applies to a client’s case. The
law-office legal me m o r an c f u m is cfesigned to inftirm the r ea d er of the results of
t he research a n d analysis. The a s s i gn me nt ma y be as simple as i dentitication o f t h e
statutory o r case law that applies to a legal issue or as c omp l ex as identification of
the issues in a case an d analysis of t h e law thal applies. The p r epa r a t i o n o f a law
office legal m e m o r a n d u m is d iscussed in (Tiapters 16 a n d 17.
2. Cor r espon de n ce . There are se\ eral types o f cor r esponde nce lhal a paralegal or law
clerk mav be required lo draff: d e m a n d letters, settlement proposals, notices of
events such as hearing tlates, a nd so on. The assignment nia\- require preparation of
a tiraft o f a letter to be sent to the client Informing the client o f t h e law thal applies in
the client’s case and ho w the law applies. Neither a paralegal nor a law clerk may gi\ e
legal advice to the client, but they may prepare a draft o f t h e c or res p on de n ce that the
attorney will send to the client. Legal cor r espo nde nce is addressed in Ch a p t e r 19.
3. Caiurt briefs. court brief is a d o c u m e n t filed with a c our t thal contains an at tor
n e y ’s legal a r g u m e n t an d the legal aut hori t) ’ in suppor t o f that ar gume nt . There are
primarily two categories o f c our t briefs: trial cour t briefs a n d appellate c our t briels.
( I) Trial C o u rt Bricf i A cou r t ma y r equir e an a t t or ney to s u b mi t a briel in s u p p o r t o f a

position the a t t or ney has t aken in regard to a legal issue in a case. A trial court brief is u s u
all)’ subni i tt ed in s u p p o r t o f o r in o pp os i t i on to a m o t i o n filed with the court.
An attorney files a motion to dism iss a complaint, claim ing thatthe statute
of limitations has run. In support of the motion, the attorney files a legal
brief containing the legal an dfactual reasons w hy the court should grant the m otion.The
opposing side will also file a brief in opposition to the granting of the motion.
(2) Ap p e l l at e C o u r t Briefs , \ n appellate brief is a d o c u m e n t tiled with an appellate

court. It pr esents t h e legal a r g u m e n t s a n d aut ho r i ti es in s u p p or t o f t h e client’s posi t ion on
appeal. It is d es i g ne d to p er s ua de t he appellate co ur t to rule in t he client’s favor.
461
( i ou r l bricts aro dismissed in detail in C h a p t e r KS.

I-'ach ol' these t \ p e s ot legal wri ting is s t r u c t u r ed dillereiith'. l he o rga ni z at i on an d eon
siderations i n s ' oh e d in dr af t i ng these d o e u n i e n t s \ar\'. Ihe s ubs e que n t stages ot the wri ting
process are g o \ e r n e d b\' the t\ pe ot'legal wri ting the as si gn me nt requires. Iher etor e, an early
step in the p re w r i ti n g stage is the identification of the t\ pe of'writing required.
O t h e r t\’pes ot legal writing include the drafting of legal d o c u m e n t s such as contracts,
wills, a n d pleadings. O t h e r courses such as cont racts and wills co\ er the specific considerat ions
inx'ohed in the drafting o f these documents ; therefore, the\- are not covered in this text. You ma\-
follow the writing process presented in this chapter, howe\ er, when preparing such documents.
c. W ho Is the Audience?
An i mpor t ant step when assessing the r equirements of an assignment is to identit}' the inteniled
audience. Inasmuch as the goal ot legal writing is to clearh' co mmunicate intormation to the reader,
}'ou must ensure that the writing is crafted in a m a n n e r suited to meet the needs o f t h a t reader.
l.egal wri ting a s s i g n me nt s are d es i gned to reach a m.imber of different audiences. 'Ihe
i n t e n d e d r eader ma}' be a judge, an attorne}', a client, or s o m e t)ther person, ' lhe r e a d e r ’s
abilit}' to u n d e r s t a n d the wri ting will d e p e n d on the r e a d e r ’s legal s ophistication a n d h o w the
d o c u m e n t is written. A legal writing designed to i nf orm a client or ot he r la}person o f t h e legal
a n a h sis of an issLie is dr af ted differenth' than a wri ting des i gned to c o n \ e}' the s a m e infornia
tion to an at torney, l h e use o f f u n d a m e n t a l legal terminolog}' ma}' be a p p r o p r i at e w he n the
writing is to be read b\' a per son trained in the law. In contrast, if the reader has little or no legal
training, it ma}' be necessar}' to use nonlegal t e rms to conve}' the s ame i n f o r m a t i o n clearl}'.
For Example Communjcatjon to the supervising attorney:
The motion to su p press the evidence should be granted. Exigent

circu m stances that would have justified an unannounced entry were not present at the
time the officers executed the warrant, and the judge who issued the search w arrant did
not authorize unannounced entry.
Communication of the satne information to the client:

The court may not allow the prosecution to use at trial the evidence seized when
the officers searched your house. The law requires officers to announce their presence
before they enter your house to conduct a search. They are required to do this unless a
judge gives them perm ission to enter without first announcing their presence. They may
also enter unannounced if, when they arrive at your house, they believe that you are
destroying evidence or present a danger to them. In your case, the judge did not authorize
the officers to enter unannounced and nothing occurred when they arrived at your house
to indicate that you were destroying drugs or you were a threat to them.
A n o t h e r factor to c on si de r is w he t h e r the wri ting is in t e nd ed soleK' tor inter nal office

use. A wri ting t hat will be read o n h ' b}' indiv iduals w o r k i n g in the office ma\' c o n t a in infor
mation, c o m m e n t s , o r a s sess ment s that woul d not be inc l uded in a wri ting i n t e n d e d to be
read o u ts i de the office.
For Example After analyzing the facts ofthe client's case and the applicable law, it may
be n ece ssary to convince the client to reconsider the amount of dam ages
he believes he is entitled to recover and the possibility of settling this case. He needs to
be informed about the amount of dam ages he can realistically expect to receive. He is
adamant in his belief that he is entitled to more than SI million, and he is not willing to con
sider settling for less. The range of recovery is more likely between S10,000 and $100,000.
462
C H A P T E R 15 THE W R I T I N G P R O C E S S FOR E F F E C T I V E L E G A L W R I T I N G
E x h i b i t 1 5 - 3 C onstraints on the W riting P ro ce ss.
If the p e rfo rm a n c e o f the a s s ig n m e n t is g o v e rn e d

b y a d e a d lin e , a llo c a te a s p e c ific a m o u n t o f tim e to
each s ta g e of th e w ritin g p ro c e ss .
If the a s s ig n m e n t is lim ite d to a se t n u m b e r of

p a g e s , o rg a n iz e th e w ritin g to e n s u re that each
se c tio n is a llo tte d s u ffic ie n t sp a ce .
If the a s s ig n m e n t is g o v e rn e d by a sp e cific fo rm a t or
style e sta b lish e d by o ffice g u id e lin e s or court rule,
id en tify the p ro p er fo rm a t and be su re yo u fo llo w it.
Identify the audience to ensure that the legal eoniniunieation is crafted in a manner
commensurate with the reader's ability to understand the contents.
2. C o n s tr a in ts
Ihe next step in the prewriting process is to consider an\' possible co n stra in ts that ma\'
affect performance ot’the assignment. Ihree niajoi' constraints that should be considered are
presented in lixhibit 1.5 ,v
a. i i i i i c
A time constraint ma\’ go\ern the [H'rfoi iiiance of an assignment. Most assignments ha\'e a
tleailline. Vou must determine the ileadline, and then allocate a specific amount of time to
each stage of'the writing process to meet that deatlline.
Foi ExampI« You have 15 ciavs to write a legal research memorandum on an issue in
a case. You should allocate your time among the prewriting, writing, and
postwriting stag e s of the writing process. A possible allocation could be six days for
prewriting, five days for drafting, and four days for postwriting.
If \'ou tail to allocate your time properh' or tail lo stick to the allocalioi'i, \'ou u'la}' be
come absoi'bed or stuck in one stage and fail to lea\e enough time to proper!}' conipiete the
assignment. It does no good to completeK' research and anaK'/.e an issue if you do nol ha\'e
time to translate the research and analysis into a good written form.
For Example You have 15 days to prepare an office memorandum. You become absorbed
in the in trica cie s of the research and leave only two days to write the
memo. This is not sufficient time to prepare a w ell-crafted product. The memorandum
will either not be turned in on time or be poorly written. Either way, your professional
reputation is harmed.
b. L e n g t h
Ihe assignment may ha\-e a length constraint. Ihe super\'ising attorne}' ma}' require thal it
not exceed a certain number of pages. If this is so, keep the length limitation in mind from the
S t a n . Ihe amount of research material you gather is atlected b}' this limitation. CM'course, }'ou
must gather all the applicable law. 'i'ou nuisl, howe\er, screen the research to ensure thal }'ou
463
do not gather exccssi\'e intormation. W’itli tlie space limitation in mind, consider how much
ot’the material you are gathering can be included in the writing. Also, organize the writing to
make sure that each scction is allotted sufficient snace.
For Example The assignm ent is to prepare a legal research memorandum that does not
exceed 15 pages. The organization must allocate sufficient space for each
section ofthe memorandum. If the an alysis ends up consisting of 14 pages, there will not
be sufficient space for the statem ent of the facts, the issue, orthe conclusion.
c. Format
Most law offices ha\e rules or guidelines go\erning the organization and format of’ most
types ot legal writing, such as case briefs, othce memoranda, and correspondence. Ucnirts
have formal rules go\erning the format and st\Te of'briefs and other documents submitted
for filing.
For Example Many courts have rules governing the size of the paper, the size of the
margins, the length of briefs, and so on. If you do not conform to these
rules, your subm ission may be rejected.
Inasmuch as you must draft the assignment within the constraints ot'the required format,
\'ou must identif')- that f'orniat at the beginning ot'the prew riting process.
3. O rg a n iz a tio n (F o rm a t)
Organization in the prewriting stage is the ke\ to sLiccessful legal writing. Vou must be orga
nized w-hen conducting research and anah s i s in the prewriting stage, and the assignment must
be organized when it is written. Ihis nia\- be accomphshed through tlie development and use
of an outline. An outline is the skeletal structure and organizational framework of'the legal
writing. Ihree aspects ot outlines follo\s-:
Ihe \alue of an outline
Ihe creation ol an outline
Ihe use otaii outline
a. Value of an Outline
An outline is considered useful in the writing stage. It makes writing easier by pro\-iding
an organized framework for the presentation of research and analysis. .An outline, h o w
ever, is of greatest \ alue when properly used in the prewriting stage. There are several
reasons for this:
Ihe act of creating an outline causes you to organize ideas and prepare an approach
to the assignment at the beginning of the process. This helps you to think through
all the aspects o f t he assignment and take a global \-ie\\-, thereby avciiding gaps and
weaknesses in your approach. Vou focus your attention and organize \ our thinking
before you iunip into the assignment.
Ihe use of an outline sa\-es time. W'hen used properly, all the int'ormation from a
research source is placed in the outline when research is being performed. T ime is
often wasted having to retrieve a research source for a second or subsequent time to
464
C H A P T E R 15 T H E W R I T I N G P R O C E S S FOR E F F E C T I V E L E G A L W R I T I N G
gather intorniation tliat \'ou either tliiuiglit was not important or lorgot to retric\’e. 11'
an outline is used properh', you should not ha\e to retrie\e an\- research source more
than once.
An outline pro\ides an organi/ed Iraniework I'lir the structure ot the assignment
and t'or conducting research and analysis. It pro\ ides a conte.xt within which to
place research and ideas. Ihis is discussed in detail in section I\',A.3.c of this
chapter.
An outline breaks complex problems into manageable components. It provides an
organized framework from which to approach complex problems.
b. Creation of an Outline
The goal when creating an outline is to prepare the skeletal framework o f t h e d o c u
ment \’ou are going to draft. The outline should prov ide an o\ erall picture of how all the
pieces ot the assignment relate to each other and tit together. The form ot the outline is
not important. W'hether \ o u use Roman numerals (I and II), capital letters (A and B),
narrati\'e sentences, tragments of sentences, or single wt>rds does not matter. Use w ha t
ever torm or stvle works tor \ ou. You should use indentations to separate main topics
from subtopics.
For Example I. Introduction

II. Issue
A n alysis
a. Rule of law
b. Case law
1. N atTieo fcase
2 Facts of case
Ihe outline of the legal writing is g o\ erne d by the t\ pe ot writing \(ui are preparing.
I ocate the standard format used in the ollice tor the tvpe of legal writing \i)u are draft
ing. In the case of an ollice legal m e m o r a n d u m or correspondence, the law office may
have a special f'oriiiat that nuLst be followed. Use that forniat as the basis for the outline.
II the writing is to be filed in court, such as an appellate brief, follow the forniat set out in
the court rules. W'hatever the basic format is, it nia\ be necessar}' to make additions and
expand the outline.
For Example The firm's format for an office legal memorandum is the following:
1. Description of assignm ent

2. Issue
3. Facts
4 A n alysis
5. Conclusion
Ihis Is a broad lorniat and takes a lot ol hlling in to be uselul. It ma\' be necessary to till
in details for each section, ihe oLitline Is a perfect place to do this.
465
For Example An expansion of the analysis section may be as follows:
1. A n alysis
1. Introduction
2. Rule of law
3. Case interpreting the rule of law
a. Name of case/citation
b. Facts of case
c. Rule of law or legal principle presented in the case that applies to the client's
facts
d. Application of rule/principle from the case to the client's facts
This outline example is referred to in this chapter as the "analysis" outline example.
When de\-eloping an outline, keep the tollow ing points in mind:
1. Keep the tacts and issues ot’the assignment in mind while developing the outline. It
may be necessar\- to e.xpaiid the outline to accommodate additional tacts and issues.
For Example The standard office outline may accom m odate only one issue,
w hereas your assignment involves more than one issue. Expand
the outline to apply the standard office outline to each issue.
2. Be llexible when creating and working with an outline. Realize that it may be
necessary to change the outline as \'ou conduct research.
For Example The assignm ent involves the drafting of a simple office legal
memorandum that addresses one issue. The outline you decide
to follow is the analysis outline example presented previously. When research
IS conducted, it becom es apparent thattwo aspects ofthe rule of law apply to
the issue, so two court opinions must be included in the analysis. The memo
outline must now be expanded:
1. A nalysis
1. Introduction
2. Rule of law
3. Case interpreting the meaning of publication as used in the rule
of law
b. Facts of case
c. Interpretation of term
d. Application of the interpretation to the client's facts
4. Case interpreting the meaning of written as used in the rule of law
b. Facts of case
c. Interpretation of term
d. Application of the interpretation to the client's facts
466
C H A P T E R 15 TH E W R I T I N G P R O C E S S FOR E F F E C T I V E L E G A L W R I T I N G
3. Do not be surprised if it is necessary to reorganize the outline as a result of \'oin'

research. Research may provide a clearer picture of the relationship between is
sues and necessitate a rethinking ot the organization ot the outline.
For Example A s a result of your research, you realize that the sequence in
w hich you plan to address the issues should be changed. The
issue you thought should be d iscu ssed first should come second.
4. 'ITie basic organizational format for most legal writing that rei]uires legal anah sis
is the IR.AC, format. Ihat is, tirst state the question or issue, next identify the rule
of law that governs the issue, then analyze how and wh\- the rule applies, and end
with a conclusion summarizing the analysis. You may follow this tormat when ad
dressing each issue and subissue. If for some reason \'ou are at a loss for a format
to follow, use the IRAC^ format.
5. Include in the outline a reference to or some notation tor transition sentences.
Transition sen te n ce s connect the major sections o f th e writing and lead the
reader smoothly through the legal analysis. They make the document more read
able. It is easy to become so focused on the law, cases, and analysis that \ ’o l i forget
the transitions.
For Example "The rule of law that governs this issue is § 36-6-6, w hich pro
hibits oppressive conduct by majority shareholders. In the case
of Jo n e s V. Thomas, the court h e ld .. . . "
There should be a transition sentence linking the case to the rule of law:
"The rule of law that governs this issue is § 36-6-6, w hich prohibits oppressive
conduct by majority shareholders. B e ca u se the statute does not provide a
definition of the term op pressive conduct, ca se law m ust be referred to. A
case on point is Jonos v. Tfiomas, where the court held...."
(')utline formats for correspondence, oflice legal memoranda, and court briefs are pre
sented in CTiapter 16 through ('hapter 19.
c. Use of an Outline
'lhe value of an outline is determined by its use. If you prepare an outline and then set it aside
while \'ou are researching and analyzing the assignment, it is of limited value. Its only \ alue
when used in this manner is to help organize your thiriking and provide the organizational
framework for the writing that foilow's. An outline is of greatest \ alue when it is acti\ el\- in
tegrated into the prewriting stage. It can serve as an invaluable guide during the research and
analysis process.
Follow the outline format when researching and analyzing: First identify
the issue, next locate the rule of law that governs the issue, then identify
the ca se law that interprets the rule of law in a fact situation sim ilar to the client's case,
and so on.
W’hen integrated in the research and analysis process, an outline provides an orga
nized context within which to place research and ideas. W'hen so used, it will result in the
development o f a rough draft while research and anah'sis are being conducted. Ihe result is
467
E x h i b i t 1 5 - 4 Tw o -Step A p p ro a ch for U se o f an O utline in the Prew riting Stage.
C o n v e rt th e o u tlin e U se s e v e ra l sh e e ts of th re e -h o le d or
to a u s a b le fo r m b in d e r p ape r, o r cre a te se p a ra te p a g e s
an e x p a n d e d o u tlin e . if y o u are u s in g a co m p u te r. W rite th e
n a m e of e ach se c tio n an d s u b s e c tio n
o f the o u tlin e at the to p o f a se p a ra te
p a g e (e .g., at th e to p o f o n e p a g e w rite
"Issu e ," at th e to p o f a n o th e r p a g e
"Facts," an d so on).
In te g ra te all re se a rch , A s y o u c o n d u c t the re se a rch an d

a n a ly s is , an d id e a s d e v e lo p id e a s c o n c e r n in g a n y a s p e c t
into th e o u tlin e w h ile o f th e c a s e , e n te r th em on the a p p r o
c o n d u c tin g re se a rch p riate p a g e o f t h e e x p a n d e d o u tlin e .
an d a n a ly s is .
a tremendous savings of time and effort, llie integrated use of an outline in the prewriting
stage simplifies the writing stage and makes it much easier.
How, then, do \x)u integrate an outline into the research and anahsis process in the
prewriting stage? There are se\eral wa\ s to accomplish this. The practical approach suggested
here is to use an expanded outline. This approach is composed ofthe two steps presented
in lixhibit 13-4.
For illustration purposes, asstmie the assignment is to prepare an olfice legal memoran
duiii addressing a single issue in a client’s case. The cause ol action is a slander tort claim. The
broad issue is whether there was publication within the meaning of the law. Section 20-2-2 of
the state statutes prcnTdes that ci\ il slander is “the oral publication of a false statement of fact
concerning an indi\ idual... The statute tloes not define p i i b l i i u t i o i i . The facts of'the case are
that neighbor A, while visiting neighbor B's hoLise, communicated to neighbor B a false statement
ol fact concerning the client. This example is referred to in this chapter as the "slander" example.
The torniat for the bod\-of an oliice legal memorandum adopted in the office isas follows:
I. Issue
11. Statement of facts
111. Analysis/application
1. Rule of law—the rule oflaw that gcnerns the issue--enacted/case law
2. Case{s)—court interpretation of rule if necessar\’
A. Name and citation
B. Brief summarv- of facts showing case is on point
C. Rule/principle/reastining applied by the coui't that applies to client’s case
1). Application—discussion of how- the riile of law presented in the court deci
sion applies in the client’s case
3. Counteranalysis
I\'. Conclusion—a sunimar\- ofthe anahsis
(I) Convert the Outline to a Usable Form The memorandum format used in the office
is typed on one page of paper and is not ver\- useful in this form. The first step in the use
oft he outline is to eoin’ert it to a usable form—to expand the outline. This is accomplished
b\- taking several sheets of three-holed or binder paper, or creating separate pages it you are
using a computer, and writing the name of each section and subsection oft he outline at the
top of a separate page.
468
For Example At the top of one sheet of paper or computer page, write "Issu e." At the
top of another page, write "Statem ent of facts." At the top of another
page, w rite "A n a ly sis— rule of law." Continue with a new page for each ofthe following;
"A n a ly sis— case," "A n a ly sis— application of case to client's facts," "Counteranalysis,"
and "Conclusion."
Some scction.s ol the outline in.u' require more than one page.
For Example The " A n a ly sis— ca se " section may require two pages: one page for
"A nalysis— ca se — citation and facts of case" and one page for "A nalysis—
case -rule/principle/reasoning." Two or more pages may be required for a case because,
in many instances, a great deal of information may be taken from a case, such as lengthy
quotes from the court's reasoning.
if mor e than one rule ot'law applies, there .should be a separate page tor each rule ol law.
11'several cases apply, there are separate pages for each case. If there are separate issues, research
and anahv.e each issue soparateh', and prepare a separate expanded outline tor each issue.
When completed, there should be a separate page for each section and subsection of
the outline. Place the pages in a loose-leaf binder or enter them in the computer in the order
oft he OLitline. In other words, the first page w ill be the “Issue" page, followed by the "State
ment ol facts" page, then the “Anahsis— rule oflaw" page, and so on. Ifyou are using binder
paper, insert blank sheets ol paper between each section. Ihis allows lor the expansii)ii ol each
section to accommodate additional notes, comments, ideas, and other inl'ormation. 'Ihe end
result is a greath' expanded luitline that is usable in the prewriting stage.
(2) hitcgnitc Rciciinh, Aiialyyis. and iilais into the Ouilinc As you c o n d u c t research
and d e v e l o p ideas c o n c e r n i n g an\' aspect ol the case, e n t er t h e m on the a pp r o p r i at e page ol
ihc e x p a n d e d ov\Uinc.
(i) Ideas When any idea occurs concerning the case, enter it on the page ofthe expanded
outline relating to that idea.
For Example In the slander example, you may begin with a broad definition ofthe issue,
such as "W as there publication?" A s you conduct research and give more
thought to the case, more refined formulations of the issue will become apparent, such
as: "U nder § 20-2-2, does slander o ccu r when one person orally com m unicates to a third
party false statem ents of fact concerning an individual?" A s soon as this formulation of
the issue com es to you, write it on the issue page. W hen it is time to write the m em oran
dum, you w ill have multiple versions of the issue listed on the issue page. W hen all the
ideas concerning the issue are in one place, it is easier to assem ble the final statement
ofthe issue.
Ihe term ideas as Lised here includes all thoughts relating to the writing t)f the assign
ment, including h(uv to compose transition sentences.
For Example W hile researching a case, an idea may come to you about how the tran si
tion sentence linking the ca se to the rule of law should be written. Write
the sentence in the beginning of the case section of the expanded outline or at the end
ofthe rule of law page.
469
Keep the expaiuicd outline witli you. Often the niiiul \\ ill work on an aspect of a case
during sleep. You ma\' wake tip in the middle of’ the night or in the iiioining with an idea
concerning the assignment or the answer to a problem, if the expanded outline is hand\-, \’ou
can immediateh' enter the idea or answer in the appropriate section. If it is not coin enient
to keep the outline with you, then carr\' a notepad. Ijiter ideas on the notepad as the\- come
to you and place them in the outline later.
'Ihe value ot'the abihty to immediately place ideas where the\- belong in the structure of'
the writing cannot be o\eremphasi/.ed. lhe I'ollowing are some ot'the benefits:
Ideas are not lost. W'hen researching, you often may ha\'e an idea and sa\' to \'ourself,
“I'll remember to include this when I write t h e ___section." Hi\'e minutes later, the idea
is lost. If you can immediateh' \\ rite the idea down where it belongs, it will not be lost,
'i'ou can avoid confusion if you record ideas in the section where they will appear in
the writing. If you keep the binder with the expanded outline with \'ou throughout
the prewriting stage, and you place all ideas where thev belong as they come to you,
\'ou will a\’oid confusion and time lost tiguring out which ideas go where.
For Example W hile you are reading a case that interprets the rule of law, an
idea may o ccu r that relates to another aspe ct of the assignm ent,
such as, "This gives me an idea about the counteranalysis of this issue." You may
]otthe idea down on a separate piece of paper or think you will remember it. You
say to yourself, "I'll remember to include this when I write the counteranalysis."
By the time you get down to writing, time has passed, and you cannot
remember what the idea w as or, if you jotted it down, where the idea fits into the
assignm ent. There are several pieces of paper with notes and ideas, and you
have forgotten what many of them relate to or why.
W'riting becomes easier. W’hen you sit down to wi ite, all ideas are there, each in its
proper place, 'i'ou do not waste time in performing the additional step of'organi/ing
ideas. Idcaf urc inniictimli'ly orguiiizi'ii l/icy ionw lo you.
For Example If the "Issu e" page ofthe expanded outline contains all the ideas
concerning the w ays the issue may be stated, it is easier to craft
the final draft of the issue. You have every possible variation at hand. Drafting
the issue is just a matter of assem bling the issue from the best of the variations.
(ii) Research just as you add ideas in the proper place in the expanded outline as they
occur, enter all the relevant data on the appropriate page as you conduct your research.
For Example Referring to the slander example, when you locate the slander statute,
§ 20-2-2, place it on the "rule of law" page. Include the proper citation and a
copy of the statute. Include on the outline page all the information concerning the statute
thatyou may need when writing. This avoids having to look up the statute more than once.
For Example When you find a case or ca se s on point, enter the information concerning
the case on the appropriate case page of the outline. This should include
information such as the full citation, pertinent quotes concerning the rule of law or legal
principle applied by the court, and the legal reasoning.
W'hen researching case law, retrieve e\ erything you may need from the case and include
it in the expanded outline as you read the case. W’hy waste time looking up the same case
470
twice? Place a copy oft he case in the outline if necessary.
For Example First, read through the entire case. Then, on the second reading, as you
come upon a statement of the legal principle or legal reasoning that may
apply to the client's case, stop reading. Enter the information from the case in the ap
propriate page ofthe expanded outline. Indicate the page ofthe case from w hich it w as
taken and, if appropriate, quote the information.
All tdo often, when reading a case, the tendencv' is to tell \ ourselt that )'ou will come
back later and note the pertinent ink)rmation. ll'there is any possibility that you will use in-
ftirmation from a case, retrieve il iis you fiud it and place on the appropriate case page o ft he
outline. Y(hi will save time by not having to reread portions oft he case.
Often the reasoning or rule you want to use is not where \'ou remembered, and then
you waste time wading through the case trying to relocate it. It it turns out that information
retriexed will not be used in the legal writing, it is simph’ not used. It is much better to have
e\'er\ thing ci)ncerning the case in \'i)ur e.xpanded outline when \ ou begin to write than to
have to stop, retrie\'e, and reread the case.
It you use an expanded outline as suggested here, \ou are read}' to write. All your re
search and ideas are assembled and organized. In effect, }ou h a\ e prepared a rough draft,
so the writing task is made much simpler: Hie organization is fmished, ideas are captured,
research is assembled in the proper place, and man}' transition sentences are already crafted
and in place. The writing task is reduced to simpK' coinerting the outline to paragraph and
sentence form.
B. W riting Stage
1he second stage in the writing process is the actual drafting ot'the legal writing. In the w riting
sta g e \'ou assenible the research, anah sis, and ideas into a written prodiict. Many individuals
lind it difticult to go irom the research stage to the dratting stage, from the prewriting stage
to the writing stage. This is often called “writer's block." Some ot the obstacles that can make
it difticult to begin writing ai e i)rganizing the researeli and determining what goes where and
how Wrelates and is connecled. It you v\sc an expanded uuUinc in '>hc pvcwviUn^ stage, it is
much easier to begin writing. The research and anaK sis are ahead}' organized, the relationship
ol the material is ahead}' established b}' the outline, and n'laiu' introductor}' and transitional
sentences have already been written.
Chapter 16 through (Tiapter 19 present a detailed discLission ot'what must be inckided
when writing an oftice legal memorandun'i, court biief oi' legal correspondence. The rules
and guidelines in j-.xhibit 15-5 will help with the writing process iii general.
E x h i b i t 1 5 - 5 Rules and Guidelines— Writing Stage.
1. P re p a re th e w ritin g lo ca tio n .
2. W rite d u r in g the tim e o f d a y w h e n y o u do y o u r b est w o rk.
3. L im it in te rru p tio n s .
4. B e g in w ritin g ; do n ot p ro c ra s tin a te .
5. B e g in w ith a part o f th e a s s ig n m e n t y o u feel m o st c o n fid e n t a b o u t.
6. D o not try to m a k e th e first d raft th e fin a l draft.
7. D o n ot b e g in to w rite u ntil y o u are p re p a re d .
8. If y o u b e c o m e stu ck , m o v e to a n o th e r part o f the a s s ig n m e n t.
9. E s t a b lis h a tim e ta b le . 471

1. Prepare the writing iocatioii, iMakc sure tiie work enx iroiiiiieiit is pleasant and
conilortable. Ila\e at hand all the resources you need, such as paper, computer,
and research materials.
2. W’rite during the time ol'chu when you do your best work.
For Example If you are a "morning person," write in the morning and save other
tasks for later in the day.
,1. i.imit interruptions. I.egal writing rec]uires locus and concentration. 'TTierefore,
select a writing time and en\ ironment that allow \-ou to be as free from interrup
tions and distractions as possible.
4. Begin writing; do not procrastinate. One oft he most difficult steps is beginning.
Do not put it otf. The longer you put it otf, the harder beginning will become. Start
writing an\lhing that has to do with the project. Do not e.xpect what you start
with to be great, just start. C')nce you begin writing, it will get easier.
3. Begin with a part ol the assignment \'ou leel most conhdent about. You do not
ha\e to write in the sequence oft he outline. W'rite the easiest material first, espe
cially ifyou are ha\ing trouble starting.
6. Do not tr\ to make the first drafi the final draft. The goal o ft h e first draft is to
translate the research and analysis into organized paragraphs and sentences, not
to produce a fmished product. )ust write the information in rough form. It is
much easier to polish a rough draft than to make the first draft a finished product.
7. Do not begin to write mitil \ ou are prepared. Do all the research and analysis
before beginning. It is much easiei' to write a rough draft if the prewriting stage Is
ihorougliK' completed.
iS. ifyou become stuck, mo\e to another part ol the assignment. I f \ o u are stuck on
a particular section, lea\e It The mind continues to wurk on a problem subcon
sclously. That Is why solutions to problems often seem to appear in the morning,
l et the subconscious work on the problem while you move on. The sokitlon to the
ditficult\- nia\’ become apparent when you return to the problem.
9. Establish a timetable. Break the project into logical units and allocate your time
accordingly. This helps \’ou a\-old spending loo much time on one section oft he
writing and running out ot time. Do not become fanatical about the time sched
ule, however, 'i'ou created the timetable, and you can break It. It Is there as a guide
to keep you on track and alert \’ou to the o\erall time constraints.
C. Postwriting Stage
The p o stw ritin g sta g e Is the stage o f t h e legal writing process where an assignment is
revised, edited, and assembled In final form.
1. R evising
Ihe first draft will not be the final draft. Re\ise all initial drafts with the idea of improving qual
ity and clarit)’. Do not be surprised if the initial draft requires several revisions. Do not set a
limit on the nuniber of drafts that may be required. 'Ihe goal is that the final product clearly,
concisely, and completeK’ conve\'s the inlormation it is designed to convey. 'Ihe number of
drafts should be go\'erned b\' this goal. De\’elop a checklist for use w'hen revising a draft (see
l!xhlbit 13-6). Some items that \'ou ma\' wish to include in the checklist follow:
1. Is the writing well organized? Is It organized in a logical manner? Does each sec
tion logicalk tollow the pre\ ious section?
E x h i b i t 1 5 - 6 R e vie w in g a Draft C h ecklist.
1. Is th e w ritin g w e ll o rg a n ize d ?
2. Is it w ritte n in a m a n n e r the a u d ie n c e w ill u n d e rsta n d ?
3. Is th e w ritin g c le a r? D o e s it m a k e se n se ?
4. Is the w ritin g co n c ise ? A re th ere e xtra w o rd s that can be e lim in a te d ?
5. Is the w ritin g co m plete? A re all the a sp e cts of the a ssig n m e n t co vered ?
6. A re th e le g a l a u th o ritie s co rre c tly cite d ?
2. Is it written in a manner the audience will understand? If the writing is addressed

to a layperson, is the draff written in plain language the reader will understand?
3. Is the writing clear? Does it make sense? Are the sections connected with transi
tion sentences that clearly link the sections and guide the leader from one section
to the next?
■1. Is the writing concise? Are there extra words that can be eliminated? Is it repeti-
ti\'e? If multiple examples are included to illustrate a single point, are all the ex
amples necessary?
3. Is the writing complete? Are all the aspects of the assignment co\ered? il there are
multiple issues, is each issue and subissue thoroughly analyzetl?
6. Are the legal authorities correctly cited? Are all legal citations in the correct form?
All legal research sources must be corrcctb’ cited. Ihe rules and resources for e n
suring N'oiu' citations are correct are discussed in Chapter 8.
When re\’iewing a draff, allow time to elapse between drafting and re\ ising. Ihis allows
the mmd lo clear. You will then be able to approach the revision with a Iresli perspecti\'e and
are more likeK' to catch errors and inconsistencies.
2. E d itin g
E d itin g is actually part ol'the revision process, lhe revision process discussed in the pre\i-
Dus section addresses the broad intellectual and structural content oft he legal writing, such
as overall organization, clarity, and conciseness. Editing focuses on technical writing issues,
such as punctuation, spelling, grammar, phrasing, typographical errors, and citation errors.
Man\' of these specitic areas are discussed in (]hapter 16. A few general editing tips to keep
in mind, however, follow:
1. Be prepared to edit a legal writing several times. It ma\’ be necessar\- to edit a re\ i-
sion several times to catch all the errors.
2. Read the document aloud. When you silenth’ read your own draft, the mind ma\'
automatically fill in a missing word or correct an error without your knowing it,
and you will not catch the error. If possible, have a colleague read it to \’ou.
I lave a colleague whose writing skills you respect edit the document.
4. Do not rely on computer spell-check or grammar-check functions.
V. GENERAL RESEARCH SUGGESTIONS

Re.search is a maior part o f t h e prewriting stage o f t h e writing process. 'Ihe steps in\’olved
in legal research are discussed in Chapter 2 through Chapter 7; some general suggestions
and guidelines concerning legal research as it relates to the prewriting stage are included in
473
Hxhibit 13-7.
E x h i b i t 1 5 - 7 S u g g e stio n s a nd G u id e lin e s— Leg a l R e se a rch a nd the Prew riting Stage.
1. P re p are an d u se an e x p a n d e d o u tlin e w iie n c o n d u c tin g re se a rch .
2. Id e n tify the is su e first.
3. R e se a rc h is s u e s o n e at a tim e.
4. B e c o m e fa m ilia r w ith the area o f law .
5. L o ca te the e n a cte d la w th at g o v e rn s the q u e stio n .
6. L o ca te the c a s e la w that m a y ap ply.
7. M ake su re th at the re se a rch is cu rrent.
8. If yo u reach a d e ad e n d , re a n a ly ze the issu e .
1. Prepare and use an expanded outline when conducting research.

2. Identity the issue first, as yoLi cannot begin to look tor an answer until you know
the question. The preliminary identitication ma\- be \er\ broad, such as “Did neg
ligence occur?” or “W’as there a breach of contract wlien the goods were delivered
10 days late?” Ihis preliminar\- identification ol'the issue will usualk identify the
general area ot law to be researched, such as contracts, negligence, and so on.
3. Thoroughh’ research each issue to its conclusion before proceeding to the next
issue. II you lind material on another issue, note a reterence to it on the page in
the expanded outline tor that issue. Researching seseral issues at once onh' leads
to frustration and confiision.
1. Become familiar with the area of law. If \’ou are unfamiliar w ith the area of kuv
thal applies to the issue, obtain a general o\ er\ ’iew. Legal encyclopedias and trea
tises are examples of sources to consult lo obtain an o\ er\’iew of an area of law.
^ 1ocate first the enacted law that gcn’erns the questitni, such as a statute or consti
tutional proN’ision.
(i. l.ocate the relexant case law if'there is no enacted law lhat goserns or if the en
acted law is so broadh’ drafted that case law is required to interpret the enacletl
law’. Attempt to locate mandatorx’ precedent first, then persuasixe precedent anil
secondarx’ authority.
7. Make sure lhat the research is current. CTieck supplenients and Shepardize cases
lo be sure lhat the authority located is currenl.
8. If x’ou reach a dead end, reanah ze the issue. If x'ou cannot tind anx’ authorilx',
either primary or secondary, chances are the issue is loo broadly or loo narrowh’
stated. Restate the issue. If the issue is too broadly stated, restate it in narrower
ternis. Return to a basic research source f'or guidance, such as a legal encyclope
dia. If the issue is too narrowly framed, restate il in broader ternis.
V I. K E Y P O I N T S C H E C K L I S T ; The Writing P r o c e s s
✓ Adopt a W’riting process. An organized a ppr oa ch is essential for legal xvriting.

Develop a process lhal works for x’ou. follow the process recomniended in this
chapter or create X’our own.
✓ W'ork from an expanded outline in the prexs riling stage. An expanded outline pro
vides a framexvork for organizing your research and capturing your ideas.
✓ C'onsider the audience. Alwaxs idenlifx’ the audience early in the process. 'Ihe Ix'pe
474
of audience influences the stvie, depth, and complexity of the finished product.
C H A P T E R 15 TH E W R I T I N G P R O C E S S FOR E F F E C T I V E L E G A L W R I T I N G
( ioiisuici' time, Icniith, anci lormat constraiiils. Idcntil\- any coiistrainLs that attect
the asî^nnlent, ami design the approach to the assignment w ith these constraints in
miiul.
Do not procrastinate. It \ou ha\'e trouble beginning to write, stait with the easiest
section. Sit down and I'legin. Do not worr\’ about qualitv—iust start.
Break large assignments into manageable sections. Do not become o\erwhelmed by
the complexity ol an assignment.
Do not try to make the tirst draft the I'mal draft. Be prepared to compose se\eral
dralts. The goal is a qualit}' product. Let the nuniber ol drafts be determined b}' this
goal.
Update }'our research. (Tieck all authorit\ to ensure that it is current.
VII. APPLICATION
This section pi'esents an o\ er\iew o ft he writing process b}' appKiiig the pre)cess to the h\'-
pothetical preserited at the begimiing ol the chapter. Altei' gatherii'ig and rev iewing all the
inlormatii)ii a\ ailable in the office concerning Ms. Beck's case, Rick follows the process recom
mended in this chapter. .An outline of Rick's application oft he process follows.
A. Prewriting Stage
1. Assigiiniciit. Rick first re\ iews the assignment.
.A. Is llic iissigniiicnl clciir? 1le re\’lews the assignment to be sure he understands
what is required. Rick has no question in this regard. The assignnient is to
research and anaUve the cjuestion ol whether the es idence sei/ed in the case
can be suppressed.
B. W'luil Ivpc ol Icgiil writing is rcijuircd'' Ihe assignment is to draft an office legal
memovanJv\nv Rick rcU'tcws ihc olfKC ntemor.wulum o.ullinc tovni used by
the lirm. The bod\' ol the outline is presented here.
I. Issue
11. Statement of facts
111. .Anahsis/application
1. lUile ol law -the rule oflaw that go\-eriis the issue—enacted/case law
2. (;ase(s) —court interpretation ol the rule ol law il necessar}'
A. \'anie and citation
B. Brief summar}' of facts sh(')wing the case is on point
U. Rule/principle/reasoning applied b}' the court that applies to
client's case
D. .Application -discussion of how the rule oflaw presented in the
court decision applies ii'i the client’s case
3. Uounteranah'sis
l\'. C'onclusion--a sumniar}' ol the anah sis
Who is the iiiulicncc? The ii'iemoranduni is for office use. Rick knows he ck)es
not ha\'e to write it in ku person's terms.
¡1. ('.onstniints. What are the constraints on the assignment? Rick has a time con
straint. .All}' motion to suppress the e\idence must be hied within 30 da}'s.
lie must hnish the meiviorandum sutficienth' in adxance ol the 30 davs to al
475
low Ms. ITetcher time to re\iew it and prepare the appropriate motion. Based
on past experience, lie knows Ms. Metclier preters to have 10 days to i'e\ iou the
nieniorandi.ini and prepare the niotion. ihis iea\'es him 20 days to complete the
assignment.
Rick also knows that Ms. I'letclier prelers shorter memos. She has told
him that a single-issue memo should not exceed seven pages. He knows he must
budget his time and research to meet these constraints,
ill. Orgauizatioti. Rick organizes the assignment around the outline.
A. Creation of expanded outline. Rick expands the outline as suggested in section
IV.A.3 ot this chapter. 'Ihe initial expanded outline is composed ot eight
pages of paper or computer pages. I le labels the pages as follows: Issue; Facts;
Analysis—rule of law; Anah’sis—case name, facts, and citation; Analysis—case
rule/principle and reasoning; Analysis—application ot case to lacts; Counter
analysis; and Conclusion.
B. Use oj expanded outline. Rick begins his research with the expanded outline
at hand. He studies the facts and begins to formulate the issue. I-very time he
thinks ot a way to state the issue, he writes it on the “Issue" page.
For Example The first formulation of the issue is, "Can the evidence be suppressed?"
Later form ulations are, "Can evid en ce be su p p resse d w hen officers
execute a warrant unannounced based on the warrant's authorization of unannounced
entry?" and "U n d erth e state's exclusionary rule, can evidence be suppressed when
officers conduct a search unannounced, pursuant to a warrant authorizing unannounced
entry to ensure officer safety, and the authorization is based upon an affidavit that gives
no particularized facts regarding threats to officer safety?"
As he researches, Rick finds article II, section 5, ofthe state constitution, which prohibits
illegal searches and seizures. He copies article II, section .5, and places it on the “Analysis —l ule
of law” page. 1k' veali/.es this provision is so broadly formulated that he must locate case law
for an interpretation of how it applies in an unannounced entry situation.
For Example Article II, section 5, does not provide guidance as to w hat constitutes an
illegal search when law enforcem ent officers enter a residence unan
nounced; therefore, case law must be consulted.
While looking for a case on point, he thinks ofa transition sentence that will connect the
rule of law section ofthe memo to the case law section. Rick immediatelv writes this sentence
at the end oft he “Analysis—rule of law” page ofthe outline.
Rick locates the court opinion ot State v. Brick. Addressing a fact situation almost
identical to Ms. Beck’s, the court held that a warrant may authorize unannounced entry. 'Hie
court went on to state, however, that the authorization must be based on a “particularized
showing that the individuals whose residence is being searched have in the past represented
a threat to officer safety. Any authorization based upon a generalized statement, such as
‘Drug offenders often present a threat to officers’ safety during the execution of search war
rants,’ violates article II, section 5, and the exclusionary rule requires the suppression of any
evidence seized.”
Rick enters all the relevant iiiforniation from the case in the appropriate “Analysis—case”
pages ot the outline. He includes the full citation, any relevant quotations from the case, and
the page-nuniber references for the quotations. Ffe does not have to reread the case when he
w’rites the memorandum. All the key information is in the expanded outline.
476
C H A P T E R 15 TH E W R I T I N G P R O C E S S FO R E F F E C T I V E L E G A L W R I T I N G
While ;inai\ /int’ the ease, he tliinl<s ol a seiitenee he will use when discussing how the
case applies to the client’s tacts. I le enters this sentence in the “Analysis —application of case
t(i tacts” page ot'the outline.
For Example "In our case, just as in State v. Brick, the officers executed a w arrant unan
nounced, based on the authorization contained in the warrant. In our case,
as in B rick, the authorization w as based upon a generalized statement that drug offenders
often pose a threat to officer safety when the officers announce their presence prior to
entry. In Brick, the court ruled that such se arch e s violate the state constitution and the
evidence seized must be suppressed. If the trial court follow s the rule of law presented
in State \/. Brick, the evidence should be suppressed."
It'there are more cases that should he included in the memo, Rick will insert additional
pages in the outline for each case and enter the pertinent intormation on the appropriate page.
Rick identifies an\- counterargument, such as that contained in contlicting case law, and
enters it in the “Counteranahsis” section ofthe OLitline. if Rick has any thoughts concerning
the conclusion while conducting the research and analysis, he enters them in the “Conclu
sion” section ot the outline.
While working on the assignment, Rick keeps the outline or a notepad with him. He
takes it home alter work. He writes any idea concerning the assignment on the appropriate
page when the idea occurs. Nothing is lost, and all his ideas and research are organized in
the outline. Transition sentences and other parts oft he writing, sui^h as how the issue should
he written, are airead}' drafted and in the proper j-ilace. It more than one issue must be ad
dressed, Rick prepares a separate section ol the outline lor lhat issue and the rule ot law and
case law that apph' to it.
B. W riting Stage
After completing the research and anah sis, Rick prepares a rough draft. 1ie simplifies the task
b}' using the expanded outline. .Ail the research, analysis, and ideas are alread\ organized, and
many ot the sentences are w ritten and in place. .All Rick has to do is to ciMuert the outline
into sentence and paragraph form and fill in the gaps. W'hen drafting., Rick keeps in mind the
guidelines presented in section 1\'.B of this chapter, such as not procrastinating and preparing
a conifortabie writing location.
C. Postwriting Stage
The final step is to re\'ise and edit the memorandum. I'ocusing on conciseness, clarity, and
completeness, Rick uses a checklist similar to the oiie presented in section 1\'.C! of this chapter.
Rick ma}' need to create se\eral drafts and spend considerable time res ising. Because his work
is judged b}’ the finished product, Rick takes care during this stage ofthe writing process.
Note that this chapter places a great deal of'emphasis on the prewriting stage ofthe writ
ing process. Organization here is the ke}' to siniplicit}', taking care in this pari o ft he process
and using an e.xpanded outline. It ma}' seem like a lot of'work to prepare an expanded outline,
but its use will actually sa\e time in the long run.
Sum m ary
(konträr}' to popular belief the bulk t)f the practice oflaw iinolves writing in one form or
another. Legal writing includes the preparation of documents, such as office legal memoranda;
legal correspondence to clients and other indi\'iduals; litigation documents that will be filed
with a court; and transaction documents prepared f'or clients’ use, such as contracts.
477
Legal writing is often complex, requiring in-depth research and detailed analysis. The
complexities of an assignment, time constraints, and hea\y workloads dictate the necessity of
following a writing process when engaging in legal writing. There is no standard writing process.
Lâch indi\'idual should adopt or create a process that works tor them. The chapter presents a pro
cess that locuses on the three stages ol the writing process: prewriting, writing, and postwriting.
The prewriting stage has three sections: the assignment, constraints affecting the as
signment, and the organization o f t h e assignment. WTien approaching an assignment, you
sht)uld first re\ iew the assignment and consider an\- constraints that alfect the assignment,
such as time, length, and format.
After \ ou address these matters, prepare an expanded outline and use it when engaging in
the research and anahsis ofthe assignment. An expanded outline consists ofa separate notebook
page or computer-generated page tor each topic and subtopic o ft he outline. Enter research
and anaK sis in the expanded outline throughout the prewriting stage as you gather material
and conduct analysis. The end result is a rougii draft de\eloped during the prewriting stage.
•Adopting a prewriting process simplifies the writing stage. In the writing stage, the
rough draft represented b\- the expanded outline is con\-erted to the finished product (for
example, a legal memorandum).
.'Ml drafts must be revised and edited. A re\'ision focuses on ensuring clarity, complete
ness, and conciseness. Hditing focLises on narrower concerns involving accuracy, such as
punctuation and grammar.
1he chapter concludes with reminders concerning legal research as it relates to the pre-
writing stage ofthe writing process. These suggestions include starting with the identification
o ft he issue and making sure to update all research.
Quick R eferen ces

Appellate briefs -461 Outline 464
•Assignment 460 Postwriting stage 472
Coiislraints M\-< Prewriting stage 460
Court briefs 461 Revisions 472
Lditing 473 Transition sentences 467
Lxpanded outline 468 T rial court briefs 461
Legal writing process 439 Writing stage 471
In tern et R e so u rc e s
Using ‘Tegal writing for paralegals” or “legal research memorandum” as a topic, )'ou will find
\ arious W'eb sites (literally thousands of sites) that concern legal writing. Some sites refer to
legal writing textbooks, some focus on legal research and analysis, others focus on legal writing
for law school students, some aci\ertise research and writing services, some are Web sites tor
specific classes taught at schools, some adxertise courses and seminars on legal writing, and
some sites discuss legal memoranda in specific areas such as environment law. A Chicago-
Kent College of l.aw site, http://www.kentlaw.edu, pre.sents a sample legal memorandum (in
the Search box, type “sample memo”). Another Web site, the Georgetown University Law
Library, http://www.ll.georgetown.edu, pn n ides links to research and writing resources and
related materials useful to legal writers.
As with most topics on the W'eb, the problem is not the lack of sites hut the presence
of too many sites. ProbabK’ the best strateg)' is to narrow )’our search to a specific type of
legal writing and topic, such as “legal memorandum, public ser\ ice contracts.” lhe follow
ing sites ma\ ’ provide useful support intormation when you engage in projects reijuiring
legal research.
http;//w\v\v. nala.org
Ihis is the site for the National Association of l.egal Assistants (N'.-\I.,-\). lhe association
site provides a wealth ot information ranging trom articles on the profession to education
and certification programs for paralegals. It includes intormation on court decisions al-
t'ecting paralegals and links to other related sites.
http://www.paralegals.org
Ihis is the Web page tor the National Federation of Paralegal .Associations (NFiÂ), an
other national paralegal organization. Its Web page prov ides links to a wide range of sites
ot interest to paralegals, such as research sources, publications, and products.
http://www.paralegalttoday.com
Paralegal Today is a magazine geared toward the needs of paralegals. It often includes
helptui articles on legal research and writing.
E x e r c ise s
Additioiiid assiginnciits are available on the CourseMate. A SSIG N M E N T S

liie tollowing exercises are helptui in developing an Prepare a checklist tor rev ising and editing.
imderstanding of and familiarity with the use o f a writing
process.
What are the general factors to keep in mind when engag
A S S IG N M E N T ! ing in research?
Describe the stages ofthe legal writing process.
A S S IG N M E N T 2 lhe paralegal is assigned the task of preparing an office
Pescribc the steps ut the prewrUirv^ stage. legal nu'movandun'i. Iho nienioranuuni is eluc in 10 days,
A S S IG N M E N T S and there is a 5 page limit. 'Ihe facts and law are as follows:
I )escribe the types olTegal writing discussed in this chapter.

Facts: Mar\- was I'om’s stockbroker and financial advisor.
A S S IG N M E N T 4 Ibm owned fi\-e acres of property. Mar\- ad\ ised I'om to
W'iiy is the type of audience important? sell the property to Ana at a price slighth' below the mar
ket value. She recommended that Tom buy stock with the
proceeds. I'om sold the propert}- to .\na and now wants
What are some of the constraints that may atTect v’our to have the transaction set aside because he believes Mary
performance of an assignment? How do they affect your undul}' and improper!}' influenced bis decision. .Mary and
performance ot an assignment? Ana are ver}- close friends.
A S SIG N M E N T S
Law: Statutory law (§ 96-4-4-1 o f t h e state statutes) pro
What is an expanded outline? Describe the creation and
vides that a contract for the sale of land ma\' be set aside it
elements o f t h e body of an expanded outline for an ofhce
it is entered info under undue influence.
legal memorandum.
A S S IG N M E N T ?
Case law: lorn v. Bell. In a fact situation similar to Tom’s,
the court ruled that under § 96-4-4-1, undue influence oc
1)escribe the use of an expanded outline in the preparation
curs when:
ot an ofHce legal memorandum.
1. Ihe person influenced is susceptible to undue
A S SIG N M E N T S inti uence.
What are some o f t h e rules to keep in mind during the 2. Ihe perstm mtkienced is influenced to enter the
writing stage? contract.
3. 'Ihe opportunit}- to intlucnce is present. ASSIGNMENT 12
4. Undue intluence is present. Ihe following assigninent is based on assignment 8 in
5. Ihe person exercising the imdue intluence benefits Uhapter 17. Use the assignment memo, statutory law, and
tVoni the iu-:due influence. case law from that assignment. Ihe memo is due in se\'en
da}'s, aiid there is a fh e-page liii-iit.
Part A 1. Describe in detail the application of each step ofthe
Detail the application of each step oft he prewriting stage prew riting stage to the assigiiment.
to this assignment.
2. For the organizatioii step of the prewriting stage,
Part B prepare an expanded outliiie based on the outline
For the organization step ofthe prewriting stage, prepare an presented in section l\'.A.3.c of this chapter. Using
expanded outline based on the outline presented in section the information presented in the assignment, till in
I\'.A.3.c(ii) in this chapter. the expanded outline. Include in the “Issue” section
oft he outline a broad statement o f t he issue and at
P a rtC least one narrow- statenient oft he issue.
Based onh- on the preceding information, fill in the ex
panded outline. Include a statement ofthe issue, anahsis,
counteranalvsis, conclusion, and recomn-iendations.
^ ^ tools, including flash cards, quizzes, and more. To learn more about this resource and access
# CourseMate free demo CourseMate resources, goto www.cengagebrain.com, and search forthis book.
To acce ss CourseMate materialsthatyou have purchased, go to login.cengagebrain.com.
Office Legal Memorandum:
Issues and Facts
l i ’li 1 A o i i s , a p a r a le g a l w i l h H c r d u i ii a n d A s s o c i a l c s , r e c c i x c d t h e l o l l o w i n g n io n io :
Outline
lo : je ll 1 \ o n s . P a r a le g a l
Introduction
I ro m : R i l a B i 'r d w i n , A t t o r n c x '
Definition
P ato : A p r i l 2(1, 2 0 1 3
Purposes, Uses, and importance
O ll'k c n i c N o : C r 1 3 -1 3 6 1\’. i’revvriting Stage
Rc: .S/ii/i- ( 1/ I l l i n o i s V, M c n l I t n d o , ( j'. I 3 - 3 7 S , \ ’. Sections ofthe Office
p r iv il e g e d c o n i m u n i c a l i o n Memorandum
\ \ c h a w b e e n r e l a i n c d to r e p r e s e n t M e n I 1 i n d o in t h e a h o \ e r e le r e n c e d e a s e . H e is iT ia r g e i.t \T. Ke\' l\)ints Checklist: Office
w it h a s s a u lt w i l h a d e a d l v w e a p o n . .Mr. I n i d o a l l e g e t lK a s s a u lt e d h is n e ig h b o r lo s e p h .M a r k h a m Ix’gal Memorandum —Issues
x v it h a h a m n i e r . .M r. I i n d o a n d .M r. . M a r k h a m w e r e a r g u i n g o \ e r t h e l o c a t i o n o l a le n c e and facts
.M r .M a r k h a m w a s b u i ld i n g . .A e e o n lin g to .M r l in d o , .Mr. .M a r k h a m b e c a m e a n g r y a n d a t te m p t e d VH. Application
l o h it h m i w it h a h r ie k . .\ s t r u g g l e e ii s ii e t l, a n d t h e b r i c k le ll a n d h it .M r .M a r k h a m o n i h e h e a d .
M r . . M a r k h a m c l a i m s l h a l .M r l u u l o h e e a n ie iik r e a s in g U a n g r \ ' a s t h e a r g i u i i e n i p ro g re s s e i.1 ;
.M r 1 i n d o g r a b b e d a h a m m e r a n d s t r u c k h i m r e p e a le d K ' o n th e h e a d a i u l a r m s . ,M r .M a r k h a m
i . l a i i ) i s h e n e v e r a s s a u lt e il ,\ lr . 1 i n d o u i l h a b r ie k . I h e r e w e r e n o w it n e s s e s to t h e a r g iu i ie n t .
L earn in g O b jectives
.M rs. I in c.lo is c i i r r e n t K s e p a r a t e d I r o n i .M i. I i i u l o a n d h a s a g r e e d l o t e s t i lv a g a in s t h i m . H e r ■After completing this chapter, you
l e s l i i n o n v is lh a t b e lo r e ih e e o n l r o n l a l i o n . .M r. 1 i n d o s t a le d . '. M a r k h a m is o u t t h e r e b u i l d i n g should understand:
t h a l < la u in le n e e a g a i n I ’ll p u l a s t o p l o t h i s o n c e a i u l l o r a ll," I le g r a b b e d a h a m n i e r a n il w e n t
• Ihe importance of an otfice legal
o u l th e d o o r Ih e 1 i i u l o s ' c h i l i l r e n , l o m a s , a g e l(->, a n il ,\ lie e , a g e 10, w e r e p r e s e n t a n d h e a r d
memorandum
th e e o n \ e i s a l i o n . N e i t h e r .M rs. l i n d o n o r t h e c h i l d r e n saw t h e e o n l r o n t a l i o n .
I ’ r e p a i e a m e m o r a i u l u i i i a i l d r e s s i n g t h e q u e s t io n o l w h e t h e r th e c o n x e r s a l i o n b e t w e e n
• The purposes and uses of an office
.M r. . m i l .M rs. I i n d o is a p r i v i l e g e i l s p o u s a l m m m u n i i a t i o n a m i , t h e r e lo r e , n o l a d m i s s i b l e in
legal memorandum
t h e I ' i a l o l .M r I i n d o . I n e e d t h e m e m o w i t h i n t w o w e e k s . N'ou c a n p r o b a b ly c o v e r t h is in t h r e e • The sections of a basic office legal
l o l i\ e p a g e s . memorandum
How to draft the sections of
an otfice legal memorandum:
heading, statement of assignment,
issue, brief answer, and facts
481
P A RT IV L E G A L W R IT IN G
E x h i b i t 16-1 S e c tio n s o f an O ffice Le g a l M em orandum .
H e a d in g
S ta te m e n ts o f A s s ig n m e n t
Is su e
B rie f A n s w e r
S ta te m e n t o f F a cts
A n a ly s is
C o n c lu s io n
R e c o m m e n d a tio n s
This chapter and Chapter 17 address the proccss and considerations involved in prepar
ing an otfice legal memorandum. The office legal memorandum is usually composed of's('me
or all of the sections presented in L.xhibit 16-1.
The Application section of this chapter addresses the first halfof |etfs assignment—the
heading through the facts sections. The Application section of (Tiapter 17 covers the remainder
oft he assigntiient —the analysis through the recommendations sections.
I. INTRODUCTION
The office legal memorandum is the type of legal writing a paralegal or law clerk engaged
in legal research and analysis most frequenth' prepares. The role of most paralegals and law
clerks is to provide assistance and support lo an attorne\’. WTien this support fLuiction involves
legal research, it usually focuses on research and anah'sis oft he legal issues in a client's case.
The results of this research and analysis are comniLmicated to the attorne\' in the form ot an
oflice legal memorandum. It is one of the most effective and \aluable ways paralegals and
law clerks can support an attorney.
This chapter and the next are de\'oted to the preparation of i)fiice legal memoranda.
T wo chapters are devoted to this topic for the following reasons:
Most law-office analytical legal writing involves the preparation of office legal
memoranda.
'Ihe considerations invohed in the preparation of office legal memoranda also apph'
to the preparation of legal analysis documents designed for external use.
This chapter focLises on the basic format tor the office legal memorandum and the
preparation oft he first half of the memorandum: the heading through the statement of facts
sections. CTiapter 17 focuses on the iieart ofthe memo: the legal analysis through the recom
mendations sections.
The preparation ot an iiffice legal memoraiul um is a multistep process invoh'ing
the integration of legal research, analysis, and writing. T his chapter and (Tiapter 17
cannot be read in a \'acuuni. T hey require you to integrate the niaterial presenfeti in
CTiapter 1 t hrough (Chapter 13. Although it is assumed that you are familiar with those
chapters, cross-references to specific chapters are included to help you correlate and
integrate the material.
As mentioned previous!)’, the majority o f t h e legal research and writing prepared b\'
paralegals and law clerks is designed for the use ofthe super\'ising attorney rather than for use
outside the othce. The basic forniat and anah'tical process that are tollowed are fundamental!)'
the same for both an office legal memorandum and a legal anaK sis document designed tor
482
C H A P T E R 16 O F F I C E L E G A L M E M O R A N D U M : I S S U E S A N D F A C T S
external use. Iheretore, consider the intormation presented here and in (Chapter 17 when
reading (Chapters 18 and ISJ. 1-xternal-use documents usually involve:
Correspondence to clients or other individuals iniorming them ot'the law or the

analysis ot'a legal problem
Briefs submitted to a trial court or court of appeals
II. DEFINITION
An office legal m em o ran d u m provides an objective, critical analysis o fa legal problem.
Il is an informative document that summarizes the research and analysis oft he legal issue or
issues raised by the facts o f a clients case. It ctintains a summary oft he law and how' the law
applies to the facts o f t h e case. It presents an objective legal analysis and includes the argu
ments in favor of and in opposition to the client’s position.
A legal meniorandum prepared for ofhce use is referred to by many difi'erent names:
iiiterolhce legal research memorandum» interoffice memorandum ot law, office legal m e m o
randum, ottice research memorandum, objective memorandum, and legal memo. Here and
in Chapter 17, the term oj^ficc fucwo is used when referring to an ottice legal memorandum.
III. PURPOSES, USES, AND IMPORTANCE

l h e major purposes and functions of an titlice memo are as tbllows:
1. An othce memo identities and records the law that applies to a specific issue or
issues raised by the client's facts.
2. An othce memo analyzes and explains how the law applies to the issue.
3. An ottices memo assesses the strengths and weaknesses ot the client’s case.
4. An lithce memo presents a conclusion and proposed solution based on the
analysis.
A well-cralted ottice memo may be put to a variety ot uses in a law oltice:
It may be used as a guide to determine whether a claim exists.
For Example One of the client's potential ca u se s of action involves a breach

of the implied w arranty of m erchantability. In the client's case ,
the purchase took place at a garage sale. The office memo reveals that under
the applicable statute, the w arranty applies only if the seller is a m erchant. The
case on point provides that individuals holding garage sa le s are not m erchants
within the m eaning ofthe statute. The office memo reveals that no cau se of a c
tion exists for a breach of implied w arranty of merchantability.
It may be used as a guide to the course of action to be pursued.
For Example The case involves a question of whether the client had a duty to
d isco ver and d isclo se information in a real estate transaction.
The client w a s unaw are that his house had term ites, and consequently, the
buyer w as not informed of this problem. The office memo reveals that the case
law requires the seller to inspect for termites and d isclo se the results of the
mspection to the buyer. This information may lead the attorney to recom m end
that settlem ent be pursued.
483
It may intorni subsequent researcliers in the law otlice, working on other cases with
similar issues and facts, how the law applies, f uture researchers do not ha\e to spend
time reinventing the wheel.
It may refresh the memor\' oft he attorne)' assigned to the case on how the law ap
plies to an issue. This is especialh' true in complex cases. It is also true when the
memo is prepared earh' in the case, and the attorne)' does iiot rev iew it until moiiths
later when the matter is addressed b)' the court.
it may be used as a guide b)' the attorne)' preparing a document to be tiled with the
court or correspondence for the client. The otfice memo ma)' contain the statutor)'
law, case law, and legal analvsis that are the basis tor the preparation ot the document.
For Example The office memo addresses the question of whether a search w ar
rant w as improperly issued due to the insufficiency ofthe affidavit
in support ofthe warrant. The standards required for a w arrant to be sufficient
are spelled out in the office memo. The attorney may use the office memo as a
basis for preparing a brief in support of, or opposition to, a motion to suppress
the evidence seized when the warrant w as executed.
Office memos are ot primar\' in’iportance because the)' pro\ ide the answer to legal
questions. Their importance is es'idenced b)' the fact that otlice memos are requiied at e\'er)'
stage ol the litigation process:
Harh' in the case, the)' identif)' the required elements ofthe cause ot action and what
is required to state a claim.
They are used to deterniine whether the client has a delense or a cause ol action.
Throughout the litigation the)' help determine w hat is required to support or oppose
a motion.
In the discover)' process, legal memos address disco\ei'\' issue.s, such as what consti
tutes an attorney’s work product.
At the trial stage, office memos often anah'/e e\'identiar)' issues, such as wiiether
evidence is admissible.
At the posttrial stage, oHice memos ma)' address issues raised on appeal, such as
w'hether the court properly ruled on a matter during the trial.
Ethics. Regardless i)f the purpose ofthe memo or at what point in the litigation process
it is prepared, the actions ofthe super\isor)' attorney and the outconie ofthe case nia\' largelv
depend upon the quality ot the otfice memo. Also, as mentioned in (Tiapter 2, Rule 1.1 ot the
Model Rules of Professional Conduct requires that a client be prox ided competent represen
tation. It is critical, therefore, that the performance ot research, anah sis, and dratting of the
memo be thorough, careful, and complete.
As discussed in Chapter 13, legal writing is easier if you use a writing process. In this
chapter, you can take that information and use it as the framework tor preparing an office
memo. Recall the three stages ofthe writing process: prewriting, writing, and postwriting.
IV. PREWRITING STAGE

The prew riting stage consists of three sections:
1. Nature oft he assignment—an identification oft he t)pe and purpose oft he writ
ing assignment
484
C H A P T E R 16 O F F IC E L E G A L M E M O R A N D U M : I S S U E S A N D F A C T S
2. Constraints on the assignnient—a consideration ol any constraints placed on the

assignnient
3. Organization —the organization ol tlie writing assignnient
A prerequisite to beginning the prewriting stage is to assemble all a\ailable files and
inlorniation concerning the client’s case. All the rele\'ant files and inlorniation nuist be c(iiii-
plete. After this is acconiplished, \ou are able to address the three sections.
A. N a tu r e of th e A ssig n m en t
The first section o f t h e prewriting stage requires a re\ie\s' o f t h e assignnient in which you
deterniine the following:
Is the assignnient cieark understood?

WTiat t\’pe of legal writing is required?
Who is the audience?
1. Is th e A s s i g n m e n t C learly U n d e r sto o d ?
Re\'iew the assignnient and make a list of all the questions you ha\ e ct)ncerning the nature
or specifics o f t he assignnient. Review the questions with the attorney; take thorough notes
when discLissiiig the matten Most attorneys would prefer that you seek clarification rather than
misunderstand tbe assignment and waste time addressing the wrong question.
For Example The assignm ent isto analyze the client's case. You may need to seek cla ri
fication on w hich aspects of the case the supervisory attorney w ants you
to analyze or the sp e cific questions or areas of law you should address.
1he assignment may appear simple and clear at tirst, but as research aiui analysis prog
ress, nniUiple L s s iie s or separate ».auscs ot a^llon ma\ Ixvome appaieul. U may Ue necessar)
to ha\e a briel follow-up meeting w ith the supervising attorne\' to lieterinine if the focus
shoLild be narrowed.
For Example A case that involves what appears to be a car-w reck situation with a simple
negligence issue may blossom into a case involving multiple issu es, such
as negligence, battery, and negligent infliction of emotional distress. It may be n ece ssary
to consult with the supervisory attorney to determine if you should pursue each issue or
if some of the issu e s should be assigned to other paralegals or law clerks. If there are
time constraints, it may be n ece ssary for others to address the newly identified issues.
An addifitinal concern when you address this question is whether tbe assignment
requires skills you ha\'e not \et acquired.
For Example You have just begun working as a paralegal or law clerk for a solo p ra c
titioner, and you are assigned the task of analyzing a com plex products
liability issue. The research and analysis skills required forthe assignment may be beyond
your current ability. If this occurs, d iscu ss the matter with the attorney. More harm may
o ccu r if you try and fail than if you com m unicate your concerns up front. The attorney
may divide the task into m anageable sections and reassign parts of it to other paralegals
or law clerks or assign you to work with others to gain experience.
485
2. W hat T ype o f Legal W riting Is R equired?

Ihis question is cas\- to answer; the assignment usual!}' identities t!ie type ot writing required.
In the example at t!ie tu-ginning ol'tlie e!iapter, the assignment cal!s for tlie preparation ofa law
oftice memorandum, llie organization, format, and elements ofthe office memo are discussed
in section 1\'.(; in tliis chapter.
3. W h o Is th e A u d ien ce?
.\n office memo is usLiall}' designed for otlice use only. 'Iherefore, the reader of tlie memo
(the audience) will be familiar with the law, and tlie use of legal terminology is appropriate.
I )etermine tlie writing preferences of tlie person tor whom the otlice memo is being prepared,
such as preferences regarding st}ie.
For Example Some attorneys prefer that the paralegal or law clerk surTimarize the re
quirements ofthe statutory or case law. Some prefer that the law be quoted.
If the memo ma}- be read outside the office, be sure to e.xclude any comments, recom
mendations, or other material intended only for office use, such as: “ Ihe client’s expectations
are unreasonable. ”
B. Constraints on the A ssignm ent

Ihe next section of the prewriting stage requires you to identit}' anv constraint that may af
fect the preparation of the office memo. Ask \'ourself if there are aii}' time or page limitations.
Ihese matters shoulil be taken into consideration at the beginning. l ime constraints govern
the allocation ol time for research, anahsis, and drafting. Length constraints may limit the
depth of research and anah sis.
For Example If you are limited to five pages and one w eek, you may want to focus your
research on the lead case or cases. There may not be sufficient time or
space to address additional ca se s or secondary authority.
C. Organization of the A ssignm ent

lhe most important section oft he prewriting stage is the organization ofthe memo. In this
section, the format or outline o f th e office memo is identified, and an expanded outline is
created and used.
Most attorneys ha\e a preferred format for an ofhce memo. Ihis format serves as a
basic outline and starting point for the organization oft he assignment. Ihe creation and use
of an expanded outline from the ofhce format is discussed in Chapter 13, section I\'.A. In
this chapter, the focus is on the format and outline of an office memo and the requirements
and considerations in\'olved in the preparation of each section o ft he outline. 'Ihis chapter
and (Cliapter 17 include a discussion ofthe use of an expanded outline when preparing each
section ofthe office memo.
'Ihere is no standard format for an office memo. Formats vary from office to office, and
attorneys within an office ma}' have different preferences. Follow the format preferred by \'our
supervisor, lhe format presented in Exhibit f6-2 is recommended for a basic office memo.
It includes the standard sections of most office memos that \'ou mav encounter. Exhibit 16-3
486
presents the recommended format for a complex otfice memo, lollowing presentation ofthese
torniats, discussion turns to the requirements and considerations in\'ol\'ed in the preparation
ot each section.
E x h i b i t 1 6 - 2 Basic Office Legal Memorandum Format.
H e a d in g
S ta t e m e n ts o f A s s ig n m e n t
Is s u e
B r ie f A n s w e r
A n a ly s is
R u le o f la w
C a s e la w (if n e c e s s a ry ) in te rp re ta tio n o f ru le o f la w
A p p lic a t io n o f la w to fa c ts o f ca se
C o u n t e r a n a ly s is
C o n c lu s io n
E x h i b i t 1 6 - 3 Recom m ended Forniat for a Complex Office Legal Memorandum

Format.
iiiléridediorniat for a complex office legal memorandum

H e a d in g
S ta te m e n t o f A s s ig n m e n t
Is s u e I
Is s u e II
Is s u e III
B rie f A n s w e r Is su e I
B rie f A n s w e r Is s u e 11
B rie f A n s w e r Is s u e III
A n a ly s is Is s u e I
R u le o f L a w
C a s e la w (if n e c e s s a r y ) — in te rp re ta tio n o f ru le o f law
A p p lic a t io n o f la w to fa c ts o f c a s e
C o n c lu s io n Is su e I
A n a ly s is Is su e II
R u le o f L a w
C a s e la w (if n e c e s s a ry ) — in te rp re ta tio n o f rule o f law
C o n c lu s io n Is s u e II
A n a ly s is Is s u e III
R u le o f L a w
C a s e la w (if n e c e s s a r y ) — in te rp re ta tio n o f ru le o f law
C o n c lu s io n Is su e III
R e c o m m e n d a tio n s (S e p a ra te re c o m m e n d a tio n s e c tio n s m a y fo llo w
c o n c lu s io n o f e ach is su e .)
487
Certain sections, such as statements ot'assignment and briel'answers, arc not included
in all formats and ma\' not be included in the format preferred b\- your super\ ising attornev.
They are included here so that you will be t’amiliar with them in the event they are part ol the
tormat used in yoiu' workplace. C)ther sections, such as issue and anah sis, are required in all
otiice memos. In addition, note that the organization oft he format nia\- \ar\- among offices.
For Example Usually, the issue section follow s the statement of assignm ent section and
precedes the facts section. Some offices, however, may prefer that the
fa cts section precede the issue section.
There is no definition of what constitutes a comple.x office legal memorandum. (lener-

alh', howe\’er, it consists of more than one issue and is relati\’eh' king (more than 10 pages).
The formal outline of a complex office memo is mereh' an expansion ofthe basic otfice memo
format, 'the components and considerations in\olved in the preparation ot a complex office
memo are the same as those for a basic otfice memo. The sections are the same in basic con
tent, but greater in number.
For Example A com plex memo may co verthree issues. The procedures recom m ended
for identifying, stating, and analyzing each issue are the sam e as those for
the preparation of a basic single-issu e memo. Each issue is addressed separately, and
the p rocess for addressing each issue isth e same asthatfo llo w e d when addressing the
single issue in a basic office memo.
See Hxhibit 16 3 tor a complex otiice legal memorandum torniat.

The otfice memo format may require the inchisiiMi ot'a table of authorities or a table of
contents. These usually t'ollow the statement oft he assignment.
For Example
TABLE OF CO N TEN TS
Page
Issues 2
Facts 3
A n alysis Issue 1 5
A n alysis Issue II 10
Recom m endations 18
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
CASES Page
Smith V. Jo n e s, 354 F2d 786 (9th Cir. 1970) 7
Tod V. Doe, 559 N.E.2d 31 (Ind. Ct, App. 1988) 13
C O N ST IT U T IO N A L PR O V ISIO N S
Art. 3 Ind. Constitution 6
STA TU TES
Ind. Code § 35-42-3-2 6
Ind. Code § 35-42-3-8 13
488
V. SECTIONS OFTH E OFFICE MEMORANDUM

This section cliscusscs the licading, statement ofassignment, issue, briet'answer, and tacts sections
ofthe ortice memo. Chapter 17 addresses the analysis, conclusion, and recommendations sections.
A. H eading
Most othce memos begin with a headmg. Ihe heading is usually brief and at a minimum
contains:
A heading in all capitals indicating the t\'pe of document (e.g., MEMORANDUM

OF LAW).
lhe name ot the person to whom the menu) is addressed.
Ihe name of th e person who prepared the memo.
Ihe date.
Information identifying the subject ot the memo. 'Ihis may include the case name,
client’s name, case number, olfice file number, and subject matter of the memo. It
usually follows “Re:".
Ifiere are various styles for the heading, as shown in the following example.
For Example MEMORANDUM OF LAW
To: Susan Day, Attorney
From: Tom Clug, Paralegal
Date: Decem ber 1, 2013
Case: Smith 1/. Garage Doors, Inc.
Office File No.: Civ. 013-1136
Docket No.: Civ. 13-378
Re- W hether a contract for the sale and installation of a garage

door is a sale of goods covered by the com m ercial code or is
a sale of a service.
OFFICE LEGAL MEM ORANDUM — CO N TRACTS
Title: Smith 1/. Garage Doors, Inc., Civ. 013-378
Office File; Civ. 013-1136
Requested by: Susan Day, Attorney
Submitted by: Tom Clug, Paralegal

Date Submitted: 12/1/13
Re: Contract law. Com m ercial Code § 42-2-205 Sale of goods/sale

of service
OFFICE LEGAL MEMORANDUM
To Susan Day, Attorney
From Tom Clug, Paralegal
Date Dec. 1,2013
Re Smith V. Garage Doors, Inc., Civ, 013-378.

W hethera contract for the sale and installation ofa garage door is
a sale of goods or a sale of a service; Commercial Code § 42-2-205.
489
B. S t a t e m e n t of A ssig n m e n t
The statem en t of a ssig n m e n t section nun- also he retened to as a Imckgroniui or purpose
section. Some othces require a section that discusses what the writer has been assigned to do.
This section usually follows the heading and ma\' include some background information. The
purpose of this section is to pro\ide the I'eader with a descriptiiMi ofthe topic co\ered and the
parameters ot the assignment.
For Example STA TE M E N T OF A S S IG N M E N T You have asked me to prepare a legal

memorandum on the question of w hether the sale and installation of a
garage door by Garage Doors, Inc,, is a sale of a service or a sale of goods covered by
Com mercial Code § 42-2-205,
For Example STA TEM EN T OF A S S IG N M E N T You have asked me to research the ques
tion of w hetherthe search of our client's automobile w as an illegal search
when she w as stopped for a minor traffic offense and did not consent to the officer's
requestfor permission to search the back seat of her vehicle. Pursuant to your request,
this memo includes an analysis of the relevant state and federal law.
C. Issue
In an otfice legal memo, present the issue(s) at the beginning of the memo following the heading
and the statement of assignnient. Doing so establishes the focus ofthe memo, A well cratted
issue informs the reader, at the outset, of
The law that applies

The precise legal question
The significant facts oft he case
In other words, it identities the specific question to be addressed and places it in the
context ofthe applicable law and the facts ofthe case. It sets the scope ofthe memo, thereby
saving the reader from ha\'ing to deterniine the issue b\' reading the analysis section.
Keep in mind the tollowing when preparing the issue section ot the memo:
The issue should be correctly identified.

The issue should be completely and correctly stated.
An expanded outline should be used when preparing the section.
Issues should be addressed separateh' when preparing complex oflice memos,
1. I d e n tify th e Issue
The issu e is the precise legal question raised by the facts ofthe client’s case. One ofthe most
important tasks in the legal anah'sis process is to correctK' identity the legal issue. Chapter 10
presents the analytical process that will help you identity the issue when preparing a memo.
2. C o r rec tly State th e Issue

Present the issue completely and correctK'. W’hen stated correctK', the reader is intbrnieci of
the focus oft he memo at the outset.
490
For Example The issue involves a question of w hether a will is valid if one of the w it
n esses does not actually see the testator sign the will. If the issu e were
stated, "W a s the will validly executed?" fhe reader would have to read the an alysis
section of the memo to determine w hy it may not have been validly executed. There
could be se ve ral reasons w hy the will may not have been validly executed: It may not
have been w itnessed correctly, there may not have been enough w itn esse s, or it may
have been signed improperly. If the issue is stated, "Under Probate Code § 29-5-7, is the
execution of a will valid if one ofthe w itn esse s is present in the room when the testator
sign s but does not actually see the testator sign?" the issue is correctly and com pletely
stated. The reader knows the precise question being addressed, the key facts, and the
applicab le law. The reader is not forced to obtain this information from the an alysis
section of the memo.
3. U se th e E x p a n d e d O u t lin e
As discusscd in Chapter 15, the use of an e xpanded o utline can greatly siniplity the iden-
tilicatioii and drafting o f t h e issue. On the issue page ot the expanded outline, write e\’er\’
formulation o ft h e issue as it comes to mind. 'Ihe initial draft may he as simple as, “W'as the
will \'alid?” As yoLi conduct research and gain a greater understanding o ft he applicable law,
more complete formulations u ill become apparent.
For Example "Under the state probate code, is a will validly executed if a w itn ess is
merely present in the room when the testator signs?" "U nderthe probate
code, is the execution of a will valid if one ofthe w itn esse s is present in the room when
the testator sign s but does not actually see the testator sign?"
When you begin to write the issue section of'the memo, all \-oui' ideas concerning
the issue and drafts of the possible wa\ s it may be stated are before \ o u in one place.
The crafting o f t h e final statement o f t h e issue becomes mereh' a matter of selecting and
combi ni ng the necessar\- elements from the various drafts. The .Application section of
this chapter illustrates the use o f a n expanded outline in regard to the preparation of an
office memo.
4. A d d r e s s Issu e s S ep arately
Oftice memo assignments, such as a complex memorandum, often invoh'e more than one issue.
W'hen performing such assignments, it is preferable to list each issue sequentially in the issue
section o f t h e memo. In the analysis section o ft h e format, address each issue separately and
completely (this is discussed in Chapter 17). Exhibit 16-4 presents an outline o ft h e format
for the anah’sis section.
W’hen there are multiple issues, list them in the issue section in the order tliey are dis
cussed in the analysis section. 'The issue listed as “Issue I” in the issue section should be the
ftrst issue addressed in the anahsis section. “Issue II" in the issue section should be the second
issue addressed in the anah’sis section, and so on. Also, list the issues in logical order. It the
analysis of one issue is dependent on t>r affected b\' the analysis of another issue, then present
the issue that affects the other issue fti'st. For example, if the analysis of issue B is in some wa\-
affecteil b\- the anahsis (>f issue A, then address issue A ftrst in the memo.
491
E x h i b i t 1 6 - 4 C o m p le x M e m o ra n d u m — A n a ly sis S e c tio n Format.
A n a ly s is Is su e I
R u le o f la w
C a s e la w (if n e c e s s a r y ) in te rp re ta tio n o f ru le o f la w
A p p lic a t io n o f la w to fa c ts o f ca s e
C o n c lu s io n is s u e I
A n a ly s is Is su e II
R u le o f law
C a s e la w (if n e c e s s a r y ) in te rp re ta tio n o f ru le o f la w
A p p lic a t io n o f la w to fa c ts o f ca s e
C o n c lu s io n is s u e II
A n a ly s is Is su e III, an d so on
For Example The client alleges that she entered into a contract to purchase d resses
from a dressmaker, and the dressm aker installed defective zippers in the
d resses. The dressm aker claim s that the contract between them w a s not a valid co n
tract, and even if there w as a valid contract, the zippers were not defective. There are
two separate issues. Present and d iscu ss the issue of whether there is a valid contract
first, because if there is no contract, there can be no breach. The issue section would
appear as follows:
Issue I: Existence of contract
Issue II: Breach of contract
If the issue.s are not dependent on or affected b\' other issues, present them in chrono
logical order.
For Example The client w as involved in an automobile accident. The defendant ran a
red light and hit the client's car. Afterthe w reck, the defendant approached
the client's car scream ing and threatening the client. The defendant then pushed the
client. At least four possible cau se s of action are present. They should be presented in
the order in w hich they occurred:
Issue I: N e gligen ce — the car w reck
Issue II: A ssau lt— approaching client's car threatening and scream ing
Issue III: Battery— pushing the client
Issue IV: Infliction of emotional d istress— arising from the com bined acts of
assau lt and battery
H.xhibit 16-5 presents a checklist for the issue section.

492
E x h i b i t 1 6 - 5 C h e c k lis t— Is s u e Sectio n .
■ Is th e is s u e c o rre c tly id e n tifie d ?

■f Is th e a p p lic a b le rule o f la w in c lu d e d in the is su e ?
■ Is th e cita tio n o f th e ru le co rre ct?
■ Is th e le g a l q u e stio n c le a r ly state d in th e is su e ?
■ A re th e k e y fa c ts in c lu d e d in th e is su e ?
» If th e re are m u ltip le is s u e s , are th e y p re se n te d in th e p ro p e r o rd e r, su ch
as lo g ic a l or c h r o n o lo g ic a l?
D. Brief A nsw er
'Ihe brief a n sw e r section of the otiice memo consists ot a brief, precise answer to the issue(s).
In one or two sentences, it informs the attorne\- ofthe answ'er to the question and briefly sum-
marizes the reasons in support o ft h e answer. Its purpose is to pro\ide a quick answer lo the
issue. It should nol include intormation that is not discussed in the analysis section ot the memo,
L'sually, this section begins with a one- or two-word answer, such as “Yes," “No,”
“Maybe,” or “Probably nol.” The brief answer is followed b\' a brief statement ofthe facts and
reasoning in support ot the answer.
For Example
Issue: A cco rd in g to the provisions of the Ski Safety A ct § 679-33,

does a resort have a duty to warn skiers of ice hazards on
expert runs?
Brief Answer: No. The act provides that resorts have the duty to warn
of hazards, and that skiers are responsible for snow and
ice conditions. The state supreme court has ruled that
resorts have a duty to w arn of snow and ice hazards only
on intermediate and novice ski runs. The court sp e cifica lly
held that there is no duty to warn of any ice hazard on an
expert run.
Issue I: U nderthe holographic will statute, Colo. Rev. Stat.
§ 15-11-503, is a holographic will valid if it is handwritten
by a neighbor at the direction of the testator, but not
written in the testator's handwriting?
Issue II: Under the holographic will statute, Colo. Rev. Stat.
§ 15-11-503, is a holographic will valid if one ofthe w itnesses
to the testator's signature is a beneficiary of the will?
Brief A n sw e r Issue I: Yes. The statute requires a holographic will to be
handwritten by the testator. The state court of appeals
has held that the statute should be interpreted liberally
to effect the intent of the testator. If there is clear and
convincing evidence thatthe writing took place atthe
direction of the testator, the will is valid even if it is not
written in the testator's handwriting.
Brief A n sw er Issue II: No. The statute requires that the testator's signature be
w itnessed by two disinterested w itnesses.
493
l.xhihil K-i-ii piesonts a checklist tor the bi'iet'answer section.
E x h i b i t 1 6 - 6 Checklist— Brief Answ er Section.
D o e s the b rie f a n s w e r fo llo w the o ffice fo rm a t (e .g., a o n e - or tw o - w o rd

a n s w e r fo llo w e d b y a sh o rt sta te m e n t o f the re a so n s )?
Is it b rief? D o e s it s u m m a r iz e the re a s o n s in o n e or tw o cle a r s e n te n c e s ?
Is th e re a se p a ra te a n s w e r fo r each is su e ?
E. S t a t e m e n t of Facts
I'ollowing the brief answer section is the presentation ol the tacts ot the case. The purpose
this section is to inform the attorney ot'the tactual conte.xt ot'the issue, there are tour corsid-
erations to keep in niind when preparing the statenient ot facts (see H.xhibit 16-7).
E x h i b i t 1 6 - 7 Checklist— Considerations for Statement of Facts Section.
Importance of the facts D o n 't u n d e re m p h a s iz e the im p o rta n c e o f the fa cts.

T h e la w is a lw a y s a p p lie d in the c o n te x t o f th e facts
of the d isp u te .
Contents of the section In clu d e the key a n d b a c k g ro u n d facts.
Organization of the section O rg a n iz e th e fa c ts c h ro n o lo g ic a lly , to p ic a lly , o r a

c o m b in a tio n of th e tw o.
Manner of the presentation P re se n t th e fa c ts a ccu ra te ly , o b je c tiv e ly , an d free of

of the facts le g a l c o n c lu s io n s .
I. Facts vSection— I m p o r ta n c e
Some writers underemphasi/e the lacts section ot an otiice niemoraiulum because they tail
to understand the importance ot'the tacts. Ihe tacts and, theret'ore, the lacts section ot the
memo, are important lor se\ eral reasons:
l',\ ei \' legal dispLite in\'ol\ es a question ot how the law applies to the tacts ot the case.
I.egal questions are not decided in a \ acuuni. the law is always applied in the context
ot'a dispLite raised b\- the tacts ofthe case, the rule oflaw selected is determined by
identitication ot the law that applies to the tacts.
The tacts section may refresh the attorney’s menior\-. Ihe attorney ma\- be working
on other issLie s in the case or on several other cases and mav not recollect the specilic
I'actLial c o n t e x t o f t h e issues a d d r e s s e d in th e assignmeni. the t'acls s e c t io n sa \’es th e
super\ ising attorne\- trom ha\'ing to review the tile to determine the facts.
In nian\- law ollices, olhce memos are kept in research files, categorized by areas of
law. 'lhe\' are available for reference and use in olher cases invoh’ing similar issues.
Subsequent researchers may not be familiar with the tacts oft he case. A subsequent
reader shoLild be able to obtain all the facts necessary to understand the analysis
from the tacts section. It should not be necessar}' to re\'iew the case tile.
Ihe facts section protects you from possible criticism, if additional facts come to
light after preparation oft he memo that aftecl the anaUsis oft he issue and lead to
a ditferent conclusion, a well-dral'ted tacts section provides a record o f t h e factual
basis of }'our conckision. It protects you trom the criticism that }'ou misanaK zed or
misapplied the law.
494
2. F acts S e c t i o n — C o n te n t
The sta te m e n t of facts ot'the otlice memorandum should not simply repeat the tacts in
cluded in the memo assignment; it should include oni\' a briel statement of th e background
and key facts, lhe preparation of this section requires you to identity those tacts necessary to
pro\-ide the reader with a complete understanding ofthe factual context ot the issues analyzed
in the memo. It may require fewer facts than those included in the memo assignment, or it
ma\- require additional facts.
Include in the facts .section all facts reterenced or included in the analysis section ofthe
memo. 'Ihe goal is to pro\ide, as brietl\- as possible, enough facts to make the memo a self-
contained document; that is, it should be sutficienth’ complete so that any reaiier who is not
familiar with the facts oft he case need not reter to the case tile. To accomplish this end, the
facts section should include background and ke\’ tacts.
Background facts are necessary because they put the key facts in context. They pro
vide the reader with the intormation necessar}’ for an overall understanding of the
context within which the ke\’ facts occurred.
Key facts are those facts upon which the OLitcome oft he case is determined, l h e key
facts are so essential that if they were changed, the outcome o ft he case would prob-
abh’ be different.
When preparing the facts section ot the oflice memo, refer to (Chapter 9 tor assistance
in iifentifying key and background facts.
3. Facts S e c t i o n — O r g a n iz a tio n
Organize the statement of facts in a manner that enables the reader to clearly understand the
events relating to the issue(s) addressed in the memo. Ihere are basically three organizational
tbrmats for presenting the facts:
Chronological
Topical
A combination ot chronological and topical
'Ihe format selected is usually gineriied b\’ the nature ot the tacts.
a. Chronological Order
A ch ro n o lo g ica l o rgan izatio n oft he tacts usually is adopted when the facts are a series
of events related b\’ time or date.
For Example The memo involves the following fact situation: On Decem ber 1, the client,
Mr. Smith, w as driving in the 600 block of First Street when the defendant,
Mr. Doe, ran a red light at the intersection of First and Rose Streets. A s a result, Mr. Doe's
vehicle collided with Mr. Smith's vehicle. M r Smith suffered a broken leg, and his wallet w as
stolen at the scene. On the w ay to the hospital, the ambulance w as ¡nvolved in a collision
when it yielded at a stop sign M r Smith suffered additional injuries, including a separated
shoulder, in this collision. Atthe emergency room, his back w as sprained when he w as being
helped onto the examining table by the hospital staff. Mr. Smith wants to know who he can
sue for his various injuries and whether he can recover from M r Doe forthe loss of his wallet.
This example is referred to as the "auto collision" example inthe remainder of this chapter.
'Ihe best way to present the facts of the case in the preceding example is chronologically,
'lhe facts that give rise to the various causes of action occurred in a linear sequence, and they
are most clearh’ understood when narrated chronologically.
495
b. Topical Order
Some fact situations do not lend themseKes to a clironological presentation. In such situations,
the facts are related more b\ topical o rganizatio n than hy time sequence.
For Example The memo involvesthe following divorce situation. The client, Mrs. Jo n es,
is the petitioner in a divorce action. M r and Mrs. Jo n e s disagree on the
property distribution. They own three pieces of real property, parcels A, B, and C. All three
parcels are held in both their names as jointtenants.
Parcel A includes the family home. The property is paid for. Forty percent of the mort
gage w as paid from an inheritance Mrs. Jo n e s received from her father. The remainder
w as paid by both Mr. and Mrs. Jo n e s from income from their respective employments.
The asse sse d value is S150,000.
Parcel B is a rental property. They purchased the property shortly afterthe marriage.
The mortgage on the property is being paid from the rent payment and contributions from
the income of both Mr, and Mrs, Jo n e s, Their current equity is S I 00,000, Part of the equity
($10,000) w as a contribution by Mr, Jo n e s from his separate property.
Parcel C is recreational property. It w as purchased five years afterthe marriage. It
includes a small cabin and a storage shed. Their equity in the cabin and shed is $75,000.
Mrs. Jo n e s contributed $12,000 ofthe equity from lottery ticket w innings. The balance of
the equity represents equal contributions from Mr. and Mrs. Jo n es.
In this example, a presentation ot'the facts by topic is most appropriate. The dates of
purchase and the dates pas'iiients were made on the \arious parcels may be ax ailable, but
presenting these tacts b\’ date would not lead to the clearest presentation ol the tacts. In the
statement of facts, all the tacts relating to eacii parcel siioLild be presented separately, b\-
parcel, regardless oft he time sequence. All the lacts relating lo parcel shoiilil be presenteil
together; all the tacts relating to parcel B should be presenteti together; and ali the tacts relat
lug to parcel should be presented together. The tacts are moie iTeaiK understood when
all the facts relating to each parcel are presented together; therelore, each parcel should be
addressed separately in the tacts section ol the memo.
c. Com bination o f Chronological and Topical Order

It may be appropriate to present the tacts both chronologically and topically.
For Example In the previous example, assum e that parcel B w a s purchased by the
husband three years prior to the m arriage, parcel A immediately afterthe
marriage, and parcel C five years later. Assum e also that there is personal property: an
automobile purchased two years afterthe marriage and a boat purchased three years
afterthe marriage.
In addition to the issu es concerning the three parcels, there are other issu e s in
the divorce involving the other property. The appropriate presentation of the facts is a
combination ofthe chronological and topical schem es.
In this situation, the real and personal propert)- should be presented in the facts section in
a chronological sequence according to tiie order of ptu'chase, such as pai'cel B lirst, then parcel A,
followed b\' the automobile, the boat, and finally parcel C. Note that all the int'ormation concerning
each parcel of property is included when the parcel is discussed e\ en though some tactual events
concerning the parcel ma\- ha\'e occurred alter the purchase of another parcel.
496
For Example All the information concerning parcel B is included in the discussion of par
cel B even though some of that information con cern s o ccu rre n ce s taking
place after the purchase of parcel A. Mr. Jo n es's 810,000 contribution of separate property
may have taken place after parcel A, the automobile, and the boat were purchased.
if w'lmki he contusing to present all the facts in this e.xainple in chronological order onl\'.
It is much clearer to present the property in chri)nological order and, within the discussion
of each piece of propert)', preseiit all the facts relating to that piece of property regardless of
when the)' occurred.
Ihe goal in the organization of the statenient of facts is clear presentation of th e facts.
Select the organizational format that best meets this goal.
4. Facts S e c t i o n — P re s e n ta tio n a n d Ethics

As mentioned in Chapter 1 i , Rule 3.3{a)( 1) ofthe Model Rules of Professional C;onduct pro-
N’ides that a law)er should not make false statements oflaw or tact to a tribunal. Therefore,
when drafting the facts section ofthe memo, present the tacts accurateh' and objectively, and
a\'oid legal conclusions.
a. Accuracy
Accurac)' in presenting the lacts means that all the facts are presented, including those unt’a-
N'orable to the client.
For Example if, in the auto collision example, Mr. Smith w as speeding when the defen
dant ran the red light, this fact should be included. Although it may not be a
key fact that affects the outcome ofthe negligence claim, it is at minimum a background
fact that should be included.
Accurac)' also means nol adiliiig or changing tacts. It is not pi'opei' to add a tact e\-en it
the existence ol the lact seems obv ious.
For Example In the auto collision example, it is not proper to state that the defendant
knew she w as running a red light if there are no facts indicating her aw are
ness of that fact. It is improper to add such a fact even if it seem s obvious.
b. O bjectivity
State the facts objectixeh'. This means )'ou should present the facts in a neutral manner that
is neither slanted nor biased.
For Example Slanted presentation: Mr. Banker obviously knew what he w as doing when
he advised Mrs. W idow to buy a risky stock when the market w a s at its
peak. Mrs. W idow, unfortunately, relied on his bad advice to her detriment.
The use of the words ohviously, unfortunately, lietrinient, bad, and risky slant the pre
sentation oft he facts in favor of Mrs. Widow. The facts should be stated neutrall)'.
For Example Neutral presentation: The market w as at its peak when Mr. Banker advised
Mrs. W idowto buy the stock. Mrs. W idow relied on his advice and purchased
the stock. The value ofthe stock subsequently fell, and Mrs. Widow suffered a loss of $1,000.
497
P A R T IV L E G A L V^'RITING
c. l.egal (;oncliisions
When eoniposiiig the laet.s section, avoid legal conclusions.
For Example Mrs. Roe w as driving negligently through the school zone. (The phrase
driving negligently is a legal conclusion.)
State the facts without legal conclusions.
For Example Mrs. Roe w as driving 35 miles per hour through the school zone. The posted
speed is 15 miles per hour.
I'.xhibit 16-8 presents a checklist for the facts section ofan office memo.
E x h i b i t 1 6 - 8 Checl<list— Facts Section.
A re su ffic ie n t b a c k g ro u n d fa c ts p re se n te d to in fo rm th e re a d e r o f th e fa c
tu al c o n te x t o f the a s s ig n m e n t? W ill the re a d e r be re q u ire d to refe r to the
c a s e file to u n d e rs ta n d the a n a ly s is o f the is s u e s ?
A re all the ke y fa c ts in c lu d e d ? W ill the re a d e r h a ve to refer to th e c a s e file
to o b ta in k e y fa cts?
A re the fa c ts o rg a n iz e d c h ro n o lo g ic a lly , to p ic a lly , o r c h r o n o lo g ic a lly an d
t o p ic a lly c o m b in e d ?
A re the fa c ts p re se n te d a c c u r a te ly an d o b je c tiv e ly ?
A re le g a l c o n c lu s io n s e x c lu d e d fro m th e fact p re se n ta tio n ?
Is the fa c ts se c tio n c o m p le te ?
VI. KEY POINTS CHECKLIST; Office Legal M e m o r a n d u m —

Is s ue s and Facts
.An olfice memo should be a self-contained document. Include in the memo all the
information necessary to Luiderstand the conte.xt o f t h e legal analysis. Subsec]uent
readers should not need to refer to the case file to understand the issue, facts, or
anah'sis.
■ lb achie\ e the goal of proper!}' presenting the issue, include the rule of law, legal
question, and key facts in the issue. Refer to Chapters 10 and 11 when identifying
and stating the issue.
Present the fact situation objectively, and include both background and key facts,
follow the format adopted by your workplace when preparing the ottice memo.
You niay be faniiliar with or prefer a different format; if appropriate, recommend
clianges to the office format. If your suggestions are not adopted, be sure to follow
the approved format used in the office.
■ Be sure you understand the assignment. If you are unclear about any aspect of the
assignment, ask the supervising attorney. Do not waste time pursuing answers to the
wrong question or performing the wrong task.
✓ If the complexity o ft h e task requires skills beyond your ability, communicate )'our
concerns.
498
VII. APPLICATION
’Ihis section illustrates the principles and guidelines discussed in the previous sections through
their application to the h\ pothetical assigiuiient presented at the beginning ol the cliapter. )ett
L\'C)ns’s assignment is to research a question invoh ing privileged spousal communications.
He performs the assignment b\' adopting and lollowing the writing process presented in
Chapter 15. 'Ihe brief summary in this section explains the steps |elf follows when applying
the writing pirocess.
'1 he first step ofthe prewriting stage oft he writing process is to revieu' the assignment.
After reviewing the assignment, |etf has no questions concerning the nature ofthe task ahead
and the constraints on performance ofthe task. Ihe assignment is to prepare an office memo
for Rita Berdwin, his supervisory attorne\'; the memo should not exceed live pages; and he
must complete the memo within two weeks.
■[he next step ofthe prewriting stage is to organize the approach to the research, analy
sis, and writing oft he assignment. To accomplish this, [eff retrie\es the office memo format
preferred b\’ Ms. Berdwin. Assume that the format preferred by Ms. Berdwin is the recom
mended office memo format presented in Hxhibit 16-1. Prom this tormat, )etl prepares an
expanded outline. Using three-hole paper or a computer, he creates a separate page for each
section o f t h e outline. )etf titles one page “Siatement of Assignment,” one page “Issue,” one
page “Brief Answer,” ime page “Statement ol Pacts,” and so on. He continues in this manner
until he has a separate page for each section and subsection of the outline.
Alter completing the expanded outline, letf begins the prewriting process. As he brainstorms
ideas concerning the assignment, |eli enters each idea on the apprt)priale page ot the outline.
For Example Assum e that, at the outset, Je ff has an idea about how the issue should
be stated. "Is the conversation between Mr. and Mrs. Findo a privileged
interspousal communication that cannot be admitted attrial?" He immediately enters this
possible formulation ofthe issue on the "Issu e" page ofthe expanded outline.
[ell locates the statute governing prixileged spousal communications, 735 ll.CiS 3/8-801
(West 1992). [he relevant portion of this statute proxides: “In ail actions, husband and wife
may testify for or against each olher, prox ided that neither may testify as to any c o m m u n i
cation or admission made b\' either of them to the other or as to any conversation between
them duri ng marriage. . . ." He places a cop\- of this statute in the “Rule of Haw” section of
the outline.
lelf s research locates the lead case on point, People r. Satuiers, 99 III. 2d 262, 457 N.H.2d
1241 (1983). He places the relevant portions o f t h e case hi the “(âse Haw” section o f t h e
expanded outline. Ihese portions tolknv:
'Ihe defendant’s murder conxiction was based in part upon the testimonx' of
his wife.
She was allowed to testify about two conversations she had with the defendant that
took place in the presence of their three children, ages 13, 10, and 8 vears.
'Ihe conversations implicated the husband in the murder.
Ihe defendant appealed the conviction, claiming the trial coLirt erred when it al
lowed the testimony.
Ihe defendant argued that under the statute the conx-ersations xvere prix ileged spou
sal communications and, therefore, were not admissible.
'Ihe state supreme court, upholding the court of appeals, stated, “'Ihe appellate court
appears to have exhaustively researched the subject and concluded, as we do, that
499
the groat weight ot authority is that tlie presence t)l ehildieii oi the spouses d e
stroys eontideiitiahty unless they are too young to understand what is being said
(citations omitted). Nothing in the record indicates tliat Robert, then 1.^ \ears
old, was not old enough or sutiicientK' bright to understand the conxersation he
heard, pai ticulark inasmuch as the wile's testimons' indicates that some ot it was
directed to him. In these circumstances, under the rule tollowed in this State, his
presence rendered the con\ersation ineligible tor the protection ot the statutory
privilege.”
jeti niav place the entire case in the outline or include onh' the relevant parts. It only the
relevant quotations are included in the outline, he notes the page mnnbers ot the quotations.
Upon reviewing the information at hand, lefi'concludes that he has sullicient int'ornia-
tion to complete the assignnient. He continues researching, however, to make sure he has
thoroughly e.xplored the question, and he updates his research to ensure that it represents
the cin'rent law.
W hile researching and thinking about the case, whenever |eli has an idea about how
something should be written or where something should be placed in the memo, he enters
the idea in the expanded outline.
For Example A reading ofthe statute reveals thatthe privilege applies only to co n ve rsa
tions between spouses during the marriage; therefore, a key fact is that the
conversation took place during the m arriage. While reading the case, he d isco vers that
the presence of children of the spouses destroys confidentiality unless the children are
too young to understand. Therefore, the fact that the children in the client's case, p re s
ent during the conversation, were 16 and 10 years old is also a key fact. A s he becom es
aware of this information, Je ff notes these key facts on the fact and issue pages of the
expanded outline.
By the time left completes the prewriting stage ol the writing process, the expanded
outline contains all the intorniation necessary to write the memo. I’ach section ot tiie ex
panded outline contains:
Ihe research relevant to the section

Anv draft sentences, sentence tragments, and ideas relevant to the section, such as
transition sentences
Notes concerning the drafting ot each section, such as order ol presentation and
what must be included
A brief summary of each section oft he expanded outline follows:
On the statement of assignnient page, |elf has noted all of his thoughts regarding
how this section should be written.
ihe issue page inckides a reference to the statute, ke\' facts, and every formulation of
the issue that has occurred to |etf as he worked on the assignnient.
'Ihe brief answer page inckides draft sentences on how the brief answer should be
phrased. Ideas for this section may have come to him while he was preparing the
analysis, conckision, or other sections ol the memo.
Included on the facts page is a hst of all the ke\’ and background lacts he has identi
fied as he conducted research, k'fi also has noted an\' drafts of sentences he might
use in composing this section.
500
On the rule iif law page ot'the anah sis section, he has included the applicable statute
with the correct citation. He has listed here an\’ ideas he had on drafting this section,
such as transition sentences.
For Example "The statute does not provide guidance concerning w hat effect
the presence of children during the com m unication has on the
privilege. Therefore, case law must be consulted."
'Ihe case law page ofthe anah'sis section contains the case citation and a copy oft he
case or relevant sections o ft he case. Also included here are any notes Jeff has made
concerning the discussion or presentation ofthe case in the memo.
On the application page ot the anah'sis section, (etf has included any information,
ideas, or sentences regarding how the rule of law from the case and statute will be
applied to the facts.
Ihe counteranalysis page o ft he analysis section includes any information concern
ing the counteranah sis, such as opposing case law.
On the conclusioii and recommendations pages ot the outline, iust as on the other
pages of the expanded outline, [eff has included notes, ideas, draft sentences, and
an\'thing that ma\' be used when drafting these sections.
After left completes the research and anah sis, and the expanded outline, he begins the
writing process, lhe use oft he expanded outline greatly simplifies his work.
For Example Included on the issue page of the expanded outline are all the vario us
w ays the issue may be stated: "Is the com m unication between M r and
Mrs Findo privileged’ " "Is the conversation between Mr. and Mrs. Findo a privileged
interspousal com m unication that cannot be admitted at trial?" "D oes the presence of
children ofthe spouses during a conversation renderthe communication nonprivileged?"
"Is the interspousal communication privilege destroyed if the communication takes place
in the p resence of children ofthe spouses?" "Under Illinois law, is the interspousal com
m unication privilege destroyed when the conversation takes place in the presence of
children (ages 16 and 10) of the spouses?"
W hen Je ff begins to draft the issue section of the memo, his task becom es easier
because all the various formulations ofthe issue are in one place. Je ff has only to com pose
the issue by selecting and combining the best language from the various form ulations on
the issue page of the expanded outline.
Using the writing process presented in (Chapter 15, the writing tips presented in
Chapter 14, and the guidelines presented in the other chapters of this text, )eff completes
the assignment, 'lhe completed portions of leff's assignment that involve the sections of the
olfice memo discussed in this chapter, the lieading through the facts sections, are presented in
the ft)llowing ofhce memo. Because the remaining portions ofan ottice m e m o —the analysis
through recommendations sections—are discussed in CTiapter 17, those sections of Jeff’s
completed office memo are presented in the Application section ofthat chapter.
501
O F F I C E M E M O R A N D U M OF LAW place in the presence ol the spmises’ children, ages 16 and

10 \ ears okl?
'Ib: Rita Berdwin, Attorne)'
From: [eff I,yt)ns, Paralegal BR IE F A N S W E R
Date: April 30,2013 \'o. Ihe communication is not a prix ileged communication
protected b)- the proxisions of the statute, ihe state supreme
Case: State i'. Findo court has rided that the prix ilege is destrcned when the conxer-
sation takes pktce in the presence ot children ot the spouses who
Office File No.: Cr. 13-136
are old enough to understand the content ol the conimunicalion.
Docket No.: Cr. 13-378
S T A T E M E N T OF FACTS
Re: Privileged spousal communications
.Mr Findo is charged with assaulting his neighbor,
ST A T E M E N T OF A S S IG N M E N T Mr. Markham, with a deadlx’ xveapt)ii, a hammer. Mr .Markham
claims that .Mr. Findo attacked him and struck him sexeral
You have asked me to prepare a memorandum ot' law times with a hammer. Mr Findo claims he did not attack
addressing the question of whether the conversation between ■Mr. Markham with a hanimei': he claims that Mr .Maikham
Mr. Findo (our client) and Mrs. Findo, which took place in attacked him with a brick, and din ing the sti uggle, the brick
the presence oftheir children, ages 16 and 10 years old, is a fell and hit Mr. Markham on the head. Mrs. Findo, currentk'
privileged spousal communication and, therefore, is not ad separated Irom her husband, has agreed to testitx' that before the
missible In the criminal trial of Mr. Findo. confrontation Mr. Findo stated, "Markham is out there building
that damn lence again. I’ll put a stop to this once and tor all."
IS S U E This coinersation took place in the pre.sence ot'the l indos' chil
Under the Illinois privileged spousal communication dren, T'omas, age 16, and Alice, age 10. There were no witnes.scs
statute, 735 II.CS 5/8-801 (West 1992), is a spousal conver to the argument. Neither .Mrs. Findo nor the chililren saw the
sation privileged and not admissible Into evidence if it takes confrontation.
Sum m ary
'Ihe drafting of an office legal memorandum is one of the most important and olten most difiicult
types of legal writing assignments a paralegal or law clerk may perktrm. It requires integration ol'
the research, analysis, and writing skills discussed throughout this te.xt.
An office memo Is designed kir otfice use and is usiuilly drafted k)r the supervising at
torney. It Involves the legal analvsis of issues raised b)’ the tacts ot a client’s case, the writing
process presented in Cdiapter 15 is recommended when preparing an otfice memo.
Tfiis chapter presents the considerations inx'olx’ed in preparing the heading, statement of
assignment, Issue, brief answer, and statement of facts sections ofthe office memo. C,hapter 17
discusses the considerations involxed in preparing the anaKsis through recommendations
sections.
The heading section contains inkirmation describing who the memo is from and to, the
name oft he case, and the nature oft he issue. Ihe statement of assignment section describes
the topic cox’ered and the parameters ofthe assignment.
The issue section t'ollows the statement of assignment. It is one ol'the most Important
parts ofthe memo. It inkirms the reader ofthe precise legal question addressed in the analysis
section ofthe memo. Ihe brief ansxver section proxides a brief and precise answer to the issue
and a brief summary oft he reasons in support ofthe ansxver.
'Ihe statement of facts section proxides the facts ofthe client’s case that gaxe rise to the
issue addressed in the memo. It includes the background and kex' facts of the dispute and
502
should pro\ iele sullicicnt lactLml inlormation to allow the reader to understand the analysis
without hav ing to refer lo the ease file or any other source outside the memo.
Manv o f t h e procedures and steps involved in preparing an oHiee memo apply to the
preparation of legal writing designed for external use, such as correspondence to clients and
documents to be tiled with a court, including trial court and appellate court briefs.
Quick R e fe re n c e s
Brief answer 493 Office legal memorandum 483
tTironological organi/ation 495 Prewriting stage 484
IThics 484 Statenient of assignnient 490
Hxpaiuled outline 491 Statement of facts 495
Heading 489 Topical organization 496
Issue 490
In te rn e t R e so u r c e s
Ihe Inlernet resources tor this chapter are the same as those listed in Chapter 13. Due to the
large number of sites, the best strateg}' is to narrow your search to a specihc t \pe of legal writ
ing and topic, such as “issues, legal memorandum, public service contracts."
EXERCISE
A S S IG N M E N T
I'or each of tlie memo and W'eb assignments presenled at the end ot C.hapter 17, prepare the
lollowing sections of an ollice memo: heading, statenient ol assignment, issue, briet answer,
and statenient of facts. Use the formal and guidelines presented in this chapter when perform
ing Ihis assignmeni.
Iflk * tools, including flash cards, quizzes, and more. To learn more about this resource and acce ss
CourseMate free demo CourseMate resources, goto www.cengagebrain.com, and search for this book.
To acce ss CourseMate materials that you have purchased, go to login.cengagebrain.com.
Office Legal Memorandum:
Analysis to Conclusion
Outline iillcn Taxior is a law clcrk w orking in a distr ict a tto r n e y ’s otficc in the h yp oth etical state o f N ew
W ash ingto n. Ms. Taylor recc n th ’ rcccivctl the follow ing a ssig n m e n t.
1. Introduction
To: I-llen Taylor, hitcrn
11. Analysis Section
iToni: (,'arl I’ ine, ,\ssistan t D istric t Atto rney
111. C'onclusion
Rc: Stiitc 1'. k'ciil. A rrest d ii r i n g e x e c u tio n o f se arch w arra nt a n d con
1\’. Recommendations
structi\'c p o s s e s s i o n
\'. (ieneral Considerations
C ase: Cr. 13-104
\T. Key Points Checklist: Office
l.egal Memorandimi —Analysis O n |an uar\' 7, po li ce olticers ex ecu ted a se arc h w arrant au th o r iz in g the search ol the
to Cônckision a p a r tm e n t o f l) a \ id Kent lor nar cotics. M r Kent's a p a r tm e n t is loc ated on the third floor o f a
\'ll. Application lo u r- sto r \ a p a r tm e n t c o m plex. U p on e n t e r in g the a p a r tm e n t, th e o t fic e rs toim d Mr. Kent lying
on the hed in the b e d r o o m , lh e officers se c u re d the a p a r t m e n t and, after trisking M r Kent for
w e a p o n s, haiulcutf ed him an d m o \ ed him into the kitchen for the stated p u r p o s e o f "h is anil
o u r salc tx.” Ihe\' d id nol reail h im his rights or otTicially pla c e h im im d e r arrest at this time.
L earn in g O bjectives ihe si-arch o f tlie ap artm ent did not reveal any narcotics. Ihe police, however, disco vered
After completing this chapter, you an “eight inch hole" in the on l\ w m d o w in the hedrcKim, a n d the w in d ow sc reen was p u sh ed
should understand: out. lhe police went d ow nstairs and searched the area below the window, lhe b e d r o o m wim lo w
laces the rear ol the a p a r lm e n l co m p le x , an d helo w the w in d o w is a p a r k in g lot. In the p arking
lhe elements and lormat of
lot, three stories helow ,\lr Kent’s b e d r o o m w indow , the of fice rs lo u n d a plast ic b a g co ntain
tlie analysis, conclusion, and
m g on e o u n c e ol rock cocaine. Ihe p a r k i n g lot is a c o m m o n ar ea ol the co m p l e x , accessib le to
recommendations sections
the public an d all a p a r tm e n t dwellers. N o w itn e sses have been loc ated w h o sa w the d ete ndant
of an office legal research
thrins the c o c a in e out the window. Ihere were n o li n g e r p rin ts on the hag or oth er ev id en ce
memorandum
linking , \lr Kent to the co caine. Alter lo c a tin g the b ag , the poli ce read the d efen d an t hi.s rights
• How to draft the analysis, an d pla ced him u n d e r arrest, lh e ch a rg e is p o s s e s s i o n o f a contr olled su bsta n c e.
conclusion, and recommendations Please prepa re an oliice legal m e m o r a n d u m a d d r e s s i n g the tollo wing qu estio ns:
sections ofan office legal research
1. W a s the defend ant u n d e r arre st w h en he w as h an d cu lfe d a n d m o v e d into the
meniorandum
kitc hen ?
• General considerations to keep 2. Is the co n n e c tio n betw een the d e t e n d a n t a n d the c o c a in e sufficient to s u p p o r t
in mind when drafting a legal
c h a r g e s ol p o ss e ssi o n ot a c o n tr o lle d s u b s t a n c e ?
research memorandum
Ihe olfice legal m e m o r a n d u m p r e p a r e d by M s. Taylor is prese n te d in the App lication
se ction ol this c h a p t e r
504
C H A P T E R 17 O FFICE L E G A L M E M O R A N D U M : A N A L Y S I S TO C O N C L U S I O N
I. INTRODUCTION
Cliapter 16 focuses on preparing the tirst liait ol an ollice legal memo: the heading, statement
ot assignment, issue, brief answer, and statenient of facts sections. This chapter addresses
preparation o ft he second half of the oliice legal memo: the anaKsis, conclusion, and recom
mendations sections. In this chapter, as in (Tiapter 16, an otfice legal research memorandimi
is referred to as an office nie/no.
The discussion in (Tiapter 16 addressing the adoption o fa writing process and the use
of an expanded outline also applies to the preparation o f the second half of an otfice memo.
The guidelines presented in that chapter in regard to the writing process and the use of an
expanded outline should be followed when preparing the anaKsis, conclusion, and recom
mendations sections o ft h e otfice memo. The examples in this chapter refer to the enacted
and case law of the hypothetical state of New Washington.
II. ANALYSIS SECTION

I he purpose ot an office memo is to prcnide a legal anah'sis of the issue(s) in a case. T he
a n a ly s is s e c tio n is the part o f t h e memo where the law is presented, analyzed, and a p
plied to the issue(s). It connects the issue with the conclusion. It is the heart of an office
m em o assignnient.
I he analysis section is often referred to as the diseiiision section. I he con\'entional
analytical format, and the mc'st efficient way to approach a legal c|uestion, is the 1RA(;
fiirmat (issue, rule, analysis, conclusion). Under the 1RA(' approach and the office memo
format i ntroduced in (Tiapter 16, the issue is presented at the beginning o f t h e memo;
the analysis section ccners the rule of law, analysis, and application of the rule of law
to the tacts; and the conclusion summarizes the analysis. T he reasons lor following fhis
approach are obvious:
The reader must know the question to know the context in which the rule is anaK zed.
The rule that applies to the question must be identified belore the rule can be
analyzed and applied the ia^ts oi the âsc.
T he rule must be applied to the tacts; this must take place belore a conclusion can be reached.
Although IRA(; is the basic format for addressing legal issues, it is onh' a broad outline ol'
the format. It is necessar\' to have a more detailed outline ofthe analysis section to effectively
approach an office memo assignment and prepare an otfice memo.
A. Analysis Form at
Exhibit 17-1 presents the recommended format of the anahsis section.
E x h ib it 17-1 Basic Four-Part Format— Analysis Section.
Part A R u le o f la w
Part B C a s e la w (if n e c e s s a r y ) in te rp re ta tio n o f ru le o f la w

1. N a m e o f c a s e
2. F a cts o f c a s e su ffic ie n t to d e m o n s tra te c a s e is on p o in t
3. R u le or le g a l p rin c ip le fro m c a s e that a p p lie s to th e c lie n t's
case
PartC A p p lic a t io n o f la w to fa c ts o f c a s e
Part D C o u n t e r a n a ly s is
505
In tlic prewriting stage ol the writing process, assign cacli subsection ot the anahsis
scction at least one page in tiie expanded outline: a page lor tlic mie ol'law, a page lor each
case, at least one page for the application ot'the law to the lacts, and at least one page tor the
counteranalysis.
It the memo is a complex memo imoK ing multiple issues, lollow tiie same basic tormat
I'or each issue (see lixhibit 17-2).
E x h i b i t 1 7 -2 Complex M em o— Analysis Section Format.
A n a ly s is
R u le of law
Part B C a s e la w (if n e c e s s a ry ) in te rp re ta tio n o f ru le o f law

1. N a m e of c a s e
2. F a cts o f c a s e su ffic ie n t to d e m o n s tra te c a s e is on p oint
3. Rule or legal principle fro m ca se that a p p lie s to the client's case
Part C A p p lic a tio n o f law to fa c ts o f c a s e
Part D C o u n te r a n a ly s is
Issue II A n a ly s is
Part A R u le o f law
Part B C a s e la w (if n e c e s s a ry ) in te rp re ta tio n o f ru le o f law

1. N a m e o f c a s e
2. F a cts o f c a s e su ffic ie n t to d e m o n s tra te c a s e is on point
3. Rule or legal principle fro m ca se that a p p lie s to the client's ca se
A p p lic a tio n o f law to fa c ts o f ca s e

_ j C o u n te r a n a ly s is
A n a ly s is (s a m e fo rm a t a s is s u e s I a n d II)
It more than one rule ot law applies to a specific issue, include a reference to each rule
in the outline.
For Example Issue I A nalysis

Part A Rule of law
1. Section 59-703 of the com m ercial code
2. Section 45-211 of the usury statute
If more than one case is rec]iiired to interpret tiic rule ol law, such as when more than
one element ol the rule rccjuires case law interpretation, include a relerence to each case in
the outline.
506
C H A P T E R 17 O F F IC E L E G A L M E M O R A N D U M : A N A L Y S I S TO C O N C L U S I O N
For Example Issue I A n a l y s i s
Part A Rule of law — section 59-703 of the com m ercial code

Part B Case law
1. Case 1; Smith v. Jo n e s — interpreting the term sale as used in § 59-703
a. Facts of c a s e — sufficient to demonstrate case is on point
b. Rule or legal principle from ca se that applies to the client's case
Part C Application of the law to the facts of the client's case
Part D Counteranalysis
2. Case 2: How \j. D ow ns— interpreting the term m erchant as used in § 59-703
Part C Application of the law to the facts of the client's case
Part A Rule of law — § 45-211 of the usury statute
Part B Case law
1. Doe y. Dean— interpreting the term loan as used in § 45-211
Part C Application of the law to the fa cts of the client's case
I he remainder of this section discusses the elements ot the basic tormat lor the anahsis
section ofan office memo. After \ oli master the consideratiiins iinoKed in preparing the analy
sis ot a single issue, you can appriiacli ci)mple\ memo assignments lhal address mulliple issues
or separate subissues by applying the basic process to the analysis of each issue or subissue.
B. Analysis Part A; Rule of Law

Inasmuch as the analysis section of an office memo addresses how the law applies to the
issue(s) and facts o ft he client’s case, the starting point is a presentation o ft he rule of law or
legal principle that applies. Simply put, you must present the law before it can be applied.
llie governing law’ may be enacted law, such as a constitutional provision or a legislative
act; or case law, such as a court-adopted rule of law. ll.xhibit 17-3 lists some considerations to
keep in mind when preparing the rule of law portion o ft he analysis section.
E x h i b i t 1 7 - 3 Part A — Rule of Law — Considerations.
Introduction U s e in tr o d u c to r y la n g u a g e to in tro d u c e th e ru le o f la w
(e .g ., " T fie la w g o v e r n in g tfie w itn e s s in g o f w ills is . . .").
W hat to include P a ra p h ira se o r q u o te o n ly tfie re le v a n t p o rtio n s o f tfie law .
Multiple rules U s e in tr o d u c to r y la n g u a g e an d p re se n t tfie re le v a n t

of law p o rtio n o f e acfi rule.
Citation P r o v id e tfie c ita tio n fo r tfie rule o f law . If it is e n a cte d law ,

cite th e sta tu te , o rd in a n c e , rule, a n d so fo rth; if it is c a s e
la w , cite th e c o u rt o p in io n .
507
1. R ule o f L a w — In tro d u c tio n

The analysis section begins with a presentation ot’the rule oflaw. Do not start ininietiiateiv
with the rule itself use introdLictor\’ language. Ilie introductor\- language is italicized in the
tollowing examples.
For Example The rule of law governing the sale o fse c u ritie sis section 59-903 of the New
W ashington Com mercial Code. The section p ro v id e s.. . .
In N ew Washington, the doctrine of strict liability w as established in the ca se o f Elton v.

A ll Faiths Hospital, 931 N. W ash. 395, 396 (1976), where the court sta te d .. . .
2. R ule o f L aw — W h a t to In clu d e
WTien presenting the rule oflaw, paraphrase or quote onl\- the rele\ant portions o f t h e law.
In some instances, the rule of law is very length}’, and only portions o ft he law appl}’ to the
issue being addressed. This is olten true when the applicable law’ is statutor}' law, the statute
is coniposed ot man}’ subsections, and o n h’ one subsection applies. If this is so, include only
the rele\’ant portion o fthe law.
For Example Statutory law:
The rule of law governing oppressive conduct is § 50-14-5, w hich provides:

A. The district courts may liquidate the assets and business of a corporation:
1. in an action by a shareholder when it is established th a t:.. . .
(b) the acts of the directors . . . are illegal, oppressive, or fraudulent___
Note: Subsection (a) is omitted because its provisions do not apply to the issue being
d iscussed.
For Example Case law;
The rule of law governing a ski resort's duty to w arn of snow and ice conditions w as
established in the case of Jo n e s v Mountain S k i Resort, 943 N. W ash. 857, 877 (198p),|
where the court stated, "Resorts have a duty to warn of snow and ice conditions in the
following situ a tio n s:. . . when the snow or ice condition is a latent h a za rd .. . . "
Note: Portions of the opinion are omitted because they do not apply to the issue being
discussed. The om ission is indicated by the three-dot ellipsis.
3. Rule o f L aw — M u ltip le Rules

The analysis ma}’ require consideration of more than one rule oflaw. If this is so, use a format
similar to that discussed in the preceding text. Use introductor}’ language, and present the
relevant portions of each rule.
For Example The New W ashington Com m ercial Code section 50-101 establishes w hich
contracts must be in writing. In our case, two subsections of that section
apply: section 50-101B, w hich requires that "(a]n agreem ent w hich is notto be performed
within one year from the m aking" must be in writing, and section 50-101C, w hich provides
that "[clontracts for the sale of goods in the amount of $500 or more" must be in writing.
508
C H A P T E R 17 O FFIC E L E G A L M E M O R A N D U M : A N A L Y S I S TO C O N C L U S I O N
W'hen the rule ol U\\\' in\ol\es hotIi general and speciiic sections ot'a statute, present
the relevant general portion ot the statute first, tollowed h\' the speciiic portion ot the statute.
For Example Section 50-501 creates an implied w arranty of m erchantability if the seller
is a m erchant with respect to goods of that kind. The term m erchant is
defined in section 50-401 as "A person who deals in goods of that kind___ "
4. R ule o f L a w — C ita tio n

Whenever the reference is to a rule ot law or legal principle, you must present the authority
in support of your statement o ft he rule. If the source for the rule is enacted law, cite the e n
acted hnv; if it is case law, cite the case. Note that in the pre\ious four examples, the reference
includes the source for the rule oflaw, either statutory or case law. Wiihout a reference to the
authority, it is merely your word that the rule oflaw presented in the memo is actually what
the law states. Readers need to know the source so they can check for accuracy and answer
an\' questions concerning the law.
C. Analysis Part B: Rule of Law I n te r p r e ta t io n —Case Law

Exhibit 17-4 presents three considerations to keep in mind when addressing the interpretatit)n
oft he rule oflaw discussed in the memo.
E x h i b i t 1 7 - 4 Rule of Law Interpretation— Considerations.
Is interpretation D o e s th e ru le o f la w re q u ire in te rp re ta tio n ? C a n

required? th e la w be a p p lie d d ire c tly to the fa c ts w ith o u t
in te rp re ta tio n ?
W hat is the role Is th e rule of la w so b ro a d ly state d th at c a s e la w

of case law? m u s t be c o n s u lte d to d e te rm in e h o w it a p p lie s ?
W hat is the process If c a s e la w is re q u ire d , u se a fo rm a t like the o n e la id

for presenting o ut in E x h ib it 17-5 w h e n p re s e n tin g e ach c a s e .
case law?
1. Rule o f Law I n te r p r e ta tio n — N o I n ter p r eta tio n R equ ired

In some instances, the rule oflaw, whether it is statutory or case law, applies directly to the
facts ot the client’s case. Further case law is not required to determine how the rule applies.
For Example The rule of law establishes a 15 mph speed limit in school zones, and the
client w as ticketed for driving 30 mph in a school zone. In this situation,
case law is not needed to determine how the law applies. The law can be applied directly
to the facts: driving 30 mph in the school zone is a violation of the law.
hi such instances, proceed to section II.I) of this chapter tor guidance.

Note, however, that \ou should always perform at least a cursory check ot the case kuv. This
is necessarv to ensure that there is not some special interpretation o ft he rule or a term used
in the rule that is not apparent trom a plain reading ot it.
2. Rule o f Law I n te r p r e ta tio n — R ole o f C a se Law

Usually the rule oflaw that governs the issue being analyzed has some unexpected quirk or
is so broadly stated that you must refer to case law to determine how it applies. Case law, in
elfect, provides the link between the rule oflaw and the issue raised by the facts oft he chent’s
509
case. Cnurt opinimis determine and e.xplain how the law is interpreted and applied in specific
tact situations.
For Example The First Amendment protects freedom of speech. The amendment does
not define w hat constitutes speech. If the client's ca se involves the ques
tion of whether a sym bolic act, such as burning a state flag, is protected under the First
Amendment's freedom -of-speech provisions, you must consult ca se law. The Supreme
Court has interpreted how the First Amendment applies in this sp e cific fact situation. A cts
such as burning a state flag are considered sym bolic speech and are protected under
the First Amendment.
For Example A statute prohibits oppressive conduct by majority shareholders against

minority shareholders, but oppressive conduct is not defined in the statute.
Court d ecisio n s may define w hat constitutes oppressive conduct in sp e cific fact situ a
tions, and reference to court d ecisio n s is n e ce ssary to determine how the law applies.
3. Rule o f Law In te r p r e ta tio n — Process for P r e s e n tin g C a se Law

When presenting the case law that interprets how the law applies to a fact situation such as
tiu' client’s, the recommended format is to present the name and citation of tlie case first,
then the facts oft he case, lollowed b\- the rule of law or legal principle applied by the court
(see H.xhibit 17-5).
E x h i b i t 1 7 -5 Format for Presenting Case Law.
Name and citation First, p ro v id e th e n a m e an d c ita tio n o f th e ca se .

of court opinion
Facts of the case N e xt, p ro v id e th o se fa cts fro m th e c a s e su ffic ie n t to
d e m o n s tra te that the c a s e is o n p o in t.
Rule of law T h e n , id e n tify the rule o f la w o r le g a l p rin c ip le

a d o p te d by th e co u rt th at a p p lie s to the is s u e
a d d re s s e d in th e m e m o .
a. Name and C itation of Co u rt O p inio n

W'hen presenting the case, first identily the case name and citation. Ihe reader should know
the name ofthe case at the beginning ofthe discussion. Ihis eliminates an\- possible confusion
that may arise concerning which case is being discussed.
For Example The case that defines the term publication as used in the statute is Smith v.
Jo n e s, 956 N. W ash. 441,881 N.E.2d 897 (1995).
b. Facts o f the Case

'Hie next step is to pro\’ide sulficient information concerning the facts and rule of law applied
in the case to demonstrate that the case is on point. 'I'o accomplish this, you must include
enough intormation about the court opinion to demonstrate that the similarity between the
key facts and rule of law ofthe opinion and those ofthe client’s case is sufficient for the court
opinion to go\ ern or provide guidance in deciding how the law applies.
510
C H A P T E R 17 O F F IC E L E G A L M E M O R A N D U M A N A L Y S I S TO C O N C L U S I O N
For Example The client's case involves the question of whether a majority shareholder in
a closely held corporation engaged in oppressive conduct when he refused
to issue dividends while granting himself, as CEO ofthe corporation, sem iannual bonuses
in an amount triple his annual salary. Section 90-9-4 of the state corporation statutes
prohibits oppressive conduct by majority shareholders against minority shareholders.
The statute does not define oppressive. The case on point is Cedrik v. Ely, 956 N. W ash.
776,881 N.E.2d 451 (1995).
The introduction of the case might read as follows:
The case that defines what constitutes "oppressive" conduct in a fact situation such as
that presented in our case is Cedrik v Ely, 956 N. Wash, 776,881 N.E.2d451 (1995). In that
case, |ust as in our case, a ma)onty shareholder of a closely held corporation granted
himself bonuses in excess of triple his salary. In Cedrik, the majority shareholder also
refused to issue dividends. In defining what constitutes "oppressive conduct" under
90-9-4, the court stated. . . . Id. at 778.
Chapter 12 presents a coniprehensive discussion ot’ the steps and considerations in-
N’olved in deteniiiiiing if a case is on point. Reter to that chapter for assistance in deciding
what nuist be included in the presentation ot a case to demonstrate that the case is on point.
Note that the presentation ofa case in a case brief is different from the presentation o fa case
in an office memo W'hen presenting a case in an oflice memo, it is not necessary to include
all the information that you would include in a case brief. In an otfice memo, present o n h ’
the lacts sutficient to show the case is on point. .A case briet slioLild include more detail, such
as backgroLind lacts and other ¡nl’orniatioii.
c. Rule o f Law
Die last step when discussing a case that is on point is to identity the rule ol law or legal
principle adopted by the court that applies to the issue being addressed in the olfice memo.
For Example The state collections statute provides that efforts to collect payment for a
debt must be made in a "reasonable manner." Reasonable m anner is not
defined in the statute. In the client's case, the collector called the client three times a day,
often after 9:00 p.m. The case on point is Cerro v. Collectors, Inc., 955 N. Wash. 641,880 N.E.2d
401 (1994). The presentation of the rule of law applied by the court would read as follows:
"In the Cerro case, the court stated that 'reasonable contact' as used in the collections
statute m eans no more than one telephone call a day to the debtor's residence. The court
went on to state that no calls should be placed before 6:00 a.m. or after 7:00 p.m. Id. at 645."
Keep in mind two considerations when presenting the rule of law from the case:
1. Quote the language ofthe court whenever practical. Quotations are stronger than
paraphrases. Sometimes the language does not lend itself to quotation, such as
when the rule is composed of several parts or steps that are presented in more
than one paragraph ofthe opinion.
Do not use too nian\' quotations. L'se quotations to set forth the law or legal
principle presented b\' the court and key portions of th e court’s reasoning. 'lhe\-
should not be used as a sLibstitute for or m place of \'our own anaU’sis. '^bu ha\’e
failed to properly anal\ /e the case law if \'our anaKsis consists almost entirely of
quotations of a court's presentation o ft he law and its reasoning.
2. W’hen presenting the law, always cite the page ofthe court opinion where the rule
is discussed.
511
For Example In defining what constitutes "oppressive conduct" under § 90-9-4,

the court stated, "Oppressive conduct o ccu rs when a majority share
holder engages in wrongful conduct w hich inures to the benefit ofthe majority and
the detriment of the minority," Id. at 778,
In summary, the sequence when presenting a case is as iiillows:
Câse name and case citation

Relevant tacts trom the case demonstrating the case is on point
i h e rule oflaw or principle adopted b\- the court that applies to the issue in the cli
ent’s case
i hi s sequence is recommended because it is logical to discuss a case using this torniat

for the following reasons:
It is more readable if the reader first knows the name o f t h e case; then what hap
pened, the facts; then the rule oflaw applied b\' the court.
It is logical to discuss the rule oflaw last because the ne.xt step in the memo is appli
cation oft he rule to tlie issue(s) and tacts ot’ the client's case, i h e memo tlo\ss more
smoothh' it the application ot the rule immediatcK' lollows the prcsciiliilion ot the
rule.
i hi s is onh' a recommended sequence, howe\'er, not a hard and last rule. In some in
stances, it ma\- be better to address the rule oflaw trom the opinion first, then present the case
name and facts from the case, follow a seqLience that works best for the memo sou are drafting.
D. Analysis Part C: Application of Rule of Law

to Client’s Case
i h e purpose ofthe otlice memo is to (.k'termine how the law applies, iherelore, a critical element
ofthe anaU'sis section is the application ofthe law to the issue(s) raised b\- the lacts ofthe client’s
case. You will encounter two situations when applying the rule ol law to the lacts ofthe case:
i h e rule does not require interpretation through the use of case law
i h e rule requires interpretation through the use of case law
1. A p p lic a tio n o f R ule l h a t D o e s N o t R equ ire C a s e Law In terpretation

As discLissed in section II,B, in certain instances case law is not required t(>interpret how
the rule oflaw applies to the issue being anahzed, because it is clear Irom the face ot the rule
how it applies. In such instances, si mpk apply the rule directly to the issue being addressed
in the oliice memo.
For Example M unicipal ordinance 91-1 establishes 25 mph as the maximum speed in
residential areas of the municipality. The client w as ticketed for driving
55 mph in a residential neighborhood. The application ofthe ordinance is clear. The client
violated the ordinance.
2. A p p lic a tio n o f R ule That R equ ires C ase Law I n ter p r eta tio n
Most instances involve the question of how the iiile o f l a w applies to the issue(s) being
analyzed. In such cases, it is necessar\- to refer to case law for guidance as to how the law
applies. After the case on point is discussed, you must apply the rule ot law or legal principle
512
C H A P T E R 17 O F F IC E L E G A L M E M O R A N D U M : A N A L Y S I S TO C O N C L U S I O N
adoptcti by the court to the facts ol the client's case, lliis is the next step ofthe analysis process.
It immediatelv tollows the presentation ot the rule ot law trom the case on point.
For Example In this case, the court defined oppressive co n d u cta s "w rongful conduct
that inures to the benefit ofthe majority and the detriment ofthe minority."
Id. at 675. The court ruled that the majority shareholder's act of granting him self a bonus
triple his annual salary w hile refusing to allow dividends w a s w rongful, inured to his
benefit and the detriment of the minority shareholders, and w as, therefore, "oppressive
conduct" within the meaning of the statute.
In our case, just as in the Cedrik case, the defendant (the majority shareholder)
gave him self bonuses in e x c e s s of triple his salary while refusing to allow the issu ance
of dividends. If the court follow s the definition of "oppressive conduct" established in
the Cedrik case, the defendant engaged in oppressive conduct.
For Example In the Cerro case, the court held that "reasonable contact" as used in the
collections statute m eans no more than one telephone call a day to the
debtor's residence, and no call should be placed before 6:00 a.m. or after 7:00 p.m. Id. at 645.
The collection age n cy contacted our client more than three times a day for seven
straight days, and several of the calls were made after 9:00 p.m. If the trial court follow s
the rule adopted in Cerro, the outcome should be in our favor. The collections statute has
clearly been violated.
Remember to include in the analysis a discussion of how the law applies to the issue(.s)
and facts of th e client’s case. It is useless to introduce the rule of law and discuss how the rule
is interpreted through the presentation ofa case on point, then tail to apply the law to the facts
ot the client’s case. Ihe purpose ot the olfice memo is to demonstrate how the rule ol law and
the case law apply to guide or govern the determination ol the issue(s) addressed in the memo.
E. Analysis Part D; C o u n te r a n a ly s is
lhe next part o ft he analysis section is the coLinteranaksis. 'Ihe anahsis ofa legal issue is not
complete imless counterarguments to the analysis are explored. Refer to (Chapter 13 when
conducting counteranalysis and drafting the counteranalysis portion ofthe anahsis. Note the
following when preparing a coimteranalvsis:
in the analysis section, the counteranalysis should follow part C, the application e)f
the law to the issue and facts ofthe client’s case. B\ doing so you immediately apprise
readers of any counterargument so they can easily compare and contrast the argu
ments and counterarguments and evaluate the merits of each.
If rebuttal is necessary, it should follow the counteranalysis. Rebuttal may be re
quired if it is necessary to explain wh\- the counterargument does not apply, or if you
want to evaluate the merits ofthe counterargument.
For Example The opposing side may argue that oppressive conduct did not occur, and
the Cedrik ca se does not apply, because the majority shareholder in our
case earned the triple bonuses by working long hours and w eekends. In Cedrik, just as in
our ca se ,th e majority shareholder worked long hours, andthe court noted, "Eventhough
the m ajority shareholder is entitled to receive extra com pensation, he is not entitled
to receive an amount of com pensation that results in the total denial of benefits to the
minority shareholders." Id. at 778.
513
l-xhihit 17-6 pieseiits a chcLklist tor tiie analysis section.
E x h i b i t 1 7 -6 Checklist— Analysis Section.
D o e s the a n a ly s is se ctio n fo llo w th e p ro p e r fo r m a t? T h e fo rm a t is rule

o f la w ' c a s e in te rp re tin g the ru le o f la w (if n e c e s s a r y ) • a p p lic a tio n ‘
c o u n te r a n a ly s is .
If the a p p lic a tio n o f th e rule o f la w is not cle ar, is c a s e la w p re se n te d that
is on p o in t an d in te rp re ts h o w the rule o f la w a p p lie s ?
Is the p ro p e r c ita tio n p re se n te d fo r each rule o f la w a n d a u th o rity
in c lu d e d in the a n a ly s is ?
Is th ere a se p a ra te a n a ly s is se ctio n fo r each is su e a d d r e s s e d in the m e m o ?
Is th e rule o f law , p re se n te d in the a n a ly s is , a p p lie d to th e is s u e ra is e d by
the fa c ts o f th e clie n t's ca se ?
Is th ere a c o u n te r a n a ly s is an d rebuttal to the c o u n te r a n a ly s is if n e c e ss a ry ?
III. CONCLUSION
Part (; ot'the anaKsis section, the application ofthe rule oflaw to the client’s case, is a discus
sion ol how the law applies to the issue. Ihis application ot the law to the issue is realK' a niini-
conckision, because il concludes how the law applies. In etiect, the anaK sis section includes
a conclusion. Because the anaK sis section includes a briet'conclusion, some law tirnis tio not
require a separate conckision section. It is recommended, howe\'er, that \’ou include a separate
conclusion section that summari/es the entire memo.
'1 he conclusion section should not introduce new intorniation or authorities, nor should
it merely repeat the briel'answer. It should summarize the conclusions reached in the analysis
section. It IS recommended that the conclusion be cralted to include a reterence to and sum
mar\' ol all the law discussed in the analysis section, both the enacted and case law. It recjuires,
however, te\\er introductory and transitional sentences. Ideallw the con clu sio n should brielK-
iiitorm the reader ol all the law that applies and how it applies, ihe reader should be able to
obtain trom the conclusion a general understanding o f t he law and its application without
lun ing to read the entire memo.
Ihe ad\ antage of tliis type of conclusion is that researchers working on similar cases
can deterniine Irom the conclusion whether a memo from tlie office memo tiles applies to
their case. Ilie\- should be able to obtain all the essential information mereh' by reading the
conclusion. 'Ihe researcher saves time b\- not ha\ ing to read the entire memo if all that is
needed is a suniniar\- oft he law and analvsis.
For Example Section 30-3-9 of the criminal code prohibits the p ossessio n of proscribed
drugs. The case of Smith i/. Jo n e s provides that when an individual does not
have actual possession, he may be in constructive possession if there is either direct or
circum stantial evidence establishing thatthe defendant had both know ledge and control
of the drugs. In our case, there is no evidence, either direct or circum stantial, that the
client had either know ledge or control ofthe drugs he w as charged with p ossessing. If
Smith 1/. Jo n e s is followed, there is not sufficient evidence to support charges of pos
session under § 30-3-9.
514
C H A P T E R 17 O F F I C E L E G A L M E M O R A N D U M A N A L Y S I S TO C O N C L U S I O N
For Example Article II, section 7, ofthe state constitution prohibits illegal searches and
seizures. In the case of State v. Idle, the court held that an individual is
seized within the meaning of the law when the actions ofthe law enforcement officers are
such that a reasonable person would not believe that he was free to leave, in our case,
the client was handcuffed and ordered to sit in the back seat of a police car. He was not
placed under arrest. A reasonable person would not believe he was free to leave in this
situation; therefore, if in our case the court follov/vs the test adopted in State v. Idle, our
client was under arrest.
N o t e t h a t in t h e s e e . \a m p l e s , t h e r e a d e r is a bl e t o o b t a i n all t h e e s s e n t i a l i n t o r m a t i o n
c o n c e r n i n g t h e a p p l i c a b l e law by m e r e l y r e a d i n g t h e c o n c l u s i o n . N o t e alst) t h a t i n t r o d u c t o r y
s e n t e n c e s a r e n o t u s e d t o i n t r o d u c e t h e law, a n d t h a t t r a n s i t i o n s e n t e n c e s a r e n o t u s e d to
c t ) n n e ct t h e s t a t u t o r y a n d ca se law. ' I h e i m p o r t a n c e a n d use o f i n t r o d u c t o r y a n d t r a n s i t i o n
s e n t e n c e s in t h e o t h e r s e c t i o n s ot a n office m e m o a r e d i s c u s s e d in secti(.)n \ ' o t t h i s c h a p t e r .
W h e n t h e r e a r e m u l t i p l e i ssues, a c o n c l u s i o n is u s u a l l y p r e s e n t e d i m m e d i a t e l y a f t er t h e
a nal ys i s o f eac h issue. W h e n t h e r e a r e o n l y t w o issues a n d t h e a n a l v s i s is n o t c o m p l e x , y o u m a y
p r e s e n t at t h e e n d o f t h e m e m o o n e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t s u m m a r i z e s t h e a n a l y s i s oi b o t h issues.
Hxhi bi t 17-7 p r e s e n t s a c h e c k l i s t k)r t h e c o n c l u s i o n s e c t i o n .
E x h i b i t 1 7 -7 Ch ecklist— Conclusion Section.
Does the conclusion include a brief summary of the analysis of each issue?
Is all the law discussed in the analysis section, both enacted and case law,
summarized in the conclusion?
Is new information or authority excluded from the conclusion?
IV . R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S
N o t all law f i r m s i n c h i d e a r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s s e c t i o n as p a r t ot t h e basi c t o r m a t ol a n o t h c e
m e m o . .Also, in s o m e f o r m a t s , r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a r e i n c l u d e d in t h e c o n c l u s i o n s e c t i o n , ( i e n -
eraily, a s e p a r a t e s e c t i o n for a n y c o m m e n t s o r r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s s h o u l d fol low t h e c o n c l u s i o n
section. R e co m m e n d a tio n s a r e n o t r eal h' p a r t of t h e a n a h sis o r c o n c l u s i o n s e c t i o n s ; t he\ '
t r e q u e n t l v a d d r e s s m a t t e r s to b e c o n s i d e r e d a n d s t ep s t o b e t a k e n as a result ol t h e ct>nclusit)ns
r e a c h e d in t h e a n a l y s i s s c c t i o n . i n c l u d e in t h e r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s s e c t i o n a n y c o m m e n t s t>r
s u g g e s t i o n s y o u h iw c c o n c e r n i n g t h e c i i e n t ’s c a se o r m a t t e r s d i s c u s s e d in t h e m e m o .
S o m e a r e a s \' ou m a \ ' a d d r e s s in t h e r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s s e c t i o n i n c l ud e ;
1. W h a t t h e n e x t s t e p s h o u l d be
For Example B a s e d on t he anal ysi s o f t h e issues, it is a p p a r e n t t h a t t h e risk

of liability is great . It m a y be advi sabl e to s e e k a s e t t l e m e n t in
this case.
2. I h e i d e n t i t i c a t i o n o f a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t m a y b e nece,ssar\' d u e t o cjues-
t i o n s rai.sed in t h e a n a h ' s i s ot tlie issue
For Example It appears from the case file thatthe neighbors were notasked
if they heard any strange noises. Inasmuch as the analysis
of this issue reveals that this information is critical, it is recommended the
neighbors be reinterviewed.
515
P A R T IV LEGAL WRITING
3. l h e i d e n t i l i e a t i o n ol a d d i t i o n a l r e s e a r c h t h a t nia\- h e n e c e ss a r y o n t h e issue
For Example Additional research may be required because the necessary

research sources are not locally available, the analysis is pre
liminary due to time constraints, or the factual investigation of the case has
not been completed.
l h e i d e n t i h c a t i o n o f re l at e d issues o r c o n c e r n s t ha t b e c a m e a p p a r e n t as a result o f
t h e r e s e a r c h a n d anal ys i s
For Example The memo addresses a negligence issue concerning an auto

mobile accident. If the analysis ofthe negligence issue reveals
other possible causes of action inthe case, such as assault ornegligent inflic
tion of emotional distress, the attorney should be advised of the existence of
these additional causes of action.
V. G E N E R A L C O N S ID E R A T IO N S
l h e t o l l o w i n g ar e s o m e g e n e r a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s w h e n p r e p a r i n g an otlice r e s e a r c h m e m o r a n
d u m . A s e p a r a t e s e c t i o n is d e \ ’o t e d t o t h e s e m a t t e r s b e c a u s e t h e\ ' o f t e n a p p k to m o r e t h a n
o n e s e c t i o n ot a m e m o a n d y o u s h o u l d k e e p t h e m in m i n d w h e n a p p r o a c h i n g a n y m e m o
assignment.
A. H e a d in g
• M t h o u g h a n olfice m e m o is w r i t t e n in p a r a g r a p h f o r m , u s e h e a d i n g s f o r e a c h s e c t i o n .
H ead in gs p r o \ i t l e t h e overal l s t r u c t u r e o f t h e a s s i g n m e n t , g u i d e t h e r ea der , a n d a p p r i s e t h e
r e a d e r o f w h a t is c o v e r e d in e a c h s e c t i o n , l h e r e a d e r m a y d e si r e to r e a d a speci t i c s e c t io n ,
su c h as t h e a n a h sis, in w h i c h c ase a h e a d i n g a l l o ws t h e r e a d e r to q u i c k k l o c a t e t ha t s e c t i on.
1 l e a d i n g s al s o g u i d e t h e p r e p a r a t i o n ol t h e t abl e ot c o n t e n t s if a tahl e is n e e d e d . L'se t h e l o r m a t
p r e s e n t e d in (Chapter 16 as a g u i d e for t h e a p p r o p r i a t e h e a d i n g s (see Hxhibit 16-1). Refer to
t h e A p p l i c a t i o n s e c t i o n t)f t hi s c h a p t e r a n d c ; h a p t e r 16 for e x a m p l e s .
B. In t r o d u c to r y S e n te n c e s
Use introductory (topic) sen te n ce s t o i n f o r m t h e r e a d e r o f w h a t is to follow. A v o i d i m-
m e d i a t e k j u m p i n g i nt o a d i s c u s s i o n o f a topi c, s u c h as t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e law.
For Example No introduction: Section 59-3-2 ofthe criminal code provides that posses
sion of cocaine is illegal. In Smith i/. Jones, the defendant__
P r o v i d e a n i n t r o d u c t i o n w h e n d i s c u s s i n g a topi c. I h e i n t r o d u c t i o n s a r e i t a l i ci zed in
the following example.
For Example Includes an introduction; The rule of law prohibiting the possession of
cocaine \s criminal code § 59-3-2, which states that possession of cocaine
is illegal. The statute does not define "possession"; therefore, case law must be referred
to. The case that provides guidance as to what constitutes possession in a fact situation
such as ours is Smith v. Jones. In the Smith case,. . . .
516
C H A P T E R 17 OF F I C E L E G A L M E M O R A N D U M A N A L Y S I S TO C O N C L U S I O N
C. Transition S ente n ces

Us e tra n sitio n se n te n ce s to e o n n e e t s e c t i o n s , sLilisections, a m i r el at ed topi cs. I h e !ollo\
i ng e x a m p l e lacks a t r a n s i t i o n .
For Example The rule of law governing possession of drugs is § 59-3-2. Section 59-3-2c
makes it illegal to possess cocaine. Smith 1/. Jo n e s provides that posses
sion occurs when....
A t r a n s i t i o n s h o u l d h a \ e b e e n u s e d in t h i s e x a m p l e t o c o n n e c t t h e s t at u t or } ' l a w w i t h
t h e c a s e law. I h e r e a d e r s h o u l d b e i i i t o r m e d w h \ ' case law is b e i n g p r e s e n t e d .
T h e t o l l o w i n g e x a n i p l e uses a t r a n s i t i o n s e n t e n c e . T h e t r a n s i t i o n s e n t e n c e is i t ali cized
in t h e exan' iple.
For Example The rule of law governing possession of drugs is § 59-3-2. Section 59-3-
2c rriakes it illegal to possess cocaine. The statute does not define what
constitutes possession; therefore, it is necessary to refer to case law for guidance.
A case that defines what constitutes possession in a fact situation such as ours is
Smith \j. Jones. In the Smith c a s e ,. . .
D. P a ra g ra p h s
P a ra g ra p h s a d d c o h e r e n c e a n d m a k e t h e n ' le m o ii'iore r e a d a b l e . .Address e a c h a r e a o r topi c
in a s e p a r a t e p a r a g r a p h .
For Example In the analysis section of the memo, address in a separate paragraph
or paragraphs the discussion of the rule of law, the case that serves as
a guide to interpretation of the rule of law, the application of the rule to the issue, the
■ counteranalysis, and the rebuttal to the counteranalysis.
E. P e rs u a s iv e P re c e d e n t
W h e n p r e s e n t i n g p e r s u a s i \ e authorit }' , i n d i c a t e t h e r e a s o n \' ou a r e r e h i n g o n t h i s t}'pe o f
aut l ior it }' a n d la}' a p r o p e r l o u n d a t i o n for its use.
For Example Section 90-9-6 prohibits oppressive conduct by a majority shareholder.

The statute does not define what constitutes oppressive conduct, and the
courts of this state have not addressed the question.
The state of New Washington, however, has a statute identical to our statute, and
the New Washington courts have addressed the question of what constitutes oppressive
conduct under the statute. In the case of Darren v. D arren,. . .
In t h e p r e c e d i n g e x a m p l e , t h e r e a d e r is i n f o r m e d \s h}' t h e o u t - o t - s t a t e law (p ersu asive

precedent) is r e f e r e n c e d : T h e s t a t u t e d o e s n o t d e f i n e t h e t e r m , a n d t h e s t a t e c o u r t s ha\-e
n o t a d d r e s s e d t h e q u e s t i o i ’i. A l o u n d a t i o n for p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e p e r s u a s i \ e p r e c e d e n t is t h u s
set: ' " I h e s t a t u t e ot t h e s t at e r e t e r r e d to is i d e n t i c a l t o o u r s t a t e s t at u t e, a n d t h e o t h e r s t a t e ' s
c o u r t s h a v e a d d r e s s e d t h e q u e s t i o n . " In t h e t o l l o w i n g e x a m p l e , a f o u n d a t i o n is set for u s e o f
a c o u r t ' s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f o n e s t a t u t e to i n t e r p r e t a n o t h e r s t a t ut e .
517
PART IV LEGAL W RITING
For Example Our courts have not defined lhe term oppressive conduct as used in
§ 90-9-6. Section 45-5-6C of the Small Loan Act prohibits "oppressive con
duct" in small loan transactions. The state court of appeals, in the case of Irons v Fast
Loans, Inc., has defined what constitutes oppressive conduct under the Small Loan Act,
and we can look to that definition for guidance in interpreting § 90-9-6.
i_____________________________________________________________________________
Ik' fcr to C h a p t e r 2 ancf (Chapter 18 w h e n re l yi ng o n persua,si\-e p r e c e d e n t .
F. C o n c lu s io n s
hi m a n y i n s t an c e s , after r e s ea r c l i i n g a n d a n a h / i n g a legal p r o b l e m , yo u ma \ ' n o t be able to
p r i n ' i d c a d e f i n i t e \-es o r n o a n s w e r as to h o w it nia\- b e r e s o h ed.
For Example If there is no mandatory precedent, and persuasive precedent or secondary

authority is relied on, you may not be able to provide an answer as to how
the court is likely to resolve the issue. If the case law that applies is very old and policies
have changed, it may be questionable if the case law will be followed.
in s u c h i ns t a n c e s , p r e s e n t \ o u r c o n c h i s i o n s a n d e. \ pl ai n yoLU' r e s e r \ a t i o n s .
For Example In conclusion, the courts of this state have not addressed this question. The
majority of states that have addressed this issue follow the rule adopted by
the New Washington Supreme Court in the case of Tyler v. Tyler. As stated in the analysis of
this issue, the progressive approach ofthe New Washington court reflects the approach our
supreme court has taken in resolving similar issues and will likely be adopted by the court.
G. R e vis io n s and D ra fts

W ' h e n p r e p a r i n g an oliice m e m o , it is essential lo p r o d u c e a prot essi oii al p r o d u c t . Ihis de-
m a n i l s t h o r o u g h r e s e a r c h a n d a nalysis ot all issues a s s i g n e d aiut all a sp e c t s ot e a c h issue, it
al s o r e q u i r e s ass eni bh- o f t h e r e s e a r c h a n d a n a h s i s int o a n o r g a n i z e d , e r r o r - t r c c tinal p r o d u c t .
Be p r e p a r e d to c o m p o s e a n u m b e r ot drafts.
H. A d d itio n a l A u t h o r it y
!t t h e r e are several cases o n p o i n t , it is not n e c e s s a r y to t h o r o u g h l y d is c u s s e a c h case. P r e s en t
a n d d is c u s s t h o r o u g h h ' t h e m o s t r ec e n t case o n p o i n t , a n d ref er bri etl y to t h e o t h e r cases.
For Example The case that defines what constitutes "oppressive" conduct in a fact situ
ation such as that presented in our case is Cedrik i/. Ely, 956 N. Wash. 776,
881 N.E.2d 451 (1995). In this case, the majority shareholder gave himself three bonuses
that were triple his salary. At the same time, he refused to allow dividends to be issued.
In defining what constitutes "oppressive conduct" under § 90-9-4, the court stated,
"Oppressive conduct occurs when a majority shareholder engages in wrongful conduct
which inures to the benefit of the majority and the detriment of the minority." Id. at 778.
See also Tyre v. Casey, 953 N. Wash. 431,878 N.E.2d 49 (1993) (oppressive conduct found
when no dividends were issued and majority shareholder received several bonuses and
was provided an extravagant expense account); Ireland v. Ireland, 952 N. Wash. 288,873
N.E.2d 553 (1992) (oppressive conduct found when no dividends were issued and majority
shareholder was given a house as a bonus).
518
C H A P T E R 17 OF F I CE L E G A L M E M O R A N D U M : A N A L Y S I S TO C O N C L U S I O N
V I. K E Y P O IN T S C H E C K L IS T : Office Legal M e m o r a n d u m —
A n a ly s is to Conclusion
✓ F o l l o w t h e s t a n d a r d f o r m a t for f h e a n a h s i s s e c t i o n ot a m e m o : r u l e + c a se l aw ( i n
t e r p r e t a t i o n ot t h e r ul e) a p p l i c a t i o n of r u l e + c o u n t e r a n a h s i s . Ihi s t o r m a t is b a s e d
o n t h e s t a n d a r d I R AC m o d e l .
✓ I h e p r e s e n t a t i o n ot a ca s e in a c a s e brief is d i t l e r e n t f r o m t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n ot a c a s e
in a n o t h c e m e m o . W h e n i n t r o d u c i n g a c a s e in t h e a n a l y s i s s e c t i o n o t ' a m e m o , it is
n o t n e c e s s a r y t o i n c l u d e all t h e i n f o r m a t i o n y ou w o u l d i n c l u d e in a c a s e brief.
✓ In t h e a n a l y s i s s e c t i o n , d i s c u s s h o w t h e r u l e o f l a w a pp l i es to t h e issue a n d fact s o f
t h e c l i e n t ’s case.
A h v a y s c o n d u c t a c o u n t e r a n a l y s i s . If t h e r e is n o c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t , m e n t i o n t h e fact
t h a t n o c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t o r di t f e r e n t p o s i t i o n is s u p p o r t e d by t h e c a s e hnv.
✓ P r o v i d e e n o u g h i n f o r m a t i o n in t h e c o n c l u s i o n t o i n f o r m t h e r e a d e r o f all t h e a p p l i
c a b l e e n a c t e d a n d c ase law.
✓ U s e i n t r o d u c t o r v a n d t r a n s i t i o n s e n t e n c e s . D o n o t i u m p t r o m o n e t o p i c to a n o t h e r .
P r o v i d e a s m o o t h t r a n s i t i o n b e t w e e n s u b j ec t s.
y ' B e f o r e p r e s e n t i n g pe r s u a s i \ ' o p r e c e d e n t o r s e c o n d a r \ - a u t h o r i t y, i n d i c a t e w h y y o u a r e
n o t r el yi n g o n m a n d a t o r } ’ authorit}' .
✓ U o n o t b e d i s t u r b e d if }'ou d o n o t r e a c h a defu'iite c o n c l u s i o n as to h o w t h e l aw
appl i e s. ' I h e r e a r e m a n \ ' gra\ ' a r e a s a n d i ssues t h a t h a v e n o t b e e n r u l e d u p o n . Yo u r
j o b is t o i n f o r n i t h e r e a d e r o f t h e e x i s t i n g law a n d p r o \ i d e a w e l l - r e a s o n e d a n a l y s i s
o f its a p p l i c a t i o n . P r e d i c t i n g t h e legal o u t c o m e a l w a \ s i nvol ves son'ie m e a s u r e o f
uncertainty.
✓ As m e n t i o n e d in C h a p t e r l;s, d o n o t tr\' t o n i a k e t h e first draf t t h e final draf t, just

w r i t e t h e i n t ' o r ma t i o n in r o u g h f o r m . It is e a s i e r tc) p o l i sh a roLigh d r a f t t h a n t o t r y t o
m a k e t h e first d r a f t t h e f i n i s h e d p r o d u c t .
V II. A P P L IC A T IO N
i h e first e x a n i p l e in t h i s s e c t i i m i l l u s t r a t e s t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e p r i n c i p l e s t o t h e a n a l y s i s ,
c o n c l u s i o n , a n d r e c o n ' i m e n d a t i o n s s e c t i o n s ol t h e o t l i c e me n ' i o a s s i g n n ' i e n t i i ' i t r o d u c e d at
t h e b e g i n n i n g o f C h a p t e r 16. Recall t h a t t h e A p p l i c a t i o n s e c t i o n o f t h a t c h a p t e r o n l y a d
d r e s s e d t h e first h a l f o f ' t h e n ' le m o a s s i g i ' i m e n t p r e s e n t e d at t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h a t c h a p t e r ,
t h a t is, t h e h e a d i n g , a s s i g n m e n t , issue, b r i e f a n s w e r , a n d t a c t s s e c t i o n s o f t h e n'lenio. ' I h e
s c c o n d e x a m p l e in t h i s s e c t i o n i l l u s t r a t e s t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e p r i n c i p l e s d i s c u s s e d in t h i s
c h a p t e r a n d t h e p r e v i o u s c h a p t e r to t h e office m e m o a s s i g n m e n t p r e s e n t e d al t h e b e g i n
nin g o f this chapter.
B o t h C h a p t e r 15 a n d C^hapter 16 d i s c u s s t h e u s e o f a n e x p a n d e d o u t l i n e a n d p r e s e n t
e x a m p l e s t h a t i l l us t r a t e t h e use o f an e x p a n d e d o u t l i n e w h e n d r a f t i n g a n o ti ice n i e m o . I n a s -
n' luch as t h e u s e o f a n e x p a n d e d o u t l i n e is i l l u s t r a t e d in t h o s e c h a p t e r s , a d e t a i l e d d i s c u s s i o n
o f its u s e is n o t i n c l u d e d in t h e t w o e. xaniples e. xplor ed in t h i s s e c t i o n . ' I h e e xan' ipl es in t h i s
s e c t i o n p r e s e n t t h e c o m p l e t e d otfice m e m o r a n d a .
A. E x a m p le 1
' I h e first e x a m p l e i l l u s t r a t e s t h e c o n ' i p l e t i o n o f t h e m e m o r a n d u n i a s s i g n m e n t i n t r o d u c e d
a t t h e b e g i n n i n g o f C h a p t e r 16. I h e h e a d i n g t h r o u g h fact s s e c t i o n s o f t h e a s s i g n m e n t a r e
i n c l u d e d in t h e A p p l i c a t i o n s e c t i o n o f t h a t c h a p t e r . I h e r e n ' i a i n d e r o f t h e m e m o r a n d u m
fol lows .
519
PART IV LEGAL W RIT IN G
Analysis
The rule of law governing privileged communications between spouses is 735 ILCS 5/8-
801, which provides, "In all actions, husband and wife may testify for or against each
other, provided that neither may testify as to any communication or admission made by
either of them to the other or as to any conversation between them during marriage...."
The statute does not include any sections that address waiver ofthe privilege. There is,
however, Illinois case law that discusses the question of when the privilege is waived.
A state supreme court case that addresses the question of waiver of the privilege
when children are present during the spousal communication is People v. Sanders, 99 III.
2d 262,457 N.E.2d 1241 (1983). Inthis case,the trial court admitted into evidence conversa
tions between the defendant and his spouse. The conversations took place in front of their
children, ages eight through thirteen years old; the conversations implicated the defendant
in a murder. When addressing the question of whetherthe communications were privileged,
the supreme court stated thatthe rule followed in the state is thatthe presence of children
of the spouses destroys confidentiality unless the children are too young to understand
what is being said.
In our case, just as in People v. Sanders, the conversation between the spouses
involved incriminating statements made in the presence of children. In our case, just as in
Sanders, the children were old enough to understand the conversation. If the trial court
follows the rule of law presented in Sanders, the conversation between Mr. Findo and Mrs.
Findo is not a privileged communication underthe statute and is admissible into evidence
in the trial of Mr. Findo.
No case law in this jurisdiction establishes an exception to the rule presented in
Sanders. The only possible counterargument is that the children, although present, did not
hearthe conversation. The Sanders opinion does not directly state thatthe children must
actually hearthe conversation, but this is implied by the requirement that the children must
be old enough to understand what is being said. See the Recommendations section in
regard to taking stepsto determine if the children heard and understood the conversation.
Conclusion
The rule of law governing privileged spousal communications is 735 ILCS 5/8-801. It pro
vides that communications between spouses during the marriage are privileged. In People
1/. Sanders, the court held that the privilege is waived if it takes place in front of children
old enough to understand what is being said. In our case, because the conversation took
place in the presence of children old enough to understand, it appears thatthe privilege
does not apply, and the conversation is admissible into evidence.
Recommendations
1. We should conduct further investigation to determine if the children heard and un
derstood the conversation.
2. Additional research should be conducted to determine if there are any cases ad
dressing the question of whether, in addition to being present, the children must
actually hearthe conversation.
520
C H A P T E R 17 O FFI CE L E G A L M E M O R A N D U M : A N A L Y S I S TO C O N C L U S I O N
B. Exam ple 2
I h c s e c o n d e x a m p l e i l l us t r a t es t h e conipl eti oPi o f t h e o t h c e m e m o a s s i g n m e n t p r e s e n t e d in
t h e h yp t ) t h e t i c a l at t h e b e g i n n i n g o f thi s c h a p t e r . A s s u m e t h a t Hllen Taylor' s e x p a n d e d o u t H n e
i n c l u d e s t h e f o l l o wi n g law f r o m t h e st at e o f N e w W a s h i n g t o n t h a t ap p l i e s t o t h e a s s i g n m e n t .
A r t i c l e II, s e c t i o n 4, o f t h e st at e c onst it uti t>n. “ ' I h e r i gh t o f t h e p e o p l e t o b e s e c u r e in

t h e i r p e r s o n s , h o u s e s , p a p e r s a n d effects a g a i n s t u n r e a s o n a b l e s e a r c h e s a n d s e i z u r e s
shall n o t b e v i o l a t e d . . .
S e c t i o n 9 5 - 2 1 - 1 4 o f t h e s t a t e c r i m i n a l c o d e p r o v i d e s t h a t “ [i| t is u n l a w f u l fo r a n y
pe rs o n intentionally to possess a con tr o ll ed su b s ta n ce . . . C ' oc a i n e is l i st e d as a
c o n t r o l l e d s u b s t a n c e u n d e r t h e act.
S ta te V. i k a n U 9 4 5 N . W a s h . 7 4 5 , 8 5 3 N . E . 2 d 6 5 2 ( 1 9 8 9 ) . hi thi s case, law e n f o r c e

m e n t officers w e r e l o o k i n g for a s u s p e c t in a n a r m e d r o b b e r y. I h e officers r e c o g
n i z e d a f r i e n d o f t h e s u s p e c t w a l k i n g d o w n a st reet. ' I h e y s t o p p e d h i m , h a n d c u f i e d
h i m , a n d a s k e d h i m w h e r e t h e s u s p e c t was. W h e n h e r e f u s e d to a n s w e r t h e q u e s t i o n ,
t h e officers s e a r c h e d h i m a n d f o u n d m a r i i u a n a in his s h i r t p o c k e t . ' I h e officers t h e n
a r r e s t e d h i m fo r p o s s e s s i o n o f n ar c o t i c s .
In r e g a r d t o t h e initial s t o p a n d h a n d c u f H n g o f t h e d e f e n d a n t , t h e c o u r t h e l d t hat
a persi^n is s ei ze d ( a r r e s t e d ) w i t h i n t h e n i e a n i n g of Ar t i cl e II, s e c t i o n 4, of t h e st at e
c o n s t i t u t i o n w h e n a r e a s o n a b l e p e r s o n w o u l d bel i e ve h e w a s n o t t r e e t o leave. ' I h e
c o u r t h e l d t h a t a r e a s o n a b l e p e r s o n in t h e d e f e n d a n t ’s p o s i t i o n w o u l d n o t b e l i e v e he
w a s free to leave; th e r e f o r e , t h e d e f e n d a n t w a s u n d e r a r r es t w h e n t h e o t l i ce r s s t t ) p p e d
a n d h a n d c u f f e d h i m.
S t a t e V. W i l s o n . 9 5 3 N. W a s h . 1 1 i , 8 7 8 N . F . 2 d 431 ( 1 9 9 3 ) . In thi s case, law e n f o r c e

m e n t officers w e r e e x e c u t i n g a s e a r c h w a r r a n t . U p o n e n t e r i n g t h e p r e m i s e s , a n o t
ii cer h e l d t h e d e f e n d a n t by t h e a r m a n d r e f u s e d to a l l ow h i m to leave. In a d d r e s s i n g
t h e q u e s t i o n t>f w h e t h e r t h e d e f e n d a n t w a s u n d e r a r r es t w h e n t h e o t h c e r h e l d h i m by
t h e a r m a n d r e l u s e d to a l l ow h i m to lea\'e, t h e coiu' t h e l d t hat “ | n | o t all d e t e n t i t i n s
c o n s t i t u t e a s e i z u r e w i t h m t h e m e a n i n g o t Ar t i cl e II. s e c t i o n 4 ot t h e ( Const i t ut i on. A
w a r r a n t t o s ea r ch for c o n t r a b a n d f o u n d e d o n p r o b a b l e c a u s e i mp l i ci t l y c a r r i e s w i t h
it t h e l i m i t e d a u t h o r i t y to d e t a i n t h e o c c u p a n t s o f t h e p r e m i s e s w h i l e a p r o p e r s e a r c h
is c o n d u c t e d . S u c h a d e t e n t i o n dt>es n o t c o n s t i t u t e a se i zu r e w i t h i n t h e m e a n i n g oi
t h e CConstitution.” Id. at 121.
S t a t e V. B ra g g , 9 5 5 N. W a s h . 2 2 1 , 8 8 0 N . E . 2 d 9 9 8 ( 1 9 9 4 ) . In t h i s case, t h e p o
lice s e a r c h e d a n a p a r t m e n t w h e r e Br a g g a n d s ever al o t h e r p e o p l e r es i d e d . N a r c o t i c s
w e r e f o u n d in a d r a w e r in t h e k i t c h e n . I h e r e w a s n o e v i d e n c e l i n k i n g B r a g g t o t h e
d ru gs . O n l y Bragg was c h ar g ed with possession. 'Ihe co u rt no ted that posse ssi on
m a y be either actual o r constructive.
In o v e r t u r n i n g his c o i n i c t i on, t h e c o u r t r u l e d t ha t in a s i t u a t i o n w h e r e se v e r al
i n d i v i d u a l s h a v e a c c e s s t o t h e l o c a t i o n w h e r e t h e d r u g s are f o u n d , a n d t h e r e is n o
e v id en c e ind icating that the d e f e n d a n t has actual possession o f t h e dru g s, a c o n v i c
t i o n c a n still t a k e pl a c e if t h e r e is e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e d e f e n d a n t is in c o n s t r u c t i v e p o s
session o f t h e drugs. 'Ihe co u rt stated that to convict the de fe n d a n t o f c o n st ru c ti v e
p o s s e s s i o n , e i t h e r d i r e c t o r c i r c u m s t a n t i a l ex i d e n c e m u s t b e p r e s e n t e d t h a t h e h a d
k n o w l e d g e o f t h e p r e s e n c e o f t h e d r u g s a n d c o n t r o l o v e r t h e d r u g s . In t h i s case, t h e r e
was n o such evidence.
l h e tolloNving is t h e m e m o r a n d u m p r e p a r e d b y Ellen 'I'ax'lor.
521
PA RT IV LEGAL W R IT IN G
OFFICE RESEARCH M E M O R A N D U M FACTS
I'o; Ca r l Pi ne, Assi st a nt Di s t r i c t O n | a nua r\ - 7, p olice officers exe c u t ed a search wa r r a nt for

Attdrney t he a p a r t m e n t o f t h e d e f e n d a n t , HaN'id Kent. ' Ihe a p a r t m e n t
is locat ed o n the t h i rd floor o f an a p a r t m e n t compl ex, w h e n
I-’roni : Kllcn Taylor, i n t e r n t he poli ce e n t e r ed t he a p a r t m e n t , Mr. Kent was lying on the
b e d in the b e d r o o m . He was frisked f'or weapons, h a n d -
iê: S tate r. K ent
cutf'ed, m o v e d to t he ki t chen, a n d d e t a i ne d while the search
Case: Cr. 13-404 was c o n d u c t e d . Me was n o t place d u n d e r arrest t)r read his
rights. ' Ihe poli ce f o u n d a b r o k e n w i n d o w in the b ed r o o m ,
Re: A r r e s t d u r i n g t h e e x e c u t i o n ot a
a n d t he w i n d o w s cr een wa s p u s h e d out. In the p a r k i n g lot
s e a r ch w a r r a n t a n d c o n s t r u c t i \ ' e t h r e e stories be l o w the b e d r o o m windt)w, t he officers f ound
possession o f d r u g s a b a g c o n t a i n i n g cocai ne. ' Ih e r e we re n o witnesses w h o saw
t he d e f e n d a n t thrc)w a n v t h i n g out o f t h e a p a r t m e n t window.
STATEMENT OF ASSI GN MEN T N o f i ng er p r i n t s we re f o u n d o n the bag, n o r was t her e an\'
o t h e r e vi d e n c e l i nki ng Mr. Kent to th e cocaine. Mr. Kent has
You have asked m e to pr ep a r e a m e m o r a n d u m a d d r e s s i n g
b e e n c h a r g e d wi t h p o s s e ssi on o f a co n t r o l l e d substance.
t h e f ol lowing quest i ons: Was Mr. Kent i m d e r arrest w h e n he
w'as handcuft ' ed a n d held in the kitchen while his a p a r t m e n t
was sear che d? Is t her e sutiicient evi denc e to s u p p o r t c harges ANALYSIS
of poss essi on in this case?
Issue I
ISSUES The rul e o f l a w g o v e r n i n g arr est in N e w W a s h i ng t o n is A r
ticle II, se ct ion 4, o f t h e state c o n s t i t ut i on wh i c h provides, in
U n d e r Article II, section 4, o t ' th e state c o n s t i t u part , ‘" I h e right ot t h e p e op l e to be seciu'e in their p e r s o n , . . .
tion, is an indi vidual seized ( u n d e r arrest) w h e n against u n r e a s o n a b l e s ea r c h e s a n d seizures shall not bc
police otlicers h a n d c u f f a n d det ai n h im in the v iolated. . . .” N e i t h e r t h e c o n s t i t ut i on n o r the state statutes
ki t chen d u r i n g the exec ut i on o f a search war r a nt ? defi ne t he t e r m seizure. I h e r e is, however. Ne w Wa s h i ngt on
Issue 11: U n d e r § 9 5 - 2 1- f 4 of the cr i mi n a l code, is there case law that de l i ne s t he t er m.
sufficient e vi de nc e to su p p o r t c harges o f p o s s e s Ihe N e w W a s h i n g t o n case that establishes the s t anda r d
si on w h e n the d e t e n d a n t is located in the be d for wh a t c o n s t i t u t e s a sei zure is .S'liiri' V. ikard, ‘■145 N. Wash.
r o o m o f a t h i r d - s t o r y a p a r t m e n t a n d t he dr u g s 745, 85.Í N.I'!.2d 652 (1989). In this case, law e n f o r c e m e n t
are l ocat ed below a b r o k en w i n d o w o f t h e b e d officers we re l o o k i ng f'or a su s p e c t in an a r m e d robbery. Ihe
r o o m in a p a r k i ng lot? officers recoi ini zed a f r i e nd ot t he sus pect wa l ki ng d o w n a
street. I h e v st i)pped h i m , h a n d c u f l e d him, a n d asked h i m
BRIEF A N S W E R w h e r e t h e s u s p e ct was. W h e n he ref used to a n s w e r the ques
tion, the officers s e a r ch e d h i m a n d t o u n d ma r i j ua n a in his
No. ' Ihe state su p r e m e c o u r t has held that d e t e n shi rt pocket. ' Ihe officers t h e n a r r e s t e d h i m I'or poss essi on of
t i ons d u r i n g the e xe c ut i on o f a search wa r r a n t narcotics. In r ul i n g that t he d e f e n d a n t \vas u n d e r arrest w h e n
d o not c onst i t ut e seizures wi t hi n the m e a n i n g ot he was s t o p p e d a n d h a n d c u ff e d , t he c o u r t held that a p e r s on
Article II, sect ion 4, o f the state c onst it uti on. is seized ( a r r e st e d ) w i t h i n the m e a n i n g o f Article II, sect ion
Issue II: No. W h e n dr u g s are found in a c o m m o n area a c 4, o f t h e state c o n st i t u t i o n w h e n a r e a s o n ab l e p e r s on woul d
cessible t o mul ti ple individuals a n d there is no believe h e was n ot free to leave. Id. at 750.
evi de nc e that the d ef e n d a n t has actual p o s s e s 'The r ul e o f l a w d e f i n i n g s e i z u r e a d o p t e d in State I'. Ik a r d
sion, t h e d e fe nd a n t ma y const ructi vely possess is so b r o a d l y s t at e d t h a t it c a n a p p l y to a n u m b e r o f s e i zur e
t he drugs. Fhe state s u p r e m e c o u r t has rul ed that s i tu a t i o n s , i n c l u d i n g t h e s i t u a t i o n p r e s e n t e d in o u r case. In
c ons t ruc t i ve possession requi res evi denc e that o u r case, a r e a s o n a b l e p e r s o n w o u l d n o t beli eve h e was free
t he d e fe nd a n t h a d k n o wl e d g e a n d control o f t h e to leave w h e n h a n d c u f f e d a n d m o v e d to t h e k i t c h e n d u r
drugs . In o u r case, there is n o evi denc e that the i ng t h e e x e c u t i o n o f a w a r r a n t . It a p p e a r s , the r e f or e, t hat
d e fe n d a n t ha d kn o wl e d g e a n d control ot the d r u g s Mr. Ke n t w a s s e i z e d ( u n d e r a r r e s t ) w i t h i n the m e a n i n g
f ou n d in the p a r k i ng lot. o f Ikard.
522
C H A P T E R 17 O F F I C E L E G A L M E M O R A N D U M : A N A L Y S I S T O C O N C L U S I O N
\ o l all det ent i ons , hinvexer, eonst it ii te a sei/Lire. I h e r e are drugs. Ihe c o u r t stated that in o r d e r to conv ict tor c o n s t r u c
except ions. O n e excep t i o n is w h e n i he d e t e n t i o n takes place tive possessi on, “t her e mu s t be eit her dir ect o r c i r c u m s t a n t i al
while otlicers are e x e c ut i n g a search wa r r a n t . Ihis e x c ep t i o n cN'idence pres ent ed that t he d e f e n d a n t h a d k n o w l e d g e ot the
was a n n o u n c e d b\- the s u p r e m e c o u r t in t he case o i State r. presence o f t h e d r u g s an d cont r ol o\' er t h e m . ” Id. at 225.
W i l s o n , 9 5 } X. Wash. 1 11, 878 N. i:. 2d 431 (1993). In Wilson, In o u r case, just as in Bragg, t her e is no e v i d e n c e i n d i ca t i ng
alter e n t e r i n g the pr e m i s e s d u r i n g t h e e xe c u t i o n ot a search thal the d e f e n d a n t act ua l h' possessed t h e d r u g s . Also, t her e
w'arrant, an oH'icer held t h e d e l e n d a n t b\' the a r m a n d re l use d is no e\' idence, ei t her direct o r ci r cuni st ant i al , ot c o n s t r u c -
to allow h i m to leave. In r ega r d to w h e t h e r the sei zure c o n s t i t i \ e possessi on. 'Iliere is n o e v i d e n c e t hat t b e d e l e n d a n t h a d
t ut ed an arrest, t he c o u r t held, “Not all d e t e n t i o n s c on s t i t u t e k n o wl e d g e o f t he pr e s e n c e o f t he d r u g s in t he p a r k i n g lot.
a sei zure wi t hi n the m e a n i n g ot Arti cle II, sect i on 4 ot the ■Also, ther e is n o e v i d e n c e that he h a d c o n t r ol o f t he drugs .
const i t ut i on. A w a r r a nt to sear ch lor c o n t r a b a n d t o u i i d e d o n Ihe d r u g s were f o u nd t h r ee stories below' his a p a r t m e n t in a
p r oba b l e cause implicitly ca rr i es wi t h it t h e l i mi t e d authorit}' pa r k i n g lot. ' Ihere is no e \ ’i d e n c e li nki ng t h e d e f e n d a n t to the
to d et a i n the o c c u pa n t s o f t h e p r e m i s e s whi l e a p r o p e r search drugs. It’t he rule o f l a w p r e s e n t e d in Bragg is fol lowed, it a p
is c o n du ct e d . Such a d e t e n t i o n d o e s not co n s t i t ut e a sei zure pears that there is not sufficient e v i d e n c e to s u p p o r t c ha r ge s
w'ithin the m e a n i n g ot t h e co n s t i t ut i on . ” UI. at 121. ot possession.
Ill o u r case, just as in Wilson, t he poli ce we r e e x e c u t i n g Ihere is no New' Wa s h i n g t o n case law c o n t r a d i c t i n g Bragg
a search w a r r a n t a n d t h e d e f e n d a n t was d e t a i n e d whi l e the or est abli shing a different defi nit ion o f con stru ctive posses
sear ch was b ei n g c o n du c t e d . N o n e ol o u r tacts i ndi ca t e s the sion. A possible c o unt e r a r gun' ie nt is t h at t h e fact t h e d r u g s
w a r r a n t was issued wi t h o u t p r o b a b l e cause. It it was b as e d o n were f o u n d below the de f e ndant ' s b ro k e n a p a r t m e n t window'
pr oba b l e cause, u n d e r Wilson, t he pol i ce h a d t h e authorit}- is sutficient to link h i m to t he drugs. Il'iere is n o case law to
to det ai n the de f e nda n t , a n d the d e t e n t i o n wa s n ot a sei zure s u ppor t this posi ti on. It ma}' be necessar}' ft) look for a d d i
wi t hi n the m e a n i n g ot t h e co n s t i t ut i on . tional ev i dence that links t he de f e n d a n t to t he d r u gs . See the
No case o r st atut or}’ law in N e w W a s h i n g t o n c o n t r a d i c t s Recoi'i'imendiitions sect ion below.
o r limits t he Wilson rLiling in re ga r d lo d e t e n t i o n d u r i n g
t h e e x ecut i on o f a wa r r a n t . I he o nl y possible c o u n t e r a r g u CO NC LU SIO N
m e n t is that the w a r r a n t wa s issued w i t h o u t p r o b a b l e cause,
. \rticle 11, sect ion 4, o f t he state c o n s t i t u t i o n pr o hi bi t s
a n d Iherefore, t he police d i d n ot have a u t h o r i t y to d e t a i n
the unreasoi'iable sei zure (arrest) of i ndi vidual s. T h e case of
Mr. Kent. Iher e is no evi de nc e in the case tile i ndi cati ng a p r o b
Slale r. Ikard states that an arrest takes place if a r e a s ona bl e
lem in this regard. See the R e c o m m e n d a t i o n s sect ion below.
[lerson wo u l d not b e l i e\ e he was free to lease. I h e case ot
Stale V. Wilson p r o \ ides that a d et e n t i o n that ta kes place d u r
Issue II ing the e x ec u t i o n o f a search w a rr a n t d o e s not c o n s t it ut e a
' Ihe rule o f l a w g o v e r n i n g t h e pos s e s s i o n o f c o c a i ne is s e c seizure wi thi n t he m e a n i n g o f t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n . In o u r case,
t i on 93-21- 14 of the state c r i mi n a l c ode , w h i c h p r o v i de s that the de f e n d a n t was cletained d u r i n g the e x e c u t i o n o f a sear ch
“ ¡ijt is unl awful for any p e r s o n i n t en t i o n al l y to p oss e ss a warrant . Ilierefore, u n d e r the ru l i n g in W ilson, it a p p e a r s the
c ont r ol l ed s u b s t a n c e . . . .” ( ' o c a i n e is listed as a c o nt r o l l ed d e t e n t i o n o f t h e d e l e n d a n t was not a s ei zure (arrest).
s ub s t a n c e u n d e r t he statute. I h e st at u t e d o e s n o t de fi ne what Section 95' 21 -14 o f t h e state c ri nii nal c o d e p r o v i de s that
const i t ut es possession; ther efore, it is necessar}' to refer to it is illegal to possess cocaine. In State e. Bragg, t h e c o u r t held
case law' for guidance. that to establish c o n s t r u c t i ve possessi on, e v i d e n c e n'lust be
A case in wh i c h the s u p r e m e c o u r t h a s d ef i ne d pos s e s s i o n pr e s ent ed s h o w i n g that t he d e f e n d a n t h a d k n o w l e d g e o f t h e
is State V. Bragg, 955 N. Wâsh. 221, 880 N. E. 2 d 998 (1994). presence o f t h e d r u g s a n d co n t r o l over then'i. In o u r case,
In this case, t he police s e a r c h e d an a p a r t m e n t w h e r e Bragg the d ef e n d a n t d i d n ot act ua l h' possess t h e d r u g s , a n d t her e is
a n d several o t h e r i ndi v i d u a l s resided. N ar c o t i c s w'ere f ou n d no evi de nc e i nd i c at i n g he h a d k n o wl e d g e o f o r c ont r ol over
in a d r a w e r in t he kit chen. Th e r e was n o e v i d e n c e l i n k i n g theni. Iherefore, it a pp e a r s t hat ther e is n ot suflicient e v i
Bragg to the drugs . O n h - Bragg was c h a r g e d w i t h p o s s e s d e n c e to su p p o r t charges o f possessi on.
sion. ' Ihe c ou r t n o t e d that pos s e s s i o n m a y b e e i t h er actual
o r const ruct i ve. In o v e r t u r n i n g Br a g g ’s c o n v i c t i o n , t h e c o u r t RE C O M M E N D A T I O N S
r u l ed that in a si tuat ion w h e r e several i n d i vi d u a l s have access
I. W e s h o u l d d e t e r n ' ii ne w h e t h e r t h e i s s u a n c e o f t h e
to t he locat ion w h e re t h e d r u g s are f ou n d , a n d t h e r e is n o
e vi de n c e i ndi cat i ng t hat t he d e f e n d a n t h a s act ual pos s e s s i o n s e a r ch w a r r a n t w'as s u p p o r t e d b y p r o b a b l e c a u s e o r
ol t he drugs, a c onvi c t i o n c an still t a ke place if t h e r e is e v i if t h e r e is a n y o t h e r n i a t t e r t h a t affects t h e legal i t y
d e n c e that the d e f e n da n t is in c o n st r u c t i v e p o s s e s s i on o f t h e o f t h e se a r c h . If t h e i s s u a n c e o f t h e w a r r a n t o r t h e
523
PAR T IV LEGAL W R IT IN G
I' xci juti on ot t h e s e a r c h wa s in s o m e w a y d e t e c t i \ e , to tlie di ugs l o u n d in t h e p a r k i n g lot. f o r e x a m p l e ,

t h e d e t e n t i o n e x c e p t i o n e s t a b l i s h e d in StiHc i'. W i l was glass t r o m t h e w i n d o w e m b e d d e d in t h e bag?
s o n m a y not apply. W e r e t h e r e a n \ ’ iiuli\ idual s in t h e a p a r t m e n t c o m
W e n e e d to c o n d u c t l u r t h e r i n \ e s t i g a t i o n l o d e t e r plex w h o h e a r d a w i n d o w b e i n g b r o k e n ?
m i n e if t h e r e is an\- e\ i d e n c e H n k i n g tlie d e t e n d a n t
C. C o m m e n t s on Examples
N o t e that t h e a n a h sis s e c t i o n o t ' b o t l i m e m o s fol l ows t h e s a m e a n a l y t i ca l f o r m a t : r u l e o f hiw
-I- case law i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e r u l e o f law -h a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e law to t h e i s sue a n d fact s o f tlie
c l i e n t ’s c a s e + c o u n t e r a n a h ’sis. I h e r e ar e t r a n s i t i o n s e n t e n c e s l i n k i n g t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e
r u l e t)f lau' t o t h e c as e law. N o e x t r a o r . su p e r t l u o u s m a t e r i a l is p r e s e n t e d ; t h e r e a d e r is n o t
r e q u i r e d t o w a d e t h r o u g h r e l a t e d b u t u n n e c e s s a r \ - c as e law o r a n a h s i s . l h e a p p l i c a b l e hiw is
i n t r o d u c e d , e x p l a i n e d , a n d a p p l i ed , l h e r e a d e r is c l e a r k a n d c o n c i s e k i n l o r n i e d ot tlie law
a n d h o w it appl i es.
In b o t h e x a m p l e s , t h e r e is o n e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t i n c l u d e s a r e t e r e n e e t o t h e a p p l i c a b l e
l a w a n d s u m m a r i z e s t h e a n a h s i s ol t h e i s sue s, l h e c o n c l u s i o n s u m m a r i z e s all t h e a p p l i
c a b l e e n a c t e d a n d c a s e law. If t h e r e a d e r d e s i r e s a d e t a i l e d a n a k s i s a n d d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e
law, t h e a n a l y s i s s e c t i o n c a n b e r e f e r e n c e d . W h e n t h e m e m o is m o r e c o m p l e x a n d i n v o l v e s
m u l t i p l e i s s u es , it m a y b e a p p r o p r i a t e to p r o v i d e a c o n c l u s i o n s e c t i o n at t h e e n d o f t h e
a n a h ' s i s ot e a c h issue.
S u m m a ry
Ihis c h a p t e r a d d r e s s e s c o n s i d e r a t i o n s i n \ o l v e d in p r e p a r i n g t h e s e c o n d h a l f o f a n otlice m e m o
r a n d u m : t h e anal ys i s, c o n c l u s i o n , a n d r e c i ) i i i m e n d a l i o n s s e c t i o n s , l h e l o c u s o f t h e c h a p t e r is
o n t he a n a h sis sec t i o n .
l h e h e a r t o t ' a n olt ice m e m o r a n d u m is t h e an a l y s i s s e c t i o n . I he p u r p o s e o f a m e m o r a n
d u m is to i n l o r m t h e r e a d e r ol t h e law that g o \ e r n s t h e issue a n d h o w t h e law a p p l i e s in t h e
c l i e n t ’s case. I hi s i n t o r m a t i o n is c o n \ e \ e d in t h e a n a h s i s s e c t i o n ot t he oHice m e m o . In thi s
s ec t i o n , t h e r e a d e r is iiifoi n i e d t h r o u g h :
.A p r e s e n t a t i o n ol t h e law t h a t g o \ e r n s t h e issue
A n e x p l a n a t i o n o f h o w t h e law a p p l i e s t h r o u g h r e f e r e n c e to c o u r t o p i n i o n s t hat a p
p l i e d t h e l a w in s i m i l a r s i t u a t i o n s
A d i s c u s s i o n o f h o w t h e law a p p l i e s t o t h e issue(s) in t h e c l i e n t ’s case
I n c l u d e d in t h e an a l y s i s is a d i s c u s s i o n o f a n y c o u n t e r a r g u n i e n t tiie o p p o s i n g si de m a y
raise.
f o l l o w i n g t h e a n a k s i s s e c t i o n is t h e c o n c l u s i o n . B e c a u s e t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e l aw to
t h e issue is d i s c u s s e d in t h e a n a h s i s s e c t i o n , t h e c o n c l u s i o n s h o u l d c o n t a i n a s u m m a r y o f
t h e law a n d a na l y s i s a l r e a d y p r e s e n t e d . It s h o u l d i n f o r m t h e r e a d e r o f all t h e a p p l i c a b l e l aw
a n d h o w it appl i es.
I h e r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s s e c t i o n is t h e last s e c t i o n ol t h e office m e n u ) . It i n c l u d e s a n y
s u g g e s t i o n s o r r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g t h e next s t e p s t o b e t a k e n o r f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h
o r investigation that s ho ul d be co n duc te d.
l h e t o r n i a t d i s c u s s e d in t hi s c h a p t e r is a r e c o m m e n d e d l o r m a t . I h e r e is n o s t a n d a r d
olfice m e m o f o r m a t . D i f f e r e n t law olfices h a v e d il f e r e nt p re f er e n c e s . L’se t h e f o r m a t p r e s e n t e d
in thi s c h a p t e r if a p p r o p r i a t e ; m o d i f y it a c c o r d i n g to y o u r n e e d s.
524
Quick R eferences
A dd it i on al autiiority 318 I leadings 5i6
Analysis— Application 512 Introductory sentences 3i6
A n a l y s i s — C a s e law 309 Paragraphs 317
A n a l y s i s — Rul e o f l a w 307 P e r s u a s i\ 'e p r e c e d e n I 317
A n al y s i s s e c t i o n 303 Recommendations 315
C'onclusion 314 Transition sentences 317
In te r n e t R e so u rce s
' I h e o n l i n e r e s o u r c e s for t hi s c h a p t e r a r e t h e s a m e as t h o s e listed in C h a p t e r 15. D u e to t h e lar ge
n u m b e r o f sites, t h e b e s t s t r a t e g y is t o n a r r o w y o u r s e a r c h t o a speci fic t y p e o f legal wTi ti ng
a n d t opi c, s u c h as “a na l ys i s, legal m e m o r a n d u m , p u b l i c s e r v i c e c o n t r a c t s ” o r “a p p l i c a t i o n o f
law, legal m e m o r a n d u m , h i g h w a y c o n s t r u c t i o n . ”
E x e rcise s
A d d i t i o n a l assigtinieiits iirc ava ila b le on the C o u r s e M a te . I h e first l i m e y o u ci t e t h e o p i n i o n , u s e t h e c i t a t i o n

f o r m a t v o u a r e g i v e n t o r t h e o p i n i o n in t h e a s s i g n m e n t .
Det ai l t h e p r o c e s s t o r p r e s e n t i n g a ca s e in t h e a n a l v s i s sec
t i on o f a n office m e m o .
For Example Britton V. Britton is cited in assignment
A S S IG N M E N T 2 5 as 100 N.M. 424, 671 P.2d 1135 (1983).
L')etail t h e f o r m a t o f t h e a n a l y s i s s e c t i o n o f a n o f h c e m e m o .
ASSIGNMENT 3 1his is h o w y o u s h o u l d cite t h i s o p i n i o n t h e iirst t i m e

D e s c r i b e w h a t s h o u l d a n d s h o u l d n o t b e i n c l u d e d in t h e it is u s e d in t h e m e m o r a n d u m . W h e n y o u n e e d t o q u o t e
c o n c l u s i o n s e c t i o n o t a n t>ilice m e m o . f r o m a n o p i n i o n in t h e m e m o , u s e a b l a n k l i ne t o i n d i c a t e
A S S IG N M E N T 4 t h e p a g e n u m b e r f r o m w h i c h t h e q u o t a t i o n is t a k e n .
i ^ er i or m a s s i g n m e n t s 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, o r 11 u s i n g y o u r s t a t e ’s
s t a t u t o r y a n d c a s e law.
In e a c h o i t h e t o l l o w i n g e x er c i s e s , t h e a s s i g n m e n t For Example Britton, 100 N.M. at____671 P.2d at.
is t o p r e p a r e a n o f h c e m e m o . Hach a s s i g n m e n t c o n t a i n s or Id. a t__ , 671 P.2d at___.
a n a s s i g n m e n t m e m o f r o m t h e s u p e r v i s i n g a t t o r n e y tliat
i n c l u d e s all t h e a v ai l ab l e fact s o f t h e case. C o m p l e t e t h e
m e m o b a s e d o n t h e s e facts. If a d d i t i o n a l facts a r e n e e d e d , D o not c o n d u c t a d di tio na l research. C o m p l e t e th e
n o t e t hi s in t h e r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s s e c t i o n o f t h e m e m o . a s s i g n m e n t u s i n g t h e facts, e n a c t e d kuv, a n d c a s e law' c o n
W h e n p r e p a r i n g th e h e a d i n g o f e ac h a s s i g n m e n t , use t a i n e d in e a c h a s s i g n m e n t . F o r t h e p u r p o s e s o f t h e a s s i g n
“S up er v i s i n g A t t o r n e y ” in t h e “T o " line, a n d p u t y o u r n a m e m e n t s , a s s u m e t h a t t h e c a se s h a v e n o t b e e n o v e r t u r n e d o r
a f t er t h e “ F r o m . ” m o d i f i e d by s u b s e q u e n t c o u r t d e c i s i o n s .
I- ollowing e a c h a s s i g n m e n t is a r e f e r e n c e l o t h e a p p l i
ca bl e e n a c t e d a n d c a s e kuv. In s o m e a s s i g n m e n t s , t h e case
■ft): [Yo u r n a m e ]
c i t at i on i n c l u d e s a r e f e r e n c e o n l y t o t h e r e g i o n a l r e p o r t e r
c i t a t i o n ; t h e s t a t e r e p o r t e r c i t a t i o n is n o t i n c l u d e d . U s e I'Vom: S u p e rv i s i n g At t o r n e y
o n l y t h e c i t a t i o n p r e s e n t e d in t h e a s s i g n m e n t . I h e case s Re: D i x o n V. C a ry; p r o b a t e o f

a r e p r e s e n t e d in A p p e n d i x A. h o l o g r a p h i c will
W e r e p r e s e n t H o l l v H i x o n , t h e w i d o w o t 'Ihoiiia.s M r . l i l d r i d g e to p a \ ’ t h e c h i l d s u p p o r t p a y m e n t s d u o
D i x o n , in t h e case o i D ix o n r. ('nry. She wi s h es t o c h a l l e n g e lor the m o n t h s he did not m a k e pa}'ments; th e a m o u n t
t h e p r o b a t e o t ' t h e h o l o g r a p h i c will o f i h o m a s O i x o n . M a r \ to t a le d S7,000. M r . E l d r i d g e c o u n t e r e d w i t h a p e t i t i o n
C a r v , t h e s i st er I h o m a s Dixon a n d personal rejiresenta- to m o d i t} ’ his c h il d s u p p o r t o b l i g a t i o n . I'he p e t i t i o n
t i ve of ' h i s est at e , h a s s u b m i t t e d for p r o b a t e a h o l o g r a p i i i c r e c ] uo s l e d t h a t h e b e e x c u s e d f r o m h a v i n g t o p a y t h e
will p r e p a r e d b y M r . D i x o n . o b l i g a t i o n s t h a t a c c r u e d d u r i n g t h e 10 m o n t h s h e w a s
l l i e first h a l f o f t h e will is in t h e h a n d w r i t i n g ot unempUn'od. T h e c o u r t o r d e r e d i\Ir. E l d r i c i g e t o p a y
M r . D i x o n . ' I h e s e c o n d h a l f is t y p e w r i t t e n . It w a s t\ p e d b\- o n e - h a l f o f the a m o u n t d u e , S3,500, a n d e x c u s e d h i m
t h e n e x t - d o o r n e i g h b o r , E d g a r M a e . M r . M a e s t at e s t ha t f r o m pa} i n g t h e r e m a i n i n g S 3 , 5 0 0 . ' I ' he c o u r t s t a t e d
M r . D i x o n a s k e d h i m to finish t h e will b e c a u s e Mr . D i x o n t h a t M r . E l d r i d g e d i d n o t h a v e t o p a } ’ t h e ful l a m o u n t
w a s t o o w e a k to c o n t i n u e , i h e will is s i gn e d b\' Mr . D i x o n . b ecause he was u n o n ip lo y e d d u r i n g the m o n t h s the
' I h e r e a r e n o s u b s c r i b i n g wi t ne s se s to t he will, b u t it inc l ude s child su p p o r t acc ru ed. T h e a tto rn e} ’ that r e p r e s e n te d
a s e l f - p r o v i n g affidavit t ha t m e e t s t h e r e c j u i r e m e n t s o l ' t h e M r s . I d d r i d g e in t h e t r i a l c o u r t t o l d h e r t h a t t h e r e is n o
s t at ut e. basis tor an ap peal o f t h e c o u rt order.
Is t h e will a d m i s s i b l e to p r o b a t e u n d e r Texas law? Please c h e c k t h e s t a t u t o r y a n d case law t o d e t e r m i n e if
t h e trial c o u r t a c t e d p r o p e r l y w h e n it e x c u s e d M r . E l d r i d g e
S tatutory Law: Tex. Prob. C o d e . A n n . § 59, Recjuisites o f f r o m pa}’ing S3, 500 o f t h e b a c k c h i l d s u p p o r t .
a W'ill ( \ ' e r n o n 1980), p r o \ ides: “ E v e r y last will a n d t e s t a
m e n t . . . shal l b e in w r i t i n g . . . , a n d shall, if n o t w h o l h in Statutory Law; Ind. C'ckIo § 3 1 - 2 - 1 1 - 1 2 , M o d i f i c a t i o n o f
t h e h a n d w r i t i n g o f t h e testat or, b e a t t e s t ed h y t w o (2) o r d e l i n c ] u e n t SLi ppor t p a } ’m e n t , p r o \ ides:
m o r e credible w i t n e s s e s . . . . ” (a) I'.xcept as p r o \ i de d in s u b s e c t i o n ( b ) . . . , a c o u r t m a } ’
'l ex. P r o b . C o d e . A n n . § 60, E x c e p t i o n P e r t a i n i n g to n ot re t ro a c t i x ’el}' m o d i f \ ’ a n o b l i g o r ' s d u t \ ’ to p a y a
H o l o g r a p h i c W'ilis ( V e r n o n 1980), p r c n i d e s : “ W h e r e t he d e l i i u ] u e n t s u p p o r t pa}’m e n t .
will is w r i t t e n w h o l l y in t h e h a n d w r i t i n g o f t h e t e s t a t or , t he
(b) .A c o u r t w i t h j u r i s d i c t i o n o v e r a s u p p o r t o r d e r m a y
a t t e s t a t i o n o f t h e s u b s c r i b i n g w i t n e s s e s ma\- b e d i s p e n s e d
modif}' a n o b l i g o r ' s d u t } ’ to p a y a s u p p o r t p a y m e n t
witli. S uc h a will m a \ ’ b e m a d e s el l - p r o\ ' e d at a n \ ' t i m e d u r
t h a t b e c o m e s d ue :
i n g t h e t e s t a t o r ' s l i fe t i me b \ ’ t h e a t t a c h m e n t o r a n n e x a t i o n
(1) . \ f i e r n o t i c e ot a p e t i t i o n to m o d i t } ’ t h e s u p p o r t
t h e r e t o o f a n atf ida\' it by t h e t e s t a t o r t o t h e effect t h at t h e
o r d e r h a s b oo n g i v e n . . . to t h e o b l i g e e . . . a n d
i n s t r i m i e n t is his last will; t h at he was at least e i g h t e e n years
o t age w h e n h e e x e c u t e d it . . . ; t ha t h e wa s ol s o u n d m i n d ; (2) b e f o r e a final o r d e i ’ c o n c e r n i n g t h e p e t i t i o n for
a n d t ha t h e h a s n o t r e \ ' o k e d sLich i n s t r u m e n t . " mo c l i l i c a t i o n is e n t e r e d .
C a se I-aw: D e a n r. D ickcy, 225 S. \\' . 2d 9 9 9 ( Tex. ( a v . \ pp. Case Law: ( j i r d w e l l v. Ciwudtiiey, 5 5 6 N.E^.2d 9 5 3 ( I nd. (' t.
1949) (s ee A p p e n d i x A). . \ p p . 1990) (see A p p e n d i x A).
ASSIGNMENT 6 ASSIGNM ENT?

I'o: I Your name] I'o: [Your n a me ]
From: Supervi si ng Attorne}' I' rom: S u p e r v i s i n g At t or ne} ’
Re: Eldridge i’. F.ldridge: mo d i f i ca t i o n of Re: C.omnioiiu’eallli r. ¡ones; a s
child s u p p o r t sault b}’ m e a n s o f a d a n g e r o u s
W e r e p r e s e n t G w e n El d r i dg e in t he case o f Eldridge i’. w e a p o n — lightning
Eldridge. I h e E l dr i dges we r e d i v o r ce d in 2010. Mr s. lildridge I hi s is a b i z a r r e c a s e to sa}’ t h e least. W e h a v e b e e n
w a s a w a r d e d c u s t o d y o f t h e i r t w o m i n o r c h i l d r e n . M r . El a p p o i n t e d b}’ t h e c o u r t t o r e p r e s e n t S e d r i c k J o n e s in t h e
d r i d g e w a s o r d e r e d to m a k e c h i l d s u p p o r t p a } - me n t s in t he case o i C o in i i i o n w e a l t h r. Jones. M r . J o n e s is c h a r g e d w i t h
a m o u n t o t $ 7 0 0 p e r m o n t h . H e lost hi s j ob in | a n u a r } ' ot a t t e m p t e d n n i r d e r , b a t t er } ’, false i n i p r i s o n m e n t , a n d assault
2011 a n d w a s u n e m p l o y e d f r o m t h a t d a t e t h r o u g h O c t o b e r with a d a n g e ro u s w eap o n . Mr. Jones has ha d a s to rm y
o f 2011. H e t h e n o b t a i n e d e m p l o } m e n t as a n e l e c t r i c i a n . 10-}oar r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h E l i z a b e t h S t e w a r d . I h e r e l a t i o n
M r. E ldridge did not m a k e child su p p o r t pa\ - ship has been m a r k e d by m u lti pl e in st anc es o f d o m e s t i c
m e n t s f o r t h e m o n t h s h e w a s u n e m p l o y e d . In | a n u a r } ' \ i o l e n c e . '1 he}’ live in a c o t t a g e l o c a t e d oil a b l u f f o v e r l o o k
o f 2 0 1 2 , M r s . E l d r i d g e filed a m o t i o n w i t h t h e c o u r t t h a t i ng t h e A t l a n t i c O c e a n . O n A p r i l 5 o f t h i s }’ea r , af t er an
e n t e r e d th e d iv o r c e d ecree, seeking an o r d e r forcing e x t e n d e d b o u t of d r i n k i n g a n d a r g u i n g , M r . ( o n e s d r a g g e d
Ms. S t e w a r d o u t s i d e a n d t i ed h e r to tiie l i g l i t n i ng r o d a t (a) \ \ ' h o e \ ' e r , b y t'orce a n d \ iol ence, o r b \ i n t i m i d a t i o n ,
t a c h e d to tiie co t t ag e . I h i s t o o k p l a c e d u r i n g a v i o l e n t e l e c takes, o r a t t e m p t s to take, I r om t h e p e r s o n o r p r e s e n c e
trical s t o r m . W h e n h e t i e d h e r t o tlie pole, h e sai d, " I ’ll fix o f a n o t h e r . . . a n v p r o p e r t } ' t)r m o n e y o r a n y o t h e r
y o u, y o u ’re g o n n a t r y . ” L i g h t n i n g d i d n o t s t r i k e t h e pole. t h i n g o f x'alue b e l o n g i n g to, t>r in t h e c a r e , c u s t o d y ,
' Ihi s act is t h e ba s i s o t ' t h e a s s a u lt b\' m e a n s o l ' a d a n g e r c o n t r o l , m a n a g e m e n t , o r po s s e s s i ( i n ot, a b a n k . . . .
o u s w e a p o n charge. 'Ih e state cla im s that th e d a n g e r o u s Shall b e f i ne d u n d e r t hi s title o r i m p r i s o n e d n o t
w e a p o n is l i g ht n i n g . m o r e t h a n 20 ye a r s , o r b o t h .
P l eas e p r e p a r e a m e m o a d d r e s s i n g t h e c ]uestion ot (d) W h o e v e r , in c o m m i t t i n g , o r in a t t e m p t i n g t o c o m m i t ,
w h e t h e r t h e r e is a su f f i c i en t b a s i s t o s u p p o r t t h e c h a r g e ot' a n v o f f e n s e d e f i n e d in s u b s e c t i o n s (a) a n d ( b) o f t hi s
a s s aul l by m e a n s o t ' a d a n g e r o u s w e a p o n s . s e c t i o n , a s s a u l t s a n y p e r s o n , o r p u t s in j e o p a r d ) - t h e
life o f a n \ - p e r s o n b y u s e o f a d a n g e r o u s w e a p o n o r
S t a t u t o r y L a w : Ci.L. c. 263, § 13A, .Assault a n d Ba t t er y
dev ice, shal l b e h n e d u n d e r t hi s title o r i m p r i s o n e d
w i t h D a n g e r o u s W e a p o n {state ot M a s s a c h u s e t t s ) , p r o
n o t m o r e t h a n 23 \ ears, o r b o t h .
vides: “ ( b) W h o e v e r , b v m e a n s o t ' a d a n g e r o u s w e a p o n ,
c o m m i t s a s s a u l t a n d b a t t e r y u p o n a n o t h e r shal l b e p u n C a s e L a w : U n ite d States r. M u r t i n c z - l i n i c n c z , 8 6 4 F.2d 6 6 4
i s h e d by i m p r i s o n m e n t in t h e s t at e p r i s o n t o r n o t m o r e ( 9 t h Cir. 1989) ( s e e A p p e n d i x A).
t h a n th' e years. . . .”
C a s e L a w : C o n i m o m v c a l t h i'. S hciu 38 Mas s. .-\pp. Ct. 7, ASSIGNM ENTS

6 4 4 N . W . 2 d 244 ( 1 9 93 ) ( s e e . \ p p e n d i x A). To: [Your n a me ]
1-rom: S u p e r v i si ng .Attorney
ASSIGNM ENTS Re: Mr . Arti.iro Ciarcia; c h i l d s u p p o r t
To: [Youi' n a me ] modification
1-rom: S u p e r v i s i n g .Vttorne}' A l t e r 13 ye a r s o f m a r r i a g e , A r t u r o ( i a r c i a a n d M a r y
Re: i i i i l c i l Sititcs i'. (.Ainlcr; ar m ed bank (;ii a\e/ . we r e g r a n t e d a d i v o r c e in Ma y 2001. I h e r e a r e t h r e e
r o b h e r \ ' wi t h a d a n g e r o u s w e a p o n c h i l d r e n f r o m t h e m a r r i a g e . Mr. Ciarcia w a s a w a r d e d p r i
m a r y cust od}' o f t h e c h i l d r e n . Ms. C;ha\xv„ a b r a i n s u r g e o n
W e lia\'e b e e n a p p o i n t e d to r e p r e s e n t I d d o n Chanter
at t h e t i m e o t ' t h e d i v o r ce , was o r d e r e d t o pa\' m o n t h l y c hi l d
in t he case o i L'liitcil S t u l f s v. i'a iilc r. .Mr. c ; a n t e r is c l i a r ge d
s u p p o r t in t h e a m o u n t o f S3, 000 p e r m o n t h , i h e t e r m s ot
w i t h o n e c o u n t o i a r m e d h , \ n k v o b b c v y , i n v i u l a U u n ol'
t h e d i v o r c e o r d e r w e r e u n d i v i de d in t h a t it d i d n o t s p e c i f y
18 U. S.C. § 2 1 13(a) a n d (d).
a “p e r c h i l d ” a m o u n t .
O n l a n u a r y 3 ot ' t h i s year, M r . C a n t e r r o b b e d t h e l irst
,\Is. ( ' h a v e z a l w a y s r e s e n t e d t h e a m o u n t o f c h i l d
St a t e B a n k . A f t e r h e e n t e r e d t h e b a n k , he a p p r o a c h e d a
s u p p o r t s h e w a s o r d e r e d t o pa\' ; h e r f r u s t r a t i o n o v e r t h i s
t eller a n d p u l l e d f r o m hi s p o c k e t a c r u d e l y c a r v e d w o o d e n
led h e r r e c e n t h ' to q u i t h e r me d ic al p r a c t i c e a n d en ro l l
replica o f ' a 9 m m Be retta h a n d g u t i . li e h a d ca rv e d the
in t h e p a r a l e g a l p r o g r a m at t h e c o m m u n i t y c o l l e g e . ' I h i s
r epl i ca t r o m a b l o c k of p i n e w o o d a n d s t a i n e d it w i t h d a r k
c a r e e r c h a n g e r e s u l t e d in a s u b s t a n t i a l r e d u c t i o n in h e r
w a l n u t w' ood s t ai n t o m a k e it l o o k blai.k. H e d r i l l e d a b o l e
i n c o m e . She to l d sev eral individi.ials th a t s h e q u i t h e r
in t h e b a r r e l e n d in a n a t t e m p t t o m a k e it l o o k like a real
p r a c t i c e b e c a u s e s h e “c a n ’t s t a n d to p a y t h a t m u c h m o n e y
Berett a.
to my ex-husban.d.”
l h e t el ler w a s s o t ' r i g h t e n e d t h a t h e o n l y g l a n c e d at
F o u r m o n t h s a g o , t h e o l d e s t c h i l d t u r n e d 18 a n d
t h e w o o d e n g u n . H e b e l i e v e d it w a s real. ' I h e teller at t h e
m o v e d o u t o f M r . ( i a r c i a ’s h o u s e . .As s o o n a s t h e o k f -
next w i n d o w l o o k e d at t h e r e p l i c a a n d a f t e r w a r d s t at ed that
est c h i l d m o v e d o u t , ,\Is. Cdiavez r e d u c e d b \ ' o n e - t h i r d
s h e w a s f a i r h ’ c e r t a i n at t h e t i m e t h a t it w a s fake. \ o o n e
the a m o u n t o f child s u p p o r t she was paying. She n e i t h e r
else n o t i c e d w h e t h e r t h e w o o d e n r e p l i c a wa s real.
sought nor obtained a court order grantin g a modification
P l eas e d e t e r n i i n e w h e t h e r , in l i ght ot t h e fact s ot thi s
o f h e r s u p p o r t o b l i g a t i o n . S h e t o l d Mr . ( i a r c i a t h a t s h e d i d
case, tl iere is s u f h c i e n t e \ i d e n c e t o s u p p o r t t h e c h a r g e t h a t
n o t h a v e to p a y t h e full a m o u n t b e c a u s e t h e o l d e s t c h i l d
M r . C a n t e r c o m m i t t e d b a n k r o b b e r \ - b \ ’ u s e o f a “d a n g e r
h a d t u r n e d 18. I' wo m o n t h s ago, s h e u n i l a t e r a l h ' re duc e c f
ous w eap o n .”
h e r c h i l d s u p p o r t p a y m e n t s t o S3 0 0 p e r m o n t h . S h e t o l d
S t a t u t o r y L a w : 18 L’.S.C. § 2 1 13(a) & (d). B a n k r o b b e r y M r . Ciarcia, “ I h a t ’s all 1 c a n a f f or d t o p a y n o w t h a t I’m
an d incidental cr im es, p r o \ i d e s : g oi n g to school .”
Mr . ( i a r c i a ha s c o m e to us s e e k i n g legal a d \ ice. W i t h d o n e a g o o d job for hini . Af t e r d i s c u s s i n g t h e t e r m s , Mr.
tlie a b o v e fact s in m i n d , p r e p a r e a m e m o a d d r e s s i n g t h e Kells p u r c h a s e d t h e m o w e r for $300.
f o l l o w i n g c | uest i ons ; O n e w e e k lat er, M r . Kells c a l l ed M r . S i m n s a n d i n
1. W a s it p e r m i s s i b l e f o r Ms . ( ' h a v e z t o u i i i l a t e r al K' f o r m e d h i m that the m o w e r w as too small a n d u n d e r
r e d u c e s u p p o r t w h e n the oldest child re a c h e d the p o w e r e d f o r hi s n e e d s , a n d h e w a n t e d h i s m o n e y b a c k .
a g e ot ma i o r i t } ? Mr . S i m n s r e f u s e d , a n d M r . Kells h a s filed s u i t in s m a l l
claims co urt , c la im in g b re a c h o f an iniplied w a r r a n t y o f
2. W h a t is t h e l i k e l i h o o d iif t h e c o u r t g r a n t i n g a m o d i
fi t ness f o r a p a r t i c u l a r p u r p o s e . M r . S i m n s ’s o n l y e x p e r i
f i ca t i on o f c hi l d s u p p o r t d u e to Ms . ( ' h a \ e z ’s c h a n g e
e n c e w i t h r i d i n g m o w e r s is b a s e d o n h i s u s e o t t h e R y d e r
o f occupation?
1000. H e d o e s n o t h a\ ' e a n y s p e ci a l e x p e r t i s e c o n c e r n i n g
S ta t u to r y Law: NMSA § 28-6-1 (Repl. Pamp. 1991) riding mowers.
( s t at e o f N e w M e x i c o ) p r o v i d e s t h a t t h e a g e o f m a j o r i t y is Please assess t h e l i k e l i h o o d of M r . Kells p re v a i l i n g o n
r e a c h e d w h e n a n i n d i \ ' i d u a l t u r n s 18 y e a r s old. a n imp l i ed w a r r a n t y o f fitness for a p a r t i c u l ar p u r p o s e claim.
N M S A § 4 0 - 4 - 7 (Repl. P a m p . 1994) — P r o c e e d i n g s ;
Statutory Law': ORS 72.3150, Implied warranty: fit
s p o u s a l s u p p o r t ; s u p p o r t o f c hi l dr e n ; d i v i si o n o f p r o p e r t y —
n e s s for p a r t i c u l a r p u r p o s e ( s t at e o f O r e g o n ) , pr o\ ' i de s :
( s t at e ot N e w M e x i c o ) , s e c t i o n F, p r o \ ides: “T h e c o u r t m a y
“ W h e r e t h e seller at t h e t i m e o f c o n t r a c t i n g h a s r e a s o n
m o d i f y a n d c h a n g e an\- o r d e r in respect to . . . care, c u s t o d y ,
to k n o w a n \ ’ p a r t i c u l a r p u r p o s e for w h i c h t h e g o o d s ar e
m a i n t e n a n c e . . . o f t h e chil dre n whene\-er c ir cu m st an ce s
r e q u i r e d a n d t h a t t h e b u y e r is r e l yi n g o n t h e s e l l e r ’s skill o r
r e n d e r s u c h c h a n g e p r o p e r . I h e d i s t r i ct c o u r t shall h a v e
i u d g i i i e n t to select o r f u r n i s h s u i t a b l e g o o d s , t h e r e is u n
e x c l u s i v e j u r i s d i c t i o n o f all m a t t e r s p e r t a i n i n g to t h e . . .
less e x c l u d e d o r m o d i f i e d u n d e r ( ’)RS 7 2 . 3 6 1 0 a n i m p l i e d
c a r e , c u s t o d } ’, m a i n t e n a n c e . . . o f t h e c h i l d r e n so l o n g as
w a r r a n t } t h a t t h e g o o d s shal l b e fit for s u c h p u r p o s e . ”
the children reniain m ino rs.”
NMSA § 40-4-1 1.4(A) (Repl. Pamp. 1994)- C a s e L a w : B e a m v. C u llett, 48 (')r. App. 47, 6 15 P.2d 1196
M o d i f i c a t i o n o f chi l d s u p p o r t or d e r s; e x c h a n g e o f fi nancial ( 19 8 0 ) (see A p p e n d i x A).
i n f o r m a t i o n — t h e r el ev a n t p o r t i o n of s e c t i o n A pi' ovides: “
A c o u r t ma}' m o d i f \ ’ a c h i k i s u p p o r t o b l i g a t i o n Lipon a
ASSIGNMENT 11
s h o w i n g o f m a t e r i a l a n d s u b s t a n t i a l c h a n g e s in c i r c u m
I'o: I'i'oiu’ n a me ]
s t a n c e s s u b s e q u e n t to t h e a d j u d i c a t i o n o f t h e p r e e x i s t i n g
order." From: S uper s ising Attorne}’
Re: ( '.omiiioiiu'ealth w (lavel; e x ec u t io n ot

C' ase I , aw: I h i tt o ii r. B ritto n , fOO N . M . 424, 671 P.2d 1 f.^3
search w a r r a n t — u n a n n o u n c e d e n t r y
( 1 9 8 3 ) (see A p p e n d r x A).
W o l c o tt V. W o lc o tt, 103 N . M . 608, 73 3 P. 2d 3 2 6 (Ct. W e r e p r e s e n t D a r r e n C l a \ e l in t h e c a s e ot C o m
A p p . 1987) ( s ee . Appe n d i x A). m o n w e a l t h r. Clavel. In t h i s case, p o l i c e officers e x e c u t e d

a s c a r c h w a r r a n t t ha t a u t h o r i z e d t h e s e a r c h o f t h e c l i e n t ’s
ASSIGNM ENT 10 h o n i e t o r d r u g s . W h e n t h e p o l i c e a r r i v e d at Mr . C.lavel’s

h o u se , t h e y k n o c k e d o n tiie d o o r , s h o u t e d “ Police, o p e n up,”
To: (Vour na me]
w a i t e d 15 s e c o n d s , k i c k e d t h e d o o r o p e n , a n d s e a r c h e d t h e
Proni: SLipcr\’isiiig At t or ne y
p re n i i s e s . Mr. Clavel , w h o is h a r d o f h e a r i n g , h e a r d s o m e
Re: Kelli v. Siuiiii; i m p l i e d w a r r a n t y o f n o i s e a n d w a s a p p r o a c h i n g t h e d o o r to o p e n it w h e n it w a s
fi tness for a p a r t i c u l a r p u r p o s e kicked op en. U p o n se ar ch in g the house, the police fo u n d a
p o u n d o f m a r i j u a n a in t h e b e d r o o m closet. Mr . C l avel w a s
O u r cli ent, M r Me r r i l Siu’i ns, is b e i n g s u e d by I'om
c h a r g e d w i t h i n t e n t t o d i s t r i b u t e n ar c o t i c s .
Kells for b r e a c h o f a n i m p l i e d w a r r a n t y o f ti tness for a p a r
P l ea s e p r e p a r e a m e m o a s s e s s i n g t h e l i k e l i h o o d o f
t i cul ar p u r p o s e in the case ot Kells i’. Siiiins. Mr. S i m n s place d
h a \ ’i n g t h e e v i d e n c e s u p p r e s s e d b e c a u s e o f t h e m a n n e r in
a n a d in t h e Diiily Post of f e r i ng to sell a R} d e r 1000 r i di n g
w h i c h t h e officers e x e c u t e d t h e w a r r a n t .
l a w n m o w e r for S400. Mr. Kells r e s p o n d e d t o t h e a d a n d
c a m e to Mr. S i m n s ’s h o u s e to p u r c h a s e t h e mo w e r . M r Kells
S t a t u t o r y L a w : ' I h e F o u r t h A m e n d m e n t to t h e U n i t e d
tol d M r S i m n s that h e n e e d e d a g o o d r i d i n g m o w e r b e c a u s e
States C o n s t i t u t i o n (U.S. C o n s t . A m e n d . IV)-
h e h a d t w o a n d o n e - h a l f a c r e s that h a d t o be m o w e d o n c e
a week. Mr . S i m n s r e s p o n d e d that, a l t h o u g h he h a d n e v e r C a s e L a w: ( C o m m o n w e a lth c. D e M ic h e l, 4 42 Pa. 353, 2 7 7
n e e d e d to m o w m o r e t h a n a n acre, t h e m o w e r h a d alwavs A . 2d 159 ( 19 7 1 ) (see A p p e n d i x A).
ASSIG N M EN T 12 o r d i n a n c e p r o v i d e s : “' I h e C i t y C o u n c i l , u p o n m a j o r i t y
\ o t e , ma\ - p r o h i b i t t h e pLiblic p e r t o r m a n c e o t an\ - t y p e
l o: I' i bur iiaiiii']
o f e n t e r t a i n m e i i t t h a t d o e s n o t c o n i p o r t w i t h l oc a l s t a n
I rom: Supcrx isiiig Atloriic\'
d a r d s ot' d e c e n c \ - o r a c c e p t a b i l i t } ' . ” T h e o r d i n a n c e d o c s
Re: M r s . | oyco 1 ielger; p r o b a t e ot co p \ '
n o t d e t i n e “ local s t a n d a r d s o f d e c e n c \ - o r a c c e p t a b i l i t y ” o r
ot lost o r i gi n a l will p rox ide a n y s t a n d a r d s o r g u i d e l i n e s t h a t t h e c i t y c o u n c i l
W’e rcpre.scnt Mr s. He l g e r in t h e p r o b a t e o t h e r h u s m u s t lollow-.
b a n d ’s est ate. .\h'. H e l g e r d i e d foui' w e e k s a g o a l t e r a s u d .Mad 1) o g R e v i e w w a n t s t o c h a l l e n g e t h e a u t h o r i t y o f
d e n h e a r t a t t a c k . .Mrs. H e l g e r h a s b e e n u n a b l e t o l o c a t e t h e | o n e s \ ille ci t y c o u n c i l t o b a n its p e r f o r n i a n c e . P l e a s e
t h e o r i g i n a l ol i\lr. H e l g e r ’s will. She k n o w s t h a l h e h a d p r e p a r e a n olfice m e m o r a n d u m a d d r e s s i n g t h e q u e s t i o n
p r e p a r e d a will, a n d s h e h a s a c o n i o r m e d cop\- o t ' t h e will o f w h e t h e r t h e m u n i c i p a l o r d i n a n c e v i o l at e s tiie g r o u p ’s
e x e c u t e d l ' ) e c e m b e r 1, 2002. She also has a c o n i o r m e d cop\' right to fr e e d o m o f expression.
ot a c i ' di ci i e x e c u t e d o n .May 6, 2007. S h e d o e s n o t h a \ e
Rule o f Law: l-'irst . A m e n d n i e n t t o t h e U n i t e d St a t es C o n
t h e o r i g i n a l ot t h e c o d i c i l . \ h ' s . H e l g e r t h o u g h t t h e law
s t i t u t i o n (L’.S. ( ; o n s t . A m e n d , i).
t i r m t h a t p r e p a r e d t h e will kept t h e o r i g i n a l , h u t s h e \vas
i n f o r m e d t ha t t h e t i r m c o u l d n o t l ocat e t h e o r i g i n a l . Ilte Case Law: A s s u m e t h a t t h e o n l y c a s e l a w g o v e r n i n g
s e n i o r p a r t n e r at t h e t i r m tol d h e r t h a t t h e v d o n o t k e e p t hi s q u e s t i o n is A t l a n ti c B cach ('asino, Inc. r. M o r c n z o n i ,
t h e o r i g i n a l o f wills o r codici ls. 74 9 I'. Supp. 38 (D. R. I. 1990). I h e r e l eva nt p o r t i o n s o f t h e
P l e a s e a s s e s s t h e l i k e l i h t x i d ot t h e p r o b a t e c o i n t c a s e ar e p r e s e n t e d at t h e e n d o f t hi s c h ap t e r .
g r a n t i n g a p e t i t i o n t o r a d m i n i s t r a t i o n ot t h e c o n i o r m e d
c o p \ ' ot t h e will a n d codicil.
A S SIG N M E N T S
R ule o f l.aw: I h e r u l e ot law g o s e r n i n g t hi s qLiestion is N o te : . A s s i g n m e n t s 14 a n d 13 w e r e p r e p a r e d b y M a r y
c a s e law r a t h e r t h a n s t a t u t o r y law - h i the I'itiitc oj I’iirsoiu
K u b i c h e k , ID, d i r e c t o r o f P a r a l e g a l S t u d i e s at C a s p e r
116 So. 2d : ^t;\ 313 ( f l a . Dist. Ct. App. 1982): t h e c o u r t
C' ollege in ( ' a s p e r , W y o m i n g . I h e initial dr a f t o f tiie i n o d e l
h e l d t hat t h e r e is a “p r e s u m p t i o n t hat a will w h i c h wa s
a n s w e r t o e a c h a s s i g n m e n t i n c l u d e d in tlie i n s t r u c t o r ’s
in t h e p o s s e s s i o n o f t h e t e s t a t or p r i o r to d e a t h a n d w h i c h
M a n u a l wa s p r e p a r e d b\- Ms . K u b ic ii e k ’s s t u d e n t s .
c a n n o t b e l o c a t e d s u b s e q u e n t t o il eat h w.is i l e s t r o x e d b\
To: |^'()ur n a me ]
t h e t e s t a t o r w i t h t h e int ent i i ) n o t ’r e \ ' okiii g it.''
I rom: S upe r \ ' isi ng At t o r n e y
(âsc I,aw: I h e c o u r t o p i n i o n thal i n t e r p r e t s t h e a p p l i ca Re: Wright i’. State; liability o f State Uni -
t i o n ol t h e rul e s t at e d in t h e p r e \ ’ious c ase is t h e t o l l o w i n g \ ersity tor batter\- of st u d e n t
case: In rc i'.itulc t>l K iisziiuiid, 191 So. 2tl 287 (l-’la. Dist.
We r e p r e s e n t j o e a n d A n n W' right, p a r e n t s o f B o b
(;t. , \ p p . 1986) (s e e A p p e n d i x .\).
Wr i gli t, a t r e s l i m a n at Stat e Un i v e r s i t ) ' o f C i e n e r i c w h o w a s
ASSIGNM ENT 13 li\-iiig 4 0 0 m i l e s f r o m h o m e . Iôb l i \ e d in S m i t h Ha l l , a
fr e s h m a n d o rm it o ry . Bob w a n t e d to be involved in sc h o o l
To: ¡ Vo i i r n a n u ' l
a c t i \ ities. I h e u n i \ e r s i t y s u p p o r t e d i n t r a m u r a l s p o r t s a c
f r om: Su p e r v i s i n g ,Att(M'iiey
tivities w h e r e d o r m s t u d e n t s c o m p e t e d a g a i n s t o t h e r d o r m
Re: M ihi Dog Review r. loiicsvillc: I’irst
st u d e n t s . Bob w a s n o t ver\- a t h l e t i c a n d his d o r m lost g a m e s
A n i e n d n i e n t - f r e e d o m o f e xpression
b e c a u s e o f his l ac k o f skill a n d h e o ft e n g o t in t h e w a y o f
W'e r e p r e s e n t M a d D o g Rex iew, a l o c a l r a p b a n d . his t e a m . A l t e r a 0 - 4 r e c o r d , BoiVs t e a m m a t e s t h r e a t e n e d
As \ ( ) u k n o w , t hi s is a c o n t r o \ ’ersial g r o u p . ' I h e lyrics o f ii i m a n d t o l d iiini t o q ui t , iôb n o t i f i e d a c o u n s e l o r at t h e
o n e ol t h e i r s o n g s , “ M a d D o g ( j t \ ' (Counci l , ” d e s c r i b e s u n i \ ’crsily. i i o b d i d n o t q u i t , a n d a f t er t w o m o r e l o s i n g
o u r cil\' c o u n c i l in expl i ci t t e r m s u s i n g “d i r t \ '’ w o r d s a n d g a m e s , h e w a s b e a t e n b\- t i i r ee t e a m m a t e s . B o b , vvlio is
l a n g u a g e gene ral ly co n si d ere d obsce ne. Based u p o n the a d i a b e t i c , s u f f e r e d a b r o k e n a r m , h a d a fittii o f a l c o h o l
l a n g u a g e in t h e i r so n g s , a n d speciticalK- t h a t iii “M a d D o g p o u r e d d o w n his tiiroat, a n d r e q u i r e d 40 stitch es to his
( j t y C o u n c i l , " t h e cit} c o u n c i l o f l ones\' il le (a n e i g h b o r i n g tor so. ik)b w i t h d r e w f r o m t h e univer sit y. B o b ’s p a r e n t s a n d
mu n i c i p a l i t ) - ) h a s b a n n e d t h e g r o u p t r o m p e r f o r n i i n g in B o b w a n t to s u e tiie c ol l e g e u n d e r t h e f o l l o w i n g s e c t i o n s
their coniniuiiit\. ot t h e s t a t e s t a t u t e .
t h e l o n e s v i l l e c i t \ - c o u n c i l b a s e d its a u t h o r i t y t o e n ^ ' ou a r e onl\- to c o n s i d e r t h e f o l l o w i n g s t a t u t e s . D o
a ct t h e b a n o n M u n i c i p a l O r d i n a n c e s e c t i o n 3 3 3 - 2 0 . I h e n o t b r i n g in a n y o u t s i d e fact s o r law.
Statutes: W'e re pr e se nt lake .Martin, lake is a 25 \'ear-old .Amer
(a) H az in g is d e t i n c d as tol lows: ican citizen. He is olive s k i n n e d , 6 teet 3 inches, 220 p o u n d s

wi t h t hi ck d a r k h a i r a n d a lull b e a r d , lake a p p l i e d t'or a n
(1) A n y wi l l ful a c t i o n t a k e n o r s i t u a t i o n c r c a t e d ,
a i r p o r t securit} p o s i t i on , l i e s t a t e d that h e h a s tilled o ut
w h e t h e r o n o r o ff a n y s c h o o l , C(illege, uni\-ersity,
all t o r ms . He was i n f o r m e d t h a t he will n o t be hirecf. Jake’s
o r o t h e r e d u c a t i o n a l p r e m i s e s , w h i c h r eckl essh'
m o t h e r l i \ e s o n a n I n d i a n reserx at i on w i t h i n h \ ’e mi le s o f
o r i n t e n t i o n a l l y e n d a n g e r s the m e n t a l o r physi cal
t h e a i r p o r t securit)' p os i t i on . l ak e a r g u e s t hat h e is b e i n g
h e a l t h o f an\- s t u d e n t , o r
d i s c r i m i n a t e d against u n d e r 42 U.S.C^. ^ 2()00e-2(a)( 1). lake
(2) A n y will ful ac t o n o r o i l ' a n \ ’ s c h o o l , c o l l e g e , w a n t s a job wi t h a i r p o r t securit)' .
u n i \ ’c r s i t v , o r o t h e r e d u c a t i o n a l p r e m i s e s b y Vo u a r e to c o n s i d e r onl)' t h e t o l l o w i n g s t at u t es . D o
an\- p e r s o n a l o n e o r a c t i n g wi t h o t h e r s in s t r i k
n o t b r i n g in ati\' o u t s i d e lacts o r law.
ing, b e a t i n g , b r u i s i n g , o r m a i m i n g ; o r serioLisly
o t f e r i n g , t h r e a t e n i n g , o r a t t e m p t i n g t o s t r i k e, Statutes:
b eat , b r u i s e , o r m a i m , o r to d o o r s e r i o u s l y offer, 42 U.S.C. § 2()()()e-2
t h r e a t e n , o r a t t e m p t l o d o p h y s i ca l \ ’i o l en c e to (a) Hn i p l o y e r p r a c t i c e s
a n y s t u d e n t o f an\- s u c h e d u c a t i o n a l i n s t i t u t i o n
It shall be a n i mlawl' ul e m p k n n i e n t p r a c t i c e for
o r a n y a s s a u l t u p o n a n y s u c h s t u d e n t s m a d e for
an e m p k ) y e r . . .
t h e p u r p o s e o f c o m m i t t i n g a n y of t h e acts, o r
( I ) T o tail o r r ef u s e to h i r e o r to d i s c h a r g e a n \ i n d i
p r o d u c i n g a n \ ' o f t h e r e s u l t s to s u c h s t u d e n t as
vi dua l , o r o t h e r w i s e t o d i s c r i m i n a t e a g a i n s t a n v
d e f u i e d in t hi s se c t i o n .
i n d i \ ' i d u a l w i t h r e s p c c t to h i s c o m p e n s a t i o n ,
(3) ' I h e t e r m h a z i n g as d e f i n e d in thi s se c t i o n d o c s
t e r ms , c o n d i t i o n s , o r p r i \ ileges o f e m p l o ) ' m e n t ,
n o t i n c l u d e c u s t o m a r y a t h l e t i c e\ e n t s o r s i mi l a r
b e c a u s e o f ' s u c h i n d i \ ' i d u a l ’s race, c o l o r , rel i gi on,
c o n t e s t s o r c o m p e t i t i o n s , a n d is l i mi t e d to t h o s e
sex, o r n a t i o n a l o r i g i n ; . . . .
a c t i o n s t a k e n a n d s i t u a t i o n s c r e a t e d in c onne i . -
t i o n w i t h i n i t i a t i o n i n t o o r a f h l i a t i o n w i t h an\ ' (g) N a t i o n a l securit)'
organization. N o t w i t h s t a n d i n g anv o t h e r p r o v i s i o n of t hi s
s u b c h a p t e r , it shall n o t b e a n i.itilawfi.il e m p l o \ ' m e n t
( 4 ) 1 h e a c a d e m i c i n s t i t u t i o n , college, u n i v e r s i t y , etc.
p r a c t i c e f or ati e m p l o ) e r to tail o r r ef u s e to h i r e a n d
is liable l o r h a z i n g if:
emjMo)' an\- i n d i v i d u a l f o r a n ) p o s i t i o n , fo r a n e m
(i) it o c c i n ’r e d b\- m e m b e r s o f a c a m p u s g r o u p ;
p l o y e r to d i s c h a r g e a n i n d i v i d u a l t r o m a n\ ' p o s i t i o n ,
(ii) it h a d n o t i ce . o r l or an e n i p l o) ' me i i t a g e n c y to tail o r r e l u s e t o ref er
Pl e a s e d r a f t a n i n t e r o l h c e m e m o r a n d u m . I n c l u d e aii\' i n d i \ ' id u a l l o r e r n p l o v t i i e n l in a n \ ' p o s i t i o n , o r
t h e fol l owi ng: l or a l a b o r o r g a n i z a ti o r i to tail o r r e l u s e to ref er a n y

indi\'idLial for e m p l o \ ' m e i i f in an\' p o s i t i o n , if. . . .
To:
(1) t h e o c c u p a n c ) ' of s u c h p os i t i on , o r a c c ess to t h e
Irom:
pret ii ises in o r u p o n w h i c h an)' p a r t o f t h e d u
Re:
ties ol s u c h p o s i t i o n is p e r l o r m e d o r is t o be jier-
facts: ( i U' i n e mh e r to include parties a n d
f o r m e d , is su b j ec t to a n y r e q u i r e m e n t i m p o s e d in
w h a t t h e clients want.)
t h e int e r e st o f t h e t i a t i on a l s e c u r i t y o f t h e l ' n i t e d
fssi.ie(s): ( R e m e m b e r that the issue or issues Stat es u n d e r a n y s e c u r i t ) ’ p r o g r a m in effect p u r
m u s t itickide iurisdiction, key facts,
suant to o r a d m i n i s t e r e d uti der a n y sta tu te of
a n d be in q u e s t i o n form.)
t h e U n i t e d St at es o r a n)' H x e c u t i \ e o r d e r o f t h e
A n a h si s : I Vesi dent; a n d
Conc l us i on:
(i) Businesses or enter pri ses e x te n d i n g p r e f e r
enti al t r e a t m e n t t o I n d i a n s
ASSIGNMENT 15
N o t h i n g c o n t a i n e d in t hi s s u b c h a p t e r ( r e g a r d i n g n a
■fo: [■^'our n a m e |
t i onal se c ur i t y) shall a p p h ' to an)' b u s i n e s s o r e n t e r p r i s e
ffom: S u p e r v i s i n g . \t tor ne\'
011 o r n e a r an I n d i a n reserx a t i o n w i t h r es p e c t to an)' p u b -
lê: M a r tin r. C.ity Airport; 42 U.S.C;
licl)' a n n o u n c e d e m p l o y m e n t p r a c t i c e o f s u c h b u s i n e s s o r
§ 2()()()e
e n t e r p r i s e u n d e r w h i c h a p r e f e r e n t i a l t r e a t m e n t is g i v e n iMease c h e c k t h e s t a t u t o r y a n d c a se l a w to d e t e r m i n e
to a i u ' i n d i \ ' i d u al b e c a u s e h e is a n I n d i a n l i ving o n o r n e a r w h e t h e r (Capital i n s u r a n c e c a n d e n y c o v e r a g e b a s e d u p o n
a r e s e r \ ’a t i on . this se c t i on.
Please draf t an interoffice m e m o r a n d u m . In cl u d e
S t a t u t o r y L a w: F'or t h e p u r p o s e s of t h i s a s s i g n m e n t , t h e r e
t h e f o l l o wi ng:
is n o s t a t u t o r y law t h a t a p p l i e s .
To:
From: C a s e L a w; P a p p a s E n terprises, Inc. v. C o ti n n c r c e ci" In-
Re: liu stry In s u ra n c e Ca i , 4 2 2 Ma s s . 80, 661 N . H. 2 d 81 ( 1 9 9 6 )
Facts: ( R e m e m b e r to i nc l ude part ies a n d (see A p p e n d i x A).

wha t the clients want. )
ASSIGNMENT 17
Issue(s): ( R e m e m b e r that the issue or issues
Fo: ¡Your n a m e ]
mu s t incl ude iurisdi cti on, ke\' facts,
a n d be in q u e s t i o n form. ) From: S u p e r \ i s i n g Assi st ant Dist rict
Attorney
A nalysis:
Re: State v'. la m e s Young; b u r g l a r y
C o n c l u s i on :
O n A u g u s t 7, M r . Y o u n g wx*nt t o C o r o n a d o Mal l.
ASSIGNMENT 16
He lo o k a coat h a n g e r w h i c h he p l a n n e d to use to b r e a k
To: |Vour n a me l i n t o c a r s p a r k e d at t h e ma l l . I h e ma l l p a r k i n g lot w'as full
From; Sup er v i si n g Attorne\' a n d Mr . Y o u n g w e n t u n o b s e r v e d . A s h e a p p r o a c h e d Karl
Re; l-spinosd r. (jip itiil Insiinincc; CiMitract Wilst>n' s v e hi c l e , h e n o t i c e d t h a t t h e w i n d o w s \ v e r e o p e n
bre a ch a b o u t a n i nch. H e also o b s e r \ ’e d M r . W ' i l s o n ’s w a l l et o n t h e
f r o n t seat. U n k n o w n t o M r . W i l s o n , t h e w a l l e t fell o u t of
W e r e p r e s e n t F’m i l i o Hs p i n o s a. O n M a \ ' 2 n d ot thi s
his p o c k e t w h e n h e e x i t e d t h e car.
\' ear, M r . F s p i n o s a p u r c h a s e d a l u ) m e f r o m Fi r st ( ' i t \ '
Mr . Y o u n g w a s u n a b l e t o u n l o c k M r . W i l s o n ’s v e
Bank. O n t h a t d a t e he p u r c h a s e d h o m e o w n e r i n s u r a n c e
hicle. 1I o we \ ' er , a f t e r f a s h i o n i n g a h o o k , h e w a s a b l e to pull
f r o m (Aipi tal I n s u r a n c e ( x ) m p a n \ - . I h e B a n k h a d tore^
t h e wallet i h r o u g h t h e o p e n w i n d o w . I h e wâllet c o n t a i n e d
c l o s ed o n t h e h o m e o n M a r c h 15, f or t \ -e i gh t d a \ s p r i o r to
S3(H} a n d t w o c r e d i t c a r d s , all o f w h i c h M r . Y o u n g t oo k .
M r . K s p i n o s a ’s p u r c h a s e . Mr . 1-spi nosa d i d n o t p l a n lo
I w o u l d like to c h a r g e M r . Y o u n g w i t h b ur g l a r ) - u n
m o v e i n t o t h e h o m e u n t i l | u l v 1st. O n l u n e 3, t h i r t \ -foiu'
dev uuv bvw^lAvy s l a l u l c . D o c s Mv. Y o u n g ' s u s e o i vhe c o a l
d a y s a f t e r M r . F' spi n o sa p u r c h a s e t l t h e h o m e a n d s i g n e d
h a n g e r t o r e t r i e v e t h e w'allet c o n s t i t u t e e n t r y w i t h i n t h e
t he h o m e o w n e r i n s u r a n c e c o n t r a c t with (Capital I n s u r a n c e ,
m e a n i n g o f t h e statute? Please p r e p a r e a m e m o a d d r e s s i n g
c o p p e r t h i e v e s b r o k e i n t o t h e h o m e , t o r e i n l o t h e walls
t hi s q u e s t i o n .
a n d ce i l ing, a n d st ol e t h e c o p p e r w a t e r p i p e s . I h e r e w a s
e x t e n s i v e d a m a g e to t h e walls a n d c e i l i n g a n d w a t e r d a m S t a t u t o r y Law: N e w M e xi co Statute § 30-16-3. Burg lar y
age l o t h e c a r p e t . I h e e s t i m a t e d r e p a i r c o s t s w e r e S 19,()()(). B u r g l a r \ ' c o n s i s t s of t h e u n a u t h o r i z e d e n t r y of a n y
' I h e h o u s e w a s v a c a n t t r o m \ h i r c h 13, t h e d a t e of v e hi cl e , w a t e r c r a f t , a i r c r a f t , d w e l l i n g o r o t h e r s t r u c t u r e ,
t h e f o r e c l o s u r e u nt i l t h e d a t e o f t h e d a m a g e ; a p e r i o d of movable or im m ova ble, w ith the intent to c o m m i t an y
e i g h t V ' t w o da ys . P a r a g r a p h 20 o f t h e i n s u r a n c e c o n t r a c t f e l on v o r t hef t t h e r e i n .
Mr . E s p i n o s a s i g n e d w i t h C a p i t a l I n s u r a n c e e x c l u d e s f r o m
c o v e r a g e loss c a u s e d by “theft o r a t t e m p t e d theft, d a m a g e C a s e L a w: S ta te r. M u q q d i n , 2 0 1 0 N M C A 6 9 , . NMCA
bv b u r g l a r s , . . . if t h e d e s c r i b e d l o c a t i o n : is h e l d as a r e s i __ _______ P 3 d ____ (see A p p e n d i x A).
d e n c e a n d h a s n o t b e e n o c c u p i e d as a r e s i d e n c e fo r m o r e
t h a n 60 c o n s e c u t i v e d a y s i m m e d i a t e l y b e f o r e t h e t oss. ”
(Capital I n s u r a n c e is d e n y i n g c o v e r a g e b a s e d u p o n
thi s s e c t i o n o f t h e c o n t r a c t .
CASE the S e p t e m b e r 21 c o n f e r e n c e a n d my review ot t he p a r l ie s ’
briets, this CA)iu t has d e t e r m i n e d that the central issue in this
A TL A N T I C : HLACTl C A S I N C r I N C . case is plaintilfs’ facial cha l l enge to the town o f Westerly's li
d / b / a t h e W' indianiiiiei' , c ensi ng o i d i n a n c e s on First . Ame n d me n t g r o u n d s . Because
et aL, Plaintitis, 1 tmd, loi' the r eas ons set o u t below, that the o r d i n a n c e s as
wi itten are u n c o n s t i t i Ui o n a l u n d e r the First a n d F o ur t e e nt h
. Ame n d men t s , d e f e n d a n t s are e n jo i ne d f r o m c o n d u c t i n g a
L d w a r d l. X L A R H N / O N l , s ho w cause h e a r i n g a n d f r o m r e \ o k i n g plaintill s e n t er t ai n
ct al., D e l e n d a n t s . me n t license. I also e n i o i n t h e d e l e n d a n t s Ir om p r o h i b i t i n g
Civ. A. No. 9 0 - 0 4 7 L t he co n c e r t foi' tailing to allege sulficient h a r m to o \ e r c o m e
U n i t e d States Di s t r i c t C o u r l , plaintill's’ First . A m e n d m e n t rights.
D. R h o d e island.
Sept. 28, 1990. III. IN JU N C T I V E RELIEE
749 F. Su p p . 38 ( D. R. l. 1990) In o r d e r for plaintilfs to p r e\ a i l in thei r request for a pre
OPINION A N D ORDH R l i mi na r y in j un c t i on , the\' mu s t mee t the I'ollowing st andar ds ;
t he plaintilf mu s t d e m o n s t r a t e a li keli hood ot success on t he
P ET TIN E, S en io r District Judge. merits, i m m e d i a t e a n d i r re p ar a b l e h a r m , that the i ni ur y out
weighs any h a r m e n g e n d e r e d by the gr ant of i n j unct i ve re
in t he last few years legislators a n d citizens h a \ e pai d in liel a n d that t h e publi c interest will not be adversely alt ected
cr eas i n g att ent i on to t h e lyrical c on t en t o f p o p u l a r music. by such grant. l.cBcau r. Spirito, 703 F.2d 639, 64 2 (1st (lir.
The interest is not e n l i r e h new, lor “rul ers lia\ e l on g k n o w n 19,S3). 1 shall a d d r e s s e a c h ot these s t an d a r d s in t ur n.
[mu s i c ’s] capaci ty to appeal to the intellect a n d to t h e e m o
t i ons a n d have c e ns o r e d musical c o m p o s i t i o n s to ser ve the A. Likelihooii o f Success on the Merits
needs o f the state.” W ard v. Rock Against R acism , ___ L'.S. Ra t he r t ha n allow 2 Five C r e w to p e r l o r m a n d t h e n pros
___ , 109 S.Ct. 2746, 2733, 105 l..l-d.2d 661 ( 19S9). l h e con ecute lor an\' illegal ac t i \ i t \ ' that c o u l d occur, t he lown
troversy s o m e g r o u p s have ignited is not, in itsell, a n \ r e a s o n Cjiuncil wishes to r evi ew a n d d e c i d e in a d v a n c e w h e t h e r
to t ake such speech ou t s i d e the First . Ame i ul me nt . I n d e e d , to allow the p e r l o r m a n c e to go l or wa r d. Ihis is a p r i or re
expr es si on ma y "best serve its high p u r p o s e w h e n it i n d u c e s straint. See Soiit/icastcrn I’romolions. Ltd. r. (.'onniil, 420 L’.S.
a c o n d i t io n o f unrest, creates dissatisfaction with c o n d i t i o n s
3 1 6 , 3 3 1 3 3 , 9 3 S.C.t. 1239, 1211 13, 13 1 .l,d.2d I IS ( 1973).
as t hey are, or even stirs p eopl e to a n g e i . ” Tcrminicllo r. (. '.Iii- “,An\' sNstem ol p r i o r res t rai nt s ol expression c o m e s lo this
cago, 337 U.S. 1, 4, 69 S.Clt. 894, 96, 893 L.F.d. 1131 (1949). CoLii't b e a r i ng a heav\' p r e s u m p t i o n against its c o n s t i t ut i ona l
T he mes sage a n d r e p u t at i on o f t h e rap mu s i c g r o u p 2 l. i \e validity.” lia n la m Books. Inc. i’. Sulliviin. 372 L'.S. 38, 70, 83
O e w evi dent l y c a m e lo the att ent i on o f the W’est erh' Town S.Ct. 631, 639, 9 F.F!d.2d 384 (1963). ,A li censing s c h e m e in
Co unc i l , for t hey have take n steps t o wa r d p o s s i b h ' p r e v en t volving such p r i o r res t rai nt survives co n st i t u t i o n a l scrutinv-
ing t he g r o u p f r om playi ng a sc h e d u l ed co n c e r t . It is in this o n h wh e n t h e law c o n t a i n s “narrow, objective a n d definite
way t ha t 2 Live C r e w b e c a m e the subject of, t h o u g h n o t a s t a n d a r d s to g u i d e t he li censi ng authoritv'.” Slnittlcswortli v.
pa r t y to, the pr es ent litigation. B irm in g h a m , 394 U.S. 147, 130-31, 89 S.Ct. 933, 938- 39,
O n S e p t e m b e r 19, 1990, plaintilfs, w h o h a \ ’e c o n t r a c t e d 22 L.Hd.2d 162 (1969); see l.a k e u v o d , 486 U.S. 760, S o u t h
to pr e s e nt t he 2 Live O e w concert , m o v e d for a t e m p o eastern Prom otions, 420 L'.S. at 333, 93 S.Cj. at 1243- 44,
r a r y r e s t r a i ni ng o r d e r p r o h i bi t i n g the d e f e n d a n t s , m e m b e r s Co.v r. State o f Louisiana. 379 U.S. 336, 3 3 7 - 3 8 , 83 S.CJ. 433,
o f t he West erl y T o w n Co u n c i l , fr om h o l d i n g a s h o w ca use 4 6 3 - 6 6 , 13 l..Ed.2d 471 (1963), Irish Su bco inm ittee v. R.I.
h e a ri ng o n S e p t e m b e r 24, 1990, c o n c e r n i n g t h e r e v o c a t i o n Heritage C o m m is sio n , 6 46 F.Supp. 347, 339 ( D . R. l . 1986).
o f plaintiffs’ e n t e r t a i n m e n t license; f r o m r e v o k i ng t b e p l a i n File Westerly C~)rdinance, see supra note 3, prov ides even
tiffs’ e n t e r t a i n m e n t license; f r om p r o h i bi t i n g th e 2 ITve C^rew less g u i d a n c e t ha n t he law st ruck d o w n in Shuttlesworth. Id.
c o n c e r t sc h e d u l ed for O c t o b e r 6, 1990; a n d f r o m i m p o s i n g 394 U.S. at 149, 89 S.Ct. at 9 3 7 - 3 8 ( p e r mi t could b e d e n i e d
a n y special r e q u i r e m e n t s o n plaintilfs relative to t h e O c t o i fdeii ' i anded by the “publ i c welfare, peace, safetv', health, d e
b e r 6 pr es ent at i on. O n S e p t e m b e r 21, 1990, t he pa r t i e s a n d cency, g oo d order, mo r a l s o r c onve ni e nce ”). For exan'iple, S e c
this C o u r t agr eed t ha t t he ma t t e r w o ul d be c o n s i d e r e d as an tion 17-87 mer ely states, “<\iiv' license grant ed u n d e r Section
appl i cat i on for a p r e l i mi n a r y i n j u n c t i o n a n d t hat t he s h o w 17-84 a n d 17 - 8 8 mav' be rev'oked bv' the Town C o u nc i l after
cause h e a r i n g w o u l d be c o n t i n u e d until O c t o b e r I, 1990. public h eari ng for cause shown. ” .As in Vcnuti, the Westerly
subj ect to a n d d e p e n d e n t u p o n this C o u r t ’s r ul ing. Based on o rd i na n c e is utterly d e v o i d ol st andards. See 321 F’.Supp. at
1030-31 (stri king dtnvii e n t e r t a i n me n t license o r di na nce ) , it I h i s ( A)urt recogni zes that the Westerly l o w n Côimci! has
leaves the issuance a nd reNocation ot licenses to the u nb r i d l ed a valid interest in re gul a t i ng e n t e r t a i n m e n t est a bl i shment s. It
discretion ot' the 'Town (Council. O u r eases ha\'e K>ng not ed is well established that ti me, pkice a n d m a n n e r restri cti ons on
that “the d a n g e r o f c ensor shi p an d ol a b r i dg e me n t o f o u r p r e expressive activity are permi ss i bl e, but e \ e n t h e n t he r eg u l a
cious r i r s t A m e n d m e n t t r e e d o ms is too great wh e r e otiicials ti ons mus t be " n a r r o wl y a n d precise!}' tailored to t hei r legiti
have unbr i dl e d di screti on over a f o r u m ’s use.” Towiini a Cniycr ma t e obiectives.” I'oward a (ia y er BiceutcJiuiiil, 427 F'.Supp. at
Biccfitcniiial Conifuittce r. Rhoiic Isiivui Biccutciiniiil hoittuia- 638; see Shutt leswort h, 394 U.S. at 153, 89 S.C't. at 940; Cox,
tion, 417 KSupp. 632, 641 (I). R. l. 1976) (qu o t i n g S o u th c a itc n i 379 U.S. at 558, 85 S.Ct. at 466. Ihe Westerly licensing o r d i
Promotions, 420 U.S. at 353, 95 S.Ct. at 1242-44). n a n c e s d o not even a p p r o a c h the necessary level ot specificity
The d e t e n d a n t s assert that they are g u i d e d by specific c o n c onst i t ut i ona l h' m a n d a t e d . Ciiven the ccMiiplete lack ot s t a n
c e r ns for publ i c safety, as o u t l i n e d in t he i r noti ce to plaintilis. d a r d s in the o r d i n a n c e s a n d the l ong a n d clear line o f p r e c
a n d not by t he me s s a g e o f 2 Live O e w ’s lyrics. W h e n d e a l i ng e d e n t , plaintitfs' likel i hood o f success is o v e r w h e l m i n g .
with the First A m e n d m e n t , howe ver , t h e law d o e s not alk)w
us to p r e s u m e g o o d i n t en t i on s o n t h e part o f t h e r evi ewi ng ORDER
body. L a k ew o o d . 486 U.S. at 770, 108 S.Ct. at 1 2 4 3 - 4 4 . llie
Be c a use W e s t e r k ( ] o d e o f O r d i n a n c e s , Secti ons 17-84 a n d
s t a n d ar d s mu s t b e e xpl i c i t h’ set o u t in the o r d i n a n c e itselt,
l “ -87 are facially u n c o n st i t u t i o n a l , be c a u s e t h e plaintiffs
a iudicial c o n s t r u c t i o n o r a w e l F e s t a b l i s h e d pract ice. Id.
have m e t the o t h e r r e q u i r e m e n t s for a p r e l i mi n a r y i n j u n c
W i t h o u t s t a n d a r d s t h e r e is a grave d a n g e r that a l i censi ng
tion, a n d because d e f e n d a n t s ha\'e failed to allege sufficient
s c h e m e “will ser\' e o n k as a ma s k b e h i n d wh i c h t he go\ -
h a r m . I F IS C')R1)F'RFT') that d e f e n d a n t s are e n j o i n e d f r o m
e r n m e n t h id e s as it e xc l ude s s p e a k e r s f r om the . . . t'orum
c o n d u c t i n g a s h o w c a u s e h e a r i n g , r e voki ng plaintiffs' license
solely b e c a u s e o f wha t t he y i n t en d t o say.” Irish S u b c o m m i t
p u r s u a n t to these t>rdinances o r I'rom o t h e r wi s e prt )hibi ti ng
tee, 646 F.Supp. at 357. Such exc l us i on is r e p u g n a n t to the
t h e sc h e d u l ed concert .
First A m e n d m e n t .
^ The available CourseMate for this text has an mteractive eBook and interactive learning
^ tools, including flash cards, quizzes, and more. To learn more aboutthis resource and access
CourseMate tree demo CourseMate resources, go to www.cengagebrain.com, anci search tor this book.
To access CourseMate materials that you have purchased, go to login.cengagebrain.com.
External Memoranda: Court Briefs
Pam H a w s , a p a ra le g a l li\ in g in the h y p o tlio tic a l state ot X e w W a sh in g to n , received the f o l
O utline
lo w in g a s s ig n m e n t from h er su p e r\ isor.
I. Introduction
To; Pam H ayes, P ara le g a l
II. Cieneral Clonsi derat ions
t ro m : .Alice B la c k , ,-\ttome\'
111. Trial CÔLirt Briets
C a se : C:i\ il 0 1 3 -6 0 1 , .ViV/.- Shiiu- r, /iliu- Sky Ski Rcôti
I \ ’. Appel l at e Cknirt Briets
V. Key Point s C'hecklist: Hxternal Re: .M otion to d is m is s lo r la ilu r e to state a c la im
M e m o r a n d a — Côurt Briefs O n D e ce m b e r 5, 2012, X ic k S h in e , an e xp e rt skier, w as s k iin g H righ t L ig h t, an in te r m e d i

\'T Appl i c a t i on ate sk i ru n , at B lu e Sk\' S k i Re so rt. ,\t the m id w a y p o in t, the ru n takes a sh arp , s lig h t ly u p h ill
tui ii lo the so u th , then p lu n g e s steepK' d o w n h ill. W’hen M r. S h in e e n co u n te re d the tu rn , the
su n w as s h in in g d ire c th In h is eves; he d id not see that the run w as co m p le te ly co ve re d w ith
ice. D u e to the s u n ’s glare , he c o u ld not see the ice h a za rd u n til it w as too late to a vo id it. H e
L earn in g Obiectives im m e d ia te h lost c o n tro l an d hit a tree, b re a k in g h is left a rm an d leg. Ih e re w as no w a r n in g
Aft er c o m p l e t i n g this chapter, you s ig n p osted to in d ic a te the p re sen ce o l the ice h a za rd .
s h o u l d u n de r s t a n d : W’e tiled .Mr. Sb.me's c o m p la in t ag a in st the reso rt on A p r il 6, 2013. In the c o m p la in t, we
alle ge that the resort w as n e glig e n t in ta ilin g to p ost a w a rn in g in d ic a t in g the p re sen ce ot the
I h e si mi lari ti es a n d differences
una\'oii.lahle and latent ice h azard .
b et we e n c o u r t briets a n d otiice
O n .April 20, B lu e Sk\ S k i Reso rt tiled a m o tio n to d is m is s u n d e r R u le 1 2 (h )(6 ) o f t h e
memoranda
R u le s ol (a \ 'il P ro ce d u re lo r la ilu re to state a c la im . In the m o tio n . R eso rt a rg u e s that u n d e r
• Techniques ol pers uasi ve wri t i ng tlie S k i S a le lv .Act, Ih e resort d oes not h a\e a dut\ to w arn o l ice h azard s. Ih e y a rg u e that ice
• ' Ih e e l e m e n t s of’trial a n d appellate co m .litio n s are the re s p o n s ib ilitv ol the s k ie r u n d e r the act; the re lo re , we ca n n o t, as a m atter o f
c o u r t brief's law, state a c la im in regard to dutv.
Please p re p are a resp o n se lo th e ir m o tio n lo r m y re\ iew,
• H o w to draft trial a nd appellate
X o te that th is a ssig n m e n t is a v a ria tio n ot the a s s ig n m e n t p resented at the b e g in n in g
c o u r t briefs
ol ( t ia p t e r 13. Ih e lo llo w in g se c tio n s o l th is c h a p te r in tro d u c e the g u id e lin e s that M s. H aye s
w ill lo llo w w h en p e r lo r m in g h er a s s ig n m e n t. Ih e co m p le te d a ssig n m e n t is p resen ted in the
A p p lic a tio n se ctio n .
534
C H A P T E R 18 E X T E R N A L M E M O R A N D A ; C O U R T B R I E F S
I. INTRODUCTION
' I h e foLiis o f t hi s text is o n legal a n a l y s i s a n d t h e m a i n t y p e t>t' writing r e l at ed to legal anal ys i s:
t h e legal r e s e a r c h m e n n > r a n d u m . (Chapters 16 a n d 17 a d d r e s s t h e t y p e ot ' legal w r i t i n g m o s t
f r e q u e n t l y p e r f o r m e d b\' p a ra l e g a l s a n d law c l e r k s e n g a g e d in legal a nalysis; t h e office legal
m e m o r a n d u m . As d i s c u s s e d in t h o s e c h a p t e r s , t h e oti ice legal m e m o r a n d u m is d e s i g n e d for
u s e w i t h i n t h e l a w ofiice a n d is d r a f t e d p r i m a r i l y as a n o b j e c t i v e r e s e a r c h a n d a n a l y s i s tool.
' Ih i s c h a p t e r a n d C^hapter 19 d i s c u s s t h e p r e p a r a t i o n ot d o c u m e n t s u s i n g legal a n a l y s i s t h a t
a r e d e s i g n e d for u s e o u t s i d e t h e law oiYwc:
D o c u m e n t s s u b m i t t e d t o a c o u r t , s u c h as b r i e f s in s u p p o r t o f m o t i o n s
D o c u m e n t s d e s i g n e d f o r o t h e r e x t e r n a l use, s u c h as c o r r e s p o n d e n c e t o c l i cn t s a n d
o pposing attorneys
P a r a l e g a l s a n d l aw c l e r k s a r e less f r e q u e n t h ’ i n v o l v e d in t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f e x t e r n a l - u s e
d o c u m e n t s t h a n t h o s e d e s i g n e d for use w i t h i n t h e l a w oHice; h o w e v e r , e x p e r i e n c e d p a r a l e g a l s
a n d l a w c le r ks m a y b e cal l ed u p o n to p r e p a r e t h e initial d r a f t s o f d o c u m e n t s i n t e n d e d for
e x t e r n a l u s e — r e f e r r e d to h e r e as c x t c n u i l m cifio riiiid a .
I h e f o c us ot t h i s c h a p t e r is o n t h e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s i n \ ’ol \ ' ed in t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f legal
a n a l y s i s d o c u m e n t s d e s i g n e d l o r s u b m i s s i o n tt> a c o u r t : trial c o u r t a n d a p p e l l a t e c o u r t legal
m e m o r a n d u m bri efs. A trial c o u r t b r i e f is o f t e n r e f e r r e d t o as a i f i c f n o r a n d i i m o f l a w o r a
tfic n io n u id iit}! of p o iiits a n d a u th o r itie s . In t h i s c h a p t e r , a legal m e m o r a n d u n i b r i e f s u b m i t
t ed t o a trial c o u r t is r e f e r r e d to as a t r i a l c o u r t b r ie f o r t r i a l b r ie f , a n d a b r i e f s u b m i t t e d
t o a c o u r t o f a p p e a l s is r e f e r r e d t o as a n a p p e l l a t e c o u r t b r ie f. I h e A p p l i c a t i o n s e c t i o n o f
t hi s c h a p t e r p r o \ ' i d e s a n e x a m p l e t)l a trial c o u r t bri et; A p p e n d i x R i n c l u d e s a n e x a m p l e o t
a n a p p e l l a t e c o u r t brief.
II. G E N E R A L C O N S ID E R A T I O N S
B o t h t r i a l a n d a p p cl l a l c v:uuvl bvicts avc sl mi l av in mAn y v cspect s t o memovAnda,
a n d t h e t u n d a m e n t a l p r i m. i p t e s t hat a p p h ' to t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f otiice m e m o s a l s o a p p l y to
t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f c o u r t briefs. I h e s i mi l a r i t i e s a r e o u t l i n e d here.
A. S im ila r it ie s — C o u rt B rie fs a n d O ffic e M e m o ra n d a
1. Legal Writing Process

lust as it is n e c e s s a r y w h e n p r e p a r i n g an oflice m e m o to a d o p t a n d u s e a legal w r i t i n g p r o c e s s ,
it is also n e c e s s a r y to d o so w h e n p r e p a r i n g a c o u r t bri et. I h e basi c wTi ti ng p r o c e s s is t h e s a m e
f or b o t h c o u r t b r i e f s a n d ol l i ce m e m o r a n d a ;
P r e w r i t i n g Stage
A s s i g n m e n t — t y p e o f briei', a u d i e n c e , a n d so o n
C o n s t r a i n t s — t i me , l e n g t h , f o r m a t ( c o u r t r ul es)
O r g a n i z a t i o n — c r e a t i o n o f an e x p a n d e d o u t l i n e
L^se o f a n e x p a n d e d o u t l i n e
W' ri t i ng St age
P o s t w r i t i n g Stage
Revising
Editing
535
P AR T IV LEGAL WRITING
2. Basic Format
C o u r t br i et s tol l ow t he s a m e basi c l o r m a t as otlice m e m o s . Bo t h i n c l u d e a p r e s e n t a t i o n ot t h e
issiie(s), t h e r el e v an t tacts, a legal analysis, a n d a c o n c l u s i o n . Re t e r to (Chapters 16 a n d 17 t o r
i n t o r m a t i o n a n d g u i d e h n e s c o n c e r n i n g t h e p r e p a r a t i o n ol t h e s e c o m p o n e n t s ot a briet.
3. Analysis Approach
Côurt briefs fol low t h e s a m e b a si c o r g a n i z a t i o n a l a p p r o a c h to t h e legal a na l y s i s o f an i.ssue a s
o f h c e m e m o r a n d a : t h e rul e o f l a w is p r e s e n t e d tirst, t h e n t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e rul e o f l a w
t h r o u g h t h e c a s e law (i f i n t e r p r e t a t i o n is i i ec e s s a r \ ) , t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e l a w to t h e i ssues
p r e s e n t e d b\' t h e lacts o f t h e case, f o l l o we d b \ ’ t h e c o n c l u s i o n . Hxhibit 18-1 p r e s e n t s t h e basi c
f o r m a t o f t hi s a p p r o a c h .
E x h i b i t 1 8 -1 Legal A n a lysis— Court Brief Organizational Approach.
Rule of law —present the rule of law or legal principle that applies.
Case law (if necessary) —follow the rule of law with the presentation of the
case law that interprets how the rule of law applies:
1. Name of case
2. Facts of case sufficient to demonstrate case is on point
3. Rule or legal principle from case that applies to the client's case
Application of law to facts of case after the presentation of the case law —
apply the law or principle in the case to the facts of the client's case.
Include an explanation of why the opposing position does not apply.
Conclusion —provide a summary of the legal analysis.
B. D is s im ila ritie s — C o u rt B rie fs and O ffice M e m o ra n d a

■\s n o t e d previ ousl y, botl i trial a n d appel l at e c o u n br i et s are si mi l a r in rn a n y r e s p e c t s t o o t h c e
legal m e m o s in basi c t o r m a t aiul c o n t e n t . I h e m a j o r d i l f e r e n c e is in t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n ol t he
toi'iiiat a n d c o n t e n t . . \ n oliice m e m o is t l e si gne d to p r e s e n t a n o h i e c t i v e a n a K sis ot t h e law.
I h e goal is to p r o \ i d e a n e u t r a l a n a h s i s t ha t t h o r o u g h l y a d d r e s s e s all si des ol an issue a n d
proN'itles t h e at t orne\ - wi t h g u i t l a n c e o n h o w t h e c o u r t m a y r e s oKe t h e issue.
W h e r e a s a n otlice m e m o is d e s i g n e d to o b i e c t i \ el\’ i n f o r m , a c o u r t b r i e f is d e s i g n e d to
c o n \ ince. .A c o u r t b r i e f is a n a d \ ocac\ ' d o c u m e n t d e s i g n e d to p e r s t i a d e t h e c o u r t to a d o p t a
p o s i t i o n o r t a k e a n a c t i o n f av o r ab l e to th e client. '1 h e r e t o r e , a l t h o u g h t h e e l e m e n t s ot a n otlice
m e m o a n d c o i u t b r i e f a r e basi c a l l y t h e s a me , c o u r t b r i et s a r e d i i f e r e n t in t h a t t h e y a r e d r a f t e d
to a d \ ' o c a t e a p o s i t i o n a n d p e r s u a d e t h e reader .
I h e t o l l o w i n g s u b s e c t i o n s a d d r e s s t h e g u i d e l i n e s , t ac t or s, a n d c o n s i d e r a t i o n s i n v o l v e d
in t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f p e r s u a s i v e c o u r t briefs. Fo a v o i d r e p e t i t i o n , t h i s s e c t i o n a d d r e s s e s t h e
f a c t o r s i n v o l v e d in t h e p e r s u a s i \ e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f b o t h trial a n d a p p e l l a t e c o u r t briefs. I h e r e
for e, t h e d e t a i l e d d i s c u s s i o n o f c o u r t briefs p r e s e n t e d in s e c t i o n s 111 a n d I \ ’ d o e s n o t i n c l u d e
i n f o r m a t i o n o n e l e m e n t s a n d t e c h n i q u e s o f p e r s u a s i \ ’e w r i t i n g . ' I h e i n f o r m a t i o n p r e s e n t e d
h e r e a p p l i e s to t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f b o t h trial a n d a p p e l l a t e c o u r t br i e f s a n d s h o u l d be k e p t in
m i n d w h e n p r e p a r i n g t h o s e briefs.
Llliici. As d i s c u s s e d in (Cha pt er 1 1, Rule 3. 3( a ) ( 1 ) o f t h e M o d e l Rules o f P r o f e s s i o n a l
( ' ( i n d u c t p r o \ i d e s t h a t a l aw\ ' er s h o u l d n o t m a k e false s t a t e m e n t s o f l a w o r fact to a t r i b u n a l .
B r o a d l y i n t e r p r e t e d , thi s m e a n s t h a t m a t t e r s s h o u l d n o t be p r e s e n t e d in a m a n n e r t h a t m a y
m i s l e a d t h e c o u r t . Also, u n d e r Riile 3. 3(a) (3) o f t h e M o d e l Rules, a n a t t o r n e y h a s a n et hi ca l
d u t \ ’ as a n o l l i c e r ol t h e c o u r t to d i s cl o s e legal a u t h o r i t ) ’ a d \ ' er se to t h e c l i e n t ’s p o s i t i o n t h a t is
n o t d i s c l o s e d b\- o p p o s i n g c o u n s e l . I h e r ef o r e , w h e n p r e p a r i n g a p e r s u a s i v e p r e s e n t a t i o n o t a
536
C H A P T E R 18 E X T E R N A L M EM ORA N DA: COURT BR IEFS
legal p o s i t i o n o r a r g u n i c n t , \' ou m u s t k e e p in m i i u i t h e i m p o r t a n c e ol t h e r u l e s ol p r o l e s s i o n a l
coni i i i ct a n d i nt e l l ect u al h o n e s t \ as (.liscussed in C h a p t e r 2. A l t h o i i g h d e s i g n e d l o p e r s u a d e ,
a coi u' t b r i e f m u s t p r e s e n t t h e i ssue(s), tact s s t a t e m e n t , a n d a na l y s i s a c c u r a t e l y , clearly, a n d
ccMiciseh'. It s h o u l d n o t m i s l e a d , d i s t o r t , o r h i d e t h e t r u t h , l h e g u i d e h n e s l o r Ik )\ v t hi s is
a c c o m p l i s l i e d a r e p r e s e n t e d in t h e t o l l o w i n g s u b s e c t i o n s .
1. Issue.s— Persuasive Presentation

A f t e r y o u i d e n t i l y t h e issue, i n t r o d u c e e a c h o f its e l e m e n t s — t h e law, t h e q u e s t i o n , a n d t h e ke y
f a c t s — in a p e r s u a s i v e m a n n e r .
a. Law C o m p o n e n t o f t h e Lssiie
St at e t h e l aw c o m p o n e n t o f t h e i ssue persuasive!)' .
For Example The case involves oppressive conduct by a majority shareholder against
the minority shareholders in the hypothetical state of New Washington. The
corporation consists of three shareholders. The majority shareholder holds 60 percent
of the stock and is employed as president of the corporation. The minority shareholders
are not employed by the corporation.
In the case, the defendant, the majority shareholder, controlled the board of direc
tors and has refused to allow the issuance of dividends for a 10-year period. During this
period, he gave himself an annual 40 percent raise each year and an annual bonus equal
to 50 percent of his salary. The minority shareholders filed a suit claiming that the majority
shareholder's actions constitute oppressive conduct.
Section 53-6 of the New Washington statutes authorizes the court to dissolve a
corporation when the majority shareholder engages in oppressive conduct. This example
is referred to in this chapter as the "corporation" example.
In a n oli ice m e m o , t h e law c o m p o n e n t ol t h e i ssue in t hi s e. \aiiiple is s t a t e d objective!)-:

“ U n d e r t h e New W ' a s l i i n g t o n c o r p o r a t i o n s t a t u t e , N W ' SA § 3.3 6, d i d o p p r e s s i \ - e c o n d u c t
OLCur \ s h e n . . . ? h i a t o u i t In lel, l i o\ ve \ e i , t h e law is p r e s e n t e d pei s u a s i \ e l ) . l l i e p e r s u a s i v e
l a n g u a g e is it al i ci / ed: " L ' n d e r t h e N e w W a s h i n g t o n c o r p o r a t i o n st at u t e, N W ’SA § 33-6, w h ic h
p r o h i h i t i o p p r c s s i w c o n d u c t , d i d . . . ?”
N o t e t h a t t h e p e r s u a s i v e p r e s e n t a t i o n ol t h e law L o m p o n e n t e m p l i a s i / e s t h e p r o h i b i t o r ) '
n a t u r e of t h e s t a t ut e.
For Example If your position is that the statute has limited application, present the law
in a manner that focuses on that limitation: "Under NWSA § 51-7, which
limits the requirement of a written contract to. ..."
If you want to emphasize the applicability ofthe statute, present the law in a man
ner that focuses on applicability: "Under NWSA § 51-7, which requires that a contract
be in writing when . ..."
b. Q u e s t i o n C o m p o n e n t o f th e Lssue
P r e s e n t t h e q u e s t i o n c o m p o n e n t of t h e i ssue in a p e r s u a s i v e m a n n e r t h a t SLiggcsts a result.
For Example Objective presentation: "did oppressive conduct occur when . .. ?"
Persuasive presentation: "was the majority shareholder's conduct oppressive
when ... ?" or "did the ma|ority shareholder engage in oppressive conduct when ... ?"
Note that in the objective presentation, the focus is on the conduct. In the persuasive
presentation, the statement immediately links the conduct to the majority shareholder.
PA RT IV LEGAL WRI TIN G
I h c l a n g u a g e uscii s h o u l d t o c u s o n thi.' i\' sult d e s i r e d .
For Example The key language is italicized: "(does the statute alloworal contracts for... ?"
or "does the statute require oral contracts fo r... ?" or "does the statute
prohibit oral contracts for... ?"
c. Fact C o m p o n e n t ot th e Issue
State t h e ke\' l act s ot t h e issue in a m a n n e r d e s i g n e d to t o c u s tiie r e a d e r o n t h e t a c t s ta\ ' orabl e
to tlie cl i ent a n d persLiade t h e r e a d e r to l a \ o r tlie client' s p o s i t i o n .
For Example Objective presentation: "did oppressive conduct occur when dividends
were not issued for a 10-year period and the majority shareholder re
ceived annual salary increases and bonuses?"
Persuasive presentation: "did the majority shareholder engage in oppressive conduct
when he refused to issue dividends for a 10-year period while giving himself large
annual salary increases and bonuses?"
For Example Objective presentation: "wlien the defendant entered the property after
being advised not to enter?"
Persuasive presentation: "when the defendant intentionally entered the property even
though he was warned not to enter?"
N o t e t h a t in hotl i e. xamples, tlic p e r s u a s i v e p r e s e n t a t i o n tocLises o n t h e d e t e n d a n t a n d

l i nks t h e d e t e n d a n t dii'CCtls' to t h e I m p r o p e r c o n d u c t .
l..\iiibit IS 2 p r e s e n t s a c h e ck l i s t t o r u s e in t h e p e r s u a s i s e p r e s e n t a t i o n o t ’t h e issues.
E x h i b i t 1 8 - 2 Checklist. Is s u c s — Feisuasi\,c Presentation.
Law component: Is the law correctly presented, stated persuasively, and

accurately cited?
Question component: Are the law, question, and key facts included and
stated persuasively?
Fact component: Are the key and background facts included and stated
persuasively?
2. Statement o f Facts— Persuasive Presentation

ihe statem en t of facts s e c t i o n o f a c o u r t h r i e f p r e s e n t s tiie facts o f tiie case, i h i s s e c t i o n is
o t t en ca l l e d t h e sliitciiiciil oj llic ease, in a c o u r t briet, iust as in an ot i i ce m e m o , tiie . st atement
o f facts siioLild i n c l u d e b o t h t h e b a c k g r o u n d a n d tiie ke)' facts. In a c o u r t brief, i n t r o d u c e t h e
tact s credi bly, persuasi\-eiy, a n d in a light m o s t t a \ ’o ra b l e to t h e client' s p o si t i o n , iiiis is a c c o m
p l i sh e d b y e m p i i a s i z i n g ta \ ' or a bl e tact s a n d d e e n i p i i a s i z i n g o r n e u t r a l i z i n g u n t a \ ’o r a b l e tacts.
I h e r e a r e se\' eral t e c h n i q u e s \ o u m a \ Lise to e n i p i i a s i z e fa\ -orabl e facts a n d n e u t r a l i z e
u n t a x ' o r a b le facts. S o m e o f t h e s e a r e di s c Li s s e d in t h e t' ol lowing s u b s e c t i o n s .
a. P la c e m e n t
R e a d e r s t e n d to r e m e m b e r i n f o r m a t i o n p r e s e n t e d at tiie b e g i n n i n g a n d e n d o f a s e c t i o n , a n d
usLially gi ve m o s t a t t e n t i o n lo o p e n i n g a n d c l o s i n g s e n t e n c e s , i h e r e f o r e , i n t r o d u c e tlie facts
t av ' or a b l e t o t h e c l i en t ' s p o s i t i o n at t h e b e g i n n i n g a n d t h e e n d o t tiie t a c t u a l s t a t e n i e n t .
538
C H A P T E R 18 EX T E R N A L M E M O R A N D A : COURT BRIEFS
i^resont t h e tact s u n f a v o r a b l e to t h e client' s p o s i t i o n t h e o n e s y o u wi s h to d e e n i p h a s i z e — in

the mitldle o f t h e section.
For Example Referring to the corporation example, "The defendant is the majority share-
holderand controlling member ofthe board of directors of XYZ Corporation.
He has refused to authorize the issuance of dividends for 10 years. During this time, the
defendant has been the president ofthe corporation. As president, he has granted himself
a 40 percent raise each year. In addition, he has given himself an annual bonus equal
to 50 percent of his salary. It is claimed bythe defendant that he is entitled to the salary
increases and bonuses because he works long hours, is underpaid, and is the person in
charge. The defendant has rebuffed the plaintiff's repeated requests to discuss the de
fendant's grants to himself of salary increases and bonuses and failure to issue dividends.
The defendant has informed the plaintiff that he does not intend to issue dividends."
in t h i s e x a m p l e , t h e facts least t a \ ’o r a b l e to t h e d e t e n d a n t — his faiku' e to issue d i \ i d e n d s

a n d r e c e i p t o f sa l ar y i n c r e a s e s a n d b o n u s e s — a r e p r e s e n t e d at t h e b e g i n n i n g . Hi s c o n d u c t ini-
i n e di at e l y c a p t u r e s t h e r e a d e r ’s a t t e n t i o n . H i s c o n d u c t is also m e n t i o n e d ag a i n at t h e e n d o f t h e
p r e s e n t a t i o n . I h e r e a d e r ’s tirst a n d last i m p r e s s i o n s a r e t(K' used o n t h e ac t s least fa\ ’o r a b l e to
t h e d e f e n d a n t . ' Hie facts f a v o r a b l e to t h e d e f e n d a n t — t h a t h e is e n t i t l e d t o t h e s a l ar y i n c r e a s e s
a n d b o n u s e s — a r e d e e m p h a s i z e d by t h e i r p l a c e m e n t in t h e m i d d l e o f t h e fact s t a t e m e n t .
II t h e t act s s t a t e m e n t ct>nsists ot se ver a l p a r a g r a p h s , ph i c e t h e t a \ ' o r a b l e m a t e r i a l at t h e
b e g i n n i n g o f t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n a n d cl os e w i t h a s u m m a r y o r r e p h r a s i n g o f t h e f a v o r a b l e k ey
facts. Pl a c e t h e u n f a v o r a b l e facts in t h e m i d d l e o f t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n a n d m e n t i o n t h e m o n l y
o n c e o r as tew t i m e s as poss i bl e.
N o t e t h a t t h e goal is a p e r s u a s i v e p r e s e n t a t i o n of t h e facts. Ibi s goal s h o u l d n o t b e so
ri gi d l y p u r s u e d as to lose clarity.
For Example It may not be practical to state the favorable facts at the beginning of a
paragraph. To ensute claiily, you niay need lo piesenl liansllion or intro
ductory sentences first, then follow them with the presentation of the favorable facts.
b. S e n t e n c e L e n g t h
Us e s h o r t s e n t e n c e s t o e m p h a s i z e t a\ ' o r a b l e i n t o r m a t i t m a n d l o n g s e n t e n c e s to d e e m p h a s i z e
u n f a v o r a b l e i n t o r m a t i o n . S h o r t e r s e n t e n c e s g eneral K' d r a w t h e reader ' s a t t e n t i o n , a n d are ea si e r
to u n d e r s t a n d a n d r e m e m b e r ; t he r ef o r e , t h e y a r e m o r e p o w e r f u l .
For Example The defendant is the majority shareholder and controlling member ofthe
board of directors of XYZ Corporation. He has refused to authorize the
issuance of dividends for 10 years. During this time, the defendant has been the president
of the corporation. As president, he has granted himself a 40 percent raise each year.
I h e s e n t e n c e s in t h i s e x a m p l e a r e s h o r t a n d clear, d r a w i n g t h e r e a d e r ' s a t t e n t i o n . L o n g e r
s e n t e n c e s t hat s t r i n g t o g e t h e r several facts t e n d to d o w n p l a y a n d r e d u c e t h e i m p a c t o f e a c h fact.
For Example It is claimed by the defendant that he is entitled to the salary increases and
bonuses because he works long hours, is underpaid, and isthe person in charge.
In th i s e x a m p l e , if e a c h o f t h e d e f e n d a n t ’s a c t i o n s w e r e p r e s e n t e d in s e p a r a t e s e n t e n c e s ,
t h e v wt ) ul d s t a n d o u t a n d be clear.
539
P A R T IV LEGAl WRITING
c. A ctiv e \ oice
L'se active voice t o c n i p h a s i / c i,n'oi\>blc i i i l o n n a t i o n a n d p a s s i v e v o i ce t o d e e m p l i a s i / e
Liiilas'orable i n l o r m a t i o n . W' he n a c t i \ e v o i c e is u se d , t h e s u b i e c t o f t h e s e n t e n c e is tlie actor.
W h e n p a s s i \ e v o i c e is u s e d , t h e s u b j ec t is a c t e d u p o n . Acti\' e voice d r a w s a t t e n t i o n to a n d
e m p h a s i / e s t h e actor. It t h u s l e n d s p o w e r l o tlie s t a t e m e n t . Passive voice draws attention
a w a \ I r o m a n d d e e m p h a s i z e s l he actor.
For Example Passive voice: "It is claimed by the defendant that he is entitled to the
bonuses ..." draws attention away from the actor, the defendant.
Active voice: "The defendant claims he is entitled . . ." is less wordy and focuses the
attention on the actor.
d. W o r d C;ii()ice
I d e a l h , t h e w o r d s \ ’o u c h o o s e s h o u l d i n t r o d u c e t h e c l i en t ’s tact s in t h e m o s t f a v o r a b l e liglit
a n d t h e o p p o n e n t ’s tacts in t h e least fa\’o r a b l e light. P r e s e n t t h e c l i e n t ’s p o s i t i o n in t h e m o s t
a t h r n i a t i \ c m a n n e i ' a n d t h e o p p o n e n t ’s p o s i t i o n in t h e least fa v o r a b l e m a n n e r .
For Example The plaintiff states that.

The defendant alleges..
In i hi s e x a m p l e , n o t i c e t h a t t h e p l ai n t i l l ' s p r e s e n t a t i o n s o u n d s s t r o n g e r b e c a u s e it is
p r e s e n t e d as a s t a t e m e n t , l h e d e f e n d a n t ’s p o s i t i o n is p r e s e n t e d as a c h a r g e ~ a n “a l l e g a t i o n ”
l a t h e r t h a n a s t a t e m e n l o f fact. I h e r e ai'e nunier oLi s w a \ s to p r e s e n t p o s i t i o n s in a s t r o n g o r
w e a k m a n n e r . He s u r e lo c h e c k \ o u r w o r d choi ce .
It is e a s \ , h o we s e i ' , to O” cl c a r r i e d a w a \- ’ a n d sl at e t h e lacts in s u c h a s l a n t e d w a v/ t hat
y o u r b i a s is p a i n f u l K obvioLis.
For Example The defendant stubbornly and unreasonably refuses to issue dividends.
Ill t hi s e x a m p l e , t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n ot t h e tact s is clea rly b i a s ed a n d h e a v y h a n d e d . It is

b e t t e r iiist t o n o t e t h at t h e d e f e n d a n t h a s r e l u s e d t o issue d i \ i d e n d s . W h e n i n de)ubt, a v o i d
i n t l a m i i i a t o r \ l a n g u a g e a n d e x e r c i se r e s t r ai n t .
iU'fer lo t h e t e c h n i q u e s p r e s e n t e d in thi s se c t i o n w h e n p r e p a r i n g a p e r s u a s i v e p r e s e n t a
t i o n o f t h e facts, f. xhi bit 18-3 p r e s e n t s a c h ec k l i s t for u s e in c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h t h e g u i d e l i n e s
f or t h e persLiasive p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e s t a t e m e n t o f facts.
E x h i b i t 1 8 - 3 Checl<list: Statem ent of Facts— Persuasive Presentation.
Placement of favorable and unfavorable facts: Are the facts favorable to

the client's position placed at the beginning and end of the factual
statement?
Sentence length: Are short sentences used to emphasize favorable infor
mation and long sentences used to deemphasize unfavorable information?
Active and passive voice: Is active voice used to emphasize favorable infor
mation and passive voice used to deemphasize unfavorable information?
Word choice: Are words chosen that introduce the client's facts in the most
favorable light and the opponent's facts in the least favorable light?
540
C H A P T E R 18 E X T E R N A L M EM ORAN DA; COURT BRIE FS
( h a p t e r 9 is h e l p f u l w h e n i d e n t i f x i n g ke\- a n d b a e k g r o u i u i l a e t s . M a n y of t h e
c o n s i d e r a t i o n s i n \ o l \ e d in p r e p a r i n g t h e s t a t e n i e n t of’ f a c t s s e c t i o n of’ a n o f f i c e l e g a l
m e m o a r e t h e s a m e a s t l u )s e i i i \ ' o l \ e d in p r e p a r i n g t h e s t a t e n i e n t o f f a c t s s e c t i o n o f
a c o u r t b r i e f . ( C h a p t e r 16, s e c t i o n \ ' . l - , t h e r e f o r e , will p r o \ ’e h e l p f u l w h e n p r e p a r i n g
this section.
3. A r g u m e n t — Persuasive Presentation
' llie pe r s u a s i \ - e t o n e o f t h e c o u r t bi'iel' is i n i t i a l h ' e s t a b l i s h e d in t h e issue a n d fact s .st a t e me nt s.
Ilie p e r s u a s i v e t e c h n i q u e s d i s c u s s e d in t h e p r e x i o u s s e c t i o n s o f t h i s text, s u c h as w o r d c h o i c e ,
s e n t e n c e l e n g t h , a n d a c t i \ e a n d p a ss i \ e \'oice, a l s o a p p k a n d s h o u l d b e e mp l o) - e d w h e n c r a f t
i ng t h e a r g u m e n t s e c t i o n o f a c o u r t b r i e f
'Ihe a rg u m e n t s e c t i o n is t h e h e a r t o f t h e c o u r t b r i e f It is t h e e q u i \ - a l e n t o f t h e a n a l y s i s
s e c t i o n o f a n office legal m e m o r a n d u m . U n l i k e t h e a n a l y s i s s e c t i o n o f a n o f h c e m e m o , h o w -
e\ er, t h e a r g u m e n t s e c t i o n of a c o u r t brief is n o t a n o b j e c t i v e p r e s e n t a t i o n of t h e law. B e c a u s e
t h e goal o f t h e a r g u m e n t s ec t i o n is to p e r s u a d e t h e c o u r t t h a t y o u r p o s i t i o n is val i d, b e s u r e
t o c r a h it b y d r a f t i n g t h e l o l l o w i n g in a pe r s u a s i \ -e m a n n e r :
I h e law in s u p p o r t ol’ y o u r p o s i t i o n
' I h e a nal ys i s o f t h e law
l l i c a r g u n i e n t t hat \ ' o u r a n a h s i s is \ al i d a n d t h e o p p o s i t i o n ' s a n a K s i s is i n v a l i d
The f o l l o w i n g t e x t p r e s e n t s a s u i i i m a r \ - o f t h e t e c h n i q u e s y o u m a \ ’ u s e t o e n s u r e t h a t
y o u p r e s e n t t h e a r g u m e n t c o m p o n e n t o f a c o u r t b r i e f in a p e r s u a s i v e m a n n e r . S e v e r a l
h e l p f u l g u i d e l i n e s a p p K ft) b o t h t r ial a n d a p p e l l a t e c o u r t b r i ef s . S e c t i o n s III a n d I V o f
this c h a p te r in tro d u c e additional in loiiiiation c o n c e rn i n g the form at a n d c o n te n t o f t h e
a r g u m e n t s e c t i o n . I' liose s e c t i o n s l o c u s o n t h e d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n t r ial a n d a p p e l l a t e
c o u r t briels.
Orgíunzíilií))!. ' I h e o r g a n i / a t i o n of t h e a r g u m e n t s e c t i o n is s i m i l a r to t h a l o f t h e a n a l y s i s
s e c t i o n ol t h e office m e m o : I h e rtile of law is i n f ro i l u c e t l , l o l l o we d by a n i n t e r p r e t a t i o n ot t h e
l aw (LisualK- t h r o u g h c a s e law), t h e n a n a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e law t o t h e i ssue r ai s e d h v t h e f act s
ot t h e case. ' I h e o p p o s i n g pi)sit ion is i n c l ud e i l in t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e a r g u n i e n t r a t h e r t h a n
in a s e p a r a t e c o u n t e r a n a l y s i s se c t i o n .
1. i s sue p r e s e n t a t i o n . W h e n t h e r e is m o r e t h a n o n e issue o r w h e n t h e r e a r e i s sue s

a n d s u b i s s u e s , d i s c u s s t h e i ssue s u p p o r t e d by t h e s t r o n g e s t a r g u m e n t first. ' I h e r e
a r e seve r al r e a s o n s for this:
First i m p r e s s i o n s a re lasti ng. I h e t o n e o f t h e a r g u n i e n t is set at t h e b e g i n n i n g .

B\- p r e s e n t i n g t h e s t r o n g e s t a r g u n i e n t tirst, \ ' ou set a t o n e o f s t r e n g t h a n d
c r edi bi l i t }.
I f y o u i n t r o d u c e t h e s t r o n g e s t a r g u n i e n t first, t h e c o u r t is m o r e likely t o b e
p e r s u a d e d thal \ (uir p o s i t i o n is c o r r e c t a n d l o o k m o r e f a v o r ab l y o n y o u r w e a k e r
argunients.
f u d g e s a r e o fi e n \ e r y busy. O n s o m e o c c a s i o n s a j u d g e ma\- n o t r e a d o r g i v e
e q u a l a t t e n t i o n fo all t h e s e c t i o n s o t a bri et. especi alK' if t h e b r i e f is l o n g . In
s u c h i n s t a n c e s , t h e j u d g e ma\ - n o t r e a d y o u r s t r o n g e s t a r g u m e n t i f y o u d o n o t
p r e s e n t it first o r n e a r t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h e b r i e f F o r t hi s r e a s o n , if t h e r e a r e
s e \ ’eral a r g u n i e n t s in s u p p o r t o f a p o s i t i o n , o m i t t h e w e a k a r g u m e n t s . W e a k
a r g u n i e n t s o r p o s i t i o n s t h a t h a v e little s u p p o r t i n g a u t h o r i t }' d e t r a c t a n d d i v e r t
atlention from the stronger argunients.
2. R u l e of law p r e s e n t a t i o n . P r e s e n t t h e r u l e o f l a w , w h e t h e r it is e n a c t e d o r c ase law,

in a m a n n e r t hat s u p p o r t s \ cuir a r g u n i e n t .
541
P A R T IV LEGAL WRI TIN G
For Example Objective presentation: The statute that governs oppressive

conduct i s . ...
Persuasive presentation: The statute that prohibits oppressive conduct by a
majority shareholder is ....
The first example merely indicates that the statute governs the area. The
second example persuasively emphasizesthe prohibitory nature ofthe statute.
Objective presentation:Jhe courts of other states are split on what constitutes
oppressive conduct. Most courts follow Smith v. Jones, which provides__
A minority of courts follow Dave v. Roe. . . . The majority view is based
on the premise that the conduct must be either wrongful or improper__
Persuasive presentation: The majority of courts follow the definition of op
pressive conduct presented in Smith v. Jones. In this case, the court
defined oppressive conduct as. . . . This definition is based on the well-
reasoned view that the conduct need only be wrongful or improper. A
mmority of courts follow....
Ill thi.s e x a m p l e , t h e p e r s u a s i v e p r e s e n t a t i o n m o r e tbr ceful K' i n t r o d u c e s t h e

m a j o r i t ) ' \'ie\v in a m a n n e r i n d i c a t i n g t h a t it is p r e f e r a b l e . ' I h e o l i j e ct i v e v i e w is
passi\' e a n d t r e a t s b o t h tlie ma j or i t ) ' a n d m i n o r i t ) ' \' ie\vs equall y. It d o e s n o t en i -
p h a s i / e o n e \ ie\s' as la\' orable. Re f e r to s e c t i o n II.B. 1 in t h e c h a p t e r t o r t h e d i s c u s
si o n o n p e r s u a s i \ ' e p r e s e n t a t i o n ol issues w h e n d r a f t i n g t h e r u l e ot law c o m p o n e n t
ol t h e a r g u m e n t s e c t i o n o t a brief.
.V C a s e p r e s e n t a t i o n . W’h e n i n t r o d u c i n g c a s e law, d i s c u s s t h e t' a\' orable ca s e law

lirst; l o l l o w w i t h t h e u n l a v o r a b l e o r o p p o s i n g c a s e law, t h e n i n c l u d e a r e s p o n s e
o r r e b u t t a l t h a t e m p h a s i z e s wh\ ' t h e ta \ ' or a bl e c a s e l a w s h o u l d b e f o l l o we d . I h i s is
s i m i l a r to t h e t o r m a t t o l l o w e d in t h e t act s s t a t e m e n t : ’I h e p l a c e m e n t o t ' t h e u n f a -
\ o r a b l e m a t e r i a l in t h e m i d d l e o l ' t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n f o l l o w i n g t h e f a v o r a b l e m a t e
rial t e n d s t o m i n i m i / e its i m p o r t a n c e .
I h e d i s c u s s i o n ot t h e case law s h o u l d e m p h a s i z e t h e s i m i l a r i t i e s a n d a p p l i ca -
bilit)' o f t h e c a s e )' ou rel\' o n a n d t h e d i s s i m i l a r i t i e s a n d i n a p p l i c a b i l i t ) ' ot’t h e ca s e
rel ied o n b)' t h e o p p o s i t i o n .
For Example The term oppressive conduct is defined in the case of Tyrone
V. Blatt. In Tyrone, the majority shareholder refused to autho
rize the issuance of dividends. He granted himself four major pay increases,
quadrupling his salary during the period dividends were not issued. In the
holding, the court noted that there was no justification forthe salary increases
and ruled that his conduct was oppressive. The court stated that "oppressive
conduct" occurs when there is wrongful conduct that inuresto the benefitof
the majority shareholder and to the detriment ofthe minority shareholders.
In our case, just as in Tyrone, the majority shareholder refused to issue
dividends. In our case, like Tyrone, the majority shareholder gave himself large
salary increases. In both cases, there was no justification forthe increases.
Therefore, the court should apply the standard established in Tyrone and i'md
that the defendant engaged in oppressive conduct.
It is argued by the defendant that the court should apply the holding
reached in Wise v. Wind and find that the defendant's conduct was not op
pressive. The defendant's reliance on Wise is misplaced. In Wise, there was
evidence that the salary increases were justified.
542
C H A P T E R 18 E X T E R N A L M E M O R A N D A COURT BR IE FS
Our S it u a t i o n is distinguishable. There is no evidence that the salary

increases the defendant awarded himself and his refusal to issue dividends
were justified. Therefore,the HZ/seopinion is noton point and is not applicable.
The Tyrone opinion is on point and should be followed.
4. A r g u m e n t or der . W h e n i n t e r p r e t i n g a n d a p p l y i n g a r ul e o f law. a l w a y s i n t r o d u c e
y o u r a r g u m e n t s first, a d d r e s s t h e c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t , t h e n p r e s e n t y o u r r e s p o n s e .
In a d d i t i o n , s p e n d m o r e t i m e a f i i r m a t i v e h ' s t a t i n g \' oi u‘ p o s i t i o n t h a n r e s p o n d i n g
to t h e o p p o n e n t ’s c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t . Tl i e r e a r e s e v e r a l r e a s o n s for this:
A s w i t h t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e fact s s t a t e m e n t a n d o r g a n i z a t i o n o f t h e a r g u
m e n t , t h e r e a d e r t e n d s t o r e m e m b e r a n d e m p h a s i z e i n t o i ' m a t i o n p r e s e n t e d at
t h e b e g i n n i n g a n d e n d o f a s e c t i o n o r p a r a g r a p h . Y o u w a n t to d r a w a t t e n t i o n
t o a n d e m p h a s i z e y o u r a r g u m e n t ; t h e r e f o r e , a d d r e s s it hrst.
By i n t r o d u c i n g y o u r a r g u m e n t first, y o u h a v e t h e o p p o r t u n i t y to s o f t e n t h e i m
pact o f t h e opp os in g a r g u m e n t th r o u g h the stro ng presentation o f y o ur position,
h i a b u s y c o u r t , if y o u d i s c u s s y o u r p o s i t i o n o r a r g u m e n t a f t er t h e o p p o n e n t ’s,
y o u r u n t h e risk oi it n o t b e i n g r e a d o r gi\ e n e q u a l a t t e n t i o n by t h e c o u r t .
By fol l o wi n g the c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t w i t h a r e s p o n s e o r r e b u t t a l t h a t s u m s u p y o u r
p o s i t i o n , y o u m o v e t h e c o u n t e r a r g u m e n t f u r t h e r I r o m t h e r e a d e r ’s a t t e n t i o n . It
is b u r i e d in t h e m i d d l e o f t h e a r g u m e n t w h e r e its si gni f i c a nc e is d o w n p l a y e d a n d
d e e m p h a s i z e d , l h e d e f e n d a n t ' s p o s i t i o n is it ali cized in t h e t o l l o u i n g e x a m p l e .
For Example It is appropriate forthe courtto allow admission of the INDMtest

results. The court of appeals in State y. Digo ruled that scientific
tests are admissible when the reliability and scientific basis ofthe test are recog-
nized by competent authorities. The INDM test, developed in 1985, is universally
accepted by all competent authorities as scientifically valid. It is argued by the
defendant that the test results should not be relied on by the court. Defendant
relies on the case of Ard v. State to suppoii this argument. Defendant's reliance
on Ard V. State is misplaced. In this 1985 case, the court of appeals did not allow
the admission of the INDM test results because the INDM was a new test not
universally accepted. The ruling in Ard is no longer applicable. The INDM test
IS no longer a new test and is universally used and accepted.
5. W o r d ch o i c e , (âretul w ord ch o ice is a n i n v a l u a b l e a i d w h e n c r a f t i n g a p e r s u a

sive a r g u m e n t . Vou c a n si g n i f i ca n t l y e n h a n c e t h e a r g u m e n t by t h e u s e o f f o r c e f u l ,
p o s i ti ve , a n d c o n f i d e n t l a n g u a g e .
For Example lneffective:\J\le believe thatthe defendant engaged in oppres

sive conduct.
Effective:Jhe defendant engaged in oppressive conduct.
Ineffective: It isthe defendant's position thatthe search was illegal....
Effective: Jhe search was illegal....
l^resent t h e o p p o s i n g p o s i t i o n in a m a n n e r t h a t d e e m p h a s i z e s its i m p o r
t a n c e o r credibilitv.
For Example Ineffective: Jh e defendant states__

E ffective:lhe defendant alleges__
lneffective:Jhe defendant's position is ....
Effective: Jhe defendant claims....
543
PA R T IV LEGAL WRITING
(■>. I\ )int h ea d i n g s . Point headin gs are a s u m m a r y (if t h e p o s i t i on a d v o c a t e d in tlie

a r g u m e n t . I h e y a r e p r e s e n t e d at t h e b e g i n n i n g o f e a c h a r g u m e n t . S e c t i o n 111 o f t h i s
c h a p t e r a d d r e s s e s t h e detai ls ol lor ni at , c o n t e n t , a n d p r e s e n t a t i o n ol p o i n t h e a di ngs .
Ihi s s e c t i on d i s c u s s e s t h e p e r s ua s i v e n a t u r e a n d p r e s e n t a t i o n o f p o i n t h e a di ngs .
llie p e r s u a s i v e role o f a p o i n t h e a d i n g is t o f o c u s t h e r e a d e r o n t h e p o s i t i o n
a d v o c a t e d in t h e a r g u m e n t . I h e i e l o r e , d r a l t a p o i n t h e a d i n g in a m a n n e r thal
pi'ov i d e s a p o s i t i ve p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t hat p o s i t i on .
For Example Not persuasive: The court should not grant the motion to
suppress.... The photos of the victim were inflammatory and
should not have been admitted into evidence by the trial court.
Persuasive: The court should deny the motion to suppress. . . . The inflamma
tory nature of the photographs of the victim outweighs their probative
value, and their admission was highly prejudicial to the defendant and
was improper.
I h e d i l f e r e n c e in t h e t w o p r e s e n t a l i o i i s in t hi s e x a m p l e is t h a t t h e p e r s u a s i v e p r e s e n t a
t i on m o r e a t f i r m a t i v e l v a n d p o s i t i v e k c l i a r a c l e r i z e s t h e p o s i t i o n a r g u e d . I h e d i s c u s s i o n s in
t h e p r e v i o u s s e c t i o n c o n c e r n i n g w o r d c h o i c e a n d a ct i ve v o i c e a p p k to p o i n t h e a d i n g s .
l-Aliibil l(S- l p r e s e n t s a ch e c k l i s t for u s e in t h e p e r s u a s i v e p r e s e n t a t i o n ol t h e a r g u m e n t
ill a c o u r t briel.
E x h i b i t 1 8 - 4 Checklist: Argum ent— Persuasive Presentation.
A rgum ent organization: Follow the standard organizational format: rule

of law, followed by the interpretation of the
law througii case law, followed by the applica
tion of the law to the issue.
Issue presentation: If there is more than one issue, discuss the is
sue supported by the strongest argument first.
Rule o f la w presentation: Present the rule of law in a manner that sup

ports your argument.
Case presentation: Discuss favorable cases first, followed by un
favorable cases, then a rebuttal em phasizing
why the favorable cases should be followed.
A rgum ent order: When applying the rule of law, introduce your
argument first, then the counterarguments,
and conclude with your response.
A rgum ent word choice: Present your argument with forceful, positive,
and confident language.
A rgum ent p oin t heading: Draft point headings persuasively.
III. TRIAL COURT BRIEFS

11 1 m a n y i n s t a n c e s , w h e n a t r ial c o u r t is in t h e p r o c e s s o f r u l i n g o n a m o t i o n o r a n i s s u e in
a case, t h e i u d g e r e q u i r e s t h e a t t o r n e v s t o s u b m i t a m e m o r a n d u m ol law. T h i s m e m o r a n
d u m o f l a w is o f t e n r e f e r r e d t o as a D icu io r a iu iu u i o f p o i n t i a iu l a u t l i o r i t i c i o r a tr iu l brief.
544
C H A P T E R 18 EX TE RN AL MEM OR AN DA : COURT BRIE FS
!lio trial b r i o t p r e s e n t s t h e legal a u t h o r i l \ ' a n d a r g u m e n t in s u p p o r t ot t h e p o s i t i o n atl\(>-

c a t e d by t h e a t t o r n e y .
A trial b r i e f is s i m i l a r t o a n otfice m e m o in m a n y respects. B o t h a r e d e s i g n e d to i n f o r m
t h e r e a d e r h o w t h e law a p p l i e s to t h e issues r ai se d b\- t h e tact s ol t h e case. M o s t ot t h e c o n si t l -
e r a t i o n s i n v o l v e d in t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f a n office m e m o also a p p l y to t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f a trial
briet. I h e r e f o r e , w h e n p r e p a r i n g a trial briet', in a d d i t i o n to thi s c h a p t e r , r e f er t o (Chapt er s 16
a n d 17 for g u i d a n c e .
I h e g u i d e l i n e s for p r e p a r i n g a p e r s u a s i v e trial b r i e f a r e d i s c u s s e d in t h e p r e v i o u s sec-
tit)n. l l i i s s e c t i o n a d d r e s s e s o t h e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n s i n v o l v e d in p r e p a r i n g a trial brief', s u c h as
t he w r i t i n g p r o c e s s .
A. A u d ie n c e
I h e a u d i e n c e for t h e trial b r i e f is t h e j u d g e a s s i g n e d [o t h e case. I'rial c o u r t j u d g e s a r e u s u a l l y
b u s y p e o p l e , w i t h h e a v \ c a s e l o a d s , w h o m a y ru l e o n s ev er a l m o t i o n s a day. I h e y m a y no t h a v e
t i n i e to ca r ef ul K' r e a d length}' bri ets. I h e r e f o r e , a j u d g e u s u a l h ' a p p r e c i a t e s a w e l l - o r g a n i z e d ,
c o n c i s e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e law.
B. C o n s tra in ts
C o u rt rules a r e p r o c e d u r a l r u l es t h a t g o v e r n t h e l i t i g a t i o n pr o ce s s . iMany trial c o u r t s h a v e
local r ul es t h a t g o v e r n v a r i o u s a s p e c t s ot a trial brief, s u c h as f o r m a t a n d st\Te. ' I h e m a j o r
c o n s t r a i n t s o n a trial b r i et are u s u a l h ' i m p o s e d b}' t h e local c o u r t rules.
For Example A local rule may establish a maximum length of a trial brief and require the
court's permission before that length can be exceeded.
A l w a \ ' s c o n s u l t t h e local r u l es w h e n p r e p a r i n g a trial briet.

U s u a l l y t h e r e is a t i m e c o n s t r a i n t . I h e c o u r t o r t h e l ocal r u l es o f t e n r e q u i r e t h a t t h e
br i ef be s u b m i t t e d w i t h i n a c e r t a i n n u m b e r o f d a y s . K n o w t h e t i m e d e a d l i n e a n d a l l o c a t e
y o u r t i m e a c c o r d i n g l y . U s u a l l y , b u t n o t a l w a y s, t h e c o u r t m a y g r a n t e x t e n s i o n s o f t i m e
u p o n request.
C. F o rm a t o r C o n te n t
' t h e f o r m a t o f a trial b r i e f v a r i es a m o n g c o u r t s a n d a m o n g j u r i s d i c t i on s . In m a n y i n s t a n c e s ,
t h e local c o u r t r u l e s e s t ab l i sh a r e q u i r e d f o r m a t , ( i en e r a l l y , a trial c o u r t b r i e f i n c l u d e s s o m e
o r all o f t h e c o m p o n e n t s p r e s e n t e d in Hxhibit i 8 - 3 .
E x h i b i t 7 8 - 5 Components of Tnal Court Brief
Caption
Table of contents
: Table of authorities
Preliminary statements
Question(s) presented/issue(s)
Statement of the case (fact statement)
Argument
Conclusion
545
PART IV LEGAL WRITING
ll tIu' hr i c t is s h o r t , s u c h as ill t h e ease ol a si ngl e issue b r i el , t h e n a tabl e ot c o n t e n t s ,

t ab l e lit aLithiii'itk's, o r p r e l i n i i n a r v stateiiiciil ina\' n o t be r e q u i r e d . In n i a n \ ’ i n s t a n c e s it is d e a r
l i d i i i t h e n i o t i o n W'hat t h e issue is, a n d t h e hr i e t w ill c o n s i s t o t ' o n h ' a slidi't tacts s t a t e m e n t ,
a r g u n i c n l , a n d Ldi i cki si on. O f t e n tl ial c o u r t b r i el s a r e i n t o n i i a l in sucli sitLiatioiis.
For Example A motion to dismiss a complaint is filed for failure to include an indispens
able party. The issue is clear from the motion, and the memorandum in
support ofthe motion may simply consist of a brief summary ofthe facts, the legal argu
ment, and a conclusion.
l . a c h of t h e e o n i p o i i e n t s in H x h i b i t 18-5 is b r i e t l ) ' d i s c u s s e d in t h e f o l l o w i n g s u b
sections. l or e x a m p le s o f these c o m p o n e n t s , refer to the A p p lic a t io n section o f this
c h a p t e i ' a n d A p p e n d i x B.
1. Caption
I A c r y b r i e l ' s u b m i t t e d to a trial coiu' t r e q u i r e s a c a p t i on , l h e l o r m a t \ a r i e s f r o m c o u r t t o c o u r t ,
b u l t h e c a p t i o n us u a l l y i n c l u d e s :
lhe n am e ot'the court
l h e n a m e s a n d s t at us o f t h e p a r t i e s
l h e tile n u m b e r a n d t y p e ol ’c a s e — civ il o r c r i m i n a l
l h e title o f t h e d o c u m e n t , s u c h as BRl Hb I N S U F P O R '1' OF' M O l ' I O N 'I'O D I S M I S S
R e l e r lo l h e Acipli cati on s e c t i o n ot t hi s c h a p t e r tor an e x a m p l e ot a c a p t i o n .
2. Table o f Contents
II a ta b le of c o n te n ts is r e q u i r e d , it t o l l o w s t h e c a p t i o n p a g e . Fh e t a b l e ol c o n t e n t s
a l l o w s t h e r e a d e r l o l o c a l e t h e \ a r i o u s c o m p o n e n t s ol t b e b r i e l a n d i h e i r r e s p e c t i v e p a g e
n u m b e r s . II p o i n t h e a d i n g s a r e u s e d in t h e a r g u m e n t s e c t i o n , t b e \ ’ a r e s t a t e d in lul l in t h e
t a b l e ot c o n t e n t s . F o r a n e x a m p l e o l ' a l a b l e o f c o n t e n t s , s ee t h e a p p e l l a t e b r i e f p r e s e n t e d
in . A p p e n d i x H.
3. Fable o f Authoritie,s
It a ta b le of a u th o ritie s is r e q u i r e d , it is p r e s e n t e d a f t e r t h e t a b l e o f ' c o n t e n t s p a g e .
A t a b l e ot a u t h o r i t i e s lists all tlie law u s e d in t h e b r i e f a n d t h e p a g e o n w h i c h t h e l a w is
c i t e d in t h e b r i e t . I h i s a l l o w s t h e r e a d e r t o q u i c k h ’ l o c a t e w h e r e t h e a u t h o r i t y is d i s c u s s e d
in t h e b r i e l . P r e s e n t t h e c a s e l aw a n d e n a c t e d l a w in s e p a r a t e s e c t i o n s . Fist t h e c a s e l a w in
a l p h a b e t i c a l o r d e r by c a s e n a n i e . F'or a n e x a m p l e o f a t a b l e o f a u t h o r i t i e s , s ee t h e a p p e l l a t e
b r i e t ' p r e s e n t e d in A p p e n d i x B.
4. Preliminary Statement
lhe p re lim in a ry sta te m e n t i n t r o d u c e s t h e p r o c e d u r a l p o s t u r e o f t h e case. It u s u a l l y
i n c l ud e s :
An identilieation ot' th e parties
t h e p r o c e d u r a l e v e n t s in t h e cas e r e l ev a n t to t h e m a t t e r t h e c o u r t is a d d r e s s i n g
A d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e m a t t e r b e i n g a d d r e s s e d b y t h e c o u r t , s u c h as “ Ihi s n i a t t e r is
b e t o r e t h e c o u r t o n a m o l i o n l o d i s mi s s t h e con-iplaint.”
546
C H A P T E R 18 E X T E R N A L M EM O R A N D A : COURT B R IE FS
lliL' rcliof s o u g h t , s u c h as "This m c n i o r a i H l u m is s u b m i t t e d in s u p p o r t ol t h e m o t i o n

to s u p p r e s s t h e e v i d e n c e s e i / e d d u r i n g t h e se a r c h . ”
For Example PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

Edna and Ida Tule, the plaintiffs, are minority shareholders in Tula,
Inc. Their brother, Thomas Tule, is the defendant in this action, the majority
shareholder, and president of Tule, Inc. On January 9 of this year, a request for
the production of company records relating to salary increases and bonuses
granted to Mr. Tule was delivered to him. Mr. Tule refuses to produce the com
pany records. This memorandum is submitted in support of a motion to compel
the production of those documents.
5. Qucstion(s) Presented
' I hi s s e c t i o n o t ' a b r i e f p e r s u a s i v e k p r e s e n t s t h e legal i s s u e ( s ) a d d r e s s e d in t h e bri ef. T h e
i s s u e s h o u l d i n c l u d e t h e r u l e o f l a w , legal q u e s t i o n , a n d t h e ke\' facts. W ' h e n t h e r e is m o r e
t h a n o n e i s s u e , list t h e i s s u e s in t h e o r d e r t h e y a r e d i s c u s s e d in t h e a r g u n i e n t s e c t i o n
o f t h e br i e f . S e c t i o n 11.15.1 o f t h i s c h a p t e r d i s c u s s e s t h e t e c h n i q u e s l o r p e r s u a s i v e h ' d r a f t i n g
t h e issue. ( C h a pt e r 16 a d d r e s s e s t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e i s s u e ( s ) in a n otfice m e m o . R e f e r t o
t h a t c h a p t e r w h e n p r e p a r i n g t h e issue.
6. Statement o f the Case

i h i s s e c t i o n is of t en r e f e r r e d to as t h e sU itc m c n t o f factf. it c o r r e s p o n d s to t h e s t a t e n i e n t o f
facts s e c t i o n ot a n olt ice m e m o , its p u r p o s e is to i n l r o d t i c e t h e t act s ot t h e ca s e in a li ght t h a t
m o s t t a v o r s t h e c l i e n t ’s p o s i t i o n . S e c t i o n li.i-!.2 ot t hi s c h a p t e r d i s c u s s e s t h e p e r s u a s i v e n a t u r e
o f tlie t act s s e c t i on , i h a t s u b s e c t i o n a n d tlie . Applicat ion s e c t i o n o f t h i s c h a p t e r i n t r o d u c e
e x a m p l e s o f p er s ua si \ - e s t a t e m e n t s (if facts. I h e fact s s e c t i o n s h o u l d be a c c u r a t e a n d c o m p l e t e
a n d s h o u l d i n c l u d e b a c k g r o u n d a n d k e \ ’ lacts. l o r a d d i t i o n a l g u i d a n c e w h e n d r a l t i n g t h e l a c t s
s e c t io n , r e t er to (Chapter 16, s ec t i o n \ ' . i ’.
7. Argument Section
llie a r g u n i e n t s e c t i o n ol a trial bri et, like t h e a n a h s i s s e c t i o n o f a n oll ice m e m o , is t h e h e a r t o f
t h e d o c u m e n t , it differs f r o m t h e a n a h s i s s e c t i o n o f a n olfice m e m o in t hat it is n o t a n o b j e c t i v e
legal anal ys i s. Ra t h e r , it is d e s i g n e d to p e r s u a d e t h e c o u r t to a d o p t y o u r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e
law. S e c t i o n 11.ii..^ o f tliis c h a p t e r d i s c u s s e s t h e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s i n v o l v e d in c r a f t i n g t h e a r g u
m e n t in a p e r s u a s i v e m a n n e r , i h i s s e c t i o n a d d r e s s e s t h e b asi c o r g a n i z a t i o n o f t h e a r g u m e n t
a n d t h e c o m p o n e n t s . I'.xhibit 18-6 p r e s e n t s t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n a n d c o m p o n e n t s o f t h i s s e c t i o n .
E x h ib it 1 8 -6 Organization and Com ponents of Argument Section of Trial Bnef.
1. Sum m ary of argument

2. Point headings
3. Argument
Rule of law
Case law (if necessary) interpretation of rule of law
Application of law to the issue being addressed
Discussion of opposing position (similar to counteranalysis in office
legal memorandum)
547
PA RT IV LEGAL WRITING
I h c t o r n i a t in lixliibit 18-6 is r c c o m i i i e n d c d ; it is n o t n c cc s s ar i l y i o l l o w e d in over\' ot-

ticc, a n d a d i t t c r c i i t t o r n i a t n ia \ bc r e q u i r e d b \ ’ local c o u r t rul e. In s o m e in s t a n c e s , a s u m m a r y
ot t he a r t i u m e n t m a y n o t b e r e q u i r e d , a n d s o m e local c o u r t rul es a n d oli ice f o r m a t s d o n o t
r e q u i r e p o i n t h e a d i n g s . I h i s is o f t en t r u e w h e n t h e b r i e f is s h o r t a n d inx'oKe.s a s i ng l e issue.
\ e \ e r t l i e l e s s . all ot t h e c o m p o n e n t s ol t h e a r g u m e n t s e c t i o n ar e p r e s e n t e d h e r e so t h a t y o u
will be f a mi l i a r w i t h t h e m w h e n t h e \ ’ a re r e q u i r e d .
a. S u m m a r y o t A r g u m e n t
llie argLuiient s e c t i o n o f a trial b r i e f s h o u l d b e g i n w i t h a n i n t r o d u c t o r ) ' p a r a g r a p h t ha t s u m
m a r i z e s t h e a r g u m e n t . It p r e s e n t s t h e c o n t e x t o f t h e a r g u m e n t , the issues in t h e o r d e r in w h i c h
the)' w ill b e d i s c u s s e d , a s u m n i a r \ ' ot t h e c o n c l u s i o n s r e g a r d i n g e a c h issue, a n d t h e m a j o r
reasons s u p p o r t i n g each conclusion.
For Example On December 12, 2011, John Jones, the defendant, was arrested for pos
session of cocaine. On January 1, 2012, he was indicted for possession
of 4 ounces of cocaine. The trial commenced on October 25, 2012. On November 11,
2012, he was found guilty by a jury and convicted of possession of 4 ounces of cocaine.
This matter is before the court on Mr. Jones's motion for a new trial, filed March 7, 2013.
Mr. Jones's motion is based on the claim that new evidence has been uncovered show
ing that the drugs belonged to a Mr. Tom Smith, a visitor in Mr. Jones’s home. For a new
trial to be granted on the basis of newly discovered evidence, the defendant must dem
onstrate that the newly discovered evidence was not available or discoverable at the
time of trial. The information concerning Mr. Smith was available atthe time of trial. The
defense made no effort to interview Mr. Smith or in any way discover whether the drugs
belonged to him. The evidence regarding Mr. Smith is not newly discovered evidence,
and the motion should be denied.
llie use ot a n a r g u m e n t s u m n i a i ) ' is v a l u a b l e w h e n \ ' ou b e l i e \ e t h e l u d g e m a ) ' iu>t l u u e

t i m e to r e a d t h e e n t i r e bri et. It m a \ ' n o t be necessar\- il t h e br i e l is s h o r t o r w h e n a s i ngl e i s sue
IS in\ ' ol\ ed. It s h o u l d be a c o m p l e t e s u m m a r y ; t h e r e a d e r s l i o u l d n o t h a \ e to r e t e r t o t h e b ot l v
ot t he a r g u m e n t to u n d e r s t a n d t h e s u n i m a r ) ' .
b. Point Headings
P oint lu'iuiings ar e s u m m a r i e s ot t h e p o s i t i o n y ou a r e a s k i n g t h e c o u r t to a d o p t . T h e y s h o u l d
b e d r a h e d p e r s u a s i v e h ' . S e c t i o n II.B.3 o f t hi s c h a p t e r a d d r e s s e s t h e g u i d e l i n e s f o r d r a f t i n g
p e r s u a s i \ ' e p o i n t h e a d i n g s in a n a r g u m e n t .
P o i n t h e a d i n g s a r e d e s i g n e d to;
Organize, dehne, and emphasize the structure o f t h e argum ent
Act as l o c a t o r s t h a t a l l ow t h e r e a d e r t o q u i c k l y f i nd speci fi c s e c t i o n s o f t h e a r g u m e n t
l-'ocus t h e c ou r t ' s a t t e n t i o n o n t h e o u t c o m e y o u a d v o c a t e a n d p r o \ ’i de a n o u t l i n e o f
y ou r theor)'
P o i n t h e a d i n g s nia\ ' n o t b e r e q u i r e d in a trial brief, e s p e c i a l h ' w h e n t h e b r i e f is s h o r t o r

a d d r e s s e s o n h ' a si ngl e issue. In s u c h i n s t a n c e s , the)' a r e n o t n e e d e d as a n o r g a n i z a t i o n a l t ool ,
n o r ar e the)' n e e d e d t o g u i d e t h e r e a d e r . Cdieck t h e c o u r t r u l es a n d otfice f o r m a t t o d e t e r n i i n e
w h e n the)' a r e r e q u i r e d .
In r e g a r d t o p o i n t h e a d i n g s , n o t e t h e f o l l o w i n g g u id e l i n e s :
1. Place t h e p o i n t h e a d i n g s at t h e b e g i n n i n g o f e a c h s e c t i o n o f t h e a r g u n ' i e n t a n d
i n c l u d e t h e m in t h e t ab l e o f c o n t e n t s .
548
C H A P T E R 18 EX TE RN AL M E M O R A N D A COURT BRIE FS
2. D i v i d e t h e p o i n t h e a d i n g s i n t o m a i o r a n d m i n o r p o i n t lieadini^s. T h e r e s h o u l d be
a maj i ) r p o i n t h e a d i n g for e a c h issue p r e s e n t e d , l ' s e m i n o r h e a d i n g s to i n t r o d u c e
si gni f i ca n t p(Mnts s u p p o r t i n g t h e m a i o r h e a d i n g .
For Example ARGUMENT
I. THE TRIAL COURT ERRED WHEN IT RULED THAT MR. SMITH'S CON
DUCT DID NOT CONSTITUTE BREACH OF CONTRACT BECAUSE THE
GOODS WERE DEFECTIVE AND DELIVERED LATE.
A. Mr. Smith's delivery of the widgets 10 days late constituted a breach
otthe_contLaj:t. (text of argument)
B. The delivery ofthe widgets with a_5-pound spring instead of a 10-pound
spring constituted a breach ofthe contract, (text of argument)
3. Hach h e a d i n g a n d . s u b h e a d i n g s h o u l d b e a c o m p l e t e s e n t e n c e .
4. Hach h e a d i n g s h o u l d identil}- t h e legal c o i i c l u s i o n \-oii w a n t t h e c o u r t t o a d o p t

a n d t h e basi c r e a s o n s s u p p o r t i n g t h e c o n c l u s i o n .
For Example THE TESTIMONY OF DR. SMITH IS PROBATIVE OFTHE DEFEN

DANT'S INTENT AND THEREFORE IS ADMISSIBLE.
THE DISTRICT COURT'S SUPPRESSION OFTHE EVIDENCE WAS IMPROPER
BECAUSE THE SEARCH WARRANT WAS SUPPORTED BY PROBABLE CAUSE.
3. Use m i n o r h e a d i n g s o n l y if t h e r e a r e t w o o r m o r e , ' l h e r u l es o f o u t h n i n g r e q u i r e
m o r e t h a n o n e s u b h e a d i n g w h e n s u b h e a d i n g s are u s e d . M i n o r h e a d i n g s p r e s e n t
a s p e c t s oi a m a j o r p o i n t h e a d i n g in t h e c o n t e x t ol t h e speci fic tact s ol tlie case.
N'ote t hat t h e m i n o r p o i n t h e a c h n g s in t h e e x a m p l e in numbei * 2 a b t n ' e p r e s e n t
t w o a s p e c t s o f t h e m a i o r p o i n t h e a d i n g . Stat e t h e m i n o r p o m t h e a d i n g s in t h e
specilit. tônlexl ol llie Lk I s ot l h e ».ase.
A . M r . Sii lit h ' s d e !j \ ■e r y_() f t h t ^ J_0 d a \ s late c o n s t i t u t e d a b r e a c h o f t h e

ct i u t r a c t .
1^. l h e de l i ve r y o f t h e w i d g e t s w i th a 3 p o u n d s p r i n g in s t e a d (>f a 10 - p o u n d s p r i n g
co n st it u te d a b reach o f t h e contract.
6. l y p e m a j o r h e a d i n g s in ALL ( ' A P L i ’ALS a n d m i n o r h e a d i n g s in r e g u l a r u p p e r

a n d l o w e r case. M i n o r h e a d i n g s m a y b e u n d e r l i n e d . Cilieck t h e c o u r t r u l e s t or
t h e p r o p e r t o r m a t . t h e p r e c e d i n g e x a m p l e in n u n i b e r 2 il l us t rat es t h e f o r m a t for
m a j o r and m i n o r point headings.
c. A r g u m e n t F o rm a t
T h e a r g u m e n t s e c t i o n o f t h e trial b r i e f is s i m i l a r to t h e a n a l y s i s s e c t i o n o f a n office m e m o ; ref er
t o ( ' h a p t e r 17, sectiiMi 11, w h e n p r e p a r i n g a trial briel. T h e s a m e basi c 1RA(' f o r m a t is fol l owed;
R u l e o f law
( ! a s e law (i f n e c e s s a r y ) - ' i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f r u l e o f law
1. N a m e o f case
2. Lacts oi c a s e — suffici ent to d e m o n s t r a t e t h e case is o n p o i n t
3. Rul e o r legal p r i n c i p l e f r o m c a s e t h a t a p p l i e s to t h e issue b e i n g a d d r e s s e d
A p p l i c a t i o n o f law to t h e i s sue b e i n g a d d r e s s e d
1 ) i s c u s s i o n ot o p p o s i n g p o s i t i o n ( s i m i l a r t o c o u n t e r a n a K si s in office legal m e m o r a n d u m )
549
PART IV LEGAL WRITING
l l i o I i i a i o r d i t f c i ' c n c c b c t wL' cn tliL' a r g u i i K ' n l L i i n i Ị H i n e n t o t ' a n o l l i c c m e m o a n d tliiU ol a

tl ial h r i c l is t h a l the' tl ial b r i e l i n l r o d i i c o tli c . u u u n i c n l ill a p e r s u a s i v e r a t h e r thiiii a n o h i e c -
t i \ c m a n n e r . Rol cr t o s c c t i o n II.B. 3 ol t h i s LhaỊ Mcr l o r g u i d a n c e i n o r g a n i z i i i i ; a n d p r e p a r i n g
a pcrsu;)si\c a r g u m e n t.
8. Conclusion
l l ic co n clu sio n section 1)1 a trial b r i e l ' r e q u e s t s tlie speci ti c relict d e s i r e d . D e p c n d i i i i i o n t h e
c o n i p l c x i t \ ' of llu' brief, it n i a \ ’ b e a si ngl e sei it cii ce statiiii’ t h e r e q u e s t e d rcliet o r a sLiniiiuir\'
(if t h e e n t i r e argLimcnt.
For Example Single sentence: For the foregoing reasons, the defendant requests that
the motion to dismiss be granted.
A s i n g l e s c i i t en c c c o n c l u s i o n is a p p i ' o p r i a l c w h e n t h e trial b r i e t is a s i m p l e , o n e - o r t wo -
i s sue bri et, a n d t h e a r g u n i e n t s e c t i o n c o n c l u d e s w i t h a s u n i n i a r \ ' o f t h e anal ysi s. W ' h e n t h e
trial b r i e f is l o n g e r a n d m o r e c o m p l i c a t e d , t h e c o n c k i s i o n ma \ ' i n c l u d e a n o v e r al l s u m m a r \ '
o f t h e law p r e s e n t e d in t h e a r g u m e n t s e c t i o n a n d e n d w i t h a r e q u e s t t o r reliet. I h i s t yp e ot
c o n c l u s i o n is s i m i l a r to t h e c o n c l u s i o n s e c t i o n ot a n oti ice m e m o d i s c u s s e d in ( Chapt er 17,
s e c t i o n 111. X o t e t h at t h e c o n c l u s i o n s h o u l d s u m m a r i / e t h e a r g i u n e n t s e c t i o n a n d retlect t h e
p e r s u a s i s e n a t u r e ot t h e a r g u m e n t .
IV. APPELLATE COURT BRIEFS

.An indi\'idLial w h o d i s a g r e e s wi t h t h e dei.ision o f a trial o r lowei' c o i n t ma\- a p p e a l t h e d e c i s i o n
t o a c o u r t o f a p p e a l s . I h e i n d i \ idual w h o a p p e a l s is call ed t h e appellant, a n d t h e i ndi xit lual
w h o o p p o s e s t h e a p p e a l is call ed t he appellee. ( )n a p p e a l , t h e a p p e l l a n t a r g u e s that t h e l o we r
c o u r t nii\de a n err or, t h e erroi' atlectetl t h e o u t c o m e ot t h e case, a n d t he a p p e l l a n t is entitleil
t o relief. I h e a p p el l e e a r g u e s l h a l i h e lowei ^.ovnl d i d n o t >. ommi l a n e r r o r t h a t enl i ll es llie
a p p e l l a n t to reliel'.
.An a p p e l l a t e c o u r t b r i e f is a n e x t e r n a l m e m o r a n d u m o f l a w s u b m i t t e d to a c o u r t o f
a p p e a l s . Il p r e s e n t s t h e legal a n a K s i s , a u t b o r i l \ ' , a n d a r g u m e n t in s u p p o r t ot ’ a p o s i t i o n t ha t
t h e l o w e r c o u r t ' s d e c i s i o n o r r u l i n g wa s e i t h e r c o r r e c t o r i nc or r e c t . I h e l o r m a l ai ul st \ le ot t he
a p p e l l a t e br i el is st rict ly g i n e r n e d b\ a p p e l l a t e c o u r t rules, a n d t h e s e rul es m u s t be c o n s u l t e d
w h e n p r e p a r i n g an a p p e l l a t e brief.
t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f a n a p p e l l a t e briet is a c o m p l e x u n d e r t a k i n g , a n d a d e t a i l e d d i s c u s
s i o n o f t h i s s ub j e c t is b e \ ' o n d t h e s c o p e o f t h i s c h a p t e r , k n t i r e t ext s ( a s a i l a b l e at t h e local law
l i b r a r \ ) a d d r e s s t h e d e t a i l e d c o n s i d e r a t i o n s i i n ’oK' ed in p r e p a r i n g a n a p p e l l a t e b r i e t , a n d \' ou
s h o u l d r e l e r t o t h o s e t e x t s w h e n a s s i g n e d t h e t a s k o f p r e p a r i n g an a p p e l l a t e briet.
P ar a l eg a l s a n d la\s' c l e r ks a r e n o t u s u al l y r e q u i r e d t o dr a l f a p p e l l a t e briefs. I h e y ma\ ' ,
h o w e \ e r , b e c al l ed u p o n t o assist in t b e p r e p a r a t i o n o f t h e b r i e f a n d , t h e r e f o r e , s h o u l d be
t a m i l i a r w i t h its c o m p o n e n t s , t h i s s e c t i o n s u m m a r i z e s c o n s i d e r a t i o n s r e g a r d i n g t h e t o r m a t
a n d ba si c c o m p o n e n t s o f a n a p p e l l a t e briet.
A n a p p e l l a t e brief, like a trial brief, is d e s i g n e d t o a d \ ' o c a t e a legal p o s i t i o n a n d t o p e r
s u a d e t h e c o u r t to a d o p t t h e p o s i t i o n a r g u e d in t h e bri et . I h e r e l o r e , \ ’o u s h o u l d d r a t t t h e br i el
in a p e r s u a s i \ e m a n n e r . I h e d i s c u s s i o n ot’ t h e p e r s u a s i \ - e n a t u r e o f c o u r t briefs, p r e s e n t e d in
s e c t i o n II.B o f t h i s c h a p t e r , a p p l i e s to t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f a p p e l l a t e bri els; t ha t is, a n a p p e l l a t e
b r i e f s h o u l d b e c r a f t e d in a p e r s u a s i \ e m a n n e r .
A n a p p e l l at e b r i e f like a trial brief, is s i mi l a r to a n lillice m e m o in nian\- respect s, f o r e x
a m p l e , a w r i t i n g proces s s h o u l d be tised w h e n p r e p a r i n g b o t h briefs. The r ef o r e, in a d d i t i o n to this
c h a p t e r , refer to (Chapter 13 t h r o u g h ( d i a p t e r 17 w h e n p e r t o r m i n g an ap p e l l a t e bri el a s s i g n m e n t .
550
C H A P T E R 18 E X T E R N A L M EM OR AN DA : COURT BRIEFS
A. A u d ie n c e
A t r i a l c o u r t b r i e t is s u b m i t t e d t o a s i n g l e j u d g e , t h e t r i a l j u d g e a s s i g n e d t o t h e c a se .
I h e a u d i e n c e t o r t h e a p p e l l a t e b r i e l is u s u a l h ' a p a n e l ot t h r e e o r m o r e j u d g e s . In a d d i t i o n ,
t h e j u d g e ’s l aw c l e r k u s u a l l y r e a d s t h e br i e f ; (in n i a n \ ' o c c a s i o n s t h e law c l e r k is t h e first
t o r e a d t h e bri ef. A l t h o u g h y o u a r e w r i t i n g t o a w i d e r a u d i e n c e , t h e s a m e b a s i c c o n s i d e r
a t i o n s a r e i n\ (' (l ved in t h e p r e p a r a t i o n ot t r i al c o u r t a n d a p p e l l a t e c o u r t b r i e t s . A p p e l l a t e
c o u r t j u d g e s , l i ke tr ial c o u r t j u d g e s , a r e u s u a l l y b u s y p e r s o n s w i t h s u b s t a n t i a l c a s e l o a d s , s o
t h e y a p p r e c i a t e a n a p p e l l a t e b r i e f t h a t is a w e l l - o r g a n i z e d a n d co i i c i s e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e law.
B. C o n s tra in ts
' I h e m a j o r c o n s t r a i n t s o n a p p e l l a t e b r i ef s a r e i m p o s e d b\' t h e c o u r t ’s r u l es . I h e a p p e l l a t e
c o u r t r u l e s d i f l e r f r o n i t r i a l c o u r t r u l e s in t h a t t h e \ ' a r e u s u a l h ' m u c h m o r e d e t a i l e d t h a n
t r i al coi u' t r u l es : Hie a p p e l l a t e c o u r t r u l e s m a \ ' e s t a b l i s h t h e s e c t i o n s t h a t m u s t b e i n c l u d e d ,
t h e f o r n i a t o f e a c h o f t h e s e c t i o n s , t h e t y p e o f p a p e r , t h e c i t a t i o n t o r n i , a n' laxi nuui' i l e n g t h
t o r t h e b r i e f s a n d a rei.]uiren' ient l h a t p e r m i s s i o n o f t h e c o u r t b e o b t a i n e d b e f o r e t h e l e n g t h
cai'i b e e . x c e ed e d, a n d s o o n . A l w a \ s c o n s u l t t h e a p p e l l a t e c o u r t r u l e s w h e n p r e p a r i n g a n
appellate b r i e f
C. F o rm a t o r C o n te n t
I h e f o r m a t o f a n ap p e l l at e b r i e f \ a r i e s a m o n g j u r i s d i c t i on s . (i eneral K' , th e basi c a p p e l l a t e c o u r t
bri el i n c l u d e s s o m e o r all ot t h e c o n i p o n e n t s p r e s e n t e d in Hxhibit 18-7.
E x h i b i t 1 8 -7 Com ponents of a B a sic Appellate Court Brief.
Cover page/title page

Table of contents/incjex
Table of authorities
Opinions below/relat6(j appeals
Jurisdictional statement
Question/issue(s) presented
Statement of the case/statement of facts
Sum m ary of argument
Argument
Conclusion
f h e l o l l o w i n g s u b s e c t i o n s b r i e f l y d i s c u s s e a c h ol t h e c o m p o n e n t s o t t h e a p p e l
l a t e b r i e t . R e f e r t o t h e a p p e l l a t e b r i e f p r e s e n t e d in A p p e n d i x H f o r a n e x a i i i p l e of t h e
components.
1. Cover Page/Title Page

T h e court rules g o v er n the forn'iat o f t h e co\'er page, often called the title page. T h e C(ner page
usual!) in cludes;
N a m e ot t h e a p p e l l a t e c o u r t
N u n i b e r assigned to th e appeal
P ar t ie s ’ n a m e s a n d ap p el l a t e st atus ( a p p e l l a n t a n d appell ee o r p e t i t i o n e r a n d r e s p o n d e n t )
N a m e o f t h e l o w e r c o u r t f r o m w h i c h t h e a p p e a l is t a k e n
N a m e s a n d addr es ses o f t h e att orney (s) s u b m it ti n g the brief
551
PART IV LEGAL W R I T I N G
2. I'ablc o f C'ontciits/lndex
S o i i u ’tiiiK's r e t e r r e d ti) as a n iiuicx, t h e tahl e ol eciiitents h st s t h e m a j o r s e c t i o n s ot t h e brief
ai ul tlie p a g e n i m i b e r o n w h i c h e a c h s e c t i o n b e g i n s . I h e t ab l e o t ' c o i i t e n t s p r o \ i d e s t h e r e a d e r
w i t h a r e t e r e n e e t ool t o r l o c a t i n g speci ti c i n t o r m a t i o n w i t h i n t h e brief, l h e t ab l e i n c l u d e s t h e
p o i n t h e a d i n g s a n d s u b h e a d i n g s , l h e p o i n t h e a d i n g s , w h e n i n c l u d e d in t h e t a b l e of c o n t e n t s ,
proN'ide th e r e a d e r wi t h a n o\ e r \ iew o t' t h e legal a r g u m e n t s a n d a l l o w t h e r e a d e r to e a s i k locate
t h e d i s c u s s i o n ot t h e a r g u m e n t s in t h e brief.
3. lable o f Authorities
I h e t abl e ot a u t h o r i t i e s lists all t h e law c i t ed in t h e brief. I h e a u t h o r i t i e s a r e li st ed by cat egory,
s u c h as c o n s t i t u t i o n a l law, s t a t u t o r y law, r e g u l a t i o n s , a n d c a s e law. l h e t ab l e i n c l u d e s t h e full
c i t a t i o n of e a c h a u t h o r i t v a n d t h e p a g e n u m b e r o r n u m b e r s o n w h i c h it a p p e a r s .
4. O pin ion s Below/Related Appeals

I he briet nitty i nc l ud e a sec t i o n that re f e r e nce s a n \ ‘ p r i o r o p i n i o n s o n t h e case o r r el ated appeals.
For Example From a Supreme Court brief: Jh e opinion of tfie Court of Appeals is reported
at 580 F.2d 501. The order of the District Court is not reported.
5. Jurisdictional Statement
l h e bri et u s u a l l y i n c l u d e s a s e p a r a t e s e c t i o n t h a t i n t r o d u c e s , in a s h o r t s t a t e m e n t , t h e s ubj ect
ma t t e i ' jLii i s dict ioi i ot t h e a p p e ll a t e co u r t .
For Example This court has jurisdiction under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
S o m e a(i pell ate rul es d o n o t r e q u i r e a ju risd ictio n al statem ent. S o m e a p p e l l a t e rules

r e q u i r e , in a d d i t i o n l o t h e i u v i sd i ct i on a l s t a t e m e n t , a h i s t o r y ot tltc case a n d l i o w t h e m a i l e r
c a m e betore the court.
For Example The judgment ofthe trial court was entered on Octobers, 2012.The notice
of appeal was filed on October 26, 2013. The jurisdiction of the court is
invoked under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
6. Qucstion(s) Presented
I h i s s e c t i o n ma\- also b e r e t e r r e d to as legul isiitcs o r assigniiiciit o f error. T h e s e c t i o n lists t he
legal issues t h e p a r t } ’ is r e q u e s t i n g t h e c o u r t t o c o n s i d e r . List t h e i s sues in t h e o r d e r t h e y are
a d d r e s s e d in t h e a r g u m e n t s e c t i o n , a n d wr i t e t h e m in a p e r s u a s i v e m a n n e r as d i s c u s s e d earl i er
in t h i s c h a p t e r in s e c t i o n II.B.l.
7. Statement of the Case/Statement o f Facts

I h e s t a t e m e n t ot t h e c a s e s e c t i o n , of t en r ef er r e d to as t h e i t a t e n i e n l of facts, is g e n e r a l h ’ s i mi la r
t o t h e s t a t e m e n t o f tact s s e c t i o n o f t h e trial b r i e f a n d t h e s a m e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s a p p h ' w h e n
p re p a r in g both.
l h e s t a t e m e n t ot t h e c a s e in a n a p p e l l a t e brief, h o w e v e r , d i f f e r s f r o m t h e s t a t e m e n t o f
t act s in a trial b r i e f in t h at t h e s t a t e m e n t o f t h e c a s e s h o u l d a l s o i n c l u d e a s u m m a r y o f t h e p r i o r
p r o c e e d i n g s ( w h a t h a p p e n e d in t h e l o w e r c o u r t ) a n d a p p r o p r i a t e r e f e r e n c e s t o t h e r e c o r d.
In t h e I' ol lowing e x a m p l e , “T r . ” re t ers t o t h e p a g e s in t h e t r a n s c r i p t o f t h e trial r e c o r d , a n d
“ D o c . " l e t e r s to d o c u m e n t s i n c l u d e d in t h e r e c o r d o n a p p e a l .
552
C H A P T E R 18 E X T E R N A L M E M O R A N D A : C O U R T B R I E F S
For Example After the presentation of the key and background facts of the case, the
information concerning the prior proceedings might read:
At the hearing on the motion to suppress, held on December 12, 2012, the trial court
denied the motion to suppress. (Tr. at 37). At the hearing. Officer Smith, the officer
conducting the search, testified . . . (Tr. at 33). The trial court stated that there were
sufficient exigent circumstances present at the scene to support the unannounced
entry by the officers. (Tr. at 38).
Trial was held on January 15, 2013. (Tr. at 201). On January 18, 2013, the jury found the
defendant guilty of possession of an ounce of cocaine. (Tr. at 291). On January 28,20013,
the defendant filed a notice of appeal. (Doc. 44). On March 7, 2013, the defendant was
sentenced to a term of imprisonment of five years. (Doc. 49).
8. S um m ary o f Argument
■jiiis s e c t i o n m a y be o p t i o n a l u n d e r tlie a p p e l l a t e c o u r t rule. Rule 28 o t ' t h e F e d e r a l Rule.s o f
.Appellate P r o c e d u r e state.s l hat t h e a r g u m e n t ma\- b e p r e c e d e d by a s u m m a r y . Tlie c o n t e n t o f
a n a r g u m e n t SLminiary is d i s c u s s e d in s e c t i o n I11.C.7 o f t hi s cha pt e r .
9. Argu me nt Section
a. P o in t H eadin g.s
I h e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s in\'oK-ed in p r e p a r i n g p o i n t h e a d i n g s a r e t h e s a m e t o r a p p e l l a t e a n d trial
c o u r t bri ets. R e t e r t o t h e d i s c u s s i o n of p o i n t h e a d i n g s in s e c t i o n 111.(77 of t hi s c h a p t e r w h e n
p r e p a r i n g p o i n t h e a d i n g s for a p p e l l a t e briefs.
b. B o d \
' I h e a r g u m e n t s e c t i o n o f a n a p p e l l a t e b r i e f is s i m i l a r to t h e a r g u m e n t s e c t i o n o t a t r ial bri ef.
I h e t o r m a t i s t h e s a m e as in a trial brief. Re f er to s e c t i o n 111.(77 of t h i s c h a p t e r w h e n p r e p a r
i n g t h e a r g u m e n t s e c t i o n ot a n a p p e l l a t e brief. R e m e m b e r to p r e s e n t t h e a r g u m e n t s e c t i o n
of a n a p p e l l a t e b r i e f in a pei s u a s i v e m a n n e r , as d i s c u s s e d in s e c t i o n 11.B..^ o f t hi s c h a p t e r .
R e v i e w t h a t s u b s e c t i o n w h e n pi' ej iariii g t h e a r g u m e n t .
10. C onclusion
P r e p a r e t h e c o n c l u s i o n s e c t i o n o f an a p p e l l a t e b r i et in t h e s a m e w a \ ’ as t h e c o n c l u s i o n o t a
trial brief, ' i h e c o n t e n t , s t r u c t u r e , a n d c o n s i d e r a t i o n s i i n o l v e d ar e t h e s a m e for b o t h . R e f e r to
s e c t i o n 111.(78 o f t hi s c h a p t e r w h e n p r e p a r i n g t h e c o n c l u s i o n .
V. KEY P O I N T S CHECKLIST: External M e m o r a n d a — Court Briefs

y ' Trial a n d a p p e l l a t e bri efs a r e s i m i l a r t o office m e n i o r a n d a in m a n y f u n d a m e n t a l
r e s p e c t s . Refer t o ( d i a p t e r 13 t h r o u g h Cd i a p t er 17 w h e n p r e p a r i n g t h e m .
y' llie w r i t i n g f u n d a m e n t a l s p r e s e n t e d in C h a p t e r 14 appK' to all legal w r i t i n g a n d

s h o u l d b e kept in m i n d w h e n p r e p a r i n g c o u r t briefs.
✓ R e m e m b e r to craft t h e b r i e f p e r s u a s i \ ’elv. ( ; olu1 b r i et s a r e d e s i g n e d t o p e r s u a d e t h e

r e a d e r t o a d i ' p t t h e p o s i t i o n t a k e n o r r e c o m m e n d e d in t h e analysis. ' I h e y a r e n o t
sLi pposed t o p r e s e n t a p u r e k o b j e c t i x e a n a h sis.
»/ D e e m p h a s i / e t h e p o s i t i o n t a k e n by t h e o p p o s i t i o n . Par t o f t h e p e r s u a s i v e n a t u r e of'
a c o u r t b r i e f is t o d o w n p l a \ a n d d i s c r e d i t t h e o p p o n e n t ’s p o s i t i o n . ' Ihi s is a c c o m
p l i s h e d t h r o u g h t h e u s e o f p a s s i v e \-oice, l o n g s e n t e n c e s , p l a c e m e n t o f t h e o p p o s i n g 553
a r g u m e n t in t h e m i d d l e o f t h e a n a h s i s , a n d so on.
PART IV LEGAL WRI TIN G
A l w . n s L'heck t h e c o u r t rules. I h e t or nuU, l en g t h, a n d s o o n ot c o u r t b r i et s are o t t e n

g o \ e r n e d by t h e r u l es o t ' t h e c o u r t , i h e a p p e l l at e c o u r t r u l e s e x t e n s i \ e l y g o v e r n m o s t
a s p e c t s o t ' a p p e l l a t e briels.
I h e r e q u i r e d c o m p o n e n t s ol trial a n d a p p e l l a t e c o u r t bri efs ma\- \ ’a r y a m o n g j u r i s

d i c t i o n s . S o m e o t ' t h e c o m p o n e n t s d i s c u s s e d in t hi s c h a p t e r ina\ ' n o t b e r e q u i r e d o r
necessar\-, s u c h as a t abl e o f c o n t e n t s , t a b l e o f a u t h o r i t i e s , o r a r g u m e n t s u m m a r y .
Ih i s is of t e n t r u e w h e n t h e a nal vs i s is briel.
VI. APPLICATION
I his s e c t i o n il lustrat es t h e g u i d e l i n e s a n d p ri nc i p l e s d i s c u s s e d in t hi s c h a p t e r b y a p p l y i n g t h e m
to t h e h y p o t h e t i c a l p r e s e n t e d at t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h e c h a p t e r . ' I h e p a r a l eg a l , P a m Hayes, a p
p r o a c h e s thi s a s s i g n i i ie n l throLigh t h e u s e o f a n e x p a n d e d o u t l i n e , as d i s c u s s e d in C h a p t e r 15.
She also fol l ows t h e g u i d e l i n e s a n d p r i n c i p l e s d i s c u s s e d in (Chapters 16 a n d 17 to t h e e x t e n t
t h e y a p p l y to t h e p r e p a r a t i o n ot a trial b r i e f W' hat fol lows is a p r e s e n t a t i o n ol t h e trial b r i e f
p r e p a r e d h y Ms. l l a \ e s a n d c o m m e n t s o n t h e b r i e f
In r ega r d to the a s s i g n m e n t , .\ls. Hayes l o u n d the tollow ing N e w W a s h i n g t o n law o n point :
Statutory Law. ( ' . ha p t e r 70 o f t h e N e w W a s h i n g t o n S t a t ut e s , t h e Ski Safet y Act, g o v e r n s
ski r e s o r t s a n d t h e s p o r t o f ski ing. N e w W a s h i n g t o n S t a t u t e s . A n n o t a t e d ( N W ' S A ) § 7 0 - 1 1 - 7A
p r o \ ides, “ I h e ski a r e a o p e r a l o i ' shall h a \ e ih e d u t \ to ma i k c i m s p i c u o u s k w i t h t h e a p p r o p r i
at e SN i n b o l o r sign t h o s e s l ope s, trails, o r a r e a s w h i c h a r e c l o s ed oi' w h i c h p r e s e n t a n u n u s u a l
o b st a c l e o r h a z a r d . ” I - 'u r l h e r mo r e . NW' SA § 7 0 - 1 1-8B p r o \ i d e s , “ A p e r s o n w h o t a k e s p a r t
in tlie spiMt ot s k i i n g a c c e p t s as a m a t t e r ot law t h e d a n g e r s i n h e r e n t in t ha t s p o r t , a n d e a c h
ski er e x p r e s s h a s s u m e s t h e risk a n d legal re s p o n s i b i l i l \ ' t o r a n y i n j ur \ ' t o a p e r s o n o r p r o p e r t y
w h i c h r es u l t s I r o m . . . siu t ace o r s u b s m l a c e s n o w o r ice c o n d i t i o n s . . . .”
Ca.se Law. In Kciirii v. High Mouiittiin PuiS, 33 N. W a s h . 462, S66 N.I-. 9 93 ((^t. Ap p . 1994),
a skier b r o k e his leg after tailing to negoti ate a series o f mo g u l s that we r e p r e s en t in the m i d d l e ol a
shar p t u r n o n a ski run. '1 h e mo g u l s were una\' oidable. ' t h e trial c ou r t g r a n t e d the resort's m o t i o n to
dis mi ss for tailure to state a claim. O n appeal , t he c o u r t o f appeal s st ated t hat skiers ar e res ponsi bl e
for s no w a n d ice hazards, a n d mogul s, e\ en t h o u g h u n a \ (iidable, are s n o w h a z a r d s easily ob,ser\ able
a n d r o u t i n e h ' p res ent o n mo s t ski runs. '1 he c ou r t went on to slate t hat u n d e r t h e statute, the ski er
a s s u m e s tlie risk ot s n o w a n d ice h a z a r d s that a re easih' i)hser\ able a n d ro u t i n e l v e n c o u n t e r e d o n
ski runs, a n d resorts h a \ e n o dul\- to w a r n o f s u c h h a z a r d s u n d e r NW'S.A 7 0 - 1 1-7A.
In A i l c r 1 '. W h i le M o u iitiiin Rciort, 33 N. W a s h . 736, 866 N.H. 421 ((It. Ap p . 1994), a ski er
was skiing a newly o p e n e d i n t e r m e d i a t e run. S e w r a l fairh’ large ro c k s h a d n o t b e e n r e m o v e d f r o m
the run. Nornial lv, t he rocks w o u l d h a \ e b e e n r e m i n ed be l or e the l u n was o p e n e d , t h e rocks wer e
coN’e r ed b\' a p p r o x i m a t e h ' t w o a n d o n e - h a l f feet o f n e w snow' a n d w e r e not visible. I h e resort di d
n ot post a w a r n i n g that t he large rocks we r e pr e s e n t o n t he run. Mr . As t e r hit a r o ck w i t h t he tip
ol his ski, lost c ont r ol , a n d i nj ur e d his kn e e a n d back. I h e trial co u r t , in g r a n t i n g t he r e s or t ’s m o
tion to d i s mi s s for tailure to state a claim, held that t he h a z a r d wa s a s n o w h a z a r d for w h i c h t h e
skier wa s r es ponsi bl e u n d e r NW'S.A § 7 0 - 1 1-8B. (')n appeal , t he c o u r t o f a p p e a l s n o t e d that t h e
s n o w c o n d i t i o n wa s an u n a v o i d a b l e latent hazard. I h e c o u r t rul e d t hat u n d e r NW' S A § 7 0 - 1 1-7A,
a resort h as a d u t y to w a r n o f h a z a r d o u s s n o w c o n d i t i o n s if t h e y a r e u n a v o i d a b l e a n d latent. T h e
c o u r t stated, “' Ih e st atut e will n ot be i n t er p r e t ed to reach an a b s u r d result, a n d r e q u i r i n g a ski er
lo be r es p o n s i b l e for u n a \' o i d a b le latent h a z a r d s w o u l d lead lo a n a b s u r d result. Skiers are o nl y
res ponsi bl e for t hos e u n a \ ' o i da b l e s n o w o r ice c o n d i t i o n s w h i c h a re n ot latent o r u n o b s e r \ ' a b l e .”
M y r o n v. ('.ox Inc., 4 0 N. W' ash. 210, 7 4 0 N.F.. 3 0 9 ( 1 9 8 9 ) , set s t h e s t a n d a r d f o r t h e
g r a n t i n g ot a Rule 12( b) ( 6) m o t i o n to di s mi ss , ' t h e c o u r t st at e d , “ A Rul e 1 2 (b) (6) m o t i o n
to d i s m i s s is proper!}' g r a n t e d o i i k if it a p p e a r s t ha l t h e r e is n o p r o v a b l e set o f facts w h i c h
e n t i t l es t h e p l a i n t i t f to r e l i e f ”
554
C H A P T E R 18 EX T E R N A L M E M O R A N D A ; COURT BRIEFS
A. T r ia l B rie f
I h c f o l l i ' w i n g is tlic trial b r i e f p r c p a i c d b\ Ms . 1 ia \ es .
LIN CO LN COUN'LY DISTRIC:'!' COUR l'

S l'AT l- o r X H W \ V A S l l l N ( ' , r O \
N O . C l \ ’. 0 1 3 - 6 0 1
N I C K S H I N H ,
Pl ai nt i t L
Bl. UH. SKV SKI RHSORT,

Detendant.
BRIEF IN O P P O S l H O N TO M O T I O N TO D ISMISS
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
O n D e c e m b e r 3, 2012, Nick Shine, the pkiintiil, was iiiiured wiiile skiing on a ski r u n at Blue Sky
Ski Kesort. H e was i nj ured skiing on an ice h a z a r d that llie resort a d mi t s was not m a r k e d wi t h
a n y type o f w a r n i n g sign. Mr. Shine tiled a c o mp l a i n t against the resort ior negli gence in tailing
to war n o t ' t h e h a / a r d . Ihe resort has lilei.1 a Rule 12(b)(6) m o t i o n tt) dis mi ss tor failure to state a
clai m, all eging lhat it does not h a \ e a d u t y to w a r n ol ice hazards. 'Ihis m e m o r a n d u m is s u b m i t t e d
in o|>position to that mo t i o n .
Q U E S T I O N PR ESENTED
U n d e r t he N e w W a s h i n g t o n Ski Safety .Act, sectit)ns 70-1 1-1 et sec]., can a n e g h g e n c e cl ai m be
st ated w h e n a ski er is i nj ured on an i n m i a r k e d ice ha/.ai'd that is u n a\ \ ) i d a h l e a n d u n o b s e r v a b l e
by the skier d u e to the sun glare?
STATEMEN I OF I HE CASE
O n 1December 3. 2012, Mr. Shine, an expei t skiei', was skiing o n an i nt er m e d i a t e ski r u n at IMue Sk\'
Ski Resort M i d w a v throu^^h the r u n ther e is a slii’hlU uphill t u r n to the s dut h W' hen Mr. Shi ne
e n c o u n t e r e d the t ur n , the s u n was ciirectlv in his eyes, a n d the glare preventetl h i m t'rom se e i ng
that the trail was entirely c overed with ice. D u e to the glare, he was u n a b l e to axoitl the d a n g e r o u s
ice h a/ a r d . 1ie hit the ice anti i m me d i at e l y lost control. As a result, he shd into a tree a n d b r o k e his
lett a r m a n d leg. N o signs w a r n i n g ol the ice h a / a i d were present.
O n April 6, 2013, Mr. Shine filed a negli gence c o mp l ai n t against Blue Sky Ski Resort tor
t b e rest)rt's negli gent tailure io wa r n o f t h e u n a \ ' oi d a h l e ice h a / a r d . O n April 20, 2013, the resort
tiled a intUion lo d i s mi ss u n d e r Rule 12(b)(6)> alleging that the\' d o not have a Lluty to w a rn o f ice
hazar ds , a n d therefore, as a ma i l e r of l aw, a clai m for n e g h g e n c e c a n n o t he stated.
ARGJJMF^Nl
MR. S H I N E ’S A R G U M E N T THA I rHHlC;H H A Z A R D IS UNAVXMDABLE
A N D L A r K N T IS A SET Ob' FACTS \ V[1K; H, lb P R O V E N , W O U L D
ESTABLISH TI IE D E F E N D A N I ’S D U l Y TO W A R N A ND , THEREFORE,
A c: LAI M c a n be S'FATHD AS FO D U FY
Ihis m a t t e r is be t or e t h e c o u r t o n a Rule 12(b)(6) m o t i o n to dis mi ss for tailure to state a
clai m. In the case o\ M y r o n v. Cox, Inc.. 40 N. Wash. 210, 213, 740 N.H. 309, 314 (1989), the
W a s h i n g t o n S u p r e m e Coiu' t est abl i shed the s t a n d a r d tor the g r a n t i n g o f a 12(b)(6) m o t i o n .
I h e c o u r t slated, “A Rule 12(b)(6) m o t i o n to dis mi ss is pro p er l y g r a n t e d on l y if it a pp e a rs lhat
t h e r e is n o p ro \ able set o f tacts wh i c h entitles the plai nti lf to reliet.” Blue Sky Ski Re s o r t ’s m o t i o n
specificall)' alleges that a cl ai m c a n n o t be st ated in this case in regard lo duty. To survi\' e this
mt )l ion, Mr. S h i n e mu s t d e m o n s t r a t e thal t her e is a p r t n a h l e set o f tacts thal w o u l d establish t h e
dut \ ' ol Blue Sk\' lo w a r n o f the ice h a z a r d in this case.
555
P A R T IV L E G AL W R I T I N G
The Ski SatctN' Act establislics the dut i es ot ski resorts a n d skiers. Secti on 7 0 - 1 1 -7A sets out t he
du t i es ot’tlie lesort; it | n o \i i i e s , " llie ski aiea o p e r a t o r siiall have t h e du t y to m a r k ct )nspicuously
witli the a p p r o p r i a t e sy mb o l or sign t hos e slopes, trails, or areas wh i ch are closed or w h i c h pr es ent
an u n u s u a l obst acle o r h a z a r d . ”
Section 70-1 I-8B sets o u t t h e duti es a n d responsibilities of the skier:
A p e r s o n w h o takes part in t h e spor t ot skiing accept s as a ma t t e r ot ' l aw t he d a n g e rs i n h er e n t

in that sport, a n d each ski er e.xpressly a s s ume s the risk a n d legal responsibi li ty tor any i nj ury
to a p e r s o n or pr o p e r t y wh i c h results t r o m . . . surface o r su b s u r f a c e s n o w o r ice c o n d i t i o n s . . . .
i he act doe s not d e t m e t he t e r ms “h a z a r d ” o r “s n o w a n d ice condit ions. " 'ITie st atut e also does
n o t provi de g u i d a n c e as to w h i c h d u t y applies in a fact si tuat ion such as t he o n e p r e s e n t e d in this
case. Ne w Wa s h i n g to n case law, howex er, does pr ovi de guidance.
The controlling case is A ilcr r. Mountain Reiort, 55 N. Wash. 736, 866 N.F.. 421 (Ct. App.
1994). In the .4,</cr case, Mr. .Aster was skiing on a newl\- o p e n e d r u n f r o m which several fairly large
rocks had not be en removed. N o r m a l h ’, the rocks would have been r e m o v e d before t h e r u n was
o p e n e d , ' lhe rocks were covered b\' approxi mat eh- t\vo and o n e - h a l f feet of n e w sinnv a n d were not
visible, l he resort did not post a wa r n i n g that the large rocks were present on t h e run. Mr. Aster
hit a rock with the tip o f his ski, lost control, a n d was injured. The co u r t ruled that u n d e r N W S A
§ 7 0 - 1 1-7A, a resort has a dut\- to warn o f hazardous s now condit ions if they are unav'oidable a n d
latent, i h c court stated, “The statute will not be interpreted to reach an absur d result, a n d requi ring a
skier to be responsible tor u n a \ ’oidable latent haz.;irds would lead to an absurd result. Skiers are only re
sponsible for those unavoidable snow or ice conditions which are not latent o r unobservable.” Id. at 759.
Mr. Shine's c o m p l a i n t , like t he c o m p l a i n t in t he Aster case, states that t he ice c o n d i t i o n
e n c o u n t e r e d was an u na \ ' o i da b l e latent ha z a r d . U n d e r Aster, t h e r esort has t he d u t y u n d e r
§ 70-1 1-7A to w a r n ot su c h h az a r d s . U n d e r t h e rul e a d o p t e d in Aster, Mr. S h i n e ’s c o m p l a i n t
d o e s pr e s e n t a p ro v a b l e set of tacts that e st abli shes a cl a i m as to d u t y a n d enti tl es h i m t o r e l ie f
Th erefor e, the m o t i o n to d i s mi s s s h o u l d be de n i e d .
it is c o n t e n d e d b\- Blue Sk\' that they do not h a \ e a dut y to wa r n o f t h e ice hazard, a n d in s u p
p o rt of this c o n t e n t i o n , they rel\- on Karen v. High .Mountain Pass, 55 N. Wash. 462, 866 N.H. 995
( ( 4. App. 1994). In this case, a skier broke his leg after failing to negoti ate a series of m o g u l s that
wer e present in the mi dd l e ol a s h a r p t ur n ol a ski run. Ihe mo g u l s were obvi ous to t he skier but
uiuu' oidable. The trial c our t g r a n t ed the r esort’s mo t i o n to dismi ss for failure to state a claim. O n
appeal, the co u r t of appeals, in u p h o l d i ng the trial coiu t, held that t m d e r t he statute, t h e skier a s
s u m e s the risk ot s n o w a n d ice h a z ar d s that are easily obser vabl e a n d rout inel y present o n ski runs.
Blue Sky’s reliance o n Karen is mi spl aced, l h e case is clearly disti nguishabl e. The s n o w c o n d i
tion in Karen, t h o u g h una\' oi dable, was c l e a r h ’ observable, a n d mo g u l s are r out inel y pr e s e nt on
ski runs. Skiers are a wa r e that t h e y will e n c o u n t e r m o g u l s a n d k n o w they mu s t be able to navigat e
t h e m . Ice condit ioris also ma y be e n c o u n t e r e d on ski runs. The ice c o n d i t i o n Mr. S hi ne e n c o u n
tered, however, was not a r o u t i n e ice co n d i t i o n . It was u n o b s e r \ ’abIe, unavoi dabl e, a n d e x t r e n ’iely
d a n g e r o u s d u e to t he glare o f t h e sun. Ihe Karen case involves obser vabl e, r o u t i n e snow' hazards .
T h e present case involves u n o b s e r \ a b l e ice ha z a r d s that are not rout i nel y e n c o u n te r e d . K aren is
obvi ous l y not o n p o i n t a n d is not cont r ol l i ng in this case.
The h a z a r d Mr. S h i n e e n c o u n t e r e d was ident ical in n a t u r e to t h e h a z a r d in t he Asft’r case:
t h e ice c o n d i t i o n was an u n a \ ’oidabl e, latent ha z a r d . U n d e r t h e h o l d i n g in Aster, t h e r e s or t has
a d u t y u n d e r § 7 0 - 1 1-7A to w a r n o f this t\ pe o f hazard. Mr, S h in e ’s c o m p l a i n t a rg u e s t ha t t he
h a z a r d is an u n a v o i d a b l e a n d lat ent ha z a r d . Th e c o n i p l ai n t p r e s e n t s a p r o v a b l e set o f facts in
r e g a r d to d u t y u p o n w h i c h rel ief can be g r a n t e d , a n d ther efore, a cl a i m for d u t y c a n b e s t at ed
a n d the m o t i o n to d i s mi s s s h o u l d be deriied.
CONCLUSION
Blue Sky Ski R e s o r t ’s m o t i o n to di s mi ss for failure to state a clai m s h o u l d be deni ed. Mr. S h in e’s
a r g i u n e n t that t he ice c o n d i t i o n c onst it utes a latent ha z a r d is a provabl e set o f facts t h a t entitles
h i m to relief
556
C H A P T E R 18 E X T E R N A L M E M O R A N D A : C O U R T B R I E F S
B. C o m m e n t s
1. N o t e that tlie p r e c e d i n g e x a m p l e o f a ti ial brief d o e s n o t ha\' e a tabl e ol c o n t e n t s o r
a tabl e of a u t h o r i t i e s , W' he n a trial b r i e f is sl iort o r invol ves a si ngl e i ssue a n d few
a u t h o r i t i e s , t h e s e tabl es m a y n o t b e r e q u i r e d . Be s u r e lo c h e c k t h e local c o u r t rule.
2. I h e p r e l i m i n a r y s t a t e m e n t p r e s e n t e d at t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h e b r i e f is o ft e n call ed
a n in tro d u c tio n .
}. A s u m m a r y o f t h e a r g u n i e n t s e c t i o n is n o t i n c l u d e d in t h i s b r i e f A s u m m a r y o f
t h e a r g u n i e n t is u s u a l l y i n c l u d e d in a n a p p e l l a t e brief, b u t n o t a l w a y s in a trial
brief. It is usef ul in a trial brief, a n d m a y b e ne c e s s a r y , w h e n t h e r e a r e s e \ e r a l i s
s u e s o r t h e a n a l y s i s is c o m p l e x , b u t it is n o t n e c e s s a r y w h e n t h e a n a l y s i s inwiK es
a si ngl e i s sue o r is n o t c o m p l e x .
4. N o t e t h e p e r s u a s i v e t o n e o f t h e brief:
I h e s t a t e m e n t o f t h e ca s e i n t r o d u c e s t h e facts w i t h l a n g u a g e t h a l fa\’o r s t h e
client: “d a n g e r o u s h a z a r d , ” “ h e i m m e d i a t e l y lost c onl r i i l . "
I h e s t a t e m e n t o f t h e c a s e a n d a r g u n i e n t s e c t i o n s s t at e t h e c l i e n t ’s p o s i t i o n in
s h o r t , c l e a r s e n t e n c e s u s i n g ac t i ve voice. ' I h e o p p o n e n t ’s p o s i t i o n is p r e s e n t e d
in a l o n g s e n t e n c e u s i n g t h e p a s s i v e voice: “ It is c o n t e n d e d b\- Blue Sk\' t h a t
t h e y d o n o t h a \ e a d u t y t o w a r n o f t h e ice h a z a r d . . .
I h e a r g u m e n t s e c t i o n d o w n p l a y s t h e o p p o s i t i o n ' s p o s i t i o n . It is p l a c e d in t h e
n i i d d l e o f t h e a r g u m e n t a n d is i m m e d i a t e l y d i s c o u n t e d a f t e r it is p r e s e n t e d .
' I h e c o n c l u s i o n is v e r y sh o r t . In a b r i e f t h a t is s h o r t o r d o e s n o l i n \ ' o l \ e a c o m
pl ex anal ys i s, a n a b b r e v i a t e d c o n c l u s i o n is a p p r o p r i a t e .
S u m m ary
Ihis c h a p t e r focuses o n t h e p r e p a r a t i o n ol d o c u n i e n t s c o n t a i n i n g legal a na h' si s that are d e s i g n e d
l o b e s u h m i t l e d U) a c o u rl . Sui.h a «.UKument, u s u a l K c a l l ed a ôuvt b i i c i , is o ù c n l o r n i a l K
r e f e r r e d l o as a “m e m o r a n d u m ot l a w ” o r a “m e m o r a n d u m o f p o i n t s a n d a ut h o r i t i e s . " I h e
cli aji ter p r e s e n t s an o v e r v i e w o f t h e m a j o r c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , key p o in t s , a n d h e l p f u l g u i d e l i n e s
in\ ' ol\ e d in t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f c o u r t briefs.
At t h e t r ial c o u r t l e \ e l , t h e s e d o c u n i e n t s a r e t r ial c o u r l b r i ef s s u b n i i t t e d in s u p p o r t
ot a legal p o s i t i o n a d v o c a l e d b y a n a l t o r n e y . ' I h e y a r e u s u a l h ' s u b m i t t e d in c o n j u n c l i o n
w i t h a m o t i o n t h a t r e q u e s t s s o m e a c t i o n o r r e h e f b y t h e trial c o u r t . At t h e a p p e l l a t e c o u r t
level, t h e d o c u n i e n t s s u b n i i t t e d t o a n a p p e l l a t e c o u r l t h a t i n\ ' o l v e legal a n a l y s i s a r e a p p e l
lat e c o u r t b r i e f s .
Offi c e legal m e n i o r a n d a a n d c o u r t b r i e f s a re s i m i l a r in m a n y r e s p e ct s. W’h e n p r e p a r i n g
b o t h ofi ice m e m o r a n d a a n d c o u r t bri efs, it is h el p f ul t o use a w r i t i n g p r o c e s s s u c h as t h a t s u g
g e s t ed in (Chapt er 15. Ol t i ce m e m o r a n d a a n d c o u r t b r i e t s t o l l o w a s i m i l a r f o r m a t : p r e s e n t a t i o n
ol t h e issue, t act s, a n a l y s i s, a n d c o n c l u s i o n .
'1 h e m a j o r d i t f e r e n c e b e t w e e n a n office m e m o a n d a c o u r t b r i e f is t h e o r i e n t a t i o n o f t h e
p r e s e n t a t i o n . A n oll ice m e m o is d e s i g n e d t o i n f o r m a n d is w r i t t e n in a n o b j e c t i v e m a n n e r .
A c o u r t b r i e f is d e s i g n e d to a d v o c a t e a p o s i t i o n a n d p e r s u a d e t h e c o u r l ; t h e r ef o r e , t h e issue(s),
facts, a n d legal a r g u m e n t a re c r a f t e d in a p e r s u a s i v e m a n n e r d e s i g n e d t o c o n s i n c e t h e c o u r l
to a d o p t t h e p o s i t i o n a d v o c a t e d .
,'\ trial c o u r t b r i e f is a m e m o r á n d u m o f l a w s u b m i t l e d by a n a t t o r n e ) ' l o a trial coi.n1.
In t h e m e m o r a n d u m , t h e a l t o r n e y i n t r o d u c e s t h e legal a u t h o r i t y a n d an a l y s i s t h a t s u p p o r t s
a p o s i t i o n a d v o c a l e d b)' t h e a t t o r n e y . A n a p p e l l a t e c o u r t b r i e f is t h e w r i t t e n legal a r g u n i e n t
s u b m i t t e d t o a c o u r t o f a p p e a l s. In t h e a p p e l l a t e brief, a n a l t o r n e y p r e s e n t s t h e legal a u t h o r i t ) '
557
a n d a n a l y s i s in s u p p o r t ot o r in o p p o s i t i o n to a n a r g u m e n t t h a t a Iowlm ' c o u r t c o n i n i i : t c d
rc\ crs i hl o e rr or .
T rial a n d a p p e l l a t e c o u r t biiet' s a r e s i m i l a r in m a n y r es p e c t s . A m a j o r di t l ' er e nc J is
t h a t a p p e l l a t e C(h u 1 b r i ef s a r e u s u a l l y m o r e f o r m a l : t h e style a n d f o r m a t a r e m o r e st ri; tl \'
g c n e r n e d b y t h e a p p e l l a t e c o u r t r ul e s. B o t h trial a n d a p p e l l a t e c o u r t b r i e f s , h o w e x ' e r , a r e
g o \ e r n e d t o s o m e d e g r e e by c o u r t r ul e s, a n d t h e s e rul es m u s t be c a r e f ul l y r e v i e w e d w i e n
p r e p a r i n g a c o u r t brief.
.A legal a s s i s t a n t ’.s rol e in p r e p a r i n g a c o u r t b r i e f u su a l l y i n v o l ve s c o n d u c t i n g legal r e
s e a r c h a n d a na l y s i s a n d p r e p a r i n g a r o u g h draf t. T h e final d o c u m e n t rec]uires t h e a t t o r n c \ ’’s
s i g n a t u r e a n d is usuall\- p r e p a r e d b\' t h e a t t o r n e y a s s i g n e d t o t h e case.
Quick R e fe re n ce s
Acti\ ' e voi c e 540 P e r s u a s i v e p r é s e n t â t it)ii 537
Appellee 550 Point headintis 544
Appellant 5 50 Preliminar}' s ta te m e nt 546
■Appellate c o u r t bri efs 5 35 Senten ce length 539
Argument 541 S t a t e m e n t o f tact s 53X
('onclusion 5 50 t a b l e ol a u t h o r i t i e s 546
( ' o u r t rul es 5 45 Table ot c o n t e n t s 546
I' t hics 5 36 Trial c o u r t b r i et s 535
jurisdictional sta tem en t 552 W o r d choice 543
Passive \' oice 5 40
In te rn e t R e so u rce s
L' sing “trial c o u r t b r i e t s ” o r “a p p e l l a t e c o u r t b r i e t s ” as a t o p i c, \ ' oli will f m d a wi t l e r a nge
o f W’e b sites ( l i t e r a l h ’ t h o u s a n d s o f sites) r e f e r r i n g to trial a n d a p p e l h i t e c o u r t b r i e t s . Ihe
f o l l o w i n g is a s u m m a r \ - o f t h e c a t e g o r i e s o f sites t h a t m a y p r o \ e li elpful w h e n w o r k i n g on
c o u r t bri efs:
Sites o f fede r a l a n d s t at e trial a n d a p p e l l a t e c o u r t s ( s o m e o f t h e s e sites i n c l u d e t h e c o u rt

r u l e s a n d g u i d e s a n d p r a c t i c e t i p s t o r p r e p a r i n g bri efs)
Sites t h a t p r o \ ide t h e trial o r a p p e l l a t e c o u r t bri efs tiled in speci fic cases, s u c h as the
O. j. S i m p s o n c a s e o r t h e I Tor i da p r e s i d e n t i a l e l e c t i o n cases
Sites a d s ' er t i s i n g b u s i n e s s e s t hat assist in t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f trial a n d a p p e l l a t e c o u r t

briefs
Sites for s c h o o l s a d x e r t i s i n g p r o g r a m s t h a t i n c l u d e as p a r t o f t h e c u r r i c u l a trial an d

a p p e l l a t e a d \ ocac\-
Sit es t h a t p r o v i d e l i n k s t o a p p e l l a t e c o u r t W'eb sites, c o u r t r u l es , o p i n i o n s , a n d

resources
As wi t h m o s t t o p i c s o n t h e W' eb, t h e p r o b l e m is n o t t h e l a c k o f sites b u t t o o m a n \ - site,'-,

'i'ou a r e m o r e l i k e h ’ to ax'oid t h e f r u s t r a t i o n o f f i n d i n g t o o m a n \ ' sites by n a r r o w i n g \ ' o u '
s e a r c h to a specific t\ p e o f trial o r a p p e l l a t e c o u r t brief.
E x e r c is e s
A tld itio iiiil tisiignniculi: iirc aviiiliiblc on th e ( 'o iiis c M d te . D. 1)oes l h e pri v i l e g e d c o m m u n i c a t i o n s st a l u t e al l ow the
a d m i s s i o n i n t o e v i d e n c e o f t h e d e f e n d a n t ’s t h r e a t s o f
ASSIG N M EN T! p h y s i ca l h a r m t o hi s s p o u s e ?
Dt'SLiibc h o w lo dralt e a c h ot the following c o m p o n e n t s o f a
brief in .1 persuasive m a n n e r hicl ude the consi derat i ons in\ ol\'- ASSIGNMENT 5
ing o r g a n i / a t i o n , wo r d choice, s e n t e n ce st r uc t ur e , a n d so on. R es t at e t h e f o l l o w i n g p o i n t h e a d i n g s in a m o r e p e r s u a s i v e
A. Is sue manner.
H. l a d statement A. THF E V ID E N C E W AS INCORRECTLY SUP-

PRF. SSED BY T H E TRI AL C O U R T S I N C H T H E R E
Po in t lieading
WHRE S U F F IC IE N T E X I G E N T C I R C U M S T A N C E S
P. .Argument A Ĩ T HE S C E N E .
ASSIGNM ENT 2 B. T H E D H X I A L O F T H E D E F E N D A N T ’S M O T I O N
1-OR M I S T R I A L W A S N O T E R R O R BY T H F T R I A L
P e s c r i b e in det ai l t he c o m p o n e n t s a n d f o r m a t o f a trial a n d
C O U R ' I ' BP; CAUSH T H E F R O S E C U T O R ’S C O M
appellate c o u r t b ri e f
M E N T O X THE D E F E N D A N T S P R I O R C O N V I C
T IO N W A S ADMISSIBLE.
ASSIGN M EN TS
Re s t a t e t h e f o l l o w i n g q u e s t i o n c o n i p o n e n t o f t h e i ssue in c. IHH IRIAL C O U R T'S ALl.OW ANCK O F THE
a persuasive manner. PHRHMP TORV C H A L L E N G E W A S P R O P F R . T H F

Cl lAl.l.ENC iH W A S N O r RACI ALLY MO' l' lN' AT E D.
A. “ s h o u l d t h e e v i d e n c e b e s u p p r e s s e d w h e n . . . ?” In
t h e c a s e , t h e p ol i c e failed to o b t a i n a s e a r c h w a r r a n t D. I'iiH COURT SHOULD NOT GRANT THH
p r i o r t o s e a r c h i n g a vehicle. D H I ' H X D A X T ’S M O l ' I O N TO DI S MI S S , , , ,
B. “(.lie.! t h e c o u r l e r r w h e n In t h e case, l h e trial ASSIGNM ENTS

coiu' l a d n i i t l e d h e a r s a y e\ i denc e .
Res t a t e t h e l o l l o w i n g r u l e o f law p r e s e n t a t i o n s in a m o r e
“ l ' n d e r t h e s t a t u t e o f f r a u d s . . . . is a n o r a l c o n t r a c t persuasive m a n n c n
\ a l i t l w h e n . . . ?” R e w r i t e t hi s p o r t i o n o f t h e issue
.A. In d e l e r m i n i i i i i w h e t h e r a n i n d i \ ' i d u a l h a s c o n s t r u c
u s i n g l a n g u a g e t h a t f o c u s e s o n a d e s i r e d result.
tive p o s s e s s i o n , t h e c o u r t d e c i d e s w h e t h e r t h e d e f e n
I). “ U n d e r t h e sal e of g o o d s s t a t u t e s , . . . is a s t a t u t e dant ha d kn o w le d g e o f a n d control over lhe drugs.
e n f o r c e a b l e w h e n . . . ?” R e wr i t e i hi s p o r t i o n o f t h e
B. U n d e r t h e first part o f t h e test, it mu s t be s h o w n t h a t the
i s s ue u s i n g l a n g u a g e t h a t f oc u s e s o n a d e s i r e d result.
d e f e n d a n t h a d k n o w l e d g e ot t h e p re s e n c e o f t h e drugs.
ASSIGN M EN TS
c. l h e c o u r t h a s s t a t e d t h a t a n a r r es t h a s t a k e n p l ace
w h e n a r e a s o n a b l e p e r s o n w o u l d n o t feel free to leave.
Rest at e p e r s u a s i v e l y e a c h of th e fol l o wi n g issues. Hach issue
sh o u l d be redr afted tw i c e — pe rs u as i\ el y from th e view o f ASSIGNM ENT?
t h e o p p o s i n g sides. In t h e fol l owi ng e.xercise, t h e a s s i g n m e n t is to p r e p a r e a trial
A. L ' n d e r t h e p r o \ ’i s i o n s o l ' l h e e x c l u s i o n a r y rule, s h o u l d court b rief Ihe a s s ig n m e n t contains the m e m o fr om the
e v i d e n c e be s u p p r e s s e d w h e n l a w e n f o r c e m e n t o f s u p e r \ ' i s i n g a t t or n e y , w h i c h i n c l ud e s all t h e avail able facts
fi cers e x e c u t e d a s e a r c h w a r r a n l b y u n a n n o u n c e d o f t h e case. C o m p l e t e t h e b r i e f b a s e d o n t h e s e facts, w h e n
e n t r y b eca use they saw the d e f e n d a n t r u n into the p r e p a r i n g t h e h e a d i n g o f e a c h a s s i g n me n t , use y o u r n a m e for
a p a r t m e n t u p o n t h e i r ar r i v al af t h e s ce n c ? the “ To" line, a n d p u t “S u p e r \ ’ising A t t o r ne y ” after the “From. ”
B. D i d t h e d i s t r i ct c o u r t i m p r o p e r l y e x e r c i s e its d i s c r e I ' o l l o w i n g t h e a s s i g n m e n t is a r e f e r e n c e t o t h e a p
t i o n w h e n it a d m i t t e d i n t o e\ i d e n c e p h o t o g r a p h s o f pl i c a bl e e n a c t e d a n d c as e law.
t h e m u r d e r \' ictini? l h e first t i m e y o u c i t e t h e o p i n i o n , u s e t h e c i t a t i o n

f o r m a t y o u a r e g i v e n f o r t h e o p i n i o n in t h e a s s i g n m e n t .
( In liglit of t he p r o v i s i o n s o l ' t h e h e a r s a y rule, d i d t h e
trial c o u r l i m p r o p e r l y a d m i t i n t o e\ i d e n c e th e d e f e n
For Example Melia I'. Dillon Cos., Inc., 18 Kan. App. 2d 5,
d a n t ’s s t a t e m e n t s t o his n e i g h b o r t hat ho w o u l d kill
846 P.2d 257(1993).
his wife?
Ihi s is h o w y ou s h o u l d cite this o p i n i o n t h e h r s t t i m e N e w M e x i c o M a n d a t o r y L in a n c i a l R e s p o n s i b il it y Act
it is u s e d in t h e m e m o r a n d u m , it ' you a r e u s i n g t h e o p i n i o n ( M F R A ) , N M S A 1978 « 66-3-2 01 to 66-3-239.
p r o v i d e d in A p p e n d i x A, w h e n you q u o t e t r o m t h e o p i n i o n M F R A , N M S A 1978 § 6 6 - 3 - 2 0 3 (1998):
in t h e m e m o , use a b l a n k li ne to i n d i c a te t h e p a g e n u m b e r N o o w n e r shal l p e r m i t t h e o p e r a t i o n of a n
t r o m w h i c h t h e q u o t a t i o n is t ake n. u n in s u re d m o t o r \ehicle, or a m otor \ehicle
f o r w h i c h ex’i d e n c e o f f i n a n c i a l r e s po n s i b i l i ty
For Example Melia, 18 Kan. App. 2d 5 at _ 846 P.2d as w a s a t l i r m e d to t h e d e p a r t m e n t is n o t c u r
at r e n t l y vali d, u p o n t h e s t r e e t s o r h i g h w a y s o f
N e w M e x i c o u n l e s s t h e v e h ic l e is specificalh-
D o n o t c o n d u c t a d d i t i o n a l re s ea r ch. C o m p l e t e t h e e x e m p t e d I r o m t h e p r o v i s i o n s of t h e M a n d a
a s s i g n m e n t u s i n g t h e facts, e n a c t e d law, a n d c a s e law t o r y F i n a n c i a l R e s p o n s i b i l i t y Act. . . .
c o n t a i n e d in t h e a s s i g n m e n t . F o r t h e p u r p o s e s o f t h e M F R A , N M S A 1978 § 6 6 - 3 - 2 1 8 (1998):
a s s i g n m e n t , a s s u m e t h e c ases h a v e n o t b e e n o v e r t u r n e d o r I'A’i d e n c e o f f i na n c i a l r e s p o n si b i l i t ) ' , w h e n r e
m o d i f i e d by s u b s e q u e n t c o u r t dec i s i ons. In m o s t i n s t a n c e s q u i r e d u n d e r t h e M a n d a t o r \ - Financi al R e s p o n
a s i m p l e trial c o u r t b r i e f s u c h as t he o n e p r e s e n t e d in thi s si bil it y Act , m a y b e g i v e n b y filing:
a s s i g n m e n t w o u l d n o t i n c l u d e a t abl e o f c o n t e n t s , t ab l e o f
a u t h o r i t i e s , o r p r e l i m i n a r y s t a t e m e n t . It w o u l d b e c o m A. e v i d e n c e of a m o t o r \ e h i c l e i n s u r a n c e policy;
p o s e d o f a q u e s t i o n p r e s e n t e d , s t a t e m e n t o f t h e c a se / f a ct s, B. a s u r e t y b o n d as p r o \ ' i d e d in Se c t i on 6 6 - 5 - 2 2 5
a n d a r g u m e n t s ect i o n s. F o r t h e p u r p o s e s o f t h i s a s s i g n N M S A 1978; o r
m e n t , d o n o t i n c l u d e a t abl e o f c o n t e n t s , t abl e o f a u t h o r i
a c e r t i f i c a t e o f d e p o s i t ot m o n e y as p r o \ i de d in
ties, o r p r e l i m i n a r y s t a t e m e n t sec t i on. F o r t h e title page,
S e c t i o n (-.6-5-226 N M S A 1978.
u s e t h e f o r m a t p r e s e n t e d in se c t i o n \ ' 1. A o f t h i s c h a p t e r .
I h e c o u r t is t h e Dist rict C o u r t a n d t h e st ate is N e w Mexi co. M F R A , N M S A 1978 § 6 6 - 5 - 2 0 7 (1998):
Memo: I h e h i l l o w i n g m o t o r v e h i c l es a r e e x e m p t f r o m
t h e M a n d a t o r ) ’ F i n a n c i a l Re sponsi bi l i t ) ' Act:
I'd: [Your narnel
From: Supervi si ng Attor ney
1:. a m o t o r v e h i c l e a p p r o v e d as s e l l - i n s u r e d by t he
Re: W h i te v. ('.¡ilkin, ( ’iv. 0 3 - 3 8 8
s u p e r i n t e n d e n t of i n s u r a n c e pLu su an t to Scvt i on
(’)ur cl i en t . Sage R e n t .^-(âr Inc., l e as e d a v e h i c l e to 66-3 2 0 7 . 1 N M S A 1 9 7 8 ; . . .
lel fer )’ ( ' a l k i n . Mr . ( ' a l k i n failed to s t o p at a s t o p s i g n a n d
c o l l i d e d w i t h l a n e W h i t e , t h e plaintiff. Ms. W h i t e filed a Câse Law: I a is Luiiuiriiis oj the S . M . ('oiineil r. Isengdnl,
n e g l i g e n c e sui t a ga i n s t b o t h Mr . ( l al k i n a n d Sage R e n t - A - 92 N. M. 297, 300 301 ((',t. App. 1978). I h e following quot e
(âr. In p a r a g r a p h 36 o f t h e c o m p l a i n t , p l ai n t i f l ' c l a i ms that f r om the case is all that is n e e d e d foi' t h e a s s i gnme nt . “A m o
Sage is r e q u i r e d to c a r r y i n s u r a n c e u n d e r t h e p r o v i s i o n s of ti on to di s mi ss a c o m p l a i n t is p r o p e r l y g r a n t ed onl y w h e n
t h e M a n d a t o r y Financ i a l Re s p o n s i bi l i t y Act a n d t h e r e f o re , it a p p e a r s that t h e plaintiff c a n n o t recover o r be entitled to
u n d e r t h e act, has a d u t y to a s s u m e r e s p o n si b i l i t y f o r t hi s relief u n d e r a n y state o f facts p r o v a b l e u n d e r the c l a i m . ..
a c c i d e n t . W h e n Sage i n c o r p o r a t e d , it filed a s u r e t y b o n d C o r d o v a v W olfeL 120 N . M. 5 5 7 , 9 0 3 P.2d 1390 ( 1995)
w i t h t h e s u p e r i n t e n d e n t o f i n s u r a n c e a n d is s e l f - i n s u r e d (see A p p e n d i x A).
u n d e r t h e act. 1 d o n o t r e a d t h e act to e x t e n d li abil it y to
ASSIGNM ENTS
lessors f or t he d a m a g e s t hat r esult f r o m t h e n eg l i g e n t use o f
P e r f o r m a s s i g n n i e n t 7 u s i n g t h e law f r o m ) ' our state.
vehicl es by lessees. Th e r e f o r e , 1 plan t o tile a Rule 1- 0 1 2B(6)
m o t i o n t o d i s m i s s f o r fa i l ure to st a t e a clai m. ASSIGNM ENTS
Pl eas e p r e p a r e a r o u g h draf t o f a b r i e f in s u p p o r t o f I h e a s s i g n n i e n t is to p r e p a r e a r o u g h draf t o f t h e a p p e l
t h e m o t i o n t o di s mi ss . lee’s br i et in o p p o s i t i o n to t h e a p p e l l a n t ’s ap p e al ot t he trial
c o u r t ’s de ni al o f t h e m o t i o n to s up p r e s s evi de nc e seized f r om
S t a t u t o r y L a w:
a p p e l l a n t ’s suitcase. I h e plainti ff/ appell ee i s t h e Uni t ed States;
N M R A 1 - 0 1 2 B ( 6 ) — I h e rul e p r o v i d e s in p a r t , t he d e f e n d a n t / a p p e l l a n t is A r n o l d ]. Stewart. Ihe trial co u r t
“ t h e f o l l o w i n g d e f e n s e s m a y at t h e o p t i o n o f r u l e d t hat t h e s ui t c a s e h a d b e e n a b a n d o n e d a n d , ther efore,
the plea de r be m a d e by motion: t h e d e f e n d a n t d i d n o t h a v e a r e a s o n a b l e e x p e c t a t i o n o f pri-
\ ’a c y p r o t e c t e d b)- t h e F' ourth A m e n d m e n t in t h e suitcase.
(6) f a i lu r e to s t a t e a c l a i m u p o n w h i c h r e h e f N u m e r o u s c as e s deal w i t h t h e issue o f a b a n d o n m e n t
c a n be g r a n t e d ; . . . o f p e r s o n a l p r o p e r t ) ' , a n d a n a p p e l l a t e b r i ef u s u a l h ' w o u l d
i n c l u d e r e l e r e n c e s U) at l eas t s e x e r a l c ase s . I h i s a s s i g n scene. ( I'r. at 72). L ' p o n o p e n i n g t h e s u i t c a s e , h e f o u n d a
i n e n t is a n ex er c i s e in p r e p a r i n g a x erx' s i m p l e , s i ng l e - i s s u e large b a g tliat c o n t a i n e d 40 s m a l l e r bags o f a xvhite poxvdery
ap p e l l at e bri ef a n d is d e s i g n e d to a cq t i ai n t s t u d e n t s \x ith t he s u b s t a n c e . ( I r. at 73). T h e s u b s t a n c e xvas l a t e r i d e n t i f i e d as
basi c e l e m e n t s of s uc h a briet. I h e r e l o r e , w h e n p e r f o r m i n g h e r o i n . ( I'r. at 122). ' I h e s u i t c a s e wa s t a k e n t o t h e s e c u r i t y
t h i s a s s i g n m e n t , use onix' t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l a n d c a s e l aw otfice a n d f ederal ol fieers w e r e called. ( I'r. at 74).
p r e s e n t e d in t h e a s s i g n m e n t ; d o n o t p e r f o r m a d d i t i o n a l . \ p p r o x i m a t e l x ' 4 5 m i n u t e s aft er h e left, Stexvart r e
r e s e a r c h . A s s u m e t h e c a s e s hax'e n o t b e e n oxertLn’n e d o r t u r n e d to his seat. (Tr. at 13). H o l t i n f o r m e d h i m t h a t he
m o t l i f u ' d b\' s u b s e q u e n t c o u r t d e c i s i o n s . t h o u g h t Stexvart h a d a b a n d o n e d t h e s u i t c a s e s o h e t u r n e d
l ol loxv t h e f o r m a t p r e s e n t e d in s e c t i o n W o f t hi s it ox e r lo a i r p o r t s e c u r i t y . (Tr. at 44). Stexvart left t h e g a t e
c h a p t e r . I h e c a p t i o n is p r e s e n t e d in t h e f o l l o w i n g text. a r e a , w e n t t o t h e t i cket c o u n t e r , a n d a s k e d f o r i n f o r m a t i o n
P r e p a r e a s e p a r a t e s t a t e m e n t o f t h e c a s e a n d s t a t e m e n t of c o n c e r n i n g t h e n e x t flight. (Tr. at 14). ' I h e t i ck e t c o u n t e r is
t h e facts. I n f o r m a t i o n necessarx- f o r p r e p a r i n g t h e b r i el n e x t to t he se c ur i t y office, ('I'r. at 75). Stexvart nex' er e n t e r e d
f ol lows. N o t e t h a t t h e t r a n s c r i p t p a g e s ( r e f e r e n c e s to t h e tlie office to i n q u i r e a b o u t hi s sui t case. ( I ' r . at 75). H e xvas
trial c(>urt r e c o r d ) a n d d o c k e t i n g p a g e s a r e r e f e r e n c e d in a r r e s t e d w h e n h e xvent to t h e g a t e a r e a a n d a t t e m p t e d to
p a r e n t h e s e s . W ' h e n d r a f t i n g t h e brief', i n c l u d e t h e r e f e r b o a r d his flight. ( I'r. at 91).
e n c e s t o t h e r e c o r d in t h e bri ef. R e f e r e n c e s to t h e c a s e a n d
s t at ut or x' laxv al s o f ol knv. W ' h e n c i t i n g t h e I ' lii lc d S h i l a In for m atio n lor S tatem en t o f the Case: O n N o v e m
r. lo i i c i c as e , u s e t h e c i t a t i o n i n s t r u c t i o n s p r e s e n t e d in b e r 21, 2012, A r n o l d I. Stexvart xvas i n d i c t e d b y a f ed e r al
a s s i g n m e n t 7. g r a n d i u r y s i t t i n g in t h e D i s t r i c t o f U t a h o n c h a r g e s o f
p o s s e s s i o n x\ ith i n t e n t t o d i s t r i b u t e m o r e t h a n 100 g r a m s
F a c t s : O n O c t o b e r 13, 2 0 1 2 , A r n o l d S t e w a r t a r r i v e d at t h e o f h e r o i n in v i o l a t i o n o f 2 I U.S.C. §§ 8 4 1 ( a ) ( 1) a n d 8 4 1(b)
a i r p o r t a n horn' a n d l i fi een m i n u t e s p r i o r to his schedule«.! ( l ) ( B ) . (D i)C . at 5 ) . O n l a n u a r y 7 , 2 0 1 3 , S t e w a r t filed a
Ilight. ('I'r. at 6). H e w a s g o i n g tii x isit a I r i e n d in Cdiicago. m o l i o n to s u p p r e s s t h e p h y s i ca l e v i d e n c e . ( D o c , at 18).
( I'r. at 7). H e xvas carrx i ng o n e s u i t c a s e t ha t lie i n t e n d e d to O n 1-ebruary 14, 2013, t h e m o t i o n w a s d e n i e d . I h e trial
c a r r x ’ o n t h e Ilight. ( I'r. at 7). H i s flight w a s s c h e d i d e d fo co ur t found:
leax'e f r o m g a t e 9, but h e d e c i d e d tc' wait at g a t e S b e c a u s e
U n d e r t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s , t o r all i n t e n t s a n d
it wasn' t so c r o w d e d . ( IV. at S). .Alter a t ew m i n u t e s , h e
p u r p o s e s t h e s u i t c a s e wa s a b a n d o n e d , l l i e d e
t l e ci d e d t o get s o m e t h i n g t o eat. ( I'r. at S). H e approachei.1
fendant did not express a poss essory interest
l . a n y Holt, w h o was a l s o w a i t i n g at g a t e 8, a n d aske«.! if
in t h e sui t c a se at a n y t i m e aft er h e l e a r n e d its
1 l o h w o u l d xxakli ) ns suili.ase. í'1'i. al S). S l e w a r l d i d n ol
l ocat ion.
k n o w Mr. Holt. ('I'r. at 8). Holt a s k e d h i m h o w l o n g h e
II ax i ng b e e n a b a n d o n e d , t h e d e f e n d a n l h a d
w o u l d b e g o n e a n d S t e w a r t r e p l i e d , “ lust a few m i n u t e s . ”
n o e x p e c t a t i o n o f p ri x a c y in it o r its c o n t e n t s .
( Ir. at 9). Hol t said, “ W'ell, ok. ” ( I'r. at 9). S t e w a r t t h e n
w a l k e d ot]’. ( Ir. at 9). A c r o s s f r o m w h e r e tliey w e r e s e a t e d ( I'r. at 40 41). O n M a r c h 6, 20 1 3 , d e f e n d a n t e n t e r e d
w e r e sex'eral c o i n - o p e r a t e d l o c k e r s w h e r e Stexvart c o u l d a c o n d i t i o n a l guilt}' plea, reserx' ing hi s r i g h t t o a p p e a l t h e
hax'e p l a ce d tlie sui t case. ( I'r, 9 - 1 0 ) . S t e w a r t xvent to t he s u p p r e s s i o n r u l i n g . ( D o c . at 22). O n A p r i l 27, 2 0 13 , t h e
fooi t bar. ( i'r. at 10). I h e r e xvas a l o n g line, a n d lie w a s n ’t c o u r t s e n t e n c e d S t e w a r t t o i m p r i s o p . m e n t t o r 60 m o n t h s ,
s e r x e d for 20 m i n u t e s . ( I'r. at 10). O n t h e xvay b a c k to his to b e t' ollowed bx' a t h r e e - y e a r t e r m o f s u p e r v i s e d rel ease.
seat , he r a n i nt o a n a c q u a i n t a n c e a n d t a l k e d to h i m for ( D o c . al 55). S t e w a r t filed hi s n o t i c e o f a p p e a l o n A p ri l
s e s e r a ! m i n u t e s . ( I'r. at 10). H e d i d n ’t r e t u r n to hi s seat in 29, 2013.
t h e gal e a r e a for 43 m i n u t e s . ( I'r. at 1 3).
Meanxvhile, after 20 m i n u te s , Mr. Holt b e c a m e Clonstitutional and C ase Law: A m e n d m e n t I\', U.S.
c o n c e r n e d . ( Tr. at 41). H e t h o u g h t , “W’h e r e is t ha t g u x ? I ('onstitution
w o n d e r it t hi s s u i t c a s e c o n t a i n s a b o m b . ” ( I'r. at 4 t ) . t h e L’liilcii S ti it e s r. A r a n g o , 9 1 2 F . 2 d 441 ( l O t h C i r .
m o r e h e t h o u g h t a b o u t it, t h e m o r e c o n c e r n e d h e b e c a m e . 1 9 9 0 ) . .Ml y o u n e e d t o k n o w f o r t h e p u r p o s e s o f t h i s
( I I', at 4 1 - 4 2 ) . H e c o n t a c t e d a i r p o r t securilx' a n d e x p r e s s e d a s s i g n m e n t is t h a t t h e A r a n g o c as e s t a n d s f o r t h e p r o p o
hi s c o n c e r n s . (Tr. at 42). A p p r o x i m a t e l y a m i n u t e later, O t - s i t i o n tl iat o n e xvho h a s t h e r i g h t t o p o s s e s s i o n o f p e r
fi cer R o b e r t D w x e r arrix ed. ( Tr. at 42). t h e r e xvas n o n a m s o n a l proper t}- h a s t h e ri g h t to e x c l u d e o t h e r s f r o m
e t a g o n t h e sui tcase, n o a i r l i ne c l a i m t i cket at t a c l i ed , a n d n o s e a r c h i n g it.
e x' idence o f o w n e r s h i p o n t h e e x t e r i o r . ( I'l. at “ I ). In sucli l ' n i t e d Sta tes v. Io nes, 707 F.2d 1169 ( lOth Cir. 1983).
si tuat i ons ai r port policy is t hat t h e sui tcase s h o u l d he i m m e d i - See A p p e n d i x A.
atelx’ i n s p e c t e d , t h e n t a k e n to t!ie securitx' oftice. Cl'i'. at 72). P rior R e la t e d A p p ea ls: ' I h e r e a r e n o p r i o r o r r e l a t e d
O l l i c e r Dwx' er i n s p e c t e d tlie s u i t c a s e a n d its c o n t e n t s at t h e a p p e a l s in t hi s case.
Caption:
L X n ' F . l ) STA THS C O U R T Ol- AF F HA l . S A R N O I . D I. S TE W A R T ,

Defendant/Appellant.
T F N TH C I R C U I T
N O . 2009-12,^ APPEAL FROM T H E U N IT E D
U N I T E D S TATES O F A M E R I C A S TA TES DIS TRIC T C O U R T
FlaintitlVAppellee, F O R FHE DISTRIC F O F U T A H
A N S W E R BRI EF O F A P P E L L E E
v,s.
tools, including flash cards, quizzes, and more. To learn more about this resource and access
CourseMate free demo CourseMate resources, go to www.cengagebrain.com, and search for this book.
Correspondence
111 the h y p o th e tic a l in tro d Lice d at the b e g in n in g ot’ the last ciiapte r, A lic e B la c k , the supt.r\ iso i y Outline
a tto rn e y, a ssig n e d Pam H ay e s, the p a ra le g a l, the task ot p re p a rin g a resp o n se to a m o tio n tii
1. I n t r o d u c ti o n
d is m is s for ta ilu re to state a cla im . A t ie r M s. H a y e s co m p le te d the a s s ig n m e n t, she received
the to llo w in g m em o . H. Basic C; o mp o n e n t s
III. Types ot ( C o r r es p o n d e n c e
Io : Pam H ayes, Parale gal
1\'. Key Point s Che ckli st:
I ro m : .Alice B la c k , .\tto rn e y
( C or r es p o n d e n c e
C a se : (^ iv il l.^ -h O l, X ick S h in e r. Uluc Sky S ki R esort
\ ’. Applicat ion
Re: ('o rre s p o n tle n c e to clie n t
Please p re p are a letter to ,\lr. .Shine adx is in g h im ot the status o l the case. In c lu d e in the
le tter the lo llo w in g : L earn in g O bjectives
In fo r m .\Ir. S h in e that a n io tio n to d is m is s has heen tiled, K.xplain to h im w hat a After c o m p l e t i n g this chapt e r , you
n io tio n is, a n d tell h im how the co u rt w ill p ro ce e d in regard to the n io tio n , should understand:
S u n im a r i/ e the a n a ly s is o l the law e o n ta in e d in the m e n io ra n d u m briet' \o u • The basic c o m p o n e n t s of
pre p are d in resp o nse to the m o tio n , correspondence
lh e .A p p lic a tio n s e c tio n ot th is ch a p te r in c lu d e s the c o r r e s p o n d e iu e p re p a re d by • ' Ihe types o f law oliice
M s. ) la .e s a iu i o th e r sa m p le co rre sp o n d e n ce . c o r r e s p o n d e n c e that
c o m m u n i c a t e t h e results o f legal
research a n d analysis
• f h e e l e m e nt s o f i n f o r m a t i o n ,
o p i n i on , a n d d e m a n d letters
• H o w to draft i n f o r m a t i o n ,
o p i n i o n , a n d d e m a n d letters
563
PAR T IV LEGAL WRITIN G
I. INTRODUCTION
I b i s c h a p t e r a n d c ; h a p t e r 18 focus p r i m a r i h ' o n t h e p r e p a r a t i o i i o f d o c L u n e n t s that c o n t a i n
legal researcli a n d analysis a n d are d e s i g n e d lor an a u d i e n c e o u t s i d e t h e law ollice. This c h a p t e r
e x a n i i n e s t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f d o c u m e n t s d e s i g n e d for a n e x t e r n a l a u d i e n c e o t h e r t h a n a c o u rt .
I h e s e d o c u m e n t s a r e u s u a l l y c o r r e s p o n d e n c e a d d r e s s e d to a clieiit. A p a r a l e g a l o r law cler k
ma\ ' , h owe\ ' er, b e c a l l e d o n t o d raf t c o r r e s p o n d e n c e to a \ ai iety o f e x t e r n a l a u d i e r i ce s , su c h as
witnesses, co ur t pers on nel , an d o p p o s i n g counsel.
( C o r r e s p o n d e n c e is a m a j o r f o r m o f w r i t t e n c o n m i u n i c a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e law fi rm a n d
t h e o u t s i d e w o r l d . (' )t her t h a n d o c u n i e n t s s u b m i t t e d to c o u r t s a n d t r a n s a c t i o n d o c u m e n t s ,
s u c h as c o n t r a c t s , c o r r e s p o n d e n c e is t h e priiiiiiry f o n i i o f w r i t i n g d e s i g n e d f o r a n a u d i e n c e
i ) ut s i de t h e l aw o t h c e .
It is ess ent i al , t h e r e f o r e , t ha t c o r r e s p o n d e n c e b e well c r a f t e d , b e c a u s e it h e l p s e s t abl i s h
a n d m a i n t a i n t h e i m a g e a n d r e p u t a t i o n o f t h e law firm. C o r r e s p o n d e n c e t h a t c o n t a i n s g r a m
m a t i c a l o r s u b s t a n t i v e e r r o r s o r is difficul t to u n d e r s t a n d reflects p o o r k o n t h e law tirm:
A cli ent m a v q u e s t i o n t h e f i r m ’s c a pabi lit \' to h a n d l e t h e c l i e n t ’s case.
I h e c o u r t nia\' q u e s t i o n t he c o m p e t e n c e o f t h e i n d i \ i d u a l w h o s i g n e d t h e d o c u m e n t .
( O p p o s i ng c o u n s e l m a \ ' c o n c l u d e t ha t if t h e law fi r m is i n c a p a b l e o f p r e p a r i n g qu a l i ty
c o r r e s p o n d e n c e , it is n o t c a p a b l e o f s u c c e s s l ' u l k r e p r e s e n t i n g its client.
Be ca u s e m o s t legal c o r r e s p o n d e n c e is in l et t er r a t h e r t h a n m e m o f o r m , t h e t e r m I d l e r
is u s e d in thi s c h a p t e r to r e f e r to legal c o r r e s p o n d e n c e . p a r a l eg a l o r l a w c l e r k m a y p r e p a r e
l e t t e r s t o r a v a r i et v ot p u r p o s e s . '1 h e t h r e e m a i n c a t e g o r i e s ol let ters t h a t i n c l u d e legal r e s e a r c h
a n d an a l y s i s to s o m e d e g r e e are:
1. Lett ers t ha t p r o \ ’ide \n k n 'm M \o n ~ - h ij o r n ic i ti o iu i l I d l e r s
2. Lett ers t ha t prox ide a n s w e r s o r legal o p i n i o n s — o/i//íío/¡ l e l t e n
3. Lett ers t ha t d e m a n d a c t i o n — i / c / íiíoií / I d l e r s
A l t h o u g h t h e f o c u s in thi s c h a p t e r is o n l et ters t h a t c o n t a i n legal r e s e a r c h a n d analysis,

( ' t h e r t v p e s o f let t er s ar e br i etl y m e n t i o n e d , l o l l o w i n g a d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e c o m p o n e n t s c o m
n i o n to all t h r e e c a t e g o r i e s m e n t i o n e d , s e p a r a t e se c t i o n s o f t h i s c h a p t e r a d d r e s s e a c h categor\' .
II. BASIC COMPONENTS

Basi c c o n \ ’e n t i o n s a p p h ' to t h e \ a r i o u s t\ p e s o f lettei s p i e p a r e t l in a l a w o t h c e a n d b a s i c
c o m p o n e n t s are u s u a l l y p r e s e n t in all t y p e s o f letters. F.ach o f t h e s e c o m p o n e n t s m a y not be
n e c e ss a r ) ' o r r e q u i r e d in ever) ' let ter )' ou draft. Ihi s s e c t i o n , h o w e \ e r , i n t r o d u c e s all o f t h e
p o s s i b l e c o m p o n e n t s so t h a t )'ou will b e f am i l i a r w i t h t h e m .
I h e c o n t e n t a n d m a n n e r o f p r e s e n t a t i o n o f ' e a c h o f t h e c o m p o n e n t s d i s c u s s e d in t h e
f o l l o w i n g text ma ) ' var y f r o m oflice to ollice. ( ' o n i p o s e ) ' ou r let ters a c c o r d i n g to t h e g u i d e l i n e s
a d o p t e d in y o u r office. Re f e r to t h e A p p l i c a t i o n s e c t i o n o f t h i s c h a p t e r f o r e x a m p l e s o f t h e
c o m p o n e n t s d i s c u s s e d in t h e l o l l o w i n g s u b s e c t i o n s .
F x h i b i t 19-1 p r e s e n t s t h e basi c f o r n i a t a n d c o m p o n e n t s o f letters p r e p a r e d in a law office.
A. L e tte rh e a d
Ihe letterhead u s u a l l y c o n si s t s o f t h e full n a m e , a d d r e s s , t e l e p h o n e n u n i b e r , a n d f a c s i mi le
n u n i b e r o f t h e law ti rm. It is u s u a l h ' p r e p r i n t e d o n t h e h r n i ’s s t a t i o n e r ) ' a n d c e n t e r e d at t h e
t o p ot t h e page. A n e x a m p l e of t h e i n t o r n i a t i o n in a l e t t e r h e a d follows:
I h o m a s , Belter a n d Ryan
731 M a i n Street
Fri endl y, N e w W a s h i n g t o n Ü0065
(200) 4 4 4 - 7 7 7 8 • FAX 4 4 4 - 7 6 7 8 . w w w . t h o n i a s l a w . c o m
564
C H A P T E R 19 CORRESPONDENCE
E x h i b i t 19-1 Basic Format and Components of Law Office Correspondence.

Letterhead/heading
Date
Method of delivery
Recipient's address block
Reference (Re:) line
Salutation
Body
Closing
Signature and title
Initials of drafter
Enclosure notation
Others receiving copies
S u b s e q u e n t pages c o n t a i n a n i d e n t i l i e at i o n ol ' t h e letter, wh i c h is u s u a l h' call ed a header.

I h e s e p a g e s d o in)t co n t a i f i t h e le t t e r h e a d , l h e h e a d e r i n c l u d e s t h e ti anie o f t h e a d d r e s s e e , t h e
d a t e , a n d t h e p a g e n u n i b e r , a n d sits at t h e t o p left o r r i gh t n i a r g i n ot t h e page. A n exa t i i p l e
ol a h e a d e r is as follows:
Ion loties
M a y 5. 2 0 1 3
Page '1 h r e e
B. D a te
l h e lull d a t e is usual K' below' t h e l e t t e r h e a d at t h e left o r rigiit n ia r gi n , o r c e t i t c r ed b e l o w t h e
l e t t e r h e a d , l h e d a t e in c k t d e s t h e full date: t h e day, tiiotith, a n d \'ear. Be c a u s e m o s t c o r r e s p o t i -
d e n c e is tiled chronoi ogi cal l v, a d a t e is essential for t h e chr ot i ol ogi c al hie. N'ote that n i a n \ ' offices
elate s t a m p c o r r e s p o n d e n c e w h e n it is r e c e i \ ’cd in t h e olfice a n d file it a c c o r d i t i g t o t h a t date.
C. M e th o d o f D e liv e ry
At t h e left n i a r g i n , b e k n v t h e d a t e , is t h e m ethod of delivery. Ihi s is usua l l \ ' r e q u i r e d o n l y
il t h f m a n n e r o f d e l i ve r y is o t h e r tlian U n i t e d Stat es tiiail. li.xaniples are as tol lows:
\ ' ia I ' ed e r a l Expr e ss
\ ' ia h a n d d e h s e r y
\ ' i a f a c s i mi l e
D. R e c ip ie n t’s A d d re s s B lock
B e l o w t h e d a t e a n d t i i e t h o d o f d c l i v e r v is t h e a d d re ss block o f t h e a d d r e s s e e . P l a c e it at t h e
left n i a r g i n . ' l h e a d d r e s s b l o c k in c i u d es:
I h e n a m e o l ' t h e p e r s o t i to w h o m t h e l e t t er is a d d r e s s e d
l h e iiidix i d u a l ’s title (il a n \ )
l h e na t i i e o f t h e b u s i n e s s (if a p p li c a b le )
1h e a d d r e s s
565
I h c t o l l o w i n g is a n c x a n i p i e o f a n a d d r e s s block:
l i l i z abc t h ( ; o i i n t c r
P re s i d e n t
I’r i c n d l y I-.ntcrpriscs
139 M a i n Street
l-'riendly, N \ \ ' ()()063
E. R e fe re n c e (Re:) L in e
Ihc reference line bri ctl y i d e n t i t i e s t h e t o p i c o t ' t h e letter. A r c t c r e n c c line is u s u a l ly p l a c e d
at t h e Ieti m a r g i n t' ollowing t h e a d d r e s s block. S o m e t i r m s r e q u i r e t h a t t h e r e f e r e n c e line i n
c l u d e t h e c a s e n a m e a n d n u m b e r if t h e let t er c o n c e r n s a p e n d i n g lawsui t . ' I h e f o l l o w i n g is a n
e x a m p l e o f a r e t e r e n c e line:
Rc: R e q u e s t t o r p r o d u c t i o n ot d o c u m e n t s
S » iith r. loncs. Civil A c t i o n 13-1001
R S a lu ta tio n
I-ielow t h e r e t e r e n c e line is t h e sa lu ta tio n o r g r e e t i n g . Legal c o r r e s p o n d e n c e is g e n e r a l l y
f o r m a l in t o n e, a n d t h e g r e e t i n g is n o r m a l l y f o r ma l . A n e x a m p l e o f a g r e e t i n g t'ollows:
D e a r Ms. C o u n t e r :
'»'ou ma\- use the lirst n a m e if y o u k n o w t he a d d r e s s e e well, b u t thi s is usual ly t h e e xcept i on.
It in d o u b t , ask t h e s u p e r \ ' i s i n g a t t o r n e } ’. It y ou d o n o t k i i o w t h e n a m e ol t he a d d r e s s e e , s u c h as
m a y be t he case w h e n t h e let t er is a d d r e s s e d t o a b u s i ne s s , c o n t a c t t h e b u s n i e s s a n d a s c e r t a i n
t he i n d i v i d u a l ’s n a m e . I h e lisc o f “ I'o w h o m it m a y c o n c e r n : " is i m p e r s o n a l a n d ¡n\' ites a sl ow
r e s po n s e . A p e r s o n is likeK’ to r e s p o n d m o r e q m c k l } ’ w h e n h e o r s h e is s p c c i t i c a l h ’ n a me t l.
G. Body
Ihe body is t h e h e a r t ot t h e l e t t e r — w h a t t h e let t er is a b o u t . I h e b o d y is u s u a l h ’ c o m p o s e d ot
an i n t r o d u c t i o n , m a i n b o d y , a n d r e q u e s t s o r i n s t r u c t i o n s (see l i xhi bi t 19-2).
E x h i b i t 1 9 -2 Com ponents of the Body of a Letter.
Introduction Introductory paragraph or sentence sum m arizing

the purpose of the letter
Main body Detailed explanation of the purpose of the letter
R equests/instruction s Request or instructions for the recipient
1. In tro d u c tio n
' Ih e b o d y o f t h e let ter u s u a l h ’ b e g i n s wi t h a n I n t r o d u c t o r } ’ s e n t e n c e o r p a r a g r a p h (if n e c e s s a r y )
th a t i d e n t i t i e s o r s u m m a r i z e s t h e m a i n p u r p o s e o f t h e letter.
For Example This letter is to advise you of the filing of a motion for summary judgment
by the defendant. The hearing on the motion is scheduled to take place
on March 4, 2013.
This letter is to confirm our conversation today in which you stated that you would
not be able to attend the hearing scheduled to take place on May 16, 2013.
566
2. Main Body
Ihc m a i n b o d y o f tlic letter follows tlie i n t r od u c t i o n . I he ma i n hotl y explaitis iti detail t h e p u r p o s e
of t h e letter, (j'al'l the maiti hod\- with care to e n s u r e that \ o u c o m m u n i c a t e t h e r e q u i r e d i n f o r m a
tion clearly a n d concisely. It ma\ ' he tiecessars' to use an (Uitline w h e n a letter co v e r s tnul ti ple o r
c o mp l e x matters. As with an oflice m e t i i o r a n d u i n o r court hriel, the bod\- tna\- reqLiire several drafts.
V o u m u s t a l w a y s c o n s i d e r t h e a u d i e n c e w h e n d r a f t i n g t h e m a i n b o d \ ' . If y o u a r e d r a f t
i ng t h e l e t t e r t o a h u p e r s o n , s u c h as t h e c l i e n t , a \ o i d t h e u s e ot legalese; defi ti e at i d c l ea rl y
e x p l a i n ati\- legal t e r t n s used.
W h e n w r i t i n g t o a h u p e r s o n , c o n s i i l e r t h e s o p h i s t i c a t i o n ot t h e r e a d e r . , \ s k yo u r s e l f ;
H o w f a m i l i a r w i t h legal m a t t e r s is t h e r e a d e r ?
D o e s t h e r e a d e r of'teti r e a d ma t e r i a l t h a t i t i \ ( ' l \ e s c o t n p l e x su b i e ct s?
A l t h o u g h t h e a d d r e s s e e m a y n o t b e l a m i l i a r w i t h t h e law, t h e i n d i \ i d u a l m a y b e highly-
e d u c a t e d o r m a \ ' offeti deal wi t h c o m p l e x o r t e c h ni c a l m a t t e r s . In s u c h s i t u a t i o n s , \ ’o u m a y
b e a b l e t o craf t t h e let t er wi t h g r e a t e r c o m p l e x i t \ - a n d p r e s e n t t h e su b i ec t m a t t e r w i t h g r e a t e r
legal o r t e c h n i c a l detail. II t h e r e a d e r d o e s n o t as a m a t t e r of c o u r s e e n g a g e in a lot o t c o m p l e x
o r t e c h n i c a l r e a d i n g o r is n o t f a m i l i a r w i t h s u c h m a t t e r s , t h e n \' ou s h o u l d a v o i d i n c l u d i n g a
d e t a i l e d , c o m p l e x d i s c u s s i o n in t h e m a i n b o d \ .
l h e c o n t e n t of t h e b o d \ ' will dif fer a c c o r d i n g to t h e t vp e of l et t er \ o u a r e d r a f t i n g . I h e
s u b s e c t i o n s o t ' t h i s c h a p t e r t hat a d d r e s s i n t o r m a t i o n , o p i n i o n , a n d d e m a n d l e t t e r s d i s c u s s t h e
d i f i e r e n c e s in t h e l o r m a t a n d c o n t e n t ol t h e b o d \ ' ol t h e s e t v p e s ot c o r r e s p o n d e n c e .
3. Requests/Instructions
Include any requests or instru ctio n s f'or t h e r e c i pi e n t in t h e last s e c t i o n o f t h e bo d y .
For Example Please bring with you copies ofthe contract and any other written material
related to the contract.
Please keep a daily diary. Include in it a detailed description of all your daily activi
ties, such as how long you sleep, what physical activities you engage in during the day,
and so on.
In s o m e i n s t a nc e s , a pa r al e g al o r law c le r k m a \ ' d r a f t a n d sign a l e t t e r t o t h e cli ent. A

p a r a l e g a l o r l a w c l e r k m a \ ' sign a l e t t er th.at p r o \ i d e s g e n e r a l i n f o r m a t i o n . N e i t h e r m a y si g n
a l e t t er t h a t gi ves a legal o p i n i o n o r legal acK lce. .Most st ate l aws a n d r u l es o f e t h i c s p r o h i b i t
a p a r a l e g a l o r l aw cl er k f r o m p r a c t i c i n g law, a n d p r i n i d i n g a legal o p i n i o n o r legal a d v i c e
c o n s t i t u t e s t h e p r a c t i c e o f law. I h e r e f o r e , w h e n p r e p a r i n g a let t er t h a t y o u , a n o t h e r p a r a l eg a l ,
o r l aw c l e r k will si gn, b e s u r e not t o i n c l u d e a legal o p i n i o n o r p r o \ ide legal a d v i c e .
H. C lo s in g
lhe c lo s in g fol l ows t h e b o i h ' ol tlie letter, l h e c l o s i n g u s u a l l v c o n s i s t s ot s o m e staiicfard
s t a t e m e n t , liie fii i l owi ng ar e e x a m p l e s o f c l os i ngs:
i l i a n k \ o u f('r \ ' o u r p r o m p t c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f t h i s mat t er .
S i n c e r e h ’,
P l eas e c o n t a c t m e if \'ou h a \ e an\ ' q u e s t i o n s in r e g a r d to t hi s mat t e r .
\ ' e r \ t r i i h' v o u r s ,
I t i a n k y o u t o r y o u r ass i st ance.
Best r e gar ds .
567
PART IV L EGAL W R I TI N G
[. S ig n a tu re an d T itle
I h c s i g n a t u r e a n d title oi t h e p e r s o n s i g n i n g t h e letter fol low t h e c l os i ng. A n e x a m p l e follows;
Sa r a h S mi t h
. Attorney at l.aw
W h e n t he i n d i v\ iidual
d u al s i gn i n g the letter is a paralegal, t he paral
p ar a l eg
e g a l s t at u s s h o u l d be clearly
i n d i c a t e d b e l o w t h e s i g n a t u r e line, as in t h e f o l l o w i n g e x a m p l e s :
Ion lones
Paralegal
Sarah S m i t h
Paralegal
J. In it ia ls o f D ra fte r
I h e final n o t a t i o n o n t h e l et ter is a r e f e r en c e to t h e a u t h o r o f t h e l et t er a n d t he typist. N o t e
the initials of the drafter in all capitals, a n d n o t e t h e t y p i s t s ini ti als in l o we r c as e letters
(e.g., | l ) R / m w t ) .
K. E n c lo s u re N o ta tio n
If e n c l o s u r e s , s u c h as c o n t r a c t s a n d d o c u m e n t s , are i n c l u d e d w i t h t h e letter, i n d i cat e t h e i r
p r e s e n c e \sith an enclosure notation hv t v pi ng “ l-'nc.” o r “ Hncs." at t h e left m a r g i n f o l l o w
i n g t h e si gna t ur e .
Sa r a h S mi t h
A l t o r n e y at l.aw
Hncs.
L. O th e rs R e c e ivin g C opies
If o t h e r i n d i v i d u a l s ar e r e c e i \ i n g c o p ie s o f t h e letter, i n d i c a t e t h i s b y t y p i n g “cc;” a n d t h e
n a m e o f t h e i n d i \ ’i d ua l ( s) a l t e r t h e s i g n a t u r e a n d title. ' Ihi s fol l ows t h e e n c l o s u r e n o t a t i o n if
a n e n c l o s u r e n o t a t i o n is used. A n e x a m p l e is as follows:
cc: C o l i n S mi t h
Ma e C a r r e y
I f y o u ar e u n c e r t a i n w h o s h o u l d receive copi es , c h e c k w i t h y o u r s u p e r vi s o r .
M. F o rm a t S ty le
I h e b a si c f o r m a t o f a l et ter \ a r i e s a m o n g firms, a n d is d i c t a t e d by p e r s o n a l taste a n d style.
I'wo f u n d a m e n t a l st yles ar e full b l o c k a n d m o d i f i e d b l o c k . In full b l o c k , e v e r y t h i n g b u t
t h e l e t t e r h e a d is flush wi t h t h e left ma r g i n . I h e i n f o r m a t i o n l e t t er in t h e first e x a m p l e in t h e
568
A p p l i e a t i o n s c c t i o n is t)-ped in lull b l o c k f o r n i at . In niodilioci bl ock, t h e tl ate is c e n t e r e d , a n d

t h e s i g n a t u r e l i ne m a y b e just to t h e r i gh t o t ' t h e c e n t e r o f t h e p a g e o r tl ush lett. I h e tirst line
ot e a c h p a r a g r a p h is i n d e n t e d . I h e o p i n i o n let t er in t h e s e c o n d e x a m p l e in t h e A p p l i c a t i o n
s e c t i o n is p r e s e n t e d in m o d i f i e d b l o c k f o r m a t .
N. G e n e ra l C o n s id e ra tio n s — A ll C o rre s p o n d e n c e
A d o p t t h e h ig h e s t s t a n d a r d s o f a c c u r a c y , b o t h s u b s t a n t i v e a n d stylistic, w h e n d r a f t i n g legal
c o r r e s p o n d e n c e . As m e n t i o n e d in t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n , c o r r e s p o n d e n c e h e l p s d e t e r m i n e t h e i m
age, r e p u t a t i o n , a n d s u c c e s s o f t h e law fi rm, hi m a n y s i t ua t i o n s , t h e i n t o r m a t i o n p r o v i d e d in
t h e c o r r e s p o n d e n c e c o n s t i t u t e s t h e p r a c t i c e o f l a w a n d s u b j e c t s t h e fi rm t o p o s s i b l e liability
for c l a i m s o f legal m a l p r a c t i c e . ' Hi erefor e, t h e c]ualit\’ o f t h e p r o d u c t is cri t i cal l y i m p o r t a n t .
You s h o u l d d o t h e f o l l o wi n g :
T ak e t h e u t m o s t c a r e to e n s u r e t h a t a n y legal r e s e a r c h a n d a n a k s i s a r e free o f e r r o r .
M a k e s u r e t h a t t h e f i n i s h e d p r o d u c t is free f r o m w r i t i n g e r r o r s i n v o h ' i n g g r a m m a r ,
s pel l i ng, a n d s o o n .
Be p r e p a r e d t o p e r f o r m t h e n u m b e r o f e d i t s a n d r e d r af t s n e c e s s a r y t o e n s u r e t h a t t h e
final p r o d u c t is p r o f e s s i o n a l l y p r e p a r e d .
Dr af t let t er s s o c l e a r k t ha t t h e y c a n n o t b e m i s i n t e r p r e t e d . A r e a d e r ma \ ' n o t like t h e

i n f o r m a t i o n c o n v e y e d in t h e l et ter a n d w i s h t o i n t e n t i o n a l l y m i s i n t e r p r e t t h e ct>ntents. I h e
discussi t>n in t h e f o l l o w i n g s e c t i o n s is d e s i g n e d t o assist in t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f le t t e r s tliat
c l e a r h ’ c o n v e v i n f o r m a t i o n a n d a r e di f ti cult t o m i s i n t e r p r e t .
III. TYPES OF CORRESPONDENCE

. M t h o u g h , as d i s c u s s e d in t h e p r e c e d i n g s e c t i o n , t h e basi c c o m p o n e n t s o f legal c o r r e s p o n d e n c e
a r e t h e sa.me, t h e c o n t e n t ot t h e b o d y ot t h e c o r r e s p o n d e n c e vari es a c c o r d i n g t o t h e t\ p e of
l e t t e r b e i n g d r a t t e d . ' I h e r e a r e m a n y c a t e g o r i e s o f legal c o r r e s p o n d e n c e , a n d t h e c a t e g o r i z a
t i o n Is b a s e d u p o n t h e p u r p o s e t h a t c a c h c a t e g o ry is d e s i g n e d t o sevve. I n a s n v a c h as t h i s text
t o c u s e s o n legal r e s e a r c h a n d analysis, t h i s s e c t i o n a d d r e s s e s law otl ice c o r r e s p o n d e n c e that
c o m m u n i c a t e s t h e r e s u l t s o f legal r e s e a r c h a n d analysis. ' I h e t h r e e basi c c a t e g o r i e s ot le t t e r s
t h at c o m m u n i c a t e s u c h i n f o r m a t i o n ar e i n f o r m a t i o n letters, o p i n i o n letters, a n d d e n i a m i l e t
t er s ( s e e Hxhibit 19-3).
E x h i b i t 1 9 - 3 Types o f Letters That Com m unicate the Results of Legal Research

and Analysis.
Inform ation letters Letters that provide general legal infornnation

or background on a legal issue (e.g., the infor
mation may be a sum m ary of the law or the
requirements of a particular statute)
O pinion letters Letters that provide information concerning
the law, an analysis of that information, and a
legal opinion or legal advice
D em and or advocacy letters Letters designed to persuade someone to take
action favorable to the interest of the client or
cease acting in a manner that is detrimental
to the client (e.g., a summary ofthe applicable
law in support of the requested action)
569
P A R T IV LEGAL WR ITING
Iliis s e c t i o n t o c u s e s o n t h e hotl y ot’tliese c a t e g o ri e s ot letters a n d h o w eacli dif fers in t h e

p r e s e n t a t i o n of legal r e s e a r c h a n d a n a K s i s . I h e f o l l o w i n g s u b s e c t i o n s a d d r e s s t h e p r e p a r a
t i o n of l et t er s to n o n l a w \ e r r e c i pi e n t s, as m o s t ol t h e c o r r e s p o n d e n c e a p a r a l eg a l o r law c l er k
p r e p a r e s is for t h at a u d i e n c e .
A. In f o r m a tio n L e tte r
A p a r a l eg a l o r law c l e r k is o f t en a s k e d to d r a f t a let ter t h a t prox ides i n f o r m a t i o n t o t h e cli ent
o r o th e r layperson. Ihe c o m p o n e n t s of an inform ation letter usual K' i n c l u d e t h e e l e m e n t s
m e i i t i o n e d in s e c t i o n II of t hi s c h a p t e r . I h e b o d y o f t h e i n f o r m a t i o n letter, h o w e x ’er, x'aiies
a c c o r d i n g to t h e tx p e o f i n f o r m a t i o i i b e i n g c oii xe\' ed. I h e r e are m a n y t y p e s o f ' i n f o n n a t i o n
letters. S o m e o f t h e types , a n d e x a n i p l e s o f p a r t s of t h e b o d y o f t h e s e txpes , follow':
Let t ers t ha t c o n f i r m a n a p p o i n t m e n t o r i n f o r m o f t h e d a t e a n d t i m e iif s c h e d u l e d

events
For Example This letter is to advise you that the court hearing on the mo
tion to modify child support will be held on May 6, 2013, in the
courtroom of....
This letter is to confirm our appointment at 9:00 a.m., May 22, 2013__
Let t ers t ha t i n f o r m t h e client o f t h e c m ' r e n t st at u s o f t h e c a s e
For Example The defendants filed an answer on June 6, 2013. On June 14,2013,
we sent them a request to produce documents concerning the
contract and are awaiting their response to that request. We will contact you
when we receive their response.
Let t ers t h a t p r e s e n t t h e l i r m ’s bill
Let t ers t h a l gix e t h e r e s u l t s o f a n inx es t i g a t i o n
For Example After performing a thorough investigation, we were unable to lo

cate any witness who actually saw the accident. We interviewed
the witnesses atthe scene, canvassed the neighborhood, and contacted allthe
store owners in the area. If you happen to remember the license plate of any
vehicle that passed by or have any additional information, please let us know__
Let t ers t h a t prox i de g e n e r a l legal i n f o r m a t i i m o r b a c k g r o u n d o n a legal is sue (' Ihi s is

t h e t y p e o f i n f o r m a t i o n b e i n g prox i d e d to Mr. S h i n e in t h e a s s i g n m e n t at t h e b e g i n
n i n g o f t h e c h ap t e r . )
' I h e i n f o r m a t i o n max' b e a s u m m a r x ' o f t h e l aw inx'oK’e d iii t h e c l i e n t ’s c a s e o r t h e
r e t ] u i r e m e n t s o f a p a r t i c u l a r st at ut e. I hi s t x p e o f i n f o r m a t i o n let ter is u s u a l l y t h e
m o s t c o m p l e x o f t h e i n l ' o r m a t i o n let ter s a n d o f t en i nxoK’es c o m m u n i c a t i n g r es ul t s
o f legal r e s e a r c h a n d a n a K s i s . ' Ih e bodx' o f t h i s tx'pe o f i n f o r m a t i o n let ter is d i s c u s s e d
in t h e r e m a i n d e r o f t h i s s u b s e c t i o n .
I h e b o d y o f a n i n f o r m a t i o n l e t t e r t h a t prox i d e s t h e r e s u l t s o f legal r e s e a r c h a n d
analysis usu al h' consists ot an i n t r o d u c t i o n ' o p e n i n g , ansx ver /expl an ation, anti a
c l o s i n g (s ee F x h i b i t 19-4).
570
E x h ib it 19-4 Body of Information Letter— Recommended Format and Components.

A sentence or paragraph explaining the purpose of
the letter
A detailed presentation ofthe legal information or
background on a legal issue
A standard closing statenient or if the answer/
explanation is lengthy, a summary ofthe answer
1. Introduction/Opening
l h e i n t r o d u c t i o n st ates t h e p u r p o s e o f t h e letter.
For Example The purpose of this letter is to inform you ofa request that has been filed by the
defendant and the law the court will consider when addressing the request.
The purpose of this letter is to inform you of a recent law that was passed that
affects your business.
2. Answer/Explanation
l h e a n s w e r / e . x p l a n a t i o n s ec t i o n p r e s e n t s t h e r e s u l t s o f legal r e s e a rc h a n d a n a k s i s .
For Example Section 97-355-21 ofthe corporation statutes was recently amended. Under
the provisions of the amendment, you must file your annual report no later
^ than 20 days after the end of the fiscal year As you know, the statute prior to the amend
ment allowed 40 days to file the report.
I h e b o d \ ot t h e let t er p r e s e n t e d in t h e lirst e x a m p l e in t h e A p p l i c a t i o n s e c t i o n p r o \ ides

a d e t a i l e d i l l us t r a t ion ol this c o n i p o n e n t ol a n i n l o r n i a t i o n letter.
3. C l o s i n g
l h e c l o s i n g ol t h e l et t e r is s i mi l a r to t h e c l o s i n g ofai i}' legal c o r r e s p o n d e n c e , as d i s c u s s e d in
s e c t i o n 11 ot t hi s cliapter.
5 Because you prepare the annual report for your corporation, 1feel it is
important that you be advised of the change in the law. If you have any
questions, please contact me.
In s o m e i n s t a n c e s , e s p e c i a l k w h e n t h e a n s w e r / e x p l a n a t i o n is l e n g t h y o r c o m p l e x , it
n i a \ be n ec e s s a r y to i n c l u d e a s u m m a r y o r a c o n c l u s i o n in t h e cl osing. See l h e c l o s i n g o f t h e
i n t o r m a t i o n l et t er in t h e lirst e x a m p l e in t h e A p p l i c a t i o n sect i on.
I hi s t \ p e o f i n l o r m a t i o n l et t e r m e r e l y p r e s e n t s a s u m m a r y o f t h e l aw o r t h e legal s t a t u s
ot a case. It c o m m u n i c a t e s b a s i c i n f o r m a t i o n ; it d o e s n o t g iv e a legal o p i n i o n o n a q u e s t i o n
o r p r o v i d e legal a d \ ice. Ihat r o l e is p e r f o r m e d b\' a n o p i n i o n letter.
B, O p in io n L e tte r
An o pinion letter is like a n i n f o r m a t i o n l et ter in t h a t it p r o \ ides i n f o r m a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g
t h e law. It is d i He r e nt in t hat it o t t e n i nc l ud e s, in a d d i t i o n , a n a n a h ' s i s o f t h a t i n f o r m a t i o n a n d
571
prov i des a legal o p i n i o n o r legal advice , llie p u r p o s e is t o i n l o r m t h e r e a d e r Innv t h e law ap-

plies to t h e facts. A n o p i n i o n l e t t er is u s u a l l y g e n e r a t e d in r e s p o n s e to a c l i e n t ’s q u e s t i o n o r
ra i s e d by t h e facts in a c l i e n t ’s case. I h e r ef o r e , t h e f o c u s o f t hi s s e c t i o n is o n o p i n i o n let ters
a d d r e s s e d t o t h e client.
V o u nia\- b e a s s i g n e d t h e t a s k o f r e s e a r c h i n g , a n a l y z i n g , a n d p r e p a r i n g a n i n t e r o f
fice m e m o r a n d u m t h a t a d d r e s s e s t h e q u e s t i o n t o b e a n s w e r e d in a n o p i n i o n l et t er . T h e
p u r p o s e o f t h e a s s i g n m e n t is t o p r o v i d e t h e a t t o r n e ) ' w i t h t h e i n f o r m a t i o n n e c e s s a r y t o
p r e p a r e t h e l e t t e r . O n o c c a s i o n , y o u ni a\ ' b e a s s i g n e d t h e a d d i t i o n a l t a s k t i f p r e p a r i n g a
r o u g h d r a f t o t t h e o p i n i o n l e t t e r , . \ h i n y o t t h e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s i n \ o l \ ' e d in p r e p a r i n g a n
o p i n i o n l e t t e r a r e t h e s a m e a s t h o s e i n \ ' o l \ ' e d in p r e p a r i n g a n otYice m e m o r a n d u m . W h e n
\ ' o u a r e a s s i g n e d t h e t a s k o f p r e p a r i n g s u c h a l e t t e r , r e f e r to ( d i a p t e i s 16 a n d 17 in a d d i
t i o n fo t h i s c h a p t e r f o r g u i d a n c e .
A n o p i n i o n l et t e r p r o \ ' i d e s t h e r e a d e r w i t h a legal o p i n i o n a n d legal a d \ ice; t he r ef o r e ,
it c o n s t i t u t e s t h e p r a c t i c e o f l a w a n d a n a t t o r n e y m u s t si gn it. I h e a t t o r n e y is s u b j e c t to legal
liability t o r h a r m t h a t o c c u r s as a r e s ul t ot t h e c l i en t a c t i n g u p o n e r r o n e o u s i n t ' o r m a t i o n
c o n t a i n e d in t h e letter. If y o u a r e p r e p a r i n g t h e dr a f t of a n o p i n i o n letter, t a k e g r e a t c ar e fo
e n s u r e t h a t \-our r e s e a r c h a n d a n a h ' s i s a r e a c c u r a t e .
B e c a u s e t h e p u i ' p o s e is t o i n f o r m t h e c li e n t o t ' t h e l a w a n d p r o \ ' i d e legal a d v i c e , t h e
o p i n i o n l e t t e r is d r a t t e d in t h e s a m e obj e c t i \ ' e t o n e as t h e o f h c e m e m o r a n d u m . ' I h e d i f f e r e n ce
is t ha t t h e c l i e nt is u s u a l h ' a Un p e r s o n u n t a m i l i a r w i t h legal t e r n i s a n d legal w r i t i n g . W' h e n
t hi s is so, a \ ' oi d legal ese a n d k e e p legal q u o t a t i o n s a n d c i t a t i o n s to a m i i i i n u m i . I f t h e r e a d e r
is fa mi l i a r w i t h t h e la w a n d legal w r i t i n g , \'oii m a \ ' use m o r e legal t e r m s , i | u o t a t i o n s , a n d c i t a
t i ons. In s o m e i n s t a n c e s , t h e a t t or n e } ' ma}' d i r e c t t h a t t h e cl i e nt b e p r o v i d e d w i t h t h e oftice
m e m o r a n d i . u i i r a t h e r t h a n a n o p i n i o n letter.
A l t h o u g h a n o p i n i o n l e t t e r a n d a n office T i i e m o r a n d u m a r e s i m i l a r in m a n } ' r es pect s ,
t h e r e a r e d i t i e r e n c e s in f' ormat. A n o p i n i o n l e t t e r f o l l o ws a b u s i n e s s l o r m a t a s d i s c u s s e d in
s e c t i o n II o f t h i s c h a p t e r , w h e r e a s a n otl ice m e m o r a n d L m i t' ollows a m e m o f o r m a t as d i s
c u s s e d in C ' h a p t e r s 16 a n d 17. ' I h e bod}' o f t h e l e t t e r i n c l u d e s t h e b a si c e l e n i e n t s o f ' t h e oli ice
n i e m o r a n d L i m , b u t t h e e l e m e n t s a r e p r e s e n t e d w i t h less te c h n i c a l de t a i l a n d few e r legal t e r ms .
.■\s w i t h m o s t legal w r i t i n g , tliere is n o standvivd f o r m a t t o r i h c b o d y ot a n o p i n i o n lei
ter. ’I h e b o d \ ' o f m o s t o p i n i o n l et ters, h o w e v e r , f o l l o ws t h e l o r m a t p r e s e n t e d in I’x hi bi t 19 5.
E x h i b i t 1 9 - 5 B o d y of Opinion Letter— R e co m m e n d e d Format and Com ponents.
Introduction/opening A sentence or paragraph identifying the question or

questions that will be answered
A brief presentation of the background and key
facts relative to the question(s) being addressed
A n sw er/conclu sion A brief answer to the question sim ilar to the brief
answer section of an office memorandum
Explanation An explanation of how the law applies to the facts
raised by the question, crafted in a manner that the
recipient will understand
Closing^conclusion The last paragraph ofthe explanation section,
containing a standard closing statement (or if the
explanation is lengthy, a sum m ary ofthe explana
tion); also includes a statement of any action the
client should take or what will occur next
572
C H A P T E R 19 C O R R E S P O N D E N C E
1. Inlrodiiction/Opcning
'1 he i n t r o d u c t i o n e s t a h h s h c s t h e t o c u s o i t h e letter a n d i de nt i t i e s tlie q u e s t i o n o r q u e s t i o n s t h a t
will h e a n s w e r e d . I h e o p e n i n g usual U' h e ^ i n s wi t h a r e t e r e n e e to t h e q u e s t i o n a n d t h e c o n t e x t
w i t h i n w h i c h t h e cl i ent r a i se d t h e q u e s t i o n .
For Example On January 1, 2012, you hired me to represent you in your criminal case.
When we met in my office on that date, you asked me to determine whether
we could obtain a suppression ofthe evidence (the heroin) seized when the police officers
executed a search warrant by entering your residence unannounced.
N o t i c e tliat t h e q u e s t i o n is s t a t e d in b r o a d e r t e r m s t h a n it w o u l d he in a n office n' le mo-

r a n d u n i . D r a f t t h e q u e s t i o n in a m a n n e r s u t ii c i e n t fo r t h e cl i ent t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e q u e s t i o n .
Vou d o n o t h a v e to s t a t e it as c o m p l e t e l y o r as f o r m a l l y as d i s c u s s e d in ( ' h a p t e r 1 1, n o r d o y o u
n e c c s s a r i h ' h a v e t o t o l l o w t h e law + q u e s t i o n f k c \ t act s f o r m a t . In t h e p r e c e d i n g e x a m p l e ,
t h e r e is n o r e f e r e nc e t o t h e r ul e o f law.
I n c l u d e l a n g u a g e in t he i n t r t ) d u c t i o n t o i n d i c a t e that t h e t>pini on a n d a d v i c e a p p l y o n l y
to t h e a d d r e s s e e a n d t h e speci fic tact s i n c l u d e d in t h e letter. V o u s h o u l d also m e n t i o n t h a t t h e
o p i n i o n is h a s e d o n t h e law as o f t h e d a t e o f t h e o p i n i o n .
For Example This opinion is provided for your use and solely for your benefit. It applies
only to the facts presented in the facts section of this letter and the law
as ofthe date of the letter.
2. Facts
Pr e s e nt t he facts in an o p i n i o n letter in t h e s a m e o h i e c t i \ e m a n n e r as in an office m e m o r a n d u m .
I n c l u d e o n l v t h e key a n d b a c k g r o u n d facts t o k e e p t h e s e c t i o n as s h o r t as pt>ssible.
3. Answer/Conclu sion
'1 h e a n s w e r / c o n c l u s i o n s e c t i o n p r e s e n t s a bri ef a n s w e r t o t h e q u e s t i o n . It is s i m i l a r ti) t h e b ri ef
a n s w e r sectiiMi of t h e office m e m o r a n d u m . B\' p l a c i n g t h e a n s w e r n e a r t h e b e g i n n i n g ot t h e
letter, t h e r e a d e r i m m e d i a t e l y k n o w s t h e result w i t h o u t h a \ i ng to r e a d t h e e x p l a n a t i o n . Thi s
is hel p f ul if t h e r e a d e r is b u s y a n d m a y n o t b e abl e t o r e a d t h e e x p l a n a t i o n u n t i l a l a t e r t i me .
T h e a n s w e r s h o u l d he cl ea r a n d as s h o r t as poss i bl e, b e c a u s e t h e a n s w e r is u s u a l l v a legal
o p i n i o n , y o n s h o u l d s t a t e it as a n o p i n i o n .
For Example The court will probably not suppress the evidence based upon the officers'
failure to announce their presence priorto entering your residence when
they executed the warrant.
A d d a n y n e e d e d speci fics o r l i n i i t a t i o n s at'ter t h e a n s w e r .
For Example The outcome could be different if Officer Galen changes his testimony
and states he did not see you holding a rifle in your front room when they
approached the house. Officer Kaler stated that he did not see you in the front room as
they approached the house. In light of Officer Kaler's statement, Officer Galen could
change his statement.
573
PA R T IV LEGAL W RITING
4. Explanation
I h e e x p l a n a t i o n s e c t i o n is s i m i l a r to tlie a n a i \ s i s s e c t i o n o f a n office m e m o r a n d u m . ' Itie dit -
t e r e n c e is tliat tlie e x p l a n a t i o n m u s t b e c r a t t e d in a m a n n e r t h a t is n o t s o t e c h n i c a l t h a t t h e
cli ent h a s ditiicult\- u n d e r s t a n d i n g it. .Also, t h e e x p l a n a t i o n s e c t i o n is u s u a l l y n o t as l o n g o r
as c o m p l e x as t h e a n a h s i s s e c t i o n ot a n office m e m o r a n d u m . W ' h e n p r e p a r i n g t h i s s e c t io n ,
n o t e t h e tollow i n g g u i d e l i n e s :
It t h e r e is m o r e t h a n o n e issue, d i s c u s s t h e issues in t h e o r d e r t h e y a r e p r e s e n t e d in
the introduction.
It p o s s i b l e , l i mi t t h e l et ter t o as few i s sues as p o s s i b l e (i.e., tw'o to t h r e e ) . If t h e r e a r e

m u l t i p l e i ssues, t h e let t er ma \ ' b e c o m e t o o c o m p l e x o r l o n g , a n d t h e r e a d e r m a y h av e
difficult)' u n d e r s t a n d i n g o r k e e p i n g t r a c k o f t h e s u b j e c t ma t t e r . S e p a r a t e t h e issues,
a n d p r e p a r e m o r e t h a n o n e l et ter if n e ce ss ar y.
D r a f t t h e c o n t e n t w i t h t h e r e a d e r ’s l egal s o p h i s t i c a t i o n in m i n d . T h e c l i e n t m a y
n o t b e f a m i l i a r w i t h t h e l a w a n d t e c h n i c a l w r i t i n g , a n d a n e x p l a n a t i o n t h a t is as
d e t a i l e d as t h e a n a l y s i s s e c t i o n o f a n o f f i c e m e m o r a n d u m m a y n o t b e a p p r o p r i
ate. K e e p q u o t a t i o n s a n d c i t a t i o n s t o a m i n i m u m . R a t h e r t h a n q u o t i n g , r e p h r a s e
t h e s t a t u t o r y o r c a s e l a w in a m a n n e r t h a t a U n p e r s o n c a n u n d e r s t a n d . I f y o u
m u s t u s e a legal t e r m , m a k e s u r e its m e a n i n g is clear. D e f i n e t h e l egal t e r m s t h a t
\ ’o u use.
ProN'ide a c o m p l e t e e x p l a n a t i o n . I h e cl i e nt m u s t b e fully i n f o r m e d . D o n o t o m i t i m
p o r t a n t i n f o r m a t i o n b e c a u s e t h e c li ent is u n s o p h i s t i c a t e d in t h e law. P r e s e n t all t h e
ke y i n f o r m a t i o n in a m a n n e r t h a t fully a n d c l e a r h ' i n f o r m s t h e client.
I h e fol low' ing is a n e x a m p l e ol a n e x p l a n a t i o n s e c t i o n o f a n o p i n i o n letter.
I h e I ' O L U t h A m e n d m e n t t o t h e L' ni t e d St at es ( C o n s t i t u t i o n a n d a r t i c l e 11, s e c t i o n 9, o f

t he st a t e c o n s t i t u t i o n p r o h i b i t “ L m r e a s o n a b l e s e a r c h e s a n d s e i z u r e s . ” T h e s e a m e n d m e n t s d o
n o t p r o h i b i t all s e a r c h e s a n d s e i z u r es , h o w e v e r , just t h o s e t ha t a r e “ u n r e a s o n a b l e . ”
I h e law p r i i v i de s t h a t a n v t h i n g s e i / e d as a r e s ul t o f a n u n r e a s o n a b l e s e a r c h m a y n o l
b e a d m i t t e d i n t o e \ i d e n c e in a trial. I h e s t at e s u p r e m e c o u r t h a s r u l e d t h a t off i cers m u s t
annoiu'ice their pr es enc e before e n te r in g a res idence w h en e x e c u t in g a search w a rr a n t . Ihe
c o u r t s t a t e d t ha t a n u n a n n o u n c e d e n t r y is u n r e a s o n a b l e a n d v i o l a t e s t h e L ' n i t e d S t a t e s a n d
st a t e c o n s t i t u t i o n s .
I h e r e are, h o w e v e r , e x c e p t i o n s to t h e r u l e t h a t officers m u s t a n n o u n c e t h e i r p r e s e n c e
b e f o r e e x e c u t i n g a w a r r a n t . O n e e x c e p t i o n is w h e n t h e officers a r r i v e at t h e p l a c e to b e s e a r c h e d
a n d t h e r e is e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e p e r s o n o r p e r s o n s p r e s e n t at t h e s c e n e a r e a d a n g e r t o t h e o f
ficers. S m i t h I’, ¡ones is a c o u r t c a s e r e m a r k a b h ' s i m i l a r t o y o u r case. In t hi s case, w h e n t h e
p ol i c e a r r i v e d at t h e r e s i d e n c e t o b e s e a r c h e d , t h e y s a w t h e d e f e n d a n t e n t e r t h e h o u s e w'ith
a rifle in hi s h a n d s . I h e s t at e s u p r e m e c o u r t r u l e d t h a t t hi s e v i d e n c e p r o v i d e d t h e officers
w i t h a u t h o r i t y t o e x e c u t e t h e w a r r a n t a n d e n t e r t h e r e s i d e n c e t o b e s e a r c h e d w i t h o u t first
a n n o u n c i n g thei r presence.
B a s e d u p o n t h e r u l i n g in t h e S m i t h r. Jones c a s e a n d t h e s i m i l a r i t y b e t w e e n t h e fact s o f
t h a t ca s e a n d t h e fact s in y o u r case, t h e trial c o u r t p r o b a b l y will n o t s u p p r e s s t h e e v i d e n c e
s ei z ed at y o u r r e s i d e n c e a n d will a l l ow its a d m i s s i o n at trial.
5. Closing/Conclusion
I h e c l o s i n g is u s u a l h ' n o t a s e p a r a t e s e c t i o n o f a n o p i n i o n letter. R a t h e r , it is u s u a l l y t h e last
p a r a g r a p h o f t h e e x p l a n a t i o n s e c t i o n . It is s i m i l a r to t h e c l o s i n g o f a n y legal c o r r e s p o n d e n c e ,
as d i s c u s s e d in s e c t i o n II o f t h i s c h a p t e r . In a d d i t i o n , in a n o p i n i o n letter, t h e c l o s i n g s h o u l d
s u m m a r i z e a n v a c t i o n t h e c l i e nt s h o u l d t ak e o r w h a t will o c c u r n e x t .
574
For Example I hope this letter answers your questions. Please note that, although the
officers may have acted properly when they entered your residence unan
nounced, there is a question as to whether the warrant was properly issued in the first
place. When we complete our investigation into this matter, we anticipate that we will file
a motion to suppress the evidence because the warrant should not have been issued at
all. We will discuss this at our appointment scheduled on Friday the ninth. Please contact
me if you have any questions.
A n e x a m p l e o f a n o p i n i o n l e t t e r is p r e s e n t e d in t h e s e c o n d e x a m p l e in t h e Applicatii>ii
s e c t i o n o t t hi s c h a p t e r .
C. D e m a n d o r A d v o c a c y L e tte r
A n o t h e r b a s i c t y p e ot l et t e r \ ' ou m a y b e c a l l ed u p o n to d r a f t is a dem and letter, som etim es
cal l ed a n a iiv o c a c y letter. I h i s t y p e o f let t er is d e s i g n e d to p e r s u a d e s o m e o n e t o t ak e a c t i o n
f a v o r ab l e t o t h e i n t e r e s t s o f t h e c l i en t o r c e a s e a c t i n g in a m a n n e r that is d e t r i m e n t a l to t h e
cli ent, I h i s m a y b e as s i m p l e as d e m a n d i n g p a y m e n t o n a d e b t o r as c o m p l e x a s reque. s t i ng
l hat a coLirse o f c o n d u c t b e t a k e n , s u c h as r e h i r i n g a n e m p l o y e e . In m a n \ ' instance.s, a d e m a n d
l et t er will i n c l u d e a s u m m a r y o f t h e a p p l i c a b l e law in s u p p o r t o f t h e reqLie.sled a c t i o n . I h i s
s e c t i o n a d d r e s s e s t h e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s i n v o k e d w h e n p r e p a r i n g a d e m a n d l et t er t h a t i n c l u d e s
a r e f e r e n c e t o t h e l a w a n d a n a n a l y s i s o t t h e law.
V o u m a y b e g i \ e n a n a s s i g n m e n t t o p r e p a r e a n o tl ice m e m o r a n d L m i s u m n i a r i / i n g t h e
law t h a t will be u s e d as t h e b a s i s f o r t h e d e m a n d l e t t er a n d lo p r e p a r e a d r a l l o t ' t h e letter. Like
t h e o p i n i o n l et ter, t h e a t t o r n e ) ' m u s t si gn a d e m a n d letter.
I h e b a s i c t o r m a t a n d c o n i p o n e n t s ot a d e m a n d l et t er a r e s i m i l a r t o t h o s e d i s c u s s e d in
s e c t i o n 11 o t ' t h i s c h a p t e r ; as w i l h a n o p i n i o n let ter, t h e r e is n o s t a n d a r d t or ni a t toi t h e d e m a n d
letter. .A m a j o r d i t i e r e n c e is t h a t a d e m a n d l e t t e r is n o t d e s i g n e d t o a d d r e s s a legal q u e s t i o n ,
b u t to e n c o u r a g e a c t i o n o r s e e k r e l i e f I h e r e f o r e , it d o e s n o t c o n t a i n a n a n s w e r ' i o n c l u s i o n
s e c t i o n in t h e b o d ) ' b e c a u s e it d o e s n o t a d d r e s s a q u e s t i o n t h a t r e t | u i r e s a bri el a n s w e r . I h e
d e m a n d l e t te r al s o d i t i e r s f r o m a n o p i n i o n l et t e r in t h a t it is d e s i g n e d t o a c h ' oc at c a p o s i t i o n
ant i p e r s u a d e t h e r e a d e r ; t h e r e f o r e , il is w r i t t e n in a p e r s u a s i v e m a n n e r .
I h e b o d y o f a d e m a n d l e l t e r fol l ows t h e s a m e basi c f o r m a t a n d is c o m p o s e d o f e l e m e n t s
s i m i l a r t o t h e b o d ) ' o f t h e o p i n i o n l e t t e r (see F' xhibit 19-6).
E x h i b i t 1 9 - 6 B o d y of D em a nd Letter— R e co m m e n d e d Format ana Com ponent.
Introd u ction /op en in g An identification of the writer or client followed by

the statement of the purpose of the letter
Facts A brief presentation ofthe background and key
facts relative to the question(s) being addressed
Explanation A presentation ofthe legal authority in support of
the relief requested, crafted in a manner that the
recipient will understand
C losin g/con clu sion The last paragraph ofthe explanation section,
containing a standard closing statement (or, if the
explanation is lengthy, a summary of the explana
tion); should restate the relief requested and indi
cate the next course of action
575
P A R T IV LEGAL W R I T I N G
Ihis scction explores the dittereiiees between the bod\' o f a demand letter and the bod\' of’
an opinion letter, lhe discussion focuses on demant] letters sent to nonlaw\'ers. lhe attorne)’
will usually draft a demand lettei' that will be sent to another attorney.
1. I n t r o d u c t i o n / O p e n i n g
lhe introduction ot a demand letter is somewhat different from the opening of an opinion
letter. It begins with the identification o f t h e writer or tiie client.
For Example Our o ffic e re p re s e n ts M r J a s o n Hill in th e a b o v e -re fe re n c e d case.

Mr. J a s o n Hill has re ta in e d th is o ffic e m re gard t o ___
.A statement of th e purpose of the letter follows the identification. It establishes the focus
o f t h e letter and identifies the problem addressed and the relief sought.
For Example Your efforts to c o lle c t p aym ent from Mr. Hill on his autom obile loan are in v i
olation o f t h e C ollections A ct, and w e d e m a n d th a t th e y cease im mediately.
2. Facts
lhe content of'tiie facts section is tiie same as in the opinion letter except that \'ou shoukl present
the lacts in a persuasi\'e manner similar to the persLiasix e presentation of the facts in a court brief.
See Chapter IX, section II.B.2, f'or additional inf'ormation on persuasi\’e presentation ot facts.
For Example On J a n u a ry 7,2012, M r Hill signed a loan w ith y o u r c o m p a n y to pay f o r t h e

p u rc h a s e of an autom obile. From th e date o f t h e loan until tw o m onths ago,
he has paid, on tim e and in full, every installm en t on the loan. F o rth e past tw o months, due
to the illness of his o ld e s t child, M r Hill has been able to pay only o n e -h a lf of the required
m onthly paym ent. He c o n ta c te d y o u r o ffic e on th e fifth of la s t m o n th and in fo rm e d the
loan o ffic e r th a t fo r the next th re e m onths he w o u ld be m aking re d u c e d paym ents. He
w a s in fo rm e d th a t he s hould be making full p ay m ents .
F o rth e past th re e w e e k s , y o u r c o lle c tio n s d e p a r t m e n t h a s te le p h o n e d Mr. Hill after
7:00 p.m. six nights a w e e k d e m a n d in g full p aym ent. In e a c h in s ta n c e , Mr. Hill has politely
inform ed the c a lle r th a t he is paying all he can and re q u e s te d th a t the c alls cease. The
calls have not ceased.
3. E xpl anati on
lhe explanation section presents the legal authorit)' in support ot the relief requested. Because
the reader is a nonlaw)'er, draft the section with this in mind. Refer to the explanation subsec
tion ofan opinion letter for guidance. I iiis section o f a demand letter differs trom the explana
tion section of an opinion letter in tliat \'ou should draft the section in a persuasive manner.
For Example The C ollections A c t provides th a t e fforts to c o lle c t debts shall be m ade in a
reasonable m a n n e r The state s u prem e cou rt, in the case of Irons v. Collec
tions, Inc., ruled th a tte le p h o n e calls to a debtor's residence after 7:00 p.m. or more frequently
than three tim es a w e e k are unreasona ble and v iolate the a c t if the debtor objects to the
calls. Your office has c o n ta c te d M r Hill after 7:00 p.m. six nights a w e e k f o r t h e past three
w eeks. The calls have con tin u e d despite M r Hill's o b je c tio n s and requests th a t they cease.
576
4. Cl os ing/ Côncl us ion

l ike the closing (it an opinion letter, the closing ot a demand letter is usually not a separate
section. It is usLialh the last paragraph of the explanation section and is similar to the c l os
ing ol'an\- legal correspondence, as discussed in section 11 of t h i s chapter. Ihe closing should
restate the relief requested and indicate the ne.xt course o f action.
For Example Your c alls to M r Hill are u n re a s o n a b le , c le a rly in v iola tion o f t h e C ollec tions
A c t, and m u s t c e a s e im m e d ia te ly . If the calls do not c ease, w e w ill ta k e the
a p p r o p r ia te steps n e c e s s a ry to o b ta in th e relief p ro v id e d in th e act.
If yo u have any q u e s tio n s in r e g a r d to this m atter, ple a s e c o n t a c t me.
IV. KEY PO INTS CHECKLIST: Correspondence

Prepare c o rr e sp o nd e n c e accurateh' and professionally. Letters ma\- affect the
reputation of the firm, and poorh' drafted letters do not inspire the cl i ent ’s
con f ide nc e.
Dratt the correspondence with the reader’s legal sophistication in mind. A\'oid legal
ese; i f y o u niust use legal terms, define them clearh.
Keep legal citations and quotations to a mi ni mu m. L'se quotations onh' if they are
easy to understand and add claritv to the subject matter Paraphrase the material if it
is w ritten in a manner that is diliicult to comprehend.
W'hen drafting an opini on letter, be sure to indicate thal the letter is limited to the
lacts of the case, based on the current law', and intended solely for the benefit o f t h e
addressee.
If there are multiple issues, di\'ide the subject into separate manageable topics. Pre
pare and send separate letters covering these topics.
D o not inckkle legal adv ice or reconimend a course ol action if the correspondence
is to be signed by s om eo n e other than an attornev'. Such intorniation constitutes the
practice of law and nuist he signed by an attorney.
Keep a file of the letters and otiier d ocu me nt s \ o u have prepared. Organize the file
b\' topic, such as (.lemand letters and opinion letters. Often, rather than starting a
new letter, it is faster and easier to edit an old letter or use it as a guide tor the c o r
respondence you are drafting.
V APPLICATION
Ihis section contains two examples o f legal correspondence that illustrate the application of
the principles discussed in this chapter. Ihe first exaniple addresses the assignnient presented
at the beginni ng o f t h e cliapter. Ihis assi gnment requires the preparation o f an information
letter b\' the paralegal, Pam Hayes. Ihe s e con d example illustrates an opi ni on letter. It is
b.ised on the s ame law used in the tirst example and on facts that are similar to those o f t h e
first example.
A. E x a m p le — I n form a tio n Letter

Ihe assignnient introduced at the b egi n ni ng o f t h e chapter calls tor the preparation o f an
information letter. In this example, the letter is presented in full block stv'le.
577
Law Offices of Alice Black

:U)() Main Street
f riendh', Neu W'asliington 0()()65
(200) 267- 7000 • f'AX 267-7001 • \vww„iblacklaw.coni
April 29, 2013
Mr. Nick Shine

9100 2nd Street
friendly, N W ()0063
Re: S h i n e v. B l u e S k y S k i R e s o r t
Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claini
Dear Mr. Shine:
i h e purpose of this letter is to inlorm you ol the status ol \’our case and to suniiiiari/.e the law in
regard to the motion that will be heard on Ma\- 17, 2013.
As you know, on April 6, we tiled \-our complaint against Hkie Sky Ski Resort. In the complaint, we
claini that the resort was negligent for tailing to post a sign warning skiers ol the ice hazard \’ou
encountered, i b pro\'e a claim for negligence, one o f t h e requirements we iiuist establish is that
the resort had a dLit\' to warn skiers of the ice ha/ard.
On April 20, the resort filed a motion with the coiu t asking that the court dismiss the case. .A m o
tion is a request submitted to the court asking the coLirt to take some form of action, 'llie court
usualh' holds a hearing on a motion. .At the hearing, the parties present their position on whether
the request should be granted.
On May 17, 201 3, the court will conduct a hearing on the resort’s motion to dismiss. At that hear
ing, we anticipate the resort will claini that under the pro\ isions ol the Ski Safety Act, it does not
have a duty to warn skiers ot ice hazards. Ihe resort will argue that ice hazards are the responsibil
it)' ol skiers under the act, and therelore, it cannot be sued lor negligence, because it had no duty
lo warn ol tlie ice liazaid.
In support of its argument that it does not ha\ e a dut)' to warn of ice hazards, the re.sort will rely on
section <SB ofthe act. Ihis .section states that skiers are responsible for injuries that result from snow
and ice conditions. Our position is that the resort does have a duty to warn of this type ot hazard
under .section 7A of the act. lhat section provides that resorts have a duty to warn skiers of unusual
conditions or hazards on ski runs.
It is unclear from the statute which section ofthe act applies in a situation such as yours. Ihe state
court o f appeals, in the case ot A s t e r v. W h i te Moiiiiiiiiii R esort, interpreted the act in a fact situ
ation similar to yours, in this case, a skier, while skiing on a new ski run, hit a rock covered by
snow. ’Ihe court stated that resorts have a duty to warn of snow conditions if they are unavoidable
and present an unobvious or latent hazard.
At the motion hearing, we will argue that the resort’s motion to dismiss should be denied because
the ice condition you encountered was unavoidable and latent, jList as the snow condition was in
A s t e r V . W h i t e M o u n t a i n R esort. We will further argue that the rule of law stated in that case pro
vides that resorts have a duty to warn of hazards such as the one you encountered, iherefore, the
resort can be sued for its negligence in tailing to post a warning of the ice hazard.
Ihe resort will probably argue that the ruling ofthe court of appeals in K a re n v. H igh M o u n t a i n Pass
should apply. In that case, a skier broke his leg after failing to negotiate a series ot moguls that were
present in the middle of a turn on a ski run. Ihe court stated that skiers are responsible for snow and
ice hazards, and moguls, even though unavoidable, are snow hazards easily observable and routinely
present on most ski runs. We believe the court will not apply the ruling in the K a re n ca.se because that
ca.se involved a snow hazard that was obser\ able and routinely' encountered by skiers. In your case,
578 the ice hazard was unobservable, unavoidable, and not routinelv encountered bv skiers.
C H A P T E R 19 C OR R E S P O N D E N C E
ii: LonL'iusion, \vc arc optimistic that the court will rule in our lavor and deny the motitin. The
ice lia/ard \'ou encouiUeretl was uiuutiidahle and latent iust hke the snow condition in A s t e r
W h i t e \ io u } i t i i i i j R eso rt, lliis heini; the case, the court should tollow the ht)lding in that case
aad tind that Blue Sky Ski Rest)rt had a duty to warn skiers oi [h e ha/ard. Vou are not required
le attend the hearing, but you may attend it you wish. Please let us know it you plan to attend,
ii'you h aw any questions please call.
S.ncerely,
P.uii Mayes
Paralegal
P \ H/ wk k
E. E x a m p le — Opinion Letter
The example in this section is based o n the following fact situation. On lanuary 6, 2013, the cli
ent, David Duggan, appeared for an initial interview at the law offices of Alice Black. Pam Hayes,
the paralegal, conducted the interview. In the interview, M r. Duggan stated that he was skiing on
December 7, 2012, on an expert ski run at Red .Mountain Ski Resort. He encountered a series of
moguls near the lop o f th e ski run. Ihe moguls weie dilTicult to ski, and he lost control, fell, and
broke his left arm. 'I here was no sign at the top of the run indicating the presence of difficult moguls
on the run. I le believes the resort should lunv posted a sign, well in advance o f the moguls, warn
ing of their presence. I le wants to know if he can sue the resort for its tailure to post a warning.
Alice Black assigned Pam IIa\ es the task ot preparing a rough drati o f a n t>pinion let-
ter to be sent to Mr. Duggan. 'Ihe letter should inform him o f t h e likelihood o f successfully
suing the resort for its failure to post a warning o f t h e presence o f t h e moguls. The governi ng
law is chapter 70 ot the New Washington Ski Satety Act. The go\'erning case is K a r e n r. H i g h
M o u u t i i i n P a ss. 53 X. Wash. 162. S66 N.I-, 9‘-J3 (('t. App. 1994). lhe relevant portions o f t h e
statute and case are introduced at the beginning ot the Application section o f Chapter 18.
The o pi ni on Iciicv is pvcscntcd in mvviit\o..\ b\ov;k ÜMnv\L
l.aw OtYices o f Alice Black

2100 Main Street
I’riendly, Ne w Washington ()()063
(200) 267 7000 . I-AX 267-7001 . www.ablacklaw.corn
lanuary hS, 2013
\Ta Facsimile and U.S. Mail
Mr. David Duggan
530] Cilenview Ave.
Friendly, N W 00065
Re: Possibility of a lawsuit against Red Moimtain Ski Resort for tailure to warn o f mo gul s
Dear Mr. Duggan:
On January 6, 2013, we met in my ottice to discuss the possibility of suing Red Mountain Ski
Resort for the ski injury you suffered on December 7, 2012. This opinion is based on the facts
outlined in the facts section ol'this letter and the applicable la\^' as of the date of the letter. This
lette- is soleh’ tor \'our benetit and limited to the facts discussed below. Please contact me if any of
tbe tacts are misstated t)r if you ha\ e additional information. 579
I AC I S
t)n DcLcniber 7, 2012, \i)ii were skiing on an cxpci l rini at Red Mountain Ski Resort. Near the
top ol the riin, \ ou eiieonntered a series ol moguls. Ihe moguls weie diliieult to ski, and as a re
ûlt, vou lost eontrol and broke \our let't arm. Ihere were no signs posted on the run that warned
skiers ol the upcoming moguls.
ANSVVKR
Based upon the aboxe tacts, \'ou prohabh cannot successlulK sue Red .\loimtain Ski Resort lor
its tailure to warn of the moguls. Ihe onl\- possible theory under wiiich you could sue is negligence.
^'ou would claim that the resort was negligent lor tailing to warn ot the upcoming moguK. I'lider the
applicable state statute and the court opinions interpreting that siatute, the resort does not ha\ e a duty
to warn ot’the presence ot nioguls.
EXPLANATION
Chapter 70 ot’ the New Washington statutes, the Ski Salet\ .Act, goxerns the operation ol ski
resorts and establishes the duties ol skiers and resort operators. Section 7.A ot the act reqLiires re
sorts to warn ot sections ol trails "which present an unusual obstacle or hazard." Section SB ol the
act states that a skier “expressh' assumes the risk and legal responsibility tor any iniur\ to a [lerson
or property which results trom . . . surface or suhsurtace snow or ice conditions. . . ."
Ihe act does not discuss whetlier a mogul is a snow' condition tor w hich the skier is respon
sible. Ihe state court ot appeals, howe\er, in the case ol Ktiivii r. H ig h M o i i n t i i i n Piisi, addressed
the question of w hether a resort has a dut\' lo post a warning ot the presence ot moguls on a ski
run. Ill this case, a skier broke his leg atter tailing to negotiate a series o! moguK that were present
in the middle of a tLirn on a ski run. Ihe court stateil that skiers aie responsible tor snow ami ice
hazards. Ihe court noted that nioguls, e\ en though una\oiilable, are snow hazarils easih obsers
able and routineh present on most ski runs, Ihe court ruled that under the act, resorts h.ive no
duty to warn ol snow hazards such as nioguls.
The lacts in your case are \ er\ similar to the la^ts in Kíiir/i r. H igh M o m i U i i n /'li.vv In \'oiir case,
iust as ill that case, the injurv' occurred as a result ot an encounter w ith moguls. It is apparent Irom
section (S1Í ol the statute, and the court’s interpretation ot that set lion in K¡ii cii r. High M o n u l i i n i
/ ’ii.v', that skiers are responsible lor iniuries sustained as a result ol encountering nioguls on a ski
run. Iheretore, based on the statute and the court opinion in K iiirii r. H igh M oiiiiliiiii I’liss, it is m\'
opinion that it is highh' unlikely that a lawsuit against Red .Mountain Ski Resort lor the injuries
you sustained would be successlul.
I hope this intorniation answers your question. I regret thal I am not able to pro\ iile a more
ta\'orable answer. It you ha\e additional inlormation concerning the accident, or it you ha\e any
other questions, please contact me.
Sincerely,
.Alice Black
■Attorne} at l.aw'
■AI.B/wkk
C. C o m m e n t s on Exam ples
In regard to the pt’eceding examples, note that both letters:
Present tiie subject matter clearh' tiirough the use ol short sentences rather tiiaii
complex sentences, which are often more ditiicuit to lollow and Linderstaiul.
Present the law in an objective and prolessional manner.
580
C H A P T E R 19 C O R R E S P O N DE N C E
A\'oicl legalese aiul discuss the material in a simple and clear manner. ( Al though
there are relerences to statutes and case law, a siuiimary ot the law is pro\ ided rather
than a technical discussion. Ihe legal points are simply phrased in lay terms.)
In addition, the (»pinion letter cleark states at the outset that the opini on is limited to
the current law and the tacts provided hy the client. Reterence is made to the tact that the
letter is intended soleh' tor the benetit ot the recipient.
Sum m ary
this chapter discusses the preparation ot'legal correspondence, reterred to as letters in the
chapter. Ihe focus is on letters lhat commun i cat e the results of legal research and anaK sis.
Letters are one oi the primary torms (.>t written commun i cat io n directed to an audience o u t
side the law otiice.
Ihere are several I’undamental c om po n e n t s o i all types o f legal correspondence. 'Ihere
is no standard tormat; the content and st\ie ot presentation ot these c om po ne nt s \ ary ac
cordi ng lt> per.sonal and local preference. Section II o f this chapter discusses the lundamental
c o m p o n e n t s ot all legal ctu'respondence.
l etters that include the results ot legal research and anah sis tall into three basic categories
based upon the purpose o f t h e communicat ion:
1. To p n n i d e information — inft)rmation letters

2. l o proN'ide an o p i ni o n - - o p i n i o n letters
3. to d ema nd a c t i o n - demand letters
these three types o f letters ditfer primarily in the content o f t h e body.

Ihe body o f an information letter presents an obiective summary o f t h e research and
anaK sis without tbe inclusion an\' legal o pini on or adv ice. Ihe body of an (>pinion letter, in
addition to a sunimar\ ot the law, usualK' provitles an ob)ecti\’e assessment ot tbe application
o f t h e law to the tacts and olten re comme n ds a course of action. Because it includes a legal
o p m i o n OI' legal ad\ ice, an opini on letter ci)iistilutes the practice ol law and must be signed
b\' an attorne}'.
A d e ma n d letter is designed to persuade the reader to act in a manner that benetits
tbe client, tor example, to pay a debt. Like an opi ni on letter, a demand letter is signed by an
attorney. Ihe body o f a dema nd letter is similar to tbe body ol'an opinion letter. Iho major
ditierence is that the law and anaK sis are dratted in a persuasive manner.
Because the recipient o f legal correspondence is an individual outsitle tbe law otiice, tbe
correspondence arfects the image and reputation o f t h e law tirm. Lor this reason, and because
legal liabilitx' attaches to s ome correspondence, it is ot paramount importance that \'ou dralt
an accurate and professional product.
Quick R e f e r e n c e s
Address block 363 Initials o f drafter 36cS
Bod\- 366 Letterhead 364
Closing 367 Me t hod o f delivery 363
De ma n d letter 373 Opiniiin letter 371
Lnclosure notation 368 Reterence line ( Re) 366
I leader 363 Rec]uests/instructions 367
intormat ion letter 370 Salutation 366

581
In te r n e t R e so u r ce s
I'sing ''legal Ldrrospoiuiencc" as a topic, \’ou will find a wide range ol W’eb sites (thousands)
that leier to legal coi'iespondence, Ihe lollowing is a sinnniary ot the categories ot sites that
ma\ pi'ox e helpful when working on legal correspondence.
Sites pro\ iding legal correspondence in specitic cases, such as correspondence of the
.Association ot Trial Lawyers regarding a specitic subiect. (Through such sites, s'cni
nia\’ \ ie\\ the examples ot legal correspondence in specitic areas.)
Sites advertising businesses that prepare or assist in the preparation o f correspondence.
School sites ad\ertising programs that include preparation ot correspondence as part
ot the curriculum.
Sites adv ertising legal torms and templates for legal correspondence.
Sites containing iob announcements tor iobs that require the preparation ot legal
correspondence.
Sites advertising texts that cover the preparation ot legal correspondence.
.As with most topics on the VVeb, the problem is not the lack ot sites but too manv' sites.
Y(ui can avoid some ot the trustration o f finding too manv' sites bv’ narrowing your search
to a topic, such as “preparing legal opinion correspondence” or "legal correspondence, child
custo(.l\ cases.”
Exercises
A i l i li l io i i ii l iis>igni)ic}ih lire in 'iiihihlc o u llic (A nir< cM itlc. H. Draft an t)pinion letter advising the det endant
whe ther there is sufficient evi d e nc e to support
ASSIGNMENTI
charges of possession.
Desci'ibe the three tvpes ol correspondence tliscussed in
this I.hapter anil the pin poses ot eai.h t\ pe. ASSIGNMENTS
lhe client, Mrs. latum, purchased a new microwave oven
ASSIGNMENT2
from Inki Appliances (¡ompanv'. No written or oral warrant)'
Desc ri be h o w the three tvjies ol c o rr e sp o n d e n c e are
was given wiien the sale was made, lhe microwave stopped
different.
working one week after Mrs. Tatum took it home. She returned
ASSIGNMENTS the microwave three da)'s after it quit working. 'Ihe owner of
Inki Appliances refused to repair or replace the microwave or
Reter to the assignment introduced at the b egi nni ng ot
give Mrs. 'fatum her money back. Prepare a demand letter to
(Tiapter 16 and the law relevant to that assignment pre
be sent to Inki Appliances. 'Ilie letter is to be signed by v'oiir
sented in the .Application section ofthat chapter. 'Ihe law
supervising attorney, Alice Black. Use the letterhead presented
firm represents .Mrs. I indo. Draft an opinion letter i nf or m
in the Application section of this chapter. Mr. Terry Spear is
ing her whether she can testily against her husband in light
the president and owner of Inki Appliances Company, and the
o f t h e applicable Illinois statutorv- and case law.
address is 1001 Maple Drive, Friendly, N W 00063.
ASSIGNMENT 4
Statutory Law; Section 50-102-314 of the New W'ashington
Refer to the assignment introduced at the b egi nni ng of
statutes provides that ‘‘a warranty that the goo ds shall be
Cdiapter 17 and the relevant law included in the Applica
merchantable is implied . . . if the seller is a merchant with
tion section ot that chapter, '^'ou work tor a law firm that
respect to the goods of that kind.” Mr. Spear is a merchant.
represents the defendant.
Mrs. I'atum did not misuse the microwave or in any other
A. Dralt an inlormation letter informing the defendant wa)- cause it to quit working.
of what constitutes an arrest in the state o f N e w
Washingt on and how the law has been interpreted Case Law': 'Ihe case oi-i point is S i ii i lh i; A p p l i a n c e C i t y ,
to appIv in search warrant situations. 36 N. Wash. 162, 868 N.F.. 997 (1993). In S m i t i i , the N e w
Washington supreme court ruled that the seller has three NW, ()()()(i3. '1 heie is no statutor}’ law go\ ’erning an insur
options when an implied warranty is breached: retiu n the ance compan\' s tlut}’ to deteiul its insured. Ihe rele\aiit
purchase price to the buyer, repair the merchandise, or le case law Iollows.
place the merchandise.
CCase La^^’: W r l c k l c s i'. W 'd s l i in ^ to n liis. (.'o .,(il N. Wash. 104
ASSIGNMENT 6 ((Ct. App. 2008). Where it is d e t e r m in e d that th e in s u r e r
Reter to Assignment (S in (Chapter 17. Piepare an informa has u n ju s t ilia b ly failed to defend against clainis against
tion letter to Mr. (Canter informing him ol the results ot its in s u r e d , the iiis L ir e r is lia b le fo r a n v jL id g n ie n t entered
\'()ur research in regard to armed bank robberx'. a tia in st its insured. In a d d it io n , th e in s u r e r nia\’ b e lia b le
f o r a n y re a s o n a b le s e t tle m e n t e n te re d in to b } the in s u r e d .
ASSIGNMENT? S t d l c I 'i ir n i I n s . ( a i. r. P e t e r s o n , 5 b N. W a sh . 38
Refer to Assignment 5 in (Chapter 17. Draft an opinion letter (1993). Ihe obligation lo delend arises oLi t ol and must be
to Mrs. Di.xon i nforming her of the results ot \'<nn’ research found in the insuring agreemenl promising to deleiul the
and the likelihood that the holographic will submitted by insured against liabilit}’.
Mar\- (Car\- will be eligible tor probate. M i s o n I’. I . i n c o l n In s. C.o., (il) N. Wash. (i77 ((Ct. .App.
2000). Ihe (.lut}’ to defend is triggered when an injured
ASSIGNMENTS
part\ 's complaint against the insured slates lacts that bi iiig
Reter to Assignment 9 in (Chapter 17. Prepare a demand let
the case within the c o\ er ag e o f t h e polic}’.
ter to Ms. (Chave/. informing her o f t h e law concerning the
j d i n i s o n r. I .i n c o l n Ins. (.'()., 38 N. Wash. 430 (1998).
unilateral reduction ol child support when a child reaches
.An insurance conipaii}’ ma}’ reluse to delend its insLired
the age o f majorit}-. Include in the letter a d e mand that she
oiiK’ when the allegations in the complaint are c o m p l e t e h ’
resume paving the lull child support ordered b\ the court.
outside the insurance polic} cinerage.
ASSIGNMENTS W i l s o ' i r. W 'd s l i in ^ ^ t o n In s. ( a \ , 39 N. Wash . 980
Ihe client, Mr. Davit! Ke\s, would like to know what state (1999). II the allegations in ihe complaint against the in-
law pro\'ides concerning the remo\ al ot a director trom the sLired ma}’ tall w ithin the c o\ er a ge ol the polic}’ bill are
board of directors of a coiporation. Prepare an inlormation poteiitiall}’ e.vcluded b} ain nonc o\ erage pros ision in the
letter to Mr. Ke}s su mm a r i / i n g the ret|uirenients ol the polic\ , then the insurer is under a dut}’ to delend the i n
renuu'al statute. Draft the lettei' for the signatiu'e of }’our sured in the priniar\’ action. Ihe diit\’ c ont i nues until a
supervisorx' attorney, .Alice black. L se the letteiiiead pre court hav ing iui isdiction (u ei the case finds that the insLirer
seated in the .Application section ol this t hapter Mr, Ke\ s's is relie\ ed ol the liabilit\’ under the nonc(n’erage pr(n'isions
aildress is 761 South \'ine Street, Sumniiale, N W ()()()(i6. ot the policN.
ASSIGNMENT 12
Statute: N e w Wasliington Statutes Annotated ^ 7 7 - 1 1-22.
In this assi gnment, dralt the letter lor the signature ol
Remo\ al o f directors: .At a meeting ol shareholders calleil
the supei'N’ising attorne}’, Alice Black. Lse the letterhead
expressi}- for that purpose, tiirectors ma}’ be removeil in
presented in the Application section o f this chapter.
the manner pro\ ided in this section. Any director or the
Mr. Sanders’s address is 930 North H a r dw o od (C o L irt ,
entire board o f directors may be removed, with or without
l-'riendh’, N W 00063.
cause, b}’ a vote o f t h e holders o f a majority (if the shaies
then entitled to \ o t e at an election ol directors.
A s s i gn me nt .Memo: W'e represent Washington Ins. (Co.
ASSIGNMENT 10 Ihe} paid a claim by their insured in the amoLint ot
S2I,233.00. Ihe claim arose out o f an automobi le c o l
Perform Assignment 9 using }'our state law. Make Lip local
lision belween the insured, Deborah Anderson, and
addresses for the law tirm and client.
Mr. Karl Sanders. Mr. Sanders ran a stop sign, and his \’e-
ASSIGNMENT 11 hicle collided with the insured resulting in the tlaniage.
Dratt an information letter to the client, Mr. Daniel Hope, W'ashington Ins. has written to Mr. Sanders requesting that
Vice President, National Insurance (Compan}’. In the let he either p n n i d e proof o f insurance at tlie time ot the acci^
ter, summari ze the state law concerning National’s diit}’ to dent or that he pa}’ the claim in full. 1le has not responded.
defend persons it insures under its automobile insLirance Prepare a draft ot a d emand letter to Mr. Karl S a n d
policies. Dralf the letter tor the signature o f }’our super\ is- ers demand i ng that he pay the S 2 1,233.00 or contact me
ing attorney, Alice Black. L'se the letterhead presented in to see if w e can reach an agreement for pa}’nient ot the
the Application section o f thi s chaptei’. National Insurance debt. Inform him that this is an attempt to collect a debt.
(Company’s address is 439 Twenty Second Sti'eet, I'riendly, Also inform h i m ihat if he does not contact us w ithin
f 33 da\ s ol the d.itc ol the letter, I will assunie that he does
not dispute the debt and I will pursue all legal remedies
Statutory Law: Section 45 6 124 of’ the New Washington
I inancial Responsibilit} Act allows a judgment creditor
a\'ailable under the law. Inlorm him that a lawsuit will be to take action to suspend a «.lebtor's diixer's license and
liled in the district eoiu’t lor the full amount of’ the debt \ ehicle registiation foi' nonpa} nient of’an\-iudgment aris
pkis interest, and I will request an\ fees and costs I may ing from a motor \ciiicle accident.
incur in pursuit ot the litigation.
In addition, inform him that piu'suant to New Wa s h ASSIGNM ENT 13
ington law, once a jLidgment is obtained I can take action to Reler to Assignment 16 in C4iapter 17 Prepare a demand
ha\ e his dri\ er’s license and v ehicle registratii>n suspended letter to Capital Insurance Compaii}’ informing the compan\’
under the provisions ol the l inancial Responsibilit}' Act, ot the law regarding the counting of time in exclusionary
N W SA « 45-6-124. clauses. Include a demand that the compaii} pa} the claini.
tools, including flash cards, quizzes, and more. To learn more aboutthis resource and access
CourseMate free demo CourseMate resources, goto www.cengagebrain.com, and search forthis book.
To a cc e s s CourseMate materialsthatyou have purchased, goto login.cengagebraln.com.
Court Opinions Referred
to in the Text
IN TRO DU CTIO N
The court opini ons in this appendix arc presented in alphabetical order rather than in the
order in which they are reterred to in the text. To save space, portions o f s ome cases that are
not relevant to specific assignments or the discussion presented in the text have been omitted.
A series o f three asterisks indicates that a portion o f t h e opinion has been omitted.
Stephen C^raig HlÂM and I.ori A. beam, Defendant appeals. He claims (1) that the court erred in en
husband and wife. Respondents, tering judgment for plaintiff because an implied warranty
ol fitness tor a particular purpose could not arise under the
facts of this case and (2) that the court erred in assessing
lohn C. Cl'lT l. r i. Appellant. damages at S7,t)00.‘
ORS 72.3130 provides for an implied warranty o f fitness:
No. 77- 1732; CA 13733.
‘A\'here the seller at the time of contracting has reason to
C'ourt of Appeals o f Oregon. know an\' particular purptise for which the goods are re
Argvicd and SubmiUcd \\w\c IS, \9SU. quired and that the buyer is relying, on the seller's skill or
iudgment to select or furnish suitable goods, there is u n
Decided Sept, 2, 1980. less excluded or modified under ORS 72.3160 an implied
Rect>nsideration Denied Oct. 7, 1980 warranty that the goods shall be fit for such purpose.”
48 Or. App. 4 7 , 6 1 3 K2d 1 196 (1980) An implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose
arises then when two conditions are met: (1) the buyer relies
lOST.PIi, Presiding ]udge. on the seller’s skill and judgment to select t)r furnish suitable
goods: and (2) the seller at the time of contracting has reason
Plaiiititf brought this action ft^r traud and breach of an to know of the buyers purpose and that the buyer is relying
implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose. Plaintitf on his skill and judgnient. C.ontroltck, Ific. i*. K w i k c c E n t e r
was in the business of hauling scrap automobile bodies tnim prises, Inc.. 284 Or. 123, 585 P.2d 670 (1978); WiHey Iro n a n d
southern C)regon to a steel plant in McMinnville. He bought Steel V . T/iorm, 278 Or. 103, 562 P.2d 1212 (1977).
a Î969 Ford Diesel truck from defendant to haul the scrap Ihe trial court found that defendant was advised that plain-
auto bivdies. 'Ihe truck had been used by defendant for ap titi intended to use the truck to haul scrap auto bodies. There
proximately two and one-half years until the engine “blew up.” was evidence to support that finding. No finding was made
Defendant had the engine rebuilt by a diesel engine mechanic. as lo whether plaintiff-buyer relied on the defendant-seiler’s
Plaintiii purchased the truck with the rebuilt engine tor S1(),0()0; skill and judgment to select the truck or that defendant bad
there were no written warranties. After the truck was used for a
brief period of time, the engine lost a rod bearing and the intake
manifold was broken. Ihis action tollowed.
1. l h e first assignment of error was preserved by defendant's
The trial court, sitting without a jury, ibund in fa\-or of de motion for non-suit and motion for reconsideration. We need not
fendant t)n the fraud claim; a judgment was entered against reach the second assignment of error in ligfit of our determination
defendant tor breach o fan implied warranty of fitness for a ofthe warranty issue.
particular purpose. Plaintiff was awarded damages of $7,000.
585
reason lo know ot any rcliaiice. Iho CN idcnce was lhal plain Ihe existence o f a wai’ianlv of titness for a particular pur
lili, w ho riin.s a iunk yard, learned ol detendaiil’s truck being pose depends in pail on the con’i paratixe knowledge ,\nd
loi' sale from one o f his employees. Plaintifl had had so m e skills ol the (’>arties. B lo ik h c iid , Inc. r. I'liiitic I'o rn iin g C o n i-
experience wilh Irucks, including driving, although usualh’ ptiiiv. Inc.. 102 1. Supp. 1 0 1 7 , 1 0 2 4 (1). Conn. 1 9 7 3 ) ; W d lcy
nol diesel Irucks. He inspecled the truck and d r o\’e il t('r a Iron a n d SiccI v. U iorni, su p r a . Iheie can be im justifiable
short distance. He was told by detendant thal the e ng in e had reliance b\’ a liLiyei’ w ho has eqLial or supei ioi’ know letlge ,uk1
been rebuilt and was gi\eii the name o f the m echanic w h o did skill wilh respect lo the product pLn'chased by hiii’i. While
the work. Hetendant leases trucks, but does nol drive iheii’i. and Suniniers, l'nitorm C!onin’iercial ( j i d e 2 9 S , ^ 9 - 9 { 19'2);
li e operates a well-drilliiig business and ow n s drilling rigs, \'allcv Iron a t u i SiccI r. Iliorin, sup ra.
fie does not h a \e any parlicular expertise co n cernin g diesel Ii’i the instant case, both parties had limited k now ledge o f
Irucks. diesel Irucks. .Absent es idence lhat plaintifl iustiliably relied
ihere was no e\id e n ce lhal plaintiff relied oii defendant's on defendant's iudgm ent in selecting the truck to t'ulfill his
iudgi’i ient in selecting the truck he purchased. Oelei’idant hauling needs, there was no implied warrant}’ ol litness ti>r a
I’liereh answered plaintilf s inquiries concerning the niechanic's particular purpose.
work on the engiiie. W’hile the needs o f plaintiff'were know n
lo detendant, there was no showing thal detendant olfered lo Resersed.
tLiltill those needs, lhal plaintiff ii’i tact relied on defendant’s
iudgment or that detendant had reason lo know’ o f plaintitfs
reliance, il anv
Kme 1'. BRI I' I'ON, Pelilioner-Appellee, Respondent should have been allowed an otfset against the
arrearage judgment; (4) whether laches bars ain reco\er\’
of the accrued child support insiallmenls; and (3) whether
H.R. HRI I I'ON, lêspondenl-Appellant. Petitioner should ha\e been awarded attornes s lees lor her
presentation at the district court level. W'e allirii’i on all issues
N'o. 14377.
except the second.
Supreme Clourl of New’ Mexico.
(X’l. 17, 1983. IA d S

Ihe parlies were mariied on September 1, 1932. four
100 X.M. 424, 671 P.2d I 133 (1983)
children issued trom the marriage, all requiiing specialized
O l ’INION care and treatmei’it tiue to \ar\ ing degrees ol developmental
disabilil\’. B\ 1964 both the \ouiigesl and oldest chikI had
SOSA, Senior lustiee.
been made wartls ol the state and con’i niitted lo Los Lunas
Irainiiig School. Ihese two children remained under the
Petitioner-Appellee, lune l^ritlon (Petitioner) filed a peti direct care and control of the Los Lunas lacilit\' al all limes
tion in the Bernalillo CoLinh' District Court lo reduce ac relevant to this case. Ihe oldest child attained majorit}’ on
crued and uiipaid child support arrearages to iudgii’i enl. Ihe lune 27, 1971, the }’oungest on |aiuiar\ 28, 1977.
district court concluded thal the divorce decree niandaling Ihe parties were dj\’orced b}' tinal decree entered Ma}’ 26,
child support was enforceable and lhal no statute of limita 1970 b}’ ludge I’Alwin Sw’ope ol the Bernalillo Count}’ District
tions period bars action on the arrearages. It did nol allow Court. On lune 28, 1971 a different iudge entered an aii’i ended
M.R. i^rilton. Respondent, any otfset. Ihe court issued an final decree w hich added the phrase “per month’’ after the one
order selling arrearages and a final iudgment in the aii’iounl of hundred dollar child support figure in the (’iriginal tinal decree.
S7,900.00 without interest and did not award attorney’s fees. Ihe amendnienl was done c.\ parlc. Respondeni ne\er n’i o\ed
Respondent appeals froni the district court’s deterniinalion the district court tor a niodification of the lernis of either
awarding arrearages. PetilK’i ner cross-appeals on the tailure ol decree.
the district court lo award her altorne\'’s fees. One of the twin children remained intermittently inider
Ihe q u e s t i o n s presented here are (1) whether t h e aniended Petitioner’s direct care trom the time ol the dixorce until the
tinal divorce decree was unambiguous and therefore enforce chilli was translerreil to a group home in .Albuquerque in
able; (2) whether accrued and u n p a i d child SLipport install lanuar} 1976. Ihe other twin remained under the direct care
ments are deemed final judgments, thereby rendering action ot'Petitioner through December 1972. Since that time he has
on t h e m subject to a staUite o f liii’i i t a l i o i ’is p e r i o d ; (3) w h e t h e r \’oluntaril\’ li\'etl with Resiiondent.
ASSERTFD AMBK.UITY the seventv-nine months that elapsed between the entry of
the original .Ma\ 26, 1970 di\'orce decree and january 28,
Respondent initially conlonds that the original final de
1977, the date that the youngest child reached maiority.
Live oi' Ma\- 26, 1970 was ambiguous and should not ha\'o
Respondent's central contention is that Petitioner’s action
heen amended c x p a rte . Ihe t)iiginai tinal deeree in relewinl
to collect accrued arrearages at this late date is barred by the
part awarded custody ot all tour children [o Petitioner and
statute of limitations. He maintains that o\ er ele\-en and one-
also awarded her "one hundred dollars (SlOO)” in child sup
hall'\ears had passed between Ma\ 1970 entr\' of the origi
port. Iho sole change made by the judge in the amended final
nal final decree and Petitioner's December 1981 petition.
decree was the addition ot'the phrase “per month” after the
Respondent primarily maintains that the seven year statute
one hundred dollar child support figure.
of limitations applicable to judgments in effect in December
Ihe omission t>f the phrase “per month” was clearly a cleri
1981 (formerh compiled as NMS.A 1978, Section 37-1-2)
cal mistake apparent on the face ofthe record. On Petitit)ner's
should apph' and bar an\' claim for arrearages thal accrued
timeh- motion this mistake was proper!}' corrected without
seven years prior to the date Petitioner filed her petition.
resort to extrinsic evidence pursuant to Rule 60(a) ot the New
Respondent's argument thus presents the questii')ii of
Mexico Rules of C'i\ il Procedure NMSA 1933, Sectitin 21-1-
whether accrued and impaid perit>dic child support install
l(6()){a) (Repl. \bl. 4, 1970), presentlv compiled as NMSA 1978,
ments mandated in a New Mexico di\'orce decree are consid
C'i\’.P.R. 60(a) (Repl. Pamp. 1980). Tclcphonic. inc. r. M o n t g o m e r y
ered tinal judgments in New Mexico on the date they become
Plaza Co., 87 N.M. 407, 334 P.2d 11 19 (Ct. App. 1973); .sec D e
due. Ihis appears lo be a case of first impression as the par
Baea v. Sais. 44 N.M. 103, 99 I^.2d 106 (1940).
ties have nol cited, and our research has not revealed, any
Ihis simple amendment ob\'iousl\' did not purport to
New Mexico authority directly on point.
clear up an\' ambiguil\' that Respondent alleges existed re
I h e applicabilitv of an\' statute o \ limitations period will
garding the exact amount of child support thal was to apply
depend o n the characleri/ati(Mi of mt>nthly child support
to each minor child. Respondent asserts that he should ha\e
installments as they become due. Both ('.orliss r. ( ’orZ/ss,
been afforded an t)pptirtunit\’ tt) present [parol] e\ idence
89 N.M. 233, 349 P.2d 1070 (1976), and S L u ie v. S la d e. 81
prior to modification so that the suppi'rt terms ccnild ha\e
N.M. 462, 468 P.2d 627 (1970), involved the characteri/a
been modified to apph \o the twins o n l y and \o reilect the
tion and entorcement ot monthh' child support prt)\'isions
tact that anotherchikl had attained maiority. In New Mexico,
incorptirated in foreig n divorce decrees. In S la d e this (A)urt
the dut\' o f a parent to support a child continues until the
considered whether the New Mexict) statute of limitations
child reaches the age ot maiority. NMSA 1978, 28-61
applicable i o judgments applied to bar recoverv' of accrued
and 28-6-6 (Repl- Paiiip. 1983); l^lielps r. Phelps, 83 N.M. 62,
child supiôrt arrearages under a Kansas divorce decree.
309 P.2d 234 (1973); Coes Pstate. 36 N.M. 378, 247 P.2d 162
Looking to Kansas law to determine the nature of a child
(1932). Ihe well estabhshed general rule is that an undi\ ided
supptirf awaid, \\e concluded that the child support awar».!
support award directed at more than one child is presumed
was a judgment in installments. We further concluded that
to continue in force lt)r the full amttunl until the youngest
fhe seven vear New Mexico statute of limitations then ai'*pli
child reaches majorit)'. Annot., 2 A.L.R.3d 396 (1963). W'e
cable to judgments (formerh’ compiled as NMSA 1933, Sec
see no compelling reason to depart from this view.
tion 23 1-2 (Su[‘>p. 1969)) applied and began tt) run on each
Respondents proper remedy, if indeed he though |sic| the
monthlv installment on the date it became duo and unpaid.
I'lnal decree ambiguous and/or unjust, would ha\'e been to seek
Accordingly, all uncollected installments that accrued more
prospective modification of tiie decree on the basis of changed
than seven years pritM' to the initiation t>f the action lo collect
circumstances. We note as to the alleged ambiguity that Respon
the arrearages were deemed subject to the sever, \-ear statute
dent at no time petitioned the district court for an\' modification
(^f limitations applicable to judgments generalh'.
of either decree. Respondent, having failed to timely petition for
In considering the entorceabilitv' of a Missouri divorce
possible relief from this asserted ambiguity, cannot now seize
decree, this (!ourt in C'.orUss looked to Missouri law to d e
upon the mere e \ p a r te correction of a clerical error and expand
termine whether child support awarded by the decree was
this into an inquiry regarding his interpretation (.)t his obliga
subject to retroactive modification. Ihis Ctuirl concluded
tions under the final decree. We concluded that the decrees were
that since Missouri courts had nt> poxser to mv>difv’ or forgive
nol ambiguous in their terms, and thus were enforceable.
accrued child support arrearages under a Missouri decree,
New Mexico (Courts could not do so.
STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS Both S la d e and i'.orliss lend support to a characterization of
A hearing was held on Petitioner's December 13, 1981 each monthlv installment as a final judgment. In both cases,
moti(Mi to reduce accrued child support arrearages to judg once the installment had become due, the amount payable
ment. Petitioner was awarded a judgment of S7,900.00. Ihe was essentially deemed liquidated and, as with final judg
district court found thal Respondent had not made any of the ments, not subject to retroactive modification, ('o rliss in par
monthh' child support pa\nients required by the amended ticular ctincluded that child support arrearages would not be
final decree. Ihe S7,90().00 figure was based on the calculation modified once accrued. Although this conclusion arose out of
that the mt)nthly payments should ha\e been made during an application of Misst)uri law to a Missouri decree, the same
(continues)
1. haractci i/alion has olnaiiK'd n'âixlnig New Mcxico docrecs. installments individualh subiect ti' a limitations perioc ap
In d o i i h ' : r. (ku/ii’c, '■>2 N.M. .'iO, 387 l’.2d 963 (1978), pears to be the maiorit\’ rule in the United States. Annot.,
o v c i'n ilc it otl o lh c i ^r o iiiu ls , M o t i l o n i i'. .\iotilovtt, 93 N..M. 7(1 A.I,.R.2d 1230 (1960); ef. 27B c:.|.S. D iv ore e ^ 236 (l'-)39)
189, 619 l’2d I2,v| (1980), this (!ouit consideicd wlicthoi' (outlining the analogoLis majority rule that as to judgirents
wcL’kh child suppoit installment paMiicnts mandated in lor alinmny in installments, the pertinent statute ot linita-
a \ c w .Mcxico dccrcc weic moditiablc oncc accrucd. Iho tions begins to run on each installment as it falls due).
then controlling N'ew .Mexico statute, X.MS.A 1933, Section Since the installment obligations were clearly embodied
22 T b{C.) (Supp. 1473) was compared with the substantialh' in a final decree, they were a product of a precise jucicial
identical .Missouri statute construed in ( a v U s í . Ihis (ÔLirt determination of Respondents obligations, lhe authiirity is
held that, as with accrued .Missouri installments, past due extensive and well-established that each monthly child sup
child support pa\ments mandated in a N'ew .Mexico di\'orce port installment mandated in the final decree was a final
decree were ileemed not subiect to retroactixe modilication. iudgment, not subject to retroactive modification.
Neither the reasonin ;4 nor the holding ot (¡otiicz bear out 1laving determined that each installment was a final judg
Petitioner's assertion that appK ing a statute ol limitations to ment, we turn to the question of which statute of limitations
bar recincrx ol support installments is inconsistent with the period should apph’. We note at the outset that there is no
proposition that sLich installments cannot be modified. Ret special statute of limitations specified under child support
roactive iiKKlilication ol chikl support awards is an issue dis or the enforcement provisions, respectiveh’, of NMS.A 1978,
tinct Irom the issue concerning the applicability of a statute Section 40 4-7 or 40-4-19 (Repl. Pamp. 1983).
ol limitations period. .Application ol a statute ol limitations In (.AH’S ¡-state, 36 N.M. 378, 247 R2d 162, the ex wife
merel\- bars the remeiKon a stale claim without determining sought a judgment for arrearages pursuant to a divorce decree
the uiulerlying \alidit\ o f that claim or modil\ ing it in an\- mandating undi\ided child support for the minor children
way. S e e Dtivn^ r. S u v u g c , 30 N..M. 30, l68 P.2d 831 (1946). under her custodx'. 'Ihis Côurt lirst held that the chikl sup
Ihe lact|s| ol ( l o i i i c : presented the question ol retroactise port order was a judgment in monthly installments granted
modification ol chikl support pa\nients. It did not address onh' during the minority of the children, thereby precluding
the issue ol a statute ol limitations period as it would apph’ an\’ accrual of liability after the \-oungest child reached m a
to the i.ollection ol ai.\rueil chikl support installments. .As jority. lhe next holding applied the general jLidgment stat
sLich, the holiling is not determinative ol the instant statute ute of limitations then obtaining under ft)rmer NMS.A 1941,
ol limitations question, I iiithermoie, (io ii i c z cites ( a i i Il'II r. Section 27 102 to bar reco\er\' since the claim was tiled more
( .¡tllclt. 112 P.2d 9 12 ( ( )kla. 196(i) lor the crucial proposition than seven \ears after the youngest child reached majority.
that ai.crueil iliild support arrearages cannot he modified. Similarly, in S la d e this ('ourt considered the applicability
While passing iudgment on this iiuestion, the ( iith'tt court of a statute ol limitations period to an action on a Kansas
also considered the appluabilit\' ol the Oklahoma statute ol decree mandating periodic child support pa\ments. Ha\ing
limitations to a tollei.Iion aition loi ileliiiqLient chikl support concluded, as we do here, that the mandated installments
pa\nients. In this regaii.1 t he i our t slated: were judgments, we there applied the se\en year iLulgment
statute ol limitations under former NMSA 1933, Section
Ihis ap[\iiently is a new i]uestion lor the Oklahoma ci)urt
23 I -2 (Supp. 1969). S l a d e and ( '.oe's ¡ ’i t a t e together provide
but the rule appears to be well settled that where a di\'orce
clear authorit)' for our application of the judgment statute
decree pro\ ii.les for the pa\ment ol alimon\' or support in
of limitation. In addition, \irtually all of the oLit-of'-state
installments the right to enloixe payment accrues on each
decisions we ha\e cited regarding construction of accrued
payment as it matures and the stalute ol limitations begins to
installments as judgments have applied their statute which
run on each installment from the time fixed for its pa\ nient.
limits executions on judgments. CAirbett r. CA nbctt, 116 Ari/.
111. at 946. lhe ( i l l i c i t court thus properh \ iewed the apph 330, 369 P.2d 292 and ¡h'liee I'roeb, 13 Ariz. App. 306, 488
cation o f a statute ol limitations period as being compatible l’.2d 662 (both applying the general five-year Arizona statute
with its conclusion that accrued child support obligations of limitations applicable to execution on judgments); ¡-¡aiiek
were not modifiable. V. Seltitek, 143 (ôlo. 324, 333 P.2d 79 (applying twenty-year
•Aside Irom Oklahoma, numerous other iurisdictions c o n limitations period pertaining to execution on judgments
sider child support installments fmal judgments and hold rendered in ('olorado); T u r i n s k y i'. T iirinsky, 339 S.W.2d 1 14
that a statute ol limitations begins to run on each installment (applying general ten-year Texas statute limiting execution
as it becomes due. See 24 ,Am.lur2d I h v o r c c a n d S e p a r a t i o n on judgments); S e eley i; lârk, 332 P.2d 684 (eight-year stat
i 863 (1966). In a number ol decisions this construction has ute of limitations pertaining to actions on judgments applies
barred collection of'chikl sLipport installments accruing b e to suit for collection of accrued child support arrearages).
yond the rele\ant limitations period. .See, e.g.. ( 'o v b e t l v. C.or- ■|he judgment statute here strikes a reasonable balance
h e tl, 1 16 .Ari/, ,i3l), 369 l’ 2d 292 (.App. 1977); Britee r. F iv e h , between the competing interests ot enforcing the support
13 .Ari/,. ,App. 306, 488 l’,2d 662 (1971); I la iie k r. Seliiiek, ing parent’s right to periodic payments on the one hand and
143 Colo. 324, 333 P.2d “9 ( I960); I'u rinsk y i; I 'u r iiiik y , 339 protecting the obligor parent from stale claims on the other.
S.W.2d li t (lex. Ci\. ,App. 1962); Seeley i; Park, 332 R2d lhe determination that accrued child support install
684 (L’tah 1973). liuleed, reiulering accrued child support ments are final judgments of record results in the application
ol the longest possible stalute ot limitations pei iod .ivaihible A lather who is required to make periodic pa}’ments tor
to a collection action b\' the supporting parent. .Application ot the support ol niinor children has an opportunit} to re
the catchall tour \ear limitations statute ol NMS.A 1978 Sec lie\e himsell ot that liabilit}’ b}' a petition to modit} the
tion .^7 1-4 would prin-ide tor an inoidinately short period in decree in jiiliiro but he cannot ren’iain silent while the
which a custodial parent could assert the child support claini. installments accrue and then claim credit lor his \olun-
'Ihis would be clearh’ inimical to the best interests ot the tar}’ acts. In \ iew ol the mandator\ requirements ot the
child, would place an undue burden on the custodial parent, di\’orcc decree as to pa\’ments ol the ii’ionthl}’ support in
and niight encourage dilator}’ tactics on the part lit obligoi’ stallments to appellaiit, although il is to appellee’s credit
parents intent on avoiding their child support duties. that he cared for his [child], he was a \olunteer and is not
Accordingl}’, we hold that the ¡udgnient statute ot limita thereb} reliexed Iroii’i the obligations ol the decree.
tions that was in etlect at the time Petitioner tiled her Deceni-
Id. at 319, 478 P.2d at 134. Ihe district court in the instant
ber 15, 1981 petition applies. Ihis was the se\en \’ear statute
case properh’ disallowed an} and all ot Respondent’s otfset
coditied at NMSA 1978, Section 37-1 2 (Orig, Pamp.). We
clainis.
note, howe\’er, that the judginent statute has since been
amended and now provides I’or a fourteen }ear limitations
period. NMSA 1978, § 37-1-2 (Cum. Supp. 1983). LACHES
AppK’ing the rele\ant se\en }ear iudgment statute ol Respondent next maintains that he has been preiudiced b\’
the lacts of the instant case, we conclude that Petitioner is Petitioner's dela\ in pursuing her action and that laches should
barred Irom rec(’) \ering the installment arrearages that ac theretore bar aiU’ claim lor arrearages not barred b} the statute
crued more thaii seven }’ears prior to her December 15, 1981 of limitations. We lind this contention without ii’ierit.
petition. Ihe trial court was incorrect in awarding iudgment Ihere is sulficient e\ idence to support the ilistrict court's
based on a sevent}’-nine month arrearage period. Ihe o n h ’ determination that Respondent would not be undiih preju
installments w hich Petitioner ma}' properh’ collect are those diced b}’ the judgment tor arrearages. Ihe staiularil review
tailing due between December 13. 1971, the last pa}n’i ent on .ippeal is w hether substantial e\ idence reasonabh’ sup
not barred b}’ the judgment statute, and lanuar}’ 28, 1977, ports the factual determinations ol the trial court, lo ll e e hi
the date that the }oungest child attained majorit} a period l e i n a l io n u l . hie. r, \'illage of l\uulo.<o, 93 82, M 9 P.2d
ot twent\'-tive months. Ihe trial court should luue awarded 186 ( 1980). Resolving all disputes and reasonable interences
iudgment to Petitioner in the amoLiiit ot S2,3()0.0(). in tav’or ot the successlul part}’ below and relusing to reweigh
the e\ ’idence, we conclude that the trial court proper!} deter-
ii’i ined that laches does not apph ii’i this case.
OFFSET
Respondent also asserts that he is entitled to an otlset
against an}’ arrearages not barred b}’ the statute ol liniita
AirOUNlY’S 1 r i’S
tions. Ihis otfset claim is haseii in large part on the lact that Petitioner conteiiils that she shouki he awardctl attorne} 's
Respondent has ii'iade substantial i-xpenditures connected lees related to the instant appeal, and lor her presentation at
with the care and support ofthe son that has been li\ing with the district court le\el. the district court in its final order ot
him since December 1972. While it is entireU commendable August 30, 1982 dill not incluile an award ot attorne} s tees at
that Respondent \'oluntaril\' imdertook the responsibilities the le\’cl as Petitioner had requesteil hut noteil that all lindings
associated with the direct care and treatment ol his son, we and awanls not specilicalh’ inckided were denied. Ihis shoulil
nevertheless caniK't agree that Respondent’s actions merit an properh he interpreted as a iinding against Petitioner on the at
offset under the circumstances ol this case. tornev's lees issue. See M i i y n n r d r. Wesler}! lia n k , 99 N.M. 133,
As we ha\e pre\'iousK' Lonchided, the amended final decree 634 P.2d 1033 ( 1982). W'e ha\’e carefulh’ re\ iewed the record and
clearlv set forth Respondent's cliild support obligatii'ins and conclude that substantial e\ idence supports the district court’s
W’a s fully enforceable at all time|s| rele\aiit herein. Respon denial of attorne}’s tees. Toltec hite niiitioiial, hie. W h i g e ol
dent, as the obligor parent, cannot b}' his actions unilateralh’ R iiidoio , 93 N.M. 82, 619 P.2d 186; C a v e r. Cm c, 81 N.M. 797,
alter the support obligations set forth in. the decree. .As we stated 474 P.2d 480 ( 1970). I'urtheriiii'ire, we conclude that Petitioner
in our discussion concerning the asserted an'ibiguit}' ol the de does not merit attoriun’s tees for lier instant cross appeal.
cree, Respondent properh' should have petitioned to modif} Ihe trial court is affirmed on all issues except that regard
the child support terms of the decree in light of this asserted ing the applicalion ol a statute ot lin’i itations period to an
change in circun’istances. Mollification ol support obligations action on unpaid child support installments. Ihe cause is
is strictlv a matter to be determined b\’ the courts. Not having reii’ianded to the district court lor turther proceedings c o n
pursued this a\enue. Respondent camiot now claim an offset sistent w ith this opinion.
for his self-imposed expenditures, substantial though the}’ ii’i a\’
r r IS s o ORDF.RhD.
have been. See Baiires v. Biiiirci, 13 ,Ari/. .App. 313, 478 P.2d 130
(1970) and authorities cited therein. .As stated in Ihiurci: R I ORDAN and S I'OWFRS, ||., c o n c u r
Dw o nn a ( .aylc (i\\altiic\ CCARDW'lil l , AppL'llaiit, as to luture pa\inents; but, all nio(.lilications operate pro-
specti\el). K n i l l i ' i i ( a u i i I i i c v ( \ 9 T \ ) . 148 Ind. .App. 338,
266 \ . 1C.2d 72; U a y ciiift r. l ii i y c i a tl ( 1978), Ind. .App. 176

Kenneth W'a\ iie (iW’Al.TXlA', Appellee. Ind. App. 21 1|, 373 N.fC.2d 232.
\ i ) . 87A()l-9()l)2-(;V-S0.
hilin r. /((//;; (1979), 179 Ind. .App. 368, 383 N.IC.2d 488, 490.
(Cdui 'I ol .Appeals ol Indiana, I'iisl Disiriet. See also ()'.\V;7 r. O ' S c i l (1988), Ind. App., 317 N.I-C.2d 433
(iransler granted on other grounds).
lulv 17, 1990.
.AdtlitionalK', l.(C. 31-2-1 1-12 pro\ ides:
3.S6 \ . i : . 2 d 933 (Ind. Ct. App. 1990)
Modilication i)l delinquent support pa) iiient.
()BI;RI SC)\, ludtê.
(a) H x c ep t as p r o v i d e d in s u b s e c t i o n ( b ), a <.oiirt n u i y n o t
n ' t i v i h t i w l r iiio d ify an obligor's diit)’ to p a \’ a d e li n
Ihe sole Issue raised in this appeal is whether an indi\'id- quent support pa\ nient.
ual should he absoK ed Irom paying child support because of
(b) A court with jurisdiction over a support order m a\'
his incarceration.
m odif) an o b l i g o r ’s d u t ) ' t o p a\- a s u p p o r t pavment
i h e underhing niaterial lacts show that the appellant
that b e c o m e s due:
(Cardwell and the appellee Clwalliie\' were di\'orced with
(iwaltney ordeied to pa\' child support. About a \ear and (1) After notice ol a petition to modil\ the sLipport
one-hall latei', (Iwaltney tiled a petition to modih' the sup order has been gi\’en to each obligee; and
port order haseti upon the reason that he IkkI spent a \ear in
(2) Belore a final order concerning the petition lor
lail. (iwaltney sought to be absoKeii Iroin the suppoi l which
motlification is entereil, (ICmphasis added.)
had accrued during that \ear and to have future sLipport re
duced. (Cardwell and (iwaltiiey reached an agreement that, ■Although t h e I n d i a n a (Child SL ip p or t ( l u i d e l i n e s , e l f e c t i \ e
among other things, e.\cused (Iwaltney trom pa\ ing support O ctober 1, 1989, w e r e n o t o l h c i a l l ) ' in u s e at t h e t i m e o f t h e
tor the \ear he was imprisoned. Ihe trial court approved the trial c o u r t ' s d e c i s i o n m t h i s a p p e a l , w e a r e ol t h e o p i n i o n t h a t
agreement; however, that agreement was challenged when a part o f t h e c o m m e n t a r \ to In d. (Child SLipport (iLiideliiie 2
the counlN prosecuting attorne) appeared in the matter and takes into co n sid e ra tio n e x i s t i n g s tatLites a n d case law as
sought lo set asiiie the agreement because (Cardwell had been h e r e t o f o r e cite(.l. i h a t p a r t o f t h e c o n n i i e n t a r \ ' r e a t l s :
a recipient ol .AflXC lunds thiough the State and had as-

l \ e n in s i t u a t i o n s w h e r e t h e n o n custinlial parent has no
signetl her support rights. Ihe Inal c(uirt relused to set aside
i n c o m e , ( Courts h a \ e r o u t i n e h e s t a h li sh ei .1 a c h i l d s L i p p o r t
the earher agreements with this appeal resulting.
obligation at som e m inm iLim level. .An obligor cannot
f.ven though the trial iudge was prompted b\' e(.]uitable
h e h e l d in c o n t e m p t for taik ire to pa) sLipport w h e n he
concerns when (Iwaltne) was excused Irom pa\ing sup
d o e s n o t h a v e t h e m e a n s t o pa \ - , b i i t t h e o b l i g a t i o n a c c r L i e s
port|,j the law is th.il ,m\ motlilicalii'n ol a support order
a n d s e r v e s a s a r e i m l n i r s e m e n t t o t h e c u s t o d i a l p a r e n t , or,
must act prospecli\el):
m o r e l i k e K ’, t o t h e w e l f a r e d e p a r t m e n t il h e l a t e r a c q u i r e s
In liicilroii r. I l ic d i v n (1938), 128 Ind. .App. 299, 148 th e abilitv to m e e t his o b lig a t i o n .
X.lC.2(.i 209, the .Appellate (Court of Indiana said, "in this

W'e conckide that the trial court erred in retroactively
state after support installments have accrued, the court
excusing (lwaltne\'s s L i p p o r t obligation l o r the time he was
is without power to reduce, annul or vacate such orders
incarcerated.
retrospecti\eK, and therelore, the court committed error
(Cause reversed and remanded for further action not in
in attempting to do so.” ((Citations omitted). Iherelore,
consistent with this opinion.
pa)-ments must be made in the mamier, amount, and at
the times required by the support order embodied in the Reversed and remanded.
dix’orce decree until such order is modified or set aside.
RA'I'I.II'K (C.|., and CON'OA’HR. |., concur.
Slitlc r. Slith' (1964), 243 Ind. 168, 197 N.IC.2d 174, Indiana
does permit cancellation or modilication of support orders
COMMOWVKALT'H o f Pennsylvania
“A. I toid him we were police officers, we had a warrant.”
"Q. How much time elapsed between the time you said
Adam D e M K ’HFU., Appellant. that and when you broke in the door, approximately?"
“A. Approximately ten or fifteen seconds.”
Supreme ( a h u ‘1 o f Pennsylvania.
Upon cross-examination by appellant s counsel. Hall re
April 22, 1971.
stated his version ot the entry into the house but did not reaf
Rehearing Denied 21, 1971. firm that he p e r s o n a l l y gave any warnings to the occupants.'
At the conclusion o f the hearing, appellant's counsel ar
442 Pa. 553, 277 A. 2d 159 (1971)
gued that the affidavit supporting the issuance o f t h e search
OPINION OFTIIKCOUR'r warrant was defective and that the police’s method of entry
into appellant’s home was illegal. The hearing judge was un-
ROBHRTS, lustice.
persuaded and the motion for suppression denied.-
Appellant thereafter waived a jury, and his case proceeded
Upon the basis of various lottery paraphernalia seized
to trial on May 16, 1968, before a difi'erent judge o f the Phila
pursuant to a search warrant and introduced into e\ idence at
delphia Court of Common Pleas. During the Cônimonwealth's
trial, appellant Adam DeMichel was con\'icted of setting up
case in chief new and different evidence came to light concern
and maintaining an illegal lottery and sentenced to imdergo
ing the execution ot the search warrant. Corporal 1lall again d e
niipristinment for three to twelve months and to pay a fme of
scribed the events surrounding the police’s entry into appellant’s
fi\e luuKlred dollars plus costs. In this appeal from the iudg
hiuise but tailed to mention that he had given any warnings to
ment ol sentence, appellant asserts that the e\ idence that led
the occupants, and Officer Oe de n, the policeman who actually
to his c(Miviction was the fruit ot an illegally executed search
knocked on appellant's door, gave the following testiniony:
warrant. Upon reviewing the record we must agree.
Appellant was arrested on lanuary 14, 1967, during a p o “Q. Now, sir, would yt)u relate to the Court specifically in
lice search of his home at 707 Sears Street in Philadelphia. detail what occurred from the time you arri\'ed at these
Also present at the time were appellant's wile and daughter. premises until the time entry was made?”
Upon initial entry intt) the house, the police observed appel
“A. W'eil, I guess we arrived around 12:40 p.m., I walked
lant at a kitchen sink attempting t(i destro\- rice papei', and in
west on Sears Street, at 7th Street, 1went up and knocked
the course of the ensuing search thev found and seized other
on the door. A lew seconds, the blind was lifted up, and
sheets o f rice paper containing se\ cral thousand lottery bets,
I annmmced that we were police The b l i n d s dropped,
other blank sheets oi rice paper, lists ol names, addmg ma
and we proceeded to knock the door down.”
chine tape, and other lottery para[ihernalia.
Prior to trial appellant lileil a timelv motion to suppress W'ithin what period o f time, sir?”
these items, and an e\'identiar)' hearing was held on March 4, “A. I rom the time that the blinds were dropped?”
1968. i rom testimon\' elicited at that hearing it appeared “Q. Ves, sir.”
that f ne police olticers armed with a search warrant arrived
“A. Ten, five, I don’t know how many seconds.”
al the tront ot appellant's two-stor\' row house at 12:40 p.m.
on January 14, 1967. All were dressed in plain clothes, and “Q. Seconds, sir?"
one ot their number. Officer Daniel O e d e n , approached the
Iront door alone carrying a cardboard box in an attempt to
create the false impression ol'a deliveryman.
(^)rporal I’rank Hall, another member of the raiding
1, Instead, Hall used the pronoun "we":
party, testified as follows concerning the execution of the
search warrant; Q. "And would you describe specifically, sir, the manner in
“(). Did * [appellant] admit you to the premises?” which you attempted to gain entrance to these premises?"
A. "We knocked on the door, and after hearing sound coming
“A. No. W'e had tt> gain entrance."
from mside the house w e announced ourselves as police
“Q- How'^” officers and that we had a warrant * *
“A. W'e broke the door down.'
277 A.2d 11.
“Q. W’ith ov without prior \sarning?"
Q. "What did you do?"
“A. With."
A, "We announced ourselves as police officers and we had
a search warrant
■‘Q. What type ol warning did \'ou gi\'e to the occupants of 2. The question of the sufficiency of the affidavit is not pressed
the house bekire breaking in the door?" on this appeal.
(iOtitinue>)
f “A. WVII, .IS s c H in .IS the blinds dropped, I callcd the tellow trial lhat its ev idence was constitutionallv obtained, the trial
otiieer who had the sledge haiiiiiier and knocked the judge must e.xclude evalence piev iouslv held admissible at
door down." the suppression hearing when the deleiulant prov es b} a pre
“Q. just to make the record perfectly clear, when \-ou first ponderance ol nevv ev idence at trial that the ev idence sought
knocked, you did not say an\ thing al all, did you?" to be introduced b}' the Conimonwealth was obtained b}' un
constitutional means.
".\. N'o. I just knocked.”
.Although we thus disagree with the Superior (A)iut. we
"Q. .And then, according to your leslinioin, someone lifted believe that the trial iudge in the instant case erred in grant
up the blinds?" ing appellant’s motion in arrest of judgment upon the basis of'
“.A. '»'es, sir." a finding that the police officers executing the search warrant
('ould \’ou tell whether lhat was male or female, sir?" did not priiperl} announce their purpose before entei'ing
appellant’s house. Officer (4'eden testified unequiv'ocallv' at
''.A. 1 couldn’t tell. I believe there were curtains behind the
trial that he had made no announcement of'purpose, but he
blinds. 1 couldn’t see who it was."
did not state that his fellow oliicers were similarK mute or
“Q. then the blinds dropped, sir, is that correct?" contradict Corporal Hall's suppression hearing testimoii}’
".A. I hat is correct." that Hall had made such an announcement ol piirpose. lhat
'Q. .And then you made an announcement lhal \<>u were being so, the record at trial in no wa}' proves the absence ot a
police officers, is that correct, sir?" proper police announcement of'purpose.
Oespite the loregoing, we are nevertheless persLiaded
“A. N'o, it is not. While the blinds were up, I said, ‘Open up,
tor other reasons that the search ol appellant’s h('>me was
il is the police.’"
illegally executed. It is settled in this ( 'ommonwealth that
"Q. A m i th a t is ¡¡¡I y o u said, siri'" the lourth .Amendment prohibition against unreasonable
".A. V c (l-mphasis added.) searches and sei/ures demands that betore a police ollicer
enters upon private premises to conduct a search or to make
Appellant was adjudged guilt}', but the trial judge granted
an arrest he must, absent exigent circumstances, give notice
his post trial motioii in arrest of ¡udgment on the ground
ol his identit} and announce his purpose, ( ^ o m m o n n v a l t h r.
that the ev idence at trial dei'i'ionstrated that the otiicei' who
X e w n u m , 429 Pa. 441, 240 A.2d 793 (1968); L ’n i t e d States ex
e.xecuted the search warrant had iiot announced their pur
rel. M aiiiliiehi r. Traev, 330 l-.2d 638 (3l1 ( är), eert. ilenieil,
pose betore resorting to forcible entr}.
382 U.S. 943, 86 S. Ct. 390, 13 1.. I d. 2d 333 (1963); i 'n i t e d
States e.\ rel. .\n ie tra iu ' v. (¡able. 276 I-. Supp. 333 (1.1). Pa.
Ihe Superior ('ourt, reasoning that a trial judge has no 1967). Ihe purpose ot this announcement rule is t hat .........
power to oxerrLile the decisioii of a suppressioi'i hearing the dignitv aiul privacv protected bv' the l-ourth .Amendment
juilge, reversed the onier grai'itii'ig arrest ol judgi'iient and demand a certain propriet}' on the part ol policemen even
renianded the case for sentencing, 214 Fa. Super ,^92, 2,^7 alter thev' have been authorized to invade an indiv idual's pri
.\.2d 60iS. l ollowing the in'iposition of sentence, appellant vacv'. Regardless ol how great the probable cause to believ e a
again appealed to the Superior ('oiu't. lhat court atfirnied man guilty ot a crime, h e n iust be g iv e n a re a so n a b le o p i u v
the iudgment of seiitenee, 2t(-) Pa. Super 804, 2(i3 .A.2d 4(S0, l u n i t v to su r re iu le r his p r i v a e v v o h a ih n i l v ." L'n ited Stiites e.\
and we granted allocatur rel. A m e t r a n e r. (iiihle, supra, 276 P. Sup(i. at 339 (eii'iphasis
Preliniinaril}' we note our disagreement with the Superior
('ourt’s apparent categorical holding that a trial judge is pow'-
erless to o\errule the decision ol a suppression hearing iudge. 3. At the time ot appellant's trial, the method of pretrial litiga
While “|w|e impliedh' held in C.oifiDuntwcalili i'. W'arfu'ld, tion of the legality of searches and seizures was governed by Pa.
4 1 8 I’a. 3 0 1 , 21 1 A.2d 4 3 2 ( 1 9 6 3 ) that the trial iudge cannot
R. Crim. P. 2001,19 RS. Appendix, which did not expressly speak
to the question [of] whether a trial judge could overrule the deci
reverse ou the s a m e re e o id at trial the decision made alter
sion of the suppression hearing judge. Rule 2001 was superseded
the pretrial suppression hearing C o m i i io u w e i il t h r.
by a 1969 amendment to Pa, R. Cnm, P 323, which consolidated
W a sh in g to n , 4 2 8 Pa. 131, 133 n. 2, 236 A.2d 772, 773 n. 2
and made uniform the procedures relating to pretrial suppres
(196cS) (emphasis added), the same does not hold true w hen sion of any evidence alleged to have been obtained in violation
the trial judge’s ditKerent ruling is based upon new and dil' of a defendant's constitutional rights. Even this new consolidated
ferent evidence. When information comes to light after the rule recognized that there are some circumstances in which the
suppression hearing clearK' demonstrating that the ev idence trial judge should be free to exclude evidence previously held
sought to be introduced by the Cômmonwealth is constitu- admissible.
tionall}' tainted, no considertion |sic] of iustice or interest ot "If the [suppression hearing] court determines that the
soinid judicial administration would be furthered b\' prohib evidence is admissible, such determination shall be final,
iting the trial judge from ruling it inadmissible. .Although conclusive and binding at trial, e x c e p t upon a sh o w in g ol
a lax'orable ruling at the suppression hearing relieves the e vidence which w a s theretofore unavailable. * * *"
( Aimmonwealth of the burden of prov ing a second time at Pa. R. Cnm. P. 323(j) (emphasis added).
added). Accordingh', c \ en whore tlie police duly announced " Ihe lact that some loltery paraphernalia is oasiK' do-
their identit\’ and pui'poso, lorcihle entr\' in still unreason sinned does nol iustily the suspension ol the Lourth
able and hence violative ol’the lourth Amendment ii the o c Aniendmenl in all lolter\ prt)soculit)ns. One o f th e prices
cupants ol the promises sought to be entered and searched we have to pa\' lor the security which the Lourth Aniond-
are not iu'st gi\en an opportiuiit}’ to surrender the promises mont bestows upon us is the risk that an occasitmal guilty
voluntarily. See l ' n i t e d StiUe< e x rel. M iu id iie fii r. T m e y , 330 part\' will escape.”
l'.2d at 662.
429 Pa. al 448, 240 .A.2d at 798 (citation oniiltod). To excuse
Ilie Comnionwoahh appears to concede this proptisition
the police's tailure lo announce their purpose and proseiice
of constitutional law but argues that the occupants of appel
and thereafter to allow a reasonable time for the \'olunlary
lant’s house were in fact gi\en an adequate opportunity to
surrender of the promises, t he re......... must be more than the
open the door \'oluntarily. (Corporal Mall and Oflicor (!roden
presumption that the o\ idonce w o u l d be destroyed because it
tostifiod that they and the other olficers began to break down
e o u ld be easily done.” S t a te r. M e i i d o z u , 104 Ariz. 393, 399,
the tiont door ol appellant's house ri\e to fitteen soct>nds al
434 !'.2d 140, 144 (1969).
ter announcing their presence and purpose. W’e cannot deem
Ihe testimony thal appellant was found standing by a
this a reasonable suiliciont period o f time. In Se w D id Ji, supra,
kitchen sink attempting to dostro\' rice paper is wilhoul
ftir example, thi> C'ourt stated that "a mere twenty second
significance.
delay in answering the door cannot constitute support lor a
belief that evidence was being destroyed * ' 429 Pa. at 44S, "It goes without saying that in determining the lawluL
240 A.2d at 798. And in A ine triiiie, supra, the L'nited States ness ot onlr\' and the existence ol probable cause wo ma\’
District CôLU't for the L’astorn District t>f Ponns\i\ ania noted concern oursoKos t>nl\' with whal the oliicers had rea
that ''[e|von if ' " '|the occupant] had known the ollicors to son lo belie\'e at th e lif)¡e of ih e ir eiitrv. lohn<oii i ’n ite ii
be policemen, he might have had ctnnitless legitimate reasons S tates. 333 C.S. 10, 17, 68 S. Cl. 367, 370-371, 92 !.. Ld.
for taking a minule to answer the door.” 276 i-. Supp. al 339. 436 (1948). .As the iSupreme] (]ourt said in l ' n i t e d State.<
In both of the abo\o cases the occupants were known by V. l)t Re. 332 C.S. 381, 393, 68 S. Ct. 222, 229, 92 L. Ld.
the police to be on the second lloor whereas here C o r p o 210 (1948). "a search is not lo be made legal b\' what it
ral Hall and Oliicer ('reden testified that they saw someone turns up. In law it is good o r b a d when it starts and does
peering at them through the blinds ol a lii'st story window not change characloi' from whal is dug up subsequently.
located \'ory near the li'ont dt)or. Ciiven the close proximits' o\ (Lmphasis added.)”
this [>erson to the l I oot , we are urged to conclude that a more
K e r V. C a l i f o n u a . 374 U.S. 23, 40 n. 12, 83 S. Cl. 1623, 1633 n.
li\'o to filtoen s o c o u l I (,lola\ was reasonable. But o\on in those
12, 10 1 . l-d. 2d 726 (1963).
circumstances this might be entirely imK>cent "for countless
W'e hold that torcible entry in the circumstances ot this
legititVuito reasons” Appellant’s wife, lor example, testified
case violated the standards ol tlie Lourth Amendment and
thal it was she who peoied through the window and that her
that the fiuils of llie ensuing search were improperh' admit
delay in rosptmding was occ<isioned by her being attired in a
ted at appellant’s trial. .Accordingly, the order o f the Superior
nightgown and ha\ ing to go to the kitchen to put on a robe.
('ourl is re\ersed. Ihe judgment of sentence is vacated and
Regardless ot the truth ol hoi' teslimon\-. it ser\-os to illustrate
the case renianded lor a new trial.
that a live to iiftoon secoiui dela\- was insulLicient lor the p o
IM’l.L, (7 ]., did not participate in the consideralit>n or de
lice to ha\o lormed a reasonable beliel that the occupants ot
cisión ol this case.
appellant's house did not intend to permit peaceable entry.
Linaliw we are not persuaded thal this case presents
(X)H L’N, ]., did not participate in the decision ot this case.
"exigent circimistancos'' suspending the ordinary require
ment that the occupants of promises sought to be searched
be gi\’en a reasonable i)pporlunit\' to open the door \'otun- P(')MLR(^V. tiled a dissenting opinion, in which
lariK. 'Iho police oliicers in\'ol\ed were seeking to execute K')N1-S, I., joins.
a warrant authori/ing thoni to enter, search lor and soi/o
lottery paraphernalia, and frt>ni their prior experience with
L..AÍÍLN, ]., concurs in the lesull.
this t\'pe o f mission they reasonabU belio\ed that some of
the paraphernalia would bo in the torm ot almost instan-
taneoush' destructible rice paper, flowover, as we stated in POMLROY, lustice (dissenting).
X ew n a in :
COMMOXW' l Al l 11 (;ommonwealth opposed the motion on numerous grounds,
not the least of which was the fact that the \ ictims had been
receixing threatening mail and telephone calls, lhe judge
john I. Sill A. denied the recjuest and the defendant claims error.
“|A| motion tor ci>ntinuance . . . lies within the sound dis
No. 93- 1> l()(-.6.
cretion of the judge, whose action will not be disturbed un
.Appc.ils Cmirt of .Nkissacluisotts, Pkiiiouth. less there is a patent abuse of that discretion, which is to
be determined in the circumstances of each case." C o in -
Argued Sept. 12, 1994. Decided Ian. 3, 1993.
n io n w c i i lt h r, B c t t c n c o u r t , 361 Mass. 313, 317-318, 281
1'i.n tliei' Appellate Re\ ie\\ Denied l eh. 28, 1993. N.H.2d 220 (1972). W’e relate the circumstances of the
denial ot the delendants motion.
38 .Mass. App. Ct. 7, 64 1 X.i:.2d 244 (1993)
.An affida\ it and a letter from a psychiatrist, dated .March 17,
I’ l i R R I - . l TA, l u s l i . e . 1992, were attached to the motion k>r a continuance. Il appears
from these documents that the defendant’s medical history
indicated that he had suffered a series of head injuries from
On the atlernoon ot lune 13, 1991, the iletendant and
which he might have sustained brain trauma and that, accord
his triend in\ ited two women who were sun bathing on the
ing to the psN'chiatrist, the “charges now pending against him
banks ot the Charles Ri\er to board the delendant s boat and
may retlect behavior caused by those head injuries.” .As turther
go loi' a riile. Once the women were aboard, the detendant
staled by the psychiatrist: “for a more conclusi\ e answer to the
heatlei.1 out to the open sea. ,\n lunn' later aiul about ti\e
question ofthe effect ot Mr Shea’s head traLimas to his alleged
miles otlshoie Irom boston, he stopped the boat, disrobed,
criminal acts, il would be necessary tor him to undergo inde
anti made sexual remaiks anti athances towaixl the women,
pendent extensi\ e neuropsychological testing and, in addition,
lie ignored all reijiiesis that he diess ami stop his oliensi\e
ha\e a BI;AM study ofthe electrical acti\ity of his brain.”
beha\ ior. W'hen lhe women demanded that he return them
As of .April 14, 1992, lhe date of the hearing on the m o
to Boston, he threw them overboard and ilrox e away without
tion tor a continuance, the BHAM stud\ had been completed
a backward glance, lhe women were rescued after managing
and the results reported to the psychiatrist. A copy ofthe re
to sw im within shouting tlisiance ol a sailboat. On e\ idence
port which had been submitted to the psychiatrist was also
01 these acts, a iur\ lound the (.lelendant guilty, as to each
attacheil lo the motion, lhe report recited the following con
woman, ol kkln.ipping, attempted munler, .issault and bat
clusion ot the BI'AM stud\': “Overall this study is qiiite c o m
ter\' by means ol a tlangerous weapon (the ocean), and in
patible with a history of multiple head injuries and suggests
decent assaull and ballcry. lhe detendaiU argues on appeal
a generalized encephalopathy with irritable qualities tailing
lhal the trial jiiLlge erroneously denied (I ) his request lor a
just short of being a seizure disorder, the latter iliagnosis, of
continuance ol the Inal; (2) his motion m limine b\- which
course, should be made on clinical grounds.”
he sought to preclude the ( Aimmonwealth's use ol ,i \ ideo
It was not until the psychiatrist was called to testify at trial
tape showing lhe ocean trom the perspecti\e ot the women
that the defendant’s theory of defense t(H)k on a clarit\-; on
in the water and the detendant on his boat; aiul (3) his mo-
the afternoon of lune 13, 1991, he was experiencing a tempo
tiiin lor requiretl findings ot not guilty on all the indictments.
ral lobe seizure which prevented him from formulating the
.Although we conclude that the occan is not a dangerous
specitic intent necessary for criminal liabilit)- for his actions.
weapon within the meaning of (I.I., c. 2(i3, 13,A, we atfirm
.At the lime ot the hearing on the motion, however, the trial
the kidnapping and attempted murder coin iclions.
iudge was intormed only that a continuance of two months
1. I h c iiiotio}! for ll coiitiiiiu iihc. frial counsel was ap
was necessary so that in addition to the ps)’chiatrist, vari
pointed to represent the detendant on August 29, 1991.
ous other named medical professionals could also re\ iew the
On l ebruary 21, 1992, he tiled a motion seeking tunds for
results of the BH.AM study and conduct psychoneurologi
a psNchiatric e\aluation ol the detendant. lhe molion was
cal testing o f th e defendant. Even were we to conclude that
allowed that same da\, and the case was continued to .April
an adequate case for granting the motion had been niacie at
2 1, 1992, "lor trial.” One week before the scheduled trial date,
that time, hut see C A vn n io n w e a lth r. B c t t c n c o u r t , 361 Mass. at
counsel souiiht a continuance ol at least two months, lhe
317*318, 281 N.K.2d 220, the defendant has failed to show
that his defense was prejudiced by the denial of his request.
.Although the defendant argues that the denial ot the
1, The defendant was also found guilty on two counts of inde continuance prevented psychoneurological testing which
cent assault and battery. Because he assented to those convictions would ha\e allowed the psychiatrist to opine whether, at the
being placed on file, ttiey are not before us. See Commonwealth y. time in question, the defendant was experiencing a tempo
Delgado. 367 Mass, 432, 438, 326 N,E,2d 716 (1975),
ral lohe seizure, the ps)’chiatrist’s testimony does not sup
2, Appellate counsel was not trial counsel. port the claim, lhe psychiatrist testihed on \'oir dire that
had additional ps\'choneiirological tcsliiv^hcen avaiial’ilc, lie in the circumstances o\ the events oi june 13, 1S)9I." See
coukl ho more “definitive" or "eonclusixe'' in his opinion con- generalK' l.iacos. Massaciuisetts l-vidence ^ 1 1.13.2 (bth ed.
eernnig the defendant’s potential tor temporal kibe seizures. 1994) (“Chalks are used to illustrate testimony . . . they are
Ihe psychiatrist nonetheless could, and did, relate to the jury not ev idence in the ordinarv' sense ol the word").
that it was his opinion, to the requisite degree of medical cer ihe detendant complains that the tapes were a preiudicial
tainty, that the detendants “historv, test results, and behavior recreation ot’ the crime, that they were not based u p o n the
is consistent with a temp<.)ral lobe disorder." evidence, and that they vsere inflammatory. We see no abuse
As tor the more immediate question ofWliether the d e of discretion tir other error in the trial judge's decision to al
fendant was experiencing a seizure at the time t)f the inci low the (Commonwealtii to use the videotapes as chalks.
dent, the psychiatrist testified, on voir dire, that he ctiutd not “Whether the conditions were sutiiciently similar to make
sav “with |a| high degree ot certainty that at that moment on the observation [olleied by the demonstration] ot anv' value
that boat, that t\ pe of episode occurred." leather, he coukl in aiding the iur\' [o pass upon the issue submitted to them
state only that “this individual, with his condition, has a high [is| primarilv tt>r the trial iudge to determine as a matter
potential for things like that happening." .-\t no time was the of discretion. |'lhe iudge's] decision in this respect will not
psvchiatrist asked whether psychoneurological testing could be inteifered with unless plainly wrong." ( A V i n n o n w c a h h r.
reveal to a reasonable degree ot'medical certainty whether a C h i p n u i n . 418 Mass. 262, 270-271, 633 NM-.2d 1204 (1994),
person who suifered from tempiiral lobe disorder had in tact quoting from H e l d i'. (u)U'i/v, 199 Mass. 368, 374, 83
experienced a seizure at a specific time in the past. 884 ( 190S). See also Tcrrio r. M c D o n o i t g h , 16 Mass. .-\pp. (.'t.
In sum, the defendant's temporal lobe disorder was fully 163, 173, 430 N’.i:.2d 190 (1983). To the extent the videotapes
presented to the jury. Although the defendant’s expert and do not depict anyt>ne being thrt>wn Irtnii the boat into the
the expert tor the ('ommonwealth agreed that the delendant's ocean, they are not a recreation of the crime. Ihe tapes oth^
HI,AM studv' indicated a temporal lobe abiKirmality, they erwise essentiallv track the victims’ testimonv.
sharply disagreed on the issue ot whether the dctendant’s ac Slate police otlicers fîrle S. Sterling and Leonard ( x''ppen-
tions were consistent or inct)nsistcnl with a temporal lobe grath testilied that at 9:30 a.m. o n April 13, 1992, thev and a
seizure. However, any weaknesses that the jurv might have number oftheir associates boarded a boat and proceeded to
found in the lestimoin- of the defendant's psychiatrist can the point live miles offshore from boston where the vsomen
not, on the record betore us, be attributed to a lack ol ps\ - had been [Hilled Irom the water, ihev' described the weather
choneurological testing and the denial of the continuance. coiulitions that day as well as the height of the waves and the
2. I h c viiicotiipcs. At trial, the ('ommonwealth was al- temperature ol the water, liiev had vitleo cameras and other
k)\ved to use two chalks, that is, videt'tapes, to illustrate to equipment with them. WT.en thev reached their destination,
the jur\' the victims' testimonv concerning the ct>ndition of Sterling aiul another man. who was holding a camera, iumped
the ocean when the detendant thre\\' them intt> the water and t)verboard. Once in the water, the t>ther man held the camera
abaiukined them. Ihe tirst videotape depicted the victims’ about two iiK hes (the eye level ol the victims) above the water,
view from the water as thev watcheti the tlelendanl (.Irive and filmed the boat as it drove oii. Meanwhile, ( Coppengi ath,
away, and the second sliowed how two people in the water who remained on the boat, It)cused a camera on the two men
would appear Irom the vantage point ol the back of the boat in the water as another one ol the men sUiwiy drove awav'.' Al
as it drove away from them. Ihe (Commonwealth argued that ter proceetling about one-hall mile, the men in the water were
the tapes were relevant to the defendant's murderous intent. no longer visible from the boat, (x)ppengrath then panned the
After an in c u n i c m viewing o f th e tapes, the trial iudge ruled “area from where we had come and to where we were lieading
that the videos could he used as chalks. Immediately before and circletl across the skyline ol Boston towards th.e point in
the jurv viewed the tapes, the trial iudge instructed: “ this is I lull which is the closest point ot land to where we were."
not offered for yt)ur consideration as evidence in this case. It Ihere is no }H’rsuasive torce to the defendant's argument
is oHered in the nature of what we reter to as a chalk to the that the ( 'ommonwealth’s use of the videotapes was no
extent that it mav' be of assistance to vou in understanding
the evidence that you have heard in v iew of the similarities, it
any, and it’s tor \'ou to determine if there are anv' similarities
4. Although the victims testified that the defendant sped away
in the boat, that testimony did not require preclusion of the use of
3. The psycfiiatrist fiad reviewed some psychoneurologi the videotapes, see C o m m o n w e a lth y. Chipman, 418 Mass. at 270 -
cal test results which were in the defendant's medical records. 271, 635 N.E.2d 1204 (1994), especially m light of the trial judge's
When asked by defense counsel whether he could be more instructions to the jury prior to the viewing ot the films.
conclusive in his opinion had "more extensive psychoneuro We also think it inconsequential that there was no evidence
logical testing" been done, the psychiatrist responded, "lY]es, to show that the defendant turned to watch the victims as he
everything that enhances helps become more definitive until drove off. The information being illustrated pertained to the wa
ultimately, hopefully, you can become almost conclusive about it. ter conditions and surroundings, which remained the same ir
I'm only saying I can't be conclusive, I can only render an opinion respective of any particular vantage point, and the defendant’s
at this time." awareness of them.
iiontiniics)
mort.' than a disguised inlla)iiiiiator\ appeal to the iurois to who cannot swim Irom a boat into water).'
put theniselves in the plaee ol’ the \ ietiiiis. See, /iir c.Miniplc. In arguing that there was no eviilence ot kidnappings apart
(A nn iiio iiw c iiltli Si’vicri, 21 Mass. .App. Ct. 745, 733-734. Irom the conduct incidental to the attempted nuirders, that is,
490 X .l ’..2d 481 (1986). Ihe Coninioiiwealth was entitled to picking the women up and throwing them into the watei', the
dispel any notion that the delendant's actions were no more delendant ignores the testimonv ot the victims. Both women
than a sunn\-da\' prank gone too tar and that he returned related that alter the defendant disrobed and made sexual
tor the \ ictims but again departed when he saw them being adv ances towards them, thev- demanded that he return them
pulled aboard the sailboat. W'hen the delendant first threw to shore. He relused, continued with his otlensive behavior,
one ol the women into the water, she screamed that she did became angry over their reaction, and then threw them over
not know how to swim, lie then jumped tnerboard, held her board. Moreover, the conduct w hich the jury reasonably could
head under the water, and reboarded the boat for the second lind as the basis for kidnapping, forcing the women to remain
woman. Hetore he threw her into the water, she too told him at sea while the defendant committed an indecent assault and
that she could not swim. Hav ing experienced the trigid tem batterv' upon them (see note one, su p ra), would not necessar-
perature o f t h e water and the height ot the waves and hav ilv' be based on the acts that constituted the attempted mur
ing been told that the v ictims could not swim, the detendant ders. See (Coninioiiwealth Rivera. 397 Mass. 244, 233-234,
drove awav' leav ing the women in great peril. Ihe v ideotapes 490 \.1-C.2d 1160 (1986); ( A n n n io iiw ea lth r. S u n i n e r . 18 Mass.
show what that delendant saw and e.xperienced, and thev' .App, (Ct. 349, 332-333, 463 N.fC.2d 1213 (1984).
were relevant to the issue of whether he "did an act designed 4. I h e d a n g e r o u s w e a p o n , (ieneral Laws c. 263, § 13A,
to result in death with the specific intent that death result." reads, in pertinent part: “Whoever commits assault and bat
C.oniiiioiiw'calth r. B eattie , 409 Mass, 438, 439, 367 N.[-.2d tery upon another by means ol a dangerous weapon shall he
206 (1991). See also (A H iiiuoiiw ealtli r. H e b er t. 373 Mass. 333, punished. . . ." Ihe sole argument made b\’ the defeiulant in
337, 368 N.i;.2d 1204 (1977) (“An attempt to commit a crime respect to the indictiiK'nts charging him with assault aiul bat
necessarily involves an intent to commit that crime").' W’e tery by nu'ans of a dangerous weapon is that the ocean is not
have viewed the videotapes and conclude that the trial judge a dangerous weapon within the meaning ot § f3A.
neither abused his discretion nor committed other error ot W'e need not consider whether the specified weapon, the
law in allowing them to be seen by the iur\'. See ( a v i i i i i o i i - ocean, is dangerous per se or dangerous as used. See ( a i i i i -
n'e a llh v, ( J i i p i n a n . 418 Mass. at 271, 633 N.f!.2d 1204; Terrio in o n w e a lth i'. ¡'arrant. 367 Mass. 11 1,416-417, 326 N.LC.2tl 710
V. M e n o i i o u ^ h . 16 Mass. App. Ct. at 173, 430 N.l-..2d 190. (1973); (A iiiin ioiiw ealth r. A p p le b y. 38(1 Mass. 296, 303, 402
3. A t t e m p t e d i in i r d e r a n d kiibhippiiii^. It is the (.letendant's N.IC.2d 1031 (1980). Although the ocean can be and often is
argument that the (Commonwealth laileil to prove thal dangertuis, it cannot be regarded in its natural state as a weapon
when he threw the women into the water and ilrove awav-, within the lueaning of « 13.A. See (A ti n n i o n w e a l t h i: l-arrell.
he speciticalK intended their tie.ith. faking the ev idence in 322 .Mass, 606, 614 61 3, 78 N,f ,2d (i'->7 (1948), stating thal the
the light most lavorable to the (Commonwealth, we see no term “ilangerous weapon" comprehends “any in stru in eiit or
error in the trial judge's denial ol the delendant's motion tor iiistru iiicn talitv so constructed or so used as to be likely to pro
a requiretl finding ot nol guiltv' on the indictments charg duce death or great bodilv' harm" (emphasis added); ( 'o i n n i o i h
ing him with attempted murder by drowning. Ihere was wciilth r. I'arrant. 367 Mass. at 4 17 n. 6, 326 N.fC.2d 710, noting
ev idence to show that the defeiulant was five miles ollshore with approval the delinition ot dangerous weapon adopted in
with no boats in sight when he threw the women overboard. the Proposed (Criminal (Code ol Massachusetts c. 263, § 3(i):
Ihe water was tlfty-two degrees, and the waves were one to "any firearm or other weapon, ilevice, instrument, material or
two feet high. Because the defendant had jumped into the substance, w h e th e r lu iin ia te or iiiaiiiniate. which in the mat
water to hold one ot the woman Lindei', he knew that it was ter [in] which it is used or is i n te n d e d to be u s e d is capable of
cold aiul choppy. For all he knew, they could not swim. producing death or serious bodilv injurv ” (emphasis added);
Ihis evidence of the defendant's conduct was sullicient to
warrant the reasonable inference that he intended that the
victims drown. See C o n i n io i i w e a l t h r. H e n s o n . 394 Mass.
6. In deciding this issue, we need not, contrary to the defen
384, 391, 476 N.lC.2d 947 (1983) (“[An] intent to kill mav' be
dant's argument, consider the testimony of his friend, that he was
inferred from the defendant's conduct"); ( . o n u n o n w e a l t l i v.
"eventually" able to persuade the defendant to turn back for the
D i.xon, 34 .Mass. ,App. CCt. 633, 636, 614 X.fC.2d 1027 (1993)
women and that with the aid of binoculars they were able to see
(attempted nuirder statute reaches act ot throwing someone the women about three-quarters of a mile away being pulled aboard
a sailboat. See Commonwealth v. Lydon, 413 Mass. 309,312, 597
N.E,2d 36(1992).
5. As the videotapes were illustrative on the issue of the
defendant's intent, we need not consider whether, as the Com 7. This definition tracks that of "deadly weapon" set out in § 210
monwealth argues, they were also helpful to an understanding of of the Model Penal Code (1980), which, as noted m comment 5, was
the victims' state of mind, an issue of questionable relevancy. See "designed to take account of the ingenuity of those who desire to
C o m m o n w e a lth v. Zagranski, 408 Mass, 278, 282-283, 558 N,E.2d hurt their fellows without encompassing every use of an ordinary
933(1990), objectthat could cause death or serious injury,"
('o}}}niofi\\'ca!tli i'. A p p lc h w 380 Mass. at 308, 402 N.1-.2d 1031, harm to someiMie by subjecting them tt> a force ot nature. W'e
ciniclutling that the “i)fiense ot assault and hatter\' by means conclude only that for purposes ol ^ 15A, the ocean, not be
ol a dangerous weapon under (i.l.. c. 263, 13A, requires that ing subject to human control, was not, in the instant case, an
the elements of assault be present . . . that there be a touch- object or instrumentality which could Ite found by the jurv U>
ing, however slight . . . that the touching be by means of lhe be a dangerous weapon. Accordingly, the defendant's niotion
weapon . . . and that the batter\- be accomplished by use of an tor required findings ot not guilty on the indictments charg
inherently dangerous weapon, or b\' use o\ s o n ic o t h e r objcct as ing him with assault and battery by means of a dangerous
a weapon, with the intent to use t h d t ohjcct in a dangerous or weapons should have been allowed.
potentially dangerous fashion" (emphasis added). 5. C o fic lu sio n . It follows from what we have said that the
All the cases collected and cited in the discussion of judgments entered on the indictments charging kidnapping
dangerous weapons, per se and as used, in C . o n in io n w c a lth and attempted murder are affirmed. The judgments entered
V . A p p i c h } \ 380 Mass. at 303-304, 402 \ . H. 2 d 1051, share a on the indictments charging assault and battery by means
common tact that is consistent with the definitions of “dan of a dangerous weapon are reversed, the verdicts are set
gerous weapons" which speak in terms o f "libjects" or “in aside and judgments for the defendant are to enter on those
strumentalities.” The commonality tound in those cases is indictments.'*
that the object in issue, whether dangerous per se or as used,
was an instrumentality which the batterer controlled, either ,S() O R D H R E D .
through possession of or authority over it. for use of it in
8. The Commonwealth has not argued that the defendant
the intentional application of force. Because the ocean in its
should, in any event, be resentenced on the lesser offense of
natural state cannot be possessed or controlled, it is ntit an
assault and battery, presumably for the reason, if no other, that it
object or instrumentalit\' capable t)f use as a weapon tor pur
would make no practical difference. The sentence imposed on the
poses ol ^ 15A. conviction for assault and battery by means of a dangerous weapon
Our conclusion should iitit be construed to mean that was to be served concurrently with that imposed on the attempted
there can never be criminal liability for causing physical murder conviction.
Philip ). CX)OPHR. Administrator Pendente Lite o f t h e 1982 will and two codicils thereto dated August 20, 1984, and
Hstate ot W’.A. Bisson, Deceased, Plamtili-Appellant. August 6, 198.^, respectively, lo probate as and lor the Tast
Will and Testament of Wheelock A. Bisson, M.D. By order
entered November 26, 1985, the probate court admitted the
('harles AUS'ITN, Defendant-Appellant. paper writings to probate as the I,ast Will and restanient oi
Dr. Bisson.
('ourt of Appeals o f Tennessee, Western Section,
On May 20, 1986, Austin tiled a petition in probate court
at lackson. to contest the two codicils,' and, after answer to the petition
1-eb. 18, 1992. by (ireer, tiie probate court certified the contest to circuit
court by order entered August 13, 1986.
.Application lor Permission to .Appeal Denied by No action was taken in circuit court until the adminis
Supreme ('ourt May 26, 1992. trator pendente liie filed a “Complaint tt> Hstablish Will and
837 SAV.2d 606 ( Tenn. Ct. App. 1992) (Codicil” on November 9, 1988. Austin’s answer to the c o m
plaint, in te r alia, denied that either codicil had been properly
CRAWFORD. Iudge. executed hy the decedent or properly witnessed and turther
denied that the codicils had an\- legal validit) or eftect.
'Ihis is a will contest case in\'olving a codicil tt> the I ast

W'ill and Testament of WTieelock A. Bisson, M.D., deceased.
Phillip Cooper, Administrator p c n i i c n t c litc of the estate,
is a nominal party only; the real parties in interest are the 1. The codicil dated August 6,1985, made no property disposition,
proponent ot the codicil, Alois B. Creer, and the contestant, but merely appointed Greer as executrix of the estate. During the
Charles Austin. course of the circuit court trial, the proponent withdrew this codicil
from evidence. Since it is not involved in this appeal we will omit
Dr. Bisson’s will, which is not contested, was executed
further reference to it in this Opinion.
lune 18, 1982. Dr. Bisson died in 1985, and shortly thereafter
(ireer tiled a petition in probate court to admit the lune 18, ( c o n t i nu e s )
(liL'cr a niiniiMi tor siiiiiiiiary ¡Lidgnient in Oclobci', i). Well, Dr. Bisson didn't tell vou vvhat il was, he iust ■.aid
1990, seeking to liaN'c Austin's ease disniissed on tlie groLuuls he needed a paper signed anti notarized. Right?
that it was barred bv T'.CIA. ii 32-4-108 (1986), because it .A. He didn't tell me anv thing. 1 was asked to witness the
was brought more than twi) \ears troni the entrv ot'the or document. 1le told .Ms. 1honias. She notari/eii il, I was
der admitting the will to probate, lhe trial court denied this asked to wiiness it,
niotion.
(). .At the time did vou know what the document was—
On .March 26, 1991, a iur\' trial was held on the issue ol
,A. Xo, sir.
v ii n o n as to the 1984 codicil, lhe 1982 will was in
troduced into e\ idence by stipulation, and (ireer ollered the Q. . . . that )()Li were witnessing? Paidon me?
1984 codicil through the attesting w itnesses. A. Xo, sir.
In his 1982 will, Dr. Bisson left ever\ thing to his wife and (^. .And Dr. Bisson didn't tell )'ou vvhat il was?
it she predeceased him he left the maiorit)' ot' his estate to
.A. Xo, sir,
.Austin, ibis disposition was changed b\' the 1984 codicil
which pnn ides: (^. 'i'ou didn’t ask anv bodv' what it v\as?
•A. Xo, sir.
CODICII. I'O .MY l.AS'l' Wil l. .AXl) 'I'liS'lAMKX'l'
(Charles Harrison, the olher wiiness appearing on the
1, Wheelock .Alexander Bisson, M.D., ol 2312 Park .Av
1984 codicil, leslit'ied on direct examination pertinent lo the
enue, Memphis, Shelby Oounty, I'ennessee, this .AugList
issue bet'ore us:
20th, 1984. Bequeath that m\' adopted daughter, .Alois
B. (ireer, receive a child’s share of' my estate which will (j. .All right. Do V'OU recall the occasion when vou signet!
consist ot'all real property, personal propert)', household this document?
furniture and an\ and all savings which I might have at .A. 'I'es, sir.
the time ot mv' demise. (). Okav'. W'ill V'OU give us the background as to how v'ou
came lo be involved with this ilocument at all?
;s/ Wheelock .A. Bisson. M.D.
W ill l-;i OCK Al.l'XAXDI'.R BISSOX, .M.D. .A. On ihis particular dav, the 20th of'.August, 1984, we
s/ Michael 1'.. 1larrison were on our wav' back Irom .Memorial Park the ro
Wl 1 XISS tunda at the .Memoi'ial Park ( Cemeterv', aiul Dr. Bisson
was sealetl on the Iront seat ol the limousine w iih me.
.1 9 0 7 K’l'/'u 7 ii Dr. M cinpliis, Icnn. ,'iS’/3cS
ADDRl'SS .And he said, “When vou gel back, vou knovv, to mv
' ^ ( d i a i l e s 1,. 1 l a x r j M i n place" —which he releried that was his home - he saiti,
Wl 1 XISS when vou get back to ni) place, he saitl, 1 have some
thing 1 want vou .ill lo tlo lor me. .Aiul so 1 saitl, well,
4403 Sagewood, .Mphs., I X. 381 16
okav. Doc. .Aiul that was that. .Aiul so the rest ol the
ADDRl'SS
people that was in the limousine thev were iust can)
Sworn to and subscribed betore me this 20th da)' ol
ing on casual convei'salioii. So when vve got hack lo his
.August, 1984.
residence on Park /\venue we were letting iheni oul ol
/s/ Lillie M. Ihonias
the limousines aiul he said, don't leave, come on in, 1
XO'I ARV I’L BLIC
have something, vou know, 1 want v'ou lo take care ol
Mv' (Commission Lxpires: for nu’. Aiul so he asked me where was Ms. Ihonias. 1
Ian. 3, 1987 said, well, she's at the luneral home, lie said, well, call
Oi'i direct examination, Michael I larrison stated that he her and tell her to come dow n here, 1 need her vou
signed the codicil in the presence ('I’Dr Bisson. He then gave know, 1 need her here, v'ou know, on this too. Anti so
the following testimoii)' regarding that signing: when vve got inside—We came through the side e n
trance and we went up lo his front i>irice. .And he saitl,
Q. All right. When )'ou got readv to sigi'i did Dr. Bisson 1 have this codicil that 1 want ) ou all lo nolari/,e for me
indicate to you what you were signing as a witness? and wiiness, and that's how 1 came in contact with him.
,A. '\’es. .At the time 1 had no idea what a codicil was.
Q. .All riglit, sir. Xow, at the lime that this document was
(). All right. signed were you present'^
.A. But 1 d i d ~ l did witness it. .A. Ves, sir.
On cross-examination, Michael Harrison gave the follow (^. .And did you see Dr Bisson sign this document?
ing testinionv': .A. '»'es, sir.
(^. .All right. Vou didn’t know what this docimient was (). W'as )'our brother .Michael also present?
now v'ou've got in front ot')OLi at the time you signed it. .A. 'i'es, sir.
Correct? Ihis is one dated .August, 1984. (.}. .And all three olv'ouwere together at the lime; is that
.A. 1 didn't understai'id v'oiu'question. correct?
A. ^’L■s, sil'. ,\. ^’es, sir.
Q. Ms. Ihdiiias is on tliciv as a iiouii y. W’as sho also inthe (j. So Dr Bisson didn’t elaboi ato as to what the docLniient
room or was sho not? was, he said 1 want you to witness a document. He had
A. No, she was in thoroom, 'i’os, sir the document ahead}'. Right?
Q. Ali riglit. And I)r Bisson askod \ oli all tosign this; is A. Right.
that oorroct? Q. '»ou didn’t give it to him?
A. M’s, sir A. No.
Q. And all throo ot von signed it in eaeh other’s presenee? Q. Okay. .And then he signed it and he said, okay, now }’ou
A. Ihat’s eori'oet. sign it, and that was it. ('.oiToct?
A. Yes, sir, basicallv. Ho didn’t sa}' sign it, ho said witness it.
Q. W itness it. .And then there wasn’t any more conversa
Ihe pertinent testimony Irom Charles Harrison on cross tion about it alter vou witnessed it, \ ’all got up and lett.
examination is: c;orrect?
.A. Right.
Q. Now, Dr Bisson didn’t tell you what was in the d o c u
ment that \()u were signing. (Correct? On re-direct examination, ('harles Harrison testilied as
A. No, he did not. lollows:
Q. And he didn’t tell \'ou what the document was? Q. Mr Harrison, be \er}' caretul now and think regai ding
Ves, sir, he did. both what }'ou said proviousU' and what }’ou iust said.
.Are you absokiteh' certain that Dr iiisson told }'ou
Q. W'ell, let me ask you. Do \ ou recall giv ing a deposi
what it was he wanted \du to witness?
tion, meaning when you came to m\' conlerence room
up at m\' oliice |anuar\ M, 1987 and you swoie to tell ■A. MR. Mi l c;i 11 1.!.: Note ni}' obioction to tlie leading,
the truth, and there was a court reporter— it wasn’t ^’o ur Honor Ho nev er testilied lie knew what it was.
this woman, but another wiiman with a machine like 1111' (,'OL'R 1': He did testilv, I believe, in his diroct-ex-
that that took down \ i u i i ' testimonv? Do v o l i recall aniination. I le said that 1)r. Bisson said he had a codicil
that':' that he wanted witnessing.
.A. |aiuiar\ the 14th ol '87? ,\1R. .\IIT(4n:i.L: Ves, sir that's all he said.
(). Ves, sir. (^). (BV MR. BI-.AI'V): Is that what vou recall todav as to
.\. 1 rem em ber c o m \n g lo oliice, yes, siv. what he said?
Q. .All right. .A. 'I'es, sir,
A. I don’t remember the exact date, but 1 do remember MR. BI-.AI V: 'lhat'sall I have.
coming to your oliice.
('harles Harrison’s re cross examination is:
Q. Have vou had a chance to look over this tiocumont -
this deposition transcript'^ (). But that was before }’ou over wont in the room?
A. No, sir. A. I beg your pardon.
(,}. I askod \'ou on page 40 at that time when \'ou were un (^. lhat was before }du over went into the room; that was
der oath, 1 said — At line 3 \'ou said, I just glanced over when vou were out in tho car?
it. I didn’t stop, I just glanced over it. A. Right.
Q. (1 ine 3) Did Dr Bisson tell \'ou what was in it? () W'hon you went in the room he didn’t say what it was
A. No, sir. or what was in it, just like }ou testilied tour }oars ago.
Q. Did he tell you what it was? Right'^
A. No, sir A. Right.
Q. W'as that \'our tostimoiu' at that time? W’ould you agree lie lliomas, who appears as a notar}- public on the
with me that your memor\' was probably better about 1984 codicil, testified that all Dr Bisson said in her presence
this in kmuarv' ot 1987, which would bo, what, lour was that ho had a paper that he wanted her to notari/e and
years ago? that he said nothing in her presence about the paper being
.A, I’m not playing with m\’ memory, but I’d say that — a will, a codicil or anything ot that sort. W'e quote I'roni the
well, \ (lii know, I— testimonv:
Q. W'ould you accept that as the truth il tliat’s what \ou (,). All right. .And what did Dr Bisson sa} about it in }'our
said thcn^ presence?
(iOlllillllCs)
A. I k' said i li .UL' .1 liL' s a u l a [ w p c r t h a t 1w a n t \ i n i t(i to LOi'tily ;i will lor an issue o t í ic v iííiv it vcl n o n . Obvii'usly,
n o t a r i / c t oi ' IIU'. the proceedings contemplated b\- this statute are proceedings
(.). .All rinlit. Hid lie usc .in\ LtiiuLi.igc: will, codicil, am that take place in the probate court, it is equalK clear that the
ihinu oT lli.tl SOI I '' proceeding in tiie circuit court on the issue ot d c v i í íi v i l vel
n o n alter the case is certified Ironi tiie probate coin't to the
A. No. I k' s.iiti a p.ipi,'!'.
circuit court is in substance an original proceeding to pro
All liglit. 1lid li L' si”ii it ill \(Uir piL'SL'IK'C? bate liie will, separate and distinct Ironi any proceedings held
A. >Vs, sir. in probate court. H c a r n u m v. C .ain atsoi, 215 i'enn. 231. 385
(). Hid lie sion it ill tlu’pirsi’iici' ol tlic other w'ilnL'sses? S.\\'.2d 91 (1964); A r n o l d v. M a r c o n i , 49 I'enn. App. 161, 352
S.\\'.2d 936 ( 1961 ). In a proceeding ot this nature, no particu
A. si I'.
lar lorni ot pleading is required. .-Ml that is required is that
Q. Now MiLÌiacl II ai l isDii \V>1.S prosont? the proponent shall olier it as a will and the contesting party
A. 'iVs, sir. shall deny it. See B o w i n a n i; H e lto n , 7 Tenn. App. 325 ( 1928).
Q. Aiui (Charles llan ÌMin, alM>; isthatcoi rcct'' l inally, it has long been held in this state that the right ofa
contestant to resist the probate of a will is a preliminary mat
A. 'it's, sir
ter and presents a separate and distinct issue from the issue
lollowini; llic tcstimoiU' (tl tlu'sL' witiK’sses, ciHinsci tor ol devistivit re l n o n , and that the order ot the probate court
Austin minctl till.' court to disallow submission of the codicil sustaining or denying the right to contest the will is an ap
to llu' jui \' on tlic î'ouikIs tlial tlic codicil 's propt)ncnl, Mrs. pealable order. See W i n te r s r. A m e r i c a n T r u s t Co., 158 I'enn.
(Ircor, had not met liL'i' bui'dcii ol pnuil pLirsLiant til TXC.A. 479, 14 S.\V.2d 740 (1929). T.C.A. § 32-4-108 clearly applies
§ 32 1 1(14, ivgaidinu tlic manner ill wiiich a will must be onl\- to this separate action.
oxL'cutcd. W'e hold that the statute of limitations set out in T.C.A.
i l i c trial L'oui't ”raiitcd Ausliii’s motion .tnd dircctcd >1 § 32-4-108 applies onl\' to the proceeding filed in the probate
\crdicl on tlic urouiuis that Ms. (liL'cr had not proNcd the court seeking to set aside the probate ol a will or a certilica-
proper cxccutiiin ol tlu’ codicil. Ai.'i.'ordin<4 l\', iudi>nicnt was lion for a will contest.
L'liloicd declaring tliat the l ast W'ill and Testament ol Wli cc Ihe second issue for review is whether the trial court
li)i.k A. Kisson datcii luiK' IS, IVS2, lu' atliniltL'i.i to probate erred in directing a verdict for the contestant .Austin by
\\ ilhiuit ,in\' 1-iii.lÌLÌls, refusing to allow the 1984 codicil to be submitted to
( I r c c r h a s a p Ị i LVi l o d a i u i presents two issues lor i cN' i c' w. the iury.
Ihc liist issue is w h e t h e r l I u' t r i a l C d u r t e r r e d in dL' i i N' i m; Ihe rule lor determining a motion tor directed \'erdict
( I ICC I"'. i n o l K i i i l o r s L i n i i n a r v i i n. l i ; i m. ' nt o n t l i c H R i i i n d s t h a t requires the trial iudge and the re\iewiiig court on appeal
Mr. AlisIiii's will (.iintcsl was h.invd In' 32-l-K IS to look to all ol the e\ idence, taking the strongest legitimate
( S i i p Ị i . 19VI ) w l i i c h pr o N' i t l c s : \ iew ol it in la\or ol the opponent ot the motion and allow
ing all reasonable inferences from it in his lavor. Ihe court
All í ì í l i o i i s 1)1 prO íC i’ílitn;s til si'l .isidc llic pniliatc lit anv
must discard all counterx ailing e\ idence, and il there is then
w ill <11 ỊiL'tiliiins 111 tL’i lil\ Midi will liti >in isMic ol licvisa-
an\- dispute as to any material determinati\e evidence or an\-
vit \cl iKtn, imi.st be hRHiuht witliiii two (2) \ears li'om
doubi as to the conclusion to be drawn from the hole e\ i-
cnlr\ ol till.' oitici' .KÌniitliiiu the w ill 1(1 prolvite, DI' bl' lor
dence, ihe motion musi be denied. I'e nnessee F a n n e r s ,\lut.
CVCI' bai iwl, sa\ ill”, lio\\c\ci', to Ịiersoiis uiuici' llic am.' ol
Ins. (,'(). r. H i n s o n , 631 S.W’.2d 235 ( Tenn. App. 1983).
ciglitccii (IS) \c\irs or 1)1 unsouiul Iiiiiul M the tiniL' the
Ihe court should not direct a verdict il there is an\' ma
C.UISC 111 >i(.tion acLiiics, the riuhts con ter rod bv 2<S-I-
terial evidence in the record that would support a verdict
106. ( I'.mphasis aiiticd.)
for the plaintifl'under an\- o f t h e theories he had advanced.
(iiL'cr CDiitcnds tlial tills sl.ilLitc b.irs Austin's action, be .Sec W h a r t o n Tran spo rt Corp. r. B ridg es, 606 S.\V.2d 521
cause' the 1984 codicil w.is adinittci.1 ti> piiibatc b\- (ircior en ('I'enn. 1980).
tered N'()\(.’Iiibor 26, 1983, and Austin lilcii IK) pleading ill Ihe lormal requirements tor the execution ot a will are set
circuit court until liL' lilcd .111 answer to the complaint on out in l'.C.,A. § 32-1 -104 ( 1984), which provides:
nccciiibcr 2, 19<S8. (IrcLT argues thal the liliiig o f t h e c o m
Will other than holographic or nuncupative — Ihe ex
plaint ill úixuil coiiil was tilt.' coninK-iicciiicnt of the ac
ecution o f a will, other than a holographic or nuncupative
tion pursuaiit til RliIo 3. Tcniu’sscc Rules (it (Cix il l^roceduiV,
will, must be by the signature o f th e testator and of at least
and hocausc il was tiled more than two \c;irs from tlie or
two (2) witnesses as Iollows:
der ol’ probate comt admitting the will lo probate, tlie ac-
lion is barred b\- tlic l\\(t \car st.itiitL' ol limitations ill i'.CC.A. ( 1) Ihe testator shall signify to the attesting witnesses that
« 32-1-108. the instrument is his will and either:
W'e must respL'Ltkill\ w itli (liccr tor se\'ei'Lil rea (.A) Himself sign;
sons. i h c sUitiilc itsell is cle.ir ,iiid uiiiiiiibimious. It is con-
(B) Acknowiedge his signature already made; or
liiK'd to at lions U) set .tsidc lliL' pi i)l\ilL‘ ol a w ill or II) petitions
i C ) At liis direction .md in his presence h.ue someone else specifically lhat tbe will had been declared b\’ the testatrix to
sign his iinme lor him; .md be her will at the time ot tbe signing. In holding in lav or of
(D) In an\- ot’the .ibo\e c.ises the .ict must be done in the tbe will, the (juirt s.iiil:
presence ol two (2) or more .Utestiiig witnesses While it is true that neither .\lr .Morrison nor Mrs. ( iilmer
(2) 'Ihe attesting witness must sign: remembered e \ er \ detail ot the signature and attestation
ol the will, the important lact in the record is that there
(A) In tlie presence ol’the testator; and
was neither from .Morrison, Mrs. (iilnier nor the Notary
(B) In the presence ol each other Public, a line o f p o s i t iv e a [ f i n iu i t iv e t e s t i m o n y t h a t w o u l d
s u p p o r t th e a lle g a tio n s ol th e p e ti t io n ol c on te st, n o r th e
Austin contended, and the trial court agreed, that (ireer's
verdict ol th e jurv. t h a t th e will h a d no t b e e n re g u l a r l y a n d
proof tailed to established that Hr Bisson did “signify to the
legally e x e c u t e d in strict a c c o r d a n c e w i lh t h e rc iju ire iiu 'n ts
attesting witnesses that the 11984 codicil] is his will . . as
o f Code, sec. ,S'(W9. 4.
required b\' the statute, (ireer argues tliat the testimony iit
“Where, for instance, the subscribing witnesses testify
the attesting witnesses was sutiicient to create an issue of tact
that tbe\’ do not recollect the circumstances, but do recog
t'or the iury as to wiiether Dr l-iisson so signified.
ni/e their signatures, and declare that the\’ W’ould not have
•Austin relies primarily upon the case ol L u i v r c u c c r.
placed them to tbe instrument unless they had seen the
I . a w r c i u w 35 Temi. .App. 648, 250 S .\\’.2d 781 ( 1951 ) which
testator sign it, or heard him acknowletlge his signature,
involved a will without an attestation clause and where
the diie execution ma\’ be presumed." Si/er's Pritchard on
the o n h ’ sur\ i\ ing attesting witness testified both that the
W ills, ^ 336, p. 380.
testatrix intornied her that the instrument to he witnessed
"In establishing tbe facts essential to the \’alidity ol
was the testatrix’s will and also testilied to the contrar\' bv
the will by a preponderance of tbe evii.leiue, proponents
stating that she did not know that the instrument was a
are, howexer not obliged in all cases to pro\e each lact
will. Ihe tÀiurt ot .Appeals, in directing a \\M\lict against
b\’ direct e\ idence; but fhe\’ may reh’ upon presumptions.
the will, said:
Ihere is, at tbe outset, no presumption that tbe alleged
Tile meaning of this statute is clear plain and unambigu testator executed tbe will in question or any will; but
ous. W'hen a testator calls Lipon persons to witness bis when a paper propounded as a will is shown to have been
will, “the testator shall signif\’ to the attesting witnesses signed by the alleged testator and the requisite nuniber
that the instrument in [sic] his will." Siirely it camiot be of w ilnesses, i n t h e a h s e i i e e o f a n y s a l i s l n e l o r y e v i d e n c e
contended that this pro\ision of t h e statute is doubtful of lo I h e e o n l r a r y tbe presumption is that all tbe formalities
meaning. It simph’ means lhal the testator must state to ha\e been complied w ith’"(Our l.mphasis). Page on Wills,
the witnesses in substance th.it the p.iper writing is his \ ol. 2, § 755, p. 462.
will and lh.u he wanU ihcm to sign il as wiuicsscs. \\\ \hc “ lllc lovcgtiiiig sUWcmctU is sv.ppovtcd b\ .;ascs I’votii
uncontradicted ev idence hef’ore us that essential requisite many juiisdictioiis, including (leorgi.i, Illinois, Iowa,
ol tbe execution o f a \alid will is lacking. Ihe testatrix tlid Missouri, .Montana, New jersey. New Mexico and South
not signily to the attesting witnesses thal the instrument ( arolma." (.onipare: Annotations, 17 1 .R..A., N.S., 722; 76
was the will of testât rix. A.I .R. 604; 14 I .R.A., N.S., 255; Ann. Cas. 426.
250 ,S.\V.2d at 784.

264 S.W'.2d at 563 (I’liiphasis added).
Austin contends that the cases relied upon b\’ (ireer -
W 'l ii t lo w V. i W i n ’i T , 63 I'eiin. App. 65 i, 478 S.\\'.2d 57 Austin asserts that L e a t h e r s is not controlling authorit)’
('I’e nn. App. 1970); S c c i l l u i n i r. DoyU'. 39 feiin. .App. 597, for the case at bar because in l.eiithers there was no positi\e
286 S.\V,2d 601 (1955); and M i l l e r v. 'I l ir a s h e r , 38 I'enn. aflirmati\’e testimoiu’ that the will Inul not been regularh’
App. 88, 251 S.\\'.2d 446 ( 1952), aiul In re T.sliiie o f Hrad- and legalh executetl. We agree with Austin ¡that] I . d i t h e r s
le y , 817 S.\V.2d 320 ( I'enn. App. 1991) —all i m o lv e wills turned on that point, so we must examine the testimoii)’
which contained an attestation clause, lie concedes that in the case at bar to determine if there is uncontroxerted
an attestation clause raises a strong presunipiion tliat the positive testimoii)’ that P r Bisson did not “signily to the
recitals therein contained are true and that contrar\’ e\ i- attesting witnesses” that tbe 1984 instrument was his will
deiice raises a question for tlie jury. Xeeilliciiii, 286 S.\V.2d or codicil.
at 601. W'e agree that these cases are distinguishable on In examining the testimoiu’ of tbe witnesses, we must
their facts. look at the testimony in tbe best light and alford to it all le
(ireer also relies upon I.colliers i'. Biiiklev. 196 'I'enn. 80, gitiniate interences. W'ith that directiiin in mind, we w ill e x
264 S.W’.2d 561 (1954). In Leath ers, the will did not contain amine the testinion\.
an attestation clause and the two attesting witnesses testified Charles Harrison’s testimoii}’ is to the effect that prior to
that they bad signed tbe w ill in the presence ol the testât: ix the gathering of’attesting witnesses, notar\ public and testa
and in the presence of each other Neither witness testilied tor testator told him that he, the testator iiatl “this ciuhcil
(toiilinuc.',)
tliat I want \'ou all to iiolai i / c lor iiio and wiiness." I Ic spcL'iti- am language such as will, codicil or ainthing ol that sort.
calK' pointed out that this statenient h\' l)i'. Bisson was made Dr. Bisson’s statement was matle at the time the parties gath
heloie the gatlieriii” lor the signing ol the instrument. ered for the signing.
.Michael I larrison's testinioin imlicales both that he was .An e.xaniination ol the witness|es|' testimony ¡lulicates
told b\- Dr. Bisson that it was a codicil to be witnesseti and that there is uncontroxerted allirmatise prool that Dr Bis
that Dr. Bisson diti not tell him what it was that he was wit son tiid not signily to at least one attesting witness that the
nessing. He specificalh- testified that he did not know what instrLiment to be w itnessed was his will or a codicil thereto.
the document was. Ihese contradictor} statements eliec- Iherefore, the trial courl correcih directed a verdict against
ti\el\’ eliminate any testimony from this witness on that lact. the admission ol the w ill.
liiy lo r X tishv illc B u n n c r I’ub. (,'o., 373 S.\\’.2d 476 ( lenii. Ihe judgment ol the trial courl is allirmed and this case is
.\pp. 197.S), C (7 7 . d i - u . , 441 U.S. 923, 49 S. Ct. 2032, 60 1. remanded to lhe trial courl lor such lurther proceedings as
l-'.d. 2d 396 (1979); Doiia lio ¡Aiigc, 23 lenn. .App. 433, 138 max' be necessar}'.
S.\V.2d 447 ( l 94l ) . Costs of the appeal are assessed against the appellant.
I.illie Ihonias, the notarx' public, testified that Dr. Bis
fOMI.IN', F.|. (W.S.), and HKIIIICRS, |., concur.
son said he had a paper lo be witnessed and he did not use
Michael .Anlhonx ( X) RDC) \’.A, Plaintill Appellant, acknowledged that onh' she had an 'additional authorized
drixer max drixe xehicle." .A space lor the designation ol an
additional authorized drix er appeared next to Abe}'la's signa
I'federick W'Cl.M.l., |r., Da\ id .Abe}'la, lames Abcyta, ture, and that space was blank. Abe} ta tieclined to purchase
Priscilla Ahe}'ta, and National Car Rentals S} stems, Inc., optional personal atciilent insurance.
1)elendanls .Appellees. Shortl} alter picking up the xehicle, ,Abe}ta became ill,
and she (.lecided not lo make the trip. She gaxe permission
Su('i'enie (Court of New' .Mexico. to her son Dax id to tlrixe. Ihere appears to be a laclual dis
120 N.M. 337, 903 P.2d 1340 (1993) pute about w hether she also ga\e Dax itl's Irieiuis W'ollel aiul
(Cordoxa permission to i.liixe. .Alter the three men started
M I N / N H R , lustice. on their trip, the} began to drink, and W'ollel look oxer the
drix'ing. Ihere is a lactual dispute about whether W'ollel had
( Cordox a appeals from a decisiiin granting summai x' judg had anything to drink and whether he was intoxicated at
ment in fax'or of National (Car Rentals Sxstems (National). the time of the accident, which occurred on an interstate
Ihis case raises the issLie ol whether the Mandatorx f iiiiiiuial higliwa}' in .Arizona.' lhe accident resulted, at least in part,
Responsibilitv Act (the MI-R.A), NMSA I97S, 66 3 201 from W'ollel's negligence, and there were no other X'ehicles
to -234 (Repl. Pamp. 1444), imposes liabilit} upon a sell- inx'oKed.
insured rental car compaii}' for the negligence o f a n unau (Cordoxa claims to haxe sustained injuries in the amount
thorized drix er, despite a contrar}' rental contract prox ision. of $630,000. Ihis ligure includes medical expenses exceeding
W'e ci'include that the MI RA does not impose such liabilitx, S64,000, lost wages, and permanent loss ofthe sense ol smell.
and we alfirm sumniarx' judgment. (Cordoxa brought suit against W'ollel, Natit)iial, Mr. and Mrs.
Abe}'ta, their son Daxid, and Iraxelers Insurance (Compaii}',
the Abeytas' persinial liabilit}' insurer (Cordoxa has settled
I. FACTS his claims against the Abe}'tas and W'olfel. 'Ihe trial court
On lanuarx' 26, 1940, Priscilla .Abe} ta rented a car Irom granted summar} judgment in lax'or ol I raxelers after it de
National at the Albtiquercjue Airport. Her piirpose was to termined that the insurance contract between Iraxelers and
drive her son Dax id and his two friends to Reno, Nex'ada. .At the Abe}'tas did not extend coxerage to the rental car. Na
the time of renting, she intended to drixe the xehicle exclu- tional is the sole remaining defendant.
sixel}' hersell. Ihere is a lactual dispute between the parties
about what rental documents Abexta read and consented to
at the time that she entered into the lease. It is clear, howex'er, I, We assume that New Mexico's substantive law applies to
that Abe}'ta signed a standard National lorm wherein she this appeal because neither party asserts otherwise.
II. D I S C U S S I O N self-insurance “cannot be equated with an insurance contract
t)r polic)'”). .A self-insurer protects itself f rom liabilit)-; it does
A. S u m m a r y J u d g m e n t not assume the risk ot another. See L e v i S t r a u s s & C.o., 1 12
Along with its motion tor summar\‘ iudgment, National N.M. at 436-37, 816 P.2d at 303-06; ( 'o n s o l i d a t e d ¡-.fiters.. Inc.
subniitted the car rental agreement wherein Aheyta ac 1 ’ S c h w i n d t , 172 Ariz. 33, 833 R2d 706, 709 (1992) (en banc).
knowledged that she was the only authorized driver of the W’e note that self-insurance and insurance serve similar pur-
vehicle. National asserted that because the agreement pro pt)ses and that insurance principles ma\- sometimes appl)' to
vided liabilit)' coverage on!)' to autht)ri/ed dri\ers. National selt-insurance b\' \s'ay of analog)'. Nonetheless, we reject as
had no obligation to indemnity W'ollel for !iabilit\' resulting inaccurate (^)rdova’s theory that selt-insurance is a sub-set
from his negligent operation o f t h e vehicle. National main o f insurance.
tains that as the sell-insured owner ot the rental car, it is nt>t |4| 'Ihe relationship between National and its lessees is one
an insurer, and there was no insurance contract between it ol baiinient, and there generally is no c om m o n law basis tor
and .\beyta. National further contends that the MI RA spe imposing upon a bailor liability for a bailee's negligent (ipera-
cifically exempts self-insurers from its provisions. tion of a bailed vehicle. S e e S t o v e r v. C ritc h fie ld , 510 N.W'.2d
Cordova argues that National’s “('ertilicate of Self-Insurance 681, 683-84 (S.l). 1994). The legislatures o f a few states h d v e
[issued b)' the State Superintendent oi Insin'ance] prov ides li altered this common law rule through legislation. 5t’t’ Ariz.
ability coverage on [the] vehicle driven by 1-rederick W'oli'el.'' Rev. Stat. Ann. § 28-324 ( 1994 Cum. Supp.) (requiringowner
Cordova does not dispute National's contention that W'olfel of rental vehicles to obtain public liability insurance protect
was not an autht>rized driver. Rather, c;ordt)\a argues that ing passengers and third parties against negligence ot renter;
W'()ltel wîs a permissive driver because he operated the ve however, owner not liable for damages beyond limits of in
hi de with Abeyta’s express or implied permission. St’c i 'iiitCii surance polic)'); ('onn. Cien. Stat. § 14 - 134a (1993) (owner
Se rv s. A u to . A s s ) i r. S u t i o n a l h i u i u e i s L'uioii P r o p e r t y & ol leased \ehicle liable for damage caused by operation ot
( 'd s u i i lt y , 119 N.M. 397, 891 R2d 338 (1993). Ihis conten leased \ehicle \o same extent as operatt>r would be held liable
tion rests upon the premise that National, as a self-insurer, if operator were t>wner); c f Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-21,239 ( 1994
provided insurance coverage under which. Abe\ta was the (ûm. Supp.) (making ow'ner o f leased truck ¡oiiith' and sev-
“named insured.” C]ordo\a asserts that because the Ml-RA erall)' liable with lessee for lessee’s negligence). Moreover, the
niandates that liabilit\' coverage must extend to persons us ctïurt ol at least one state has determined that, as a matter ot
ing the \ ehicle witli the express or implied permission o f the public polic)', a \ehicle lessor will be liable lor the negligence
named insured, coverage extends to W'olfel b\ operation of o f a lessee, irrespective of contrary contractual language. S e e
law, ,SVc ill.: § 66-3-221(A)(2). \ î o t o r \'ehicle A c c u l e n t Ifid etn. C.orp. v. CA)>ïtinental X a t ' l A m .
C o r d o \ i \ argues on appeal that the trial courl erred when ( i r o u p Co., 33 N.Y.2d 260, 360 N.Y.S.2d 839, 861-63, 319
\t determined that, ;\s a nVvUtcr o\ law. National i'' not Uable NM-\2d 182, 184-83 (1974). 'Ihe New Mexico legislature has
lor Woltel’s negligence. W'e agree with the trial coui t's inter not enacted legislation that would make vehicle lessors g e n
pretation o f t h e rental agreement and its resolution ot the eralh’ liable for injuries that result when lessees negligently
piireh' legal issues presented h y this case. ResoK ing all dis use their \eliicles, and we decline to take that step in the ab
puted facts in ta\'or of C'ordo\a, we conclude that National sence of legislative action. We conclude that a vehicle lessor
is entitled to judgment, and we afiirm. Stv 'lapiu r. Spri}igcr is liable for the negligence o f a lessee or a lessee’s permittee
T r a n s f e r Co., 106 N.M. 461, 462-63, 744 P.2d 1264, 1263 66 only to the extent that a statute, adniinistrative regulation, or
(Ct. App.), cert, q u a s h e d , 106 N.M. 403, 744 P.2d 180 (1987). agreement of th e parties imposes such liabilit)'.
[5] Cordova’s arguments on appeal largel v proceed from the
premise that a self-insured entity such as National is subject
B. S e l f - I n s u r a n c e to the requirements of the MFRA. However, the Ml-RA itself
belies this contention. In unambiguous language, the Mr'RA
|3] Most authorities agree that self-insurance is not insur exempts from its provisions “motor vehiclels] approved as
ance. Insurance is a contract whereby lor consideration o n e self-insured by the superintendent of insurance." Section 66-
part)- agrees to indenniity or guarantee another part)’ against 5-207(1-). We recognize that there may be situations w4iere it
specified risks. See N e w M e x i c o Life his. (iua r. A ss'n r. M oo re , is appropriate to apph' the pn)visions o \ the MFRA to selr-
93 N.M. 47, 30, 396 R2d 260, 263 (1979); NMSA 1978, insurers by analogy. Nonetheless, w’e cannot ignore the stat
$ 3 9 A - 1-5 (Repl. Pamp. 1992). In contrast, sell’ insurance is a ute’s plain language, see V.P. CJarence Co. r. C o lg a te , 1 15 N.M.
process ol risk retention whereb)' an entity “set|s] aside assets 471. 473 833 P.2d 722, 724, (1993), and a literal interpreta
to meet foreseeable future losses." Robert I v . Keeton & Alan tion of Section 66-3-207(H) does not lead to an absurd result.
I. W'idiss, b i s u r a n c e I a u v : A ( i u i d e to T i i n d a i f i o i t i i l Principles, C f S tate V. C u t ie r r e z , 115 N.M. 551, 552, 854 R2d 878, 879
L e g a l D o c t r i n e s a n d C o n n n e r c i a l Practices ^ 1.3, at 14 (1988); (C,'t. App.) (holding that where literal language o f statute
se e a lso L e v i S tr a u s s Co. v. S e w M e x i c o P r o p e r t y d- ( 'a s u - leads to absurd result, court may construe statute to avoid
a l t y Ins. (.¡uar A ss'n (In re Ai/.s\s7'o/i Ins. C'o.), 1 12 N.M. 433, such result), cert, d e n ie d , 115 N.M. 545, 854 P.2d 872 (1993).
437, 816 P.2d 302, 306 (1991) (holding that a certificate of » 4 »
( c o n t i nu e s )
111. C O N C L U S I O N lor Wollel's ne”li”enee. Sinnmai \' iiidument in tavor of Na-
tioiial is atlii nied.
\ \ V c o i k U k I c that the trial eourt eoi rectK determined that
National is exempt Irom the MI RA, and that, in the absenee I ! iSS()C)Rl)l-,Rl l).
ol a eontraetual agieement. National is not \ieariousiy liable iWCA, CM., and i iUXS 1', |., eonem-.
DHANetal. testator" and in Article 3344, Section 4 “it'the will was wholly
W l itten by the testator, b\' two witnesses to his handwriting,”
require that the words “wholl\- written” used in these articles

DICKHYet al, be construed to mean wholh’ written in the handwriting (if
the testator Article 8283 prescribes the requisites ot a holo
No. 4662.
graphic will. .Article 8284 pro\ ides that when those rec|iiisites
(Court ol Cj\ il Appeals ot I'exas. HI Faso. ha\e been complied with, attestation by subscribing wit
nesses ma\ be dispensed with, while .Article 3344, Section 4
Sept. 28, 1949.
prescribes the character ot proof necessary to pro\’e such
Rehearinu Denied c\ 't. 26, 1949. will, lo give the identical language “whollv written" used
m these Statutes the nieaning tor which appellants contend
22? SA\'.2d 999 { Tex. Civ. App. 1919)
woLild render .Articles 8283 and 3344, Sectit)ii 4, inconsistent
MCCdl.l., lustice. and repugnant, since such interpretation would make it i m
possible to pro\ e a typewritten will in the manner prescribed
by .Article 3344, Section 4, that is, b\- two witnesses to the
lhe sole qiiestion piesented b\' this apỊieal is whethei' a
handwriting ot the testator.
t\'[ie\\ritten instrument ot lestaiiientar\' eharaeler t \ Ị H ' d
,A[ipellants concede that this case is one ot first impres
holỉ\'b\- 1rollis Dell l)ieke\'on Inne 12, 1443, and intendei.1
sion in this State, and that the construction tor which they
by him lo be his last w ill ami testament, and signed by liim
contend is contrar\- to the o\erwhelming weight ot aLithor
and one witness in ink, is entitled to probate as the holo
it\ in other iurisdictions where similar Statutes lia\e been
uraphie will ol the sail.! irollis Dell I)ieke\', Deeeased. Ihe
construed, citing 68 C.|., p. 714, Section 4(12, and 37 Ani.lur.
trial eonrt allirmed the order ol the CCountN' CConrl den\'inn
p. 4,v^, Section 6.^4, lhe reason tor the rule laid down
Ịirobate ol the instiLiment, and this appeal has been duU
by these authorities is abl\' stated in In i r D r e y f u s ' l-ittitc,
perleeted.
173 Cal. 417, 163 \>. 441, 1 .R.A. 14I7I-, 341:
lhe Statutes applicable on lime 12, 1943, are the lollow
in”: X'ernon's iexas ( J\ il Statutes: "I rom time immemorial, letters and words ha\e been
w ritten with the hand by means of pen and ink or pencil of
Artiele S2S3: ''l-.ver\- last will and testaiiient except
some description, and it has been a well-known fact that
where othei'wise proxided b\' law, shall be in writiii”
each indi\ idual who writes in this nianner acquires a style
and signed b\' the testator or b\' some otlier person
ol lormiiig, placing, and spacing the letters and words
b\' his direction and in his presence, and shall, if not
which is peculiar to hiniselfand which in most cases ren
wholh' written b\' himsell, be attested b\' two or more
ders his writing easily distinguishable from that ot others
credible witnesses abo\'e the age of tourteen \ears,
by those lamiliar with it or b\' experts in chirograpliy who
siibseribini; iheir names tliereto in the presence ol the
make a stud\' o f th e subject and who are afforded an op-
testator."
piirtunity of comparing a disputed specimen with those
Article 8284: "Where the will is wholly written b\- the
admitted to be genuine, lhe provision that a will should
testator the attestation ot the subscribin» witnesses ma\’
be \ alid if entirely ‘written, dated, and signed by the hand
be dispensed with.”
ofthe testator,’ is the ancient rule on the subject. There can
Article 3344, Section 4: “If the will was wholly
be no doubt that il owes its origin to the fact that a suc
written by the testator, b\' two witnesses to his hand-
cessful counterfeit of another’s handwriting is exceedingly
writin», whieh ma\' be made b\' atlida\'it taken in
diliicult, and that therefore the requirement that it should
open courl and subscribed to b\' the witnesses, or b\'
be in the testator’s handwriting would atlord protection
deposition.”
against a forgery of this character.”
Ihese StaUites eonslrued together lea\ e no room lor doubt
that the language empUned in Article 82S3 “if not wholly See also: A d a m s ' /.'.v’.v v. B c iu n iu u it, 226 K\'. 311, 10 S.\\'.2d
written b\- himselt"; in Article 82(S4 “\\iioll\' written b\ the 1 106; and M c S c i l l v. M c \ c i H , 261 K\'. 240, 87 S.\\'.2d 367,
where the statutory language “wholK' written” under con abo\e pointed t>ul. Articles 8283 8284 and 3341, Section 4,
sti'Lictionis identical with that of o u r s , i lowe\er, appellants construed together leave no rotim lor doubt as to the mean
contend that a difierent interpretation should be given to Ar ing ol the words "wht)lly written" therein employed. '1heretore.
ticles 8283 and 8284, supra, tor twti reasons: l-irst. because ot Article 23, Scction 3 has no application. Lor like reason, with
Section 3, Article 23: out application is the rule enimciated in StiViforii et al v. Butler,
Ll2 Te.\.692. 181 S.W.2d 269, /oc. c//. 274(8, 9), 133 A.L.R. 1034:
“Detinitions" ot Title I: “(ieneral Provisions” R.(;.S.,
which provides; "Written or 'in writing’ includes any '■ ■ ' where a later act implies a particular construction
representation ot words, letters or tigures, 'whetiier bv of an e.xisting law, and particular!) w here the existing law
U777///î;, p r i n t i n g o r o t h e r w i s e " (Our Hniphasis). is ambiguous or its meaning imcertain, interpretation ot
the prior act b\' the Legislatine as contained in the later
Secondly: Because ot the einergenc\- clause ot SM . 328,
act is persuasive when a court is called upon to interpret
enacted b\- the 3()th Legislature, Acts ot 1947, 3()th Leg., Reg.
ihe prior law."
Sess.. (;h. 170, p. 273, which amended Articles 8283 and 8284
by substituting for the words "wholly written by himself" in .Articles 8283 and 8284, when construed with Article
Article 8283, the wt>rds "wholh' in the handwriting ot'the tes 3344, Sectit>n 4, are not ambiguous, nor is their meaning
tator’’ and tor the words "wholK' written b y the testator" in uncertain. Lurthermore, when S 4 i 328 was enacted there
Article 8284, the words “wholly written in the handwriting o\ had been no decision bv any appellate court of this State c o n
the testator." Ihe relevant portion of t h e emergency clause is struing Articles 8283 and 8284 as declared in the emergenc}'
“that under the present interpretatit)n o f the statute an\- form clause. Lrom the similarity ot the language emphasized it
ot writing including ty p e w r i t in g , o r prifititig o r o t h e r w i s e (our is probable that the Legislature erroneously assumed that
emphasis) is sutiicient to constitute a will which lea\es a dan .Article 23. Section 3 was applicable and controlling in its
gerous and unsafe condition nol properh' protecting w idow s construction ot Articles 8283 and 8284. Lor this addili<.>nal
and orphans ot'this state." Section 3. reast>n, the above quoted rule is inapplicable.
By the very terms ot Article 23, the meaning g'\en the
words "written oi‘ in writing" by Section 3 has no application Ihe iudgment ol the trial court is allirmed.
where "a dilierent meaning is apparent trom the context.” As
In re HS'I A LL: OL Clitiord R KU SZ MA I L, Deceased. testament. Ihe tnal iudi;e tlenied the petition lor administra
tion. L'nder the tacts here presented, we disagree and reverse.
No. 8 3- 647 .
When the testator died, the interested parties tVuitlesslv
District ( ’ourt ot Af'tpeal ot Llorida. Loiu'th District, searched tor the original executed will, sLiỊiptìsedlv last seen
in the decedent's possession. Ihere is a dispute t)ver where
lune 23, 1986.
the copv ol lhal will aiul the cotîicil were lirst located. It is
491 So. 2d. 287 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986) conceded, however, that shorllv alter the testator died, a c o n
formed copy of ihe will and the original ofthe executed codicil
ON M O T IO N FOR REHEARING thereto, were lound Uigether amont« the decedent’s personal
possessions. Ihe codicil stated in its concluding paraiiraph:
i.LT'LS, ludge.
1 IIIRI). 1 herebv ratilv and conlirm my said Last Will and
Lestament except inst)lar as anv part thereol is modified
Ihe motit)n tor rehearing is granted ihe original opin b\ this (Codicil.
ion tiled May 7, 1986, is withdrawn and we substitute the
W'e betj;in b\ reailirming our conclusion in In (he E s t a te o f
following:
Parson, -IK. So. 2d 313, 313 (L'la. 4th DCA 1982) that there
Ihis case invohes the disposition ot certain estate assets.
is a “presumptiiin that a will which was in the possession
Ihe distributiini hinges on whether a ci^ntormed cop\‘ ot a
ol the testator prior to death and whicli cannot be located
will, tound together with an original executed codicil, will
subsequent lo death was destroyed by the testator with the
suiiice to uphold the prov isions o f that will and its codicil,
intention ot revokini» it." We turther continue to alii^n our
despite the absence of the original executed last will and
selves with the pi'iiposition, also sel lorlh in ỉ \ ỉ r s o n , that “the
( e oỉ ì t i ni i c s )
prcsüiiiption IIKIV onl\' be mcrcdnie b\’ cnniỊictent and sub would be “Linlikcly thot the testator inteiitioiialh’ revoked
stantial e\ idence.” Iii. at 313. I'niike tlie trial ÌLidgc, htnve\er, his will while retaining the codicil and a cop\’ ol the oripnal
we arc ot the opinitiii tliat the tacts tlie case now betore will." Id. at 352.
us vield conipotcnt iind sLil')sUiiitial e\idcnt(.’ to DW'ivonie llu' W'e would also point to two Florida statutes not cor.sid-
presumption. ered in Buird. lhe tirst ot these is section 732.3103, i-'lcrida
'Ihc proponents ol the view that tIu' inslant will was re- Statutes (1983) wherein it is stated that “the execution o f a
\'okcd point 1(1 aiKithor decision (it tliis cmirt W'ith somewhat codicil reterring to a previous will has the ellect ol repub
similar tacts. Sec In I T l'..<Uilc ol B a in l, 343 So. 2d 41 (Fla. 4tli lishing the will as modified by the codicil." 'I'rue, that sectii'n
DCCA 1977). Ho\vc\cr, tlicrc arc iniportant distinctions. In does not set forth whether or not il is applicable if the e x
B a ir d the disco\civd executed codicil was not, so tar as we ecuted original will cannot be found. However, the ensuing
can dt’tcrmine, acconipaiiicd b\' a copv ot the will, as it was in section 732.311, pnn ides that even if a will has been revoked
tlu’ matter niiw before us. l urtlior, while Mr. Kuszmaul, like “it mav be republished and made valid |by] .. . the execution
Mr. liiiird, showed continuing allection tor the beneticiaries o f a codicil republishing it with the formalities required by
undcT the will, tIu' toniier also wrote a letter to one of the this law for the execution of wills.” lhe codicil before us now
beneficiaries under tlic will, alter its execution, statiiii» that was executed with requisite formalit\'.
property dt'N’ised in that will would “s()ineda\’ . . . be VDurs,” in the sum of all that we ha\e set forth abo\e, we conclude
We are Dt'the opinion that the instant cause is more closely that the presumption was o\ ercome and the trial iudge was
allied to the tacts ill tlic Xow Viirk decision ol W'ill ol H e r b e r t, in errt)r
89 Misc. 2d 340, 341 X.V.SJd 351 (1977) where the court
lu'ld that the presumption was ox’crcoiiie because a copy of iii;\'i-:i^si-;i) .a n d i^í-;\ í a n i ) í :i ) in a (:(; o í U ) a n c h
the will and tlie original ccidicil "were caretull}' kept together Hi-Ri-.WiTH.
Iinioni; [the tost.itor's| [leisoiial possL'ssioiis” and because il DOW'NHVand Di-.i.L, ||„ concur.
.McCI.AIN el al. v. ADA.MS. iumcupati\e will were met and complied with. Iheir st)le
Lonlention here is that, as a mallei oi law, llie words uttered
In rc nOL'Cd ASS’ i;S f.A i i-.
b\ the deceased which are claimed to constitute her will were
No. 2310-7379. nol uttered during her “last sickness” within the meaning of
those words as used in the article abcn-e referred lo. lhe case
C o mmi ss i o n ot .Appeals ol I'exas, Section A.
turns upon our decision ofthat single question and our slate
Ian. 13, 1941. ment will therefore be limited lo such facts as are ihought to
be rele\ ant thereto.
]46 S.\V.2d 373 Cl'ex. Civ. App. i 9 4 i )
Annie Douglass, tlie alleged testator, died on Septem
H K ' K M A N , (]onimissioner. ber 8, 1934, at the age of more than sixty years. i')uring
the four years next preceding her death she had “spells.”
ihe subject matter ol'this litigation is an alleged nuncu- Dr 1^ N. Miller, a witness for the proponent, began at
pati\e will. .Annie Douglass, deceased, was the alleged testa tending her professionally in june 1934. in his opinion the
tor; W'illie Adams, defendant in ernir, was the proponent in original cause of her conditit)ii was malaria, but the i m me
the probate court; and Idi/a McC^lain and others, plaintiffs in diate cause o f her death was “aortic insufficiency,” which he
error, the next of kin of the deceased, were the contestants, explained to be a weakened condition o f the heart and
lhe county court of lefferson CA)unty sustained the contest aorta, ihe “spells” about which the other witnesses testified
and denied the probate. On appeal the district court ofthat were in the nature o f fainting spells brought about, accord
count}- entered judgment admitting the alleged will to pro ing to the evidence as we understand it, by the general weak
bate, which judgment was allirmed b}’ the Court of C]i\il Ap ened condition of her heart. The words claimed to constitute
peals. l26S.\V.2d61. a nuncupative will were spoken by the deceased at about
One o f t h e requisites o f a nuncupative will, as prescribed 4:30 p.m. on Thursday, September 6, 1934. The proponent
by article 3346, R.C.S., is that, “it be made in the time of the and four other witnesses were present in her bedroom at that
last sickness of the deceased." As we understand the position time. One o f t h e witnesses, l?erltrue McDaniel, went to the
of plaintiffs in error, they concede that the trial court was home of th e deceased to pay her some rent. He testified that
warranted in finding that all olher statutory requisites ot a
he sl. ncd there about Iwo hours, aiul lhal while lie was there i d w o f Wills, i t h lili., in \'ol. 1. ch. \ ’l. Section 17a wrote:
she said to him: ......... Ilils subject came before the (Court of ITrors in New
York, at an early day, * * ' and is most exhausli\'el\' discussed
'“Mr. McDaniels, ! am leehng not \ e r\ well al tills lime,
b) (Chancellor Kent, and by Mr. lustiee Woodworth. Ihese
and i i<now' tiial i am going i o die,’ and sa\ s 'i want W'li-
opinions contain the substance of all the learning upon the
iie Adams lo have everything tiiat 1 possess, and iand
subiect of iumcupatl\'e wills, from the earliest days to that
and money.' Slie says 'Siie is tiie onl\' one stood to me in
date and very little has occurred since, which could add
m\- sici< iiour at m\' bedside.' Sa\ s, '1 iia\en'l anv reiali\es
much to tlie \*er\ full discussion which the subject there
alaii.'"
receives."
"Siie caiied \dur name and said tiiat?"
Our investigation has lead [sic] us to the conclusi(.)ii that
"^'es. sir, said 'Mr. Mci)anieis"’
the foregtiing is still an accurate stalemenl of the situation.
lliereatter. on September 12, 1934, llie witness committed Nothing has been written to date, within our knowledge,
the substance ol the testimon\' lo writing, his wrlrien m e m o which adds materially to the discussion contained in the
randum being as follows: majority and minority opinions in that case. In fact, there
have been relative!)' few cases before the appellate courts in
“Beaumonl, Texas, Sept. i2. Í934.
this generation in which a nuncupative will was offered for
On the 6 day ot September, 1934, I was at Annie duglas
probate.
home and slie told me aiul (Uhei's beside thal at lier death
In the majorit)' opinion ('hancellor Kent announced this
slie wanted W'lllle Adams to ha\e all liiat she had iand and
conclusion: "L'pon the strength ot so much authorit)', I teel
nuniey and every thing else that she new she was going lo
mv'sell warranted in concluding, that a nuncupative will Is
die lhat slie had no kin and she was the onl\- one that sat
nol good, unless It be made by a testator when he is in e x
al lier i')ed side and waited on her and she wanted her lo
tremis, or overtaken b)' sudden and violent sickness, and has
ha\e all her estate at hei' death
not time or opportunit)' [o make a written will."
'Ik-rttrue McDaniel."'
lhat has become known generally as the in extremis rule,
Me testified thal when he went to the home ot tiie de ihe minority opinion in lhat case announced a somewhat
ceased iie found her in bed; that when lie paid her the rent more liberal rule ot construction. L'roni that decision two
slie handed him a receipt therefor wtiich she had thereto lines of decisions have emerged, tMie based upon the d o c
fore written, llis testimony with regaid to wlial occurred trine that the testator must be in extremis, as announced b)'
o u the occasitMi is. in the main, corroborated by the other (Chancefloi Kent in the majorit)' opinion, and the other based
witnesses who were present at that time. Ihere is practi- u[>on the nu>re liberal rule announced bv Iustice Woodworth
cali\' nil lestimoin- concerning tlie condition (.»f the de in the dissenting opinion, thal the testator need nt)t actually
ceasod from liiursda\' afternoon until about noon on be in extremis the niaitiritv tif tbe ct>urls have adopted the
Saturday. Ihe proponent testified tliat '‘she had taken the (Chancellor Kent doctrine. S c h m i t z r. Siim}}icrs, 179 Miss. 260,
bed on a Ihursday. i riday she was in and lhursda\ she 17 1 So. 369; O ' S c i l l i'. S}>iitlh 33 Md. 369; B cH iim y v. Peeler,
had taken the bed and sla\eti in bed Irom Ihursday up to 96 (ia. 467, 2 ^ S.L., 387; Poge i'. Page, 2 Rob., \ a. , 424; R eese v.
I riday." lhat testimoiu' [trol’tably means lhat deceased did I{(¡n'tht>rn, 10 (irai., \'a., 348. Annotations: 20 Am. Dec. 43;
not lea\'e her home on l rii.ia\' but was in bed at least a part 9 .\,I..R. 464; 13 I .R.A., N.S., 1092; 67 Am. St. Rep. 372.
o \ lhat day. Shortly before noon on Satiu'day morning the Ihe (Court of (Civil Appeals in its opinion In this case rec
deceased went to the home of'a neighbor, |uiia Keegans, to ognized the existence i»f bolh the rules above reterred to, but
get lulla to pay a water bill for her which amounted to SI. concluded lhat Lexas had not adopted the iiiauirity rule, and
Deceased had only a S3 bill wilh her and |ulia was unable upon the theorv that the minorit)' rule \vas the more reason
to change it. Deceased next went to a grocery store near by able, It adopted and applied that rule. We cannot agree with
and purchased some bac(Mi and a small sack of tioiu'. She Its conclusions.
ihen returned lo julia's home and gave her SI with which to In the first place, this court has approved the rule of strict
pay the water bill. At that time she discovered thal she had construction. While the facts in the cases below cited were
failed lo biing the bill with her, whereupt)n ¡ulia acc o mpa noi like those before us, still the)' presented situalions call
nied her home to gel It. Ihe deceased carried the bacon and ing upon the court ti) declare the rule of construction which
julia carried the flour. Shortk after reaching home the d e should gtwern in cases like the instant one, and the court d e
ceased became sick. Dr. Miller was later called and he came clared it in \er)- clear language.
U) see her abi>ut six o'clock that ev ening. She died some two In loties 1 ' \ o r t o n . iO 'lex. 120, will be found the fblknv-
hours or iiKire thereafter. ing: ......... Nuncupative wills had their origin in the sudden-
.Ml lext-writers and opinions on the subjecl ot’what c o n ne.ss and urgency of the occasion, w'here there were present no
stitutes "last sickness" within the meaningof'statutes relating means of making a formal written will, and n o time for dela)'.
to nuncupative wills seem to agree lhat the leading authority And. among al! civ ilized nations, where the necessit)' has been
upon the question is i^rincc v. H iîzlc îo ii. 2Í) |ohns., 302, apparent, nuncupatlv'e wills have, under some regulations,
1 1 Am. Dec. 30". Ot’lhat case the author of Redfield, ( h i the been allowed. Hut the danger of fraud. In setting up such wills,
(continues)
has al\\a\ s (.■xacti.'c.i lull aiul satistactor\ ptDolOt the existciuc the (Courl ol (Civil .Appeals that the so talleti liberal rule is the
ot the luw'ssitN'; aiul, where we have a statute regulating such more reastmable. In (Chancellor Kent's opinion, supra, writ
wills, there is the sanu- reason win’ we should require its eon ten in 1822, reterence was nuule to the lact thal, in the ages ol'
ditions and requisites to lie satistactoriK made out. ' ’ Henry the ICighth, ICIizabeth and lanu’s reading and writing
In M i l i h c l l r. M ckcrs. 2 0 lex. 377, it is staled: “Nuneupa- had beconu- so wideK' dilliised that nuncupative wills were
li\ e wills are not tavorites ot the law. Hut as they are autho conlmed to extrenu' cases. I'nder the view there expressed,
rized by the statLite, the\- must, when duly prcned, be allowed which is the commonly accepted \ iew, the nuire wideh the
and established. Ihe\ are hedged round with numerous re abilit) to read and write beconu's dilt’used, the less iustilica
stnetions, to guard against the trauds tor which oral wills o i tion exists lor recognizing nuncupative wills, except in cases
ler so mam taeililies; and it is a well established rule, that ol necessitx'. W'ith the general diHusion ol knowledge al this
strict proot is required oiall the requisites prescribed b\' the linu', we can perceive of no reason why we should depart
law. {\l\ir.<oiii r. l \irs o iis\ 2 Cireenl. |Me.], 2S)8; |//i rc Y a n i u i r i from or var\- the terms o f the rule of construction as hereto
Will] 4 Rawle |l>a.|, 46 |26 .Am. Dec. 113|; 20 lohns. ,302; fore pronounced b\’ this court. Ihe instant case appears to be
1 larman on Wills, 89; .Modern Probate ot’ W'ilis, 304.) llu' Iree ol the taint ol Iraud, but to ailopt the rule pressed upon us
prcnision ot the statute (Hart. Dig. Art. 1113) is essentially a would be to afford opporlLinit\- lor Iraud in many olher cases.
cop\ trom the statute ot’ frauds ot’ the 29 (di. 2, Sect. 19-21; ■AppK ing the apprcned rule to the facts ol this case, it is
and in substance the same prin'ision is lound in the codes ol’ obvious thal .Annie Douglass was nol in extremis when she
nuist ot the other States; and exerywhere a strict conslruc uttered the words claimed lo constitute her will. Ihereafter
lion has been applied." she had the time, abilit\ and opportunity lo prepare or ha\e
One of the authorities cited above, 20 lohns. 302, is the prepared a written will. .About that there is no dispute in the
Priiicc I h i z l c l o n case. record. (Certain it is that she could ha\e attended to that mat
.\iul in W illis V. U oU a u d , 36 Tex. 34, CChancellor Kent's ter on Saturda\' nuirning when she was able to transact busi
opinion in the I’riiicc Ih i z l c l o i i case, was cited in support ol ness and go in person to a store to purchase groceries. Ihe
the loll(u\ ing conclusion announced in the opinion: probate ccnirl did not err in relusing lo adniil the alleged will
to probate.
........ Wills ol this kind, b\ the law, are allowed to exist, on
It IS therelore oiileied that the imlgments ol the district
its liare toleration, and under the shadow ot its iealously
courl and the (Courl ot (Ci\il .Appeals both be reversed, and
IsK j ; and the establishment ol them is allowed, subject to
that iudgnu'iit be here reiuleretl that the alleged will be nol
exacting resti ictions aiul conditions which correspoiul in
admitted to probate. It is turther ordered that upon receipt ol
degree with its tears ol their dangerous t|LKilities.
the maiulale ot this court the (.listrict courl certih this court’s
1 rom the toregoing we conclude that earl\' in the jurispru iudgments to the county court lor ohser\ance.
dence ot this state the maiorit\' rule that the testator must be
111 extremis w,is approved bv this court.
In the second place, we tlo not c<incur in the «.oiuiusion ot ( )pinion adopted b\ the Supreme ( Court.
P.MM'AS ICX I’lCRPRISHS, IN(C., & others liability t'or a lire loss under vacanc\’ exclusion in polic\'. Ihe
District (CiHirt certified questions ol law to the Supreme ludi
cial (Courl. Ihe Supreme ludicial (Court, Wilkins, |., held that:
(CO.MMICIUCIC .AND INDUSTRY INSUR.AN(C1C (1) 60-da\' vacancN' p nn ision does not apply in case where
(COMPANV. part of 60 da\ s of vacanc\- occurred prior to da\' policy came
into lorce, and (2) h(nvever, where polic\' in lorce at time ot
661 N . 1C.2d 81
lire was renewal ol immediately preceding polic\’, and por
Suprenu' ludicial (Court ol .Massachusetts, Suffolk. tion ot vacanc)' be\’ond 60 days occurred during immedi-
atel\- preceding polic\' period, exclusion would operate to
.Argued Dec. 4, 1993. Decided Feb. 14, 1996.
preclude coverage lor loss.
Insured commenced action in the L'nited States District (Certilied questions answered.
( Court for the 1)istrict ol .Massachusetts alter insurer declined
(ClCR'l ll'KC.ATION of questions o f l a w to the Supreme ludi
cial (Courl b\- the L'nited States District (Court for the District
I . Pappas Management Corp., Tlie 418 Worcester Wareland
of .Massachusetts.
Realty Trust, and Capital Site Management Associates.
i u- t ore I . I A C O S , c;. |.. a n d W ' l l . K I N S , O ' C O N N O R , CRl-; da\s of \acancv, referred ft) in the \acanc\' exclusion prtni-
A N H V . m d i R I H l ) , II. sion, onl\- if the current policy is a renewal ot substantialh'
the same co\erage of the damaged propertN' prox ided in the
O JM N IO N
previous polic\' period.
WILKINS, lustice.
i. Totla\, and since its insertion in the Cieneral Laws (bv
St.1931, c. 478), § 99 ITwelf'th] of (i.l,. c. 175 has required
Tlie plaintirt's, whom wc shall rotcr to collcctiN'ch’ as the that a policy state that, unless it otherwise provides, the in
insured, are beneficiaries ot'an insurance polic\- issued by the surer of'premises lif the kind invohed in this case “shall not
defendant insurer that provided coverage against fire loss to be liable for loss occurring . . . (b) wTiile the described prem
numerous properties in the Boston area, 'lhe polic\’, which ises, vvhether intended tor occupancv b\’ owner or tenant, are
became effective on September 1, 1990, was a renewal of' vacant or unoccupied bevond a period of sixtv consecutive
property damage policies that had been issued on September I, days” Prior to the 1951 amendment, the relevant statute had
1988, and September 1. 1989. On October 27, 1990, fif'ty- required that the standard Massachusetts policy prox'ide that
se\’en liays after the effective date of the polic\' then in the polic\- was \ oid “if the premises hereby insured shall be
effect, one o f the covered properties was damaged b\' hre. come vacant b\’ the renioN’al t)f the owner or occupant, and
ihat property had been \ acant since .\la\-, 1989, a jieriod of so remain vacant for more than thirty days.” In W a ific r V. M ii-
well over a y ear. J o n i M u l . l-irchis. Cl)., 153 Mass. 333, 339, 26 N.F. 877 (1891),
When the insurer declined liabilit\’ t(>r the fire loss, the the court construed that former language to mean a X’acancv
insured commenced an action in the L'nited States District of thirt\' davs commencing while the policv was in force. The
(^)urt f'or the District of Massachusetts. In defense of the words “shall become vacant” pointed to a prospective event, a
claim, the insurer relied in part on polic\' language, pre luture \acancv. ¡d. Ihe language of the current § 99 concern
scribed by (i.l.. c. 175, §99 I'Twelfth] ( 1994 ed.), that excluded ing premises that “are \acant” for more than sixt\' da\'s is not
liability f'or a loss occurring while the described premises as clearly prospective in its focus. Ihe 1931 change in the rel-
“are vacant or unoccupied beyond a period ol si\t\- consecu e\ anf language tends to suggest that the Legislature mav have
tive (.lays.” The facts presented the question |of | whether the no longer intended that the focus should be onK’ on a prospec-
period of sixty consecuti\'e days of \acaiic\' included only ti\ e \ acanc\'.
days during the polic\’ period in which the loss occurred or Ihe Legislature mav not, however, ha\'e had its eve on
could also include consecuti\e days ot \acancy during the the W a i n c r case when it placed the relevant language in
prior policy period. 99. Ihat laiinuage came from the New ^’ork standard
District Court judge determined that I 1) the policy pro fire insurance policN', which was adopted in most States
vision was inherently ambiguous; (2) there was no control b\- statute and was adopted ill Massachusetts in part. See
ling Massachusetts authonty; (.^) cases elsewhere relied on Annot. ot the 1943 standard Tire Insurance Policy 3 (eel.
factors not applicable in the circLimstances of this case; and ■ABA lor! and Insurance Practice Section, 2d ed. 1994);
(4) the ambiguity is “contained in every fire insuraiue policy \'ance 1)11 Insurance 807-808 (3d ed. 1931), Ihe old stan
written in Massachusetts.” She in\'oked S.|.C. Rule 1:03, as dard form policy used nationally (bul not here) and re
appearing in 382 Mass. 700 (1981), and cei tilied the follow placed generally in this countrv by the New '^’ork standard
ing two questions to this court: tire insurance polics', provided that, if premises “be or b e
come vacant or unoccupied and so remain for ten days,” the
"I. Does the 60-day vacanc\ pro\ision for tire insurance
policN' was \'oid. See o l d ('.oloiiy I m . c.o. V. ( i i i r v c v , 233 F.2d
policies prescribed by M.(i.i.. cli. 173 ÿ 9 9 - that the
299, 301 (4th ( ’ir. 1958); 'llio iìu iỉ I'. Ỉ n d i i ỉ t r i a ì F in ' & ( ' a s u -
iiisLirance company is not liable for losses (Kcurring
(illy 253 So. 2d 486, 488 (La. .App. 1971). 'Ihe ab and on
‘while the described premises, whethei' intended for
ment of the old form (“be or become vacant”) in favor o f th e
occupancy by owner or tenant, are \acant or Linoc-
less certain “are vacant” provision was a nioN'e awav from
cupied beyond a period of sixty coiisecuti\e days'—
\'oiding a policy or co\erage based on a \’acanc\' existing at
apply in the case wTiere part o f th e 60 da\s of vacancy
the policv’s inception.
occurred prior to the day the policy came into force?
W’e decline to interpret language used in a national stan
“2. If'the answer to the preceding question is in the nega dard policy to have a special iMassachusetts meaning siniplv
tive, would the result be different (that is, would the because of an implication that could be derived from an u n
\acancy provision apply, and thus preckide co\erage) certain legislative history, 'fhe language “are vacant” (which
where the policy in force at the time o f t h e fire was a replaced “be or become vacant”) has been consistentiv
renewal ofan immediately preceding policy, and a por regarded as referring only to a vacancy occurring after the
tion ot the period ot vacancy beyond 60 da\ s occurred commencement of coverage. See H o m e M ill. Fire his. Co.
during the immediatelv preceding policx' period? " V. Picrcc, 240 .Ark. 865, 402 s.\v.2d 672, 674-675 (1966);
K o liv c n i V. H a r t f o r d hire Ins. Co., 8 III. App. 3d 356, 360-361,
VVe conclude that consecuti\e days of \acanc\’ occurring
290 N.i;.2d 356 (1972); 'IlìoiììiìS 1' I n d u s t r i a l ¡■'in’ & C u i i i a l t y
prior to the policy period may be counted toward the sixtv
ịíonlinuci)
23:-' So. 2cl tSii, 4<S<S (l.a. .App. 19, 1 ); l l i n f t r. IhDicgiil C' 3. W’e next consider whether the vacancv exclusion
C.oiiov M ill, l i r e lii<. Co., 221 S.C. 188, 78 S.i;.2d 189, 191 applies where, as here, the lire loss occurred during the
(1933); Olil C o l o n y Ins. Co. i'. ( n i r v c v , 233 l-'.2d 299, 302 (4lh lirsl sixtv davs of the polic}' renewal and the vacanc}' had
(JI-.I938) (Noilli (Carolin.i knv); C n ilc il S idle s l-itlelily c- existed lor more than sixtv davs before the dale ot the lire.
Ciidi: (,'(). r. B o d it l of l u li u . n/ I d ir fie h l, 339 I-. Supp. 313, 318 We conclude thal the vacancy exclusion precludes coveiage
(NM). .Ala. 1972) (.Alabama law). ot the tire loss, assuming thal the renewal did not involve
2. Sonit.' opinions lioldiiig tliat tiic entire \acancy must an}' change ol significance in the coverage provided lor
occur during tlie poiic\ period resol\e the policy ambi the properlv damaged bv tire. See '¡hatc h er r. Relidiice Ins.
guity b\- reliance on the principle that ambiguities should Co., 226 .A.2d 919, 924-923 (Oel. Super 1967). W’e do not
be construed against the insurer. See H o m e .Miil. Ins. (.\i. have the circumstances ot the renewal belore us and, there
r. Pierce, s u p r a . 402 S.\\'.2d at 673; ()/</ C .olo ny Ins. C.o. i'. lore, our comments can onl}' be general.
C a r v e y . s u p r a : L'niletl S la te s l iile lity & C i i a r v. B o a r d ol Ihe rule we stale would unquestionablv' applv when a
P.iliic.. siiprit. Ihat principle has no proper place in coiv polic}' bv its terms, unlike the case before us, was autoniati-
struing policN' language that is, as in this case, dictatetl b\ call}' renewed on the limeK' payment t)f premium. See S ta te
statiUe. See . \ l c \ e i l l i'. . M e tr o p o lila n P r o p e r t y I.iah. Ins. P a n n (ic n . Ins. ('o. ol B lo o m i n g t o n r. C h d n i b e r s , 260 .Ark.
Co.. 420 Mass. 387, 389, 63(1 N.i;.2d 793 (1993); B il o d e a u 637, 640, 343 S.W’. 2d 470 (1976) (dein ing coverage because
r. I .i i n ih e r n i e ii s .Mul. ( A is u ii l ty ( a ).. 392 .Mass. 337, 341, 467 “|t|he old and onlv insLn'ance contract was simplv e.xtended
\ . i ; . 2 d 137 (1984). lor an additional }ear bv' the pavnieiit ot the premium tor
W’e conclude that the period ol a \acancy existing prior the ensuing vear”). Ihe result should not ttn'ii, however, lor-
to the date ccnerage is first ellectise sliould not be counted malisticalK' on whether a new polic}', substantialK' identical
in determining whether a \ acanc\ that excludes liabilit}' has as to the damaged properlv', was issued or the old policv' was
occin red. One lactor is oui‘ interest in giv ing ^ 99 the same continued bv' its terms.
treatment that is given to identical language in policies is Ihe controlling factor should be whal the parties reason
sued in other States. .Anotlier consideration is the opportu ablv should have understood the polic} language lo mean.
nit} an insiner has to determine w hether a v acancy exists at Ihe propert}' had been vacant since ,\hi}', 1989. (Coverage of
the inception ol a policv and lo choose not to underwrite the vacant premises uiuieniabK' ceased under the Iirst policv'
the risk, to amenti the polic\ pro\isit)ns (where permitted), sometime in lulv, 1989, pursuant to the vacancv exclusion
or explicitl} to provide coverage at an additional premium. clause, sixt} da}s after the vacanc} began, 'ihat exclusion
See ( .o n i n i e r c c In.-.. ( a > . r. K och. 23 .Mass. .App. C4. 383, 388, ot coverage continued at least lo September I, 1989, when
322 N’.l',.2d '■)79 (I9.SS). .Most important is the imderstand the second policv period began. .An exclusion ol coverage
ing that the parties should reasonablv ha\e concerning the unquestionablv' therealter existed during the second policv
poliiÂ language, applving normal reasoning anti anaKsis. period at least Irom the end I'l October, 1984, to Septem
See S i n ’c M o r S i ip e n i h ir k e ls . Inc. r. S k ellv D c t e c liy e S c r y . ber 1, I'-^JO, when the ihiid policv period began. No reason
Inc.. 339 .Mass. 221, 223 226, 268 N.I..2d 666 (1971). See also able insured would believe, in those circumstances, with the
l l o n i e liid e n i. Ins. (.'(>. r. .Merclunils Hislrih.. Inc.. 396 .Mass. uncontestable periods ol noncoverage defined above, that
103, 107, 483 N.I..2d 1099 (1983). l í a vacanc}' exists at the the vacant premises would annualK' be provided coverage
inception ol coxeiage, it is liardK reasonable to believe that iluring the first sixt}' davs of each renewal period. Ihere is
the coverage should terminate earlier than sixt}' davs later no sensible reason wh}' that result shoLild be reached or ex
when, lor the piemiimi paid, the insurer has agreed lo as pected. Ihe insurer agieed to assume the increased risk dur
sume lor sixtv' davs the increased risk ol loss that vacant ing a sixtv'-dav period and nol during a period ol a vacancy
premises present. lasting more than sixt}' da}s.
W’e answer the lirsl certilied question in the negative be W'e answei' the second certified question in the affirmative
cause the vacanc} exclusion does nol appk when the loss oc because a period ol a vacancv' during a prior policv' period
curred within sixt}' da}s ol the eltective date of the policv, should be lacked on lo the vacancy continuing during the
assuming that there was no pi ior coverage of the tvpe we next subseqLient polic}' period, assuming that there was no
shall describe in answer lo the ne.xt question. significant change in the coverage of th e premises.
3. We answer the first question in the negative (on the assump

tion that there was no continuation of coverage), and the second
question in the affirmative.
Ihc IM-OIM.I; ot'the State ot'IUinois, Appellant, the murder victim identitied at trial as tlie victim's. Ihe third
conversation took place later that day. Ihe defendant told her,
she testified, that he had roblx'd the murder victim after strik
Robert SAXDHRS, Appellee. ing him with a brick and tving him up. Me also told her that he
got the watch and ring during the robberv'. Ihis conversation,
No. 57801.
she said, was in the [presence of their children.
Supreme Court ot Ilhnois. Ihe State argues that communications between spouses
are prl\ ileged only when intended to be contidentiai. In this
Dec. 16, 1983.
case the State contends the confidentiality ot the first and
99 ill. 2d 262, 457 X.I-.2d 1241 (1983) third conversations was destroyed b\' the presence oi their
clilldreii. It contends that the sect)iid conversatit>n was not
SIMON, Iustice
contidentiai because the detendant must have e.xpected that
his wite would display the watch and ring he gave her by
'ihe principal issue raised by tliis appeal is tiie construc
wearing them In public, and that he did not therefore intend
tion and application to be given to the Illinois statute wliich
his act to be confidential. Ihe detendant argues that the re
proliibits luisband and wii’e trt>m testifying in criminal trials
cord does not clearly show that their cliildren were In the
as to an\’ comnumication or admission made o n e to tlu' other
immediate presence ol his v\ ile and himself in a pt)sition to
or as to an\- con\'ersation between them (111. lêw Stat. 1981,
hear their tirst and third conversations, and that during the
ch. 38, par. 133 1 ). More preciselv', the question is whetlu'r
sect>nd communication he acted in rehance u p o n the exp e c
tlu' privilege established by the statute is destroyed wlien the
tation that what transpired would be contidentiai.
communication, admission or conversation in question is in
Ihe starting ptiint lor our decisit>n Is the interpretatitin
the presence of children ot the spouses (Including a child ot
given in People v. ¡ \ i l u n i b o (1933), III. 2d 409, 123 N.H.2d
one ot the spouses who is not the child ot detendant) who arc
318, to the statute relating to the admisslbllitv of interspousal
old enough to understand the content of the conversation.
communications (111. Rev. Stat. 1981, ch. 38, pai'. I 33-1). Ihis
A secondarv issue is whetiier the plain error rule (87 ill. 2d
court, in P a ln n ih o . rejected the argument advanced by the
R. 613) should be applied to the admission of testimonv'
detend.int there that the statute ctnered all conversations b e
abcHii two conversations between spouses which mav' not
tween spouses, holding Instead that the statutory privilege,
have occurred! in the presence ol children but where no t>b-
like the similar common law privilege, applied onlv to conver
iection was aelvanced wiien all that was saui in them was re
sations which were t)I a contidentiai chai\icter. Ihe problem
peated In a tiiirtl ct'iiversatlon which toc)l< place a few hours
is {o determine under what circumst.mces conversations be
ia\er and Lonêi iiing v\huh teslimonv was admissible.
tween sptuises are to be regarded as confidential in character.
A murder conviction ofthe defendant, Robert Sanders, in a
Ihis court, in P a lu m b o , adopted the standards announced by
jury trial in the circuit court of ('ool< County based in part upon
the Supreme (Court in W olfle i 'nitcil State<. (1934), 291 I ’.S.
the testiniony of his wite was reversed by the appellate coLirt
7, l-l, 34 S. Ct. 279, 280, 78 I,. ICd. 617. 620, a iiolding which
(111 111. App.3d 1,66 111. IVc. 761,443 N.H.2d687). Weallowed
the court 41 years later in TraiJittiel r. D i i l e i i Statci^ (1980),
the State's petition for leave to appeal (87 ill. 2d R. 313(a)).
143 L'.S. U), 100 S. Ct. 906, 63 I,, l.d. 2d 186, said remained
During pretrial discover}', the defense tiled a nuitlon in
undisturbed, by adopting language iVom Wolfle w hich teaches
liinitic to prevent the delendant's wife, Beverlv' Sanders, from
the following: Ihere is a presumption th.at intersptnisal com-
testifying about conversations she had with her husband,
numlcations are intended to be contidentiai. Hut it, because
the defendant. Sliortly after It was tiled, the public defeiul-
ot the circumstances under which the comnumication took
ers oliice, wlilcli had been representing the detendant. was
place, it appears lhat confidentiality was not Intended, the
replaced by other appointed counsel, who represented the
communication is not i o be regaided as privileged. In this re
detendant at trial. Defendant’s new attornev did not seek a
gard. communications made In the presence of third persons
ruling on the motion iti liïtiiiic, and that motion was never
are usually not regarded as privileged because thev' are not
ruled upon. Neither did defendant's attornev object at trial to
made in confidence, hi l \ i l u m b o the comnumicati(in testified
the wife's testimonv'.
to bv the wite was regarded as not privileged because the e n
She testified to three conversations with her husband which
tire conversation took place in the presence of a third person
implicated him in the murder o f which he was convicted. In
who, according to the v\ ite, was trv ing to purchase narcotics
the first conversation, which occurred the day before the mur
trom the husband, who was the detendant In the case.
der, she testified the detendant told her while one or nune of
We agree with the appellate court's conclusion that the
her children was present that he was going to rob the murder
evidence establishes that the third conversation took place in
victim. Ihe second conversation occurred in their bedroom in
the presence of her sons, Robert w !u> was 13, and two others
the early morning hours ot the next dav'. During this conver
who were 10 aiul 8 at the time. On cross-examination the
sation, at which no one else was present, the detendant gave
wife repealed her direct testimonv, which is quoted ai length
hi'* vvife a ring and a watch wiiich tiie woman who lived with
lc o iitin u c,< )
ill t h e a p p c l h i t o c i Hi r t o p i n i o n , i h . U l l i c t h r o e c h i l d r e n w e r e of it was directed to him. In these circumstances, under the
p r e s e n t d n r iiig th e third coin ersation w h e n the lo llo w in g ex rule followed in this State, his presence rendered the conver
c h a n g e t o o k place: sation ineligible for the protection ofthe statutor)' prixilege.
lhe detendant argues that this court should recogni/.e a
"Q. Did you know anything about Cîrtiss L.ovelace?
pri\ilege, which he concedes does not presenti)' exist in Il
A. Only what ni\' husband had told me. linois, between parents and children which would include
Q. 'i’ou sa\' he was bragging when he told you this? con\’ersations between spouses at which their children are
A. Yes. present. Courts in a tew other jurisdictions ha\e cloaked
coniniuiiications between parent and child with a privi
Q. He wasn't nerxous, was he?
lege. (In re A g o slo (D. Nev. 1983), 333 K Supp. 1298; People
A. Not until he lound out the man was dead. i; F itzg e ra ld (1979), 101 Misc. 2d 712, 422 N.Y.S.2d 309.)
Q. When he first told \'ou was he ner\ous or bragging? lhe source of all privileges currently applicable in Illinois,
A. Not nervous. with the exception of the attorney-client pri\ ilege which
has a long-standing common law existence, is statutory. (See
Q. Pacing around the room?
III. lêv. Stat. 1981, ch. 31, par. 3.1, 111. Rev. Stat. 1981, ch.
A. No, he wasn't. 38, par. 104-14 (physician-patient); 111, Rev. Stat. 1981, ch.
Q. Pxcited? 31, par 48.1 (clergymen); III. Rev. Stat. 1981, ch. 9 Iti, par.
A. No. 810 (therapist-client); III. Re\'. Stat. 1981, ch. 11 1, par. 3333
(accountants); 111. Rev. Stat. 1981, ch. 31, par. 3,2 (rape cri
Q. Who was present when this conx'ersation occurred?
sis personnel-\'ictims); 111. Rev. Stat. 1981, ch. 48, par 640
A. Robert, .Albert and IV‘c Wee. (public officers, regarding unemployment compensation).)
Q. The\- were all there? W'e decline, therefore, to introduce an additional pri\ilege
A. 'les." by judicial authorit}' w hich w o u ld be applicable to c o mm u
nications between parents and children. Hven if we were to
following this exchange there was another reference during initiate this t\'pe of pri\ ilege, to assist the defendant here we
her cross-examination to the presence of the wife's oldest son: w'O Lild ha\e to extend it to children of onh' one spouse, for
“Q. .And that day of the e\ ents that you have testified to, Robert, the oldest and presiuiiably the most discerning ol the
October the l-fth, that da\ you had just finished a fight children and who was priv)' at least to the third conversation,
with your husband, right? was the son o f t h e wife and not the defendant, lhe statute
b)' its terms does not contemplate such a stretch. Were we
A, Yes.
to recogni/.e such a privilege under our judicial authority, it
Q. Did he threaten \'our son, Robert, in an\' wa\' at that would be impossible to contain it logical!)' trom spreading to
tinie^ coinersations with other relatises in whom a person might
A. No. norniall)' confide, or e\en to close Iriends.
Q. Hut during all ol’these coin ersations, Robert, sour son, .Moreo\er, we are constrained not onh' b)' the legislature’s
was present, right? lack of interest in extending an interspousal communications
priv ilege to communications between parent and child, but
A. Ves, he was."
also by the lact that evidentiary privileges of this sort exclude
'lhe t]uesfion presented in this case is whether the C i ) n i - rele\'ant evidence and thus work against the truthseeking
niunications fell outside the ambit of the statute's protection function of legal proceedings. In this they are distinct trom
because of the presence of the children. We have found no evidentiary rules, such as the prohibition against hearsay' tes
Illinois case holding that the confidentiality ofa con\ersation tinion}', which promote this function b)- insuring the qual
between a husband and wife is preserved when it takes place ity of th e evidence which is presented, 'ihe pri\ilege at issue
in the presence of children, lhe appellate court appears to here results not from a policy of safeguarding the quality of
ha\e exliaustivel}' researched the subject and concluded, as evidence at trial but from a policy of promoting family har-
we do, that the great weight of authority is that the presence mon)' independent of what might occur in a trial at some
of children ofthe spouses destroys confidentialit)' unless they future date. Ihe Supreme C'ourt in T r a m m e l i; L 'n ited S ta te s
are too young to understand what is being said. (See, e.g.. (1980), 443 U.S. 40, 30, 100 S. Ct. 906, 912, 63 I.. Hd. 2d 186,
M a s t e r v. M a s t e r (1960), 223 Md. 618, 166 A.2d 231; Free 193, has stated:
m a n V. h r e e m a n { \ 9 1 \ ) , 238 .\hiss. 130, 130 N.H. 220; F a ü e r i>.
“Testimonial exclusionar)' rules and privileges contra
I'a ller (1923), 100 W. Va. 309, 130 S.H. 270; McCormick, F.vi-
vene the fundamental principle that 'the public . . , has
</t’/!a'sec. 80, at 166(2ded. 1972); 97 C.|.S. W itn esses iiec. 27 \ ,
a right to every man’s e\'idence.’ L 'n ite d S ta te s v. B r y a n
at 777 (1937).) Nothing in the record indicates that Robert,
[(1930), 339 U.S. 323, 331, 70 S, Ct. 724, 730, 94 L. Hd.
then 13 years old, was not old enough or sufficiently bright
884, 891,1 .As such, they must be strictly construed and
to understand the coinersation at which he was present, par-
accepted 'onU' to the \'er}' limited extent that permitting
ticularlv inasmuch as the wife's testinions’ indicates that some
a rcUisal lo tcsiih- or excluding relevant c\'idciices has where, as in this case, the witness who is a lamilv mem
a public good traiiscciuhn^ ihc noinially predominant ber volunteers lier testimonv; the voluntariness o f the act
principle of utili/ing all rational means lor ascertaining is strong evidence that the choice the witness faced was an
truth.’ ¡-:ikin< V. I iiitcii S ta te s |(1960), 361 U.S. 206. 234. easv one for her to make. We ctinciude that even if the ('on-
80 S. Ct. 1437, 1434, 1 1.. i.d. 2d 1669. 1693] (Frankfurter. stitution bestows a privilege on coninuinications between
|.. dissenting)." a parent and a child, an issue which we d o not decide here,
that privilege ma\' be waived bv the teslitving witness acting
See also <S |. Wigmore. i'viifcficc section 22S3. at 327-2<S
alone. (Compare L 'n ite d S t a t e s r. Pcìiỉì (9th Civ. 1980), 647
(1961).
F.2d 876, 882 (rejecting a challenge to a child's voluntary
I h c expansitin ol existing testimonial privileges and ac
testimonv based on due process, on which the right to pri
ceplance of new ones involves a balancing of public policies
vacv depends).
which slu)uld be left lo the legislature. .A compelling reason is
Although thev were the subject o f t h e motion ĨỈ1 liniific
that while ctnirls, as institutions, find it easv to perceive \ alue
which was never ruled upon, no objection was advanced at
in public policies such as those lavoring the admission of all
trial when the wife testitied about the first and second con-
relevant and reliable evidence which directly assist the judi
versatiinis. Cnder Ị ^ ì l u n i h o the Illinois statute preventing
cial lunction ot ascertaining the truth, it is not their primary
testimonv bv either spouse concerning confidential c o m
iLuiction to promote policies aimed al broader social goals
munications between them creates onlv a privilege, and a
more distantly related to the judiciar\'. Ihis is primarily the
privilege mav be waived by the holder of it, in this case the
responsibilitv' ol ihe legislatuiv. To the extent that such poli
husband. (See cômnient. M a r i t a l P rivileges, 46 Chi.-Kent
cies conlhcl with truth seeking or olher values central to the
F. Rev. 71, 82- S3 (1969).) 'Iherefore, in order to alĩirm the
jutliciai task, the balance thal courts draw might not rellect
appellate court's reversal o f the convicti<.)ii. we would have
the choice the legislature would make.
U) conclude thal the court properlv applied the plain errt>r
Ihe detendant argues, however, thal inasmuch as the
doctrine (87 111. 2d R. 613) in holding that testimonv re-
l ederal coiu ts have recogni/etl the right of privacv' to be ol
»ardinu the first two ct)nversations was improperiv admit
constitutional dimension in the context of certain functions
ted. W'e believe the appellate C(Hirt erred in reachiiii; that
which are intimately associated with the family, we should
conclusion.
hold that comnumical ions (tl a conlidential nature between
Ihe plain error doctrine is properly applied only when
a parent and his chikl enjov an ev identiarv privilege undei
the question ol i;uilt is close and the evidence in question
the C;onstitutu)n which did iu)l exist under the c o mmon
might have significantlv alfected the outcome o i the case
law. ihe defendant [Ktinls t>ut that in In rc A g o s t o (D. N'ev.
{P eop le V. l a i k s o f i (1981), 84 111. 2d 330, 339. 49 111. Dec. 719,
19S3). 333 F. Supp. 129S. and ¡ \ ’o p lc r. i 'l t z g c r a l d (1979).
418 \.1..2d 739; P eople V. P i . k e t t (1973), 34 ill. 2d 280, 283,
101 Misc. 2d 712. 422 N'.V.S.2d 309, courts have recognized
296 \ l-,2d 8^61. ov wliere the error alleged is so substantial
the sov \ ol constitutionally based privilege sought to be i n
as lo retlect on the fairness or inipartialitv of the trial reuard-
voked here.
less of how closelv balanced the evidence is {P eople I'. B a v n c s
We need not decide here, ani-i we do nol tiecide. whether
(1981), 8S ill. 2d 223, 233 -34, 244, 38 111. Dec. 819. 430
the decisions in hi rc A g o s lo or People v. I'i tzgeralti were
\.l'..2d 1070; People V. R o b e r t s ( \ 9 7 9 ) , 73 ill. 2d 1, 14, 23 111.
sound, lor the question in both o f th e s e cases was whether
Dec. 673, 387 N.l-.2d 331). I h e third conversation which we
a parent or a child could be compelled against his will to
conclude, as the appellate court did, was properlv admitted.
testitx' against the olher. [See also hi re .-\ C' M (197(S). 61
incorỊìoraled substantialh' all of what was said in the first
A.I).2d 426. 403 ^■.^'.S.2d 373 (same).) Ihe testimony in the
two conversations. Ihe defendant, in the third conversation,
instant case, by contrast, was given by the defendants wife,
discussed the robberv ol the murder victim, said he hit him
without protest and apparently ol her own Iree will, after she
over the head with a brick, displayed several items ot cloth-
was approached and requested to give it by an assistant State's
int; taken fri)ni the victim, and referred to the watch and ring
Attorney.
he had given his wife earlier that day. 'Ihus, even conceding
W'e find tills dilference lo be signiiicanl. Both A g o s t o and
lhal no one overheard the first two conversations and that
the Xew York courts, in holding that a constitutional privi
ihev were privilet>ed and should have been excluded had
lege protected the communicaiions there at issue, relied
timely objections been made, in practical eifect they did no
heavily on conjecture tlial a iamih' member who is torced
more than duplicate the incriminating content o f t h e third
to testily against her vvill would face the unpleasant choice
conversation which was properlv admitted. For that reason,
of aiding the criminal conviction o f a loved one, periuring
the testimonv winch narrated the defendant’s conversation
herself on the staiul. or risking a citation tor contempt of
and conduct during the first two conversations was not prej
ct)urt tor refusing to leslitv', and the belief that the harshness
udicial. It added ntithing to the third conversation that was
i)f this choice has the ellect ot sundering the familv' rela
needed bv the prosecutor It) implicate the defendant, and af
tionship. [hi re A g o s t o (IX Nev. 19S3), 333 F. Supp. 1298,
ter the third ct)nversation was in evidence, the evidence as to
1309 -10, 1326; hi rc A & M (1978), 61 A.l).2d 426. 4 32-33,
the defendant’s t;uilt was no Ioniser closelv balanced.
403 N.Y.S.2d 373. 380.) Such a fear is without foundation
(cotnifnics)
Nor do \M' rcg.iitl am crnirs that might h a w been 370-71.) W'e belie\e it should nol have been applied here,
matlc «.oiucniing llic .idmissibihly ol tlic lirst and sccond tor the tairness and impartiality ot the tri<il was nol sub-
coincrsalioiis as tlcpri\ing the acciiscd ot tlie substantial slantialh’ compromised by the errors, il any took place. See
means o i c n i o \ ing a tair and impartial trial {I'c op lc r. R o b P eople V. «o/kT/s (1979), 75 111. 2d 1,14 15, 25 III. Dec. 675,
c m (1979), 73 111. 2d 1,14, 23 III. Dcc. 675. 387 X.i:.2d 331; 387 N.i:.2d 331.
citing P eo p le r. lUirsoii (1957), II III. 2d 360, 370- 71, 143 Ihe detendant has raised a number ot Other issues, none
N.I..2d 237, see P eo p le r. W h i t l o w (1982), 89 ill. 2d 322, ot which were considered bv the appellate court because of
342, 60 111. Dec. 587, 433 N.h.2d 629), as the admission ot its erroneous reversal ol the coiniction on the ground ot
polygraph ex idence does (see P eo p le v. B a y i i c i (1981), 88 improper use of prix ileged cíMiimunications. Ihe juiignient
111. 2d 225, 244, 58 III. Dec. 819, 430 N.H.2d 1070). As we of the appellate court is reversed and the caLise is remanded
lia\e noted, the husband-wi l e testimonial pri\ilege oper to that court tor disposition o f t h e issues raised by the d e
ates not to purge a trial ot unreliable e\'ideiice but to wit h fendant but not reached b\’ its original decision. See People
hold rele\ant and ol'ten liigliK’ reliable es’idence I'roni the V. S i m p s o n (1977), 68 111. 2d 276, 284, 12 III. Dec. 234, 369
trier ol lact. Ihe decision whether to apply the plain error N.K.2d 1248.
doctrine where the e\’idence is not close is one ol grace.
{ P e o p le V. R o b e r t s (1979), 75 111. 2d 1, 14, 25 111. Dec. 675,
387 N.i:.2d 331; P eo p le v. B u r s o i i (1957), 11 111. 2d 360, R e v e r s e d a n d r e n u i n d e d , w ith dire ction s.
I’eler S T.ANl.I.'i', Sr., Petitioner, the dead mother had not been married. Stanlev''s actual fit
ness as a lather was irrelevant. In re Stanley, 45 111. 2d 132,
256 N.L.2d 814 (1970).
Stale o f ILLINOIS. Stanley presses his equal protection claini here. 'Ihe State
continues to respond that unwed fathers are presumed unlit
No. 70 501 I.
to raise their children and that it is unnecessarv' to hold indi-
.Argued Oct. 19, 1971. v iduali/ed hearings to determine whether particular lathers
are in lact unlit parents belore thev are separated Irom their
D e u d e i l .April 3, 1972.
children. W'e granteii certiorari, 400 L'.S. 1020, 91 S. Ct. 584,
103 L'.S. o45 11972) 27 L. I d. 2d (i31 (1971), to determine whetiier this method
ol procedure bv' presumption coukl be allowed to stand in
.\lr. luslitc W'l 11 1 I. delivered the opinion ol the ('ourt.
light ofthe fact that Illinois allows married lathers—whether
loan Stanley lived with Peter Stanlev interniittentiv divorced, widowed, or separatei.1 ,\nd mothers—even if
toi' 18 years, during which time thev had thiee children. u n w e d - t h e benefit o f t h e presumption that they are lit to
W hen loan Stanley died, Peter Stanley lost not only her but raise their children.
also his children. I'luler Illinois law, the children ot unwed
lathers become wartls ot the State upon the death ot the I
mother. .Ai.torilingly, upon loan Stanley's death, in a d e p e n
dency proceeding instituted by the State ot Illinois, Stan ■At the outset we reiect any suggestion that we need not
lev s children were declared wards ot the State and placed consider the proprietv’ ot the dependency proceeding that
w ith court appointed guardians. Stanley appealed, claiming separated the Stanlevs becaLise Stanlev' niight be able lo regain
that he had never been shovvn to be an unlit parent and custody of his children as a guardian or through adoption
thal since married lathers and unwed mothers could not be proceedings. Ihe suggestion is that il Stanlev- has been treated
deprivetl of their children without such a showing, he had ditferentK- from other parents, the ditierence is immaterial
been deprived ol the equal protection ot the laws guaran and not legally cognizable tor the purposes ol the L'ourteenth
teed him bv the Lourteenth .Amendment. Ihe Illinois Su .Amendment. Ihis CiHirt has not, however embraced the gen
preme Court accepted the fact that Stanley's own Lintitness eral proposition that a wrong may be done if it can be undone.
hail not been establisheii but reiected the equal protection C4. Sn iada cli r. I'aniily I in a n c e (\)rp . ol Biiy M e w , 395 L'.S.
tlaini, holding that Stanlev could properly be separated 337, 89 S. Ct. 1820, 23 L. I'd. 2d 349 (1969). Surely in the case
trom his chililren upon prool o f t h e single tact that he and before us, if there is delav' between the doing and the undoing
petitioner sutlers from the deprivation ol his children, and the
children suiter Irom uncertainty and dislocation.
L Unconiradicted testimony of Peter Stanley, App. 22.
It is clear moreover that Stanley does not have the means
2. Only two children are involved in this litigation. at hand promptiv lo erase the atlverse consequences o f t h e
piDccctling in the course of which his children were dechired II
wards ot the State. It is first urged that Stanley could act to
Illinois has two principal methods tit renio\ ing nondeiin'
adopt Ilis children. But under Illinois law, Stanle\' is treated
quent children trom the homes ot their parents. In a depen-
not as a parent but as a stranger to his children, and the de
denc\' proceeding it may demonstrate that the children are
pendency proceeding has gone torward on the presumption
wards t)f the State because they have no surviving parent or
that he is unht to exercise parental rights. Insofar as we are
guardian. 111. Rev Stat., c. 37, §§ 702-1, 702-5. In a neglect
informed, Illinois law allords him no priority in adoption
proceeding it may show that children should be wards of th e
proceedings. It would he his burden to establish not only that
State because the present parent(s) or guardian does not pro-
he would be a suitable parent but also that he would be the
\ ide suitable care. 111. Re\'. Stat., c. 37, §§ 7 0 2 - 1, 702-4.
most suitable ot all who might want custod\ o f th e children.
The State's right—indeed, duty—to protect minor chil
Neither can we ignore that in the proceedings from which
dren through a iudicial deterniination oi their interests in
this action developed, the “p*‘^'hation oiiicer,” see App. 17,
a neglect proceeding is not challenged here. Rather, we are
the assistant state's attorney, see id., at 29-30, and the judge
faced with a dependency statute that empowers state oihcials
charged with the case, see iti., at 16-1<S, 23, made it apparent
to circumvent neglect proceedings on the theory that an u n
that Stanley, unmarried and impecunious as lie is, could not
wed tather is not a “parent" whose existing relationship with
now expect to profit tVoni adoption proceedings, lhe Illinois
his children must be considered.^ “Parents,” says the State,
Supreme Côurt apparently recognized some or all of these
^‘means the tather and mother o f a legitimate child, or the
considerations, because it did not suggest that Stanley's case
sur\ i\'or o \ them, or the natural mother of an illegitimate
was undercut by his failure to petition for adoption.
child, and includes any adoptive parent," III. Rev. Stat., c. 37,
Before us, the State k>cuses on Stanley's tailure to petition
^ 701-14, but the term does not include unwed fathers.
for ‘custody and control" - the second rt)ute bv which, it is
l'nder Illinois law, theivfore, while the children o f all par
urged, he might regain authorit\- lor his children. Passing the
ents can be taken trom them in neglect pn^ceedings, that is
(,)bvious issue whether it would be futile or burdensome for an
only after notice, hearing, and proof of such unfitness as a
unmarried tather—without tunds and alread\‘ once presumed
parent as amounts to neglect, an unwed father is uniquely
unfit—to petition for custody, this suggestion tnerU)oks the
subject to ihe more simplistic dependency proceeding. By
tact that legal custody is not parenthood or adoption. A per
use ol this proceeding, the State, on showing that the father
son appointed guardian in an action tor custod\' and control
was not married to the mother, need not prove unfitness in
is subject to removal at aii\- time without such cause as must
fact, because it is presumed at law. Thus, the unwed lather's
be shown in a neglect proceeding against a parent. 111. Rev
claim o f parental qualification is avoided as "irrelevant.”
Stat.. c. 37, § 705-8. He mav nol take the children out of the
In considering this procedure under the Due Process
iurisdiction without the court's appnn al. 1le ma\- be required
CTause. we recognize, as we have in other cases, that due pro
to report to the court as to his disposition tif the children’s
cess ol law cloes ii»)l require a heal ing "in e\ ei \ concei\aWe
atiaii's. 111. Rev. Stat., c. 37, § 705-8. ()b\iousl\ then, e\en if
cas eof go \ er nment impairment (if pri\ate interest." iA i t c t c r i u
Stanle\' were a mere step awa\ from "custody and control." to
ii}}d R c s t a u n i n t W o r k e r s U n i o u ctc. r. M c l : l r o \ \ 367 U.S. 886,
give an unwed lather only “custod\- and control" would still
894, 81 S. Ct, 1743, 1748, 6 I.. F.d. 2d 1230 (1961). That case
be to leave him seriously preiudiced by reason of iiis status.
explained that "[t|he very nature of due process negates any
We must therefore examine the question that Illinois
concept of inflexible procedures universal!)' applicable to e v
would have us avoid: Is a presumption that distinguishes and
ery imaginable situation" and firmly established that “what
burdens ail unwed lathers ctMistitulionally repugnant? We
procedures due process may require under any given set of
conclude that, as a niatter ot due princess of law, Stanle\- \sas
circumstances must begin with a determination o f t h e p^re-
entitled to a hearing on his htness as a parent before his chil
cise nature ot the government function iin'olved as well as of
dren were taken irt)m him and that, by den\'ing him a hearing
the pri\'ate interest that has been afTected by governmental
and extending it to all other parents whose custod\' of their
action.” /(/., at 895, 81 S. (T., at 1748; (¡ o l d h c r g v. Kelly, 397
children is challenged, the State denied Stanley the equal pro
U.S. 254, 263, 90 S. Ct. 101 1, 1018, 25 1.. Hd. 2d 287 (1970).
tection ofthe laws guaranteed by the lourteenth Amendment.
The private interest here, that of a man in the children he
has sired and raised, undeniably warrants deference and, ab
sent a po\s'erful countervailing interest, protection. It is plain
that the interest of a parent in the conipanitinship, care, cus
3. The Illinois Supreme Court's opinion is not at all contrary to tody and management of his or her children “conie[s] to this
this conclusion. That court said:
■'Hlhe trial court's comments clearly indicate the court's

willingness to consider a future request by the father for 4. Even wtiile refusing to label him a "legal parent/' the State
c u sto d y a nd guardianship." 45 III. 2d 132,135, 256 N.E.2d 814, does not deny that Stanley has a special interest in the outcome
816. (Italics added.) See also the comment of Stanley's counsel of these proceedings. It is undisputed that he is the father of these
on oral argument; "If Peter Stanley could have adopted his children, that he lived with the two children whose custody is
children, we would not be here today." Tr. of Oral Arg. 7. challenged all their lives, and that he has supported them.
(continues)
(Couit with .1 iiioiiK'ntuni tor icspcct lacking when appeal is the State interest in separating children I’rom fathers without
made to liberties which derive mereh Irom shitting economic a hearing designed to deterniine whether the lather is unfit
arrangements." K o v iu s i’. C.oopcr, 336 I'.S. 77, 93, 69 S. (Ct. McS, in a particular disputed case? W’e observe that the State reg
■138, 93 I.. ICd. 313 (1949) (Frankfurter, |., concurring). isters no gain towards its declared goals when it separates
Ihe (Court has frequenth' emphasized the importance ol children from the C L i s t o d y ol lit parents. Indeed, il Stanley is
the tamih. Ihe rights to conceive aiul to raise one’s children a lit lather, the State spites its own articulated goals when it
have been deenu-d “essential," M e r e r r. S e h r a s k i i. 262 L'.S. needlesslv separates him trom his family.
390, 399, 43 S. (Ct. 623, 626, 67 I.. ICd. 1042 (1923), "basic civil In Bell r. B u r s o n , 402 L’.S. 333, 91 S. (Ct. 1386, 29 L. ICd. 2tf
rights of nian," S k iiiite r r. O k h i l i i v u a , 316 L.S. 333, 341, 62 S. 90 (1971), we lound a scheme repugnant to the Due Process
(Ct. 1 I 10, 1 I 13, 86 I.. FCd.1635 (1942), aiui “|r]ights far nuire (Clause becaLise it deprived a driver ot his license without ret
precious . . . than propei tv' rights," M u r v. A iu lc rso ii, 343 L'.S. erence to the verv I’actor (there fault in driving, here fitness as
328, 333, 73 S. (Ct. 840, 843, 97 I.. ICd. 1221 (1933). “It is car a parent) that the State itself deemed fundamental to its statu
dinal with us that the custodv', care and luirture o f t h e child torv scheme. Illinois would avoid the sell-contradiction that
reside first in the parents, whose primarv' lunction and tree- rendered the (leorgia license suspension svstem invalid by
doni include preparation tor obligations the state can neither arguing that Stanley and all other unmarried lathers can rea
supply nor hinder.’’ P rince v. M a s s ti c ln i i e l l i, 32 I L’.S. 138, 166, sonablv be presumed to be unqualified to raise their children.'
64 S. (Ct. 438, 442, 88 L. ICd. 643 (1944). Ihe integrity of the
tarnily unit has found protection iii the Due I’rocess (Clause
5, Illinois says in its brief, at 21-23, "[T]he only relevant consid
ol the Fourteenth .Anu'ndnu’iit, .V/i'i'i'r r. X e b m s k i i . s i i p m ,
eration in determining the propriety of governmental intervention
262 L'.S. at 399, 43 S. (Ct. at 626, the FCqual Protection (Clause
in the raising of children is whether the best interests of the child
ot the Fourteenth .Anu'iuinu'nt, S k i n n e r r. O k ltilion ui, iiip rn , are served by SLich intervention,
316 L’.S., at 341, 62 S. (Ct., at 1113, and the Ninth .AiiumuL "In effect, Illinois has imposed a statutory presumption that
nu-nt, Ciri>\rohi C.oim ecticnl, 381 L’.S. 479, 496, S3 S. (Cl. the best interests of a particular group of children necessitates
1678, 14 L. led. 2d 3 10 (1963) ((¡oldberg, |., concurring). some governmental supervision in certain clearly defined
No)' has the law relused to recognize those tamily relatioi'i' situations. The group of children who are illegitimate are
shi('s unlegitimized bv' a marriage ceremony. Ihe (Court has distinguishable from legitimate children not so mrich by their
declareii Lnuonstitutioiial a state statute denv ing natural, but status at birth as by the factual differences in their upbringing.
illegitiniate, children a wrongtul-death actioii tor the ileath ol While a legitimate child usually is raised by both parents with
the attendant familial relationships and a firm concept of home
their niother, emphasizing that such children cannot be de
and identity, the illegitimate child normally knows only one
nied the right ot other children because tan'iilial boiuis in such
parent the mother___
cases were olten as warm, enduring, aiui important as those
",, The petitioner has premised his argument upon par
arising within a more lormallv organized lamilv' unit. I .e r r ticular factual circumstances a lengthy relationship with the
i.o iiisnnia, 391 L.S. (i8, 71-72, 88 S. (Ct. 1309, 1311, 20 L. ICd, mother, , a familial relationship with the two children, and a
2d 43(1 (1968). " Fo say that the test ol’equal protection should general assumption that this relationship approximates that in
be the 'legal' rather than the biological relationship is to av'oid which the natural parents are married to each other.
the issue. F'or the FCqual Protection (Clause necessarilv limits ",.. Even if this characterization were accurate (the record
the authority ot a State to draw such 'legal' lines as it chooses." IS insufficient to support it) it would not affect the validity of
a io ii i i r. A in e r ic iin ( ¡ n a n i n l e e c- l.ialn litr liii. ( \ i , 391 L'.S. 73, the statutory definition of parent.,,. The petitioner does not
73 -76, 88 S. (Ct. 1313, 1316, 20 L. ICd. 2d 441 (1968). deny that the children are illegitimate. The record reflects their
natural mother's death. Given these two factors, grounds ex
Ihese authorities make it clear that, at the least, Stanley's
ist for the State's intervention to ensure adequate care and
interest in retaining custody of his children is cognizable and
protection for these children. This is true whether or not this
substantial.
particular petitioner assimilates all or none of the normal char
For its part, the Slate has made its interest quite plain: acteristics common to the classification of fathers who are not
Illinois has declared that the aini of tlu' luvenile (Ciuirt Act is married to the mothers of their children." See also Illinois' Brief
to protect “the nuiral, enuitional, nu'ntal, and phvsical wel 23 ("The comparison of married and putative fathers involves
fare ot the minor and the best interests ol the coninumity" exclusively factual differences. The most significant of these
and to “strengthen the ii'iinor's tamily ties whenever possible, are the presence or absence of the father from the home on a
renuiving hiii'i Ironi the custodv' of his parents onlv' when his day-to-day basis and the responsibility imposed upon the rela
welfare or safety or the protection ofthe public caniu)t be ad- tionship"), id., at 24 (to the same effect), id., at 31 (quoted below
equatelv' safeguarded without removal.. .. ’’ III. Rev. Stat., c. 37, in n. 6), Id., at 24- 26 (physiological and other studies are cited
in support of the proposition that men are not naturally inclined
701-2. Ihese are legitimate interests, well within the power
to childrearing), and Tr. of Oral Arg. 31 ("We submit that both
o f t h e State to implement. W'e do not question the assertion
based on history or [sic] culture the very real differences ...
that neglectful parents may be separated from their children.
between the married father and the unmarried father, in terms
Hut we are here not asked to evaluate the legitimacv' ol of their interests in children and their legal responsibility for their
the state ends, ratlier, to determine whether the means used children, and the statute here fulfills the compelling govern
to achieve these ends are constitutionallv delensible. W’hat is mental objective of protecting children ,,.").
It may he, .is the Slate Insists, that most unmarried la “W'e recogni/e lhal special problems n'lax' be involxed
thers are iinsuitahle and negleetlul parents. It ma\' also he in tietermining whether serxicemen haxe aclualh' a c
that Staiile)' is sueh a parent and that his ehlldren should be quired a new domicile in a Slate tor franchise purposes.
placed in olher hands. Hut all unmarried lathers are not in W'e eii'iphasi/e that Texas is free to lake reasonable and
this category: some are whol h suited to have custody ot their adequate steps, as haxe olher Stales, lo see lhal all ap
children, lhat much the State readily concedes, and nothing plicants for the x'ole aclualh' fulfill the requirements of
in this record indicates that Stanle\' is or has been a neglect bona lide residence. But jlhe challenged] provision goes
lul lather who has not cared lor his children. t ii\en the op- beyond such rules. ']T’]he presuii'iplion here created is . . .
portunit}' to make his case, Stanley may have been seen lo be deliniteh conclusive—incapable ol being oxercome
desei'ving ot custody ot his ortspring. Had this been so, the bx' proof O t the most positixe character.” Id., al 96, 85
State's statutor}' polic\' would have been furthered b\' lea\ ing S. Cit., al 780.
custod\ in him.
".All serx'icenien not residents of Texas before induction,”
C i i n i n g l o u r. Rash, 3<S() L'.S. 89, 83 S. ('t. 775, 13 1.. lid.
we concluded, “come within the prox ision’s sweep. Nol one
2d 675 (1965), dealt with a sin'iilar situation. Ihere we rec-
ol theni can ever vole in Texas, no niatler” what their indi-
ogni/ed that Texas had a powerful interest in restricting its
x'idual qualifications. Ibid. W'e found such a situation repug
electorate to bona fide residents. It was not disputed lhat
nant lo the f-A]ual Protection (Tause.
niosl servicenien stationed in Texas had no intentioii of re
Despite Bell and ( . i i n i n g t o n , il niax' be argLied that u n
maining in the State; most therefore could be deprived ot
married lathers are so seldom fit lhat Illinois need not u n
a vote in state affairs. Kut we refused to tolerate a blanket
dergo the adminislralixe inconvenience of inquiry in anx'
exclusion depri\ing all serxicemen o f t h e x'ote, when some
case, including Stanlex ’s. The establishment of pronipt ef-
servicemen clearly were bona fide residents and when “more
ticacioLis procedLires to achiexe legitimate slate ends is a
precise tests,” x/., at 95, 85 S. ('t., at 779, were available to
proper state interest worlhx' of cogni/ance in constitulional
distinguish members of this latter group. “IVy forbidding a
adjudication. But the ( ônslilulion recognizes higher x'alues
soldier e\ er to controvert the presumption of I'loriresitlence,"
than speed and elliciencx.' Iiuleed, one might tairh' sax' of
ill., at 96, 85 S. c;t., at 780, the State, we said, uniustifiabh'
the Bill ot Rights in general, ,uul the Due Process (Tause in
ellected a substantial deprixation. It xiewed people one
parlicular lhal ihex' were designed lo protect the Iragile x al-
dimensionallx' (as serx'icemen) when a finer perception could
ues of .1 xulnerable citizenrx Irom the oxerbearing concern
readih hax'e been achiexed bx' assessing a serviceman’s claim
lor efiiciencx' and eflicacx' lhat max' characlei ize praisewor-
to residencx' oi'i an indix idualized basis.
llix goxermnenl oliicials no less, and perhaps more, than
mediotre ones.
Proceiiure bx presumption is alwaxs cheaper and easier
6. The State speaks of "the general disinterest of putative than indix'iciLialized delermm.ilion. Bui when, as liere, the
fathers in their illegitimate children" (Brief 8) and opines that "|i| procedure forecloses the lielermiiKilixe issues of compe-
n most instances the natural father is a stranger to his children." leiice and c,ire, x\ hen il explicillx ilistlains present realities
Brief 31 in deference lo past formalities, il neetllessh risks running
7. See In re I , 8 Mich. App. 122,154 N.W.2d 27 (1967). There a

panel of the Michigan Court of Appeals, in unanimously affirming
a circuit court's determination thatthe father of an illegitimate son
was hest suited to raise the boy, said:
"The appellants' presentation in this case proceeds on the 8. Cf. R e e d i/. R eed, 404 U.S. 71, 76, 92 S. Ct. 251, 254, 30 L. Ed,
assumption that placing Mark for adoption is inherently 2d 225 (1971), "Clearly the objective of reducing the workload
preferable to rearing by his father, that uprooting him trom on probate courts by eliminating one class of contests is not
the family which he knew from birth until he was a year and without some legitimacy. . . . |But to] give a mandatory prefer
a half old, secretly institutionalizing him and later transfer ence to members of either sex over members of the other,
ring him to strangers is so incontrovertibly better that no merely to accomplish the elimination of hearings on the merits,
court has the power even to consider the matter. Hardly is to make the very kind ot arbitrary legislative choice forbidden
anyone would even suggest such a proposition if we were by the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment."
talking about a child born in wedlock. Carrington i/. Rash. 380 U.S. 89, 96, 85 S, Ct. 775, 780 (19651,
"We are not aware of any sociological data justifying the teaches the same lesson. ", . , States may not casually deprive
assumption that an illegitimate child reared by his natural a class of individuals of the vote because of some remote ad
father is less likely to receive a proper upbringing than one ministrative benefit to the State Oyama \ . [ S t a t e o fj California,
j
reared by his natural father who was at one time married to 332 U.S. 633, 68 S. Ct. 269, 92 L. Ed, 249. By forbidding a soldier
his mother, or that the stigma of illegitimacy is so pervasive ever to controvert the presumption of nonresidence, the Texas
it requires adoption by strangers and permanent termina Constitution imposes an invidious discrimination in violation of
tion of a subsisting relationship with the child's father," I d , the Fourteenth .Amendment."
atl46, 154 N.W,2d,al39,
(COIllilUICi)
rouglisliiHi ()\cr the iiiipiMhint interests til both piirent and only after a hearing and proof of neglect. The children t)fun-
cliild. It thcrctoro cannot stand.'' mari'ied fathers, howeser, are declared dependent children
Bell r. B i m o i i held that the State could not, while purport without a hearing on parental fitness and without proi'f iif
ing to be concerned with tault in suspending a driver's li neglect. Stanley’s claim in the state courts and here is that
cense, deprive a citi/en oldiis license without a hearing that failure to afford him a hearing t>n his parental qualifications
would assess fault. Absent fault, the State’s declared interest while extending it to other parents denied him equal prc'tec-
was so attenuated tliat adiiiinistrati\ e con\’enience was insut- tion o f th e laws. We ha\e concluded that all Illinois parents
ficient to excuse a hearing where evidence o f fault could be are constitutionally entitled to a hearing on their fitness b e
considered. That dri\ers in\’ol \ e d in accidents, as a statistical fore their children are removed from their custody It follows
matter, might be ver\- likeK' to have been wholly or partially that den\ ing such a hearing to Stanley and those like him
at huilt did not loreclose hearing and proof in specific cases while granting it to other Illinois parents is inescapably c o n
before licenses were suspended. trar)' to the Hqual Protection Clause. '
We think that [the] Hue I’rocess Cdause mandates a The iudgment o f the Supi'eme Court of Illinois is reversed
similar result here. The State's interest in caring for Stanley’s and the case is remanded to that court for proceedings not
children is d c if Stanle\' is shown to be a fit father, inconsistent with this opinion. It is so ordered.
it insists on presuming lather than prtning Stanley’s unfit Re\'ersed and remanded.
ness soleh- because it is more c on\’enient to presume than lo Mr lu.stice POWHI.I. and Ah', lustice RHHNQCIS T took
pro\’e. L’nder the Due Process ('laLise that ad\ antage is insuf no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
ficient to iustify refusing a lather a hearing when the issue at Mr. lustice I)C)b'(jLAS joins in Parts I and II of' this
stake is the dismemberment of his f'amih'. opinion.
■Mr. Chief lustice HL'RCj LR, with whom Mr. justice
Ill B1.A(;KMUN' concurs, dissenting.
The State of Illinois assumes custody of the children of

married parents, di\'orceti parents, and unmarried mothers
9. We note in passing that the incremental cost of offering 10. Predicating a finding of constitutional invalidity under the
unwed fathers an opportunity for individualized hearings on fit Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment on the
ness appears to be minimal. If unwed fathers, in the main, do nol observation that a State has accorded bedrock procedural rights
care about the disposition of their children, they will nol appear to some, but not to all similarly situated, is not contradictory to
to demand hearings. If they do care, under the scheme here held our holding in Picard v. Connor, 404 U.S. 270, 92 S. Ct, 509, 30 L,
invalid, Illinois would admittedly at some later time have to af Ed, 2d 438 (1971), In that case a due process, ratherthan an equal
ford them a properly focused hearing in a custody or adoption protection, claim was raised in the state courts. The federal courts
proceeding. were, in our opinion, barred from reversing the state conviction
Extending opportunity for hearing to unwed fathers who on grounds of contravention of the Equal Protection Clause when
desire and claim competence to care for their children cre that clause had not been referred to for consideration by the state
ates no constitutional or procedural obstacle to foreclosing authorities. Here, in contrast, we dispose of the case on the con
those unwed fathers who are not so inclined. The Illinois stitutional premise raised below, reaching the result by a method
law governing procedure in |uvenile cases, 111. Rev, Stat,, of analysis readily available to the state court.
c, 37, § 704- 1 et seq„ provides for personal service, notice For the same reason the strictures of Cardinals v. Loui
by certified mail, or for notice by publication when personal siana. 394 U S, 437, 89 S, Ct. 1161, 22 L Ed. 2d 398 (1969), and
or certified mail service cannot be had or when notice is Hill I'. California, 401 U.S. 797, 91 S, Ct. 1106, 28 L. Ed. 2d 484
directed to unknown respondents under the style of "All (1971), have been fully observed.
whom it may Concern." Unwed fathers who do not promptly
respond cannot complain if their children are declared
wards of the State. Those who do respond retain the burden
of proving their fatherhood.
S I 'A T l oí M a i n e Benner requested the iur\' be iiislructed that the statements
“can be used tor inipeachment \alue, bul not as substantive
V.
e\'idence.” 'the courl caiuioned tile iur\- as tollows:
David
[1'Ịhe Trooper is ntiw gointi to testif\' about statements
Supreme ludieial ('ourt t)l’Maiue. ihat were made lo him bv [the victim], and that testimony
is otĩered lo impeach her teslimom', the statements that
Submitted o n Briels |aii. 3, 1993.
she has testified about. It is not offered tor the truth o f t h e
Decided l etr 10, 1993. niatter asserted.
634 A. 2d 433 (Me. 1995) lhe defendant did not ol-íịect to the instruction, the jury
returned a \ erdict o f ííuilt\’ and the court accordinglv entered
CI.II-IORD, lustice.
a iudgment of conviction.
Da\'id Benner appeals from a con\iction It>r assault. I

17-A M.R.S.A. ^ 207 (19tS3 ^ Suj-tp. 1994), tollowing a jury
Benner contends that the trial court's cautionarv instruc
trial in Superior ('ourl (Washington C'ounty. .\/;7/>. I.). On
tion to lhe jur\' prior to Trooper Bessette's testinioin’ was in
appeal Benner contends, in te r liliii, lhal lhe trial courl erred
adequate. Although he concedes that the court’s instruction
in giving a cautionar\ instruclion on how ihe jury should
is a c(irrect statenient of the law, and lhal he failed to o b
consuler the hearsax' lestimon\‘ ot the investigating stale
iect, he avers tliat the trial court committed re\'ersible error
trooper, and thal ihere was insiiliicient e\'idence to support
b\' tailing to i;i\e a lull explanation ol the instructions. We
the jur\'s \ erdicl. I’ind ing no erroi'. we allirm the coin'iction.
disagree.
Ilie e\'idence at trial re\eaied the lollowing. 4he \ictim
Because Benner did not object to the instruction when it
testilied ihat [tenner is her btnirieiui, and at lhe time ol lhe
was gi\ en, we rev iew the charge onl\- tor obv ious error atfect -
alleged as.sault, she \vas living with him. On lhe night of Sep
ing his substantial rights. S t a te V. M t ( ' l i i s k i t \ 61 1 A.2d 975,
tember 1 1, 1993, she was ht>me alone with Benner; thev were
978 (Me. 1992); see M.R. ('rim. 1’ 30(b). ('lÌNÌiiíí an instruc
argumg and she wanted hmi out ol the house, lhe \ iclim
tion that is a correct statement of tlie law does not rise to
stated that she called the stale police and complained that
the le\'el ot\>b\'ious error, ịiuxìrs are presumed to Luiderstaiid
Benner had hit her. She also leslilied that she told the inves
the instruction. .Set' S t a te r. ,V íỉí)/////, 548 A.2d 120, 123 (Me.
tigatmg trooper that Iênner had struck hei' on the hand with
198S). While il would ha\e been more helptui tor the trial
either an a\ handle oi' a broom stick. She testified lhal she
v'OVwl lo h.wc A mure de\ailed inslruction on lhe Um
had said that Benner had hit her only because slie wanted
ited purposes !or which the hearsay testinuMiy was admit
him out oi her liouse and not becaust- he had actualU hit her.
ted, <cc II Alexander. A/íỉ///e j u r y Ỉ ì i s tr u il i o ỉi M iìỉiỉK ìỉ ị 6-24
She further testified that the iniur\' to the back ol her hand
(2d ed. 1990). the cautitinar\- instructit)!! aclualh’ gi\'en was
Occurred because she was drunk and had fallen.
not obviiius error.
State Trooper Raymond Bessette testilied that \s hile on
patrol on the night of September 1 1, 1993, he received a cat!
from the dispatcher that the victim called ti) complain that IỈ
Benner had struck her. When P>essette arrived at the home,
Benner turth.er contends that the evidence presented at
he t)t-»ser\ed the \ ictim to be \ isibl\- distraught, scared, and trial was insufficient to support a judgment of con\’iction.
quite nervous, and that she had an injury to the back ot her
lhe standard to determine if evidence at trial was sufhcient
hand. Sht‘ also had water\' e\'es. I ie did not, however, observ'e to support the jurv's verdict is “whether, based on the e\'i-
her lo be under the influence.
dence viewed in the \\q}M most favorable to the prosecution,
In order to impeach her credibility, and without objection
an\- trier of fact rationally could find bevond a reasonable
b\ the detendant,' Bessette further testified as to what tlie vic
dtiubt e\ erv element of the ofVense diarized." S t a t e V. B a r r y ,
tim had told him that night. Betore Bessette did so, ho\s'ever,
495 A.2d 825, 826 (Me. I9H5).
lhe afhrmative evidence supporting a guilty verdict i n
cludes the following. 'File victim was home alone with Ben
1. 17-A M.R.S.A. § 207(1) (1983} provides ihat "la| person is ner; tlie two Avere ha\ ing an argument; the \ ictim made a
guilty of assault if he intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly causes complaint; when the trooper arrived, the victim was dis-
bodily injury or offensive physical contact to another." trauuht. scared, and ner\' 0 us; the trooper observed the back
2. Benner did not argue for the exclusion of the statements be of the v ictim's hand to be swollen; Ik'nner was intoxicated;
cause the probative value of Bessette's testimony as to the victim's the trooper testified that the victim was sober.
statement was substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair Althoutih the victim testified at the trial that Benner had
prejudice. S e e IVl R. Evid. 403. not hil her and that she sustained her injuries while drunk
(iOfitiuucs)
h\ l.illiiig inid a wall, her lestimoin' was substantialK' im circunistantial e\ idence is not lor that reason less conclusive.
peaehed by her ow n lestinioiu' and that ol TroojH'r Bessette. S u ite \'. IxK'Jair, 423 .A.2d 182, 184 (Me. 1981). Ihe ta^thnder
Il was reasonable lor the iin \ to disiegard her denials. .As we is allowed to draw all reasonable inlerences from the circum
ha\e pre\ iously stated, “the weight ol the e\ idenee and the stantial evidence. S la le ( j o s b v , 436 .A.2d 369, 370 (Me.
cleterminalion ol witness credibility are the e\clusi\e pro\'- 1983). N’iewing the evidence in the light most favi'rable lo
HKe ol the iur\." S h i lc C ilo w r , 394 A.2d 1086, 1088 (Me. the State, the iury could have ralionalK' infei red that Benner
1491). Iheretore. her testinion\- alone does not niandale a had assaulted the victim.’
concUi.sion that the e\ idence was insiilhcieiit. Ihe entry is:
.Although the coi niclion in this case was based sub-
Iudgment allirmed.
stantialK on ciicunistantial evidence, a coiniction nia\'
be giounded on stich evidence. S l a te v. hig alli, 334 .A.2d .All concurring.
1272, 1276 (,\le. 1988). Indeed, a conxiction based solely on
3. The victim's trial testimony that she told police that Benner 4. Benner also contends that the court's instruction on the ele
hit her was hearsay. It normally would not be admissible for the ments of assault constituted error Our review of the instructions,
truth of the matter asserted, but would be admissible to impeach to which Benner did not object, reveals no error. See Sta te v. Grif
the victim's trial testimony that Benner did not strike her M.R, Evid, fin, 459 A,2d 1086, 1091-92 (Me. 1983); 17-A M.R S.A. § 2(5) (1983).
801, 802, In this case, however, because there was no objection
to the victim's statement that she told the police that Benner had
hit her, there was no instruction that the testimony could be con
sidered for impeachment only. It is not wholly unreliable and its
admission was not obvious error.
S I .ATI', of X e w .\le.\ico. Plaintiff-.Appellee, insufficient to constitute an enlr\' under the burglar}- stat
ute, and because he belie\ed the van to be abandoned, he
lacked the requisile inlenl lo commit the crimes ol burglary,
.Abdul .\lL'C^C^DDIX, Delendant-Appellant. criminal damage, and larceny. .As a result, Delendant claims,
his coin ictions are unsupported b}' substantial e\ idence. W'e
No. 28,474,
hold that entr}', under Section 30-16 3, is citniplele when a
.May 3, 2010. defendant penetrates a gas lank with a nail. W'e also hold that
substantial evidence supports Delendant's convictions. W'e
(A'rtiorari (Iranted, Aug. 2, 2010, Xo. 32,430.
affirm.
2010 X.MCA 69, P.3d (CCt. App. 2010)
■k -k -k FACTS
OPIXIOX |2) Neither part}' disputes what took place in the early
morning hours of .August 21, 2003. .An .Albuquerque police
KI'CXXI'CDY, Iudge.
oliicer, responding to an unrelated call, beard loud bang
ing noises coming from an alle}'. Suspicious o f t h e noise, he
i n .Abdul .Muqqddiii (Helendant) used a nail to pen- stopped his \ehicle at the entrance to the alle}’ and cautiously
eti'ale the gas tank o f a \ an parked in a dark alle\' without investigated on fool. Alter proceeding approximately hallway
the pei'mission olTbe owner. .After piercing the tank, Defen- down the alley, the olticer saw Defendant lying underneath
ilanl positioned a container below the hole so as to catch the a \an. Next lo Defendant was a red plastic container, posi
luel as it drained from the \ an. Ihe \ an was in e.xtremeK' tioned beneath the \ an lo catch fuel dripping from the lank.
bati condition and had been parked in the alle\' for as man\' Ihe officer detained Delendant, asked him his name, and
as six months, tlioLigli it had not been abandoned. Defen Defendant falseh idenlilied himsell as Kdward Kdgerton. A
dant appeals his convictions for aulo burglar}' under NMS.A routine computer check revealed that Hdgerton had an out
1978, Section 30 16-3 (1971), ciiminal damage lo propert}' standing warrant loi' his arrest, and al thal lime. Defendant
under X.MS.A 1978, Section 30-13 I (1963), and larceii}' im ga\e the oliicer his real name.
der N.MSA 1978, Section 30-16-1 (1987) (amended 2006). |3| W'hen asked whal he was doing under the \ an, Defen
Delenilant aigues that penetrating a gas tank with a nail is dant first stated thal he was taking gas from the lank with the
permission of the owner. L'pon further questioning, h ow R o iirigu e z, the delendant reached into the uncovered bed
ever. Defendant admitted that he did not lia\e permission ot a pickup truck and removed a toolbox with the intent of
to take the gas. but that because the van was abandoned, it taking it unlawfully. 101 N.M. at 193, 679 P.2d at 1291. 'ihis
was alright [sic] for him to do so. He said he had used a nail Court held that such an entry is sufficient to constitute a bur
to create a hole in the tank st> that the gas coukl escape, and glary. “|\ \ ' | e hold that the bed o f a pickup truck, as a part
two nails were found in his pocket. At that point, the officer of a \'ehicle, tails within the statutoriK' protected area.” Id. at
placed Defendant under arrest and called for additional per 194, 679 P.2d at 1292. A similar issue prompted the anabasis
sonnel to assist in an investigation o ft h e scene. in R e y n o ld s . In that case, like the one before us, police found
|4} Police identified the \ an’s owner as I'.mil Hanson, the the defendant on the ground beneath a vehicle, lestimony
prtïprietor of a nearby dry cleaning business. Hanson had at trial established that he reached into the engine compart
purchased the van approximately two years prior but stopped ment trom underneath in an apparent attempt to remove
driving it when it became tot> expensive for him to do so. the vehicle's starter. R e y n o ld s , 1 11 N.XL at 264-63, 804 P.2d
While trying to figure out wliat to do with it. lie piu'chased a at 1083-84. Ihis Court, citing I'ixier, held that such an act
new van and parked the old tine in the alle\' behind his busi is sufficient to sustain a conviction for burglar)'. R e y n o l d s ,
ness. He testified that although the van was in bad condition 111 N.M. at 270, 804 P.2d at 1089. "In establishing a burglary,
and could have been sitting in the alley tbr as many as six |a|ny penetration, however slight, of the interior space is suf
months, he had neither abandoned it nor gi\en Defendant ficient (to constitute entry]. Since there was no dispute that
permission to enter or remove tuel from it. [the] defendant’s hand penetrated the engine compartment
|5) When the State completed its case in chief, Detendant of the \ ehicle, there would h a\e been no rational basis for the
made a motion for directed verdict on all coimts. In perti jury to lind attempted burglary but not burglary itself].]” Id.
nent part. Defendant argued that penetration of a gas tank (second aheratit)n in original) (internal quotation marks and
wilh a nail is insufficient to constitute burglary in New Mex citation omitted). Ihus, a jury could reasonably conclude
ico, anti further, that he lacked the requisite intent to ctimmit that a burglarv had occurred. Id.
burglary, criminal damage, and ku'cen\' because he thought |9) We are s\'nipatlietic to the unique tacts of Defendant's
the \'an was abandoned. As a result, Detendant contended, case. He was loimd draining fuel from the tank of a van with
substantial evidence did not support the charges against him. no license plate, several brt>ken windt)ws, and four flat tires.
Ihese arguments failed to persuade the district court. D é Ihe investigating officer testified that the van would have
tendants motion was denied, and he was con\ icted as stated been unsafe [o drive, and Llanson, the owner, testified that
abo\e. Defendant now reasserts the argimients trom his mo the van might have been sitting in the alley tor as many as six
tion tor directed verdict. months prior to the incident. In tact, during direct exami-
natitin. Hanson staled that although the \'an had not been
abandoned, his plan for it was to “iust gi\e it to charit\' or trv
to sell it tor the engine."
110} Necessary or not, that which niiglit be a prudent
TH E CRIME OF BURGLARY measure of justice must bow to that which the State may
{7} Section 30-16-3 defines the crime »)f burgku y as “the legally prove. Simply put. Defendant was properly charged.
unauthorized entry of any vehicle, watercraft, aircratt, dwell He did not ha\e permission to enter the van, and his actions
ing or t)ther structure, nnnable or immo\able. with the in clearh- constitute entr\- under New Mexico's burglar}’ statute.
tent to commit any felony or theft therein.” .\s such. Seetion j l l i \W Defendant’s own uncontroverted admission to
30-16-3 expresses “a radical departure trom its common law police, he laid down on the groimd beneath the van, pro
predecessor,” which required “(1) breaking and (2) entering cured an instrument, and used it to create a hole in the tank.
(3) a dwelling house (4) of another (5) in the nighttime As fuel dripped trom the hole, he caught it in a container spe
(6) with the intent to commit a felon\' therein.” S ta te v. Roiiri- cifically positioned to do so. He did not own the van or the
g u c z . 101 N.M. 192, 193,679 P2d 1290, 1291 {Ct. App. 1984); fuel. Such facts are plainly analogous tt) this Court's opinions
s e c S t a t c v. Byhcc, 109 N.M. 44.43, 781 P2d 316, 317 (C.'t. App. in R o d r i g u e z and R e y n o ld s . A fuel tank—attached as it is, to
1989). Ihus, our Legislature has chosen to keep only the ele a vehicle--is luiquestionabK' a p a r t o f that vehicle and abso-
ment o f entry completely i n t a c t . 101 N.M. at 193, lutel}' necessar}' for its primar}' function as a mo de or trans
679 P.2d at 1291. As this C'oin't has held, entr\' contemplates portation. Any penetration of a vehicle’s perimeter is thus a
penetratit>n of a space by either a person or an instrument. penetration o f t h e vehicle itself .See R e y n o l d s , 111 N.M. at
S t a te V. Tixier, 89 N . \ L 297, 298-99, 331 P2d 987, 988 89 (Ct. 270, 804 P.2d at 1089. Like the defendant’s entry o f t h e truck
App. 1976) (holding that a one-halt-inch penetration with an bed in R o d r i g u e z , this Defendant reached into the undercar
instrument is enough to effectuate an entr\-; '‘¡a|n\- penetra riage o f t h e van and removed fuel from inside the tank lo
tion, however slight, of the interior space is sufficient”). cated there. .See R o d r i g u e z , 101 N.XL at 193, 679 P.2d at 1291.
18} 'this Côurt’s opinions in R o d r i g u e z and S t a te R evii- In fact, Defendant went e v e n further b}' puncturing the tank
old s, 111 N.M. 263, 804 P2d 1082 i C i. App. 1990), define in order to etlectuate the theft. But perhaps e\ ’en more analo
the limits of entry in the context ol \ehicle bin'glaiy. In gous is Revfu^lds. In that case, the defendant reached into the
( co n t i nu e s )
I'liginc (.'oiiipiiilmciit troin Lindt.TiK'ath so he could rciiK)\e llie lacts ot Davis, lor instance, are readily distinguishable.
the st.H-tcr. Kcviiolcli. 1 1 1 N.M. .U 26.i, 270, SO I l>.2d at lOS l, In that case, the (California court held that an entr\' had not
10S9. Likewise, Detendant in this case reached into the luel occurred because the chute in which the delendant placed
tank, albeit via an instrument, in order to remo\e luel, and as the lorgetl check was regularh- used by other patrons who
tliis (Court has held, “|a|iiy penetration, however slight . . . is also deposited checks. Such an entry does not \ iolate the
sullicient." hi. at 270, S04 P.2d at 10<S9. occupant's possessory interest in the building.’ Ih ivis, 76 iCal.
1121 llic lacts ol the instant case lit cleanly within the con Rptr 2d 7“0, 958 P.2d at 1089. In the case before us, 1lanson's
ceptual framework established b\- Rcytiohl.^ and Roilrigucz, possessor}' interest in the \ an was clearh' \ iolated when COe-
and understandably, Delendant had diliiciilty distinguishing fendant punctured its tank. Nor are we persuaded b}' R.:i.S.
those opinions. 1le thus relies heax i k upon out-ol-state cases and Drew, the Llorida opinions, which both proceeil from
to support his argument, but each is readiK' distinguishable interpretations ol l lorida’s case law. In those cases, it is ap
ill either law or lact. 1-or instance, in People r. Davis, IS (Cal. parent that burglar}' in Llorida contemplates the entry ol a
4th 712, 7(1 (Cal. Rptr 2d 770, 958 F.2d 1083, 1090 (1998), \ eliicle compart ment large enough to accommodate at least
the detendant placed a forged check into the deposit win a part of a person and that the theft actualh occurred within
dow ol a check cashing business. Ihe court held that such the vehicle. See Drew. 773 So. 2d at 32; R.P.S.. 396 So. 2d
an act, although technicalK' an entry with the intent to co m at 1220. Not so in New .Mexict). where a slight entr}' b\' use
mit a theft, should nevertheless not be considered an entr\- of an instrument is suMicieiit. .See. e.^s;., R ey n o ld s . I l l N.M.
lor purposes ol (Calitornia’s burglar)' statute, hi. Likewise, at 264-63. 804 P.2d at 1083-84 (providing that removal o f a
in R.P.S. V. Sla le , 396 So. 2d 1219, 1220 (l-'la. Dist. (Ct. .App. starter Irom the engine compartment is sulLicient to coi'isti-
1981), the courl analyzed whether, under LTorida's burglary tule burglarx ); Ti.\ier. 89 N.M. at 298-99, 351 P.2d at 988-
statute, siphoning gas from the tank o f a \eliicle constituted 89 (inckkling the use of an inslrument in the definition of
an entry. It held that siphoning did not constitute an entr\ an entr\ ). W'e turn now to Defendant's other argunient t)ii
and based its hokling on the notion that Morida's burglary appeal.
statute contemplates onK \eliicle compartments "which can
be entered either wholU' or partialh' by a person; e.g.. e n
gine .md passenger compartments, trunks. etcC hi. l inally.
the florida Supreme (Court reached the same conclusion in
C O N C L U S IO N
D r e w r. Slale, 773 So. 2d 46. 47 (Lla. 2000). when it consid
ered whether the reminal ol tires or hubcaps trom a \ehicle {16) Lor the reasons stated above, we hold that using a nail
constituted an entr\. In that opinion, the court held that such to penetrate a xehicle's gas tank constitutes an entr}' under
an act coiikl not constitute a burglars because floridas com Section 30 16 3. W’e also hold that substantial e\ideiKe sup
mon kiw ret|uires that the thelt actualh take place “within" ports each of Defendant's coin ictions. W’e .illirm.
the \ehicle. Kemoxal ol a lire or hubc.ip. which i'ei|Liii'es dis-
1I7( I I IS SO ORDLCRICD.
assembU. thus does not take place within the \ehicle as rc
quired b\ the statute, hi. at 32. W'L CONiCl'R; lON.VLll.AN B. SL’ LIN and ILMO'lil'i’ L.
|13( On the lacts and New' .Mexico law belore us. the (i.AR(Cl.A, Iudges.
reasoning ol these out-ol state authorities tails to persLiade.
I ’NI LiCD S’LA l'KS o f Anierica, Plaintili -Appellee, checks, and S2.02-1 in cash, triggering a bank sur\'eillance
camera. Ihe robbers were seen leaxing the bank and walk
ing towards an automobile b} a bank customer. (Christine
(Carless jONLCS and LCugeiie I lar\'C}', (Christensen, who had just dri\en up to the Iront ofthe bank.
Defendants-Appellants. Because the men appeared su.spicious, (Christensen wrote
down the license number ot their car One of the robbers
707 L'.2d 1 169 (loth Cir 1983)
ordered (Christensen into the bank, and the men left.
SLCV.MOUR, (CIIUCL’LI |L’D(iH. On lanuar}' 4. 1982, members of the Denver Police
Department responded to a famih' disturbance call al or near
3-134 High Street in Denver While there, the olficers saw a
On December 3 1, 1981, three armed men robbed a Dein er
car bearing the license nuniber obser\ed b}' (Christensen at
area sa\ ings and loan branch. Lisa Dalke, a teller, and .Mari-
the robber\'. Deiner Police Olticer .Andrade saw a man car-
K'li Cates, the branch manager, were bound and lorced to lie
rx'ing a brown satchel emerge from the back of number 3434.
on the lloor Ihe robbers removed mone\' orders. tra\'eler's
Andrade ordered him to h.ilt, and lhe man ran. The oliieer.s at 698. Since ,\bel, the circuit courts lia\ e examined the issue,
tound lhe man, laler identilied b\' .Andrade as delendanl and the lollowing guidelines to the 'abandoned propert\”
loiies, hiding in lhe rear ol another building, l ie no longer exception to the fourth .Amendment's warrant requirement
had the brown satchel. When i]uestioncd about the satchel, ha\ e emerged. W'hen indi\ iduals \-oluntaril\- abandon prop
lones replied, "I don’t know whal \'ou are talking about.” ert\-, the\ forfeit an}- expectation of pri\ac}- in il that lhe\-
Rec., vol. II, at 27. niighl have had. L'nited .S/k / cs r. Herd, 634 K2d 979, 987
The police arrested lones and look him into the resi (3th Cir 1981). Iherelore, a warrantless search or seizure ol
dence Irom which he had lied. He was questioned se\'eral abandoned propert}- is not unreasonable under the I’ourth
limes about the location of t h e brown satchel. I-'inalh', |ones .Amendment. I'or e x a m p l e , L 'n ite d State.-: r. D iggs, 649 H.2d
directed a woman who was present, “Show ’e m where I put 731, 733 (9th Cir.), eerl. d e n i e d , 434 U.S. 970, 102 S. Cl. 316,
it,” pointing towards a closet. Iil. at 29. The ofiicers searched 70 1,. l-:d. 2d 387 ( ¡ 9 8 1); «cn/, 634 I.2d al 987; L 'n il e d S t a te s i'.
the closet, bul found nothing. ShorlK' thereafter, howe\er, D .’Ava nzo , 443 1.2d 1224. 1223-26 (2d Cir.), eert. d e n i e d , 404
other police officers t'ound a satchel lying outside the build U.S. 830. 92 S. Ct. 86, 30 f . f:d. 2d 89 (1971). 'Ihe e x i s t e n c e
ing where lones had been found hiding, near the spot where ot p o l i c e p u r s u i t o r i n v e s t i g a t i o n at t h e time o f a b a n d o n
he was apprehended. Otiicer Andrade idenlified the satchel m e n t d o e s n o t ol itsell r e n d e r t h e a b a n d o n m e n t ¡nvolLiiilar}-.
as the one lones had been carrying, and opened il. Inside L'n ited S tale s V. C o lb e r t, 4 7 4 V.2 d 174, 176(3th C'ir 1973); ,'Ci.’
was a handgun, traffic tickets written oul in lones’ name, and generally, for e x a m p l e , Herd, 634 f.2d al 987; L 'n ite d S l a te s v.
a small knapsack. The officers asked lones if the satchel was C a n a d y , 613 f'.2d 694 (3th Cir.), eert. d e n i e d , 449 U.S. 862,
his, and he again denied owning il. 101 S. (,'t. 163, 66 f. Hd. 2d 78 (1980); L 'n ited S ta te s i'.
Appellants Harvey and |ones were joinlK- indicted and lianis, 369 H.2d 823 (3th c;ir. 1978); D ’.Avanzo, 443 K2d 1224.
chargetl with armed robbery o f a sa\'ings and loan in \ iola- Ihe test I'or abandonment is whether an indixidual has
tion of 18 U.S.(7 § 2 1 13(a), (d) {1976). Both detendanls filed retained ain reasonable expectation o f pi i\-ac}- in the object.
motions lor se\erance. lones also fileti a motion to suppress Diggs, 649 f.2d at 733. Ihis determination is to be made b\-
the fruits o f the search ol the satchel. After a length}- pretrial objecti\'e standards. Lhiite d S h ile s Keiulall, 633 I'.2d 199,
heari|-ig, Ihese and olhei- motions were denied, lones and 201 (9thCir 1981),cc/-i. (/cii/Ci/,433 U.S. 941, l 02 S . Ct . 1434,
Har\ey were tried and found guilt}-. Both filed motions loi' 71 f. l.d. 2d 632 (1982). An expeclatiiin ol prixacv is a ques
a new trial, alleging that ad\erse prior contact between the lion ol intent, which “ma\ be inferred Irom words s[->oken,
iur\- forewonian and lones had denied them a lair trial. The acts done, and olher obiecli\e tacts." K e n d a ll, 633 I'.2d al
trial courl denied the motions. 202 (quoting W i ll i a m s , 369 f.2il at 826). ".A fiiuling o f aban-
On appeal, 1Iar\-e}- argues thal the trial court erred in de <.lonnient is re\ iew etl under the clearh- erroneous standard. '
n\'ing his motion to se\’er. |ones argues that the warrantless Dii^^s. 649 1.2d at 733.
se.wch ot the salchel violated his h'urih .Xmc.Admenl ri>j;hl' \\'lien lotu's discarded the salchel, he niav- ha\e hoped
P)Olh (.lefendants argue that their Sixth Ainendnienl rights to tliat the police would not finil il aiul that he couki laler re
a tair trial were violated by juror misconduct, for the reasons trieve it. I loweNer. his abilit} to recover the satchel depended
discussed below, we affirm defendants' con\ ictions. enlirelv upon late and the absence ot inquisiti\e (aiul acquis
iti\e) passersb}. W'hen questioned b}- the police, he repeat
edh disavowed an} knowledge of the satchel. His conimenl
lo the woman in the residence to “| s| how 'em where 1 pul i t "
II appears al most lo have been a mere ruse lo deceive the p o
lice as lo the existence ot a satcliel, rather than “words which
Abandonment
acknowledgeil ownership,’’ Briel of .Appellants, al 17. Here,
lones argues that the warrantless search ot' the satchel the “words spoken" and, more signilicanth, the “acts done"
N'iolaietl his fourth .Aniendmeni rights. Tlie trial courl held objectivel}- manifested lones’ clear intent lo relinquish his
lhal the search was permissible on two grounds: thal |ones expectation o f privac}- and abandon the satchel. Ihis is not
had abandoned the satchel and therefore had no legitimate a case like L 'n iled S tate s r. l ii i r n e tt e , 698 1.2d 1038 (9th C'iV.
expectation of privac\- in it entitling him to I'ourlh .Amend 1983), where, alter an initial disclaimer ol ownership, the d e
ment protection; and that the search was permissible as inci fendant's subsequent conduct “strongh indicated her intent
dent lo a lawful arrest. Because of our resolution of t h e first to retain a 'reasonable expectation ol privac}- in the purse.’’’
ground, we need not address the coLirt’s allernati\-e Imlding Id. at 1048.
thal the search was incident to lones’ arrest, and we oiler no \\'e hold ihat lones voluntanh- abandoned the satchel.
opinion as lo the correctness of that holding. .Accordingl}-, the subsequent warrantless search b\- the police
In A b e l r. l ’n i t e d States. 362 I'.S. 217, 241, 80 S. Ct. 683, did not v iolate his fourth .Amendment rights.
698, 1 I.. Hd. 2d 668 (1960), the Supreme Cxiurt declared thal
the Ci)\-eninient’s warrantless seizure of abandoned propert}
did not violate the fourth .Amendment. Id. al 241, 80 S. Cl. .Atfirnied.
I ’N’ IT l'.l) ST'AT'HS, P c litio n e r Castillo had listed as his employer’s. Leon had been arrested in
1980 on drug charges, and a companion had informed the po
lice at the time that Leon was hea\ ily iiivohed in the importa
Alberto Antonio l.HOX et al. tion ot drugs into this country. Betore the ciu rent investigation
N'o. 82-1771. began, the Burbank oliicers had learned that an int'orniant had
■Argued |an. 17, 1984. told a Glendale police otficer that Leon stored a large quan
Dccidcd luly 3, 1984. tity of methaqualone at his residence in (ilendale. During the
course ot this in\estigation, the Burbank otlicers learned that
Rehearing Denied Sept. 18, 1984. Leon was li\'ing at 716 South Sunset Canyon in Burbank.
468 L’.S. 897 (1984) Subsequenth, the olfieers observed se\ eral persons, at least
one of whom had prior drug in\'olvement, arri\ing at the Price
Iustice WHI'I'H delixered the opinion ot'the Court.
Drive residence and lea\ ing with small packages; obserxed a
Ihis case presents tlie question whether the l-ourth variety of other material activity at the two residences as well
.Amendment e.xclusioiiary rule sliould be modified so as not as at a condominium at 7902 \'ia Magdalena; and witnessed a
to bar the use in the prosecution’s case in chief of e\ idence \ ariet\' of relex ant actix ity inx'oh ing respondent.s’ automobiles.
obtained by oliicers acting in reasonable reliance on a search Ihe officers also obserxed respondents Sanchez and Stewart
warrant issued b\' a detached and neutral magistrate but ul- board separate flights for Miami. Ihe pair later returned to
tiniateh tound to be unsupported b\' probable cause. To re- Los Angeles together, consented to a search of their luggage
soh e this question, we must consider once again the tension that rex'ealed only a small amount ot marihuana, and left the
between the sometimes competing goals of, on the one hand, airport. Based on these and other obserx ations siniiniarized in
deterring othcial iiiiscondLict and removing inducements the affidavit, .App. 34, Officer Cyril Ronibach of the Burbank
to unreasonable in\-asioiis of pri\ ac\- and, on the other, es Police Department, an experienced and well-trained narcotics
tablishing procedures under which criminal detendants are inxestigator prepared an application lor a warrant to search
“acquitted or convicted on the basis of all the e\idence which 620 Price Drixe, 716 South Sunset Cânyon, 7902 \'ia Magda
exposes the truth." A h k r u i a u i'. L’u i l a l States, 394 L'.S. 165, lena, and automobiles registered to each ofthe respondents for
175, 89 S. Ct. 961, 967, 22 1.. I.d. 2d 176 (1969). an extensix'e list of items believed to be related to respondent.s’
drug-traflicking activities. Officer Rombach’s extensix'e appli
I cation was reviewed bx' several Deputx' District Attorneys.
A tacialh xalid search warrant was issLied in September
In .August 1981, a contidentiai inlorniantol Lmpro\en reli-
1981 bx' a State Superior (ôurt ludge. Ihe ensuing searches
abihty infiM iiicd an otliccr iif the iUirbank I’olice DeparlnieiU
produced large quantities ol drugs at the \'ia Magdalena and
that two persons known [o him as “Armando” and “Pats\”
Simset C'anx'on addresses and a small quantity at the Price
were selling large quantities of cocaine and methaqualone
Drive residence. Other evidence was discovered at each of
trom their residence at 620 Price Drive in Burbank, Cal.
the residences and in Stewart’s and Del (Castillo’s automo
llie intormant also indicated that he had witnessed a sale of
biles. Respondents \xere indicted by a grand jury in the Dis
methaqualone by "Pats\ ” at the residence approximateh live
trict (Court for the Central District of (California and charged
months earlier and had observed at that time a shoebox con
with conspiracy to possess and distribute cocaine and a vari
taining a large aiiioimt of cash that belonged to “Pats\-.” He
ety ot substantixe counts.
further declared that “.Armando” and “Patsy” generally kept
Ihe respondents then filed motions to suppress the evi
only small quantities ofdrugs at their residence and stored
dence seized pursuant to the warrant.' 'ihe District (Court
the remainder at another location in Burbank.
On the basis ol this information, the Burbank police ini
tiated an extensi\e iinestigation tocusing tirst on the Price 1. Respondent Leon moved to suppress the evidence found on
Dri\ e residence and later on two other residences as well. Cars his person at tfie time of fiis arrest and tfie evidence seized from
parked at the Price Dri\ e residence were determined to belong his residence at 716 South Sunset Canyon. Respondent Stewart's
to respondents Armando Sanchez, who had previously been motion covered tfie fruits of searches of her residence at 620 Price
arrested for possession of marihuana, and Patsy Stewart, who Drive and the condominium at 7902 Via Magdalena and state
ments sfie made during the search of her residence. Respondent
had no criminal record. During the course o f t h e investiga
Sanchez sought to suppress the evidence discovered during the
tion, officers observed an automobile belonging to respondent
search of his residence at 620 Price Drive and statements he made
Richardo Del Castillo, who had previously been arrested for
shortly thereafter. He also joined Stewart's motion to suppress evi
possession of fitt\’ poinids of marihuana, arri\'e at the Price dence seized from the condominium.
Dri\-e residence. Ihe drixer of that car entered the house, ex Respondent Del Castillo apparently sought to suppress all of
ited shortly thereatter carr\ ing a small paper sack, and drove the evidence seized in the searches. App, 78-80. The respondents
avva\’. A check <il Del Castillo’s probation records led the otli also moved to suppress evidence seized in the searches oftheir
cers to resptindenl Alberto Leon, whose telephone number Del automobiles.
hold an c\'idcntiar\' hcariii” and. while' rccíìgni/.iniỊ tliat tlic prt)\id(.‘d h\ the informant was inadequate under b<>th
ease was a closc (iiK\ see Iii., at 131. granted tlic iiKitions to prongs of the tuo-part test established in A g u i l a r r. Texas,
suppress i n pail. It coiKÌudi-xi that tlio atiida\it \vas i n s L i l i i - 378 L'.S. 108, 84 S. Ct. 1309, 12 1.. Hd. 2d 723 (1964), and
cicnt to cstablisli probable cause, hut did iHit suppress al! o\ S p in c lli r. i ' f i i t a l Sta tes, 393 I'.S. 410, 89 S. Ct. 384, 211.. l-d.
[he evidence as l(i all ol ihc respondents bccauso none (if the 2d 637 (1969).
respoiulcnts had s t a n d i n g to cliallcnut-' ‘ill ol'lhc searches. In
response to a request Iroin tlio (i()\'crnmcnt. the LOurt made
We have concluded thal, in the Fourth Amendment
Îcar that otìicci' Ronibacỉi liad acted in good taitli, hut it re
context, the exclusionary rule can bo modified somewhat
jected the Ciincrnnient’s suggestion that the Hourth A me nd
without ieopardi/.ing its abilit\' to perform its intended func
ment exclusionarv- rule shi>iild not appl\‘ where ev idence is
tions. .Vccordingly, we reverse the judgment o f t h e Court of
sci/ed in reastinabic ”ood-lailh rcỉiance on a search warrant. ’
Appeals.
'ỉhe District (A)urt denied tlic Cit)\'ernnient’s motion tcir
[ ■ C L O i i s i d c r a t i o i i , /í/., at 147, and a d i v i d e d panel (if the ('ourt
i)i Ajipcals tor llic Xinlỉi Cjrcuil ailirnied. jiidgt. order re- II
pcii'tcd at 701 l-.2d 187 {19S3}. Ihc CÀiurt (if Appeals first Language in opinions of this ('ourt and o f indi\'idua!
concluded that Oỉìiccr li.omhaclVs aíỉìda\ it could not estab justices has sometimes implied that the exclusionary rule
lish Ịtnìbablc cause to search the !*rice Drive residence, lb is a necessar) corollar)' o f t h e F'ourth Amendment, M a p p i'.
tlie cxltMit t ỉ i a t tlio aỉỉìdax it sot ỉorlli tacts demonstrating the 367 U.S. 643, 65 1, 633-657, 81 S.Ct. 1684, 1689, 1691-
basis ol tlie informanl's knowledge ol criminal activitv', the 1692, 6 F. I'd. 2d 1081 (1961); O l n i s t c a d v. U n i t e d States, 277
inltM'mation included was latallv stale. Iho aiiida\'it. niore- U.S. 488. 462-463, 48 S. Ct. 564, 567, 72 F. Fd. 944 (1928), or
tner, failed to establish the intorniant’s credibilit}'. Acctird- that the rule is required b)' the conjunction of the Fourth and
iiiiilw the ( ^ ) L i r t 1)1 Appeals concluded that tlie intorniation Fifth Amendments. M a p p r. O hio, s u p r a , 367 U.S., at 661-
662, 81 S. (4.. at 1694-1693 (Black, j., concurring); A g n c l l o
V. L 'n ite d S tates, 269 U.S. 20, 33-34, 46 S. Ct. 4, 6-7, 70 F. Fd.
145 (1925). Ihese implications need not detain us long. Ihe
2. "I just cannot find tfiis warrant suflicient for a showing of Filth .-\mendment theor)' has not withstood critical anah’sis
probable cause. or the test of time, see A f i d r e s e u v. M a r y l a n d , 427 U.S. 463, 96
S. (4. 2T'37. 49 F. F.d. 2d 627 (1976), and the Fourth A m e n d
"There is no question of the reliability and credibility of the ment “has ne\er been interpreted to proscribe the introduc
informant as not being established. tion ol illegallv sei/ed evidence in all prt>ceedings or against
"Some details given tended to corroborate, maybe, the reliability all persons." S t o n e v. P ow elL 428 U.S. 465, 486, 96 S. Ct. 3037,
oi lihe \ntovii\ar.fsl intovma^ôn about the pre viou s U an saction , but 31MS, IS I . I'd. 2d 1067 U97 6i .
if It IS not a stale transaction, it comes awfully close to it; and all the
other materia! 1think is as consistent with innocence as it is with
guilt.
"So I just do not think this affidavit can withstand the test. I find, Ihe Fourth Amendment contains no provisions expressh’
then, that there is no probable cause in this case for the issuance [■'recluding the use ol e\’idence obtained in violation of its
of the search warrant.. . Id., at 127. commands, and an examination ot its origin and purposes
3. The District Court concluded that Sanchez and Stewart had makes clear that the use of fruits of a partỊlvỊ unlawful scarch
standing to challenge the search of 620 Price Drive; that Leon had or seizure “\vork|s] n o ne\\' Fourth .-\mendment wrong.”
standing to contest the legality of the search of 716 South Sunset i ' m t e d Stale s V. C a l a n d r a , 414 U.S. 338, 354, 94 s. Ct. 613,
Canyon; that none of the respondents has established a legitimate 623, 38 1 . Fd. 2d 561 (1974). 4he wrong condemned bv tiie
expectation of privacy in the condominium at 7902 Via Magdalena; Amendment is “fullv accomplished" b\' the unlawful search
and that Stewart and Del Castillo each had standing to challenge or seizure itsell, ibid., and the exclusionar\' rule is neither i n
the searches of their automobiles. The Government indicated that it tended nor able to "cure the invasion ofthe defendant’s rights
did not intend to introduce evidence seized from the other respon which he has already suffered.” S t o n e V. Powell, s u p r a , 428
dents' vehicles. Id., at 127 129. Finally, the court suppressed state
I'.S., at 540, 96 s. (^t., at 3073 (WMITF, F, dissenting). The
ments given by Sanchez and Stewart. Id., at 129-130.
rule thus operates as “a judiciallv created remedy designed
4. "On the issue of good faith, obviously that is not the law of the to safeguard Fourth Amendment rit^hts generallv through its
Circuit, and 1am not going to apply that law.
"1 will say certainly in my view, there is not any question about
good faith. [Officer Rombachl went to a Superior Court judge and 5. In Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213,103 S. Ct 2317, 76 L. Ed.
got a warrant; obviously laid a meticulous trail. Had surveilled for a 2d 527 (1983), decided last Term, the Court abandoned the two
long period of time, and I believe his testimony— 1think he said he pronged A g u ila r-S p in e llite st for determining whether an infor
consulted with three Deputy District Attorneys before proceeding mant's tip suffices to establish probable cause for the issuance
himself, and 1certainly have no doubt about the fact that that is of a warrant and substituted in its place a "totality of the circum
true." Id., at 140. stances” approach.
dc'tciiciit cltcct, icithci' than a personal L'onstitutional right exclusionary rule, therefore, ma\ well “generat|e| disrespect
ol the pai t\ aggrii'Ncii." L'luli'i! S ta le s r. (.'.tdandra, siip n i. 414 for the law and atlministration ol justice." Id., at 491. 96 S. Cj.,
l\S., at 348. 44 S. Ct., at (■>20. at 3031. .Accordingly, “|a|s with anv remedial dex ice, the ap
plication of the rule has been restricted to those areas where
* * *
its remedial obiecti\es are thought most cllicacioush serxed.”
Mic substantial social costs oxactcd by the exclusionar\' L'nited S ta te s i; i '.alandra, su p r a , 4 11 L'.S., at 348, 94 S. Ct., at
rLile tor the \indicatii>n ol 1-ointh .Amendment rights have 670; see S t o n e v. Powell, su p r a . 428 L’.S., at 486-487, 97 S. Ct„
long been a source ol concern. "Olu' cases ha\e consistent!}- at 3048-3049; L'nited States v. lanis. 428 L'.S. 433, 447, 96 S.
recognized that Linbending application ol the exclusionary Ct. 3021, 3028, 49 1.. Hd. 2d 1046 (1976).
sanction to enforce ideals o f governmental rectitude would
impetle unacceptabh' the truth-linding lunctions ot iudge
and iur\'.” L'liilcd Stiilcs I ’a y iu 'i \ 447 L'..S. 727, 734, 100 S.
(4. 2439, 2443, 63 I., l-’d. 2d 468 (1980). ,An objectionable Ill
collateral consequence of this interference with the criminal
iustice system’s truth-linding function is that some guilty
delendants ma\ go free or receive reduced sentences as a BecaLise a search warrant "provides the detached scrutiny
result of fa\'orable plea bargains.' Particularly when law en of a neutral magistrate, which is a more reliable safeguard
forcement oliicers ha\e acted in obiectixe good faith or their against improper searches than the lunried iudgment ol a
transgressions ha\e been minor, the magnitude ot the ben law enforcement ollicer 'engaged in the olten competitixe
efit conlerred on such guilt\' delendants ollends basic co n enterprise of ferreting OLit crime,” L'nited StiUes v. ( J u u lw i e li ,
cepts o f th e criminal justice s\stem. S t o n e r. Powell, 428 L'.S., 433 L'.S. 1, 9, 97 S. Cj. 2476, 2482, 33 H. I.d. 2d 338 (1977)
at 490, 96 S. Ct., at 3030. Indiscriminate application o f t h e (quoting lo h n s o n r. L'nited Slates, 333 L'.S. H), 14, 68 S. CCt.
367, 369, 92 I,. I'd. 436 (1948)), we haxe expressed a sti'ong
prelerence for warrants and declared that "in a doubtlul or
marginal case a search under a warrant max' be sustainable
where without one it vx'ould tall." L'nited S ta te s v. \'e ntresea,
380 L.S. 102, 106, 83 S. Ct. 741, 744, 13 1. Hd. 2d 687 ( 1963).
6. Researchers have only recently begun to study extensively See .Aguilar r. I'e.Xiis, 378 L’.S., at 111, 84 S. (4., at 1312. Rea
the effects of the exclusionary rule on the disposition of felony ar sonable I' l' iinds trequentlx' ii'iay ditfer on the questioii [ofj
rests. One study suggests that the rule results in the nonprosecu- whether a particular alfidaxit establishes probable cause,
tion or nonconviction of between 0.6% and 2,35% of individuals aiul we haxe thus concluded that the prelerei'ice lor war
arrested for felonies, Davies, A Hard Look at What We Know (and
rants is most appropriately effectuated by a c c o r d i n g “great
Still Need to Learn) About the "Costs" of the Exclusionary Rule,
deference" to a magistrate’s determiiiation. Sp in elli i’. L'nited
The NIJ Study and Other Studies of "Lost" Arrests, 1983 A,B,F
Slates, 393 L'.S., at 419, 89 S. Ct., at 390. See Illinois dales,
Res. J, 611, 621. The estimates are higher for particular crimes
the prosecution of which depends heavily on physical evidence. 462 L’.S., at 236, 103 S. (4., at 2331; ( 'nited S ta te s v. \ 'eulresea,
Thus, the cumulative loss due to nonprosecution or nonconvic- su p r a , 380 L'.S., at 108-109, 83 S. CA., at 743-746.
tion of individuals arrested on felony drug charges is probably in Deference to the ii'iagistrate, howex-er, is not boundless.
the range of 2.8% to 7.1%. Id., at 680, Davies' analysis of California It is clear, lirst, that the deference accorded to a magistrate’s
data suggests that screening by police and prosecutors results finding of probable cause does not preclude inquii'X’ into
in the release because of illegal searches or seizures of as many the knowing or reckless falsity of the athdavit on which that
as 1.4% of all felony arrestees. Id., at 650, that 0,9% of felony ar detern'iination xvas based. P ra n k s r. D e la w a re , 438 L’.S. 134,
restees are released, because of illegal searches or seizures, at
the preliminary hearing or after trial, id., at 653, and that roughly
0,5% of all felony arrestees benefit from reversals on appeal Many of these researchers have concluded that the impact of
because of illegal searches, id., at 654. See also K. Brosi, A Cross- the exclusionary rule is insubstantial, but the small percentages
City Comparison of Felony Case Processing 16,18 19 (1979); U.S. with which they deal mask a large absolute number of felons who
General Accounting Office, Report of the Comptroller General are released because the cases against them were based in part
of the United States, Impact of the Exclusionary Rule on Federal on illegal searches or seizures, "lA)ny rule of evidence that denies
Criminal Prosecutions 10 11,14 (1979); F. Feeney, F Dill, & A. Weir, the jury access to clearly probative and reliable evidence must
Arrests Without Convictions; How Often They Occur and Why bear a heavy burden of justification, and must be carefully limited
203 206 (National Institute of Justice 1983); National Institute of to the circumstances in which it will pay its way by deterring of
Justice, The Effects of the Exclusionary Rule: A Study in California ficial unlawlessness." Illinois i-. Gales, 462 U S., at 257-258, 103 S.
1 2 (1982); Nardulli, The Societal Cost of the Exclusionary Rule: An Ct,, at 2342 (WHITE, J., concurring in judgment). Because we find
Empirical Assessment, 1983 A.B.F Res. J. 585, 600, The exclusion that the rule can have no substantial deterrent effect in the sorts
ary rule also has been found to affect the plea-bargaining process. of situations under consideration in this case, see infra, at 3417-
S, Schlesinger, Exclusionary Injustice: The Problem of Illegally 3419, we conclude that it cannot pay its way in those situations.
Obtained Evidence 63 (1977), But see Davies, supra, at 668-669;
Nardulli, supra, at 604 606,
s. c;t. 2674, 37 L. lid. 2d 667 ( 197(S).'- Socond, tlio courts pursuant to a search warrant; in the other areas, it has s i m
must alst ) insist the magistrate purport to “perloim his ‘neu ple excluded such evidence without considerinu whethei'
tral and detached' luiiction and not ser\e mereh' as a rubber Hourth .Amendment interests will be advanced. I'o the extent
stamp lor the police.” A g u i l a r r. Tc.xus, su p r u , 37<S U.S., at 111. that proponents of exclusion relv on its behavioral etlects on
84 S. (]t., at 1512. See ¡llinoi,< v. Ciulcs. su p r a , 462 l\S., at 239, judges and magistrates in these areas, their reliance is mis
103 S. ( at 2332. A magistrate tailing to “nianilest that neu placed, f irst, the exclusionary rule is designed to deter police
trality and detachment demanded a judicial oiiicer when misconduct rather than to punish the errors ol judges and
presented with a warrant application” and who acts instead magistrates. Second, there exists no evidence sugiêstinu that
as “an adjunct law enforcement otiicer" cannot provide valid judges and maîstrates are inclined to ignore or subvert the
authorization for an otherwise unct)ustituti 0 nal search, i o - j i 1-ourth .Amendment o r that lawlessness among these actors
Sales, hu'. V. \ c w York, 442 U.S. 319, 326-327. 99 S. Ct. 2319, requires application ot the extreme sanction ot exclusion. ’
2324-2325, 60 L. Fd. 2d 920 (1979). 'ỉhird, and most inipt>rtaiit, we discern no basis, and are
ihird, reviewing courts will not defer to a warrant based offered none, foi believing that exclusion o f evidence seized
on an aliida\ it that does not "prov ide the magistiate with a pursuant to a warrant will have a sii^nilicant deterrent eliect
substantial basis lor determining the e.xistence of probable on the issuing iudi;e or magistrate. ' Manv o f t h e factors that
cause.” lllifiois v. G ates. 462 U.S., at 239, 103 S. Ct„ at 2332. indicate that the exclusitiiiarv rule cannot prtiv'ide an e t l e C '
"Sulhcient information must be presented to the magistrate tive "special” or "general" deterrent tor individual otfending
to allow that olHcial to determine probable cause; his action law enlorcement (itlicers"' appiv as well to judges or magis
cannot be a mere ratification ot the bare conclusions of t>tlv trates. And, t() the extent that the rule is tlniUi^lit [o operate
ers." Ihiil. See A g u i l a r Ic x a s , su p r a , 378 U.S., at 114-115,
84 S. c;t., at 1513-1514; ( i i o n h ’iu'llo v. i ’n itc il States, 357 L’.S.
14. Although there are assertions th a t some m agis trates b e
480, 78 S. C:t. 1245, 2 I.. I'd. 2d 1503 (1958); S a t h a u s o i i v. come rubber stamps for the police and others may be unable ef'
L'fiitcil Slates, 290 U.S. 41. 54 S. Ct. 1 1. 78 1.. Hd. 159 (1933). fectiveiy to screen police conduct, see, for example. 2 w, LaFave,
[{veil il the warrant application was supported b\' more than Search and Seizure § 4.1 (1978); Kamisar, Does (Did) (Should) The
a "bare bones” aliidavit. a rev iewing court mav propeiiy con Exclusionary Rule Rest on a "P rin cip le d Basis" Rather than an
elude that, notvsithstaiiding the deference that magistrates "Empirical Proposition"'?, 16 Creighton L, Rev. 565, 569-571 11983);
deserve, the warrant was invalid because the magistrate’s Schroeder, Deterring Fourth A m e n d m e n t Violations: Alt e rn a tives
probable cause deterniination retlected an improper analy^ to the Exclusionary Rule, 69 Geo. L.J, 1361, 1412 (1981Ị, w e are not
convinced that this is a problem of major proportions. See L. Tif
sis ol the totality ofthe circumstances, Illinois i'. iiiHes, su p r a ,
fany, D, M cIntyre, & D. Rotenberg, Detectio n of Crime 119 (1967);
462 U.S., at 238-239, 103 S. Ct.,at 2332 -2333, or bcLause the
Israel, Criminal Procedure, the B urger Court, and the Legacy of the
form ot the warrant was improper in some respect.
Warre n Court, 75 M ich. L, Rev. 1319, 1414, n. 396 (1977); p Johnson,
Onlv in the tirst of these three situations, howevei', h a s the
Â p p iù ứ ù h tỉ s to L n t o i c i n g thè ĩ o u í t h A m e n d m e n t s i O ( W o r k
C!ourt set tiirtli a rationale lor suppressing evidence obtained ing Paper, Sept. 1978), quoted in V, Kamisar, w, LaFave, & J. Israel,
M odern Criminal Procedure 229-230 |5th ed. 1980); R, Van Duizend,
12. Indeed, "it w ould be an unthinkable imposition upon |the L. Sutton, 8i c. Carter, The Search W a r ra n t Process, ch, 7 (Review
Draft, National Center for State Courts, 1983),
m agistrate's] authority if a w a rra n t affidavit, revealed after the fact
to contain a deliberately or recklessly false statement, w e re to 15. As the Supreme Judicia l Court of M a s s a c h u s e tts r e c o g
stand beyond im peachm ent." 438 U.S., at 165, 98 S, Ct., at 2681. nized in C o m m onw ealth 1/, Sheppard. 387 Mass. 488, 506,
441 f\J,E,2d 725, 735 (1982):
13. See also B e c k v. Ohio. 379 U.S. 89, 85 S. Ct, 223,13 L. Ed, 2d
142 (1964), in w h ic h the Court conclu ded that "the record . , does "The exclu sionary rule may not be w e ll tailored to d e te r
not co ntain a single objective fa c t to support a belief by lhe o ffi ring judicial misco nduct. If applied to judicial m is co nd u ct,
ce rs that the petitioner w a s engaged in criminal activity at the time the rule w o u ld be just as costly as it is w h e n it is applied to
th e y arrested him." Id., at 95, 85 S. Ct., at 227, Although the Court police m is co nduct, but it may be ill-fitted to the jo b -c re a te d
w a s willin g to assume that the arresting officers acted in good motivations of ju d g e s___ [Ijd eally a judge is im partial as
faith, It co nclu ded that: to w h e th e r a p articula r piece of e v id ence is admitted or
a particula r d efendant convicted. Hence, in the abstract,
"'|G |o od faith on the part of the arresting officers is not
enough,' Henry u. United States, 361 U.S. 98,102, 80 S, Ct. suppression of a particular piece of evidence may not be as
168, 171, 4 L, Ed, 2d 134. If subjective good faith alone w ere effective a disincentive to a neutral judge as it w o u ld be to
the police. It may be that a ruling by an appellate c o u rt that
the test, the pro te ctio ns of the Fourth A m endm ent would
evaporate, and the people w o u ld be 'secure in their per a searc h w a r ra n t w a s unco nstitu tio n a l w o u ld be su ffic ie n t
sons, houses, papers, and effects,' only in the discretion of to deter similar c o n d uc t in the future by magistrates."
the police." {Id., at 97, 85 S. Ct., at 228.) But see United S t a t e s y. Karathanos. 531 F,2d 26, 33-3 4 (CA2), cert,
denied, 428 U.s, 91o! 96 S, Ct. 3221, 49 L Ed. 2d 1217 (1976).
W e adhere to this v ie w and emphasize that nothing in this opinion
IS in tended to suggest a lo werin g of the p robable -cause standard. 16. See, for example. S to n e Ự. Powell, 428 u ,s ., at 498, 96 s, Ct,,
On the contrary, w e deal here w it h the remedy to be applied to a at3054 (BURGER, C,J., concurring); Oaks, Studying the Exclusionary
c o n c e d e d ly unconstitutio nal search. Rule in Search and Seizure, 37 u, Chi. L, Rev. 665, 709-710 (1370).
(iO fitin u c s )
as a “systemic” deterrent on wider audience, it clearK W'e haxe trequentl}' questioned whether the exclusion-
can liave no sucli etiect on iiuli\ iduals einpo\verei.i to issue ai'}' rule can haxe aiu' deterrent etfect when the of fend
search warrants. Iudges and magistrates are not adiuncts to ing otticers acted in the obiectixely reasonable belief that
the law entorcement team; as neutral iudicial otticers, the\’ their conduct did not x iolate the I’ourth ,Amendment. “No
have no stake in the outcome ot particulai' criminal pros empirical researcher, proponent or opponent ot the rule,
ecutions. The threat ot exclusion thus cannot be expected has xet been able to establish with aii}' assurance whether
significantly to deter them. Imposition ot' the exclusionar\ the rule has a deterrent etiect. . . ." L 'n itc ti Sliitc< r. ¡¡inis,
sanction is not necessar}' meaningtully to inform iudicial o t ■128 L'.,S., at 132, n. 22, 96 S. CCt., at 3031, n. 22. But even
licers ot their errors, and we cannot conclude that admitting assuming that the rule etiectiveK' deters some police mi s
evidence obtained pursuant to a warrant while at the same conduct and prox ides incentixes lor the law entorcement
time declaring that the warrant was somehow detectixe will profession as a whole lo conduct itself in accord with the
in an}’ w’a}’ reduce iudicial officers' professional incentixes to Lourth .Amendment, it cannot be expected, and should not
comply with the l-'ourth .Aniendnient, encourage them to re be applied, to deter obiectixeK’ reasonable law enfi)rcement
peat their mistakes, or lead to the granting ot all colorable actix'it}'.
warrant requests.'' •As we obserx'ed in M i c h i g i i n r. 'l u c k c r , 417 L'.S. ■133,
■L17, 94 S. Ct. 2337, 2363, 41 L. Fd. 2d 182 (1974), and
reiterated in i 'l i i t c i l Sliilc^ r. I’clticr, 422 L.S., at 339, 93 S.
B Ct., at 2318:
If exclusion ol exidence obtained pinsuant to a subse- “ Ihe deterrent purpose ol the exclusionar}' rtile necessar-
quentl}’ inxalidated warrant is to liaxe anx deterrent effect, ilx' assumes that the police haxe engaged in wiltul, or at
therefore, it must alter the beliaxior of indixidiial law en- the xer\ least negligent, conduct which has deprixed the
torcement ofhcers or the policies ot’ their departments. One defeiulant of some right. B}' relusing to admit ex idence
could argue that applxing the exckisionarx’ rule in cases gained as a result ol’such conduct, the courts hope to instill
where the police tailed to demonstrate probable cause in the in those particulai' inxestigatiiig otticers, or in their future
warrant application deters t'utme inadequate presentations counterparts, a greater deal of care toxxard the rights ol an
or “magistrate shopping” and thus promotes the end ot’ the accused. Where theolficial action was pursued in complete
l-ourth .Amendment. Suppressing ex idence obtained pursu gooii laith, howexer, the deterrence rationale loses much
ant to a technicalK’ detectixe warrant supported b} a prob ol its loi'ce."
able cause also might encourage otticers to scrutini/.e more
closeh' the torm ol the warrant and to point out sLispected Ihe /'c/Z/i'/'( Court continueti, id., at 342, 93 S. (Ct., at 2320:
¡Lidicial errors. We tind such argimients speculatixe and con “It the purpose ol the exclusionarx rule is to deter unlaw
elude lhal suppression ol evidence obtained pursuanl lo a lul police coiuluct, then ex idence obtained Irom a searcii
warrant should be ordered onlx on a case bx case basis and should be suppresseil onlx' it it can be said that the law
onl}' in those unusual cases in which exclusion will fiuther enloriement oliicer luul knowledge, or nui} properlx be
the purposes ot’the exclusionarx' rule. " charged with knowledge, that the search was unconstilu
tional under the Lourth .Amendment.”
See also Illinois r. Cnilc.<. -462 L'.S., at 260-261, 103 S. CCt., at

2344 (WilLLLC, L. concurring in iudgment); L'nited SUilfs r.
hin if. i u p r n . 128 L.S., at 439, 96 S. (Ct., at 3034; B r o w n ////-
17, See, e.g., D u n a w a y v. N e w York, 442 U.S. 200, 221, 99 S, nois. 422 L'.S., at 610-61 1, 93 S. (Cl., al 2263- 2266 (POW'LCLL,
Ct. 2248, 2261, 60 L, Ed, 2d 824 (1979) (STEVENS, J „ concu rring):
Mertens & Wasse rstrom, The Good Faith Exception to the Exclu
sionary Rule: Deregulating the Police and Derailing the Law,
70 Geo. LJ, 365, 399-401 (1981).
18. Limiting the application of the exclu sio nary sa nction may
well increase the care w ith w h ic h m agistrates scrutinize w a r r a n t
applications. W e doubt th at m agistrates are more desirous of
avoiding the exclusion ot e vid ence obtained pursuant to w a rra n ts 19, Our discussion of the deterrent e ffe ct of excluding evidence
they have issued than of avoiding invasions of privacy. obtained m reasonable reliance on a subsequently invalidated
Federal magistrates, moreover, are su b je c t to the d ir e c t su p e r w a rra n t assumes, of course, that the o fficers properly executed
vision of district courts. They may be removed for "in co m p e te nc y, the w a rra n t and searched only those places and for those objects
misconduct, neglect of duty, or physica l or mental disability." that it w a s reasonable to believe w e re co vered by the wa rra n t, Cf.
28 U.S.C. § 631(i). If a magistrate serves merely as a "ru b b e r M a s s a c h u s e tts i/. S heppard, 468 U.S. 981, 989, n. 6, 104 S. Ct 3424,
stamp" for the police or is unable to exe rcise mature ju dgment, 3429, n, 6, 82 L, Ed, 2d 737 ( "[l|t w a s not unreasonable for the police
closer supervision or removal provides a more effective remedy in this case to rely on the judge's assu rance s th at the w a r ra n t a u
than the exclusionary rule. thorized the search they had requested").
)., ctMicurring in part). ' In short, where tho otiicer’s ct>ndiict most such cases, there is no police illegality and thus noth
is obiecii\'cl\' reasonable, ing to deter. It is the magistrate’s responsibility lo determine
whether the otlicers allegations establish probable cause and,
'excluding the e\'idence will nol turthei' the ends oi the
il so, to issue a warrant compt^rting in form with the require
exclusionary rule in any appreciable way; tor it is painfully
ments o f t h e fourth Amendment. In the ordinary case, an
apparent . . . the ofiicer is acting as a reasonable otlicer
otficer cannot be expected to questitm the magistrate’s prt>b-
would and should act in similar circumstances. lixciuding
abie-cause determination or his judgment thal the torm ot
the evidence can in no way atiect his tutiu'e conduct u n
the warrant is technically sufficient. “[Ojnce the warrant is
less it is to make him less willing to do his duty."
sues, there is literally nothing more the policeman can do
S t o n e V. P o w e l l . 428 U.S., at 339-340, 96 S. Ct., at 3073- in seeking lo comply with the law.” Id., 428 U.S., at 498, 96
3074 (WHri'H, dissenting). S. Ct., at 3034 (BUIUil-R, C.|., concurring). Penalizing the
officer for the magistrate's error, rather than his own, cannot
Ihis is particularlv true, we believe, when an otficer act logically contribute to the deterrence of l-ourth Amendment
ing wilh objectixe good faith has obtained a search warrant violations.
t'rom a iudge o r magistrate and acted within its scope. ' In W’e conclude that the marginal or nonexistent benefits
produced b\' suppressing evidence obtained in objectively
20, We emphasize that the standard of reasonableness we reasonable rehance on a subsequenth' invalidated search
adopt is an objective one. M a n y objections to a good-faith e x c e p warrant cannot justify the substantial ct)sls of exclusion. We
tion assume th a t the exception will turn on the subjective good do nol suggest, howe\'er, lhat exclusion is alwa\'s inappi\>-
faith of individual officers. "Grounding the modificatio n in objective priale in cases where an otficer has obtained a warrant and
reaso nableness, however, retains the value of the exclusionary abided b v its terms. “|S]earches piu'suant to a warrant will
rule as an in centive f o r t h e la w enforcem ent profession as a w h o le rarely require any deep inquiry into reasonableness,” Illinois
to co n d u ct themse lves in accord w it h the Fourth Am endment."
Illin o is y. Gates, 462 U.S., at 261, n, 15, 103 S. Ct., at 2344, n. 15
(WHITE, J., co n cu rrin g in judgment); see D u n a w a y u. N e w York, 22. To the extent that J u s tic e STEVENS' c o nclu sio ns c o n c e r n
442 U.S.. at 221, 99 S. Ct., at 2261 (STEVENS, J „ concu rring). The ing the integrity of the courts, p o st, at 3454 3455, rest on a fo u n
objective standard we adopted, moreover, requires officers to dation other than his ju dgment, w h ic h w e reject, co n cern in g the
have a reasonable knowle dge of w h a t the la w prohibits. U n ite d effects of our decision on the d e t e rre n c e of police illegality, we
S ta te s V. P eltier. 442 U S, 531, 542, 95 S. Ct, 2313, 2320, 45 L. Ed. 2d find his argum ent unpersuasive. " J u d ic ia l in tegrity clearly does
374 (1975). As Professor J ero ld Israel has observed: not mean that the courts must never admit evid ence obtained in
"The key to the lexclu sio nary l rule's effectiveness as a violation of the Fourth A m e n d m e n t." U n ite d S ta te s v. J anis, 428
d eterrent lies, I believe, in the impetus it has provided to U.S. 433, 458, n. 35, 96 S. Ct, 3021, 3034, n. 35, 49 L. Ed. 2d 1046
police training programs that make otticers a w are ot the OS’/G). "W h ile coui\s, ot co u is e , must ever be c o n c e tn e d w it h
limits imposed by the fourth amendment and emphasize the preserving the integrity of the ju d ic ia l proce ss, this concern has
need to operate w it h in those limits, (An objective good-faith limited force as a ju stificatio n fo r the e xclu sio n of highly probative
exce ption] is not likely to result in the elimination of such evid ence ." S tone v. P ow ell, 428 U.S., at 485, 96 S. Ct,, at 3048. Our
programs, w h ic h are n o w vie we d as an im portant aspect of cases establish that the question w h e t h e r the use of illegally o b
police professionalism. Neith er is it likely to alter the tenor tained evidence in judicial p ro c e e d in g s represents judicial p a rtic i
of those programs; the possibility that illegally obtained pation in a Fourth A m e n d m e n t vio latio n and offends the integrity of
evidence may be admitted in borderline cases is unlikely to the courts

en courage police instru ctors to pay less attention to fourth "is essentially the same as the in quiry into w h e t h e r e x c lu
am endm ent limitations. Finally, [it] should not encourage sion wou ld serve a d e terre nt p u r p o s e . . . . The analysis
office rs to pay less attention to w h a t they are taught, as the sh o w in g that exclusion in th is case has no demonstrated
requir em ent that the officer act in 'good faith' is in c o n s is de terre nt effect and is unlikely to have any sig nificant such
tent w it h closing one's mind to the possibility of illegality." e ffe c t shows, by the same reasonin g, th a t the admission
Israel, su p ra n. 14, at 1412 -1413 (footnotes omitted), of the evidence is unlikely to e n co u ra g e violatio ns o f t h e
Fourth Am endment."
21, A c c o r d in g to the A tto rn ey General's Task Force on Violent
Crime, Final Report (1981), the situation in w h ic h an officer relies U n ite d S ta te s \j. J a n is, supra. 428 U S., at 459, n. 35, 96 S. Ct., at
on a duly authorized w a r ra n t 3034, n.35.
A b s e n t unusual c ir c u m s ta n c e s , w h e n a Fourth Am e n d m e n t
"is a pa rtic u la rly co mpelling example of good faith. A war^
violation has o cc u rre d be ca use the police have reaso nably relied
rant is a ju dicial mandate to an officer to co n d u c t a search
on a w a r ra n t issued by a d e ta c h e d and neutral magistrate but
or make an arrest, and the officer has a sworn duty to carry
ultimately found to be defective, "the in te g rity of the courts is not
out its provisions. Accordin gly, w e believe th a t there should
im plicated." Illin o is i^. Gates, s u p ra . 462 U.S., at 259, n, 14,103 S.
be a rule w h ic h states that evidence obtained pursuant to
Ct., at 2343, n 14 (WHITE, J., c o n c u rr in g in judgment). See S tone
and w ith in the scope of a w a r ra n t is prima facie the result
P ow e ll. 428 U.S., at 485, n. 23, 96 S. Ct„ at 3048, n. 23; id., at 540, 96
of good faith on the part of the officer seizing the e v id e n ce.”
S. Ct., at 3073 (WHITE, J., dissenting); U n ite d S ta te s P e ltie i, 442
U.S. 531, 536-539, 95 S, Ct. 2313, 2317-2318, 45 L, Ed. 2d 374 (1975),
Id., at 55.
(e o fititiu c s )
l(i2 L'.S., at 2(i7, 103 S. C4., at 2347 (Wl 11 I L. L. con reasiinably well trained oiiicer should reh on the warrant.
(.Lii riiig in iLklgmciil). tor "a wanaiit issued h\ a magistiate Nor would an oiiicer nianilest oiijective good laith in reiv
normalh sLillices to establish” that a law enlorcement oiiicer ing on a warrant ba.sed on an aliidavit “so lacking in indicia
has “actetl in good laith in conducting the search." L'liiWil of probable cause as to render oliicial belief jii it.s existence
S u i t e s V. l i o s s , 436 r.S. 798, 823, n. 32, 102 S. Ct. 2137. 2172, entirely unreasonable." l i n n v n v. Illinois, 422 L'.S., at 610-61 1,
n. 32, 72 L. L.d. 2d 372 (1982). N'e\crlheless, the otiiccr's reli 93 S. C4., at 2263-2266 (POW'l'.LL, I., concurring in part);
ance on the magistrate's probable-cause determination and see Illinois r. CuUcs. siipni, 462 L'.S., at 263-264, 103 S. Ct.,
on the technical sutiicienc\' of the warrant he issues nuist al 2343-2346 (WHI'I'l;, |., concurring in the iudgment). i'i-
be obiecti\ely reasonable, ct. //liWoir r. I l t z g c n i l d , 437 L’.S. nallv, depending on the circumstances ofthe particular case,
800, 813-819, 102 S. C.I.. 2727, 2737-2739, 73 1.. I'd. 2d 396 a warrant may be so facialh delicient —i/ii!/ is, in failing lo
(1982), and it is clear that in sonu' circumstances the ot particularize the place to be searched or the things lo be
iicer w ill ha\ e no reasonable groiiiuls lor believ ing that the seized—that the executing oliicers cannot reasonably pre
warrant was properh issued. sume it to lie valid. Cl. .Mtissdt h usi'tts V. Slicppiird, 468 U.S., at
Suppression thereiore remains an appropriate renu'dv' it 988-991, 104 S. Ct. al 3428-3430.
the magistrate or ¡udge in issuing a warrant was misled by In so limiting the suppression reniedx’, we leave untiniched
inlormation in an aliidavit that the aliiant knew was lalse or the probable-cause standard and the various requirenieiils
woukl have known was false except for his reckless disre for a valid warrant. Olher objections to the modification of
gard of th e truth. I n i i i k s r. Dcltuvurc, 438 L'.S. 134, 98 S. Ct. the fourth Amendment exclusioiiarv' rule we con.sider lo be
2674, 37 L. I'd. 2d 667 (1978). lhe exception we recogni/e ¡nsubslantial. lhe good-failli exception for searches con
toda\ will also nol ap|ily in cases where the issuing magis ducted pursuant lo warrants is nol intended to signal our
trate wholly abandoned his judicial role in the nianner con willingness slriclh lo enforce the reqihremenls ofthe [-ourth
demned in / 1)-/( Stiles. Inc. v. .Veir York, 442 L'.S. 319, 99 S. .Amendment, and we do not believe that it will have this ef
Cl. 2319, 60 L. i d. 2d 920 (1979); in such circumstances, no fect. .As we have ahead}' suggested, the good-faith exception,
turning as it dt>es on objective reasonableness, should nol be
diliicult lo apph in practice. When oliicers have acted pursu
ant lo a warranl, the prosecution should ordinarily be able to
23, In H arlow , we eiiminatecl the siibiective component of the estabhsli objective good faith wjthout a substantial expendi-
qiialilied immunity public officials enjoy in suits seeking damages iLire ol judicial time.
for allüged deprivations of constitutional nghts. The situations are Nor are we persuaded that apphcation c)l a good-lailh
not Ijerfectiy analogous, but we also esch e w inquiries into the exception to searches conducted pursuant lo warrants will
sLib|ective beliefs of law enforcement officers w h o seize evidence preclude review ol the coiistitutionalil}- ol the search or
pursuant to a siihse qiienlly invalidated warrant. Although we seizure, denv needed guiilance Irom the C(uirts, or tree/e
have suggested that, " lo in occasion, the motive w it h w h ic h the
foLirlh .Amendment law in Its present stale, lliero is no
officer conducts an illegal search may have some rele vance in
need lor cinirts to adopt the jnllexible practice ot alwavs
cletermining the propriety of applying the exclu sio nary rule," S co tt
deciding whether the oliicers' conduct manifested objective
V. U n ite d S tates. 436 U.S. 128, 139, n. 13, 98 s. Ct. 1717, 1724, n. 13,
56 L. Ed. 2d 168 (1978), we believe that "sending state and federal
good laith betore turning lo the question [oi| wlielher the
courts on an expedition into the minds of poijce office rs would I'oLirlh .Amendment has been violated. Detendanls seek
produce a grave and fruitless misallocation of ludicial resources." ing suppression of the fruits of allegedly unconstiliiljonal
M a s s a c h u s e tts u. P aiiiten. 389 U.S. 560, 565, 88 s, Ct. 660, 663, 19 searches or seizures undoubtedly raise live controversies
f. Ed. 2d 770 (1968) (WHITE, J., dissenting). Acco rdingly, our good- which .Art. Ill empowers tederal courts lo adjudicate. As
faith inquiry IS confined to the objectively ascertainable question cases addressing questions of good-faith immunity under
w h e th e r a reasonably we ll-trained officer wo uld have kn own that 42 U.S.C. ^ 1983, compare O ’C.'o/i/ior r. D o n a ld s o n , 422 U.S.
the search was illegal despite the magistrate's authorization. In 363, 93 S. Ct. 2486, 43 1.. I’d. 2d 396 ( 1973), with P r o c u n ic r
making this determination, all of the circu m s ta n c e s— jncluding
V. S tiv a r c tlc , 434 U.S. 333, 366, n. 14, 98 S. (It. 833, 862, n.
w h e th e r the w a r ra n t application had previously been rejected by a
14, 33 L. I'î. 2d 24 (1978), and cases involving the harm-
different mag istrate— may be considered.
less-error doctrine, compare .M ilto n r. W 'a in w rig h t, 407 U.S.
24. References to " o ffic e r" throughout this opinion should not 371, 372, 92 S. Ct. 2174, 2173, 33 L. Hd. 2d 1 0 9 7 2 ) , with
be read too narrowly. It is necessary to consider the objective
reasonableness, not only of the officers wh o eventually executed
a warra nt, but also of the officers w ilo originally obtained it or wh o
provided information material to the pro bable-cause d e term in a 25. The argument that defendants will lose their incentive to
tion. Nothing in our opinion suggests, for example, tiia t an officer litigate meritorious Fourth Am endment claims as a result of the
could obtain a w a r ra n t on the basis of a "bare bones" affidavit and good-faith exception we adopt today is unpersuasive. Although
then rely on colleagues w ho are ignorant of the circum stances the exception might discourage presentation of insubstantial
under w h ic h the w a rra n t wa s obtained to conduct the search. See suppression motions, the magnitude of the benefit conferred on
W h ite le y v . W arden, 401 U.S. 560, 568,91 s. Ct. 1031, 10 37,2 8 L. Eel, defendants by a successful motion makes it unlikely that litigation
2d 306(1971), of colorable claims will be substantially diminished.
C.olcniiin r. A ld l h i n i d , L'.S. L 90 S. CCt. 1999, 2(i L. I d. appropriate onK' it the officers were dishonest or reckless
2tl .^S7 (1970), make (.Icar, coLirts ha\c considerable discie ill preparing their at1ida\'it or could not ha\'e harbored an
li('ii 111 coiilorniiiig their decision-niaking processes to the obiecti\eK reasonable beliet in the existence ot probable
exigencies t)l particular cases. cause. OnK' respondent Leon has contended that no reason-
II the re.solutioii ol a particular Lourth .Aniendnient abl\' well trained police othce could ha\e belie\ed lhal there
question is necessary to guide luture action b\ law enforce existed probable cause lo search his house; sigiiiticaiillv, the
ment olHcers and magistrates, nothing will pre\'ent re\ iew- other respondents adv ance no comparable argument. Olticer
ing courts troni deciding that question before turning to Ronibach's application tor a warrant clearK' was supported bv
the good-taith issue.-" Indeed, it trequently will be ditticult much more than a “bare bones" atiida\'il. The aliidavit related
to determine whether the officers acted reasonably without the results ol an exlensi\e iinesligalion and, as the opinions
resolving the I'ourth .Amendment issue. L’, \en if the Lourth ol the dixided panel of the (Courl of Appeals make clear,
.Amendment question is not one ol broad import, re\iew pro\'ided ev idence sutficient to create disagreement among
ing courts LOiild deciiie in particular cases that magistrates thoughtlul and competent iudges as lo the existence o f prob
under their supervision need to be int'ornied ot their errors able cause. L nder these circumstances, the otticers' reliance
and so evaluate the otticers’ good taith onh' after tinding a on the niagislrate’s determination ot probable cause was ob-
\ 'i('latioii. In o t h e r c i r c u m s t a n c e s , t h o s e c o u r t s c o u l d reiect iecti\el\' reasonable, and application o f t h e extreme sanction
suppiession motions posing no important lourth .Amend ol exclusion is inappropriate.
ment qtiestions by turning inimediateK' to a consideration ot
■AccordinuK', the jtidgment of the (Court o f .Appeals is
the otticers' good taith. W’e ha\'e no reason to belie\e that our
R c t’c n c il.
l oLirth .Aniendnient jurisprudence w'ould sutler b\' allowing
re\ iewing courts to e.\ercise an intormed discretion in mak lustice H1..A(CK.\1L'\', concurrint;.
ing this choice.
ihe CCourt toda\' holds lhal ev idence obtained ill N'iolalion
of the Lourth .Ainendiiient b\' ollieers acting in obiectiveK'
I\' reasonable reliance on a search warrant issued b\' a neutral
When the principles we have enunciated toila\ are ap and detached magistrate need nol be excluded, as a niatter of
plied lo the tacts ol this case, it is apparent that the ¡LHigment federal law, Irom the case in chiel <il federal and stale criminal
o f th e (Court of .Appeals cannot stand. Ihe (Court ot .Appeals proseculi('iis. In so doing, the (Courl writes another chapter
applied the pre\ailing legal standards to Oliicer Ronibachs in the X'olume of Lourth .Aniendmenl law opened by W e ek s
warrant application and concluded that the application could r, L'lutCil S l a ic i , 232 L'.S. 3«3, 34 s. CCt. 341, ,58 L. LCd. 6;'^2
not support tlie magistrate's probable cause deterniination. (1914). 1 join the (Court's opinion in this case .uid the one in
In so doing, the court clearK' iniormetl the magistrate that he r. S h c p p a n l , 4(i8 L'.S. 98 1 , 104 s. (Ct. 3424, 82 L.
liad erred m issuing tlie cliallenged warrant, lliis aspect ot I d. 2d TC'iT (19S4), hceause 1 beiie\e lhal llie 1 ule amiouiKed
the court's iudgment is not under attack in this proceeding. loda\' atK ances the leLỊÌlimate interests ot the criminal justice
ILu'ing determined that the warrant should not ha\e is sN'siem w ithout sacrificing the indi\'idual rights protected b\'
sued, the (Court ot .Appeals understandabK' declined to adopt the Lourth .Amendment. 1 write separaleK', however, lo uii-
a modilication of tlie Lourth Amendment e.\clusionar\' rule tlerscore whal 1 regard as the unax'oidabK' proN'isional nature
that this (Court had nol pre\ iously sanctioned. .Although the of lodax 's decision.
modilication tinds strong support in our pre\ ious cases, the -As the (Court's opinion in this case makes clear, the (Courl
(Courl ot .Appeals' commendable sell-reslrainl is nol to be has narrowed the scope o f t h e exclusionar\' rule because of
criticized. W'e ha\e now reexamined the purposes ot the ex an empirical judgment lhal the rule lias little appreciable et-
clusionary rule and the propriety of its application in cases tect ill cases where otticers act in obiecti\elv reasonable re
where otticers ha\'e relied on a subsequentK' in\'alidaled liance on search warrants. See a n te, at 3419-3420. Because
search warrant. Our conclusion is lhal the rule’s ptirposes will I share the N'iew thal the exclusionarx' rule is not a consli-
only rareK' be serv ed b\' appK'iiig it in such circumstances. lulionalK' compelled corollarv of the Lourth .Amendment
In the absence of an allegation that the magistrate ilselt, see íiììtc, at 3412, 1 see no way lo avoid making an e m
abandi'ned his del.iched and neutral role, suppression is pirical judgment ofthis sort, and 1 am satisfied that the (Courl
has made the correct one on the information before il. Like
26, It has been suggested, in fact, that "the recognition of a all courts, we face institutional limitations on our abilil\' lo
'penumbral zone,' with in w h ic h an inadvertent mistake wo u ld not gather intorniation about “legislali\'e facts," and the exclu
call fo r e x c lu s io n , , . . will make it less tempting for judges to bend sionar)' rule itself has exacerbated the shortage o f hard data
fourth amendm ent standards lo avoid releasing a possibly danger concerning the beha\'ior ol [lolice oliicers in the absence of
ous criminal because of a minor and unintentional misca lculation such a rule. See L 'n it e d S tiitci V. laiiis, 428 U.S. 433, 448- 453,
by the police." Schroeder, supra n. 14, at 1420-1421 (footnote 96 S. (Ct. ,M)21, 3029-3031, 49 L. LCd. 2d 1046 (1976). Xone-
omitted); see Ashdown, Good Faith, the Exclusionary Remedy, iheless, we cannot escape the responsibility to decide the
and Rule-Oriented Adjudication in the Criminal Process, 24 Wm. &
question before us, howe\'er impcrfocl our information mav
M ary L. Rev. 335, 383-384(1983).
be, and 1 am prepared to ioin the (Court on the inloniialioii Ihe logic of a decision that rests on untested predictions
now at hand. about police conduct demands no less.
Wliat nuist be stressed, however, is that an\' empirical If a single principle ma\’ be drawn Irom this (Court’s
iudgment about the eliect ol’ the exclusionar\- rule in a par exclusionar\' rule decisions, Irom W e e k s through M a p p v.
ticular class of cases necessarily is a pro\ isional one. iU their O h i o . 3(^7 L’.S. 643, Si S. (Ct. 1684, 6 1.. Hd. 2d 1081 (l'-)6l),
\ e r \ ’ nature, the assumptions on which we proceed today to the decisions handed down today, it is that the scope of
cannot be cast in stone. To the contrary, they now will be the exclusionary rule is subiect to change in light ol chang
tested in the real world ol’slate and tederal law enforcement, ing iLidicial understanding about the eflects ol the rule
and this (Court will attend to the resLilts. If it should emerge outside the conhnes of the courtroom. It is incumbent on
Irom experience that, contrar\' to our expectations, the good- the Nation’s law enforcement olhcers, who must continue
laith exception to the exclusionary rule results in a material to observe the I'ourth Amendment in the wake ol today’s
change in police compliance with the fourth Amendment, decisions, to recognize the double-edged nature ol that
we shall have to reconsider what we ha\e Lindertaken here. principle.
L’N’ri'H.D ST AT'HS o f .America, Plaintiti-Appellee, FACTS

On lune 19, 1987, at approximatel}' 12:33 p.ni., Martine/-
liiiiene/ and De Ha I’cirre entered a bank in 15ellllower, (Cali-
(iilbert MARTTNH/- | l. \IHNlC/„ Defendant-Appellant.
lornia. W’hile De Ha T’orre took cash Irom a customer and
Xo. 87 3303. two hank drawers. Marline/ limene/ reniained in the lobby
and ordered that the people in the bank lie “lace down on
L’nitetl States (C o l u I of Appeals, Ninth (Circuit.
the Iloor.” During this time Martine/-|imenez was holding
SLibniitted Oct. I, 1988. an object that eyewitnesses thought was a haiulgLin. These
persons included two bank employees and a custonier who
Decided Ian.3, 1989.
was familiar with gLins because he c'wned handguns, had
864 IC2d 664 (9th (Cir. I9,S9). handled weapons while in military service, and occasionally
useil weapons at tiring ranges. The three witnesses testilied
N’lCHSON, (Circuit ludge.
that the object was a dark revoKer about eight or nine inches
long and that it caused theni to fear tor the saleU' of theni-
(iilbert Mar t i ne / - l i mene/ a(ipeals his coiniction fol seK es and of those around them.
lowing a bench ti ial on one count ol armed bank robber} ■At trial, De l.a forre testilied that neither he nor Martinez-
in violation of 18 L’.S.(C, ^ 2 1 13(a) & (d). fie contends lhat limenez had operable firearms when they entered the bank,
the trial court erred in concluding that the to}’ gun lhal he lie testilied that Martinez-linienez had a toy gun that he
held during the bank robber}' was a "dangerous weapon" as and Martinez-linienez had purchased at a department store
defmed b\' 18 L’.S.(C. § 21 13(d). W’e allirni the judgment of a few hours prior lo the robbery. De Ha Horre also testified
the district court. lhal he hid the toy guii in his closet after the robbery, lhal
neither he nor Martinez-linienez wanted the bank employ
ees to believe lhat the}' had a real gun, and thal the}' did
PROC EDU RAL BACKGROUND nol want the bank emplo}ees to be in lear tor their li\'es.
On |ul}' 14, 1987, a federal grand jur\' in the (Central District Martinez-Iimenez testified lhal he had carried the toy gun
of CCalilornia returned a ihree-count indictment that charged because he fell secure with it and lhat during the robbery he
the appellant and an accomplice, |oe .Anthony De Ha I’orre, held il down towards his leg in order to hide it so lhal peo
wilh arnied bank robbers' in \ iolation of 18 L'.S.(C. § 2 1 13(a) & ple would not see il. Ihe defense introduced into evidence
(d) and with carrying a firearm during a crime of violence in a toy gun. Marlinez-|inienez testified thal the gun used in
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). Al a bench trial the appellant the robber}' was the to}' gun introduced into evidence. It
and his accomplice were lound guilty ol arnied bank robber}' was stipulated lhal lOe Ha 'I’orre’s attorney had received the
as charged in count one and not guilt}' of carr} iiig a firearm to}' gun offered as the gun used in the robbery from De Ha
during a crime ol \ iolence, as charged in counts two and three. Hiirre’s mother.
Based upon observ ation of tiie bank robberv pholtigraphs characteristically dangerous; the use for which it is manu
and tbe toy gun, lhe eourt eonekided that Martinez limene/ tactured and st)ld is a dangerous one, and the law reason
p(>ssessed a l a y gun diu'iiig tlie eoiu'se ot the bank robber\ abl\ may [iresume that such an article is alwav s dangerous
and tliat he had kept the h ) \ gun pointed downwards be his even though it niav' not be armed al a particular time or
sitie during the e o L U ' s e o t the bank robberv'. On the basis place. !n a d iiitio n , t h e liispla y of a g u n instills fe a r in th e
ol his displa\- oi the toy gun in the course of the robber\; a v er a g e c itize n ; as a conseijitence, it c re a te s a n i n n n e d i a t e
Martinez-linienez was ct)ii\'icted under seclitm 2113(d) d a n g e r t h a t a v io le n t re sp o n s e will e n su e . l inally, a gun can
which provides an enhanced penaltv for use ol a "dangerous cause harm when used as a bludgeon.
weapon" during a bank robberv'.
Mcl.tUi^hli}!. 476 U.S. at 1"-18, 106 S. Cl. al 1677-78 (foot
note omitted) (emphasis added).
STANDARD OF REVIEW Ilie M c l.iiu g h H n opinion rect>gnizes that the daiiger-
Ilie question presented is vs'hether a tt)y gtni is a “danger ousness o f a device used in a bank robbery is not simply a
o u s weapon" within the nieaning ofthe federal bank robberv function of its potential to injure people directly. Its dan-
statute. Interpretation o f a statute presents a question of k\w gerousness results from the greater burdens thal il imposes
reviewable de novo. U nitcii States r. W ils o n . 720 I-.2d 608, upon victims and law enlorcement oriicers. Iherefore an u n
609 n. 2 (9th Cir. 1983), ccrt. iic n i a i, 463 U.S. 1034, 104 S. loaded gun that only simulates the threat o f a loaded gun is
Ct. 1304, 79 L. Hd. 2d 703 (1984); U n i t e d S ta te s v. M o r e u o - a dangerous weapon, l h e use o f a gun thal is inoperable and
!>iilido, 693 F.2d I 141, 1143 (9th Cir. 1983). incapable of tiring also will support a conviction under sec
tion 921(a)(3) and section 21 13(d). U n i t e d S t a te s r. York. 830
|-.2d 883, 891 (8th Cir. 1987), cert, d e n i e d . ___ U.S. ____ , 108
DISCUSSION
S. Ct. 1047,98 H. Hd. 2d 1010 (1988); see also U n i t e d S t a te s v.
.■\ robber may be guilty o f an armed bank robberv luider i i o o d h e i n i . 686 h.2d 776, 778 (9lh (!ir. 1982).
section 2113(d) il he uses a dangerous weapon or dev ice in the Ihese cases reflect a policy that the robber's creatit>n of
commission ot the crime. Ihe instrumentalitv does not have even the appearance ol dangerousness is sufiicient to subiect
to be a firearm. 4 he use, or unlawful carrying, ol a iireai iii in a him to enhanced punishment. C')ther cases have given etlect
bank robbery is a more serious offense punishable separately to this policN' bv holding that the trier t>f fact may inter that
under section 924(c). In this case, the appellant carried a tov the instrument carried by a bank robber was a firearm based
replica ot a firearm that simulated the appearance but not the only on witness lestinHiin that it appeared to be genuine.
weight of a genuine firearm. '1he toy gini did not tit the statu P arker. 801 H.2d at 1283- 84; U n i t e d S t a le s v. H a r n s . 792 i'.2d
lorv' delinition ol’a firearm under 18 L'.S.C^ 92 1(a)(3). 1low 866, 868 (0th Cir. 1986). M c l i iu g h lin validates this policy but
ever, it did tall within the nieaning o i \ \ “(.langerous weapon eliminates the melliciencies associated with the inference
OI devKe under seetion 2i 13id). Se*.lion 2 U . n J ) stales lhal plOcCss.
.A robber who carries a toy gun during the commission of
Whoever, in committing, or in attempting to commit, an\-
a bank robbei y creates some of the same risks as those ere
olfeiise defined in subsections (a) and (b) ol'this scction,
ated by one wlio cariies an unloaded ov inoperable genuine
assaults any person, or puts in jeopardy the life ofaiu' per
gun. l irst, the robber subjects victims [o greater apprehen
son by the use ot a dangerous weapon or dev ice, shall be
sion. Secoiui, the robber requires law entorcement agencies
fined not more than SlO,0 0 0 or imprisoned not more than
lo fttrmulale a more deliberate, and less efiiLient, response in
twenty-five years, or both.
light of the need to counter the apparent direct and i m me di
In M c L a i ig h l i fi r. L 'n ited Statens, 476 U.S. 16, 106 S. Ct. ate threat to human life. Ihird, the rt>bber creates a likeli
1677, 90 I., hd. 2d 13 (1986), the Supreme Côurt found that hood that the reasonable response o f police and guards will
a tielendant who used an unloaded handgun was convicted include the use ol deadly force, lhe increased chance o f a n
properly under section 21 13(d) because the unloaded hand armed response creates a greater risk to the physical security
gun was a dangerous weapon under the statute. Id. at 17, 106 of victims, bystanders, and even the perpetrators. Iherefore
S. (!t. at 1677-78. Prior to M e i.iiK ghlin this circiut, and other the greater harm that a robber creates bv' deciding to carry a
circuits, had assumed thal section 21 13(d) was vii)laied onlv toy gun is similar to the harm that he creates bv deciding to
bv' the use of a loaded operable gun. L 'n ited S ta te s v. /e/rv, carrv' an unloaded gun.
760 l'2d 939, 942 (9lh Cjr. 1983); see also P a r k e r v. V u i t e d lhe M c l. a ii g h l in opinii)ii examined the floor debate on the
States. 801 K2d 1382, 1384 n. 2 (D.C. Cir. 1986), eert. d e n ie d , provision thal became section 2113(d) and concluded that
479 U’.S. 1070, 107 S. Ct. 964, 93 I,. Hd. 2d 1011 (1987). (Congress was concerned with the potential of an apparently
'ihe M e L a u g f i l i n opinion staled: dangerous article to incite fear. M c lA i u g h li n . 476 U.S. at 18 n.
3, 106 S. ('t. at 1678 ii. 3. lhe Mouse debate on the provisit>n
Ihree reasons, each independeiillv- sufiicient, support
that became section 2 1 13(d) indicates that an ersatz wooden
the conclusion tliat an unloaded gun is a “dangerous
gun used in a bank robbery would satisfy the statutorv
weapon." Hirst, a gun is an article that is lypicallv and
moaning ot a dangerous weapon or dex ice. See 78 Cong. Rec. By extension, appellant also argues that the toy gun did
8132 (1934). It Congress intendod that an ersatz wooden gun nol jeopardize the lile ol an\' person because il did nol in
\s'ould fall within tho statute. h\' analog}' an ersatz plastic gun crease the police’s burden to interdict tho crime during its
should tall within the statute. C'ongress’ intent Uicused on the commission or altormath and ctnild nol ha\'o pro\'oked tho
nature oi the eliect that tho robber creates, not the specilic police’s use of a deadly response thal could ha\ e endangered
nature o f t he instruments that he utilizes. t>lhers. Ihis argument tails bocause tho police must formu
Appellant citncodes that M e L u u g h U n applies to the use ol' late a response to an apparontU' armed robber dining the
an inherently dangerous weapon such as an unloaded lirearm course ot the crime, not after it. Ihey must contront tho risk
but argues that it does not apph' to a harmless instrLmiental thal a replica or simulated gun creates betore knowing that
it\' ol a crinio, such as a tov gun, unless the detendant used it presents no actual threal. Ihese controntalions often lead
the instrumentality in an assaulti\e manner, the trial court to gunhre and casualties. Sec, lo r e x a m p l e , L.A. Times. Oc{.
found that tho replica was a "totalh' plastic and extremely 18, 1988, 2, al 3. col. 1 (San Diego Count} ed.);/</., Mav 13.
light” toy gim, and that \h\rtinez-| imenez had held it dt>wn- 1988, ^2, at 2, col. 5 ( home ed.).
ward by his side and not towards an\' t)f the bank emplo\ees
or customers. Iherefore the delendant urges that his man
ner ot displaying this particular to\' gun avoids M el.iiughlin 's CONCLUSION
defmilitin ot a dangerous weapon because it would not ha\e
Ihe \ alues ot justice, administrabilit}-, and dolerrence re
instilled tear in an a\orago citizen and would not ha\e cre
quire the rule lhal a robber’s use ot a replica or simulated
ated a danger of a violent response.
weapon lhat appears to bo a genuine weapt>n to those present
W'e disagree. A bank rt>bber's use of a lirearm during tho
at the scene ot the crime, or lo ihoso charged wilh rosponsi-
commission of the crime is punishable even if ho does not
bilit}' lor responding lo the crime, carries tho same penall}' as
make assaulti\'o use of tho do\ icc. lie need not brandish tho
the use of a genuine weapon. In this case appellant avoided
firearm in a threatening manner, i ' n i l e i f S ta te s r. M iisoii.
the harsher penalties associated wilh use ol a lirearm in \ io
658 |-.2d 1263, 1270-71 (9th ( ’ir. 1981). Iiis possession ol
lalion ol section 924(c) h y pro\ing lhat he only had simu
tho weapon is an integral part o f t h e crime, i 'niteii Stiites r.
lated the use ol a firearm. 1ktwexer, tho appellant’s decision
M o o r e , 580 [■.2d 360, 362 (9th Cir.), eer!. iie iiia i, 439 I ’.S. 970,
to blufi did not eliminate tho haiins that (Congress intended
99 S. C;t. 463, 58 1.. 1-d. 2d 430 (1978). Hy analogy, a bank
to address in section 21 13(d).
robber’s use ol a replica or simulated weapon \ iolates section
21 13(d) e\'on it he does not make assaultive use ol the (.lex ice.
I lis [tossession of the instrument during the connnission ol
AFFIRMHl)
the crime evidences his apparent ability to Ciimmit an as
sault. 'ilie appellant’s possession ol the tt)\- gun tacilitated tho
crime and increased its likelihood ol success. Iho acipollant
testilied lhat ho carried tho to\' gun because ho "tolt secure
with it.” this suggests that lie nuu not ha w begim the rob
bory without it.
Section 21 13(d) is not concerned with the way thal a rt)b-
ber displays a simulated or replica weapon. Ihe statute to-
cuses on the harms created, not ihe manner ol creating tho
harm. Tlu' record shows substantial evidence that the appel
1. The recent trend in lo y and replica m anufacturing to d u
lant’s possession of tho to\' gun created tear and apprehension
plicate precisely the o u tw a rd appearance of genuine w e a p o n ry
in the victims. Appellant argues that we should put aside this
compounds the difficulty and risk of making any distinction. See
testimony because it was based upon tho witnesses’ mistaken
N Y. Times, Oct. 16, 1988, § 4, at 7, col. 1. This trend has led some
assessment ol the apparent threat. .Xppellanl’s argument fails state and local governm ents to enact bans on realistic toy guns.
because, during a robbery, people conlrontod with what they See N.Y. Times, Aug. 5, 1988, § A, at col. 1; L.A. Times, Apr. 29, 1988,
belie\'e is a deadh* weapon cannot bo expected lo maintain a § 1, at 2, col. 6 (home ed.). Congress has held hearings on a federal
high level ot critical perception. ban. 134 Cong. Rec. D 1084 (daily ed. Aug. 11,1988).
StcpluMi Alan \VC')L(X)'i T, Petitioner-Appellant, Husband closed his .Albuqueique oilice in |une 1985 and
commenced his residency the following month. Tlie dura
V.
tion o f t h e program is three lo four years, and during this
Sandra Lee W'OLCX) 1 T, Respondent-Appellcc. period, husband's annual gross income will range from ap
proximateh' S2I.000 to S24.()00. Ihis salary is approximately
Xo. 9308.
one-tiHirlh of his annual grt)ss income during the several
Court ot Appeals ot N e w Mexico \ears prior lo and the \ear tollowing the divorce.
In lune 1985, husband unilateralh' reduced his combined
March 5, 1987.
monthly child support and alimony payment from SI,800 to
(x'rtiorari Denied April 9, 1987. S550, contrary to the terms t>f the marital settlement agree
ment and without jLidicial apprcnal or torewarning his tor
105 N.M. 608, 735 P.2d 326 (Ct. App. 1987)
mer spouse.
O PI N I ON
P RU M A N, Iudge.
DISCUSSION
Husband contends that the denial of his motion for re
duction <_)t support pa\'menls was erroneously based on the
Our opinion, previoush' tiled on l-'ebruar\- 3, 1987, is
trial court’s tinding of a lack of good taith in changing his
withdrawn and the tollowing opinion is substituted therefor.
speciality and thal there was nol substantial evidence to sup
Husband appeals trt>m the denial of his post-divorce m o
port this tinding.
tions to reduce or abate his child support obligations and to
Fo iustity modification in the amount of child support
terminate o r abate his aliiiKMiy obligation. Husband relied
alread\ awarded, there must be ev idence of a “substantial
upon his \'oluntar\' change ot employment, which resLilted in
change of circumstances which materially affects the exist-
a maior reductit>n i)f his income, as the substantial change ot
mg welfare o f t h e child and which must have occurred since
circumstances justit\ing his motions. In denying these mt>-
the prior adjudication where child support was originally
tions, the trial court tbund that husband had not acted in
awarded.” H c m l c r s o n v. L c k v o l d , 95 N.M. 288, 291, 621 P2d
good faith with regard to his support obligations when he
505, 308 ( 1980). See Spijigohi Spifigohi, 91 N.M. 737, 580
changed emplo\ inent.
P.2d 958 (1978). A similar change in circumstances o f t h e
Husband’s issues on appeal are: “ 1. W'hether the vt>luntary
supported spouse must be shown before the request ma}' be
career change of a professional ne\er iustities modification
granted as \o ahmonv See Bn,<tcr i'. Hristcr, 92 N.M. 711, 594
oi his suppt)rt obligation, e\ en it undertaken in good laith.”
W W U67 Ihc vcc\p\enl's actual need tor suppcivl \s
and 2. Whether there is substantial evidence to support the
the essential criterion. See Wein er r, Wcin'er, 100 N . \ F 165,
trial court’s tinding that husband was nol acting in good laith
667 P.2d 970 (1983); B ristcr v. B ri^lcr
when he changed specialty
Husband, as the petitioner for the nnHlitication, had the
As the first issue is presented in the abstract, il would re
burden of proving to the trial coiu't’s satistacti(Mi that cir
quire an advisory opinion on rev iew. Ihis court does nol gi\'e
cumstances had substantially changed and, thereby, justifieci
ad\'is(>i-\- (jpinions. In rc B u u n c ll, 100 N.M. 242, 668 P.2d 1119
his requests. See S m i t h r. S m i t h , 98 N.M. 468, 649 P.2d I 381
((^t. App. 1983). .Although the first issue will nol be directh'
(1982); Spingolii r. S p iu g o la . Any change in support obliga
adth'es.sed, it will be generally ctMisideretl in our review ot the
tions is a matter within the discretion ol'the trial court, and
second issue. We affirm the trial court on the second issue.
appellate review is limited to a determination of whether that
discretion has been abused. lJ c nd crso }i r. l.ckvold . It substan
FACTS tial evidence exists to support the trial court’s findings, they
hollowing iheir marriage of thirteen years, the parties will be upheld. See C.huvcz ('J uivcz. 98 N.M. 678, 652 P2d
were di\'orced in December 1983. Pursuanl lo the marital 228 (1982). C f P it c h c r v. Pitchcr. 91 N.M. 504, 576 P2d 1135
settlement agreement incorporated into the decree of disso (1978).
lution, husband was to pay SI,500 monthly for the support I h e C i i m m o n trend in various jurisdictions is lhal a good
ot the three minor children, and S300 monthly for alimony faith career change, resulting in a decreased income, may
for a period of five years. At the time oi the di\orce, husband constitute a material change in circumstances that warrants
was a physician specializing in obstetrics and gynecology in a reduction in a spouse’s suppt)rl obligation. See I h o f i i a s
Albuquerque. r. I h o m a s , 281 Ala. 397, 203 So. 2d 118 (1967); G r a h a m
For a number o f \ears husband had considered changing V. G r a h a m , 21 111. App. 3d 1032, 316 N.F.2d 143 (1974);
his speciall)' lo psvchiatr\'. In March 1985, he was accepted S c h u lc r V. S c h u lc r, 382 Mass. 366, 416 N.F.2d 197 (I98I);
in a psychiatric residency program in Washington. D.C'. G ic s n c r v. Gicsiicr, 319 N.\\'.2d 718 (Minn. 1982); Fogcl v.
(Lontifuics)
logi-l. ISl Xch. 123, 16,S \ , \\'. 2d 273 (1969); W I s o n i'. ,\V/ his loniier spouse. W'e lind this ev idence suHicieiit to sup
<011. 223 Or. 237. .'37 l’.2d 336 (1960); A iiilc iso ii i'. Aiiilcrsoii. port the trial court's decision to denv' husband’s petition lor a
303 S.W.2(.i 124 (Tc\. (j\'. .App. 1973); l .a u ib c r t r. ¡.¡inibcrt. modilication ol his child support obhgation.
66 W'lisli. 2d 303, 403 P.2(.l 664 (1963). l ikewise, where the Ikisband also argues that, during their marriage, wife was
e.iieer ehange is not made in good laith, a reduetion in one's willing to make changes in the faniilv 's lilestv le as would be
support obhgations will not be warranted. See 1)1 iv M i ii i ii i g c necessarv- to accommodate his career change. Because ot
ot l.b c rl. SI 111. .App. 3d 44, 36 111. Pee. 413, 400 N.i;.2d 993 this, husband contends that his career change lollowing tlie
(I9S0) (e\ idenee of a desire to e\ade support responsibili divorce does not indicate a lack of good faith. Husband did
ties); M o u i i i d i t r. M o n c c u ld . SI .Mieh. App. 26, 264 \ . \ \ ’.2d not, however, request a Iinding as to this contention, and his
104 (197S) (no exidenee tiiat luisband acted in bad laith or lailure to do so waives anv' merit the argument may have. See
with w illlul disregard lor the wellare ol his dependents); B e d W o r l u i id v . W'oWi!;«/, S9 X.M. 291, 331 P.2d9Sl (1976).
fo rd V. B e d fo rd . 49 Mich, App. 424, 212 N.W.2d 260 (1973) In the determination of alinionv-, the recipient’s actual
(husband \-oluntaril\- avoided re-employiiient opportuni need lor support is the focal point. See B risler v. B r i i l e r
ties); W'Isoii r. W 'l so ii (no exidence that the sale ol a medi While husband did request a finding as to wife’s employment
cal practice and assumption ol clinic duties, resulting in a and there was testimonv' as to her emplovnient, there was
decrease in income, was matle to jeopardi/e the interests ol also testimonv- indicating her continued need for alimony.
the children); (AHimionwcidtli r. Sa u l. 173 Pa. Super. 340, 107 We lind this ev idence suliicient to support the trial ccuirt’s
.A.2d 1S2 (1934) (luisband literally gave awa\ assets available decision to coiitiiuie wile's alinionv.
lor support pa\ nients). S ee gciicriilly .Annot., S9 .A.L.R.2d 1 .Although husband asserts that his voluntary career
at 34 (1963). change was made entirely in good faith, without a disregard
lUisband challenges the trial court's lindings that: (1) at ofthe welfare of his children and former spouse, this change
the time husbaiKl entered the marital settlement agreement, does not autoniaticallv- mandate a reduction in his SLipport
he had planned to termiiiate his private practice and return obligation. See Spiiigolu r. Spiiigola. Ihe decision as to reduc
to school, but tiiil not so advise wite; (2) although wile mav ing or maintaining the support obligation rests within the
hav e IkkI prior know ledge of husband's luture employment trial court's discretion. Id.
desiies, she had no reason to believe that he would ellcLt a W'e recogni/e that tlie “responsibilities of begetting a fam
career change uc>on entering the settlement agreenient, il it ily manv times raise havoc with dreams. Xevertheless. the
interleietl w ith the suc>port obligations he was assuming; and duty Ito support] persists, with lull authority in tiie State to
(3) husband was not acting m good laith with regard to his enlorce it." R o iu iu io r. KoniiUio. 133 \'t. 314, 316, 340 .A.2d
^hiUi siijiport and alinioin obligations when he voluntarilv' 63, 63 (1973).
iiKkle his career change. Basetl upon our rev iev\ ot the record we ct)iiclude that the
Ihe record contains both direct and reasonablv inleriwl decision ol the trial court does not constitute an abuse ct its
evKience Irom the testimony ol the parties to support the discretion. Its decision is allirmed.
lirst two challenged lindings. Ihe tliird lindiiig is supportetl
LL i s s o o r i )1-:rl:p .
by ev iileiKc ol husband's disregard lor several linancial obli
gallons uiKlertaken In him in the marital settlement agree nOXXLd.l.V, C.L, and AI.ARID, |., concur.
ment, bv his lailure or inabihtv to make a IliH disclosure ol
his income aiui assets to wile aiul the court, and bv his sell-
indulgence with regard to his own lilestv le and personal ne
cessities without regard to the necessities ol his children and
Appellate Court Brief
INTRODUCTION
Ihe brief o f t h e appellee in the case o\ l-raiik v. U.S. Att oDi cy, U.S. M u r s h a l afiii \ c \ v
Mi ' xii O D c p a rl f f i c n t o f CAvrccti ons is presented in this appendix, llie brief was filed in the
L'nited States CA>urt of Appeals lor the Tenth Circuit, lhe legal research, legal analysis, and
initial drafts of this brief were perfornied by (iardner Miller. Mr. Miller, listed in the 1998- 1999
edition o f Who' s W h o in A i u c r i c i u i l.inw received his Associate o f Applied Science degree in
Paralegal Studies from Central \ e w Mexict) CA)mniunit\' C'ollege in Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Mr. Miller was employed as a paralegal in the C'riminal Division of the L’nited States Att^)rne\ s
Oliice for the District o f Ne w Mexico when he worked on this brief'.
lhe Tenth C'ircuit Côuit o \ Appeals decided this case on the biiefs submitted [o the
court (there was no t>ral argument), lhe decision was in lavor o f the appellee (L’nited Stales
government).
637
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
TENTH CIRCUIT
NO. 94-2275
FRANK LEWIS,
Petitioner-Appellant,
vs .
U.S. Attorney, U.S. Marshal and
New Mexico Department of Corrections,
Respondents-Appellees.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
BRIEF OF APPELLEE
ORAL ARGUMENT IS NOT REQUESTED
JOHN J . KELLY
United States Attorney
LARRY GÓMEZ
Assistant U.S. Attorney
P.O. Box 607
Albuquerque, New Mexico 87103
(505) 766-3341
Attorneys for Appellee
January, 1995
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
TABLE OF CASES AND OTHER AUTHORITIES ii
PRIOR OR RELATED APPEALS iv
STATEMENT OF ISSUES PRESENTED FOR REVIEW 1
STATEMENT OF THE CASE 2
STATEMENT OF THE FACTS 4
POINT I
LEWIS'S HABEAS PETITION SHOULD

HAVE BEEN DISMISSED BY THE DISTRICT COURT
FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION 9
POINT II
IN DECIDING ON THE MERITS OF LEWIS'S HABEAS

PETITION, THE DISTRICT COURT ACTED PROPERLY IN
DENYING THE PETITION AND DISMISSING IT WITH
PREJUDICE 13
CONCLUSION AND STATEMENT CONCERNING ORAL ARGUMENT 24
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 25
T M L E _ O F _ C A ^ ^ AND OTHER AUTHORITIES
TABLE OF CASES
PAGE
Billiteri V . United States Board of Parole,
541 F.2d 938 (2d Cir. 1976) 11
Bledsoe v. Wirtz, 384 F.2d 767 (10th Cir. 1967) 9
Bloomgren v. Belaski, 948 F.2d 688 (10th Cir. 1991) 16, 17, 22
Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky,

410 U.S. 484 (1973) 9
Bruss V. Harris, 479 F.2d 392 (10th Cir. 1973) 23
Chatman-Bey v. Thornburgh, 864 F.2d 804 (D.C. Cir. 1988) 10
Del Guzzi V . United States, 980 F.2d 1269

(9th Cir. 1992) 14, 15
Goode V. McCune, 543 F.2d 751 (10th Cir. 1976) 22
Guerra v. Meese, 786 F.2d 414 (D.C. Cir. 1986) 10
Harrell v. Shuttleworth, 200 F.2d 490 (5th Cir. 1952) 20
In the Matter of Jackson, 15 Mich. 417 (1867) 9
Joyner v. Henman, 755 F. Supp. 982 (D. Kan. 1991) 10
Kiendra v. Hadden, 763 F.2d 69 (2d Cir. 1985) 15
Lionel V. Day, 4^0 F. .ûpp. ^84 (W.P. Ol^la. 1976) 18
McGrath v. Kristensen, 340 U.S. 162 (1950) 9

TABLE OF CASES cont.
PAGE
McIntosh V. Looney, 249 F.2d 62 d o t h cir.1957),
cert, denied, 355 U.S. 935 (1958) 19-21
Meagher V. Clark, 943 F.2d 1277 (11th Cir. 1991) 22
Salley V. United States, 786 F.2d 546 (2d cir. 1986) 18
Scott V, United States, 434 F.2d 11 (5th Cir. 197Ũ) 22
Sinclair V. Herman, 986 F.2d 407 (10th cir.),

cert, d e n i e d , ___U.S. ____ , 114 s. c t . 129 (1993) 13
Smith V. Swope, 91 F.2d 260 (9th cir. 1937) 15
Stanley V. California Supreme Court, 21 F.3d 359

(9th Cir. 1994) 11
Thomas V. Brewer, 923 F.2d 1361 {9th cir. 1991) 22
Thomas V. Whalen, 962 F.2d 358 (4th Cir. 1992)
United States V. 51 Pieces of Real Property,

17 F.3d 1306 d o t h cir. 1994) 9
United States V. Croft, 450 F.2d 1094 (6th cir. 1971.) 15
United States V. Siviglia, 686 F.2d 832

d o t h Cir. 1981), cert, denied, 461 U.S. 918(1983) 9
TABLE OF OTHER AUTHORITIES
PAGE
Tenth Circuit Rules:
28.2(a) ii
United States Codes:
18 U.S.C. § 3568 21, 22
21 U.S.C. § 851 5
28 U.S.C. § 2241 2, 13
28 U.S.C. § 2242 9
28 U.S.C. § 2243 9
28 U.S.C. § 2254 2
28 U.S.C. § 2255 2, 13
PRIOR OR RELATED APPEALS
The United States informs this Court, pursuant to 10th
Cir. R. 28.2(a), that there are no prior or related appeals
in this case.
STATEMENT OF ISSUES PRESENTED FOR REVIEW
This appeal is a review of the District Court's denial
of Appellant's Habeas Petition, and presents the following
issues for review:
POINT I:
WHETHER THE DISTRICT COURT SHOULD HAVE DISMISSED

APPELLANT'S HABEAS PETITION FOR LACK OF
JURISDICTION?
POINT II:
WHETHER THE DISTRICT COURT ACTED PROPERLY IN

DENYING APPELLANT'S HABEAS PETITION ON THE
MERITS AND DISMISSING THE PETITION WITH
PREJUDICE?
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On March 15, 1993, Petitioner-Appellant Frank Lewis
(hereinafter referred to as Lewis) filed a pro se Petition
for Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for a per
son in state custody.'- (Doc. 1) . On March 25, 1993, United
States Magistrate Judge William Deaton issued an Order
appointing Tova Indritz, the Federal Public Defender, to
represent Lewis. (Doc. 4) .
On May 25, 1993, Lewis filed an Amended Petition (Doc. 5)
with numerous exhibits. The government filed its Answer on
July 20, 1993, requesting that Lewis's Amended Petition be
dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. (Doc. 8). Lewis then
filed a Memorandum Brief in support of his Amended Petition
on September 27, 1993. (Doc. 12). Because this Memorandum
Brief restructured Lewis's habeas petition under 28 U.S.C.
§ 2241 and § 2255, revamped old arguments, requested new
remedies and introduced new exhibits, it was, for all
practical purposes, a new habeas petition. Without being
ordered to do so, the government responded to Lewis's
Memorandum Briet on December 13, 1993. (Doc. 14).
On October 4, 1994, United States Magistrate Judge
Lorenzo Garcia issued his proposed findings and recommended
disposition of Lewis's habeas petition. (Doc. 17). Lewis
filed his objections to Judge Garcia's findings and recom
mended disposition on October 17, 1994. (Doc. 18).
On November 8, 1994, Senior United States District Judge
Juan Burciaga adopted Judge Garcia's proposed findings and
recommended disposition and ordered that Lewis's action be
dismissed with prejudice. (Doc. 19) . Lewis timely filed a
notice of appeal of Judge Burciaga's Order on November 22,
1994. (Doc. 20) .
The following day, March 16, 1993, the New Mexico Department of
Corrections transferred Lewis into Federal custody.
STATEMENT OF THE FACTS
The facts underlying Lewis's habeas petition are not in
dispute. They are summarized from the record as follows;
On February 27, 1985, Lewis pled guilty in New Mexico
State District Court for the Second Judicial District
(Bernalillo County) to two crimes he committed on December
22, 1983. One was the felony offense of heroin possession
and the other was the misdemeanor offense of possession of
drug paraphernalia. (Doc. 5, Petitioner's Exhibit 1).
As a result of these convictions, on May 17, 1985, State
District Judge Burt Cosgrove sentenced Lewis to the custody
of the New Mexico Department of Corrections for a term of
6-1/2 years. The court also ordered Lewis to turn himself
in to authorities at 9:00 a .:-:, on May 21, 1985 to begin
serving his sentence. On June 4, 1985, about two weeks
after Lewis started serving his sentence, a federal grand
jury indicted him on four counts of heroin trafficking. The
first two counts charged Lewis with possession with intent
to distribute heroin and distribution of hei'oin on or about
August 18, 1983. The other two counts charged that Lewis
committed the same offenses on or about August 25, 1983.
(Doc. 5, Petitioner's Exhibit 2).
On April 29, 1986, as a consequence of the federal indict
ment, United States District Judge Juan Burciaga issued a

Writ of Habeas Corpus Ad Prosequendum commanding the Warden
of the New Mexico State Penitentiary to deliver Lewis into
federal custody so that he could be prosecuted on the fed
eral drug charges. (Doc. 5, Petitioner's Exhibit 5).
On May 23, 1986, pursuant to a plea agreement, Lewis
pled guilty to Count IV of the Indictment (heroin distri
bution) . In return, the government agreed to dismiss the
other three counts against him and not seek a sentence
enhancement under 21 U.S.C. § 851, based on his prior state
drug conviction. The agreement also stated there was no
agreement that "a specific sentence is the appropriate dis
position of this case." (Doc. 5, Petitioner's Exhibit 3) .
Judge Burciaga accepted Lewis's guilty plea and, on
July 18, 1986, sentenced Lewis to eight years imprisonment
to be followed by a special parole term of three years.
After imposing the sentence, the court dismissed the
remaining counts against Lewis. The Judgment was entered
on the docket on July 28, 1986. (Doc. 5, Petitioner's
Exhibit 4).
Lewis was returned to the state's custody on July 23,
1986. (Doc. 12, Petitioner's Exhibit 16 at 3).
Five months later, on December 22, 1986, Lewis escaped
from the New Mexico State Penitentiary and also kidnapped
someone. The record does not show when he was apprehended.
However, on January 12, 1988, Lewis was convicted in state
district court (Thirteenth Judicial District, Valencia
County) for the felony offenses of Escape from the peni
tentiary and Kidnapping. On April 11, 1988, the state
district court sentenced Lewis to the custody of the New
Mexico Corrections Department tor 19 years tor these con
victions. The court then suspended eight years of the sen
tence and ordered the remaining eleven years to be served
in the state penitentiary, "consecutive to any other state
or federal time that he is now serving or served." (Doc. 5,
Petitioner's Exhibit 6). According to an affidavit from
Lewis's attorney at this sentencing. State District Court
Judge Mayo T. Boucher actually wanted the new eleven-year
sentence to be concurrent with Lewis's existing state and
federal sentences. (Doc. 5, Petitioner's Exhibit 9).
Consequently, the state district court for Valencia
County issued a series of Amended Judgments regarding
Lewis's latest state sentence. The first, filed August 27,
1990, ordered the sentence to run concurrently with the
eight-year federal sentence, but consecutively to the orig-
inal state sentence of 6-1/2 years. (Doc. 5, Petitioner's
Exhibit 7). The second, filed October 31, 1990, made
Lewis's latest sentence run concurrently with both his
original state sentence and his federal sentence. (Doc 5,
Petitioner's Exhibit 8). The Third Amended Judgement; filed
September 10, 1992, retained the basic nineteen-year sen
tence, but suspended half of it (9-1/2 years) instead of
the eight years that had been previously suspended. It
again ordered the state sentence to be served concurrently
with the federal sentence, this time specifying the under
lying case number, and ordered Lewis to be remanded to
the custody of the U.S. Marshal's Office for transfer to
a federal prison to serve his federal sentence. (Doc. 5,
Petitioner's Exhibit 10). A year earlier, New Mexico prison
officials had given Lewis written notification that the
U.S. Marshal's Office, on the advice of the U.S. Attorney's
Office, would not take him into federal custody until he
had been paroled or discharged from the state. (Doc. 5,
Petitioner's Exhibit 12). The Fourth (and final) Amended
Judgment was filed on January 7, 1993. It again specified

that Lewis's state sentence for escape and kidnapping run
concurrently with his federal sentence to be served and
ordered Lewis's immediate transfer to federal custody.
(Doc. 5, Petitioner's Exhibit 11).
As a result of his federal sentence, a federal detainer
had been lodged against Lewis while he was incarcerated
at the New Mexico State Penitentiary. However, despite the
state court judgment ordering his transfer to federal cus
tody, the U.S. Marshal's Office refused to take him into
custody until he had been released from all his state sen
tences, (Doc. 12, Petitioner's Exhibit 17 at 2).
Upon being paroled from his final state sentence, Lewis
was transferred to federal custody on March 16, 1993 and
began serving his federal sentence. (Doc. 12, Petitioner's
Exhibit 15 at 2) . On April 30, 1993, Lewis arrived at his
present place of incarceration, the Federal Correctional
Institution (FCI) at Florence, Colorado. (Doc. 12,
Petitioner's Exhibit 16 at 3).
After his arrival at FCI Florence, Lewis sought to
receive credit against his sentence through a Request for
Administrative Remedy. His request was denied, as was his
appeal of that denial. (Doc. 12, Petitioner's Exhibits 14
and 15). Lewis then pursued the habeas petition which was
denied by the federal district court.
POINT I
LEWIS'S HABEAS PETITION SHOULD HAVE BEEN DISMISSED BY
THE DISTRICT COURT FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION.
STANDARD OF REVIEW: Jurisdictional issues are reviewed de
novo. United States v. 51 Pieces of Real Property, 17 F.3d
1306, 1309 (10th Cir. 1994) .
It is well settled that jurisdictional issues are impor
tant enough that they may be raised at any time during
the proceedings. McGrath v, Kristensen, 340 U.S. 162, 167
(1950); United States v. Siviglia, 686 F.2d 832, 835 (10th
Cir. 1981), cert, denied, 461 U.S. 918 (1983); Bledsoe v.
Wirtz, 384 F.2d 767, 769 (10th Cir. 1967).
28 U.S.C. § 2242 provides that a habeas petition shall
state "the name of the person who has custody over him"
(i.e., the petitioner). Likewise, 28 U.S.C. § 2243 states:
"The writ, or order to show cause shall be directed to
the person having custody of the person detained." As the
Supreme Court noted: "The writ of habeas corpus does not
act upon the prisoner who seeks relief, but upon the person
who holds him in what is alleged to be uniawtul custody."

Braden v, 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky, 410 U.S.
484, 494-5 (1973). The Braden Court then quoted from In the
Matter of Jackson, 15 Mich. 417, 439-440 (1867), character
izing the quotation as a "classic statement":
The important fact to be observed in regard to the mode of

procedure upon this writ is, that it is directed to, and
served upon, not the person confined but his jailer. The
officer or person who serves it does not unbar the prison
doors and set the prisoner free, but the court relieves
him by compelling the oppressor to release his constraint.
The whole force of the writ is spent upon the respondent.
410 U.S. at 495.

When the habeas petitioner is incarcerated, the
only appropriate respondent to his habeas petition is the
warden of the facility where he is incarcerated. Guerra
V. Meese, 786 F.2d 414, 417 (D.C. Cir. 1986) ("Until they
are paroled . . . the proper respondents are the wardens
of the federal facilities at which the prisoners are con
fined.") . Guerra was expressly reaffirmed in Chatwan~Bey v.
Thornburgh, 864 F.2d 804, 810-11 (D.C. Cir. 1988) ("[T]he
proper defendant in federal habeas cases is the warden.").
See also Joyner v. Henman, 755 F. Supp. 982, 984 (D. Kan.
1991) (proper respondent for petitioner's habeas action is
the warden at USP Leavenworth because he is the petition
er's present custodian). The "custodian," for habeas corpus
purposes, is the person having day-to-day control of the
prisoner and is the only one who can produce "the body" of
the habeas petitioner. Guerra, supra at 416.
The record clearly shows that Lewis was delivered to FCI
Florence on April 30, 1993. (Doc. 12, Petitioner's Exhibit
16 at 3) . On May 25, 1993, Lewis (through his appointed coun
sel) filed his Amended Petition. (Doc. 5). In this Amended
Petition, Lewis acknowledged that "he is currently in the
custody of the Bureau of Prisons at Florence, Colorado."
(Doc. 5 at 4). Yet, the respondent to his Amended Petition
was not his present custodian, the warden of FCI Florence.
Instead, Lewis named as respondents: the U.S. Attorney (for
the District of New Mexico), the U.S. Marshal (for the same
District), and the New Mexico Department of Corrections.
A similar situation occurred in Billiteri v. United
States Board of Parole, 541 F.2d 938 (2d Cir. 1976).
There, instead of naming as respondent the Warden of USP
Lewisburg, Pennsylvania, where he was confined, the pe*:i-
tioner named the parole board which had denied his release.
In dismissing his petition, the Billiteri Court declared:
It would have imposed no great hardship on Billiteri to
liave brought his action against the Warden in the Middle
District of Pennsylvania, as he should have done. As he
did not, the present case must be dismissed for lack of
jurisdiction over an application for a writ of habeas
corpus . . .
541 F.2d at 948-49.
Recently, the Ninth Circuit in Stanley v. California

Supreme Court, 21 P.3d 359 (9th Cir.1994), addressed the
same situation as here where there were two habeas peti
tions with multiple respondents, but none of them were the
pet itioner's custodian:
A petitioner for habeas corpus relief must name the state

officer having custody of him or her as the respondent
to the petition . . . . Failure to name the petition
er's custodian as a respondent deprives federal courts
of personal jurisdiction. (Citations omitted). . . .
Neitner of Stanley's two petitions named his custodian
+"V^r\ Icj ' -’lrpiH nnv''>Q-
diction. (Emphasis added).
21 F.3d at 360 .
In its initial Answer to Lewis's Amended Petition, the

government sought to have the petition dismissed for lack
of jurisdiction. (Doc. 8). The district court never ruled
on this request, but impliedly rejected it by addressing
the merits of Lewis's Amended Petition as presented in his
Memorandum Brief.
For the reasons stated herein, this Court, as a matter
of law, should remand the case with instructions to dismiss
for lack of jurisdiction.
POINT II
IN DECIDING ON THE MERITS OF LEWIS'S HABEAS

PETITION, THE DISTRICT COURT ACTED PROPERLY IN
DENYING THE PETITION AND DISMISSING IT WITH
PREJUDICE.
STANDARD OF REVIEW: This Court reviews de novo a district
court's decision to deny habeas relief. Sinclair v. Herman,
986 F.2d 407, 408 (10th Cir.), cert, denied, ___ U.S. __ ,
114 S. Ct. 129 (1993).
As an introductory note, it is recognized that, should
this court indeed remand the case with instructions to dis
miss for lack of jurisdiction, Lewis may be tempted to file
another habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 in perhaps a
different forum. In that event, an opinion from this Court
which also discusses the merits of Lewis's contentions
would prove very useful.
The thrust of Lewis's habeas petition was that he was
entitled to receive credit against his federal sentence
because the U.S. Marshal's Service, on advice from the
U.S. Attorney, ignored the custody transfer orders issued
by a New Mexico district court. In his Memorandum Brief
(Doc. 12), Lewis introduced a second stratagem under 28
U.S.C. § 2255 for obtaining the credit he sought. It was
to request that Judge Burciaga (who had imposed his federal
sentence) recommend nunc pro tunc that New Mexico State
Correctional Facilities be designated as the location for
serving his federal sentence. In his Order Adopting the
Magistrate's Findings and Dismissing Action with Prejudice,
Judge Burciaga expressly declined to make such a recommen
dation. (Doc. 19). Because the decision was clearly within
Judge Burciaga's discretion, this avenue for obtaining the
desired credit is permianently blocked.
As previously stated, Lewis's main complaint centers
around the conduct of the U.S. Marshals. By ignoring the
repeated custody transfer orders of a state district judge,
they ensured that Lewis would not start serving his fed
eral sentence until he had been paroled from his second
state sentence. This also defied the state district court's

Orders that Lewis's second state sentence be served con-
currently with his imposed but unserved federal sentence.

A somewhat similar situation existed in Del Guzzi v.
United States, 980 F.2d 1269 (9th Cir. 1992). The federal
marshals in that case also created a consecutive sentence
by refusing to accept custody of the defendant until he
had completed his state sentence. In Del Guzzi, however,
the expectation of concurrent sentences was shared by all
parties concerned before the state sentence was imposed
and may have even contributed to its length (the statu
tory maximum). Nonetheless, the court upheld the marshal's
actions, stating it had "no authority to violate the statutory
mandate that federal authorities need only accept prison
ers upoTi compxetioTi of tlieii SBntGncs nBod not

credit prisoners with time spent in state custody." Del
Guzzi, 980 F.2d at 1271.

In his proposed findings and recommended disposition,
Magistrate Judge Garcia found the following guidance from
Judge Norris's concurring opinion in Del Guzzi to be
"highly instructive." (Doc. 17 at 9).
While Del Guzzi will get no relief from this court, I
hope his case will serve as a lesson to those who are

in a position to guard against future cases of this
sort. State sentencing judges and defense attorneys
in state proceedings should be put on notice. Federal
prison officials are under no obligation to, and may
well refuse to, follov/ the recommendation of state sen
tencing judges that a prisoner be transported to a fed
eral facility. Moreover, concurrent sentences imposed by
state judges are nothing more than recommendations to
federal officials. Those officials remain free to turn
those concurrent sentences into consecutive sentences by
refusing to accept the state prisoner until completion
of the state sentence and refusing to credit the time
the prisoner spent is state custody.
980 F.2d at 1272-73.
To counter this harsh reality, Lewis contends that a

prisoner should not be made to suffer because ministerial
officers, such as federal marshals, failed to execute a
court order. Among the cases Lewis relies upon to support
this contention are: Kiendra v. Hadden, 763 F.2d 69 (2d
Cir. 1985); United States v. Croft, 450 F.2d 1094 (6th Cir.
1971); and Smith v. Swope, 91 F.2d 260 (9th Cir. 1937).
As Magistrate Judge Garcia noted, these cases are easily
distinguishable because they involved federal marshals
failing to execute orders issued by federal courts, not
state courts. (Doc. 17 at 7-9).
Lewis also attempts to find support in Tenth Circuit
case law. He cites Bloomgren v. Belaski, 948 F.2d 688, 690
(10th Cir. 1991), for the proposition that a "federal pris
oner is entitled to credit for time spent in state prison
on an unrelated charge 'if the continued state confine
ment was exclusively the product of such action by federal
law enforcement officials as to justify treating the state
jail as the practical equivalent of the federal one.'"
(Appellant's Brief-in-Chief at 9, 20).
What Lewis fails to mention is that this exception
was being applied to the pretrial state time served by
Bloomgren on bailable offenses; Bloomgren had been denied
bail in accordance with a federal arrest warrant that had
been lodged against him after his arrest by state offi
cials. Bloomgren, 948 F.2d at 689-90. In contrast, all
of Lewis's state prison time was the direct result of
his convictions and sentences imposed by state district
courts.
In fact, Bloomgren supports the government's case.
Bloomgren had committed his bailable state offenses while
on a federal appeal bond from an earlier federal con
viction. That conviction became final while Bloomgren
was serving a state sentence from yet another set of
offenses. Although the state sentencing judge had ordered
Bloomgren's state sentence to be concurrent with his
unserved federal sentence, the federal marshals refused
to take him into custody until he had been paroled from
his state sentence. Bloomgren, 948 F.2d at 290-91. The
Bloomgren court held;
Bloomgren thus served his federal sentence after his

state sentence, rather than serving them concurrently as
anticipated by the state court. Nonetheless, Bloomgren is
not entitled to credit on his federal sentence from time

spent incarcerated on state charges. The federal govern
ment has no duty to take one in Bloomgren's situation
into custody. See Smith v. United States Parole Comm'n,
875 F.2d 1361, 1364 (9th Cir. 1989).
948 F.2d at 691.

If the federal government did have such a duty, then
merely by ordering concurrent sentences and custody trans
fers, state courts could require the federal government to
assume the costs of incarcerating any state prisoner facing
a previously imposed federal sentence.
In imposing Lewis's federal sentence, by not recommend
ing that New Mexico corrections facilities be designated as
Lewis's place of federal confinement. Judge Burciaga made
it clear that he intended for Lewis's federal sentence to
be consecutive to his first state sentence.- The Bloomgren
Court declared:
The determination by federal authorities that Bloomgren's

federal sentence would run consecutively to his state
sentence is a federal matter which cannot be overridden
by a state court provision for concurrent sentencing on
a subsequently-obtained state conviction.
948 F.2d at 691.

Also, in Salley v. United States. 786 F.2d 546, 548 (2d
Cir. 1986), another federal circuit court observed: "There
is no reason why the (United States) district court's sen
tence, which was prior in time, must give way to that of
the State court." (Citations omitted).
Another case in which U.S. Marshals ignored a state
judge's order for concurrent sentences was Lionel v. Day,
430 F. Supp. 384 (W.D. Okla. 1976) . In Lionel, as here,
consecutive sentences resulted and federal prison officials
refused to grant the petitioner credit for time spent in
state custody. In upholding their decision, the Lionel
court declared: "Obviously no comment or order by a state
judge can control the service of a federal sentence." 430
F . Supp. at 386 .
As established by these cases, the comment by U.S.
Marshal John Sanchez that "state court judges cannot dic
tate when a federal sentence begins" is a correct statement
of the law. (Affidavit of Cathleen M. Catanach, Doc. 12,
Petitioner's Exhibit 17 at 2). The portions of the Amended
Judgments which directed Lewis to be transferred into fed-
In his Memorandum Brief, Lewis acknowledged that Judge

Burciaga intended that Lewis serve his federal sentence after his
existing state sentence. (Doc. 12 at 19) .
eral custody (and thus begin serving his federal sentence)
were invalid; therefore, the marshals were free to ignore
such orders.
A crucial part of Lewis's claim is the theory that, once
Lewis was paroled from his first state sentence on December
9, 1989, the state lost its jurisdiction over Lewis and
Lewis was now subject to federal jurisdiction by virtue
of his federal arrest and conviction that occurred "before
the Valencia County case even arose.'' (Appellant's Brief-
in-Chief at 10).
The government's position is based on the fact that
Lewis's first state sentence was clearly still in force on
April 11, 1988, when his second state sentence was imposed.
Therefore, Lewis's second state sentence merely extended
the time the State had jurisdiction over Lewis. This also
was the conclusion reached by Magistrate Judge Garcia.
(Doc. 17 at 6).
The authority for this proposition lies in another Tenth
Circuit case, McIntosh v. Looney, 249 F.2d 62 (10th Cir.
19S7) , cert . deified, 3SS 13. b . 93S \19SS) , which the appellant
has relied upon for support.' McIntosh was serving a six-
month sentence in a Missouri county jail when, pursuant
to a Writ of Habeas Corpus Ad Prosequendum, he was sen
tenced in federal district court for violation of the fed
eral kidnapping statute. He received a five-year sentence,
to begin upon completion of his misdemeanor sentence. He
was returned to the county jail and, while still serv
ing his six-month sentence, he assaulted a jailer there.
McIntosh agreed with the "ministerial officer malfeasance"

exception propounded by Smith, calling it the "academic premise"
for the claims in its case. McIntosh, 249 F.2d at 64. However,
the Court then described why the marshal's actions in its case
were proper. (Id. )
McIntosh's misdemeanor sentence was still in force when he
was indicted in state court for the assault, pled guilty,
and received a five-year sentence. It also was to begin
when he completed his misdemeanor sentence. When McIntosh
finally completed his six-month sentence, he was taken from
the county jail to the Missouri penitentiary to serve his
second state sentence. Only after his second state sentence
was completed on October 11, 1956, was McIntosh transferred
into federal custody to begin serving his federal sentence.
McIntosh, 249 F.2d at 63.
Like Lewis, McIntosh claimed the State had lost its juris
diction over him upon completion of his first state sentence
and that the federal marshals had a duty to take him into cus
tody at that time to begin serving his federal sentence. Id.
at 64. In rejecting his claim, the McIntosh Court declared;
The State of Missouri . . . had continuous jurisdic

tion and custody of appellant until October 11, 1956,
at which time state jurisdiction and the right to cus
tody were terminated. . . . Appellant's incarceration
was continuous and undei' a single and proper authority,
that of the State of Missouri. (Id.).
The Court then compared its case to Harrell v.

Shuttleworth, 200 F.2d 490 (5th Cir. 1952) . There, while
serving a state sentence, a federal court sentenced the
prisoner to a federal sentence to begin upon completion of
his state sentence. Before completion of the state sen
tence, the prisoner received an additional state sentence
for an offense committed at the state prison. The Harrell
Court held that [the] federal sentence did not begin to run
upon completion of the first state sentence. The comparison
which the McIntosh Court made was as follows:
In Harrell, the state sentences overlapped. In the

instant case they were consecutive. The effect was the
same— continuous j urisdiction and custody under a single
sovereign authority. (Emphasis added).
249 F.2d at 64.

In recognition of the State of New Mexico's jurisdic
tion over Lewis and Judge Burciaga's intent that Lewis's
federal sentence be consecutive, a federal detainer was
lodged against Lewis at the New Mexico State Penitentiary.
It was not linked to a specific conviction or sentence and
it could be executed only after New Mexico had released
Lewis from all his state sentences, thereby relinquish
ing its jurisdiction over him. This occurred on March 16,
1993, and Lewis was transferred into federal custody on
that date.
In his Appeal Brief, Lewis acknowledges that 18 U.S.C. §

3568 (since repealed)’ governed the calculation of federal
sentences imposed for crimes committed prior to November 1,
1987. (Appellant's Brief-in-Chief at 12).
This statute clearly stated "The sentence of imprison
ment . . . shall commence to run from the date on which
such person is received at the penitentiary, reformatory,

or jail for service of such sentence."
Although Lewis decries applying § 3568 "mechanis
tically," there is no other way to apply it. Federal
courts have uniformly interpreted the plain language of
§ 3568 as precluding the calculation of the time served
on a federal sentence from any date other than the one
on which the prisoner was delivered into federal cus
tody. See, e.g., Thomas v. Whalen, 962 F.2d 358, 36 3
(4th Cir. 1992); Meagher v, Clark, 943 F.2d 1277, 1282
’ 18 U.S.C. § 3568 (1982) (repealed effective November 1, 1987)

by P.L. 98-473, Title II § 212(a)(2), 98 Stat. 1987, 2031 (1984),
reenacted in part, 18 U.S.C. § 3585 (1988).
(11th Cir. 1991) ; Thomas v. Brewer, 92 3 F.2d 1 3 6 1, 1 3 67
(9th Cir. 1991); Scott v. United States, 434 F .2d 11,
21 (5th Cir. 1970) .
Title 18 U.S.C. § 3568 also stated that, in order to
receive credit against a federal sentence for state tirr.e
served, the offense underlying the state sentence must be
"in connection with the offense or acts for which (the fed
eral) sentence was imposed." Lewis' federal sentence was
for drug trafficking while his second state sentence (fcr
which he seeks credit against his federal sentence) was fcr
escape and kidnapping. Thus, the statute itself precludes
the credit Lewis seeks. See Bloomgren, supra at 690, cit
ing to Goode V. McCune, 543 F.2d 751, 753 (10th Cir. 1976)
(no credit for time spent in state custody where state time
was attributable to state charges only).
In effect, Lewis's pleadings are an attempt to obtain
double credit for much of the time he was incarcerated by
the State of New Mexico. In Bruss v. Harris, 479 F.2d 392,
394 (10th Cir. 1973), the court addressed a similar claim:
We attach no significance to the fact that the state

sentence ran concurrently with the previously imposed
federal sentence. Petitioner owed a debt to two sov
ereigns, and each had a right to exact its debt inde
pendently of the other. The petitioner's claim is that
after having received credit from one sovereign he is
entitled to double credit.
Lastly, Lewis decries the perceived unfairness and

unjustness of his plight resulting from federal marshals'
actions. Lewis was convicted of five distinct crimes for
which he was sentenced to a total of more than 33 years
imprisonment. Even if he serves every day of his federal
sentence, his total time of incarceration (even counting
the time he was a fugitive) will be less than 16 years.
CONCLUSION AND STATEMENT CONCERNING ORAL ARGUMENT
For the reasons stated above, Lewis's habeas petition was
properly denied. Oral argument is not necessary in this
case and the matter should be submitted on the briefs of
the parties.
Respectfully submitted,
JOHN J. KELLY
United States Attorney
LARRY GÓMEZ
P.O. Box 607
Albuquerque, NM 87103
(505) 766-3341
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the Brief of Appellee was served upon
Defendant-Appellant, Frank Lewis, by mailing two true and
correct copies to his Attorney of record. Tova Indritz, at
her address of record, Post Office Box 449, Albuquerque,
New Mexico, 87102, this 27th day of January, 1995.
LARRY GÓMEZ
P.O. Box 6 07
Albuquerque, NM 87103
(505) 766-3341
Web Sites
Ilie f o l l o w i n g is a list o\ t h e W e b sites p r e s e n t e d in t h e I n t e r n e t R e s o u r c e s s e c t i o n s of t h e text,
l h e a d d r e s s e s a r e c u r r e n t as o l ' t h e d a t e o f p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s text, if a W'eb site is n o t at t h e
ad d r e s s listed, it d o e s not m e a n that t h e site n o longer exists, l h e site co u l d be d o w n t e mp o r a r i l y
d u e ft) t e c h n i c a l p r o b l e m s , o r t h e a d d r e s s m a \ h a v e c h a n g e d . To d e t e r m i n e if t h e a d d r e s s
h a s c h a n g e d , s e a r c h for a key t e r m in t h e a d d r e s s u s i n g a s ea r ch e n g i n e . N o t e t hat s e c t i o n 111
ol C^hapter 7 i n c l u d e s c o m p r e h e n s i \ ’e c o v e r a g e ol a d d i t i o n a l n o n l e e - b a s e d W'eb sites.
For Example If you are s ea r ch i n g for Legal Pad and the site does not c o m e up at t he
a d d r e s s listed in this a pp e n di x, p e rf or m a s e a r c h using ' l e g a l P a d " as
i the s e a r c h t e r m. If you are looking for a school's l a w library, s e a r c h u nd e r the n a m e of
I the s choo l and " l a w library."
l.i nks t o d o c u m e n t s t h a t h e l p v o u e v a l u a t e W’e b sites c a n be foui i d at t h e site "l-,valuation

o f I n f o r m a t i o n Sour c e s " by Al asl ai r S mi t h at htt p: / 7w w w . v u w . a c . n / 7 ' a g s i u i t h / e v a l n / e v a l n . h t m .
A. G e n e r a l A ccess a n d Links to C ase a n d S t a t u t o r v I,aw

a n d O t h e r S o u rces
Several sites p r o v i d e l i nk s to W'eb sites t h a t a l l ow a c c e s s to s t a t u t o r y law, c a s e law, a n d o t h e r
r e s e a r c h s o u r c e s . S o m e of t h e m o s t c o m p r e h e n s i \ ' e sites lollow:
http://w w w .fin dlaw .com

1 i n d l aw is o n e ot the mos t c o m p r e i i e n s i w sites pro\'i(.ling h n k s to sour ces for fetlerai a n d
state st atut orv a n d case law, law firms, legal o r g a n i za t i o n s, law schools, k'i;al pract i ce ma t e
rials, a n d n im i e r ou s ot he i s o L U 'c e s .
http://w w w .law .in diana.edu

ihi s \ irtual law librar\' incl udes links to sites of specialt\' area> t'f law. g o v e r n m e n t re
soLU'ces, a n d law journals.
http;//w w w . law .cornell.edu

Ihis C’ornel l Univ'ersitv site provi des re s o u r c e gui des to main- dilierent loâl topics, in
e l u d i n g L' nited States S u p r e m e C'oLU'i o pi n i on s . United Sttih's ('()(/(. aild others.
http ://w w w .w ash law .edu

In a d d i t i o n to links to n u m e r o u s law a n d leâl research -relaietl We b s i t e s , leâl n e w s p a
pers, newslet ters, a n d m a g a / i n e s , this W a s h b u r n L'niversity School o f 1,aw site pr o v i d e s
links to state a n d federal c o u r t a n d m n e r n m e n t sites.
http.7/w w w .a b an e t.o rg/law lin k/h o m e .h tm l

'lliis A m e r i c a n Bar Associ at i on site i ncl ude s links to legal I'esL-arch sources, b i a n c l i e s o f
t; overnme!it , an d court s.
663
http://w w w .law sonline.com /
lilis site p n n ides q u i c k a c c e s s t o s t a t e s t a t L i t e s , c a s e law, a n d a d n i i n i s t i ' a t n c kiw.
http://w w w .oyez.org
You nia\' h e a r the oral a r g u n i e n t s or read t h e co u r t briets ot the L'nited States S u p r e m e
(Court cases al this sile. llie oral a r gi ini ents are a\ a i l a bl e lor cases Ironi 1961) to present.
http://law .gsu.edu/
I’rovi des an i nde x lo legal sites on the Web, i n c l ud i n g links.
http://w w w .law .villanova.edu

Iliis N'illaiiova Law School site is a slate co u r t locator.
B. G o v e r n m e n t S o u rc e s
h ttp ://w w w .lo c.go v/index.h tm l
'Ihis is the Librar}' ot (Congress site. Wn\ iiia\' search by title, key words, o r a u t h o r t or any
b o o k that has an ISBN.
h ttp://tho m as.lo c.gov

Legislali\e historx' is available at this sile n i a i nt a i ne d b\' the Librars' ot (Congress.
h ttp ://w w w .a cce ss.gp o .go v

t h e (i o\ ' erni i i enl P r i n t i ng Oltice W’eb site prov ides access to congres si onal , presidenti al,
a n d v a r i o u s o l h e r g o v e r n n i e n t d o c u n i e n t s , such as th e L'nited Stiilcs (.'oí Íl'.
h ttp://w w w .w hiteh ou se.go v/

Ihe W h i l e I lous e X'irlual Librarv' al this Web sile prov ides access to pre s i dent i a l inaierial.
http://w w w .ho use.gov/

Ihis is the h o m e page ot t h e L'nited Stales 1louse ot Represent ati ves
http://w w w .senate.gov/
Ihis is the h o m e page ot the L'nited Slates Senate,
http://w w w .usdo j.go v

L'nited Stales a t t or n e y general o p i n i on s are available al this L'nited Stales Il e p a r l i i i en t ot
lustice W'eb sile.
http ://w w w .u sco u rts.go v

this We b sile is t he h o m e page lor the lederal court s.
http://w w w .courts.net
Ibis sile p r ovi de s access lo W'eb sites m a i n t a i n e d bv' c o u r t s nationw ide.
http ://w w w .su p rem eco u rt.go v

Ihis otticial page ot t h e Un i t ed Slates S u p r e m e (Court leatures co u r l o p i n i o n s , order s,
rules, ca l e n d a r s a n d schedul es, n e w s releases, a n d general i nl orni a t i on.
http://w w w .naag.org
.Many slate a t t o r n e y gene r a l o p i n i o n s are available al this Nalional Asso c i a t i o n ot .Attor
neys ( i en e r a l W’eb sile.
http ://w w w .re gu iatio n s.go v

Iliis is an o n l i ne s o u r c e tor U.S. g o v e r n m e n t regul at i ons t r om nearly 300 tederal agencies.
C. Law School Web Sites

LCvery l a w s c h o o l h a s a W' eb site, a n d m o s t sites p r o v i d e l i n k s lo t h e s c h o o l ’s lavs li brary.
A list ot all t h e law s c h o o l W'eb sites is t o o large lo i n c l u d e he re , l b l oc a t e t h e site ot a .school ot
i nt erest , use a se ar c h e n g i n e a n d i n s e r t t h e n a m e o t ' t h e law school . Re s e a r c h m a y b e c o n d u c t e d
t h r o u g h m a n \ ' law sc h o o l li brar)' W’eb sites. S o m e o t t h e m o r e t r e q u e n t h u s e d sites tt)llow:
h ttp://w w w .law sch oo l.corn ell.edu/

CA)rnell Liii\'ersit\' Law Schotil
http://w w w .law .em ory.edu/LA W /law .htm l

l ’mor\- L' ni\ersit\' Law School
http://w w w .law .harvard.edu/library

[ l a r \ ard Law School
http://w w w .law .indiana.edu/

I n d i a n a L’niversity Law School
http://w w w .law .vlllanova.edu/

\ ' i I l a no\ a U n i\ e r s i t y School oi Law
h ttp ://w w w .II.georgetow n.edu /

((et>rgetown l ' ni \' ersity H.B. W’i l ha ms Law Librar y
h ttp://w w w .w ash law .edu

W a s h b u r n l ' n i \ ersit\' School ot Law
D. M i s c e l l a n e o u s
http://w w w .abanet.o rg/
A m e r i c a n Bar Associ ation
http://w w w .nala.o rg
N a t i o nal Associ at i on ot l.egal Assistants
h ttp ://w w w .p a ra le ga ls.o rg

N a t i o nal Lederat i on ot Paralegal Associ ations
http://w w w .paralegaltoday.com
¡âriilcgii! lodiiv m a g a / i n e
h ttp ://w w w .m artin d ale.co m

. Ma r t i ndal e- Hubbel l locatt>r site
h ttp ://w w w .alw d.o rg

Ihe Web site lor the A L W D ('itiition M a n u a l. ' Ihe site incl udes m a n y teatures, such as
a d d i t io n a l mat eri al, exampl es, a n d updates.
h ttp ://w w w .le ga lb lu e b o o k.co m

ihi s Web site i ncl udes i n f o r ma t i o n on the 18th e d i t i o n o f I h c Bluebook.
h ttp ://w w w .llrg.co m

i.inks lo f or m sour ces are p r ov i de d at this I n t er n e t Legal Re s o u r c e ( i u i d e site.
Active voice Su- voicc. P l a i n t i l f - A p p e l l e e v. H mi l l i o ( ^ \ I ) | - ! \ A a n d . Manuel ( ' a d e n a ,
Adjective A w o r d t h a t m o d i h c s a l u i u n o r pr oi i cui n. A n adicv neteiidants-.-\ppellants).
t i vc uMi al l y d e s c n b o s a i i oi i n o r p r o n c u m (a r a i (.ar). case brief .A w r i t t e n s u m m a r v ' i d e n t i t v i n g t h e e s s e n t i a l c o n i p o -
Adm inistrative law Rul e s , r e g u l a t i o n s , o r d e r s , a n d d c e i s i o n s iieiits i>t a c o u r t o p i n i o n ,
a d o p t e d b \ a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a g e i i e i c s t h a t h a v e tlie a u t h o r i t y case law .Siv c o m m o n l a w / c a s e l a w
ol law. case law analysis I h e a n a l y t i c a l p r o c e s s e n g a g e d in t o d e t e r
Advocacy l o s u p p o r t o r u r g e t h e a d o p t i o n ol a p o s i t i o n m i n e If a n d h o w a d e c i s i o n in a c o u r t o p i n i o n e i t h e r g o v e r n s
t h r o u g h t h e u s e ot a n a r g u m e n t . o r a t l e c t s t h e o u t c o m e ol a cl i ent ' s case,
Advocacy letter See d e i i i a n d / a d \ ( i c a c \ ’ letter. cause of action I h e l egal ba s i s u p o n w h i c h a l a ws u i t is b a s e d
Affirm decision ot a n a p p e l l a t e c o u r t t h a t u p h o l d s t h e d e c i (e.g., n e g l i g e n c e ) , l o s t a t e a c l a i m in a l a ws ui t m e a n s t o a l l e g e
s i o n ol t h e t ri al c o u r t . tact s in s u p p o r t ot e a c h e l e m e n t ot t h e c a u s e ot a c t i o n (e.g., in
Agreem ent W o r d s t h a t a r e r e l a t e d m u s t a g r e e in n u m b e r a n e g l i g e n c e ca s e , t h e r e m u s t h e t a c t s a l l e g e d in s u p p o r t ol
(singular/plural) an d g e n d e r (leniinine/niasculine'neiiter) e a c h o f t h e e l e m e n t s o f n e g l i g e n c e du t y , b r e a c h o f dut y ,
(e.g. , m u s t w e a r th e i r h e l m e t s . A h i r v nui s t w e a r he r p r o x i m a t e c aus e, a n d d a m a ge s) ,
helmet,) . certiorari .See w rit o f c e r t i o r a r i .
Antecedent . \ w o r d , clau.se. o r p h r a s e r e f e r r e d t o by a p r o n o u n . citation I n f o r m a t i o n that allows t he r e a d e r to locate w h e r e a
In t h e lollow i n g s e n t e n c e , t h e w o r d worl<eri is t h e a n t e c e d e n t lor r e t e r e n c e c a n h e I' ound. In c a s e law, t h e t e r m r e l e r s t o t h e
t h e p r o n o u n t h e i r I h e irorAreo p u t o n th e ir he l me t s . volum e n u m be r, page nu mb er , a n d n a m e o f t h e repo rter
Apostrophe (' ) m a r k t h a t i n d i c a t e s p o s s e s s i o n ( M a r v 's ha t ) w h e r e a case m a y he lo u nd .
o r t o r m s a c o n t r a c t i o n (can' t ) . cite See c i t a t i o n .
Appeals court c o u r t t h a t r e v i e w s t h e d e c i s i o n ol a tri al c o u r t collateral estoppel, doctrine of I h e d o c t r i n e p r e v e n t s .1
o r o t h e r l o w e r c o u r t t o d e t e r m i n e a n d c i i r r e c t anv e r r o r t hat partv' ill a l a w s u i t I r o m r e l i t i g a t i n g a n i s s ue t ha t h a s b e e n
ma y have been made. d e c i d e d in a p r e v i o u s law suit,
Appellant I h e partv- w h o tiles a n a p p e a l . (.’>11 a p p e a l , t h e a p p e l colon (:) .\ p u n c t u a t i o n m a r k u s e d t o i n t r o d u c e o r call a t t e n t i o n
l a n t a r g u e s t h a t t h e l i n s e r c o u r t m a d e a n e r r o r t hat e n t i t l e s t o i n l o r m a t i o n t ha t l ol l ows . ( I h e s t a t u t o r y r e q u i r e m e n t s a r e t h e
t h e a p p e l l a n t t o reliel. lol l owi ng: t h e will m u s t b e w i t n e s s e d hv t w o wi t n e s s e s . . .).
Appellate brief . \ n e. xt ernal m e m o r a n d u m ol law s u b m i t t e d comma (,) I h e m o s t I r e q u e n t l y u s e d p u n c t u a t i o n m a r k . It is
t o a c o u r t ot a p p e a l s . It p r e s e n t s t h e l egal a n a l vs i s , a u t h o r i t v u s e d t o s e p a r a t e p a r t s of a s e n t e n c e ,
a n d a r g u m e n t in s u p p o r t ol a p o s i t i o n t h a t t h e l o w e r c o u r t ' s common law/case law I h e h o d v ol law c r e a t e d bv c o u r t s
de ci s i i i i i o r r u l i n g w a s e i t h e r Lor r e c t o r i nc or r e i . t . It is o l t e n It IS ( . ( i m p o s e d ol t h e g e n e r a l l egal r ul e s , d o c t r i n e s , a n d p r i n
r e t e r r e d t o as a n a p p e l l a t e bri el . ci pl e s . i d o p t e d hv c o u r t s w h e n i n t e r p r e t i n g e x i s t i n g l a w o r
Appellee Ihe p a r t y w h o o p p o s e s t he a ppeal. O n appeal, the w h e n c r e a t i n g l a w in t h e a b s e n c e ol c o n t r o l l i n g e n a c t e d law.
a p p e l l e e u s u a l l y a r g u e s t h a t t h e l o w e r c o u r t d i d n o t m a k e an concurring opinion A j ud i c i a l o p i n i o n t h a t a g r e e s w i t h t h e
e r r o r t h a t e n t i t l e s t h e ap p e l l a i i l t o reliel. m a j ( n itv h o l d i n g in a c a s e hu t l o r d i l i e r e n t o r a d d i t i o n a l
Authority . Anyt hi ng a c o u r t mav rely o n w h e n d e c i d i n g a n issue. It r ea son s t h a n t h o s e p r e s e n t e d by t he niajority
i n c l u d e s t h e law, s u c h as c o n s t i t u t i o n s a n d statutes, a n d n o n l a w constitution . \ g o v e r n i n g d o c u m e n t a d o p t e d by t h e p e o p l e
s our c e s , s u c h as legal e n c y c l o p e d i a s a n d treatises. t ha t e s t a b l i s h e s t h e f r a m e w o r k l o r t h e o p e r a t i o n o f t h e
g o v ern me nt, defines the po wers of the gove rnm en t, a n d guar
Background facts l-acts p r e s e n t e d in a c o u r t o p i n i o n , c a s e hriel. a n t e e s t h e l u n d a m e n t a l r i g h t s o f t h e p e opl e ,
t)r l egal m e m o r a n d u m t ha t p u t t h e k e y f a c t s in c o n t e x t . I h e y contraction w o r d f o r m e d by c o m b i n i n g t w o w o r d s : a u i t
g i v e a n o v e r v i e w ot a t a c t ua l e v e n t a n d p r o v i d e t h e r e a d e r w i t h ( c a n n o t ) , l i i i ’t (is n o t ) ,
t h e ov e r a l l cont e. xt w i t h i n w h i c h t h e k e y t a c t s o c c u r r e d . counteranalysis I h e p r o c e s s ol d i s c o v e r i n g a n d c o n s i d e r i n g
brackets ([ ]) M a r k s u s e d t o s h o w c h a n g e s in o r a d d i t i o n s to t h e c o u n t e r a r g u n i e n t t o a l egal p o s i t i o n o r a r g u m e n t ; t h e
q u o t a t i o n s , u s u a l h ' l or t h e purpc' i se o f p r o v i d i n g c l a r i l i c a t i o n p r o c e s s o f a n t i c i p a t i n g t h e a r g u m e n t t h e o p p o n e n t is li kel y to
t o t h e q u o t a t i o n o r i n d i c a t i n g a n e r r o r in t h e o r i g i n a l q u o t a ra i s e in r e s p o n s e t o t h e a n a l y s i s o f a n i ssue. It is t h e i d e n t i t i c a
t i o n s . ( I h e priv i l ege | a g a i n s t s e l t - i n c r i m i n a t i o i i | a l l o w s a n tion a n d obie ctive e v al u at io n o f t h e s tre ngths a n d w e a k n e s s e s
i ndi v i d u a l t o r e m a i n si l ent . ) ol a l egal a r g u m e n t ,
brief .See a p p e l l a t e c o u r t br i ef , c a s e br i ef , a n d t ri al i.oiirt hr i et . counterargument I h e a r g u n i e n t in o p p o s i t i o n t o a l egal a r g u
brief answ er .-\ s e c t i o n ol a m e m o r a n d u m ot l a w t ha t p r e s e n t s m e n t o r p o s i t i o n . I h e a r g u m e n t t h e o p p o n e n t is li kel y t o r a i s e
a h r i e l , p r e c i s e a n s w e r t o t h e i s s ue ( s ) a d d r e s s e d in t h e m e m o . 111 r e s p o n s e t o t h e a n a l y s i s ot a n i ssue,
court opinion I h e s t a t e m e n t ot a c o u r t ol its de c i s i on r e a c h e d 111 a
canons of construction I h e r u l e s a n d g u i d e h n e s c o u r t s us e
âse, t h e rul e t ha t applies, a n d t h e r e a s o n s tor t h e court ' s de ci si on,
w h e n i n t e r p r e t i n g st at ut es .
court rules P r o c e d u r a l r u l e s a d o p t e d b y a c o u r t t ha t g o v e r n t h e
caption In a n o p i n i o n , t h e c a p t i o n c o n s i s t s ol t h e n a m e s o f t h e
l i t i ga t i o n p r o c e s s . Côurt r u l e s o f t e n g o v e r n t h e t o r n i a t a n d
p a r t i e s t o a l a w s u i t a n d t h e i r c o u r t s t a t u s (e.g., I . ddi e R,-\l,l.,
stv le o f d o c u m e n t s s u b m i t t e d t o t h e c o u r t .
666
dangling m odifier A n i o d i f R T t h a t d o c s n o t ni odi í N a n y Dtlicr infinitive A \ c r b I d r n i th a t t u i K ' t i d i i s a s a n o u n o r a s a n a u x i l
p a r t ot a s e n t c n c c . i a r \ ’ v e r b ( e .g .. to a r g u e , to ! e a \ e ) . A <plit lufiijitivc r e f e r s to t h e
dash (—) A m a r k u s e d in a s c n i o n c e to e m p h a s i / . e s o i n c l h i n u . p l . i e e t n e n l ot a n a J x e r h b e l w e e n to a n d the \ e r b in an iiifitii
sol of t l ists, b r i e f l v s u m n i a r i / c m a t e r i a l s c o n t a i n i n i ; t i v e (e .g ., to comfylctdy understand),
c o i i i i n a s , o r s h o w aii a b r u p t c h a n g e o f t h o u g h t o r d i r e c t i o n . information letter ('(M r e s p o n d e n e e t h a t p r o v i d e s g e n e r a l
{’lliC i l ei i i s l o c a t e d at t h e s c e n c - t h e k n i t e , t h e d r u g s , l e g a l i n t o r n i a t i o n o r b a c k g r o u n d o n a l e g a l i s s u e , Il u s u a l K '
anti the s c a r f — h a v e d i s a p p e a r e d t r o m t h e e \ ' i d e n c e i n \ ' o l \ e s t h e e o n i m u n i c a t i o n ot i h e r e s u l t s ot l e g a l r e s e a r c h
room.) a n d a n a l v s i s to a c l i e n t o r a t h i r t l p a r t y ,
defendant I h e p a r l y a g a i n s t w h o m a l a w s u i t is b r o u g h t , in personam jurisdiction . V e p e r s i i n a l j u r i s d i c t i o n ,
dem and/advocacy letter C o r r e s p o n d e n c e d e s ig n e d to intellectual honesty I n t h e c o n t e x t ot l e g a l a n a l y s i s , t o re
p e r s ua LỈ e s o m e o n e t o t a k e a c t i o n f a v o r a b l e t(i t ỉ i e i n t e r e s t s ot se arch a n d a n a ly z e a p r o b le m o b je c tiv e ly. I h i s in c lu d e s
t h e c l i e n t o r c e a s e a c t i n g i n a m a n n e r t h a t is d e l r i n i o n t a l ti) a n a l w i n g a l l a s p e c t s o t a p r o b l e m t r e e ot p r e c o n c e i v e i l
t h e c l i e nt . n o t io n s , p e r s o n a l \ ie w s, a n d e m o t io n s ,
dissenting opinion A iudicial o p i n i o n in a case that disagrees interoffice memorandum of law Sec o t f i c e le g a l
w i t h t h e n i a i o r i t v opi ni t ) i i . m e m o ra n d u n i,
district court I n m a n y s t at es , t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t is t h e t r i al Loi i rt IRAC . \ n a c r o n \ n i c o i n n i o n b ' u s e d i n r e f e r e n c e to t h e l e g a l
lit' general j ur i sd ic t io n. See a ỉio U n i t e d States Di s tr ic t O i u r t . a n a l y s i s p r o c e s s . It is c o m p o s e d ot t h e f ir s t l e t t e r o l ' t h e
d e s c r ip t iv e te rm tor e ac h step ol the p ro c e s s /ssue, ru le ,
ejusdem generis A cannon oi c o n s t r u c t i o n t h a t p r o v i d e s < n ia l\ ' s is / a p p h c a t io n , c o n c l u s i o n . I h e s t a n tla rtl le g a l a n a l y s i s
t h a t \ v h c n e \ e r a s t a t u t e c o n t a i n s a s p e c i f i c lisl k)l l i )\ vcd hv a p r o c e s s is t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n ot t h e i s s u e , t o l l o w e d b y t h e p r e
g e n e r a l t e r m , t h e g e n e r a l t e r m IS i n t e r p r e t e d t o h e l i m i t e d t o s e n t a t i o n ot t h e g o v e r n i n g r u l e of la w . t h e a n a l y s i s / a p p l i c a t i o n
o t h e r t h i n g s o f t h e s a m e c l a s s o r k i n d a s t h e list, o t'th e r u le ot'law , a n d the c o n c l u s i o n ,
elem ent A n e s s e n t i a l c o m p o n e n t o t a l aw, r u l e , p r i n c i p l e ' , o r irrelevant facts I h o s e tacts that are c o i n c i d e n t a l to a n e \ ent
d o c t r i n e . In o r d e r t o r a l aw, rule’, a n d s o o n t o a p p l v , t h e b u t a r e n o t of s i g n i t i c a n t l e g a l i m p o r t a n c e i n a c a s e ,
r e q u i r e m e n t s ot e ac h e l en ie nt nuis t h e m e t . ( I h c c l oni cnt s issue i h e p r e c i s e l e g a l q u e s t i o n r a i s e d b\' t h e s p e c i f i c t a c t s ot a
ot n e g l i g e n c e a r c d u l y , b r e a c h o t d u t y , p r o x i m a t e c a u s c , a n d d isp u te ,
d a m a g e s . F o r a c l a i m o f n e g l i g c i i c e 1(1 p r e v a i l , t h e p l a i n t i í ĩ issue com prehensive/narrow statem ent A co m p lete
m u s t e s t a b l i s h t h a t t h e d e l e n d a n t h a d a d u t v , t h e t l c f oi ul a i U s t a t e m e n t ot t h e i s s u e th a t i n c h u l e s t h e s p e c i f i c la w , l e g a l
h r o a c h e c l t h e d u t y , t h e b r e a c h o i ' d u t y w a s t h e c a u s e (it* t h e q u e s t i o n , a n d k e \ t a c ts
MKi d c n l . a n d t h e p l a i n t i l i ' w a s d a m a g e d a s a r e s u l t ol t h c issue short/broad statem ent A hroatl fo rm u la tio n o f t h e
liivach.) i s s u e th a t u s u a l U d o e s n o t i n c l u d e r e t e r e n c e t o t h e s p e c i f i c
ellipsis (. . .) I h o use o f t hr e e d o t s to i n d i c a t e the omis si on of part f a c t s (it th e c a s e o r t h e a p p l i c a b l e law.
ol a q u o t a t i o n (t’.g.. I h e s t a t u t e p R i v i d e s t h a t c o n t r a c t o r s a r c
responsible tor . . . t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o t ' w o r k o r d t ' f s . . .). Jurisdiction I h e c o u r t ’s a u t h o r i t y to h e a r a n d r e s o K e s p e c i f i c
enacted law I h c bí KỈv o i h w a d o r n e d b v t h o o r lcỊỊisla d i s p u t e s l u r i s d i c t i o n is u s u a l U c o m p o s e d ('t pcrômil iurisdiction
l i \ ' f b o d i e s , i n c l u d i n g c o n s t i t u t i o n s , s t a t u t e s , ( i r J i n a i i c o s , .iiul (authorit\' o w r p erso n s) a n d <uh}irt tiialtcr lunsdn lion (a u th o ritv
ad nii nis tra tiv e rules a n d regulations, o v e r i h e t \ p e s of c a s e s a c o u r t m a \ ' h e a r a n d d e c i d e ) .
expanded outline Siv outüne, e x p ; i i u i e d
expressio unius A Lai i oi i o f c o n s t r u L t i i i n t h a t pKi vi e l c s t h a t it key fact(s) I h e l e g a l l y s i g n i t i c a n t f a c t s ¡it a c a s e th a t r a i s e t h e
a s t a t u t e c o n t a i n s a list o f i t e m s L' ove r od b y t h e s t a t u t e , e v e r y l e g a l <.]uestion ot h o w o r w h e t h e r t h e l a w g o v e r n i n g t h e d i s p u t e
t h i n g e l s e is e x c l u d e d , a p p l i e s ; th e t’a c l s u p o n w h i c h t h e o u t c o m e o l t h e c a s e is d e t e r
external m e m o r a n d u m A m e n io r a n d u m o fla w designod m i n e t i . l h e \ ' a r e i h e t a c ts t h a t e s t a b l i s h o r s a t i s f y t h e e l e m e n t s
t o r USC’ o u t s i d e t h e l a w (ittice ( e .g ., n i e n i o r a i i d a s u h m i t l t ' d 1(1 of a cau N C ot act i( Mi a n d a r e n e c e s s a r \ ’ to p r o v e o r d i s p r o \ e a
a c o u r t , s u c h as b r i e f s in s u p p o r t o i ' m o t i o n s ; t n t ' n i o r a i u l a c l a i m . A k e y fact is s(^ e s s e n t i a l th a t , it it w e r e c h a n g e d , i h e
d e s i g n e d i or o t h e r e x t e rn a l use, s u c h as t or c li e nt s or o u t c o m e o l th e c a s e w o u l d p r o h a b h ’ c h a n g e ,
o p p o s i n g attorneys). key facts groups I n d i v i d u a l facts that, w h e n c i> n s id e r e d as a
g r o u p , are k e y facts. I n d t \ ' i d u a l tacts, w t ie n t re a te d a s a g r o u p ,
fact I n t o r m a t i i i i i c o n c e r n i n g ' i oi ne t h i n g , a c t i o n , e v e n t , o r m a y d e t e r n i i n e t h e o u t c o m e ot a c a s e ,
ciivuiiistaiice. key facts individual A k e y f a ct t h a t , i f it w e r e c h a n g e d , t h e
o u t c o m e of t h e c a s e w o u l d b e a f f e c t e d o r c h a n g e d ,
general jurisdiction A court ofîeneral juri sdi ction has tlu* key num bers W e s t ( i r o u p h a s d iv i d e d a l! a r e a s o f . \ m e r i c a n
po we r, w i t h tow e x c e p t i on s , to h e a r a n d d e c i d e a n y n ia t te r l a w i n t o v a r i o u s t o p i c s a n d s u b t o p i c s . l a c h a r e a is i d e n t i i i e d
b r o u g h t b e t ö r e it. h v a t o p i c n a m e , a n d e a c h s p e c i f i c t o p i c (u' s u b t o p i c i s a s
sig n e d a n u m b e r c a lle d a k e v n u m b e r.
headnotes Summaries (ÌÍ the’ p o i n t s ot l a w d i s c u s s e d in a court
o p in io n p r e p a r e d by the publi sh er ij f t h c o p in io n , law ih e e n to rc e a h le r u le s that g o v e r n i n d i v i d u a l a n d g r o u p
holding I h e c o u r t ’s a ppl i c a t i <i n ot t h e r u l e o f l a w t o tlio legal c o n d u c t i n a s o c i e t y . I h e l a w e s t a b l i s h e s s t a n d a r d s i^t c o n
q u e s t i o n r a i s e d b \ t h e t a c t s (i! a c a s e ; t h e c o u r t ' s a n s w e r t o tỈK' d u c t, the p r o c e d u r e s g i n e r n i n g s t a n d a r d s o l c iM id u ct, a n d the
i s s u e i n a c ase, r e m e d i e s av a i l a b l e w h e n t h e s t a n d a r d s a r e n o t l o l l o w e d .
hyphen (-) A m a r k u sed lo torni c c M i i p o u n d modiiicrs and legal analysis I h e p r o c e s s of i d e n t i t v i n g th e is s u e o r is s u e s
C D i n p o i i n d n o i i n > (c.ti., w e l l - k n o w n , c.\-juLÌ<^c). p r e s e n t e d bv a c l i e n t ' s t a c t s a n d d e t e r m i n i n g w h a t l a w a p p l i e s
i U i d I l o w i l a p p l i e s ; i h c p r o c e s s ot a p p l y i n g i h c law l o t h e t a c t s outline I h e s k e l e t a l s t r u c t u r e a n d o r g a n i z a t i o n a l f r a m e w o r k ot
o l a e a s e . It is a n e x p l o r a t i o n ot h o w a n d w i n a s p e e i t i e law a w r ting,
Jo e s or does n o l ap p l\. outline, expanded A n o u l l i n e that h as been e x p a n d e d so lh a l
legal issue S tt issue. it m ^ v b e u s e d i n t h e p r e w n t i n g s i a g e , l h e u s e o l a n e x p a n d

legal research I h e p r o e e s s o i i d e n l i t y i n g l h e l a w o r le g a l e d o j t l i n e a l l o w s t h e i n t e g r a t i o n ot a l l r e s e a r c h , a n a l y s i s , a n d
a i i l h o n l v t h a t a p p l i e s l o t h e is s u e , ic c a in to an o rg a n iz .e d o u t l i n e s t r u c t u r e w h il e r e se a rc h a n d
legal writing process s y s l e m a l i e a p p r t t a e h to l e g a l w r i t i n g ; a n a l s i s a r e b e i n g c o n d u c t e d . It l a c i l i l a t e s t h e p r e p a r a l u > n o l
a n o r g a n i z e d a p p r o a c h to l e g a l r e s e a r c h , a n a h s is , a n d w rit a ro L g h draft,
i n g . it is c o m p o s e d o l t h r e e s t a g e s : p r e w r i l i n g , w r i t i n g , a n d
p o s lw rilin g . paragraph A g r o u p o f s e n t e n c e s t h a t a d d r e s s t h e s a m e t o p i c ,
legislative history I h e r e c o r d ot l e g i s l a t i o n d u r i n g ; t h e e n a c t parallel citation W ' h e n a c o u r l o p i n i o n is p r i n t e d i n n u ) r e l l i a n
m e n t p r o c e s s . Il is c o m p o s e d ot c o m m i t t e e r e p o r t s , i r a n - o n e ‘e p o r t e r . e a c h c i t a t i o n is a p a r a l l e l c i l a t i o n l o t h e o l h e r c i -
s c r i p l s ot h e a r i n g s , s t a t e m e n t s ot l e g i s l a t o r s c o n c e r n i n g th e td ti o T o r c i t a t i o n s , l o r e x a m p l e . " H n t t o n r. H n l t o n , 1 0 0 N . M .
le g is la tio n , a n d an\' o t h e r m a t e r ia l p u b lis h e d tor le g is la t i\e 4 2 4 , 6 7 1 P . 2 t i 1 1 3 3 ( 19 8 3 ) . ” l l i e p a r a l l e l c i t a t i o n s a r e i n b o l d ,
u se in re g a rd lo the le g is la t io n , parentheses ( ) M a r k s u s e d to a d d to a s e n t e n c e i n f o r m a
lim ited jurisdiction I h i s t y p e o f c o u r t is l i m i t e d i n t h e k i n d s t i o n h a t is o u t s i d e t h e m a i n i d e a o f t h e s e n t e n c e (,>r o f l e s s e r
o T c a s e s il m a \ ' h e a r a n d d e c i d e . im portance.
pari materia A c a n o n o f c o n s t r u c t i o n t h a t p i \ ) v i d e s th a t
majority opinion I h e o p i n i o n i n a c o u r t d e c i s i o n ot i h e s ia t u e s d e a lin g w ith th e s a m e s u b je c t s h o u ld b e in te rp r e te d
m a i o r i t y ot j u d g e s , c o n s s t e n t ly .
m andatory authority A n y a u t h o r it y o r so u rc e o l la w ihat a party r. p l a i n t i l f o r d e f e n d a n t i n a l a w s u i t ,
c o u r l m u s t r e l y i ) i i o r l o l l o w w h e n r e a c h i n g a d e c i s i ( » n ( e .g .. passive voice .See v o i c e
a d e c is io n o l a h ig h e r c o u r t in the iu r is d i c t io n o n the sa m e personal jurisdiction T l i e a u t h o r i t y o f i h e c o u rt o v e r the p ar
o r a s i m i l a r is s u e ) , ties n r e s o l v e a l e g a l d i s p u t e i n v o h i n g t h e p a r l i e s ,
m em orandum of law A w r i l l e n a n a l y s i s ot ’ a l e g a l p r o b l e m , il persuasive authority A n v a u t h o r i t v ' a c o u r t is n o t b t ) u n d to
is a n m l o r m a t i v e d t ) c u m e n t l h a l s u m m a r i z e s t h e r e s e a r c h a n d c o n s . d e r o r t o l K ) w b u t m a v c o n s i d e r t>r l o l l o w w h e n r e a c h i n g a
a n a ! \ si s ot l h e l e g a l i s s u e o r i s s u e s r a i s e d b \ t h e l a c t s o l a c a s e . d e c i s i o n (e.g., a d e c i s i o n o f a c o u r l i n a n o t h e r s t a l e o n l h e s a m e
It c o n t a i n s a s u m m a r \ ot t h e la w a n d h o w t h e l a w a p p l i e s in o : a i m i l a r is s u e , s e c t ) n d a r y a u l h o n l v ' , a n d s o o n ) ,
th e case, plain meaning rule A c a n o n ot c o n s t r u c t i o n t h a t p i o v i d e s
modifier A w o r d o r p h r a s e that p ro v id e s a d e s c r i p i i o n o l the that f l h e m e a n i n g t)l a s t a l u t e i s c l e a r o n its t a c e , i l w i l l b e i n -
s u b ie ct, v erb , o r o b ie c t in a se ntence. t c r p r e l e d a c c o r d i n g U) it s p l a i n m e a n i n g a n d t h e o t h e r c a n o n s
o : ct n s l r u c l i o n w i l l n o l b e a p p l i e d b y l h e c o u r l .
nom inalization .\ n o u n c r e a t e t l l r t ) m a v e r b ( e .g .. rciihziitioii plaintiff l h e p a rtv ' w h o s t a r t s ( t i l e s ) a l a w s u i t ,
I r o m t h e \ e r b ivtiliZi'). point heading A s u m m a r v ot t h e p o s i t i o n a d \ t > c a i e d in the
nouns W o r d s th a l reter U) p e r s o n s , p la ce s, th in g s, o r i|u a lit ie s a r g u n e n t s e c t io n o f a t r i a l o v a p p e lla t e brief
postwriting stage l h e sta g e in th e legal w r i t m g [M ocess w h e r e
office legal m em orandum . \ leg al m e m o r a n d u m p re fv ir e d a n a s s i g n m e n t is r e v i s e d , e d i t e d , a n d a s s e m b l e d in l i n a l l o r m .
t o r o t h c e u s e . It p r e s e n t s a n o b i e c l i v e l e g a l a n a l v s i s o l i h e precedent A n e a r lie r c o u r l d e c is io n o n an issu e lh a l a p p lie s lo
i s s u e ( s ) r a i s e d b v t h e l a c l s o l l h e c l i e n t ’s c a s e a n d u s u a l l v g o ve .' n o r g u i d e a s u b s e q u e n l c o u r t i n its d e l e r m i n a l i o n o l a n
i n c l u d e s l h e a r g u m e n t s i n l a v o r o l a n d i n o p p o s i t i o n to t h e i c e n i c a l o r s i m i l a r i s s u e b a s e d u p o n i d e n t i c a l o v s i m i l a r l . ic t s ,
c l i e n l ' s p i t s i t i o n . It is o l t e n r e l e r r e d l o b y o t h e r n a m e s , s u c h A c o i n o p i n i o n is p r e c e d e n t il t h e r e is a s u l l i c i e n l s i m i l a r i t v
as i n l e r o ll ic e leg al r e s e a rc h m e n K ) r a n d u m , o liic e re se a rc h betw een the k e v la c t s a n d r u l e o l la w o r le gal p r i n c i p l e o f ih e
m e m o r a n d u m , a n d i n t e r o l i i c e m e m o r a n d u m o l law. c o u r s o p in io n a n d the n ia t t e r b e lo re lh e s u b s e q u e n t c o u r l.
on all fours A p ri t> r c o u r l o p i n i o n i n w h i c h t h e k e \ l a c t s a n d predicate A \ e r b , its m o d i t i e r s , a n d i h e o b j e c t o f t h e v e r b , s u c h
a p p lic a b le r u le o l la w are id e n t ic a l o r n e a rU id e n t ic a l w iih as a d i r e c t o b j e c t (i t n e c e s s a r v ). l h e p r e d i c a t e t)l a s e n t e n c e
t h o s e ot t h e c l i e n l ' s c a s e o r t h e c a s e b e f o r e a c o u r l . p r o v d e s i n f o r m a t i o n c o n c e r n i n g t h e s u b i e c t t>l a s e n t e n c e
on point . \ t e r m u s e d to r e l e r l o a p r i o r c o u r t o p i n i o n i n w h i c h (e.g . T o m n v i t o t f i c s t o r e . ) , l h e p r e d i c a t e ot t h e s e n t e n c e is
t h e l a c t s a r e s u l i i c i e n t l v s i m i l a r to t h e t a c t s ot th e c l i e n l ' s c a s e i r it a li c,
o r t h e c a s e b e l o r e t h e c o u r t l o r t h e p r i o r c o u r t o p i n i o n to a p p i v prewriting stage l h e stag e i n th e le g a l w r i t in g p r o c e s s w h e r e
a s p r e c e d e n t . A c a s e is o n p iM nt i l t h e s i m i l a r i t y b e t w e e n th e the a > s i g n m e n t is o r g a n i z e d , r e s e a r c h e d , a n d a n a l y z e d ,
k e y l a c t s a n d r u l e o l ' l a w o r le g a l p r i n c i p l e o f t h e c o u r t o p i n u > n primary authority A u t h o r i t y t h a t i s c o m p o s e d o f t h e l a w (e .g ..
a n d t h o s e o f t h e c l i e n t ' s c a s e is s u t i i c i e n t l o r t h e c o u r t o p i n i o n c o n s it u t io n s , statutes, a n d c o u r l o p in io n s ) ,
It) g o v e r n o r p r o v i d e g u i d a n c e to a l a t e r c o u r t i n d e c i d i n g t h e prior proceedings 'Ih e e v e n t s that o c c u r r e d in the li i i g a i i o n in
o u t c o m e o l t h e c l i e n t ’s c a s e , a lo w e r c o u r t o r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e h e a r i n g ,
opinion l h e w r i t t e n s t a t e m e n t b y t h e c o u r l e x p r e s s i n g h o w il punctuation M a r k s o r c h a r a c t e r s u s e d in w r i t i n g lo m a k e the
r u l e d i n a c a s e a n d t h e r e a s o n s l o r it s r u l i n g , i r . e a r . i n g c l e a r a n d e a s y t o u n d e r s t a n d , s u c h a s p e r i o d (.) ,
opinion letter C Ä > r r e s p o n d e n c e , u s u a l l y w r i t t e n to a c l i e n t , l h a l c o n i T i a (, ), s e m i c o l o n ( ; ) , a n d c o l o n (:).
i n a d d i t i o n to i n f o r m i n g t h e r e a d e r ot h o w t h e l a w a p p l i e s to purpose clause A statutorv- s e c t io n that in c l u d e s the p u r p o s e
a s p e c ific q u e s t io n , p r o v id e s leg al a d v ic e , ll in f o r m s the r e a d e r th e l e g i s l a t i v e b ( x i y i n t e n d e d l o a c c o m p l i s h w h e n d r a f t i n g t h e
ho w the la w a p p lie s a n d a d v is e s w h i c h steps s h o u ld b e ta k e n . s l a t u :e .
quotation M a r k s u s e d t o i d c n i i h ' a n d set o l i ’t i u o l o d i n a t e r i a l . a s p e c i f i c l a c t s i t u a t i o n , h o w it a p p l i e s , a n d t h e e l i e c t o f t h a t
( M a i \ s a i d , "I d o n o \ b e l i e v e it is t r u e ” ) apphcation.
statutory elem ents I h e s p e c i f i c c o n d i t i o n s o r c o m p o n e n t s ot
Re A t e r m l h a t m e a n s , “ m t h e m a t t e r of, a b o u t , o r c o n c e r n i i i g . " It is a s t a t u t e t h a l m u s t b e m e t f o r t h e s t a t u t e t o a p pl y.
u s u a l l v p l a c e d at t h e b e i ^ i n n m g o t t h e r e t e r e n c e l i ne in a m e m o statutory law I h e b o d y o f l a w c o m p o s e d of l a w s p a s s e d b y
or correspondence, legislative b o d i e s . I h e t e r m i n c l u d e s laws o r o r d i n a n c e s
remand A d e c i s i o n of a n a p p e l l a t e c o u r t t h a t s e n d s t h e c a s e p a s s e d b\ a n y legislative b o d y
h a c k lo t l i e t r i a l c o u r t f or f u r t h e r a<.tion, subject A i u ) u n o r p r o n t ) u n t h a t is t h e a c t o r i n a s e n t e n c e
reverse A d e c i s i o n ot a n a p p e l l a t e c o u r t t h a t d i s a g r e e s w i t h t h e (e.g. , l o i n r a n t o t h e s t o r e . ) . I h e s u b j e c t ol t h e s e n t e n c e is
d e c i s i o n ot t h e t r i a l c o u r t . t n italic.
subject matter jurisdiction Ih e types o r k in ds o f cases the
salutation ilie part ot a letter that presents the g re et ing (D e a r c o u r t h a s t h e a u t h o r i t \ ' U) h e a r a n d d e c i d e .
Ms lones).
scope A s t a t u t o r y s e c t i o n l h a t s t a l e s u h a t is s p e c i f i c a l l y c o \ e r e d topic sentence Ihe s en te n c e that identifies the subiect ot a
a i u l n o t c oN' e r e d b \ t h e s t a t ut e , p a r a g r a p h . It i n t r i > d u c e s t h e s u b j e c t a n d p r o v i d e s t h e f o c u s o f
secondary au th ority A n y s o u r c e oi l a w a c o u r t m a \ ’ rel\' o n a paragraph.
l h a t is nt)l t h e l a w ( e. g. , l egal t r e a t i s e s , r e s t a t e m e n t s o t t h e law, trial court I h e c o u r t w h e r e t h e m a t t e r is h e a r d a n d d e c i d e d .
a n d l egal e n c y c l o p e d i a s ) , In t h e t r i al c o u r t t e s t i m o n y is h e a r d , e v i d e n c e is t a k e n , a n d a
sem icolon (;) A p u n c t u a t i o n m a r k used to sep ara te m a jo r ele d e c i s u ) ! ! is r e a c h e d .
m e n t s o t c o m p l e x s e n t e n c e s , o r t o s e p a r a t e i t e m s in a s e r i e s ii trial court brief A n external m e m o r a n d u m o fla w submitted
t h e I t ems a r e l o n g o r it o n e of t he i t e ms h a s i n t e r na l c o m m a s . t o a t r i a l c o u r t . It p r e s e n t s t h e l e g a l a u t h o r i t v a n d a r g u m e n t
C l h e s h a r e h o l d e r s h e l d t h e i r m e e t i n g at n o o n ; t h e b o a r d of in s u p p o r t ol a p o s i t i o n a d v o c a t e d b v a n a t t o r n e v , u s u a l l v in
d i r e c t o r s m e t i m m e d i a t e U thereatter.) r e g a r d t o a m o t i o n o r i s s u e b e i n g a d d r e s s e d b y t h e ci>urt . It is
sentence I h e t u n d a m e n t a l bui l di n g b l o c k ot W r i t i n g . It is c o m o f t e n r e t e r r e d t o a s a t r i a l br i e f .
p o s e d t)l a g r o u p o f w o r d s t h a t c o n \ e\' a s i n g l e t h o u g h t . It is
us u a l K' a s t a t e m e n t in w h i c h t h e a c t o r ( s u b i e c t ) p e r t o r m s s o m e United States District Court 1h e t r i a l c o u r l ot g e n e r a l j u r i s
. k t i o n o r d e s c r i b e s a s t at e ot b e i n g ( t h e p r e d i c a t e ) , d i c t i o n in t h e l e d e r a l j u d i c i a l s y s t e m .
short title I h e n a m e b v w h i c h a s t a t u t e is k i u n v n United States Su prem e Court I h e f i nal c o u r t o f a p p e a l s in
(e. g. , L ' n i t o r m C ^ o m m e r c i a ! ( . o d e Sal es) , t h e l e d e r a l s v s t e m a n d t h e h i g h e s t c o u r t in t h e L’n i t e d Sl at es .
split infinitive S t v i n h m t i \ e
squinting m odifier A m o d i f i e r l o c a t e d m a p o ^ i t l o n m a verbs W o r d s t h a t e x p r e s s a c t i o n , a s t a t e ot b e i n g o r t e e l i n g , o r a
s e n t e n c e t h a t m a k e s it u n c l e a r w h e t h e r it m o d i f i e s t he w o r J r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n t w o t h i n g s ( e. g. , T o m i d u t o t h e s t o r e . ) , f h e
l hat p r e c e d e s il o r t h e wi)rd t hal UjIIows it. ( I-or e x a m p l e , “ I he v e r b m t h i s s e n t e n c e is i n italic.
ivf’o r t t hat wa s p r e p a r e d r o u d n c i v i nd i c a t e d l hal t h e s t r u c t u r e voice I h e r e l a t i o n s h i p ol t h e s u b i e c t t o t h e a c t i o n ot t h e s e n -
WA'' v\us.\te.” U is v\ucle;\v w h c t h c v ’Vi i t i ' H’!)' vv'tev^ U' t h e v e pov l UM^ce
b e i n g p r e p a r e d r o u t i n e l y o r t h e r e p o r t r o u t i n e l y iiitiiCiiled llie .■\t7/rc v oii c : t h e s u b j e c t o l t h e s e n t e n c e is p e r f o r m i n g t h e
sti u c t u r e w a s uns a l e . ) a c t i o n in t h e s e n t e n c e . ( I h e a u t o m o b i l e hi t t h e c h i l d . )
stare d ecisis A basi c p r i n c i p l e o f t he c i ) m m o n law s ys t e m that I'd/cc, t h e s u b i e c t ot t h e s e n t e n c e is a c t e d u p o n .
re(.|uires a c o u r t lo t ol l ow a p r e\ i ous d e c i s i o n of l hat c o u r t o r ( I h e c h i l d w a s hi t b v t h e a u t o m o b i l e . )
.1 h i g h e r c o u r t w h e n t h e c u r r e n t de c i s i o n i i n ’o K e s issues a n d
lac Is s i m i l a r l o t h o s e iiivoK ed m t he p r e v i o u s dec i s i o n ; t he writing stage I h e s t ag e in the legal w r i t i n g p r o c e s s w h e r e
d o L t r m e t h a t p r o v i d e s that p r e c e d e n t s h o u l d be t ol l owed. research, analysis, a n d ideas are a s s e m b le d into a w ritten
S tatem ent of facts I h e sectuMi o f a m e m o r a n d u m o f l a w t hat product.
p r e s e n t s t h e lactLial c o n t e x t ol t h e i ssue(s) a d d r e s s e d in t he writ of certiorari A writ t r o m a h ig h e r c our t ask ing a lower
memorandum, c o u r t l o r t h e r e c o r d o t a c a s e . A p e t i t i o n t o r a w r i t ot
statutes l a w s pass ed by le gislatue bod ie s that declare rights c e r t i o r a r i is a r e q u e s t f i l e d b y a p a r t y in a l a w s u i t t h a l
a n d duties, o r c o m m a n d or prohibit certain co n d u ct , a h i g h e r c o u r t is t o r e v i e w t h e d e c i s i o n of a l o w e r c o u r t .
statutory analysis Ihe mterpretation and application of
st . i t ul or y l a w ; t h e p r o c e s s o f t i e t e r m i n i n g if a s t a t ut e appl i es to
t a b l e o\ a u t h o r i t i e s , 5 5 2
t able o\ c o n t e n t s / i n d e x , 552
Abb rc vi. itions. 265, 2 8 4 - 2 8 5
A p p e l l e e , 109, 5 5 0
M u tu a l Life ¡ n s u r u f j c c C o m p a n y v. Africriciui ( ¡ c iic r d l ¡.¡fc
A p p l i c a l i l e l aw. 3 2 7
¡usuram c C om pany, 342-343
Arbitr ation. 250
A c t io n verbs , 416, 4 17
Archaic terms. 422 423
Active voice, 416, 417, 540
A r g u m e n t . 541 544
A ddit ion al authority, 518
A r g u m e n t s ec t io n , 54 7- ^50
Atldress block. 5 6 5 - 5 6 6
Assignment. 460-463. 485 488, 490
A d n u n i s t r a t i v e law, 5, 2 5 0 . 2 7 6
A s s i g n m e n t ot e r r o r . 5 5 2
analysis process, 8 3 - 9 0
A t l a n t i c B e a c h ( ii.<int\ Inc. r. M a r e n z o n i ,
c o u r t r u l e s , 81 - 8 3
532-533
d e h n i t i o n , 76
A t t o r n e x ’ g e n e r a l , 120
tederal. 76- 81
A t t o r n e ) g e n e r a l o p i n i o n s . 120- 1 2 1 , 2 4 7
s t a t e , 81
A t t o r n e \ s , 1 10
A d v a n c e s h e e t s , 114
Audience. 462-463. 486
A d v o c a c y l et t er , 5 7 5 - 5 7 7
Authority
M \ \ 7 ) ( itation M a n u a l, 2 6 1 - 2 6 2
d e l i n i t i o n . 13 19
A m e r i c a n B a r A s s o c i a t i o n , 193
mandalor>. 14.15 17
Am encan S y s t e i n , 166, 169
persuasi\e, 14.17 19
A m e r i c a n f u r i s p r u d c f i e e , 15
p r i m a r v . 1 3, 1 ~ 18
A m e riiiin lu risprudence Second, 14 3-1 49
r o l e of, 15 19
A m e r i c a n L a w I n s t i t u t e ( A L I ) , 15, 199
s e c o n d a r y , 13 15. I S 19, 121
A n u ' r i c a n L a w R e p o r t s ( A L R ) , 14, 141
a n n o t a t i o n , 154, 155, 156, 157
B
a n n o t a t i o n h i s t o r v t a b l e , 160
c o m p o n e n t s , 1 5 4 - 160 B a c k g r o u n i i lacts. I 26 127.309 310
m d e \ , 15 7 1 59 l i i i l l e n t m e s I c\îil D i c t i o n a r v , 15
o v e r \ i e \ v , 153 154 B a n k r u p t c y . 250
r e s e a r c h u s i n g , I hO - I h l Wm a s s O L i a \ i o n M v \ o \ h e v a s s o c i a t i o n p u W u a \ i i i n s . 1^ 3 ,
A m p e r s a n d , 285 Ht'iiiM 1' f 585 586
A n a l y s i s / a p p l i c a t i o n , 28 Hliick's I a w I h c t i o n i n w I 5. 2 0 9
A n al ys is pr oc e ss , 83 l^luclu>ok: A I ' m f i n ni S \' s fe n i o f ( '¡tati on, 261 262
Analysis section, 5 0 5 - 5 1 4 B( u l \ . 5 6 6 ‘^ 6“
A n d , use ot te rm , 86 -87 B o d \ of t h e o p i n i o n . 110 112

A n n o t a t e d Law R e p o r t s . 277 B o o l e a n s ea rc he s. 224. 228
A n n o t a t i o n s , 14, 6 3 6 4 Brackets, 445
A p t ) s t r o p h e , 441 442 Br i e l a n s w e r , 4 9 3 494

A p p e l l a n t , 109, 5 5 0 lin ttifn V. H n t t o n . ^86 589
A p p e l l a t e br i e f , 461 i n r oa d s t a t e m e n t of t l i e i s s ue . 3 2 8 - 3 3 0 . 3 5 2
Afipollate c o u r t . 8 H r o w ii r. H o a r d o f F . d u c a lio n o f T o p e k a . 12
Appellate co u rt briet B u r e a u o t N a t i o n a l Af f a i r s , 1 18
ap pel lee/appellant, 550

a r g u m e n t section, 553
a u d i c n c e , 551 ( aiKMis (^1 c <Mi s t r u c t i o n . 91
c o n c l u s i o n , 553 ( 'apitali/atii^n. 2 85 2 86
c o n s t r a i n t s , 551 C a p t i o n . 109
c o v e r p a g e t i t l e p a g e , 551 C a r d w e l l r. ( ¡ w a l t n e v , 5 9 0
t o r m a t / c o n t e n t , 551 - 5 5 3 ( a se, 6
j u r i s d i c t i o n a l s t a t e m e n t . 552 ( ' a s e law. 5 1 2. 1~. 104, 2 6 3 272,509 512
o p i n i o n s b e l o w / r e l a t e d a p p e a l s , 55 2 c o u n t e r a n a h sis a n d . 4 0 0 404
t>vcr\ lew, 5 5 0 f i n d i n g . 231 2^3
q u e s t i o n ( s ) p r e s e n t e d , 552 issue b a s e d on. 3 56
sample, 6 37-662 issue id en ti fi c at io n anti, 33^- 339
s t a t e m e n t of c a s e / s t a t e m e n t o t t a c t s , 5 5 2 - 5 5 3 ke \ facts a n d . 3 15 318
s u m m a r v ot a r g u m e n t , 553 l o c a t i n g . 121- 123
671
( 'asc l aw a nal vsis C lo si n g sen ten ce , 419
d c t i n i i i o n . 372 Coiic ofFciicral Regulations ((^¡ R), 6 3 , 76, 7 ~ - 7 8 , 79. 2 4 8
d c t i n i t i o n ol on point, 3 72 Colon, 440-441
d c l c r n u n i n g it c a s e is o n [■»onu. 3 “ 4 - 3 S i C o m m a. 437-439
i l i t i c r e n t Ivey t a c t s , 3 7 6 - 3 S 0 C o m m e n t s , 1 2 9- 1 M)
i m p o r t a n c e ot , 3 7 2 - 3 7 - 1 C o m m e r c i a l I n t er ne t r es ea rc h , 223 243
k e \ tacts. 3 7 3 - 3 7 6 C o m m e r c i a l l o u r n a l s , 193
l e g i s l a t i v e a c t s , 381 - 3 S 3 ( A ) m m o r c i a l s o u r c e s , 298
m a n d a l o r v p r e c e d e n t . 3 73 (. 'o mm it te e hearings. 21 0- 211
p e r s u a s i v e p r e c e d e n t , 373 C o m m i t t e e r e p o r t s , 21 I
p r o c o d e n t , 3 7 2 - 3 7 3 , 3 74 C ^ o m m o n l aw, 3, 3 - 1 2 , 104
r u l o s a n d p r i n c i p l e s , s i m i l a r i t v o\. 3 S 0 - 3 8 4 Coinnionw’caltfi of Pcnnsvlviiniii r. DcMiclu'l, 3 9 1 - 3 9 3
s tar o docisis, 3 7 3 - 3 7 4 C o innionn v alth i'. Shea, 3 9 4 - 3 9 7
( ! a s o l a w c i t a t o r s , 1 73 C o m p i l e d legislative hi st ori es , 213
( \iso n a m e s , 2 6 3 - 2 6 7 C o m p r e h e n s i v e s t a t e m e n t ot t h e issue, 333 - 3 3 3
(â so ma ko r , 243 C o m p u t e r research
( i a s o s — e l ec t r o n i c s o u r ce s, 272 B o o l e a n s e a r c h e s , 2 24
C;i)- 1U) M, 2 3 4 - 2 5 3 c a s e l aw, t i n d i n g , 2 3 1 - 2 3 3
C.I R hidc.x a m i h'iniiin\i Mils, 7S, SO C ^ a s o ma k e r , 2 4 3
Chart torm at, 8 8-84 C D -R O M , 234-233
( 'h r on o lo gi c al t)rgunization, 493 c o m m e r c i a l internet research, 2 2 3 -2 4 3
( Circuit c o u r t s , 8, 9 ( ' o n g r e s s a n d tederal a g en c ie s , 248
( ' i t a t i o n . l egal e t h i c s a n d , 243
abbrev ia tio ns, 284 283 Fastcaso, 24^
a d m i n i s t r a t i x e l aw, 2 7 6 tederal c o u rt s opi ni on s . 2 4 6 - 2 4 7
l \ 7 ) ('ilation Manuiii, 2iil 262 t e d e r a l g o v e r n m e n t o n l i n e r e s o u r c e s , 24(t
A n n o t a t e d Law R ep o r t s , 277 t e d e r a l s t a t u t e s , c o u r t r u l e s , a n d r e g u l a t i o n s , 2 4 7 2 48
n iu ch o o k .ltl 2h2 h e l d r e s t r i c t i o n s , 2 33
capitalization, 283- 286 g e n e r a l access, 2 4 4 - 2 4 3
c a s e law, 2 6 3 - 2 7 2 ge ner al access soinxes, 246
^.onstitutions, 272 273 K o v C i t o , 2 34
d e l i n i t i o n , 261 law scluiols, 2 4 3 - 2 4 6
e le ctr oni c sources, 297 298 legal s e a r c h e n g m e s , 2 4 4 - 2 4 6
g e n e r a l rules, 28 ! 298 legislation, 248
i n t e r n a l c r o s s r e t e r e i u e s , 2 93 I exisNexis, 2 3 8 -2 4 2
Italics, 281 2 83 l i m i t a t i o n s tit, 2 4 3 - 2 4 4
l egal d i c t i o n a r y , 2 7 8 listservs, 2 3 3 - 2 3 4
l egal e n c y c l o p e d i a s , 2 7 S 279 L o i s l a w, 2 4 2
p a g e n u m b e r s , 291 2 92 n at ur al language, 2 2 7 - 2 2 8
p a r a g r a p h s , 296 297 o r g a n i z a t i o n s , 2 34
pe riodicals, 279 - 280 o v e r v i e w . 2 24
p l a c e m e n t in s e n t e n c e s a n d c l a u s e s , 2 8 3 presid ent ial materials. 249
p r i m a r y a ut h o r i t v ' , 2 6 2 - 2 7 6 p r i m a r y authority, tinding, 2 2 6 -2 3 4
quotations, 28(i-290 p r i n t a n d s ave , 2 3 4
Rcstiitcnicnls of tfic l.aw, 2 8 0 s e a r c h results, 2 3 3 - 2 3 4
r u l o s o i ov i d e n c e a n d p r o c e d u r e , 2 7 6 search terms, 224-223
s e c o n d a r v authoritv, 277 -281 s e c o n d a r y a ut ho ri ty , t in d i n g , 234
sections, 2 9 6 - 2 9 7 Shepard's, 2 3 0
short citation torms, 292-294 specialty areas. 2 4 9 - 2 3 3
signal s, 2 93 - 2 96 state sources, 249
s t a t u t o r v law, 2 7 3 - 2 7 6 te rm s and connectors, 228-231
s tr m g , 292 u n i t o r m r e s o u r c e l o c a t o r ( I ' R L ) , 244
treatises/books, 280-281 \ ersusLaw, 243
t v p e t a c e , 281 Wes ti aw, 2 2 6 - 2 3 3
u n d e r s c o r e s , 281 - 2 8 3 WestlawNext. 233-238
( j t a t i o n p l a c e m e n t in s e n t e n c e s a n d c l a u s e s , 2 8 3 wireless applications, 253
C i t a t i o n s , 1 0 6 - 1 0 9 . 1 2 3 - 1 2 6 , 337 C o m p u t e r - a i d e d r e s e a r c h , 76 , 8 1 , 122, 149. 199
( j v i l litigation, 230 C o n c l u s i o n , 28. 38, 3 1 4 - 5 1 3 , 3 1 8 , 3 3 0
Ci v i l r i g h t s . 2 3 0 C o n c u r r e n t iurisdiction, 8
( 4 o a n A i r Act, 3 C o n c u r r m g o p i n i o n , 112
( l o s i n g , 367 C o n g re ss , 248
( j i n g r o s s i D i i a l h i l l s , 2 10 l a d c oi npi i i K' i i l i>t t h e i s s ue , 5 3 S
( ! i 'n i > r c s s i o n a i d e b a t e s , 21 1 general co n sid er at io ns , 5 3 3 -5 4 1
(A ^nị^rcssỉoniil I n d e x , 213 Liw c o m p o n e n t ot t l i e i s s ue , 5 3 7
C on ị^ rc s sỉo n iỉ ì ¡ỉì Ịo n ỉH iỊ ỉo n Sí'r\ i ú ' ( ( . I S ) . 2 1 2 . 21-ỉ olFke m e n i o r a n d a a n d . 536 544
( .oỉìị^rcssiOỉìiiỊ R c ì o n ỉ . 2 1 1 , 2 1 3 o\er\' ie\v, 535
CC o n s o l i d a t e d e a s e s . 2(Sh placement, 53S-539
Ct>nstiluli()nal p r o v i s i o n s , íiiKÌini», 2 2 6 - 2 3 1 q u e s t i o n e o m p t m e n t ot t h e i s s ue . 5 3 7 - 5 3 8
CDnsiit iitionality, 91 s e n t e n c e len gt h. 5 39
C ^ ) n s t i t i i t i o n s . 4. 2 7 2 273 s t a t e m e n t ol t a c t s , 5 3 S - 5 4 I
C^msiraints, 463 464 t ri al c o u r t h r i e f ( S t r IVial c o u r t b r i e t s )
C^misLinicr kuv. 2 3 0 w o id choice, 5 4 0 - 5 4 1
C o n v e r s i o n t a b l e s , 6 9 , 71 w r i t i n g p rocess . 535
C o o p e r r. A i í S t i n , 3 9 7 * 6 0 2 ( ' o u r t ol a p p e a l s , 8. 9, 10, 118
( ^ t p x r i gl i i , 231 ( \) ur t tipinion
C o n i o v i i I'. W o l f d , ( - . 02- 604 a d v a n c e s h e e t s , 114
C ! o r p o r i \ l e l aw, 2? 1 a t t o r n e ) ' g e n e r a l t ) pi ni t ) i i . 1 2 0 - 1 2 1
( '.orpiís Ị i t n ^ SL r iiH iiu n i ( C Ị S ) , 13, 1 4 3 - 1 4 9 a t t o r n e y s . 1 10
C^Ha-spondoncc b o d y o l ’opi ni t ) ! ! , 1 1 0 112
a d d r e s s b l o c k . 5( - )5-566 b r i e l i n g ( c a s e br i et ' ) . 1 2 3 - 1 3 0
b o d v , 5(->ò-56" c a p t u >n , 109
c l o s i n g , 5(S7 ci t a t i t ) ns , 10(' )-109, 1 2 5 - 1 2 6
C()iììịH>iìciìls oí . S( ì 4 - 3 ( i 9 c o m p u t e r - a i d e d r e s e a r c h , 122
c op ie s, 56S c o n c u r r i n g t)pi nit>n. 11 1
dvitc, 3 6 3 d e l i n i t i o n . 104
d e n i . u i d o r a d \ ' i ) c a c v l et t er, 5 7 > - 5 7 7 d i g e s t , 122
LMiclosurt' n o t a t i o n , 5 6 S d i s p o s i t i o n ( r el i et g r a n t e d ) . I l l , 129
t o n n a l s t vl c , 3 6 S - 3 6 9 disse nting opinit)n. 1 1 1
u i t or i i KUu>n l et t er, 5 7 0 - 5 7 1 e l e m e n t s , lOh 1 12
i n i t i a l s (it d r a t l c r , 5 6 S t a c t s , 111, 1 2 6 - 1 2 7
i n t r o d u c t i o n , Síiíi h e a d n t ) t e s , 109 110
ÌcliLThcMcl, 5ò-i -5íi 3 I m l t l m g , 111, 128
m a i n boclv, 3(i7 i m p t ' r l a n c e oi , 104- 106
I i i f t h o d I)t d e l i v e r y , 3 6 3 i s s u e ( s ) , 1 1 1, 127
()Ị>ini(ui l et t er . 57 1 3 7 3 i u d g e . 1 10
V.wcvv\c\v, \ kc\ nuivAvcvs.\U'.
rctcrcn».c liỉìc. 5b6 N a t i o n a l R e p o r t e r S y s t e m , 114 115
ax Ịucsls/nìslrL R tiD iis, 367 p . u t i e s . 109, 126
salutation, p r i o r p r o c e e d i n g s . 111. 127
s i g n a t u r e a n d litlc, 56S p u b l i c a t i o n . 113 114
t y p e s ol , 5 6 9 - 3 7 7 p u b l i c a t i o n of l e d e r a l c o u r t d e c i s u > n s , 1 1 5 - 1 19
(jiuntoianalN'sis, 3 7 -3 S p u b l i c a t i o n of s t a t e c o u r t d e c i s i t i n s , 1 1 9 - 1 20
ill a n a l y s i s s e c t i o n , 5 13 r e a s o n i n g . 111. 128- 1 2 9
c a s o law, -Ị()() lO-l r e g i o n a l r e p o r t e r s . 1 19
c ou rt b n c l, 404 -Ỉ05 r e p o r t e r , 1 14
d ef i n i t i on , 392 researching, 112- 123
f i i a c t c d law. 3 9 5 - 4 0 0 r u l e t)l l a u , 1 1 1
i n t c a t l l i c o r c s c a i L h n i c i i i D t a i u l u n i , 4 ( ) 5 - ‘l{)6 Shcpiinl'< c i t a t K) n s a n d u p d a t i n g r e s e a r c h . 123
o ve r v i e w , 392 s l i p o p i n i t ) n , 1 13- I 14
RMs d i i s lor. 3 9 2 393 s t a l u t t ) r y a n n o t a l i t > n s , 121 - 1 2 2
a- s ci i i xi i s o u r c c s , 3 9 1 s v i l a b u s . 109
t e c h n i q u e s tor. 3 9 5 4i)4 ( ^ o u r t r u l e s . 8 1. 83. 5 4 5
wlicn to c o n d u c t , 3 9 3 - 3 9 4 C o u r t s N s t e ms
w h o r e t o Lisc, 4 ( ) ỉ - - l ( ) 6 concurrent jurisdiction, 8
( j u i n t o r a r i ’i m i c n ! , 3 9 2 c o u r t o f a p p e a l s , s , 9, 10
( ’oLirt b r i e t s , 161 federal c o u r t s y s t e m , 8 - 9
act ive voice. 540 lurisdiclKin. 7 - 8
an al vsi s a p p r d a c h . 536 perso nal iurisdiction, 7
a p p e l l a t e (.St’f AppclKitt.' c o u r t briL' t) p re c e d e n t , 10-11
a r g u m e n t , 5- Ỉ 1 - 3 4 4 stare decisis, 1 1- 1 2
b a s i c tcjriiial, 3 3 6 state c o u r t s vs te m. 9 10
c o i i n l c r a i i a l v s i s a n J . 40-1- 4 0 3 s t a t e s u p r e n i e c t ) u r t , 10
( (H irl s y s l c n i s (( ontiiiUiUl] F x p a n d e d o u t l i n e , 4 6 S , 491
Mibn' Cl m a t t e r l u r i Ml i c t i o n , 7 E x p r c s s i o u i u u s , 91
t r i a l c o u r t s , .S, 9 E x t e r n a l m e m o r a n d a (.See ( ' o u r t b r i e t s )
L' nited Stales S u p r o i n e Cûirt, 9
( ' o u r t s , r o l o of , 6
( ' r i n i i n a l l aw, 231 1-act c o m p o n e n t o t t h e i s s u e , 33,S
( j i n i i n a l s t a t u t e s , 92 F a c t s , 2 7 - 2 « , 111, 1 2 6 - 1 2 7
C .i in iii hit iv c i n t e r C.usc a n d S t i i t u t o r y S c r \ iiL\ 73 background, 309-310
C.iirrciit /, 1111' l i u l c x I C I I). 197, I 9 S definition, 307
g r o u p s ot, 3 1 1 - 3 1 2
D
i m p o r t a n c e of, 3 0 7 - 3 0 8
H ash, 446
irr el eva nt, 3 09
I 5a t e a n d c o u r t a h l i r e v i a t i o n , 2 6 9 - 2 7 0
key, 3 0 9 , 3 1 0 - 3 1 8
n i ’iiii 1' P i c k i- y .
t y p e s of, 3 0 8 - 3 1 0
Decision, 6
F a c t s c o m p o n e n t o t t h e i s s ue , 361
D e t i n i t i o n s , i n s t a t u t e s , 63
F a m i l y l aw, 231
D e m a n d letter, 3 7 3 - 3 7 7
Fastcase, 243
Descriptions, 337-339
1-ederal a d m i n i s t r a t i v e l aw, 7 6 - 8 1
D e s c r i p t i v e w o r t l i n d e x , 166, 167, 171
Federal agencies, 248
D i c k e r s o n , D e a n Da r l i y, 2 6 2
H a k ' r n l A p p e n d i x , 113
D i l i e r e n t k e v f a c t s, 3 7 6 - 3 M 0
F e d e r a l c o u r t d e c i s i o n s , p u b l i c a t i o n ot,
D i g e s t s , 122
113-119
Aiiii ' r/ i i i / i nii^c>l S y s t e m , 166, 169
Federal c o u rt rules, 247
c o m p o n e n t s ol, 163 Ihii
F e d e r a l c o u r t s y s t e m , 8 - 9 , 169
d e l i n i t i o n , 163
Federal c o u rt s o p i n io n s , 2 4 6 - 2 4 7
l e d e r a l c o u r t o p i n i o n s , 169
Federal g o v e r n m e n t sources, 246
o v e r v i e w , 161, 163
l a i e r a l P n i c t i e e D i g e s t , 122
r e g i o n a l , 169
l-edertil R e g i s t e r , 76 , 77, 2 4 8
r e s e a r c h u s i n g , 17 0 171
l ederal Register In d ex , 78
state, 1 6 9 - 1 7 0
l e d e r a l R e p o r t e r , 1 13, 1 18
\\'csl> K e y S i t n i l h ' r I h ^ c ^ l S y s W n i,
l e d e n d R u l e s D e c i s i o n s ( E H . D ) , 118
163 163
F e de ra l R ul e s o f (;ivil a n d (Criminal
I ) i s p o s i t i o n , 1 1 2 , 1 29
P r o c e d u r e , ,S3
1) i s s e n t i n g o p i n i o n , I I 2
Federal statutes, 274
I'lstnct C ourt, S
l eiie iiil S u p p l e m e n t , 1 18
1 ) i s t r i c t c o u r t . 10, I I S
F e d e r a l i s m , 12
Drafts, 318
Field r e s tr ic t io n s , 233
l l e t i l i e r C .y clopccha C o r p o r a t i o n s ,
130, 132
I ' . di t mg, 4 7 3
I h n c e r s r, C a m p b e l l , 321
I liiSitei}! ^ c i i c r i ^ , 91 - 9 2
Focus, 3 8 - 3 9
1, l d e r law, 2 3 I
F o c u s o n issues o t case, 3 1 - 3 2
l lectronic sources, 2 9 7 - 2 9 S
F o r m bo ok s, 216
1 l e m e n t s , 36, 3 3 2
r i l i ps e s , 4 4 4
l -.ni bedded c it at io ns , 2S3
I n a c t e d law, 4 - 3 , 16, 33, 3 3 6 - 3 3 9 , (ieiider, 424
393-400 Cieneral a cc e s s , 2 4 4 - 2 4 3
l - n t i r e c o n t e n t , 92 ( j e n e r a l i nd e x , 63, 67. 7 4 - 7 3
I ' j i v i r o n m e n t a l law, 231 (i eogra phic al terms, 266
|{n\ 'ironmenta l Protection Agenc\-(I'I'A), 3 ( l O v e r n m e n t s o u r c e s W e b s i t es. 6 6 4
i-^state p l a n n i n g , 231 (iram mar, 427-436
l - t hi cs , 2 3 2 G r o u p s o t facts. 3 1 1 - 3 1 2
c o m p e t e n c e a n d diligence, 76
coLinteran.ilvsis a n d , 3 9 2 - 3 9 3 H
lacts an d, 307 Header. 363
inte ll ec tu al lionestv, 3 9 - 4 0 Fleading. 489. 516
I nt e r n e t r es e a r c h a n d , 243 Headnotes. 109-110
o b j e c t i v e l y s t a t i n g t h e i s s ue , 3 6 2 - 3 6 4 H ereinafter, 294
l .xcessive w o r d s , 42 I H o l d i n g . 111. 128
| - . x c l a ma l i o i i p o i n t , 44,S Hyphen, 443-446
I p r a c t i c e a n d f o r m l ' ' ooks. 2 1 6
p r e s i d en t i a l materi al s, 218
l i i . 2 93
s a m p l e . 2 1~
IdL’iUic.il k o v l a c t s . 3 7 5 - 3 7 6
I n i n i i g r . i t i o i i . 23 1 K
In r c i , s t a t e ot K i i s / n i a u l , 6 0 3 - 6 0 6
K e \ l a c t s , 1 26
h ul c nt c î q u o t a t i o n s . 2S7
c a s e law. 3 1 3 31 s
¡mlcx to I.cîil Pcrioiiiiuls (II.P), 1 9 3 - 1 9 7
c l i e nt ' s c a s e , 312 - 3 1 3
index to the (Ahic of I'cdcriil Rcîdatious, 78
d e f i n i t i o n , 309. 3 1 0 - 3 1 1
I n d i v i d u a l tacts, 3 i 1
i n d i v i d u a l . 311
i i i t i ni t i \ - c s , 4 3 1 . 4 3 2 - 4 3 3
issue id en tific ation a n d . 328
I n l o r n i a t i o n letter. 3 7 0 - 3 7 1
s i m i l a n t v o t , 3 "' ^- -380
Infra, 2 9 3
t v p e s ot , 311
Initials ol dr al te r, 368
K e v n u m b e r s , 110
I ns tr uc tio n s , 367
K e v t e r m s , 2 9 30
Intellectual honesty, 3 9 - 4 0
K e y C i t e . 1 " 2, 181 184, 1 8 3 - 1 8 6 , 2 3 4
I n t e l l e c t u a l p r o p e r t y , 231
I n t e n d e d r e me d v ' . 9 2
I n t e r n a l c r o s s - r e l e r e n c e s , 293
l a n d l o r d l e n a i i t law. 232
I n t e r n a t i o n a l l aw. 231
I. ast a n t e c e d e n t r ul e , 92
In te rn a ti ona l o r ga niz a tio ns, 234
l . a w (.S'tY lilso spi'Lifit ty pe s o f l a w )
i n t e r n e t r e s o u r c e s . I IX. 120
definition. 3
commercial, 223-243
h i e r a r c h \ ' ol . 12 13
intertit lice r e s e a r c h m e m o r a n d u m . 4 0 3 - 4 0 6
issue identiliLation a n d . 3 33 360
I n t r o d u c t o r y senten ce s. 316
s o u r c e s ot , 3 12
llÂC . 2 7 l . a u c o n i f ’o n e i u ol t h e i s s ue , 3 3 9 - 3 6 0 . 3 3 7
i!^•\(■ a n a l v s i s . 3 0 - 3 8
l aw d i c t i o n a r i e s , 1 3
i r r e l e v a n t lacts, 3 0 9
L a w l i r ni s . 2 3 3
issue ide ntilication
L a w r e v i e w s , I V 193. 194
a p p l i c a b l e l aw, 3 2 ” l. aw r e vi e ws , louriials, a n d p e r i o d i c a l s , 232
b r o a d s t a t e m e n t o f t i i e i s s ue , 3 2 8 - 3 3 0
L a w s c h o o l W e h sites. 6 6 4 6 6 3
c a s e law. 3 3 3 - 3 3 9 L a w s c h o i ' I s . 2 L'^ 2 16
client's case, 3 3 0 - 33 1 Le g a l a n a l v s i s
d e t i n i t i o n o{ is s u e , 3 2 6 - 3 2 7
a n a l v s i s - a p p l i c a l i o n . 3 “^ - 38
examples. 328-330 , i ppl \ t a c t s ol cl i e nt s c. i se t o c o m p o n e n t
k e \ lac\s, 32S
parts. -3-'
legal q u e s t i o n , 32 7 3 28
c a s e law. 3 '
n a r r o w ( s pecif ic) s t a t e n i e n t of t h e issue. 3 2 8 - 3 3 0
conclusions.
overview, 326
c o i i t l u c t c o u n t e i a n a l v s i s o l a n a h sis. 3 7 - 38
t y p e s ot . 3 2 6 ' 3 2 7
d e l i n i t i o n , 3, 26
I s s u e ( s ) , 3 0 - 3 2 . 1 1 1. 127. 3 0 8
e n a c t e t l law,
ba s e c f o n c a s e law, 3 3 6
e t h i cs (intellectual hone'^ty), 39 40
h a s e d o n e n a c t e d law, 3 3 6 - 3 3 9
t a c t s , 2 7 28
g e n e r a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s w h e n drat' ting. 3 6 4 - 3 6 3
f o c u s , 38 39
law Ltin ipon ent. 3 3 3 - 3 6 0
f o c u s (ill i s s ue s of 1. a se . 31 - 3 2
i n ollict. l e g a l m e m o r a n d u m , 4 9 0 - 4 9 3
h y p o t l i e t i c a l ap| >l i c. Ui on. 4 3 - 4 8
q u e s t i o n c <>mp( »ne nt , 3 6 0 - 3 6 1
i d e n t i f y e l e m e n i s ol r u l e ot law. 3 6
s i gnificiiiit o r k e y l a c t s c o m p o n e n t . 3 6 1 - 3 6 2
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n ol g c n e r a l l a w a p p l i e d t o s p e c i f i c ¡ a c t s ot
I t al i cs . 2 8 1 - 2 8 3
situation, 3 ^ ' M
I R A C , 27
I RAC: a n a l v s i s . 3 0 - ^ 8
I'.idiie, 1 10 issue. 3 0 - 3 2
Ị u d g e - n i a d e l aw. 6, 104 key ternis. 29*30
juristliclion, 7 -8 l e ga l a n a l v s i s p r o c e s s . 2 6 - 3 8
Ị u r i s d i c t i o n a ỉ s t a t e m e n t , 332 l o c a t e g e n e r a l l a w th.at g o v e r n s , 33
l u n s d i c i i o n a l t a b l e ' ' . 134. 136 m u l t i p l e i s sues . 31
Jury in s tr u c ti on s p r e l i m i n a r y research, 30
delinititin, 216 research sequence. 3 4 - 3 3
l o o s e- l ea l’s er vi ce s. 216, 2 18 rule, 3 2 - 3 3
X í u r t i ỉ ì d í ỉ ỉ c - ì ỉ u b h c Ị Ỉ ¡.liw 218 s e p a r a t i ( ' n ol i s s ue s . 31
o v e r v iew. 2 1 6 w h e n to s top researi h i n g . 4 0 - 4 3
I oga i . in.iK sis p r o c i ' s s , 2 6 - 3S M a \ . u s e ol t e r m , 8( i - H,
1 cg.il ci l . i t i di i ( S i r ( J t a t i i i n , k' g. il) A /t i litin r. .Ai/ti/i/.N. 6 0 6 608
I I'g.il i.lKtioMarit.-s, 2(18-2(19, 2 5 3 , 2 7 S M e d i a t i o n , 250
l . c g a l c i K y c l o p e d i a s , 15, 142 - 149, 2 7 8 2 7 9 . M e d i u m n e u t r a l c i t a t i o n s , 120
I egal issues, 552 . M e m i i r a n d u m of l a u , 5 35
I e g a i n e w s p a p e r s , 195, 2 5 5 . M e m o r a n d u m of p o i n t s a n d a u t h o r i t i e s , 5 35
1 egal periiniieals, 285 . M e t h o d of d e l i ve i 565
b a r a s s o e i a l i o n s a n d o t h e r a s s o e i a t i o n p u b l i s h e r s , 19, v 195 M c t r o p o l i t i i n I ilc I n s i i h i i u c ( o iii pii ii v v S y iih ' k I iiu ii h c
e o n i n i e r e i a l i o u r n a l s , 195 ( orporatioii, 347
( A i n c m l tin' h i i i i w (C J I ). 197, 198 . Mode l a c t s , 2 0 5 2(18, 253
l i i t l c x ill ¡.Ci;i)l P c n o d u c i l s ( H P). 1 9 5 - 197 . Mo d i l i e r s , 431 432
l a w r e v i e w s , 193, 194 r. (ircciiwilhil. 348 349
l e ga l n e w s p a p e r s , 195 . Mul t i pl e i s s ue s , 31, 3 1 5 , 3 65
ov e r v i e w , I 9 2 - 193 . Mul t i pl e p a r t i e s , 2 6 5
research using, 195 -1 9 9
t y p e s of, 1 9 3 - 1 9 5
N
I, e g a l c | u e s l i i i n , 3 2 7 - 3 2 8 N'arratne summarv, 8 9 -9 0
I. e g a l r e s e a r c h , 3 N a r r o v v ( s p e c i f i c ) s t a t e m e n t of t h e i s sue, 3 2 8 3 3 0
I. e g a l w r i t i n g p r o c e s s N a r r o w s t a t e m e n t ol t h e i s sue, 3 3 4 , 3 5 3 355
a p p e l l a t e brief' , 4 6 1 - 4 6 2 N a t i o n a l . As s o c i a t i o n ot Le ga l . As s i s t a nt s ( N A l . A ) , 4 0
assigiiineiit, 4 6 0 - 4 6 3 N a t i o n a l ( ' ( i n f e r e n c e ol ( ' o m m l s s i o n e r s o n I ' m f o r m S t a t e L a w s
audience, determ inin g, 462 463 ( N ( C r s l ), 2 0 5
constraints, 4 63 -464 N a t i o n a l e n c v c l o p e d i a s , 143 149
c o u r t br i e f , 4 6 1 , 5 3 5 N a t i o n a l l e d e r a t i o n of P a r a l e g a l . As s o c i a t i o n s ( NL P. A) , 4 0
defniitiiin, 459 N a t i o n a l R e p o r t e r S v s t e m , 1 14- 1 15, 1 16
editing, 473 N a t u r a l l a n g u a g e , 2 2 7 - 2 2 8 , 232
expanded outline, 468 N e u t r a l c i t a t i o n s , 106
g o a l of, 4 5 8 - 4 5 9 N e u t r . i l / p u b l i c d o m a i n c i t a t i o n s , 272
i m p o r t a n c e of w r i t i n g s ki l l s , 4 5 8 Newsletters, 195, 253
o r g a n i / a t i o n (f orma t), 464 47f N o m i n a h / a t i o n s , 42 I 422
outline, 46 4-4 71 N o u n p r o n o u n ,i g r e e m e n t , 4 3 3 4 3 4
o v e r v i e w , 4 58 N o u n v e r b s t r i n g s , 421
p o s t w r i t i n g stage, 4 7 2 - 4 7 3 N u m b e r s , 62, 4 19 451
p r e w r i t i n g stage, 4 6 0 471
research suggestions, 473 474
o
r evi s i Di i s , 4 7 2 473 O f f i c e l egal m e m o i a i u l u m
t r i a l c o u r t brief' , 461 .idditional authoritv, 5f8
w r i t i n g s t a g e , 4 71 - 4 7 2 a n a l y s i s s e c t i o n , 5(15 514
I egal ese, 422 a ud i e n c e , d e t e r m i n i n g , 486
l egislation, 248 br i e f a n s w e r , 193 4 9 4
l e g i s l a t i v e a c t s , 381 - 3 8 3 c o nc l u s i o n s , 514 515. 5 18
l e g i s l a t i v e h i s t o r y , 91 (. lefinition, 4 8 3
compiled, 212,213 h e a d i n g , 489, 516
definition, 210 in t r o d u c t o r v (t op ic) s en te nc e s, 516
federal sources, 21 0 -2 1 1 i s s ue , 49(1 4 9 3
o v e r v i e w , 2 10 ove rvie w, 4 8 2 - 4 8 3 , 505
r e s e a r c h i n g federal legislative history, 2 1 1 - 2 1 5 p a r a g r a p h s , 517
state, 2 15 persuasive p reced en t, 5 1 7 - 5 1 8
I etterhead, 564-565 p r e w r i t i n g stage, 4 8 4 4 88
LexisNexis, 2 3 8 - 2 4 2 p u r p o s e s , uses, a n d i m p o r t a n c e , 4 83 484
L in kin g verbs, 360 -3 61 r e c o m m e i i d a t i o n s , 5 1 5 - 5 1 (i
Li stservs, 2 5 3 - 2 5 4 re vi si on s a n d drafts, 518
Local rules, 83 s e c t i o n s ol, 4 8 9
Lo i s l a w, 2 4 2 s i a t e m e n t of a s s i g n m e n t , 4 9 0
L o o s e l eaf s e r v i c e s , 1 18, 2 1 6 , 2 1 8 s t a t e m e n t ol fact s, 4 9 4 - 4 9 8
transition sentences, 5f 7
M O n all f o u r s , 3 7 5
M a n d a t o r v a u t h o r i t y , 14, 1 5 - 1 7 O n p o i n t , 112 - 1 1 3 , 3 7 2 - 3 8 4
.\landator\- p re c ed e nt , 373 O' . Vi’ii/s ( ) p p ir s s io i! o l M i m v i l v S lh ir c h o lilc r s . 1 52
Mtirliiuiiilc lluhhcll l.iiw ¡) in \ lory, 2 18 O n l i n e c i t a t o r s , 130
■Material l a c t s , 3 0 7 Opinion, 6
O p i n i o n l et t er, 57 1 3 7 5 Q
O l , Uso o t t t ' r m , S 6 S7
( , }uos t i o n c o m p o n e n t , 5 6 0 - 3 6 1
Ouliiuinoo, \
Q u e s t i o n c o m p o n e n t o f t h e i s sue , 5 3 7 - 5 3 8
( ) n ’n's ¡'>u tiot¡(¡rv of t h e I. (i u\
Q u e s t i o n mark, 448
Oi^.in i/. it ion (iorniat), 464 --Í7I,
( . }u o s t i o n s o i t a c t , 8
1S6-4SS
( , ) u o s t i o n s o i law, 8
O i ^ a n i / . i t i o n s . 234
Q u e s t i o n ( s ) p r e s e n t e d , 3 4 7 , 33 2
O utlino , 164-471
Q u o t a t i o n marks, 286 -287, 442- 443
(Quotations, 28(v-290
l \ i i i h i D ig e st, 122
U i' portcr . 106, 1 14 Kuel V. C ih le n ch 106, 1 0 7 - 1 0 8
IMô n u i i i b o r s . 26S), 2 9 1 - 2 9 2 Re a l p r o p e r t v . 2 3 2
¡ \ i p p t i s } nlcrpri<c< hic. r. CA)nu}icn'c a m i Iniiii<trv R e a s o n i n g . 111. 1 2 8 - 1 2 9
h i s u n i n c c C .o n ip ii iiw 6 0 8 - 6 1 0 Recommendations. 515-516
I’a r a g i M p h l e n g t h , 4 2 0 R e d u n d a n t w o r d s , 421
IMragrapli s v ni ho ls , 283 Reterence information, 6 3-64
P a r a g r a p h s , 290, 2 9 6 - 2 9 7 , 4 1 8 -4 2 0, 317 R e f e r e n c e l i ne, 5 6 6
P a r a l k ' l c i t a t i o n s . 106, 2 6 8 - 2 6 9 R e g i o n a l d i g e s t s , 169
I’ara i l ol c o n s t r u c t i o n , 4 2 9 - 4 3 0 Regional reporters, 1 1 9-1 20
l \ i m l l c l Jiihlc ol A u t h o r i t i e s a m i R u l e s , 7 8 R e g u l a t i o n s , 76
Paronihosos. 443 R e l i e i g r a n t e d , 1 12
I’a r o n i h o l i c a l i n l o r n i a l i o n , 2 7 0 - 2 7 1 R e p o r t e r , 114
l\iri ludteriiL 92 R e q u e s t s , 56 7
I’a r t i o s , 109, 126 Research
l Mssi\ o \ t)ico, 4 1 6 , 4 1 7 , 5 4 0 c o u n t e r a n a l v s i s a nd , 394
P e o p le o f S u i t e o l I ll in o is i' S u n d e r s , s u g g e s t i o n s ior. 4 7 3 4?'4
611 614 u p d a ti n g a n d validating. 17 2 -1 84
I Vr uHl , 4 4 6 4 4 7 using l.iuv R e p o r t s ( M . R ) , 1 6 0 - 1 6 1
I Vr i oi i i La l s . 2 7 9 280 u s i n g c i t a t o r s , 184 - 1 8 6
I’o r s o n a l i n i u r y , 2 5 2 u s i n g d i g e s t s , 170 171
Personal iurisdiction. 7 u s i n g l egal p e r i o d i c a l s , 195 - 1 9 9
P c r s u a s i \ o a u t h o r i t y 14, 17 19 u s i n g R e s t i i t c f n e n t s of t h e l . i i n \ 2 0 4 - 2 0 5
P o r s u a s i \ o p r o c o d o n t , 18, 3 7 3 . u s i n g t r e a t i s e s . 1 S2 153
i 1~ 3 1 8 u s i n ^ u n i t o r m a n d n i o d e l l a ws , 2(16. 20 8
Poii tion lor writ ot c o rt io r ar i . 9 w h e n to stop. 40 -43
P i n p o i n i C i t a t i o n s . 291 292 R e s e a r c h s e q u e n c e . 34 35
Plain n u - a n i n ^ rulo. 90 R e s t a t e m e n t s o f t h e i.(iu \ 1 141. 1 99 205. 280
P lessy r, l e ri^ us on, 12 Revi sions. 4 7 2 - 4 7 3 . 518
Pockot pa rt s , 63 66, 6 7 69 R u l e o f l a w . 3 2 - 3 3 , 1 1 1. 3 0 7 , 3 0 7 - 5 1 3
Point lic.idings, 544. 5 48 - 54 9 R u l o s , 76
P o p u l a r n a n i o , 75 R u l e s o t ’ov i d e n c e a n d p r o c e d u r e , 2 7 6
P o p u l a r n a n i o table. 69, 70 R u l o s oi law. 3 8 0 - 3 8 4
P o s t w r i t i n g stage, 4 7 2 - 4 7 3 R u n - o n sentence, 416
P r o c o d o n t , l O - I 1. 3 7 2 - 3 7 3 . 3 7 4
P r o l i n i i n a r y r e s e a r c h . 30
P rehm inary statement, 346-547 Salutation. 566
Presidential materials, 218, 249 Scope, 6 2 -6 3
P r e w r i t i n g stage. 4 6 0 - 4 7 1 . 4 8 4 - 4 8 8 S e a r c h r e s ul t s , 2 3 3 - 2 3 4
P n m a r \ ' a u t h o r i t v , 13, 1 7 - 1 8 . 4 2 S ea r c h ternis, 2 2 4 - 2 2 5
linding. 2 2 6 -2 3 4 S e c o n d a r y a u t h o r i t v , 1 3 - 1 5 , 1 8 - 1 9 , 4 2 - 4 3 , 121,
log.il ci t at i oi ' i s a n d , 2 6 2 - 2 7 6 277-281
P r i n u p l o s o t law. 3 8 0 - 3 8 4 A n i e r ic iiti L a w R e p o r t s ( A I R), 1 3 3 - 1 6 1
Prior historv. 270 dictionaries, 2 0 8 - 2 1 0
P r i o r p r o c e e d i n g s . 111. 127 digests. 161-171
P r o c e d u r a l h i s t o r y , 127 t i n d i n g . 23 4
Procedural phrases, 26“ l egal e n c y c l o p e d i a s , 1 4 2 - 1 4 9
P r o ol re ad i n g, 452 l egal p e r i o d i c a l s , 1 9 2 - 1 9 9
PropiTtv. 267 l e g i s l a t i v e historv-, 2 1 0 - 2 1 5
i^ in ct ua tit m, 267, 4 3 7 - 4 4 9 p r i m a r y u s e o t , 141, 142
P u r p o s e clause, 62 research u s in ^ citators, 1 8 4- 1 86
S c x o n c la n a u lh o iilN (( o n lin ỉiC iỉ) St a t Li t or \ j n a l \ S I S
R o i t U c i Ị i L Hls o Ị tlic ỉ iHW 199 203 an al ysis proccss , 83 9 0
lo lc n L 34 a n a l o n n ol a s t a t u t e . 3 5 6 4
lic a liN c s . 130 133 annota tions /rcl crc iK'c inUirniation. 63 64
L iiu lu i 111 Li\\s a n d m o d e l »Kls, 203 2()cS c o i i i p u U T aidL' d r e s e a r c h . "{■>
L iỊH la lin u ai ì d wi l i dal i i i n ic s c iiix tì. J el i ni t KMi s . 6 3
17J 1S4 e t h i c s in. 7(t
S c L lin ii Iiìh u ls , 2S3 l e d e r a l law. 6 4 73
S c llu n is , 2V(-> 297 general co nsid era tio ns . 9D-92
S c n ik o lo iK 4 3 9 4 4 0 n u m b e r , 62
SCIUCIILC le n g th , 4 1(I. 539 p u r p o s e clause. 62
S c n k iiL L S , 4 i 3 4 IS r e s e a r c h p r o c e s s . 7 4 -7('»
S u p .ira lio n o l issues. 3 1 s c o p e . 6 2 63
ScssiiMi law s. 73, 27 3 276 s h o r t title. (-*2
Scxi-sl lani;uaL;c. 4 2 3 424 s t a t e s t a t u t o r y l a w a n d c o d e s . 73 74
s h a ll, use t»l Ic i III, .S(i <S7 statutor) research. 6 4 - 7 6
s h c p j i t l i / i n ^ , 172. 3V4 s u b s t a n t i v e p r o v i s i o n s . 63
Sl ic pti ni' s A l Ly l\)Ị>iiỊiii S i ỉ i n c , 73 Sl at u t i M) a n n o t a t i o n s , 121 122
s l u p i i i i i > (.ititiioii<, 12.V 141, 172 IS 1, S t a t u t o r y e l e m e n t s . 8 7 88
1S4 1 8 3 ,2 3 0 S t a t u t o r ) law, 4. 2 7 3 - 2 7 6
SliL piini> ( U ii lo r S c r v Ì L i s , !3() d e l i n i t i o n , 55
S lii'piini's Ì A h ỉ c o f h c ilc iiii R ix iiiiit io n s ( itiitio n s , SI S t a t u t o r y l a ws , t m d i n g . 2 2 6 - 2 3 1
S l u f u n i i ' s i 'n iíc iỉ Stiitc> A i l n i i n i s t r i i t i v c (. ititti on >, s 1 S tevens V. Sor o. ¡ne., 12
s h o t l c i UUi o n t o r n i a t . 271 272, 274 S tr i n g citations. 292
sluiit cilalion loniis, 292 294 Subiect m a tt e r juri sdi ct ion , 7
S liD rl tillc . 62 Subject verb a g re e m e n t, 427- 429
S iio rt he in J sl al ci i ic nl , 332 Subje ct \' erb d i s t an ce , 4 1 5, 4 16
S ig iu iis . 2V3 29Í-) SubsetiueiU history, 2 70
S iu n a U irc , 3(i8 S u b s t a n t i v e pr<)\ i s i o n s , 6 3
S ii;n ilk a iU tacts. 307 S u p e r l l u o u s verbs, 430
Slash. 110 S u p p l e m e n t a r \ p a m p h l e t s , 66, 6 8 69
S lip law, (-)4 S u p n i . 2 9 4 . 2 95
s lip o p in io n , 113 i l l . 2h9 S u p r e m a c y l lause. 1 2 - 1 3
Sinilh w 1{)(■> S u p r e m e C t m r l R e p o r t e r , 1 15 1 l(i
S| -»cciall\’ jr c .is , s e c o i u l a r v a u lliin 'ilv a n d . 2-49 2 3 3 S/ / pM’/ííí’ ( o n r l R e p o r t s i ííiv\'t7\': l i h t i o f L 106
S p e lliiii;. 449 S v i l a b u s , 109
S filil in li n i t i \ c s . 4 3 2 A ^ ^
s p o t t i i i g t h e issue, 3 26
s tiifilc v r. ///;/(()/>, (i 14 ( i ! s l a b l e ol a u t h o r i t i e s , 54(i
S l a r pai i i ni ; , 2(->9 Table ol c a s e s , l 6 o , 168. 1 7 1 , 5 4 6

S lai L’ tl(.‘Lisis, 11 12. -^7.^ } 7 4 l a b l e t)I c o n t e n t s . 5 4 6
SUiU' a n d k ’clci\il l.iw, 2 4 7 l a x law. 2 5 2
Sl a t e h i U ' a s s o c i a t i o n i o u r n a l s , 193 l e r m s a n d c o n n e c t o r s , 2 24, 228 2 3 1. 2 3 2
S t a l e b a r i n i i a n i / a l i D i ì s . 23-Ỉ Title t a b l e o T c o n t e n t s , “ 5
Slalc CDiislilulions. 4 Titles, 3 5 7 359
S l a t e c o u r t dcLÌs ÌDi ì s , ị>Liblicali()iì ot, 1 19 1JO Topi c s e n t e n c e . 4 19
S t a l e CDLirt s N ' s l c m , 9 - 1 0 Topi cal o r g a n i / a t i o n . 4 9 6
S t i Ue d i g c s l . s , 1 6 9 170 Tort law. 5
M a l e c i K \ \ . i t ) p c d i a s , 1-Í9 Transition s e n t e n c e s , 4 1 9 - 4 2 0 , 467, 517
State o b ic c tiv c U , 362 364 Transitions, 416, 4 1 7 - 4 1 8
S hitc of M i i i t i c 1 '. H c n n c i \ 6 1 9 -6 2 0 Tr eat i s es, 14, 15, 1 5 0 - 1 5 3 , 2 5 3 , 2 8 0 281

S tiitc of S e w M c m l o 1 ’. MniỊíịiiiỉin. ò2 l) 622 Trial c o u r t , 8, 10
S t a t e soui'lc.s, 2 4 9 Trial c o u i t b r i e l s , 461
S K ilc s t a l Li l c s , 273 a r g u m e n t section. 547-551)

SUUc s la U ilo rs ' law a iiJ codcs. 73 -74 a utlie nce , 545
Sỉiitc 1' A l i n ' i i s . I 1 constraints, 545
Ma t c i i R' i i t ot a s M i ; n n i c n t . 4 9 0 c o u r t rules, 545
S t.U eniL 'iil o t L ic ts . 494 4S)S. 33.S-341, 347. 352 33-^ lt)rmat/content, 5 4 5 -5 5 0
S ta te m e n t o \ t lic case. 347, 3 3 2 -3 3 3 o v e r v i ew, 5 4 4 - 5 4 5
S u u i . s l i c a l i n l o i l ì ì a l i Di ì , 2 3 3 pom t headings, 5 4 8 -5 4 9
Stalutcs, 4 5 preliminar) statement, 546-547
q u c s t i o n i s ) p r e s e n t e d , 317 VoL 'o tt 1' W o l e o l t , 6 3 3 - 6 3 6
st . i t e i i i e nt o \ e a s e . 54 7 V o r d c h o i c e , 3 4 0 - 341, 3 4 3
s Li mi n a r \ - o t a r g u n i e n t . 33i) \ ’o r d s e l e c t i o n a n d u s a g e , 4 2 0 - 4 2 7
t a b l e o t a u t h o r i t i e s , 5 16 \'ords and phrases, 2 0 9 - 2 1 0
t a b l e oi e o n t e n t s . 3 1 6 Vorld W i d e W e b s o u r ce s, 2 9 8
I v p e i a a - , 2S1 Wiling
a c t i o n v e r b s , 4 16, 4 1 7
u a ct i v e / p a s s i v e voicc, 416, 417
rnders.ores, 2S1-2S3 a d v e r b s , a die ctixe s, a n d c o n i u n c t i o n s . 434 43 6
I ' n i t o r n i C ! o n i m e r e i a l ( ' o d e ( l ' ( X ' ) , 23 2 a p t i s t r o p h e , 441 - 4 4 2
I' nittM-ni l a ws , 2 0 3 - 2 0 8 , 2 3 3 archaic lernis, 4 2 2 - 4 2 3
i ' m t o r f } } ¡.(iws A n n o t i i t c d , M a s t e r F d i t i o n ( i ’l . A ) , 2 0 8 brackets, 443
I ' n i t t i r n i L a w s A n n o t a t e d ( L' . L. A. ) , 2 0 3 - 2 0 8 c l o s i n g s e n t e n c e s , 119
l iuicM in r e s o u r c o l o c a t o r ( L’ RL) , 24-4 colon. 44 0 -4 4 1
l ' n i t e d S t a t e s ( ' i r c u i t ( AUi r t s o f A p p e a l , 2 4 7 comma, 437-439
I ' n i t c i i S t a t e s ( l i i i m s C .o urt R e p o r t e r , 119 dash, 446
i ' i n t e d S t a t e s (.'oi/c A n n o t a t e d { i ' S C A ) , 33, 6 4 , 6 3 . 6 6 ellipses, 444
i ' n i t e d S t a t e s ( ' o d e C .o n g r e s s io n a l a n d A d m i n i s t r a t i v e .Wu-.s e x c l a m a t i o n p o i n t , 448
i C , S ( ' C A M , 64. 21 2 grammar, 427-436
l ' n i t e d S t a t e s ( ' o d e S e r v i c e ( L ' S C S ) , 69. 7 2 - 7 3 hv phen,443-446
L'n ite d States C o d e ( C S C ) , 63. 83. 2 4 " legalese, 422
l ’n i t e d S t a t e s ( ' ( M i s t i t u t i o n , 4 n u i d i f i e r s , 431 - 4 3 2
l ' n i t e d States D is t r i c t (^>urts, 247 n o m i n a l i z a t i o n s , 121 - 4 2 2
i n i t e d S t a t e s L a w W e e k , 118 n o u n -proiiou n agreement. 433-434
i ' n i t e d S t a t e s o f A m e r i c a v. lo n e s , 6 2 2 - 6 2 3 n o u n - v e r b s t ri ng s, 42 1
i 'iiiti'ii S t a t e s o t A m e r u a r. M a r t i n c z ^ j i m e n e z , 6 3 2 * 6 3 4 num bers, 449-431
I 'niti d S t a t e s R e p o r t s , 113. 116 paragraphs, 4 18-420
I 'fille d S h i t e s S t a t u t e s a t ! ar ge, 6 4 - 6 3 parallel c o n s tr u c t io n , 4 2 9 - 4 3 0
l ' n i t e d S t a t e s S u p r e m e ( ' o u r t , 9. 113* 118, 2 16 pa re nth e se s, 443
( ' n i t c d S t a t e s S u p r e m e ( j ^ u r t i')igest, 169 period, 446-447
( ' n i l e d Stiite s S u p r e m e ( ' o u r t R e p i V t s , I a w v e r s ' L d i t i o n , 1 1 ~ - I I S pHK it re a di ng , 4 32
C n i l e d Stiite s i'. ¡.e on. 6 2 4 6 3 2 p u n c t u a t i o n , 4 3 “ -449
r n p u b l i s h e d d e c i s i o n s , 113 q u e s t i o n m a r k , 44S
r s ( ( , \ \ s er vi ce . 212, 213 quotation marks, 442-443
semicolon. 4 39-440
V s e n t e n c e l e ngt h, 4 16
W n d o r n e u t r a U i t a t i o n s , 106, 120 sentences, 413 418
W r b tense. 429 s exi s t l a n g u a g e , 4 2 3 - 4 2 4
W r s u s l a w. 2 4 3 slash, 4 4 6
X'olume. r e p o r t e r , a n d page, 2 6 " - 2 6 9 sp ec it k w o rd p r o b l e m areas. 424 427
spell ing, 449
w s pl i t i n f i n i t i v e s . 4 3 1 , 4 3 2 - 4 3 3
W e b si t es. 6 6 3 - 6 6 3 subiect-verb agreement. 427-4 2 9
Wes tlaw. 2 2 6 - 2 3 3 su bie ct -v er b distance, 413, 416
W e s t l a w N ’e x t . 2 3 3 - 2 3 8 s u p e r il u o u s \ e r b s , 430
West's B a t ; k r u p t i . y R e p o r t e r , 1 18 topic sent en ce s. 419
W est 's C o d e o f F e d e r a l R e g u l a t i o n s , G e n e r a l I n d e x , 78 transition sentences, 4 1 9-420
W'esi's F e d e r a l P r i i i t i c e I'>igCi>t, 81 trans itions, 416, 4 1 7 - 4 1 8
W e s t 's K e v X u t n h e r D ig e s t S y s t e m . 1 6 3 - 1 6 6 verb tense, 429
W e s t 's M i l i t a r y J us tiLe R e p o r t e r , 119 w o r d selecti<Mi a n d u s a g e , 4 2 0 - 4 2 7
W est's \ e t e r a n s A p p e a l s R e p o r t e r , 119 w r i t i n g c o n v e n t i o n s , 431
W i l l i a m t h e ( ' o n q i i e r o r , 3, 6 W r i t i n g c o n v e n t i o . n s , 43 1
W i r e l e s s a p p l i c a t i o n s , 23 3 W r i t i n g s t a g e , 4 ~ 1- 4 7 2
William H. Putman | Jennifer R. Albright Third Edition
Legal Research, Analysis, and Writing

D esigned to prepare students for a career in the paralegal field, the third edition of Legal
Research, Analysis, and W riting teaches the fundamentals in a hands-on, step-by-step format that
is comprehensive yet easy to understand. With coverage of key topics such as research analytical
principles, legal research, legal analysis, and legal writing, this popular text covers the information
students need to know in order to find, access, apply, and analyze legal materials on the job. Numerous
hypotheticals, examples, and exercises clarify material and give students additional opportunities
for practice. In addition, the third edition includes the most up-to-date information in the field, with
special attention given to electronic research programs such as WestlawNext, LexisNexis interface,
Shepard’s online, and Westlaw’s KeyCite.
FEATURES:
■ In addition to topics such as updating and Each chapter includes a hypothetical that
validating research, students are introduced is designed to create interest in a topic and
to specific information on how to use online is supported by principles, concepts, and
programs such as Shepard’s online and guidelines. The answers allow students to
Westlaw’s KeyCite. see how the subject matter ties together and
■ Legal research Chapters 3 to 7 have been is applied.
revised to reflect relevant trends in the Each chapter includes a list of key points as
field. For example, new online research well as exercises in order to help students
assignments give students the opportunity review the material and master difficult
to use electronic legal research sources. concepts.
■ A list of online resources is included in Every principle is followed by an example to
the chapters, allowing students to access illustrate the concept and to aid in retention
additional information on chapter topics of the material.
from the Internet.
ALSO AVAILABLE:
Putman
Legal
Putman # Course 360
iFbcte Pocket Guide to Legal Legal Analysis and Online Uarning to the Next Degree
Analysis
Guide Writing Writing, 4th edition Legal Research and Writing
to ISBN-10; ISBN-10: Course360 Online Course
Legal
I VVtìtíng 1-401-86597-6 1-133-01654-5 PAC: 1111545189
ISBN-13: ISBN-13: lAC: 1111545197
978-1-401-86597-9 978-1-133-01654-0
Putman
\A ^ U T 0 R
Putman WebTUTOR on Blackboard is
Pocket Guide to Legal Legal Research, available for this book.
Research 2nd edition
ISBN-10: ISBN-10:
1-418-05376-7 1-428-35701-7 f CourseMate
ISBN-13: ISBN-13: Paralegal CourseMate is available
978-1-418-05376-5 978-1-428-35701-3 for this book.
Please visit us at w w .ce n g ag e.co m /co m m u n ity /p araleg al
ISBN-13: 1 7 a - l - 1 3 3 - S i n D - D
ISBN-IQ: l - 1 3 3 - S H I Ũ - b
DELMAR 90 0 00
»% CEN G A G E Learning-
To learn mo r e a b o u t Delmar, visit ww w.cengage.com /delm ar
Pur cha s e a ny o f o u r pr o d u c t s a t yo u r local b o o k s t o r e or at o u r pr ef er r ed onl i ne s t or e

www.cengagebrain.com
9 781133 591900

Legal Reasearch Analysis and Writing

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Legal Reasearch Analysis and Writing

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Legal Research,

Analysis, and Writing

O rg a fn / a tio iis / C o rp o ra tio ;; '. • C a re e rs a rid E m p lo y m e n t • C iv il t.itig a tio n a n d P ro c e d u re • C L A Exam

P re p a ia tii'in • I'fjrn p u ttM A p p lic a tio n s m th e La w O f^ ^ e • C o n s tit u tio n a l La w • C o n tra c t La w • C o u rt R e p o rtin g

( ■I : ( ii'l f’ :-. ' :U P ’ C'p.aia' ■

L v id t ' r u r [a w • h a n ily Law • H e a lth C a re Law • Im m ig r a tio n La w • In t e lle c tu a l P r o p e r ty • In te rn s h ip s

In t e r v ie w in g a n d In v e ^ tig a ti'in • in tio t lu c U o n to La w • In t r o d u c t io n to P a ra le g a lis m • J u v e n ile L a w • L a w O ffic e

T e r m in o lo g y • Legal T ia n s c r ip t io n • M e d ia and E n t e r t a in m e n t Law • M e d ic a l M a lp r a c t ic e La w

P ro d u c t L ia b ilit y • R eal E sta te Law • R e f e re n c e M a t e r ia ls • S o c ia l S e c u r it y • S p o rts Law • T o rts and

P e rs o n a l In ju r y Law • W ills . T ru s ts , and E s ta te A d m in is t r a t io n • W o rk e rs ’ C o m p e n s a t io n La w

DELMAR CENGAGE Learning

Le g a l R e s e a rc h , A n a ly s is , and W ritin g , €) 2014, 2010, 2 0 0 4 Deimar, Cengage Learning

M a rk e t D e velo p m e n t M anager: Erin Brennan

Senior P ro d uction D irec to r: W e n d y T roeger Lib ra ry of Congress C o n tro l N um ber: 2012940893

P ro d uctio n M anager: M a rk Bernard ISBN-13: 978-M3B-59190-0

Senior C o n te n t P roject M anager: ISBN-10: M33-59190-6

A rt D irec to r: Riezebos H o lzb aur G ro u p

Cengage Learning is a leading p ro vid er of custom ized learning so lu tio n s w ith

Cengage Learning products are represented in Canada by Nelson Education, Ltd.

To learn m ore about Deimar, v is it w w w .c e n g a g e .c o m / d e lm a r

Purchase any of o u r products at yo u r local bookstore o r at o u r p re fe rre d o n lin e

N otice to the Reader

I’rintocI in the I'liilcd States o f .Aincrica

This book is dedicated to P.Y, luhose love,

CHAPTER 1 Introduction to Legal Principles and A u th orities 2

PARÍ II LEGAL RESEARCH 53

CHAPTER 3 C o n stitu tio n s, S tatu tes, A d m in istra tiv e Law,

PART III T H E SPECTLICS OE LECiAL ANALYSIS 303

CHAPTER 9 Legal A n a ly s is — Key Facts 305

PART IV LEGAL WRITINC: 413

CHAPTER 14 F u n d a m e n ta ls o f W riting 414

APPENDIX A Court O p in ion s Referred to in th e Text 585

( ' h a p l o r I ' o a l u R' s / \vi

PART I INTRODUCTION TO RESEARCH,

CHAPTER 1 In tro d u c tio n to Legal Principles a n d A u th o rities 2

CHAPTER 2 In tro d u c tio n to Legal R esearch a n d A nalysis 25

PART II LEGAL RESEARCH 53

CHAPTER 3 C o n stitu tio n s, S ta tu te s, A d m in istra tiv e Law,

CHAPTER 4 Case Law—R esearch a n d Briefing 103

( . H o w t o R e a d a (Case 12-1 (Case l a w (Ci t a t i on l.'7

CHAPTER 5 Seco n dary A uth o rity a n d O th e r R esearch S ources—

1. I i i l r o i l u t tidii 192 \ II. Ki r\ I n s l r i i i t i o n s - ' d l h e r R e s e a r c h

CHAPTER 7 C o m p u t e r s a n d L egal R e s e a rc h 223

CHAPTER 8 L egal C ita tio n 260

PART III THE SPECIFICS OF LEGAL ANALYSIS 303

CHAPTER 9 Legal A nalysis—Key Facts 305

CHAPTER 10 Legal Analysis: Issue Id entification —Spotting the Issue 325

CHAPTER 11 Legal A nalysis: S ta tin g t h e Issu e 351

I. Introduction ' '32 \' III. ( ie n e r a l ( Co ns ider at i on s ' 364

( l’cv-u.\s\vc l’v.\cvk’nl C ,'"3 A (Ch.\pK'v U y p o t h c U c a l ' .^SC^

CHAPTER 13 C ounteranalysis 391

CHAPTER 14 F u n d a m e n ta ls of W riting 414

CHAPTER 15 The W ritin g Process for Effective Legal W ritin g 457

CHAPTER 16 Office Legal M e m o r a n d u m ; Is s u e s a n d Facts 481

CHAPTER 18 E x te r n a l M e m o r a n d a : C o u rt B riefs 534

CHAPTER 19 Coiiespondence 563

APPENDIX A COURT OPINIONS REFERRED TO IN THE TEXT 585

APPENDIX B APPELLATE COURT BRIEF 637

APPENDIX C WEB SITES 663

Alhtiilic Bi'ach (Aiiino, Inc. r. M u rcu zo u i

H auni^arducr r. S tuckcy (C.ourscMatc C.haplcr 17. Assi^iuiicnt 5)

Beam 1 '. ('ulletl

III re Bratz ((. '.ourscMate C hapter 10, Aiiiiiuiiient 4)

Britton I’. Britton