1.8 Million US Court Rulings Now Online 94
I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "For a long time now, lawyers and any serious law students have been bound to paid services like LexusNexis for access to case law, but that is slowly changing. Carl Malamud has posted free electronic copies of every U.S. Supreme Court decision and Court of Appeals ruling since 1950, 1.8 million rulings in all, online for free. While the rulings themselves have long been government works not subject to copyright, courts still charge several cents per page for copies and they're inconvenient to access, so lawyers usually turn to legal publishers which are more expensive but more convenient, providing helpful things like notes about related cases, summaries of the holdings, and information about if and when the case was overturned. This free database is not Carl's first, either. He convinced the SEC to provide EDGAR, and helped get both the Smithsonian and Congressional hearings online."
Re:No search feature (Score:4, Interesting)
Legal Research the Free Way (Score:2, Interesting)
Good to hear, but... (Score:5, Interesting)
But Lexis and Westlaw will remain exceedingly important and worth their fees. Publishing cases is one thing - publishing the proprietary information that Lexis and Westlaw add (headnotes, the West Key system, Shepard's citations, treatises, and countless other secondary sources) would truly make this useful for attorneys. Of course, maintaining all of these sources requires a huge effort - and is one of the reasons these databases cost as much as they do. (There are, I'm sure, less savory reasons as well, of course.)
I wouldn't count on seeing Lexis and Westlaw go belly up soon - an attorney needs much more than the raw cases. But, like I said, this is very positive for the public.
I admit it - I tried a case using Google (Score:5, Interesting)
I got the verdict last Friday in a case I tried myself in federal court: Verdict, Gregerson v. Vilana Financial, Inc. [cgstock.com]
I'm not sure whether to be proud or embarrassed, but I did all my legal research using Google. The only paid service I used was Pacer, and that only for 2-3 cases. I bought one case from LexisNexis (Pinkham v. Sara Lee, 8th US Circuit), which cost $9.00. In the end, I was awarded $19,462 in damages (and I defeated six claims against me).
I found most of what I needed at Findlaw.com, www.law.cornell.edu. Specific state cases for Minnesota were at state.mn.us/lawlibrary/. I went to a law library only one time, and they didn't have what I needed, and I never went back.
I did get advice from an attorney on legal procedure (stuff not in any book). I would have used LexisNexis or West Law if it wasn't so overpriced ($9.00 for one webpage? All because the case was too old to be on Pacer, where it would cost about 18 cents). I'm going to try out this guy's service in the future.
(a full chronology of my case is here http://www.cgstock.com/essays/vilana [cgstock.com]))
Datamining for Lawyer Batting Averges (Score:5, Interesting)
Volunteer Resources (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:New Court Ruling (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:No search feature (Score:4, Interesting)
http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Abulk.resource.org%2Fcourts.gov%2F+Google [google.com]
or search PDF file...
http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Abulk.resource.org%2Fcourts.gov%2F+filetype%3Apdf+Google [google.com]
I think, it's a compromise until there is a better way.
Re:Datamining for Lawyer Batting Averges (Score:1, Interesting)
LexisNexis and Westlaw (Score:1, Interesting)
This shouldn't take more than 10 minutes.
Re:No search feature (Score:3, Interesting)
While 1.8 million records does seem like quite a bit, Wikipedia (at least the English edition) has close to that many articles.
The real question would be this: What kind of person would be interested in digging into case histories and provide the meta linking information in order to make this sort of information useful?
Next question: What sort of skills would be necessary to make this happen? I know you don't necessarily need a J.D. in order to understand case law, but this seems to be a bit higher level of knowledge than the typical internet user, or even Wikipedia contributor.