Familiar with
Bluebook citation rules, technical terms, proofreading, summarizing depositions and editing legal documents
Not exact matches
The Supreme Court's guide notes the
Bluebook «provides a useful reference for
rules governing
citations of types of materials not covered in this Style Manual,» but «caution [s] that this Style Manual frequently deviates from
Bluebook style.»
In the mid-1990s (if memory serves), the 16th edition of The
Bluebook first came out with a
rule that every
citation prefaced with the word See must be followed by an explanatory parenthetical — something like «(holding that...)» or «(stating that...).»
First, the style manual need not duplicate the
citation rules detailed in The Bluebook or the ALWD Citation
citation rules detailed in The
Bluebook or the ALWD
CitationCitation Manual.
The second part, printed on white paper, is the heart of the
Bluebook system of
citation: the
rules of
citation and style.
A court
rule calls for
citations to conform to it or, alternatively, to The
Bluebook.
The preface to the fifth edition explains (without once naming The
Bluebook): «Feedback from membership surveys pointed to the staying power of certain scholarly traditions in legal
citation and urged that ALWD modify its
rules to acknowledge those traditions.»
Moreover, in several instances (Alabama, California, Idaho) where a court
rule refers to
Bluebook style, it also authorizes use of one or more alternative
citation guides or speaks of The
Bluebook as providing guidance (South Carolina).
In short, there is only limited correspondence, in degree or detail, between Supreme Court's use of abbreviations in
citations to its own precedent and The
Bluebook rules.
Those few journals that call for the
citations in article submissions to be formatted in ALWD style and state
rules of procedure (like those in Alabama and Idaho) that specify ALWD style as a
Bluebook alternative have been rendered dead letter.