Its proposal, picked up and refined by the American Association of Law Libraries (AALL) and the American Bar Association (ABA), became the template for a reform movement that continues to spread, albeit too slowly, across the U.S. (For the story in greater detail,
see Neutral Citation, Court Web Sites, and Access to Authoritative Case Law.)
Not exact matches
I would love to
see your
citations in support of this: «it is almost unanimous that it has been historically either highly beneficial or
neutral.
That being said, I think it is silly to require parallel
citations at all and would rather
see courts require a static URL in addition to one
citation for a case,
neutral cite first, any other
citation second and in the form that the publisher of that second
citation produced it in.
As you can
see, preference is given to the
neutral citation (where available), but a parallel
citation to another print reporter is generally required.
Sam Glover: Well maybe in another 20 years we can get back together and
see if vendor -
neutral citation has finally come around.
And though I wouldn't argue for the effort of devising a fuzzy logic search for misspelled names, I would like to
see CanLII amend its
citation recognition algorithm to bring in the obvious (wrongful) variations on the
neutral citation scheme and the commercial publisher
citations as well.
Anybody can
see the point: the author uses the
neutral citation instead or in addition to a proprietary
citation, anybody will find the cited case in her favorite database (commercial or not) or in a printed report series.
Personally I
see that
neutral citations have great potential if and when they come to be accepted by the legal profession as the primary means of identifying cases.
My real point, which I may not have expressed clearly, is that
neutral citations represent less than 5 % of
citations seen or used by legal researchers.