“The Oregon Judicial Department is pleased to provide free online access to limited case information in the circuit courts and Tax Court of this state. The displayed information is not the official ORS 7.020 register record, and, therefore, should not be relied upon as an official record of the court. Specifically, individuals should not use this system for background checks or other purposes that require more complete identity or case information. The full official register for non-confidential case types can be accessed at the courthouse public terminals or, for certain business entities, through a subscription to OJCIN Online.” [Link to portal.]
I’m sure your state’s legislative, judicial, and executive branch IT managers are wishing they had attended the Legal Hackers Summit. Here’s some commentary on one rather interesting topic. (Legal Geek Love, indeed!)
“Greenwood: Law Itself is the Killer Blockchain App,” posted on July 11, 2016 by legalinformatics, which links to this blog post: Law Itself is the Killer Blockchain App
About Legal Hackers: “Legal Hackers is a global movement of lawyers, policymakers, technologists, and academics who explore and develop creative solutions to some of the most pressing issues at the intersection of law and technology. Through local meetups, hackathons, and workshops across 40 global chapters, Legal Hackers spot issues and opportunities where technology can improve and inform the practice of law and where law, legal practice, and policy can adapt to rapidly changing technology.”
We have been informed that that the 1995 and 1997 ORS are appearing online at the Oregon Legislature’s website. Our partners in this have been Legislative Counsel, so please thank them for this effort.
Previous blog posts on our superseded ORS digitization project can be found with these tags, among others:
From the Gallagher Law Library Blog: Alternative Legal Research Databases
“When you think of online legal research, LexisAdvance, WestlawNext, or BloombergLaw probably spring to mind. With summer fast approaching, it may be worthwhile to explore some alternative legal research databases….” [Link to Gallagher Law Library blog post.]
Book Review: Levitt & Davis: “Internet Legal Research on a Budget: Free and Low-Cost Resources for Lawyers”
- Would you like a clear description of 3 free online versions of the U.S. Code?
- Would you like useful tutorials on Fastcase and Casemaker?
Link to details from Gallagher Blogs: “Capital Punishment: Race, Poverty, and Disadvantage—Free Online Course”
“Stephen Bright is president and senior counsel at the Southern Center for Human Rights, a public interest law program that deals with human rights in the criminal justice and prison systems….
This course examines issues of poverty and race in the criminal justice system, particularly with regard to the imposition of the death penalty…. There are 40 videos, ranging from 18 to 45 minutes…. that’s a lot of instruction from one of the nation’s leading authorities on the death penalty….” [Link to blog post.]
No, Virginia, you can’t believe anything you read “on the Internet,” except of course that there is a Santa Claus.
Excerpt: “Rotten World of Legal Citation,” July 31st, 2014 by sadavis:
In the past few years, the issue of link rot has become a growing concern in relation to broken links in legal citations, most notably in U.S. Supreme Court decisions. Two articles that discuss this problem in detail are:
1) Raizel Liebler & June Liebert, Something Rotten in the State of Legal Citation: The Life of a United States Supreme Court Citation Containing an Internet Link (1996-2010), 15 Yale J.L. & Tech. 273 (2013). Available at http://yjolt.org/sites/default/files/Something_Rotten_in_Legal_Citation.pdf (finding that 29% of websites cited in US Supreme Court opinions no longer worked);
Hat tip to Bob Ambrogi’s LawSites blog post: WellSettled.com Mines Cases for Established Principles,” which introduces us to wellsettled dot com: “It is well settled…”
I bet you can’t search just one (word or phrase), but this “one” is a non-hedonic hyperphagia compulsion, so enjoy.
When you rely on a judicial opinion to support your cause, which version of the case do you carry into court? This is the 21st century law librarian and bench-bar dilemma.
See, “Final Word on U.S. Law Isn’t: Supreme Court Keeps Editing,” by Adam Liptak, May 24, 2014 (re the upcoming article, “The (Non)Finality of Supreme Court Opinions,” by Richard J. Lazarus, 128 HARV. L. REV. ___ (forthcoming 2014)).