Published on:

By

If you think the U.S. Supreme Court posts official versions of their opinions on their website … hahaha … I have a virtual bridge and an inside WH or Congressional source to sell you for $1B dollars. (Tip: Beware of any source who charges too much or too little and read those disclaimers, e.g. click on “Latest Slip Opinions.“)

If you think that is the only problem with online Supreme Court opinions, guess again: what about their link rot? See e.g.:

NYT article, “In Supreme Court Opinions, Web Links to Nowhere,” by Adam Liptak, Sept. 23, 2013.

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

People like “free.’ People like getting free content from other people who paid for the content. Long live the free-loader, long live the person who spends $20 in time and gas looking for a free parking spot instead of paying $10 for a paid space! It’s the principle, isn’t it?

But sometimes getting “free” is about the journey and the satisfaction earned when putting one’s search skills to the test. Here’s one way to do both, from Aaron at Musings about Librarianship:

5 services to help researchers find free full text instantly & a quick assessment of effectiveness

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

Oregon Judicial Department Online Records Search: Free, Public Access:

“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.]

Published on:

By

Remember the 1989-1992 George HW Bush and Dan Quayle “White House Council on Competitiveness”?

It does not have a website (or even a Wikipedia page – do not confuse other competitiveness councils with the GHW Bush, D Quayle White House Council on Competitiveness, which was dissolved in 1993. (White House webpages, and all others, were in short supply back then, in fact virtually non-existent.)

It also should not be confused with the former White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs inside the Office of Management and Budget.

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

Scotland’s voters in favor of a second vote for independence have purchased the mothballed U.S. Declaration of Independence.

A Scottish “man on the street” was heard to say, “they weren’t using it anymore anyway, so we bought it. Americans will sell anything for the right price – their liberty, independence, health, and their children’s welfare – and it was going for a song, so we sang. We did refrain from offering them our bagpipes, which might have, ur, scotched the deal.”

Read more about Scotland and its Brexit fall-out, aka Scotch Eggsit, Scoot, Votey McVoteface, and more:

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

In a case that will be of interest for those following the Children’s Trust lawsuit:

“In New Zealand, Lands and Rivers Can Be People (Legally Speaking),” by Bryant Rousseau, July 13, 2016

“Can a stretch of land be a person in the eyes of the law? Can a body of water?

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

“Lack of Oxford Comma Costs Maine Company Millions in Overtime Dispute,” by Daniel Victor, March 16, 2017, New York Times.

“A class-action lawsuit about overtime pay for truck drivers hinged entirely on a debate that has bitterly divided friends, families and foes: The dreaded — or totally necessary — Oxford comma, perhaps the most polarizing of punctuation marks.

What ensued in The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, and in a 29-page court decision handed down on Monday, was an exercise in high-stakes grammar pedantry that could cost a dairy company in Portland, Me., an estimated $10 million….” [Link to full NYT article.]

Published on:

By

Your digital photos, letters, books, articles, documents, messages, etc. have no existence unless you pay attention to their preservation – or without electricity, for that matter. (You can’t really hold Zeros and Ones, Nothingness if you will, in your hands, let alone bequeath Nothingness to your heirs without taking serious steps to preserve and authenticate the data.)

See, e.g. from Moritz Law Library at The Ohio State University for what PURLs are:

Research Tip: What is “Permanent” Online?

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

Multnomah County Library (MCL) patrons know that materials, signs, events, and librarians bring multi-lingual expertise to their patrons, but did you know that the Multnomah County Library and other public libraries around Oregon (and likely other states) also provide “language line” service to their patrons.

I recently asked MCL if they still have the service and here was their response:

“Thank you for contacting Multnomah County Library about the “Language Line” service. We do still use telephone interpretation services to help us assist patrons who may not be fluent in English. I’m sorry that information isn’t readily available on our website–I will suggest that it be added.

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

Other databases (Lexis, Westlaw, maybe, who knows) may start doing this too for students, scientists, and other researchers, but in the meantime:

ProQuest launches free access to its databases for researchers affected by travel ban

Contact Information
The information provided on the Oregon Legal Research website and blog is for research purposes only. We do not provide legal advice, nor do we endorse any person, product, or company

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2015 – 2024, Oregon Legal Research
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design