The Topical Case Archive
I have added a topical case archive to the sidebar of the blog. So you understand how the archive works, and why my recent posts look like repeats of earlier posts, I'm going to explain what I've done.
I'm not very html-savvy. So when I decided to try to create a topical case archive, I decided to think simple and use the existing tools provided by Blogger. So what I've done is created a post for each category in the index. Within the post I have pasted in the links and summaries for cases in that category. Then I put links to those posts in the side bar.
That's why, if you look at my previous posts, it looks like I've been re-blogging all my old case summaries. As cases are released, I will add to those posts or create new topical archive posts.
If you are an html-master and have a better solution, please let me know.
So what's the topical archive for? First let me tell you what it's not for:
(1) legal research
(2) pro se litigants
This isn't Westlaw, and I don't intend it ever to be. The best you'll ever get here are summaries of court-decisions since December 16, 2005.
If you are a pro se litigant, stop looking at my blog and go retain an attorney. I would never represent myself in anything but a traffic ticket, and I'm an attorney. I've never seen a pro se litigant do anything but screw up his or her case.
How to properly use the archive:
If you are new to the blog, or if you haven't check it in a while, the archive will get you up to speed on recent court decisions in a specific area.
When I first conceived of this blog, I thought it would be a resource for keeping up on recent court decisions without having to read the entirety of every decision. That works great for those with time to check the blog every couple of days for new decisions, or those with OCD who are compelled to check it every time they return from the bathroom.
The archive is for the rest of the world. Those who only check up on court decisions every couple of months. The fortunate who fill their days with billable hours and catch up on court decisions once a quarter at their child's oboe recital.
A few things about the archive.
(1) It's a living index. As new opinions cover subjects that are not in the archive, I will add those subjects.
(2) Some cases cover more than one subject, so they will appear in more than one index.
(3) Criminal Procedure will cover anything that doesn't have to do with the elements of the crime and what you must do to prove or disprove those elements. It will include sentencing, restitution, jury selection, merger, etc. Criminal Law will cover the substantive criminal statutes.
Please let me know if you have any comments, suggestions, or criticisms about any part of this blog. I want it to be useful. If it isn't, tell me why and what I can do to make it useful. Just don't say anything mean. My fragile ego can't take it.
I'm not very html-savvy. So when I decided to try to create a topical case archive, I decided to think simple and use the existing tools provided by Blogger. So what I've done is created a post for each category in the index. Within the post I have pasted in the links and summaries for cases in that category. Then I put links to those posts in the side bar.
That's why, if you look at my previous posts, it looks like I've been re-blogging all my old case summaries. As cases are released, I will add to those posts or create new topical archive posts.
If you are an html-master and have a better solution, please let me know.
So what's the topical archive for? First let me tell you what it's not for:
(1) legal research
(2) pro se litigants
This isn't Westlaw, and I don't intend it ever to be. The best you'll ever get here are summaries of court-decisions since December 16, 2005.
If you are a pro se litigant, stop looking at my blog and go retain an attorney. I would never represent myself in anything but a traffic ticket, and I'm an attorney. I've never seen a pro se litigant do anything but screw up his or her case.
How to properly use the archive:
If you are new to the blog, or if you haven't check it in a while, the archive will get you up to speed on recent court decisions in a specific area.
When I first conceived of this blog, I thought it would be a resource for keeping up on recent court decisions without having to read the entirety of every decision. That works great for those with time to check the blog every couple of days for new decisions, or those with OCD who are compelled to check it every time they return from the bathroom.
The archive is for the rest of the world. Those who only check up on court decisions every couple of months. The fortunate who fill their days with billable hours and catch up on court decisions once a quarter at their child's oboe recital.
A few things about the archive.
(1) It's a living index. As new opinions cover subjects that are not in the archive, I will add those subjects.
(2) Some cases cover more than one subject, so they will appear in more than one index.
(3) Criminal Procedure will cover anything that doesn't have to do with the elements of the crime and what you must do to prove or disprove those elements. It will include sentencing, restitution, jury selection, merger, etc. Criminal Law will cover the substantive criminal statutes.
Please let me know if you have any comments, suggestions, or criticisms about any part of this blog. I want it to be useful. If it isn't, tell me why and what I can do to make it useful. Just don't say anything mean. My fragile ego can't take it.
posted by Matt, Rach, Samus, Little-O, & Hank the Tank at 11:41 PM
2 Comments:
This is a huge innovation that changes your blog from being a site of interest for Utah law wonks into a useful tool for legal professionals and journalists and anyone else who wants an up to date take on Utah case law. Thanks a lot. I pray you continue to have the time and inclination to provide this service.
This blog is a great idea. I'd really like to see more commentary by other attorneys voicing their opinions about the soundness of the appellate courts' opinions, whether they think the courts got it right, etc. We've got to get the word out about this blog and see if it takes I guess.
Post a Comment
<< Home