Suspect Law Review Articles

The American group blog Concurring Opinions has posted A Guide to the Eight Most Suspect Types of Law Review Articles. My favourite is number 4:

4. The One-Off

“In my previous article, I made a significant contribution to the literature. In this piece, I will coast on the vapors of that article.”

In the comments section, someone has suggested a ninth category be added:

9. Straight from the Framers!

“In this article, I uncover the original meaning of a clause (phrase, word, or letter) that no one has ever heard of, that no court (or litigant) has ever referred to, and that will never again be relevant.”


  1. If we replace SCOTUS with the SCC, some could suggest that a few people, including me, have use #8

    8. The Torn from the Headlines

    “Few would recognize that the United States Supreme Court’s recent decision in ___ vs. ___ would fundamentally alter ___ law. Yet it did, or at least, you won’t be able to prove that it didn’t until this article is already well on its way to publication.”

    to create a bit of cottage industry regarding one SCC case.

    OTOH, the BCCA seems to agree and perhaps we’ll find out at some point after February, 2012 if the SCC agrees.

    Fortunately for me, I expect my next piece to get published well before the SCC chimes in again.

    The reCaptcha terms are “Q-values” and “yToking”. Who says software programmes can’t be programmed with a sense of irony.

  2. Now, I wonder which one I should use for my next Slaw column …