Another fascinating paper from SSRN, this one about mapping case law. I think this approach has enormous implications for everything that relies on an accurate understanding of the structure of law, including accessing legal information, and teaching law.
Archive for April, 2006
In doing the prior post I thought that there may be some Slawyers who don’t know about the Social Science Research Network’s e-Library. A joint project of Stanford Law School and the European Corporate Governance Institute, SSRN is a repository for abstracts of academic papers (current count: 114,700) and full-text versions of academic papers (current count: 86,500). The data is categorized into 10 areas, or “networks”: accounting research, economics research, entrepreneurship research & policy, financial economics, information systems, legal scholarship, management research, marketing research, negotiations research, social insurance research.
Within each network, papers are organized into topical “journals” . . . [more]
Bruce Welling always wrote the most stimulating heresies in Canadian Corporate LawAs well as having the funniest index references footnotes in Canadian legal writing:
the constitutional significance of drunks
The Exploding Mountbattens.
Since Bruce’s writings are replete with references to his surf buddies, and he can be found at dawn in the lineup at the Alley, off Currumbin Point, it’s not surprising that he has taken himself off to legal publishers in more surf-friendly climes.
His new edition of Corporate Law in Canada (3rd edition) is published by Scribblers Publishing Queensland Australia.
Copies of Corporate Law in Canada (3rd . . . [more]
. . . [more]
This paper begins by considering the important role information plays in the law. It then notes the increasing industry concentration that has occurred over the last 10-15 years among legal and other publishers. This industry concentration is believed to have contributed to significant price increases for scholarly journals generally. This industry concentration has potentially significant implications for questions of access, particularly in the current environment of increasing electronic dissemination of legal information. In addition to examining characteristics of the legal information industry, this paper also looks at the role of dominant players such as Lexis and Westlaw and the ways
Thanks to John Swan , for a lead to a mindboggling comment made by Grant Campbell J. (London, Family Court) regarding the proper way (from a costs perspective) of doing legal research. In Biggin v. Maloney For parallel cites.
In reviewing a bill for legal services submitted in respect of an order for costs in Biggin v. Maloney, Grant Campbell J. of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice observed:
. . . [more]
“Although some case-law research was necessary, and although Mr.Hopkins did indeed produce several relevant and persuasive cases… I cannot understand how Mr.Hopkins could invest 10 1⁄2 hours obtaining and reading
- Patuxent Bird Identification InfoCenter
- Robertson v. Thomson: Order from the Supreme Court of Canada (April 7, 2006)
- Robertson v. Thomson: Case information from the Supreme Court of Canada website
- Robertson v. Thomson: Ontario Appeal Court (lower court) decision
- Baigent and Leigh v Random House
- Toronto Star: Students Draft Ontario Legislation
- Jurist: French labour law standoff
- CBC: Harper willing to re-open Constitutional debate
- Canoe: Da Vinci Code triumphs in court
- CBC: A black eye on the practice of law, from NB
- CBC: Legal Aid issues in NL
- Berkman Center conference: Bloggership: How Blogs Are Transforming Legal Scholarship
- The Filter: Special In-depth
The Robertson v. Thomson case, heard December 6, 2005, has been ordered for a re-hearing. See the Order from the Supreme Court of Canada (April 7, 2006).
This well-known copyright case regards a freelance writer whose articles were published in the newspaper and then subsequently reproduced in three electronic formats (online, CD-ROM, and electronic index), which she said were not covered by her copyright agreement. When this case first came out in the Ontario courts, I believe news publishers pulled articles by freelance writers from their online services until such time as an updated copyright agreement could be put . . . [more]
The entire judgment is available but most will be happy with Baigent and Leigh v Random House: summary of judgment
Neutral Citation Number:  EWHC 719 (Ch)
Case No: HC04C03092
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
MR JUSTICE PETER SMITH
1. Michael Baigent
2. Richard Leigh
The Random House Group Limited
Mr Jonathan Rayner James QC and Mr Andrew Norris (instructed by Orchard Brayton Graham LLP) for the Claimants
Mr John Baldwin QC and Mr James Abrahams (instructed by Arnold . . . [more]
Quick News on the last day of classes here at Dal….
Students Draft Ontario Legislation. (Toronto Star) Is this the beginning of a trend? Think of the possibilities. Kurtz had something to say about that didn’t he?
Speaking of students. (Jurist) If you are going be age-ist, go all the way.
Harper willing to re-open Constitutional debate. (CBC) Whoo-hoo, life has been far too boring lately! You see the burning technological issue in my mind is that it remains very difficult to convey sarcasm via the web.