Skip to main content

The "Gray Areas" of Westlaw/LexisNexis

I recently had a student email me with a problem. He was looking for a particular document in its original form (it has been amended at least once). He was wondering if there was a source in the library that would contain this document, but he also wondered if it was available online at all. He stated that he couldn't find it on Westlaw or LexisNexis, and that he even talked with a LexisNexis rep who "conceded that they probably don't have it."

Having spent several years working in the customer support department of one of these publishers, I recognized that this particular document was the kind of thing that could easily fall into what I call a "gray area" in the content available through Westlaw and LexisNexis.

Many of the secondary sources available through LexisNexis and Westlaw reprint the texts of entire treaties (including some not ratified by the US), decisions (of US courts, international bodies, and other entities), legislative materials (including model acts), older versions of documents that are no longer in effect, and a myriad of other, unusually hard-to-find, documents. Frequently, these are reprinted in appendices in treatises or in relevant periodicals, but treatises can also reprint the text of relevant documents within its own sections.

That's where we located this student's document: On LexisNexis, a treatise reproduced the text within a section, while on Westlaw, the text was reproduced in an appendix to another treatise. So remember: If you can't find it elsewhere, see if there is a treatise on the topic and look in it. It's amazing what you can find!

P.S. These aren't the only places to look: The Congressional Record is a good place to find difficult-to-locate documents, and even courts may have relevant or unusual documents appended to their decisions, such as a transcript of George Carlin's famous "Filthy Words" (also known as "the seven words you can't say on television") comedy routine. See FCC v. Pacifica Found., 438 U.S. 726, 751 (1978).

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Amazing, but True, Deportation Story of Carlos Marcello

Earlier this week, the University of Houston Law Center was fortunate to have as its guest Professor Daniel Kanstroom of Boston College of Law. An expert in immigration law, he is the Director of the International Human Rights Program, and he both founded and directs the Boston College Immigration and Asylum Clinic. Speaking as the guest of the Houston Journal of International Law’s annual Fall Lecture Series, Professor Kanstroom discussed issues raised in his new book, Aftermath: Deportation Law and the New American Diaspora . Professor Michael Olivas introduced Professor Kanstroom to the audience, and mentioned the fascinating tale of Carlos Marcello, which Professor Kanstroom wrote about in his chapter “The Long, Complex, and Futile Deportation Saga of Carlos Marcello,” in Immigration Stories , a collection of narratives about leading immigration law cases. My interest piqued, I read and was amazed by Kanstroom’s description of one of the most interesting figures in American le

C-SPAN Video Archive Now Online

Legislative researchers and politics fans take note. C-SPAN recently completed a digitization project placing the entirety of its video collection online. The archives record all three C-SPAN networks seven days a week, twenty-four hours a day. The videos are available at no cost for historical, educational, research, and archival uses. The database includes over 160,000 hours of video recorded since 1987 and the programs are indexed by subject, speaker names, titles, affiliations, sponsors, committees, categories, formats, policy groups, keywords, and locations. The most recent, most watched, and most shared videos are highlighted on the main page. To start watching, visit the C-SPAN Video Library and use the search function at the top of the page.

Texas Subsequent History Table Ceases Publication

This week, Thomson Reuters notified subscribers that publication of the Texas Subsequent History Table will be discontinued and no further updates will be produced, due to “insufficient market interest.” Practitioners have been extracting writ (and since 1997, petition) history from the tables since their initial publication in 1917 as The Complete Texas Writs of Error Table . The tables, later published by West, have been used for nearly a century to determine how the Texas Supreme Court or Court of Criminal Appeals disposed of an appeal from an intermediate appellate court. The purpose of adding this notation to citations is to indicate the effect of the Texas Supreme Court’s action on the weight of authority of the Court of Appeals’ opinion.  For example, practitioners may prefer to use as authority a case that the Texas Supreme Court has determined is correct both in result and legal principles applied (petition refused), rather than one that simply presents no error that requires