Tuesday, September 20, 2011
While teaching basic research skills to 1Ls this week, a potentially blasphemous idea crossed my mind: Is using the print-based version of a citator to update an important source professional negligence? The answer is probably no, but the ubiquitous and easy-to-use nature of online source updating does make me question the prudence of using print. At the least, practitioners who use a print citator without calling a research service to obtain up-to-the-minute case updates may be at risk of using a source that was overruled since the last print update.
Even if using the books instead of the online citators does not rise to the level of negligence, using print definitely entails peril for the practitioner. It is easy to miss critical notations in the fine print of a book, and it is even easier to misunderstand the somewhat complex process to update the citator itself. Perhaps the real question is whether using print citators to update cases is wise. My answer is that in most cases it is not. The cost in time would likely outweigh the cost in electronic research services for most attorneys.
Should legal writing and research professors teach students how to use print citators? Or should we teach students that using print is a bad idea when online services like KeyCite and Shepard’s are on the market?