School: How (Not) to Do Legal Research

Compared to most in my school, I'm not a legal research whiz, but I do know a little about it.

The old saying, "Quantity has a quality all its own" applies a lot in legal arguments - the more court opinions you can find that back up what your position is on a specific legal issue, the more likely it is that a judge'll buy it. Whether it's the "right" choice or not is a whole 'nother story. There's some legal theories out there that posit that even if cases were decided by a coin flip, given enough time, the wiser choice on an issue will win out since more aggrieved parties will come forward under a bad rule (tell that to Mr. Dred Scott).

Modern research is easier than it used to be, of course. You can literally get through law school in the 21st century without ever cracking open a federal reporter; online legal databases to do most of the heavy lifting. All that's needed is a discriminating eye to find what's helpful and what's not.

With that in mind, here are some tips for the junior researchers working under me:

1) All cases need cites. Giving me the party names isn't quite worthless, but it's a time-waster.

2) Not everything a court says is helpful, or even relevant (not entirely your fault, since modern casebooks spoonfeed you the issues).

3) When a case cites another case or statute, open the cited authority in a new browser tab and check it out. You'll be glad you did.

4) Paraphrasing an opinion is dangerous unless you are precise. It took me a whole summer's worth of antitrust research to figure that one out.

5) Know the question you are researching. Off-topic research is very tedious to work through.