Citing cases which cite cases which cite cases. Forum

[HalfManHalfAmazing]

Im writing a memo based on common law not statute, and the case I am citing from cites a case which cites a case.

Do I write Jones v. Smith xxx 123 123-125 (Mich. 2000) citing case, citing case?

That seems like a LOT of crap, however it seems improper to just cite Jones v. Smith when the justices cite a case citing a case. They however are clarifying laws which will be dicta, and I am writing an LS memo.

Need help ASAP.

[Formerbruin]

That's the most proper way, though over summer I was able to get away with Jones v. Smith xxx 123 123-125 (Mich. 2000) (citations omitted).

[Arrow]

First, the most proper way is the cite the actual case itself.

Now...last semester when writing an memo, we were given like 6 cases and can only used those 6. One of the cases cited another case that was not on the given 6 list, so basically...

I did...Jones v. Smith xxx 123 123-125 (Mich. 2000) (quoting Your v. Mom xxx 123 123-125 (Mich. 2000)).

[aguacaliente]

see bluebook rule 10.6.2.

only one level of recursion, or "citing" (XXX citing YYY) is required. though, if relevant, you can cite to both. (XXX citing YYY citing ZZZ).

you could also always consider going to the second case (YYY), reading it, then using YYY citing ZZZ, to build a stronger case, have a wider breadth of authority, rather than relying on one case citing one case citing another case.

[NewHere]

First, the most proper way is the cite the actual case itself.

It depends. Sometimes you want to cite the case that cites the original, e.g. because it's in your jurisdiction or governs your jurisdiction. For example, say the original phrase comes from an opinion by the 7th Circuit. You are in the 2nd Circuit. Now you find a Supreme Court case that quotes the phrase from the original opinion. In this case it's better to cite the Supreme Court case because it governs your court.

Another case where you would cite the citation is if the citing case adds something to it that is relevant to your case. Example: "We hold that the rule that "red cars are dangerous" (X v. Y, 123 F.3d 456) can be expanded to cars of all colors." (M v. N, 111 F.3d 222). If your case involves a green car, you want to cite the citation (M v. N), citing X v. Y, not the original.

[underdawg]

yeah arrow is wrong

[Hitachi]

Man, I love P/F legal writing - don't have to worry about any of that s***.

[aguacaliente]

NewHere is absolutely right -- always consider your jurisdiction and make sure to note what is binding, and what is only persuasive. Good tip, newhere.

[HalfManHalfAmazing]

This is a closed world memo where I cannot go beyond the bounds of the cases I have been given. We are an ALWD school, so I will have to dig through that piece of crap and see how narrow my rule can be. I decided to synthesize a common law rule from the most recently settled case in this jurisdiction (The state appellate court level in this case) and cite the full level of cites, as I am establishing a rule for a civil suit.

[AR75]

citations omitted. ALWD here, too. You'll be fine.