quick bluebook question Forum
-
rawrab

- Posts: 88
- Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2011 3:28 pm
quick bluebook question
For an assignment for legal writing one of the questions asks us to list relevant cases. My professor wants them to be in correct bluebook citation. When just naming a case in general, should there be a pinpoint cite? For example, should it be Forsyth v. Dugger, 523 N.E.2d 704, 119 (Ill. App. Ct. 1988). or Forsyth v. Dugger, 523 N.E.2d 704 (Ill. App. Ct. 1988).
-
Void

- Posts: 861
- Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2011 10:56 am
Re: quick bluebook question
rawrab wrote:For an assignment for legal writing one of the questions asks us to list relevant cases. My professor wants them to be in correct bluebook citation. When just naming a case in general, should there be a pinpoint cite? For example, should it be Forsyth v. Dugger, 523 N.E.2d 704, 119 (Ill. App. Ct. 1988). or Forsyth v. Dugger, 523 N.E.2d 704 (Ill. App. Ct. 1988).
First, underlining is TTT. Italicize that shiz.
Second, the answer to your question is no pincite for citing case generally.
Last edited by Void on Sat Oct 01, 2011 9:25 pm, edited 3 times in total.
- The Gentleman

- Posts: 670
- Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 12:25 am
Re: quick bluebook question
That's pretty much exactly how my LRW teacher wants us cite. Include the court's name along with the year in parentheses and underline the case name. So you're not necessarily doing it wrong.Void wrote:First of all, I don't know where you got this "III. App. Ct." thing, but you didn't get it from the bluebook.rawrab wrote:For an assignment for legal writing one of the questions asks us to list relevant cases. My professor wants them to be in correct bluebook citation. When just naming a case in general, should there be a pinpoint cite? For example, should it be Forsyth v. Dugger, 523 N.E.2d 704, 119 (Ill. App. Ct. 1988). or Forsyth v. Dugger, 523 N.E.2d 704 (Ill. App. Ct. 1988).
Second, underlining is TTT. Italicize that shiz.
Third, the answer to your question is no pincite for citing case generally.
And I didn't do pincites for a similar assignment. (Although I haven't got it back yet, so I might be wrong about it)
-
Void

- Posts: 861
- Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2011 10:56 am
Re: quick bluebook question
I was wrong about the Ill. App. Ct. thing- I was reading "Ill" as a roman numeral 3 (III) because of the font on TLS. Then realized it was saying ill, as in illinois.The Gentleman wrote:That's pretty much exactly how my LRW teacher wants us cite. Include the court's name along with the year in parentheses and underline the case name. So you're not necessarily doing it wrong.Void wrote:First of all, I don't know where you got this "III. App. Ct." thing, but you didn't get it from the bluebook.rawrab wrote:For an assignment for legal writing one of the questions asks us to list relevant cases. My professor wants them to be in correct bluebook citation. When just naming a case in general, should there be a pinpoint cite? For example, should it be Forsyth v. Dugger, 523 N.E.2d 704, 119 (Ill. App. Ct. 1988). or Forsyth v. Dugger, 523 N.E.2d 704 (Ill. App. Ct. 1988).
Second, underlining is TTT. Italicize that shiz.
Third, the answer to your question is no pincite for citing case generally.
And I didn't do pincites for a similar assignment. (Although I haven't got it back yet, so I might be wrong about it)
As for italics, underlining is still acceptable but generally considered outdated.
Last edited by Void on Wed Mar 14, 2012 9:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
rawrab

- Posts: 88
- Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2011 3:28 pm
Re: quick bluebook question
This way of writing the cite is the exact way that my prof wants it done. I don't care so much that it's correct in the bluebook because that is what she wants and I just want an A ha. Thanks for the input though, I'll ditch the pinpoint cite.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- kalvano

- Posts: 11951
- Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 2:24 am
Re: quick bluebook question
My LRW class required underlining as opposed to italicizing, for clarity reasons.
-
random5483

- Posts: 684
- Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 8:17 pm
Re: quick bluebook question
Underlining or italicizing is fine for regular LRW bluebooking. Italicizing is the way you do it for legal journals.
Pin cites should almost always be used. If using no signal, see, see, e.g., see also, etc, you should have a pin cite. When using See generally or some of the other tags, a pin cite is not as important. For the purpose of an LRW class, just use pin cites for every citation unless you use the see generally tag (I never had need to use that my 1L year).
Pin cites should almost always be used. If using no signal, see, see, e.g., see also, etc, you should have a pin cite. When using See generally or some of the other tags, a pin cite is not as important. For the purpose of an LRW class, just use pin cites for every citation unless you use the see generally tag (I never had need to use that my 1L year).
-
Void

- Posts: 861
- Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2011 10:56 am
Re: quick bluebook question
How do you pincite if you're just listing cases, as asked in the OP? If you have, for example, a list of cases you read in class this year, which page number do you cite for each citation?random5483 wrote:Underlining or italicizing is fine for regular LRW bluebooking. Italicizing is the way you do it for legal journals.
Pin cites should almost always be used. If using no signal, see, see, e.g., see also, etc, you should have a pin cite. When using See generally or some of the other tags, a pin cite is not as important. For the purpose of an LRW class, just use pin cites for every citation unless you use the see generally tag (I never had need to use that my 1L year).
-
random5483

- Posts: 684
- Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 8:17 pm
Re: quick bluebook question
Void wrote:How do you pincite if you're just listing cases, as asked in the OP? If you have, for example, a list of cases you read in class this year, which page number do you cite for each citation?random5483 wrote:Underlining or italicizing is fine for regular LRW bluebooking. Italicizing is the way you do it for legal journals.
Pin cites should almost always be used. If using no signal, see, see, e.g., see also, etc, you should have a pin cite. When using See generally or some of the other tags, a pin cite is not as important. For the purpose of an LRW class, just use pin cites for every citation unless you use the see generally tag (I never had need to use that my 1L year).
I apologize, I misread the Ops post. I assumed he meant using cases in a paper. I never had to "list" a set of cases for my LRW class. I assume no pin cites would be required if you are merely listing the cases you are using.
- jeeptiger09

- Posts: 325
- Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 10:15 pm
Re: quick bluebook question
If you're listing cases, like in the table of authorities, don't pincite. Just cite to the first page of the case.Void wrote:How do you pincite if you're just listing cases, as asked in the OP? If you have, for example, a list of cases you read in class this year, which page number do you cite for each citation?random5483 wrote:Underlining or italicizing is fine for regular LRW bluebooking. Italicizing is the way you do it for legal journals.
Pin cites should almost always be used. If using no signal, see, see, e.g., see also, etc, you should have a pin cite. When using See generally or some of the other tags, a pin cite is not as important. For the purpose of an LRW class, just use pin cites for every citation unless you use the see generally tag (I never had need to use that my 1L year).
- ph14

- Posts: 3227
- Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 11:15 pm
Re: quick bluebook question
I have a bluebook question too, I didn't want to start my own thread for a quick question. When citing a case and the assignment says give the "full citation" and lists among the information a Argued On and Decided On date, do I need to include those somehow? And if so, where would I find that in the Bluebook? If not, is the decided date the date that I use for the citation?
-
Void

- Posts: 861
- Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2011 10:56 am
Re: quick bluebook question
The "decided on" date is the relevant date for citation, and a "full citation" typically only includes one date. You only need the year (i.e. "2006" or "1978") and it goes inside the parenthesis after the page numbers.ph14 wrote:I have a bluebook question too, I didn't want to start my own thread for a quick question. When citing a case and the assignment says give the "full citation" and lists among the information a Argued On and Decided On date, do I need to include those somehow? And if so, where would I find that in the Bluebook? If not, is the decided date the date that I use for the citation?
Edit: this is the rule for typical practitioner citation. As evidenced by this thread, different professors vary in what they're looking for.
- ph14

- Posts: 3227
- Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 11:15 pm
Re: quick bluebook question
Okay thanks, that's what i thought. I wasn't sure why they gave us both the argued by and decided on dates, probably just to confuse us then.Void wrote:The "decided on" date is the relevant date for citation, and a "full citation" typically only includes one date. You only need the year (i.e. "2006" or "1978") and it goes inside the parenthesis after the page numbers.ph14 wrote:I have a bluebook question too, I didn't want to start my own thread for a quick question. When citing a case and the assignment says give the "full citation" and lists among the information a Argued On and Decided On date, do I need to include those somehow? And if so, where would I find that in the Bluebook? If not, is the decided date the date that I use for the citation?
Edit: this is the rule for typical practitioner citation. As evidenced by this thread, different professors vary in what they're looking for.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
Void

- Posts: 861
- Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2011 10:56 am
Re: quick bluebook question
Yeah I don't know why they'd give the argued-on date. If you think about it, the case doesn't take on the force of law until it's decided. We don't use cases with pending decisions as precedent, so the arguing date is basically irrelevant most of the time.ph14 wrote:Okay thanks, that's what i thought. I wasn't sure why they gave us both the argued by and decided on dates, probably just to confuse us then.Void wrote:The "decided on" date is the relevant date for citation, and a "full citation" typically only includes one date. You only need the year (i.e. "2006" or "1978") and it goes inside the parenthesis after the page numbers.ph14 wrote:I have a bluebook question too, I didn't want to start my own thread for a quick question. When citing a case and the assignment says give the "full citation" and lists among the information a Argued On and Decided On date, do I need to include those somehow? And if so, where would I find that in the Bluebook? If not, is the decided date the date that I use for the citation?
Edit: this is the rule for typical practitioner citation. As evidenced by this thread, different professors vary in what they're looking for.
- Cupidity

- Posts: 2214
- Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 10:21 pm
Re: quick bluebook question
How does 119 follow 704?
-
Void

- Posts: 861
- Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2011 10:56 am
Re: quick bluebook question
Is this one of those buddhist questions that doesn't actually have an answer?Cupidity wrote:How does 119 follow 704?
- kalvano

- Posts: 11951
- Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 2:24 am
Re: quick bluebook question
Cupidity wrote:How does 119 follow 704?
2 different reporters?
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
- Bronte

- Posts: 2125
- Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 10:44 pm
Re: quick bluebook question
119 cannot be the correct pincite.kalvano wrote:Cupidity wrote:How does 119 follow 704?
2 different reporters?
-
Void

- Posts: 861
- Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2011 10:56 am
Re: quick bluebook question
I love that this thread has become a place to subtly brag about citation qualifications, and I love that I started it.betasteve wrote:
Bona Fides: 3L, Exec Board of LR.
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login