Shepardizing question Forum

[iliketurtles123]

When you shepardize a court decision or article...
If there is a citation that has a negative treatment, and the court decision that gave this negative treatment was BEFORE the original court decision/article, is it safe to assume that the original court or author's obviously took this into account when writing the decision?

Example:

2001 article/case citing X (1950's decision)
Shepardizing shows X was negatively treated (rejected or superceded by statute) by a court in 1988.
Since the article/case was published in 2001, is it safe to assume that despite the negative treatment in 1988, this would not affect the article/case in terms of finding out whether the proposition is supported by good law?

Otherwise, this would mean I would have to read the entire case...

[NotMyRealName09]

When you shepardize a court decision or article...
If there is a citation that has a negative treatment, and the court decision that gave this negative treatment was BEFORE the original court decision/article, is it safe to assume that the original court or author's obviously took this into account when writing the decision?

Example:

2001 article/case citing X (1950's decision)
Shepardizing shows X was negatively treated (rejected or superceded by statute) by a court in 1988.
Since the article/case was published in 2001, is it safe to assume that despite the negative treatment in 1988, this would not affect the article/case in terms of finding out whether the proposition is supported by good law?

Otherwise, this would mean I would have to read the entire case...

If X was overruled or superseded in 1988, then X is bad law, period. And anything relying on it that was written after 1988 is suspect.

[Teoeo]

When you shepardize a court decision or article...
If there is a citation that has a negative treatment, and the court decision that gave this negative treatment was BEFORE the original court decision/article, is it safe to assume that the original court or author's obviously took this into account when writing the decision?

Example:

2001 article/case citing X (1950's decision)
Shepardizing shows X was negatively treated (rejected or superceded by statute) by a court in 1988.
Since the article/case was published in 2001, is it safe to assume that despite the negative treatment in 1988, this would not affect the article/case in terms of finding out whether the proposition is supported by good law?

Otherwise, this would mean I would have to read the entire case...

If X was overruled or superseded in 1988, then X is bad law, period. And anything relying on it that was written after 1988 is suspect.

Not necessarily. It depends WHAT was superseded. Cases often have multiple legal holdings/issues - one of which may have been superseded. That doesn't make the entire case bad-law.

[NotMyRealName09]

When you shepardize a court decision or article...
If there is a citation that has a negative treatment, and the court decision that gave this negative treatment was BEFORE the original court decision/article, is it safe to assume that the original court or author's obviously took this into account when writing the decision?

Example:

2001 article/case citing X (1950's decision)
Shepardizing shows X was negatively treated (rejected or superceded by statute) by a court in 1988.
Since the article/case was published in 2001, is it safe to assume that despite the negative treatment in 1988, this would not affect the article/case in terms of finding out whether the proposition is supported by good law?

Otherwise, this would mean I would have to read the entire case...

If X was overruled or superseded in 1988, then X is bad law, period. And anything relying on it that was written after 1988 is suspect.

Not necessarily. It depends WHAT was superseded. Cases often have multiple legal holdings/issues - one of which may have been superseded. That doesn't make the entire case bad-law.

I was speaking generally, but you're right.

[A. Nony Mouse]

It also depends on why the later case/article is citing it. The case might be saying something like "one example of this completely misguided school of thought appeared in [1950s case], which has since been thoroughly discredited" or "1950s case came up with the best solution, even though it has since been overturned."