Is casebriefs.com a good resource? Forum

[Princetonlaw68]

I recently started law school and I'm curious to know what anyone who has some experience with online case briefs thinks of casebriefs.com. I've been using it a lot when I want some info. on a case, but I noticed a tiny mistake in a brief they made that made me think that I might have to use a resource that forces you to pay to get the proper information. In one of the briefs I just read, "the due process clause of the fourth" amendment was written out. Could casebriefs.com have a lot of mistakes that could affect me a lot worse than this, or is it a good resource as I originally thought, with maybe a minor mistake here or there that really won't affect my understanding of the case.

If anyone wants to list any good online resources for the best online case briefs, that info is also welcome


Thanks a lot!

[Princetonlaw68]

I'd also just like to add that sometimes the black letter law that casebriefs.com has written out seems a little too broad given the particulars of a case, and will be much broader than in certain books that have the brief (resources that require you to pay). However, most of my books don't have case books keyed to them, so for a lot of the cases I read, I'm forced to go online. Is there any resource that anyone knows of that has the black letter law for every case, and done properly? I would be happy to pay for a resource like this, so if anyone has some good info. on sources, I'd really appreciate it.

Thanks again!

[sublime]

..

[BankruptMe]

I think they are crap.

I just use them to get through class. When I construct my outline, I will look at better resources.

1L

[ymmv]

I usually just google "jones v smith brief" in class and pick whichever of the first two or three results looks most promising. Assuming I don't have a good outline from a previous year, or if the case is a new one.

[Br3v]

It's fine. I wouldn't build an outline off it alone (or any non professor specific source alone) but as a backstop of sorts to make sure you hit the high points? I use it for that all the time.

[zugzwanger]

It's fine. I wouldn't build an outline off it alone (or any non professor specific source alone) but as a backstop of sorts to make sure you hit the high points? I use it for that all the time.

Agree completely and it is way too extreme to say it's shit it typically gives at least a decent summary

[sublime]

..

[meegee]

Casebriefs.com is not the best source out there. I've found a few cases where they had errors, as in fact errors.

I'm only a 1L that recently started, so take what I'm saying with a grain of salt.

Usually, I open around 3 links from different sources, and kinda compare them to one another, instead of just using one. But like others said, I found the more "amateur" looking ones tend to be better.

[Br3v]

It's fine. I wouldn't build an outline off it alone (or any non professor specific source alone) but as a backstop of sorts to make sure you hit the high points? I use it for that all the time.

Agree completely and it is way too extreme to say it's shit it typically gives at least a decent summary

it is hardly a summary. Gives far too much for even a longer brief. There is no reason for simple cases to be two single spaced pages and seems like little more than copying and pasting parts of the opinion.

Nah dude. Obviously don't read like the procedural history. I find the "issue" and "summary of the law" or whatever pretty helpful. Also, the ads are usually LOL-worthy

[russbp]

I find http://www.quimbee.com to be a great resource, especially as a way to read about a case in summary before diving into the textbook itself. I can copy/paste a lot from there as well in my own briefs which I then annotate with a few of my own notes depending on things that I know professors are going to be looking for (e.g., torts prof likes lots of facts that many of these sites just don't include).

[martymoose]

It's fine if you want a quick glance at what's going on in the case and you didn't read, but don't rely on it exclusively. Cases are often appealed on several grounds and the rule that the website gives you may not be what your professor is wanting you to get out of it. An individual case can be used in a Civ Pro class, a Torts class, or a Con Law class. This is why casebooks are nice, in that they edit the cases so you don't have to slog through pages about jurisdiction or some other point of procedure, when what you really want is the ruling on equitable servitudes.

[Nonconsecutive]

I haven't used it much, but in one of our recent cases Casebriefs had the complete wrong holding, like, completely the opposite of what happened.

[Yukos]

Believe it or not, I've found Wikipedia to generally have the best case summaries.