Shepardizing is the process of checking a case’s subsequent history and judicial treatment in order to verify that it remains valid and reliable legal precedent. This crucial procedure in legal research helps legal professionals ascertain whether a case has been upheld, modified, questioned, or overturned by subsequent rulings, thereby ensuring that it remains “good law” — meaning it can responsibly be relied upon as part of legal arguments and judicial decisions.
Key Components of Shepardizing
Checking Case History
Shepardization involves scrutinizing the history of a case to track its progression through the judicial system. This includes verifying the case’s appeals, reversals, or any other modifications to its standing.
Identifying Treatment by Other Cases
It is essential to confirm how the case has been treated by other judicial decisions. This involves analyzing citations in subsequent cases to ensure it has been followed, affirmed, or otherwise treated positively, rather than having been overturned, distinguished, or criticized.
Verification Tools
Traditionally done using Shepard’s Citations, most modern Shepardizing is conducted through online legal research databases like LexisNexis, Westlaw, or Bloomberg Law. These platforms provide digital tools and updates that streamline the process and offer comprehensive citation histories.
Importance and Applicability
Ensuring Reliable Precedents
Legal professionals must ensure that the cases they cite as authority are still considered good law, thereby avoiding reliance on invalid or overruled cases that could undermine legal arguments and court decisions.
Legal Research and Case Preparation
In preparing for trial or drafting legal documents, attorneys must rigorously shepardize cases to craft solid legal arguments based on valid precedents.
Preserving Legal Integrity
Shepardizing upholds the integrity of legal practice by maintaining an accurate and current understanding of case law, guiding judicial decision-making, and supporting the rule of law.
Examples and Case Use
Case History Analysis
For example, if a lawyer cites the case Smith v. Jones in a brief, they must shepardize it to determine if it remains authoritative. Through services like LexisNexis, they might discover that although Smith v. Jones was followed by several courts, it was subsequently overturned by Anderson v. Smith on a critical issue, thus cautioning against its use without qualification.
Practical Application
In Johnson v. United States, shepardizing might reveal that the case has been positively cited hundreds of times and thus remains a robust precedent. Conversely, another case may show a pattern of negative treatment, suggesting courts’ reluctance to follow its reasoning.
Historical Context
Origin of Shepard’s Citations
Shepard’s Citations was first published in the early 1900s by Frank Shepard. It was initially a series of printed volumes allowing legal professionals to trace the treatment of case law.
Evolution into Digital Research
With technological advancements, Shepard’s evolved into a sophisticated digital tool, facilitating swift and accurate legal research. Today, Shepardizing is integral to ensuring that legal precedents remain intact and relevant.
Related Terms
- Shepard’s Citations: Reference books and online tools developed for tracking the judicial history and treatment of cases, statutes, regulations, and other legal authorities.
- Legal Precedent: A judicial decision that serves as an authoritative rule or pattern in future similar or analogous cases.
- Good Law: A case or statute that remains valid and has not been overturned, reversed, vacated, or rendered obsolete by subsequent legal developments.
FAQs
**Q1: Why is Shepardizing important in legal practice?**
**Q2: What tools are used for Shepardizing?**
**Q3: How has Shepardizing evolved over time?**
References
- LexisNexis. “Shepard’s Citations Service.” LexisNexis Resource.
- Black’s Law Dictionary. “Shepardize.”
- Legal Information Institute. “Shepardizing in Legal Research.” LII at Cornell Law School.
Summary
Shepardizing remains a vital process within the legal system, ensuring that the cases cited in legal arguments retain their authority as good law. By systematically verifying a case’s subsequent history and treatment, legal professionals can uphold the integrity and reliability of their practice, contributing to well-founded and legally sound judicial outcomes.
