Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Academic Blogs -> CYB3RCRIM3
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Academic
: CYB3RCRIM3Citations
I got an email recently from someone who said my including frequent citations (e.g., "People v. Smith," "State v. Smith") is a distraction when someone is reading a post.I'm afraid that didn't really surprise me. I find it tedious to put all those short citations in, and I'm sorry if they are distracting.
He seemed to think I include them because I'm a compulsive (even nerdy) law professor type who HAS to have a citation for every statement, even when it's referring back to a case I've already cited in full.
I am enough of a compulsive (though perhaps not nerdy) law professor type to include citations for every statement I make in a law review article . . . because if I don't, the law review editors who are working on that article will insist that I do. (Sometimes they even want more than I've already included.)
I'm not, though, compulsive (or nerdy) enough to need to repeat short citations over and over in a blog post. The reason I include them is this: Very early in the history of this blog, I did a post on a case and did what I always do: Summarized the facts in the case from the court's opinion or quoted the facts as given in the opinion. All I know about the facts in a case is usually what I read in the opinion; sometimes I look for more facts in online news stories; when I do that, I cite those stories for whatever I take from them.
When I did this with the case I wrote about very early in the history of this blog, I ran across a . . . shall we say, very strange man. I got well over 40 emails from him, none of which really made any sense. He accused me of "ruining his life" (???), among other things; and some of the emails were at least implicitly threatening.
I had not included the repetitive short citations to the opinion in that post, even though it was obvious that the opinion is where the facts I referenced came from. As a defensive tactic, in an attempt to avoid encountering another person like this fellow, I began using the repetitive cites. I really doubt it would have made any difference if I had used them in the post on this case, but they make me feel better, at least.
So . . . I'm sorry for the stuttering citations. Some people just make things difficult.
Full post as published by CYB3RCRIM3 on September 18, 2009 (boomark / email).

Shawnee PD had 18 seatbelt, 1 DUI citations over Thanksgiving
2008 Tax Law Journal Rankings: Tax Law Review #1, Tax Notes #2
2009 Tax Journal Rankings: Tax Law Review #1, Tax Notes #2
Law Reviews Continue to Cite Blogs
Brophy: The Signaling Value of Law Reviews -- An Exploration of Citations and Prestige








