« Ind. Courts - "C. Allow me to direct you to our pro se research area." | Main | Ind. Courts - Some Highlights of Yesterday’s “Insider’s Guide to Indiana Appellate Practice” & Today’s CLE with Justice Rush: E-Filing is Coming and Much More »
Friday, May 09, 2014
Ind. Law - More on: N.E.2 phased out; or, marking a milestone in time
Updating this ILB post from March 17th, on April 28th I received a note from the Indiana Supreme Court librarians, letting me know:
We just received the print volume of 999 N.E.2d. The last case in the volume is Spangler v. Stark County Dog Warden (Ohio), dated October 28, 2013. In the advance sheet, 1 N.E.3d 1 is People v. Mineau (Illinois), dated Nov. 6, 2012.This is just as they advised me in the March 17th post.
What I've learned, from the librarians and from a law clerk reader, is that within a Reporter volume, the cases aren't necessarily in chronological order. As I wrote to the librarians last week to make sure I understood:
Oh, I think I understand. As it turns out for Vol. 999 of NE2nd, the last case is from Oct. 28, 2013, while the first case in NE3rd is from Nov. 6, 2012 (which is just what you wrote on March 17th). But within Vol. 999, the cases aren't always in chronological order, as the reader wrote and you agreed:And it turns out that it is not a rarity that a case is overlooked by West. As the librarians added:Tax Court opinion, Kellam v. Fountain County Assessor, dated Dec. 10, 2013, has been assigned the citation 999 N.E.2d 120, according to online Westlaw Next.In order to get the page numbers to come out right, they must have already had all the pages of the NE2nd 999 volume finalized and locked up when they put Spangler in the advance sheet. If you or anyone were to find a case they overlooked that should have chronologically been in 999, no big deal, it goes in the next set ...
Yes, anything overlooked goes into a new volume. With 4 other states in the North Eastern Reporter, there could be wide variations in coverage dates, hence the 2012 case from Illinois. I just wonder how long a case could be sitting in Westlaw with no assigned North Eastern number before West would catch it. Yikes!To prevent the "Yikes", the librarians only wait about 2 months to report a case that hasn’t been reported in the North Eastern Reporter. This is only for the Supreme Court cases.
Since we process the bindery of the Library's copy of Supreme Court briefs, we notice when a case is on Westlaw but hasn't been assigned a North Eastern number yet. This means it also hasn't appeared in the advance sheets or print volumes. We also get reports from other patrons when they need to cite something, and it still has a Westlaw number.
Posted by Marcia Oddi on May 9, 2014 02:50 PM
Posted to Indiana Law