To search California and other state and federal cases for free, you can use Google Scholar. Google Scholar can be reached from the Google.com home page by clicking the Apps icon, selecting the More tab from the pop-up, then selecting Even More and finally  selecting Scholar.  Better yet, you can go directly to Scholar with this URL: http://scholar.google.com (we recommend you bookmark it if you use if often). 

The cases come from a variety of sources, such as Cornell LII, Justia, Public.Resource.org, and official court sites. Scholar contains opinions from the following courts:

• All U.S state appellate and state supreme courts back to 1950
• U.S. federal district, appellate, tax, and bankruptcy courts back to 1923
• Court of Claims from 1929 to 1982 (when the court was abolished)
• Court of Customs and Patent Appeals from 1929 to 1982 (when the court was abolished)
• Customs Court from 1949 to 1980 (when it was replaced by the Court of International Trade)
• Court of International Trade from 1980 (when it replaced the Customs Court) to the present
• Board of Tax Appeals from 1924 (when it was established) to 1942 (when it became the Tax Court)
• Tax Court from 1943  (when it replaced the Board of Tax Appeals) to the present
• U.S. Supreme Court back to 1791

Google states that it does not guarantee its coverage to be complete or accurate.  The Customs Court and Tax Court, for example do not appear to be complete for all years, especially for older years.  It would be a good idea to double-check your research, especially for older cases, in another database if possible.  If a particular case is not available online for free in full-text format, Google Scholar search results will only include a citation. 

There are three ways to search case law using Google Scholar.  To use any of the three methods, first select the Case law (radio button under the search box. Three pre-filtering options will then appear—a Federal Courts radio button, a radio button for the state you are in (or the jurisdiction you have saved in a previous search), and a Select courts link.

After you have selected Case law, you can search in one of three ways:

1. enter your search terms directly into the search box, which will search all jurisdictions;
2. enter your search terms into the Advanced search feature, which we will explain below; or
3. pre-filter your search by selecting certain courts to search, such as Federal courts or Illinois courts, or by using the Select courts link, as in the illustration above. If you use the first or second methods (and enter your search terms now), you may still want to filter the results by court or other criteria afterward.  We will discuss how to do this below.  

If you click Select courts, a screen containing all the courts Google Scholar covers will appear.  You can then use the checkboxes to choose any combination of courts to search.  

For example, for a customized all federal court opinions search, you would click the Select all link just to the right of the Federal courts heading to select all federal courts. This will include the U.S. Supreme Court, all federal appellate courts, the 1st Circuit Appeals and District (through the 11th and D.C.), the Federal Circuit, the Tax Courts and Board of Tax Appeals, Bankruptcy Courts, etc. Or, you could search one federal court or multiple (instead of all) federal courts. You could also mix and match federal and state courts.

For a customized all-state court opinions search, you would click the Select all link beside the State courts heading. To search only the state courts of Nebraska, on the other hand, click the Clear all link beside the State courts heading (as well as the one beside Federal courts, if you had selected any) and then check the box next to Nebraska.  If you only want the Nebraska Supreme Court but not the Nebraska Court of Appeals, simply click the Court of Appeals checkbox to uncheck it.  (This will also uncheck the main Nebraska box, as well.)  When you are finished making your court selections, click Done to close the courts screen.

When you click the Select courts link to use the check boxes to select jurisdictions before entering a search , clicking Done takes you to a screen with a single Google Scholar search box and the instructions “Please enter a query in the search box above.”  If you wish to use the Advanced search feature at this point (which we recommend), you may click the small arrow to the right of the My Citations button.  A drop-down menu will appear, and you can select Advanced search.  (My Citations is a recently added feature that helps authors track citations to their own publications.)

You can also access the Advanced search from Google Scholar’s home page (in one of two ways, depending on your browser).  Most users can access the Advanced search option by clicking a small downward-facing arrow in the right side of the search box.  This arrow does not always appear, however, and some users may need to access the feature by clicking an Advanced search link at the top of the Google Scholar home page.  Regardless of how you access the Advanced search, the menu will look the same. Before selecting the Advanced search, be sure you have changed the Articles default to Case law if you want to search case law.

Google frequently updates its features, and one of these recent updates includes the removal of the separate Advanced search page with four sections, which was known as the “old venerable” look.  Researchers must now use the “modern” version which essentially consists of a pop-up box containing two of the four sections that had been available with the venerable look.  Despite its simplified format, however, you can still create better and more targeted searches with the Advanced search than without it.

Searching Google Scholar is similar to searching Google.com as far as Boolean, keyword, and phrase searching are concerned, but proximity searching does not seem to work all the time. Although there are some Google Scholar-specific search tips (http://scholar.google.com/intl/en/scholar/help.html#searching), which explain how to use the Advanced Search menu, they focus primarily on how to search for articles. To compensate for Google’s lack of documentation about how to search the case law portion of Google Scholar and its Advanced search, we have run a number of test searches to offer searchers some guidance.

The Google Scholar Advanced search menu is labeled Find Articles, but it should be labeled “Find Articles and Opinions” because this is where researchers enter words and phrases to also search Google Scholar’s opinions database. The first four search boxes in this section are similar to the Google.com Advanced Search page but there are some differences, such as he the drop-down menu labeled where my words occur. You can use this drop-down menu to select either in the title of the article (this should really be labeled “in the party names of the case”, such as roe wade to search for Roe v. Wade) or anywhere in the article (this should really be labeled “anywhere in the case”).

The Find articles section provides keyword/Boolean connector field boxes for you to enter your search terms into and a phrase field box.

In addition these fields allow you to create searches that are unique to opinions. For example, to force a search by citation, enter the citation (in Bluebook style) into the exact phrase search box. Even though a case citation is not an “article,” the results will include cases.

To force a case search by party name, first limit the results to a specific court (e.g., the U.S. Supreme Court) if you know which court decided the case. Next, enter the party names (e.g., Roe v. Wade) into the exact phrase search box, making sure to use “v.” and not “versus” or “vs.” Finally, from the where my words occur drop-down menu, select in the title of the article. This search brought back one opinion. It did not bring back any articles because choosing a court eliminates articles in the search results.

The remainder of the Advanced search box provides search fields for Author, Publication, and Date. The label “Judge” could be substituted for the “Author” label because this is where a judge’s name can be entered when researching opinions.  Test searches indicate that this field does not necessarily return opinions (or concurrences or dissents) authored by the judge searched, however. Any case in which the judge’s name appears (i.e., if he or she heard the case, but did not author the opinion) can appear in the search results.

Once you have selected which courts to search and entered your search terms, you will receive the list of results, much like any other list of search results.  However, Google Scholar now provides search result filtering options for legal document searches, and you can use these to refine your research even more.  You will find the filtering options in a sidebar on the left side of the search results page.

After you have executed a search and refined your results, you will begin reviewing the cases by clicking any search result link to view a full-text opinion with Google Scholar.

Keywords are automatically highlighted in pale yellow, but you can remove the highlighting by clicking the small “x” in the upper right corner of the screen. Page numbers in the left-hand margin and throughout the text of the opinion correspond to the pages in the printed reporter (usually the official reporter), as shown in the Federal Reporter in the illustration above. The upper left corner of the screen contains three links—Read, How cited, and Search.  The Read link is inactive on this screen because you are already reading the case. Clicking How cited will show other cases that cited this case and can help you conduct a rudimentary citation check of your case.

Google Scholar allows you to create alerts to receive regular e-mail alerts about cases on any chosen topic emanating from any chosen court.  If your search included articles, legal journals, or patents, those would be included in your alert results. You can also set up alerts using a citation or keywords, such as a party, judge, or attorney name. The alert defaults to your current search, but you can revise the alert by typing in other keywords/phrases and selecting up to 10 or up to 20 results at a time. You do not have to have a Google account to set up an alert, although if you don’t, Google may require you to click a verification link in order to begin receiving alerts.

FindLaw’s “Powered By ACCESSLAW” California Case Law Database

FindLaw.com offers a free California case-law database, powered by ACCESSLAW, which provides coverage of California case law back to 1934 (http://www.findlaw.com/cacases/index.html#dirsearch2). California Appellate and the California Supreme cases can only be searched together. To use the FindLaw.com California case law database (http://www.findlaw.com/cacases/index.html#dirsearch2), scroll down the page to “Powered By ACCESSLAW.”

After you run your search, there will be a results list displaying the summary of the case. Click the case name and then click the Read link to view the full text of the case. Note that you must be logged into your free FindLaw account to view the full text. (To register for a free account, see http://linkon.in/csv4n0.)

You can search by:

• Citation by clicking on the Citation tab or
• by Advanced Search by clicking on its tab.

The Advanced Search menu allows you to search by the following criteria:

1. Keywords and Phrases (full text)
   1. The Boolean operators AND, OR, and the proximity operator NEAR (which places words on the same page, “close together,” according to the help page) can still be used to connect keywords and phrases. Note that the above operators must be in all capital letters; otherwise the search engine will treat them as regular search terms. Even when the connectors appear to be functioning correctly, FindLaw often highlights them in results, as if they were regular search terms. 
   1. To search for an exact phrase, enclose it in quotation marks. (Although this technique will locate cases containing the phrase, the individual terms will also be highlighted in the cases.)
2. Docket Number
3. Party Name
4. Judge Name
5. Attorney Name
6. Cite Check (for an explanation of Cite Check, see the later section with the heading “Is it “Good Law”?).

Cases can also be browsed by date or volume if you scroll down the Advanced Search page. Some other helpful navigational features on FindLaw are the hyper-links that link to any of the California cases that are cited in the case being viewed. This assists a researcher to expand his or her research to related cases. FindLaw’s ACCESSLAW database uses the Boolean connectors “and”, “or” and “not.” If you leave a space between words, it will not understand your request—you must use one of the Boolean connectors. To search for an exact phrase, enclose it in quotation marks.

Once you click on a case result, notice the links labeled Do Another California Case Law Search and Cases Citing This Case. CAVEAT: The Do Another California Case Law Search link does not always appear to work, however, and we have informed FindLaw, so hopefully there will be a fix by the time you read this. 

FindLaw's U.S. Supreme Court, Circuit Courts of Appeals, and         Other State Online Case Law Databases

FindLaw also offers U.S. Supreme Court cases back to 1893 (http://www.findlaw.com/casecode/supreme.html, U.S. Courts of Appeals cases back to 1995 or 1996 (but the First Circuit goes back to 1984), and all fifty state courts’ cases dating back to 1997 (for most states). NOTE: FindLaw has two separate databases for California cases: one that is part of the fifty-state court case law database (which only goes back to 1997) and the ACCESSLAW one discussed in the prior paragraph. You will want to use ACCESSLAW, not only because it goes back further in time (1934), but because it offers more search capabilities.

To find FindLaw’s U.S. Supreme Court and Circuit Courts of Appeals case law databases and all fifty states’ case law databases select the “Cases & Codes” tab on the upper-left side of FindLaw’s home page at http://lp.findlaw.com and then:

Scroll down to “Browse Cases and Codes”

For the U.S. Supreme Court or any of the Circuit Courts of Appeals, scroll down to “US Courts of Appeals - Opinions & Resources” and select one of the courts.

For one of the state’s courts, scroll down to “State Resources” and select a state. Then, scroll down to “State Court Opinions” and choose the database labeled “From FindLaw.”

FindLaw’s U.S. Supreme Court cases (http://www.findlaw.com/casecode/supreme.html) are searchable by Citation, Full-text, or Party name. For an explanation of how to cite check U.S. Supreme Court cases, see the later section with the heading “Is it “Good Law”?

FindLaw’s Circuit court cases and state cases are searchable by Free Text Search—also known as a full-text search (keywords and phrases-see the explanation of how to search in the section about ACCESSLAW), Party Name Search (although the  Party Name Search states it includes Counsel and Judge Names, only a party name search worked for us), and Docket Number (instead of the Citation search found at the U.S. Supreme Court database). A Date Range can also be added to the preceding searches (the U.S. Supreme Court database does not offer this option). The Circuit and state courts case law search menu also contains a Browse by Court tab, which displays opinions in reverse date order by year/month.

FindLaw adds cases to its database on a daily basis and FindLaw highlights your search terms.

Lexis' Free California Case Law Database Provided at the Court’s Official Site 

A free California case law database is provided by Lexis at the court's California Official Reports Public Access Web site  http://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/CACourts), with coverage back to 1850.

The home page defaults to a Search By Terms page where the researcher uses natural language words or phrases to search for published or unpublished cases (see next illustration).  California Appellate and Supreme Courts can be searched together or separately and a date restriction can be added to the search.  The Search by Terms page is very basic and does not accept Boolean connectors or truncation symbols. Researchers type their research issue into the search box using terms (keywords), phrases, lists, or a “natural language”  sentence (e.g., Where can I find cases about “negligence per se” and also products or goods?).

Although there is a warning that a search will only retrieve the 25 most relevant cases, test searches retrieved varying numbers of results higher than 25 and up to 100. Results are displayed in the Cite View, which shows the citation and our search terms highlighted within partial sentences.  This view can be switched to Full, KWIC (KWIC stands for “keywords in context” so each case result will be displayed with 25 words on either side of our keywords), or Custom.  (For example, case results could be displayed with a citation only or with a citation and the counsel names only.  There are over twenty custom display options.) Results can be Sorted By either Relevance or Date. The Focus search allows a researcher to enter one or more keywords or phrases to re-run the search within the current search results (to narrow down the search further).

When a case is being viewed, colored “treatment” flags indicate how other cases have treated your case (e.g., positive, negative, etc., treatment). The green plus sign indicates there is positive treatment of this case.  If researchers click the plus sign, however, they are shown this message: “ERROR: Shepard’s is not available to you under your current subscription agreement.”  Nevertheless, the treatment flags are a valuable editorial enhancement to this database, as they let a researcher know whether a case is likely to be good law. 

On the left-hand column of the search page for both Terms (natural language) or Terms and Connectors, there are additional search options: By Citation (official only), By Party Name (plaintiff or defendant or both), By Judge, and Advanced.  The Advanced search link will take you to a Search By Terms & Connectors page that looks almost identical to the Search by Terms (natural language) screen.  The only difference is that the search box, now labeled Search for Opinions by Terms & Connectors, will accept Boolean operators with your search terms. 

Although Lexis has provided some helpful tips for Terms and Connectors searching, you must first run a search to view them (by clicking Advanced), so we will provide a brief overview here.  The Terms and Connectors searching on this site functions similarly to the pay Lexis databases.  The basic connectors and, or and and not are available, as are several proximity connectors, such as w/n (within n words of the next word or phrase) w/s (within the same sentence as), w/p (within the same paragraph as), and w/seg (within the same segment as).  And not can also be combined with the proximity connectors for even more advanced searching.  In addition, several search commands, such as atleast, allcaps, caps, nocaps, plural and singular are available to researchers.  And finally, the wildcard symbols ( ! ) and ( * ) can be used in Terms and Connectors searching (but not in a natural language search).  The Boolean and proximity connectors and the search commands are case insensitive.  Note: Although you are not required to enclose phrases in quotation marks in the Terms and Connectors searches (but you are in Terms--natural language searches), our test searches show that it is a good idea to always put them in quotation marks, both in natural language and Terms and Connectors searching. 

Lexis displays the list of case results in reverse chronological order and includes both the case name and the date of the case. Most researchers prefer to look at recent cases first rather than older cases first, thus the reverse chronological order display makes navigating through the list easy.

Is it “Good Law”?

Note that the cases found at these free sites (and even at a court's own official site) are “slip opinions" and may not yet be final. They are subject to clerical corrections, modifications and rehearing. California Court of Appeal slip opinions are subject to a grant of review or to a de-publication order by the California Supreme Court. And, of course, opinions can be overruled or reversed. Thus, before relying on a case, attorneys need to verify that the case is still “good law.” To verify a California ACCESSLAW case at FindLaw, use the Advanced Search menu (http://www.findlaw.com/cacases/index.html#dirsearch2) and enter a citation into the search box labeled “Cite check: Find Cases which cite another case." In the alternative, while reading a California ACCESSLAW case at FindLaw, you can click the link labeled "Cases citing this case." While reading a U.S. Supreme Court case at FindLaw, you can click the link labeled "Cases citing this case: Supreme Court" or "Cases citing this case: Circuit Courts" to learn how your case has been treated by other cases. There is no free FindLaw citator service for the U. S. Courts of Appeals or states other than California.

Google Scholar, however, has a citator feature for all courts. It is the "How cited tab" (displayed to the right of the "View this case" tab) when viewing a Google Scholar case.

None of these free citator services provide editorial treatment. Instead, you will need to read the case to learn how your case has been treated by other cases and whether it's still good law. And, none of the free citators will tell you if an included unpublished case was later affirmed or reversed by a published case. 

Official California State Court Dockets

Case information (dockets) for California Supreme and Appellate Courts can be searched at the official state court site (http://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov). To locate information about specific cases, select the Supreme Court or an individual district (or county if you don’t know its district number) and then beneath "Select a function" click the "Search" button. You can search by docket number, attorney name, law firm, case name, or case caption. From the case summary screen, you can link to docket entries, future scheduled actions, briefs, trial court information (including the name of the trial court judge), request automatic e-mail notification of case actions, etc. You may select which case actions to be notified of including “record on appeal filed, brief filed, calendar notice, disposition, and remittitur issued.”

Justia's Free Federal Docket Web Site 

Justia’s U.S. District Court’s civil case filings and dockets database (http://dockets.justia.com) provides free searching of the federal district court’s civil filings and dockets and and the U.S. Courts of Appeals’ dockets from 2004 to present. This database is updated multiple times per day. This Justia database can’t be searched by keywords and phrases. Instead, it is searched by one or more of the following “field” options: party name, court, date, or lawsuit type. “Lawsuit type” refers to the Nature of the Suit (“NOS”), which is assigned by the court. For example, in the Lawsuit Type search box, you could search by the NOS Airplane Product Liability to search all cases relating to that one topic. You would leave the party name search box empty, but you could narrow down the search with dates or specific federal district courts (e.g. all California Federal District Courts or only the California Federal Central District Court). The database can also be browsed by state, NOS, or case name.

While the opinions and orders noted on the docket sheet are available from Justia, only select underlying pleadings (complaints, answers, etc.) are. Researchers are directed to the government’s pay database, PACER. At PACER, one can also search the dockets of the Bankruptcy Court—something that Justia does not offer.

California Court Forms

Court forms can be browsed by Category, Number, or Name  or searched by Keyword or by Number (http://www.courts.ca.gov/forms.htm). Also, you can view a list of recently changed forms by clicking Latest Changes from the left-hand side column. Most forms are interactive and can be saved and printed.

This article was adapted from the book, “Internet Legal Research on a Budget” by Carole Levitt and Judy Davis (ABA LPD 2014). Reprinted with permission of the American Bar Association. All rights reserved.

The post Free California Internet Legal Research appeared first on Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) in California, MCLE Los Angeles, CLE Orange County, Irvine & San Francisco.

Lawyers looking for evidence need to start thinking about looking "virtually." With increasing amounts of "paperless" information being added to the Internet every minute of every day, there is an increasing chance lawyers could find potentially relevant evidence there. Evidence to prove or refute a point in contention, get the upper hand in a settlement conference, or decide whether to even take a client’s case, might be found in both the near and far reaches of the Internet. Taking a virtual look at the "near reaches" of the Internet means searching the Website of the person or company being researched. More often than not, useful information will be posted there that can be used as evidence. For example, after being attacked by skin-heads, a client learned that his name, address, and picture, along with a call to action to attack him, had been posted on a skin-head organization’s website. When the lawyer accessed the website, the information about his client had been removed. Not willing to give up, he turned to his teenaged nephew who advised him that the old web pages might be stored at the Internet Archive Way Back Machine (archive.org), a non-profit organization that stores old Web pages to preserve virtual history.

Archive.org

While this lawyer did find the incriminating pages at Archive.org, if he had not, this would not have necessarily proven they had never appeared on the skin-head site because: (1) the Internet Archive does not archive every page of every Web site; (2) there is a six to 18-month (or more) delay before pages are archived on the Internet Archive site; and (3) Web site owners can request their site not be archived. If a Web site owner has requested that their site not be archived, this fact appears in the search results at Archive.org. In that case, the lawyer at least would surmise that the site owner had something to hide and could attempt to subpoena the pages from the site owner.

Getting Archive.org Pages Admitted into Evidence

Once a lawyer finds evidence on an Internet Web site, the next step is to get the pages admitted into evidence. Getting Internet evidence admitted should be no different than getting other traditional evidence admitted: it must be (1) relevant; (2) authentic; and (3) admissible. But, getting pages into evidence from the Archive.org, in particular, may prove more difficult than getting pages from other Web sites (which are currently on the Web), into evidence.

In the skin head beating case, it would seem obvious that the evidence is relevant. Showing that the evidence was authentic could be accomplished by pointing to an unreported case, Telewizja Polska USA, Inc. v. Echostar Satellite, Case No. 02C3293 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 15, 2004), available at http://www.scribd.com/doc/45878902/Telewizja-Polska-Internet-Archive-Case (see pages 13-15 of the document), where federal court Magistrate Keys, in a motion in limine, rejected defendant’s claim thatWweb pages from the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine were unreliable. Instead, the Magistrate found that Federal Rules of Evidence Rule 901 "requires only a prima facie showing of genuineness and leaves it to the jury to determine the true authenticity…"of the archived Web pages. The Magistrate also explained that the Internet Archive Web pages were: 

• not hearsay
• not “statements” but merely images and text showing what the Web site once looked like
• admissions by a party-opponent.

Everything we have read about the Telewijza Polska case cites to the Magistrate's reasoning, except for one article that asserts that District Court Judge Ronald Guzman overruled Magistrate Keys' findings at the actual trial, Telewizja Polska USA, Inc. v. Echostar Satellite, Case No. 03293 (N.D. Ill. 2004). Strangely enough, the article is from Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wayback_Machine#Telewizja_Polska), not necessarily considered a trusted source. The Wikipedia article offers no citation to back up its assertion that Judge Guzman overruled Magistrate Keys. In fact, the only citation is to an article in the Journal of Internet Law that only cites to the Magistrate's decision.

After sifting through many documents at Pacer, we were unable to find the judge's overruling opinion, but we were informed by an attorney at one of our seminars that he had confirmed the Wikipedia assertions by phoning one of the attorneys involved in the case.

This is what the Wikipedia article stated Judge Guzman held:

• The Internet Archive employee’s affidavit and underlying Web pages (Telewizja Polska Web site) were not admissible as evidence.
• The employee's affidavit contained hearsay and inconclusive supporting statements.
• The purported Web page printouts were not self-authenticating.

Be Sure to Authenticate Evidence From the Internet

As an attorney attempting to authenticate evidence from the Internet, it is important to prove when the research was done. This can be accomplished by having the researcher sign a declaration explaining how, and on what date, the researcher found the Web page evidence on the Internet. To further authenticate the evidence from a Web site, the web page should be printed out--with the URL listed. It would also be advisable to print any page on the Web site that indicates who owns the site. This is usually found on the "About Us" page. (Searching a domain registry, such as Betterwhois.com, to verify ownership is not necessarily going to yield the true owner of the Web site because domain registries do not verify that real names are used.)

Admissability of Archive.org Pages

Because Telewizja Polska is an unreported case (and not binding on other courts) and because the Judge and the Magistrate came to opposite conclusions as noted above, we do not have a definitive answer as to whether pages from the Archive.org could overcome hearsay objections. As to the admissibility of pages other than Archive.org being admitted into evidence, it will vary from judge to judge.

Even Judges are now Using the Internet to Make Judicial Decisions

As recently as 1999, a district court cautioned against relying on data from the Internet as "voodoo information." St. Clair v. Johnny’s Oyster & Shrimp, 76 F. Supp. 2d 773, 775 (S.D. Tex. 1999). Fortunately, today, not only are judges admitting information from the Internet into evidence (as illustrated by the Telewizja case), but judges are even conducting their own Internet research to help make judicial decisions. For example, in a recent Indiana decision, the court was incredulous that the plaintiff failed to "Google" the missing defendant as part of his due diligence process. The court noted that the investigative technique of merely calling directory assistance to find a missing defendant has gone "the way of the horse and buggy and the eight track stereo" as a consequence of the Internet. The court upheld the defendant’s claim of insufficient service of process and affirmed the dismissal of the case. The court stated, "We do note that there is no evidence in this case of a public records or Internet search for Groce…to find him. In fact, we [the judge] discovered, upon entering 'Joe Groce Indiana' into the Google™ search engine, an address for Groce that differed from either address used in this case, as well as an apparent obituary for Groce’s mother that listed numerous surviving relatives who might have known his whereabouts." Munster v. Groce, 829 N.E.2d 52 (Ind. App. 2005) available at http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/indianastatecases/app/06080501mpb.pdf. On appeal, the plaintiff could argue that there was no proof that the data found by the judge had been available on the Internet at the time plaintiff searched for the defendant.

In Dubois v. Butler, Case nos. 4d04-3559 and 4d04-3561 (FL App, 2005) available at http://caselaw.findlaw.com/fl-district-court-of-appeal/1028016.html, the court noted as a consequence of the internet that the investigative technique of merely calling directory assistance to find a missing defendant has gone "the way of the horse and buggy and the eight track stereo." The court quashed the service of process and dismissed the case.

In another recent case, the Louisiana Appeals court upheld a decision in which the trial court nullified a government tax sale because the original tax-delinquent owner would have been "reasonably identifiable" and locatable if the government had run a simple "Internet search" to "locate the named mortgagee." It was the trial court judge who conducted an Internet search and determined that the owner was "reasonably identifiable." Part of the basis of the appeal was whether or not it was appropriate for the judge to conduct such a search at all to determine this. The Appeals court dismissed this argument, saying "Nevertheless, we find any error the trial court may have committed by conducting the internet search is harmless, because the trial court's ultimate conclusion that the tax sale violated Dr. Weatherly's due process rights is legally correct." Weatherly v. Optimum Asset Management, 928 So.2d 118 (La. App. 2005), available at http://www.la-fcca.org/Opinions/PUB2005/2005-12/2004CA2734Dec2005.Pub.10.pdf.

Look Beyond the Near Reaches of the Internet: Social Networking Sites, Blogs, Podcasts & Videos

To find potentially relevant evidence, lawyers also need to look beyond the near reaches of the Internet, which would be a person or company’s Web site, and into the far reaches of the Internet. Some of the "far reaches" could include new types of Web content such as social network sites (myspace.com or facebook.com) or blogs (http://blogsearch.google.com), podcasts (Podcast Alley), and videos (youtube.com).

People often drop their guard when they are posting to these types of sites. Not only can their written words be readily displayed to a jury, but so can their behavior, attitude, or tone of voice, all heard or viewed from an audio or video tape, or a still picture placed on the Internet. For instance, Hugh Foskett might have had a better chance at winning the Seattle’s 43rd district state house seat in 2006, if pictures from his facebook.com page, showing behavior unbecoming to a candidate, had not been publicized. (Social networking sites are no longer “just for kids.” All ages are beginning to add their profiles and pictures.)

Look Beyond the Near Reaches of the Internet: Dating & Reunion Web Sites and Google Groups

Lawyers should also look to other far reaches of the Internet not traditionally thought of as useful to serious researchers, such as dating sites (match.com), reunion sites (classmates.com) and discussion groups such as those searchable at Google Groups—all places where people post personal information. A divorce lawyer shared an incident where, at a settlement conference, they were proffered embarrassing information that their client had posted to a dating Web site. Admissibility was not at issue, since the parties were not at trial, and in fact, admissibility was not really the husband’s goal. Simply gaining the upper hand or unsettling the wife was the goal, which apparently was met.

Learning that your client was on methadone might be an important piece of evidence in a case where your client allegedly caused an accident. If your client failed to inform you of this, searching the client’s name at Google Groups might reveal this interesting fact if the client participated in online discussions and divulged such information (in our case, the person was on a migraine headache discussion group and mentioned his methadone maintenance in passing).

Do People Post Using Their Real Names?

It's important to remember that many people do not use their real names when posting to discussion groups. In those cases, searching by the poster's e-mail address might yield more useful results, assuming you know their e-mail address (or addresses). In contrast, people posting profiles at classmates.com do tend to use their real names—since they are trying to hook up with former friends. Thus, classmates.com is a perfect place to search for evidence. At Classmates.com, people often post information about where they work (or worked), attended school, or served in the military. These are the bits and pieces of information that might be the very evidence a lawyer is looking for.

Finding Information From Different File Formats Posted to the Web

Lawyers can sometimes unearth evidence from a PowerPoint presentation, an Excel spreadsheet, or a Word document posted to the Internet. By using Google.com’s advanced search page, a search can be limited to one of these file formats. While evidence from a PowerPoint presentation might show up in the PowerPoint slide, be sure to view the presentation in the “editing” mode to read the presenter’s outline and notes—where more evidence might be lurking.

Have Potential Evidence Automatically Collected and Delivered to Your E-mail In-box

Attorneys can even have potential evidence automatically collected and delivered to their email in-box by using Google's Alert service (http://www.google.com/alerts). While Google Alerts originally monitored only news based on the researcher’s key words (e.g., a topic, a company name, or a person’s name), monitoring has been expanded to Web sites, Google Groups, and most recently to Blogs. Thus, if the topic, the person, or the company one is gathering evidence about is mentioned in the news, on a Web site, in a Google Group discussion e-mail, or on a blog, attorneys will be automatically alerted and can add the information to their pot of evidence.

Conclusion

As useful as the Internet is in helping to find evidence, it cannot be expected to show how the evidence is relevant or how to authenticate it and get it admitted into evidence. That’s still your job!

The post Looking For Evidence in Virtual Places Admissibility of Internet Evidence appeared first on Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) in California, MCLE Los Angeles, CLE Orange County, Irvine & San Francisco.

On July 6, 2000, LexisONE debuted an ALL FREE FULL TEXT, KEY WORD case research web site. Search strategies are identical to its pay site. For example, you can use boolean connectors—“and”, “or” or “not” to connect words and phrases, and you can search by judge, counsel or party name, besides citation, of course. Date limitations are also possible.

The post LexisONE.com vs. Lexis appeared first on Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) in California, MCLE Los Angeles, CLE Orange County, Irvine & San Francisco.

by Carole Levitt J.D., M.L.S.

California Attorneys and Paralegals can earn one hour of Self-Study Legal Ethics MCLE credit by submitting this quiz after reading this article.

Most attorneys are familiar with the term “neti-quette,” which is the code of proper behavior online. Basic netiquette applies as much to the legal professional as it does to a lay person, but more specific rules have been crafted to guide the online behavior of attorneys. As early as 1996, many state bar associations began issuing opinions on Internet ethics, often focusing on law firm Web sites. Most of the rules and opinions relating to online communications apply the advertising rules that already exist for print advertising. The State Bar of California has issued only one opinion on Web site ethics. The principles behind the opinion, which was issued in 2001, may be applied to other online forms of communication, including e-mail, URLs and domain names, e-mail addresses, online articles, discussion groups, and chat rooms.

Share this artice:       
  

Formal Opinion No. 2001-155 of the State Bar of California Standing Committee on Professional Responsibility and Conduct deals specifically with the ethical issues attorneys must address when creating and displaying Web sites relating to their law practice. The specific question that COPRAC addressed was, “What aspects of professional responsibility and conduct must an attorney consider when providing an Internet website containing information for the public about her availability for professional employment?”

In a nutshell, the opinion views Web sites as a “communication” under Rule 1-400(A) of the California Rules of Professional Conduct and an “advertisement” under Business and Professions Code Sections 6157 to 6158.3. Consequently, the text, images, and sounds on an attorney’s Web site cannot be false, misleading, or deceptive. Surprisingly, Web sites are not considered to be a solicitation under Rule 1-400(B), even in a situation in which a potential client can e-mail a specific attorney directly from the site. Attorneys are warned, however, that their Web sites may be subject to another jurisdiction’s regulations and may also be considered the unauthorized practice of law in that jurisdiction. To avoid being regulated by another jurisdiction or facing an accusation of unauthorized practice of law, COPRAC suggests that attorneys use a disclaimer on the site stating that they are advertising only in California and that they do not seek to represent someone based solely on that person’s visit to the Web site. The disclaimer should include a statement indicating where the attorney is licensed, what the attorney practices, where the attorney maintains an office, and in which courts the attorney is willing to appear. Even with these precautions, California attorneys who are licensed or have offices in another state may still may be subject to that state’s rules on Web sites. For this reason, a California firm should know if anyone in the office is licensed outside of California. If someone is, the firm should review the rules of the state or states in which the attorney is licensed. Most of the rules will be found in ethics rules relating to attorney advertising, solicitation, and marketing. (For links to the rules of each state, users may go to http://www.abanet.org.)

To augment the one opinion from the State Bar of California, it is helpful to look to the American Bar Association and other state opinions for guidance. For example, the ABA’s Formal Opinion 99-413 holds that sending unencrypted e-mail does not violate the Model Rules of Professional Conduct. Additionally, COPRAC’s opinion No. 2001-155 does not address whether an attorney’s domain name or e-mail address is also a communication or advertising; other states, however, have answered this question in the affirmative. In Arizona, State Bar Opinion 2001-05 holds that while a firm’s domain name does not have to be identical to the firm’s actual name, the domain name must not be false or misleading. Furthermore, a law firm’s domain name cannot state or imply any special competence or unique affiliations unless the claim is factually true (http:/ /www.azbar.org/EthicsOpinions /Data/01-05.pdf). The opinion also indicates that a for-profit law firm domain name should not use the .org suffix or use a domain name that implies that the law firm is affiliated with a particular nonprofit or governmental entity. Thus, a private firm’s request to call itself arizonalawyer.org was rejected.

It is likely that the California bar would agree with these holdings if presented with the question. For example, if a California attorney were to use domain names such as bestresults.com or bestattorney.com, the act may be considered unethical under Section 6157.2 of the Business and Professions Code, which prohibits any guarantee of outcome, or Section 6157.1, which prohibits false or misleading advertising. It is possible that a naive consumer may assume that an attorney with these domain names is promising to be the best or is guaranteeing the best results. Using the domain name bestattorney.com may also violate ABA Model Rule 7.1, which prohibits using superlatives to distinguish one law firm from another without factual proof. A bankruptcy attorney who uses the domain name paynobills.com can expect to face ethical problems if, for example, the domain name misleads a client who is reorganizing instead of declaring outright bankruptcy.

ABA Model Rule 7.1 also prohibits communications that contain “guarantees, warranties, or predictions regarding the result of the representation.” Thus, advertising past client successes on an attorney’s Web site may be deemed unethical because it may indicate to a potential client that he or she can expect similar results. Personal injury attorneys who use their sites to detail past successes or advertise damage awards may therefore want to reconsider.

What type of graphics or images on an attorney’s site could be considered unethical? Placing a picture of a person on your site that implies that the person is either a member of your firm or is an actual client, when in fact the person is not, may be considered mis-leading. This would violate Rule 1-400, Standard 13, unless you label the photograph as a dramatization.

Keep Copies of Web Pages

Many attorneys do not realize that Rule 1- 400(F) (which dictates that attorneys must retain for two years copies or recordings of any communications they have made by written or electronic media) applies to their Web sites and any revisions of their sites. The easiest way for attorneys to comply with this rule is to simply print a copy of each new or revised page that is added to the Web site and keep all the printouts in a chronological file. Attorneys who prefer less paper could save the HTML files that constitute the Web site on a separate disk or in a separate folder on a hard drive. Attorneys may thereafter make a habit of transferring pages as they are created or revised. For those who have not kept copies of each earlier version of their sites, the omission might be rectified with a visit to the Internet Wayback Machine (http://web.archive.org/collections/web.html). The Internet archive, dating back to 1996, recently made its collection of outdated Web pages available to the public. By entering the firm’s URL into the wayback machine’s search box and clicking the Take Me Back button, attorneys can determine if their Web sites are included in the archive. Attorneys who locate the desired site there can print their old pages and keep them in a paper file in order to satisfy Rule 1-400(f).

Since Web sites are considered communications and advertisements, other online communications may be too. Attorneys’ online communications that do not appear on their Web page could pose ethical problems. For example, many attorneys send e-mail invitations for seminars or e-mail newsletters about an area of law. Should they label the e-mail as an advertisement in the subject line? Probably yes, if one is to extrapolate from regular mail to e-mail. With print materials, attorneys are instructed under Standard 5 of Rule 1-400 that “[n]ewsletters, recent legal development advisories, and similar materials…transmitted in an envelope…shall bear the word ‘Advertisement,’ ‘Newsletter’ or words of similar import on the outside thereof.” A cautious attorney would also apply Rule 1-400 to e-communications. A Tennessee attorney was disbarred when he e-mailed an advertisement about the firm’s immigration services to more than 5,000 Internet groups and thousands of e-mail lists without the required words: “This Is an Advertisement” (see http://www.legalethics.com/?p=355). He also violated several other professional responsibility rules in the same matter.

Attorneys should also consider the ethics of their e-mail signature line or tag line (a signature block that includes “King of Torts,” for example, is probably not a good idea). An attorney’s e-mail signature should not include anything that could be interpreted as false, deceptive, or tending to confuse or mislead the public.

Another ethics issue for attorneys online is giving legal advice or soliciting clients in chat rooms or discussion groups. The Florida Bar Standing Committee on Advertising held (http://www.floridabar.org/TFB/TFBETOpin.nsf/ca2dcdaa853ef7b885256728004f87db/2636a9893f38296385256b2f006c8a6b?OpenDocument) that “[a]n attorney may not solicit prospective clients through Internet chat rooms, defined as real time communications between computer users.” Thankfully for attorneys who write for magazines, articles that are published online—with or without the author’s knowledge—are probably protected by the First Amendment. If someone in or out of state reads the article and relies upon the information to his or her detriment, the attorney author may not be liable for either the unauthorized practice of law or malpractice. This ethical area becomes more problematic, however, when attorneys begin expressing their opinions in chat rooms or discussion groups that feature, as most do, two-way communication.

The ethical principles that apply to attorney advertising and communications in older media may serve as a guide for attorneys seeking to avoid ethics difficulties online. Attorneys and firms should keep copies of their Web sites (including every different page) and consider the ethical ramifications of their e-mail content, domain names, e-mail addresses, and discussion group and chat room posts. Finally, it pays to observe common netiquette. The Tennessee attorney, for example, violated it by spamming (i.e., sending out an unsolicited e-mail message to many recipients), thus drawing complaints from offended computer users. One’s manners online can matter just as much as they do in person.

The post Internet Ethics and Netiquette for Attorneys and Law Firms appeared first on Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) in California, MCLE Los Angeles, CLE Orange County, Irvine & San Francisco.

Unfortunately, many law firms are canceling their print subscriptions (if they even had them to begin with) and relying on online sources, whether pay or free. When it comes to using free websites, however, annotated codes are simply not in the picture. That’s the bad news. The good news though is that the free unannotated codes are full-text searchable and easy to use.

This article will discuss where to find and research the United States Code, which is found in three sites:

• Federal Digital System (FDsys) at http://linkon.in/y2uMZC
• Cornell’s Legal Information Institute (Cornell LII) at http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text
• Office of the Law Revision Counsel’s United States Code Online (OLRC) at http://uscode.house.gov/browse.xhtml

United States Code (U.S.C.): Three Sites Compared

Although the OLRC site is now the “official” Web site for the United States Code Online, only the OLRC’s print version of the U.S.C. is the “official” document (published every six years). All three Web sites use the online OLRC version of the U.S.C. to create their online searchable databases. While it may seem redundant to have three databases, each is unique in terms of its search and updating features, and also dates of coverage. Thus, deciding which database to search will change from time to time, depending on your needs.

If a researcher wants to use the most up-to-date U.S.C., the OLRC United States Code Online version is a better choice over FDsys and Cornell. The OLRC site states that it updates the U.S.C. throughout a congressional session on an ongoing basis instead of delaying the update process until the end of the session. FDsys and Cornell do not make any representations about their currency. OLRC’s currency information is found by selecting the Currency and Updating tab in the left-hand column of any page on the OLRC site.

For those who want to conduct a retrospective U.S.C. search, the OLRC site or FDsys are the best choices because they date back to the 1994 edition. Cornell only has the current version of the U.S.C.

For those who prefer to jump back and forth between sections (offering the look and feel of browsing a book), the OLRC or Cornell versions will work best.

Sometimes a researcher only knows the “popular” name of an act--e.g., the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO)—rather than the citation or other information. The best choices for those who prefer to browse through lists of popular names would be Cornell’s Table of Popular Names feature (http://www.law.cornell.edu/topn/0) or the OLRC’s Popular Name Tool (http://uscode.house.gov/popularnames/popularnames.htm). For those who prefer to keyword search popular names, the best choice would be FDsys, which offers a Short Title search criteria option of its U.S.C. Collection from the Advanced Search page.

Searching the OLRC United States Code Online

The newly updated ORLC United States Code Online has many helpful search features. The home page (http://uscode.house.gov/browse.xhtml) offers boxes to search the U.S.C. by keyword as well as by title and section number. Underneath the search boxes are a table of contents with links to browse the Code.

You can perform a citation search by using the Jump To boxes on the home page. To do this, leave the keyword search box empty and fill in the title and section number that you want to retrieve. Even if you only know the section number but not the title, you can enter just that number in the Section box to retrieve any section with that number found within the Code. (Note that you cannot do the reverse; searching for just a title number without a section number will retrieve no results.)

Your search results will appear in a pop-up box (unlike keyword searches, where the results appear on a regular page of the site). If your search retrieved more than one section, you can browse through the different sections by using the arrow tools at the top of the screen, as shown in the illustration below. Note that the forward and backward arrows serve a different function than the Next and Previous links underneath them. The arrows allow you to browse through your search results (1 U.S.C. 101, 2 U.S.C. 101, etc.). Next and Previous jump to the next section in the code (1 U.S.C. 101, 1 U.S.C. 102, etc.). You can use these links, along with the Title number and Chapter number links to browse the code.

Caveat: the results in the pop-up box do not always appear in numerical order. For example, although entering 101 into the Section box will retrieve all sections numbered 101, the browsing arrows might jump from 1 U.S.C. 101 to 4 U.S.C. 101, and then back to 3 U.S.C. 101, etc.

A sidebar on the left side of the screen provides links to Currency and Updating information, Classification Tables, the Popular Name Tool, and Other Tables and Tools, as well as resources to help understand various aspects of the Code and the functions of the Office. A Downloads link leads to a page with downloadable files for the most current updates or “release points” of the United States Code. At the bottom of the sidebar are links to FDsys and to Thomas (despite the fact that the link says "Thomas," you are automatically redirected to Congress.gov).

OLRC site also provides a handy Advanced Search Options page at http://uscode.house.gov/advancedSearch.xhtml. Among other options, you can choose which version of the U.S.C. to search back to 1994, which title(s) or section(s) to search within, which fields to search, including text, citation, heading, future amendments, and more. Links in the upper right corner of the page allow the user to specify Preferences such as the number of search results per page, the search results view (context or citation), and the sorting order (code number or relevance).

The OLRC Help Searching the United States Code page (http://uscode.house.gov/static/help.html) explains specific searching and browsing options available on this site.

The OLRC can be searched by Simple Searches, which search the entire text of the code for the best match containing all your search terms. Phrases may be searched by enclosing them in quotation marks.

The help page also describes the operation of the site’s search engine and includes tips for the use of Boolean connectors, wildcards and order of operations. Boolean connectors—AND, OR, NOT—and proximity connectors—NEAR/ (e.g., alien NEAR/3 homeland) ADJ (adjacent; e.g., alien ADJ homeland), BEFORE/ (e.g., alien BEFORE/6 homeland)—may be employed to refine the search. (The "and" operator by default has precedence over "or," but you can override the default order by using parentheses.)

The OLRC offers two types of wildcard searches; one uses question marks and the other uses an asterisk. Each question mark wildcard symbol represents one character. For example typing int??city into the search box indicates a search for any word that begins with int, is followed by any two characters, and then ends with city. The search results might include the words intercity or intracity, or both words. An asterisk wildcard indicates an unlimited number of characters. For example, a search for child* would return search results that include child, child’s, children, childish, etc. Other helpful hints explain case-sensitive searches, locating executive orders and presidential proclamations, document browser help, and special keyboard navigation functions.

If researchers do not want to conduct a keyword search of the entire U.S.C., they can also keyword search within a particular Title, Section, etc., or a combination of any of the available criteria. For example, in the next illustration, the number 42 was entered into the Title search box, restricting that search to Title 42 only.

Some other useful features of the OLRC include:

• The ability to download portions of the Code (by Title, Section, etc.) by selecting Downloads from the home page side bar;
• Various classification tables (discussed in more detail below) to help researchers find sections of the Code that have been recently affected by newly enacted laws or to translate specific citations of Public Laws and Statutes At Large into their current U.S.C. citation; and
• The ability to find sections containing references to a specific title and section using the Advanced Search (although this is a very imprecise type of search).

Updating the OLRC United States Code Online

Although a previous resource known as USCprelim used to provide preliminary release updates, the OLRC no longer provides this resource. The OLRC’s Currency and Updating page (use this URL: http://uscode.house.gov/currency/currency.shtml) now states that “If the section has been affected by any laws enacted after [the currency] date, those laws will appear in a list of ‘Pending Updates.’ If there are no pending updates listed, the section is current as shown.” According to the OLRC United States Code Online’s Currency and Updating page, (http://uscode.house.gov/currency/currency.shtml), as of August 28, 2013, for example, all Titles in the United States Code Online (http://uscode.house.gov/) are current through Pub. L. 113-31. The currency information on this page is updated as the code is updated. One can also consult the U.S.C. classification tables to be sure of the latest laws that affect the Code.

Near the top-left corner of every section of the OLRC version of the U.S.C. is a date and a statement that the text contains those laws in effect as of the date shown. See the illustration below. If the section has been affected by any laws enacted after that date, those laws will appear in a list of "Pending Updates." If there are no pending updates listed, the section is current as shown.

When present, the list of pending updates provides the public law numbers of each law affecting the section in some way—either the text of the section, a statutory note set out under the section, or a table of contents preceding the section. Following the list of pending updates is a View Details link that provides more specific information about how each new law has affected the section.

The Classification Tables (http://linkon.in/Hmnmnx) can also be used to find the latest laws affecting the Code. The Classification Tables indicate which sections of the Code have been affected by recently enacted laws. They show where the newly enacted laws and amendments will eventually appear in the U.S.C. The user can view the tables either in Public Law order or in U.S. Code order. The text of public laws listed as Pending Updates or appearing in the Classification Tables can be found in a number of sources, such as the Government Printing Office’s FDSys (Federal Digital System) or Congress.gov.

Searching the Cornell LII U.S.C. Database

Cornell LII (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text) has made some improvements to its recent site redesign. The link to the Table of Popular Names has returned to the main page of the U.S.C. database (see the next illustration), along with a link to the Parallel Table of Authorities.

A researcher can browse a numerical list of Titles, perform a Quick search by citation (by Title and Section), or enter keywords/phrases into the Search US Code search box (on the right-hand side of the page). In the redesigned version, the Keyword search of a specific Title has been eliminated, unfortunately. (But you can conduct that type of search at OLRC United States Code Online site, as described earlier.)

How to Keyword/Phrase Search Cornell LII’s U.S.C.

Cornell’s U.S.C. database (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text) does not offer as sophisticated Boolean and proximity searching as the OLRC and FDsys sites do. To keyword search Cornell’s U.S.C. database, use the Boolean connectors AND, OR, NOT (AND is the default, so there is no need to type it in—simply leave spaces between words). Phrase searching is allowed (surround phrases by quotation marks).

How to Navigate through Cornell LII’s U.S.C. Results

After you select a Title to browse (or after you have conducted a keyword/phrase search), the currency of the Title is shown (e.g., “Current through Pub. L. 113-31”). This is the same currency as the OLRC United States Code Online. There is a link to the Public Laws of the Current Congress that goes to the most recent Public Laws pages on Thomas. Selecting the Updates tab will show recent classification updates for the section you are viewing, as well as the date for the most recent update of which LII is aware. An empty table under this tab indicates that there are no relevant changes in the classification tables. Selecting the Notes tab will provide general background notes about the Title you are reading (Title 14, for example).

Updating the Cornell LII U.S.C. Database

After you click the Updates tab, the Sections that have Updates Pending will be displayed. If you want to read the change, then click on the Public Law link or the Statutes at Large link.

Linking to CFR Parallel Authorities from the Cornell LII U.S.C. Database

One of the most useful features of Cornell LII’s U.S.C. database (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/) is the ability to automatically link to the rules and regulations in the CFR that relate to the U.S.C. section being viewed. This feature is activated by clicking on the Authorities (CFR) tab noted on the preceding illustration. If there are any related authorities, they will be displayed at the bottom of the screen.

Note that the U.S. Code title and section numbers and the CFR parallel authority title and section numbers do not always match up as in the above illustration, but they are, nevertheless, related. Sometimes you will see a completely different Title number.

Searching the FDsys United States Code Database

FDsys researchers can keyword or phrase search through all of FDsys’s Collections from the search box on FDsys’s home page (this is called a “Simple” search) at http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/search/home.action or use the Advanced at http://linkon.in/y2uMZC. Researchers can also browse Collections or retrieve a document by citation via links available on the home page.

Whether you are performing a simple or Advanced Search, you can create simple or complex queries. We will highlight some of the search queries available at FDsys, but for more detailed information and examples, see the FDsys Help page (http://linkon.in/I6uqKF). According to the documentation at FDsys, its simple queries are similar to “typical search engine such as Google” because FDsys uses the same Boolean connectors (AND, OR, -) and phrase searching (using quotation marks) as Google. There are some differences, though: (1) FDsys researchers can use the Boolean connector AND or leave a space in between words (but Google scolds you if you type AND in between words), (2) Boolean connectors are case insensitive at FDsys (while the OR Boolean connector must be in uppercase at Google), (3) FDsys researchers can also use NOT instead of the minus ( - ) sign--they are interchangeable at FDsys (but not at Google), and (4) FDsys allows for additional types of complex queries not found at Google such as:

• Proximity connectors (near/#, adj, before/#)
  • adj specifies that one word is adjacent to another
  • before/# ( e.g., handgun before/3 protection) specifies that the first word is within whatever number of words that you select of the second word and that the first word must precede the second word
  • near/# (e.g., handgun near/10 protection) specifies that the first word is within whatever number of words that you select of the second word and in any order
• Wildcards, which are indicated by the:
  • question mark symbol (?) to replace one character before, within, or after a search term need example.
  • asterisk symbol ( * ) to replace one or more characters before, within, or after a search term.
  • Typing int*city into the search box indicates a search for any word that begins with int, is followed by any two characters, and then ends with city. The search results might include the words intercity or intracity, or both words.

If we will run a search for “water pollution,” for example, the search results page would show links to U.S.C. sections from different years. If you only want the most recent version of the Code displayed, click the Show only recent editions link.

We can further refine our search by clicking on links in the left-hand column, such as Government Author, Organization, and Date Published. By clicking the See more link in the Dates Published section, you can see results back to 1994.

Clicking the More information link, found with each result, displays Metadata. Metadata refers to information about the document. For example, the Metadata for our “water pollution” search results informs us that this Title of the U.S.C. (33) is not positive law, that the section’s Public Law number is Pub. L. 92-500, §2, its date is October 18, 1972, and its Statutes at Large citation is 86 Stat. 828.

This article was adapted from the book, “Internet Legal Research on a Budget” by Carole Levitt and Judy Davis (ABA LPD 2014). Reprinted with permission of the American Bar Association. All rights reserved.

The post How to Research the U.S. Code Online appeared first on Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) in California, MCLE Los Angeles, CLE Orange County, Irvine & San Francisco.

Search engines have evolved. They still locate information on Web sites, but they have expanded the type and amount of materials indexed and added new tools, all of which can assist attorneys in their online research and in their practice in general. For example, a desktop search tool (Google, Yahoo, Alta Vista, and MSN offer them for free) can assist attorneys in their practice simply by helping them find documents on their local hard drives. In addition, there are a number of tools that, for a price, will search in a networked enterprise environment, and Google has recently introduced a desktop tool that can search multiple computers.

Desktop search tools can save time. Windows users who search for a document among their Word files using the “Search for files” feature in the Start menu, only to learn after many frustrating searches that the desired document is in an e-mail message, can benefit from one of the new desktop search tools. Google’s desktop search engine creates an index of documents on a computer’s hard drive and maintains cached versions of the documents as the user makes changes. Other desktop search tools function in a similar manner. Google’s desktop search tool conducts its searches on its index of the local hard drive, which includes Word documents, Excel spreadsheets, Power Point presentations, Outlook e-mail, Web history, chats, and even Web pages previously visited but not currently online. Desktop search tools may even find the sought passage in deleted documents, as long as they are still in the Recycle bin. The desktop tool searches more quickly than the “Search for files” feature because it uses an index, not the files themselves. (The “Search for file” feature searches each word of each document.) Desktop search tools also permit more targeted searches than the “Search for File” feature because they permit users to add Boolean connectors to search words.

Downloading and installing Google’s desktop search tool takes only seconds with a high-speed connection. Once the download is complete, an icon appears on the computer’s desktop labeled Desktop Setup.exe. Double click on this to begin the installation. The user is given the opportunity to opt out of providing Google with non-identifying search usage information and can set other preferences. After the installation is complete, documents on the user’s hard drive will be indexed (this will happen behind the scenes). To use the Google Desktop Search, double click the icon that appears on the desktop. The Google Desktop Search page appears, looking very similar to the Google search engine page. Enter key words or phrases (with or without Boolean connectors) into the search box and select Search Desktop.

Attorneys need to consider some security issues before installing a desktop search tool. Typically, a desktop search tool runs simultaneously with a regular Web search and displays summaries of documents from the local hard drive and the Web. Anyone who uses the computer to search will view results from the local hard drive. This could expose a client’s confidential information. However, there is a way to switch off this preference when first installing the desktop search tool. In a network environment, users should check with the firm’s IT staff prior to installation.

Tool Bars Some search engines (Google, Alta Vista, and Yahoo) have created specialized tool bars that allow a searcher to perform a Web search no matter what Web page they are visiting. Generally free, tool bars seamlessly integrate with a Web browser and are easily downloaded and installed.

The Google Tool bar, for example, allows one to:

• Conduct a Google search from any Web page.
• Search only the pages of the site being viewed.
• Highlight search terms on the Web page—each word is highlighted in its own color and the highlighter can be turned on and off.
• Block pop-ups.
• Complete Web forms with information that is saved securely on the local computer.
• Post links to blogs.

Alta Vista’s tool bar (at altavista.com/toolbar) features a Translate tab, which when clicked translates a Web page into one of 10 languages. Yahoo’s tool bar can be downloaded from its home page. Internet search tool bars can help attorneys speed up their online research, first by saving them from the extra step of going to a search engine’s home page before searching, and second by allowing them to scan results more quickly by using the highlighter feature. Competition may also keep improvements coming.

Google offers an easy way to retrieve phone numbers and addresses from its database. The search engine has added street addresses and phone numbers (for residences and businesses) to standard Google search results. The phone numbers and addresses are limited to published U.S. phone listings. Phone number and address results are displayed at the top of results pages. Residential results have a phone icon to the left, while business results feature a compass icon to their left.

To retrieve business listings, type the business name, city, and state into the Google search box. The business’s zip code can be substituted for the city and state. To retrieve residential listings, users can type any of the following combinations into the Google search box: first name (or initial), last name, city; first name (or initial), last name, state; first name (or initial), last name, area code; first name (or initial), last name, zip code; last name, city, state; or last name, zip code. A reverse search can be conducted to retrieve a complete listing for a business or residence by entering only the area code and phone number. A free search may be all that is needed to find someone.

Google’s Glossary allows attorneys to quickly find the definition for a word. Type the word “define” and the word to be defined into the google query box (e.g., define clew). A definition of the word is displayed along with Google’s regular results page. To find multiple definitions of a word, use this search format— define:clew.

Google and Yahoo offer free alert services. These services allow a user to be notified by e-mail when a Web site or a news article is placed online that contains matches to the user’s chosen topics. Notification can be on a daily or as-it-happens basis. Yahoo’s My Web service allows a user to keep track of Web pages visited by saving specific pages or links to them and assigning key words or tags to those pages in order to group similar pages together. Yahoo also allows for sharing lists of saved pages and tags with a group of other My Web users (all or a select group). The service is free, but it does require setting up a Yahoo account. Anyone who has a Yahoo e-mail address has a Yahoo account.

Indexing More File Formats

Google was the first major search engine to index non-HTML files (including Word and Excel documents, Power Point presentations, and PDFs) that until then had been relegated to obscurity. Recently additional search engines have begun to index more file formats. Not only does this provide searchers with more results but also sometimes more useful results. For example, one may want to search for a Power Point presentation about a new law rather than an article on the topic. Google, Yahoo, and Alta Vista index Power Point files; using a search engine’s Advanced Search page, a user can limit the results to Power Point documents and not have to sift through results.

Until recently, Google had very little competition, but recently Yahoo Search and MSN Search have made impressive progress. In mid-2004, Google claimed to have indexed nearly 8.2 billion pages of the Internet. (No independent confirmation of this self-reported number is available.) In late 2005, after attempting to refute Yahoo’s claim that it had indexed more than 20 billion pages, Google removed the reference to the size of its index from its home page.

In February 2004, Yahoo implemented a new search index reportedly based on an index and spidering technology created by Inktomi, which Yahoo had acquired in 2002. Previously, Yahoo had been receiving its Web search results from Google. Yahoo’s new index is returning relevant, high quality results—many of which are very similar to Google results. In an August 2005 posting to the Yahoo Search Blog, Yahoo claimed that its search index had grown “to over 20 billion items…[that] includes just over 19.2 billion web documents, 1.6 billion images, and over 50 million audio and video files.” Because no definitive evidence is available, searchers have to take Yahoo’s word for it. (Some veteran search engine watchers have not embraced that claim.)

Google has created a separate search engine that searches only blogs (blogsearch.google.com). Blogs can be an excellent source of news, commentary, and public opinion on companies and their products. At the blog search site users will find the standard search term box and a link to the Advanced Blog Search. Some search engines, including Google, also include blogs in their standard search results. Users may therefore opt for results that include blogs and results that refer only to blogs.

Finally, attorneys who are too busy to stay informed about the advances that search engines are making can visit Searchenginewatch.com for news and information. Another way to learn about new search engine features and tools is by browsing a search engine’s help pages. For those who are curious about future Google features, Google Labs (labs.google.com) offers a preview. According to Google, this site “showcases a few of our favorite ideas that aren’t quite ready for prime time.”

Taking the time to learn about new tools will save attorneys time in the long run.

The post Established Search Engines Offer More than Just Traditional Search Features appeared first on Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) in California, MCLE Los Angeles, CLE Orange County, Irvine & San Francisco.

The post Metadata Can Expose Lawyers to Ethical Concerns appeared first on Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) in California, MCLE Los Angeles, CLE Orange County, Irvine & San Francisco.

If you still think that Spam is a pork product that comes in a can, or that phishing requires not just a hook, but also a rod and reel, or that pharming involves working the land and growing crops, then this glossary can help you understand the evening news, the morning paper, conversations around the water cooler, and cocktail party talk without having to go to one of those technical colleges that advertises on TV in the middle of the night.

The post Geek Speak for the Rest of Us – A Technology Glossary for Non-Technical People appeared first on Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) in California, MCLE Los Angeles, CLE Orange County, Irvine & San Francisco.

Share this article:          

The term "public record" has always been VERY misleading. Even though a record is "public" and available for public scrutiny in the strictest sense, in reality it may not be readily available. The availability of numerous public records via the Internet has addressed some of the accessibility issues, but just as it's always been in the "offline" world, access to free public records via the web is a hit or miss proposition.

What's available varies greatly from state to state, with many states differing greatly on what is and is not considered "public". For example, until recently some states, such as Tennessee, considered driving records to be "public" while others, such as California, did not. The US Supreme Court recently ruled (docket number 98-1464, decided January 12, 2000) that driving records are not "public" records, and therefore will only be available on a VERY limited basis in every state.

Some states, such as Florida (http://www.dos.state.fl.us/), not only have a plethora of free public record information on the web (such as UCCs, trademark owner names, corporate records and annual reports), they also provide the actual images of the full public record.

Even when information is considered "public," agencies still may not provide free Web access to the information. In these instances, we're no better off than we were 10 years ago, and are forced to use either to a fee-based commercial database, messengers or "snail mail".

FREE PUBLIC RECORDS META-SITES

For an excellent low-cost meta-site that lists which states do provide free public records via the Web, go to Search Systems at http://www.searchsystems.net, which provides links to those states. From Search Systems you can view information about the New York State Department of Health's Physician Discipline page at http://www.health.state.ny.us/nysdoh/opmc/main.htm, the Texas state Comptroller's Corporations Search at https://ourcpa.cpa.state.tx.us/coa/Index.html, and Nevada bankruptcies at http://www.nvb.uscourts.gov/, among numerous other links. Clicking on the links to any of the thousands of resources in SearchSystems' collection is once again free.

The California list provides links to public records such as a database of which insurance companies are admitted to do business in California (along with complaint information), the Unclaimed Property database and the docket sheet and actual documents from the U.S. Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Another useful meta-site that is maintained by BRB Publications contains links to more than 300 local, state and federal websites at http://www.brbpub.com/pubrecsites.asp. These include vital statistics in Colorado (http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/certs/) and death certificates in Maine (http://portal.maine.gov/death) and Kentucky (http://ukcc.uky.edu:80/~vitalrec/), as well as corporate records (California's Secretary of State added its corporate records in late 1999 at http://kepler.sos.ca.gov/) and select county assessor records of numerous states.

MEDICAL LICENSES

For free public access to professionals' licensing records (such as doctors and lawyers), many states, like Florida (https://www.myfloridalicense.com/wl11.asp) and California (http://www2.dca.ca.gov/pls/wllpub/wllquery$.startup), offer access to all their licensing boards from one central page. You can link to professional license information on all 50 states from Search Systems at http://www.searchsystems.net.

To verify medical licenses, you can also check AIM's DocFinder site at http://www.docboard.org/, which links to many states' medical licensing boards. Click on "California" or go directly to the California state agency that licenses doctors by typing in http://www.mbc.ca.gov/.

To locate more public information about doctors, check their associations' web site to discover what type of information is available (in addition to licensing information), such as disciplinary or biographical information. The American Medical Association is at http://www.ama-assn.org/; the Texas Medical Association is at http://www.texmed.org/; and if you're looking for a list of medical associations in Haiti, you'll find it at http://www.haitimedical.com/aso.htm.

Links to other select medical associations can be found at http://dir.yahoo.com/Health/Medicine/Organizations/Professional/ Medical_Associations_and_Societies/.

LAWYER LICENSING

Most state bar association websites can verify whether an attorney is licensed in that state. In California, check the California State Bar's Member Records Search at http://members.calbar.ca.gov/fal/MemberSearch/QuickSearch#searchlink. History of disciplinary information, if any, is also noted. In Texas go to http://www.texasbar.com/Template.cfm?Section=Member_Directory&Template=/CustomSource/MemberDirectory/Search_Form_Client_Main.cfm. Or in Florida try http://www.floridabar.org/names.nsf/MESearch?OpenForm. FindLaw lists links to the bar Associations of all 50 states at http://www.findlaw.com/06associations/state.html. However, many states do not have mandatory Bar membership for attorneys. In those states, the actual licensing is handled by a state (or quasi-state) agency or an arm of the courts. To help make it easier to locate the lawyer licensing bodies in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico, we have compiled this list of links directly to the searchable databases of licensed attorneys in those jurisdictions.

OTHER LICENSED PROFESSIONS

There are a number of other professions, from cosmetologists to funeral directors that are licensed and regulated in various states. Here, too, Search Systems at http://www.searchsystems.net can be a very helpful resource, offering links to various licensing board sites in all 50 states. Some of the hundreds of available categories include Colorado architect licensing at https://www.colorado.gov/dora/licensing/Lookup/LicenseLookup.aspx, Georgia auctioneers at https://secure.sos.state.ga.us/myverification/, New York state interior designers at http://www.op.nysed.gov/opsearches.htm, and a searchable directory of Arizona Accountants.

Information on all licensed professions in California (from Funeral Directors to Repossession Agencies) can be accessed at http://www2.dca.ca.gov/pls/wllpub/wllquery$.startup.

Search the American Institute of Architects membership at http://www.aia.org/. Select "Connect with an Architect" on the homepage. The site does not allow you to input an architect's name directly, but you can retrieve a list of members geographically (by major city) or using their firm's name.

A database of 1.5 million non-profit professional associations may also be searched to obtain information about professionals at http://www.guidestar.org/search.

CRIMINAL RECORDS

Wonder if your new neighbor is a sex offender? At http://www.prevent-abuse-now.com/register.htm, you can link to the offender registries of all 50 state law enforcement agencies and the District of Columbia. In addition to the offender databases, the site also links to the sex offender "registry laws" in those jurisdictions. At http://www.nsopw.gov/Core/Conditions.aspx, the U.S. Department of Justice has created a combined search of the sex offender databases of all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and Guam. Individual states sex offender databases include the Illinois State Police's "Sex Offender Information" page at http://www.isp.state.il.us/sor/sor.cfm, which allows searching by city, county and zip code. For the New York state sex offender registry, see http://criminaljustice.state.ny.us/nsor/.

In more examples of the debate of what constitutes a "public" record and what does not, Texas provides free access to its sex offender database, but charges a fee to access its database of other convictions (http://records.txdps.state.tx.us/), and Oklahoma's database of sex offenders is made available at http://docapp8.doc.state.ok.us/.

North Carolina makes some criminal offender information available at http://www.doc.state.nc.us/offenders/. The searchable database includes information regarding "inmates, probationers or parolees since 1972. [The] system allows users to view and download any/all public information from the Department of Correction database for convicted offenders. [It a]lso includes information on inmate releases and escapees." Vermont (http://vsp.vermont.gov/about_us/divisions/support_services/public_information) only makes its criminal records available to non-law enforcement entities if they obtain a VCIC [Vermont Criminal Information Center] Release Form signed by the subject.

If you want to see a list and pictures of Illinois' most delinquent parents, then go to http://www.deadbeatsillinois.com/ or visit the Los Angeles County Sheriff's department at http://www.la-sheriff.org/lasd_wanted/index.html to see its Most Wanted criminals. You'll find Arizona's at http://www.azdps.gov/about/Task_Forces/Wanted/. 

The FBI's Ten Most Wanted list can be found at http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten.

COUNTY RECORDS

What's available at the county level? Need birth, death or marriage records? Los Angeles County and Orange County, California do not provide this data on the web. Instead, the Los Angeles site at http://www.lavote.net/recorder/BDM_Records.cfm provides detailed information on how to order these records by mail and provides the required forms. In Orange County, California, things move more quickly, for a small price, however. At the County Clerk's site at https://media.ocgov.com/gov/clerk/services/records/default.asp you are informed that you can order certified copies of birth, marriage and death certificates.

To check what type of information and documents that the counties in your state provide online, check FindLaw's links to all 50 states websites at http://www.findlaw.com/11stategov/index.html or Search Systems at http://www.searchsystems.net.

If someone has taken the time to make a social security claim for death benefits, the death record will be found in Rootsweb.com at http://ssdi.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/ssdi.cgi.the Social Security Death Index. Most free sources have discontinued access to updated versions of the Index, but the FamilySearch.org site still makes a version that was last updated on October 31, 2011 available at https://familysearch.org/search/collection/show#uri=http://hr-search-api:8080/searchapi/search/collection/1202535.

REAL PROPERTY RECORDS

Are you trying to trace the other spouse's assets for a divorce client? The Univerity of Virginia's Portico portal site at http://www.indorgs.virginia.edu/portico/assessors.html links to many county assessors' offices that are on the web and permit owner name or address searches. In California, only eight counties will be found. The Los Angeles (CA) County Assessor's records are available and searchable via the Internet (by address only) at http://lacountyassessor.com/extranet/default.aspx. Also see http://lacountyassessor.com/extranet/Outsidesales/saleintr.aspx for information on renting or buying the records. In Orange County, California you can't even make a request over the Internet for property appraisal records, while in Orange County, Florida, the records are available free on the web.

If your county does not place its records on the Web, you may be able to find some limited home value and/or sales information at Domania (http://www.domania.com) or Zillow (http://www.zillow.com). These sites aggregate public information from multiple sources.

MILITARY RECORDS

Some personal information from U.S. Military records is available to the public, without authorization from the veteran. This includes name, rank, service number, dates of service and medals awarded. If the service person is dead, the place of birth, place of death and location of burial may also be available. No information is available via the Internet, however. Requests must be made in writing. For more information see the National Archives and Records Administration's National Personnel Records Center at http://www.archives.gov/st-louis/index.html.

That said however, there is a strong possibility that the record you want no longer exists, after a major 1973 fire that destroyed millions of U.S. Military service records. It's estimated that 80% of all U.S. Army files for personnel discharged between November 1, 1912, and January 1, 1960, as well as records for approximately 75% of U.S. Air Force personnel discharged between September 25, 1947 and January 1, 1964 (with names alphabetically after Hubbard, James E.) were destroyed. It does not appear that Navy or Marine records were affected.

Personnel records of living civilian personnel are not available to the public.

OTHER RECORDS FROM COMMERCIAL DATABASES

For access to public records such as state corporate and limited partnership records, UCCs, liens, judgments, bankruptcy records, aircraft, watercraft and stock ownership, death records and lawsuits, that you did not find in any of the sources previously listed, you will have to use a commercial database.

Fortunately, many commercial databases are available on the Web and you can pay as you go without subscribing in advance or installing their software on your computer. Some of these databases are: Westlaw at http://www.westlaw.com, Lexis at http://www.lexis.com/xchange and Choice Point (formerly CDB Infotek and now a LexisNexis company) at http://www.choicepoint.com/. KnowX at http://www.knowx.com (previously acquired by ChoicePoint and now also a LexisNexis company) is one of the fee-based public record web sites that offers per-search pricing, as well as 24-hour, 30-day, and annual subscriptions. Registration with a credit card is required. Per-search charges range from $1.50 - $24.95. Thirty-day subscriptions range from $59.95 to $124.95.

The volume and diversity of public records available for free on the Internet is truly astounding, particularly in light of the fact that most of this information has only recently been placed on the Web. Despite the widespread availability of information on the Internet, for the near-term at least, it remains a hit or miss proposition whether the specific information you might be looking for will be available. Even though new information is added to the Internet, literally, every day, that doesn't do you any good, if the material you're looking for isn't available yet.

It will still be awhile before the public has access to all "public" records from our computer desktops. In the mean time, there are still the old stand-bys like the phone, mail and commercial databases available to access this information. They'll still cost you, but the good news is, in most instances, will cost much less now than it used to.

PUBLIC RECORDS META-SITES

• Search Systems - http://www.searchsystem.net provides links to states that provide free public records via the Web.
• BRB Publications maintains a page with links to more than 300 local, state and federal websites offering free access to public records - http://www.brbpub.com/pubrecsites.asp

EXAMPLES OF AVAILABLE PUBLIC RECORD INFORMATION

• New York State Department of Health's Physician Discipline - http://www.health.state.ny.us/nysdoh/opmc/main.htm
• Texas' Comptroller of Public Accounts; Certification of Account Status Corporation Search - https://ourcpa.cpa.state.tx.us/coa/Index.html
• Nevada bankruptcies - http://www.nvb.uscourts.gov/
• Vital statistics in Colorado - http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/certs
• Death certificates in Maine - http://portal.maine.gov/death
• Death certificates in Kentucky - http://ukcc.uky.edu:80/~vitalrec/
• California's Secretary of State corporate records - http://kepler.ss.ca.gov/
• Florida Department of State - http://www.dos.state.fl.us

MEDICAL LICENSES

• Florida - http://www.doh.state.fl.us/mqa/PRAES/index.html
• California - http://www2.dca.ca.gov/pls/wllpub/wllquery$.startup (all licensed professions) or go directly to the California state agency that licenses doctors - http://www.medbd.ca.gov/.
• AIM's DocFinder - http://www.docboard.org/
• The American Medical Association - http://www.ama-assn.org/
• Texas Medical Association - http://www.texmed.org/
• Medical associations in Haiti - http://www.haitimedical.com/aso.htm
• Other select medical associations can be found at http://dir.yahoo.com/Health/Medicine/Organizations/Professional/Medical_Associations_and_Societies/

LAWYER LICENSING

• California State Bar - http://members.calbar.ca.gov/fal/MemberSearch/QuickSearch#searchlink
• Texas State Bar - http://www.texasbar.com/Template.cfm?Section=Member_Directory&Template=/CustomSource/MemberDirectory/Search_Form_Client_Main.cfm
• Florida State Bar - http://www.floridabar.org/names.nsf/MESearch?OpenForm
• FindLaw's links to the bar Associations of all 50 states - http://www.findlaw.com/06associations/state.html

OTHER LICENSED PROFESSIONS

• Here, too, Search Systems - http://www.searchsystems.net can be a very helpful resource, offering links to various licensing board sites in all 50 states.
• Colorado architect licensing - https://www.doradls.state.co.us/lic_database_req.php
• Georgia auctioneers - https://secure.sos.state.ga.us/myverification/
• New York state interior designers - http://www.op.nysed.gov/opsearches.htm
• Arizona Accountants - http://www.azaccountancy.gov/CPADirectory/CPASearch.aspx.
• California licensed professions (from Funeral Directors to Repossession Agencies) - http://www2.dca.ca.gov/pls/wllpub/wllquery$.startup.
• American Institute of Architects - http://www.aia.org/
• A database of 1.5 million non-profit professional associations - http://www.guidestar.org/search.

CRIMINAL RECORDS

• North Carolina (criminal offender information) - http://www.doc.state.nc.us/offenders/
• Vermont (information on requesting criminal records) - http://vsp.vermont.gov/about_us/divisions/support_services/public_information
• The FBI's Ten Most Wanted list - http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten

SEX OFFENDERS

• U.S. Department of Justice Multistate Sex Offender search - http://www.nsopw.gov/Core/Conditions.aspx
• Illinois - http://www.isp.state.il.us/sor/sor.cfm
• Washington State (select counties) - http://searchsystems.net/list.php?nid=56.
• Texas - http://records.txdps.state.tx.us/
• Oklahoma - http://docapp8.doc.state.ok.us/servlet/page?_pageid=190&_dad=portal30&_schema=PORTAL30

DELINQUENT PARENTS

• Illinois - http://www.deadbeatillinois.com
• Mississippi - http://www.dps.state.ms.us/dps/dps.nsf/webwanted?Openform&Div=mostwanted

COUNTY RECORDS

• Los Angeles County (information on ordering vital statistics) - http://www.lavote.net/recorder/BDM_Records.cfm
• Orange County, California Clerk - http://www.oc.ca.gov/recorder
• FindLaw's links to all 50 states websites - http://www.findlaw.com/11stategov/index.html
• Search Systems - http://www.searchsystems.net
• Rootsweb.com Social Security Death Index - http://ssdi.rootsweb.ancestry.com

REAL PROPERTY RECORDS

• Property Assessments Online - http://indorgs.virginia.edu/portico/personalproperty.html
• Los Angeles County Assessor (information on renting or buying the records only) - http://assessor.lacounty.gov/extranet/default.aspx
• Yahoo Real Estate sales information - http://realestate.yahoo.com/

MILITARY RECORDS

• National Archives and Records Administration's National Personnel Records Center (information to make written requests) - http://www.archives.gov/research

OTHER PUBLIC RECORDS FROM COMMERCIAL DATABASES

• Westlaw - http://www.westlaw.com
• Lexis - http://www.lexis.com/xchange
• Choice Point (formerly CDB Infotek) - http://www.choicepoint.com/ aka http://www.lexisnexis.com/risk
• KnowX - http://www.knowx.com

The post How Public Are Public Records? appeared first on Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) in California, MCLE Los Angeles, CLE Orange County, Irvine & San Francisco.

The post Finding Facts on the Internet on Non-Legal Topics appeared first on Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) in California, MCLE Los Angeles, CLE Orange County, Irvine & San Francisco.