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.

Our online MCLE exercises are text-based and accessible via any computer with an Internet connection.

After your payment was completed, you should have received two e-mails:
•  a receipt for your purchase, and
•  instructions/links to access your exercises.

Follow the directions and links in that second e-mail to access the exercises. (If you purchase multiple exercises use the individual "Download" buttons to access each exercise. Do not use the "Download All" button.)

If you cannot locate the instructions e-mail , send us a message at MCLE@netforlawyers.com with the e-mail address and name used to submit your exercises and we will re-send the instructions e-mail to you..

Note that these exercises each for Self-study credit. Each of the Legal Ethics, Substance Abuse, and Elimination of Bias exercises qualify for 1 credit each. Note that some of the General Credit exercises qualify for 1 hour of credit and others qualify for 2-hours of credit. (Credit-hour and category designations are listed on this page http://www.netforlawyers.com/page/access-page-online-participatory-legal-ethics-general-elimination-bias-and-substance-abuse-onli.)

Once you select your exercise(s) you would read the associated article(s), answer the quiz questions, and click the submit button. (Some exercises have a separate article while others have the reading material integrated into the quiz or the web resources referred to in the quiz.)

What if I paid for MCLE exercises prior to January 20, 2015 - and now I can't access the quizzes?

We have updated our MCLE system to automatically generate Certificates of Completion immediately upon successful completion of an exercise.

You can still access those exercises in our old system here. These quizzes require us to manually review your submission to issue your Certificate of Completion. Close to the MCLE deadline, it can take 5-7 days for us to certify your submission and send those Certificates of Completion. (Your Certificate of Completion reflects THE DATE ON WHICH YOU SUBMITTED THE EXERCISE.

You can also e-mail us at MCLE@netforlawyers.com with the name(s) of any exercises you paid for prior to 1/20/15 but have not yet completed. We will send you links (in the new system) to access the exercise(s) you have paid for but not completed. Please also include the name and e-mail address used to to originally purchase the exercises.

How do I receive my Certificates of Completion for these online MCLE exercises once I complete them?

Our new Online MCLE system automatically generates your California MCLE Certificate of Completion immediately after you successfully complete an exercise.

These California MCLE Certificate of Completion are sent as an e-mail attachment and include the date/time you successfully completed the exercise, along with the title/credit category/credit hours for the MCLE exercise. The forms are customized with your name and Bar Number (or Paralegal title). Your California MCLE Certificate of Completion serves as your "proof of completion" in the event that your MCLE compliance is audited by the Bar at some later date. You are required to keep it in your records for four years.

If you did not receive your California MCLE Certificate of Completion, send us a message at MCLE@netforlawyers.com with the e-mail address and name used to submit your exercises and we will re-send it to you.

Thank you for completing a portion of your MCLE requirement online with Internet For Lawyers.

The post Frequently Asked Questions Regarding Submitting, Completing, and Certifying Online MCLE Exercises Completed with Internet For Lawyers appeared first on Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) in California, MCLE Los Angeles, CLE Orange County, Irvine & San Francisco.

By Roy S. Ginsburg, JD

Everyone knows that, much like diet and exercise, networking is good for you and that, similarly, there are lots of excuses for avoiding it. 

Understanding Networking-An Attitude Adjustment

When coaching lawyers or conducting CLEs on business development, I hear a lot of resistance to incorporating networking as a means of building a book of business. Here are the most common excuses:

* I don't have the time.

* I'm a professional; networking is like being a salesperson.

* It is outside my comfort zone.

A better understanding of what networking really is will convince you that most anyone can learn to do it comfortably. A better understanding will also lead to a realization of how indispensable it is. 

Let's discuss first what networking is not. Networking is not showing up at a conference or reception glad-handing and distributing business cards to strangers. Who wouldn't feel uncomfortable doing that?

Networking is a straightforward concept. It's building a network of people for the purpose of mutual assistance. Put the emphasis on mutual. It's not "I want your legal business." Rather, it's developing relationships among those who can help one another in professional, as well as personal, ways. In its simplest form, networking presents a platform for exchanging information that is mutually beneficial. It may be about a legal advice, but it could even be about a baby sitter or plumber if the need is expressed.

Further, and this is key to building a network, it's more about giving than receiving. Only when you give (advice, praise, recommendations, etc.) do relationships grow and develop. Once that occurs, it's only a matter of time before you get something back. 

It's human nature; people like to reciprocate. Developing trusting and dependable relationships, however, doesn't happen in one meeting. It is a process, and it requires persistence and patience to reap the benefits. 

Getting Past the Excuses

No more excuses! Below, I discredit the attitudes that stand in the way of networking progress:

I don't have the time.

Once it's understood what a well-developed network can accomplish, it can actually be a time saver. For instance, everyone who is part of your network is a potential resource, with access to information, opportunities, or ideas that could otherwise require hours of your time to gather. With an established network, it's possible the answer to a practice management issue is only a phone call or two away. 

However, the main reason lawyers should network is for business development. Attorneys have a tendency to overestimate the importance of their technical skills when, in fact, prospective clients are weighing more "human" considerations, such as "Is this someone I get along with?" and "Can I trust this person?" 

Think about the successful lawyers you know. Are they the most exceptionally skilled or technically competent legal professionals? If not, then what is it that sets them apart and sparks their success? Undoubtedly, it's the number of people they know and the quality of the relationships they have with them. Building meaningful relationships, over time, is the key to a robust practice; and effective networking is the genesis for developing those relationships.

I'm not a salesperson.

If there's a consistently common objection to networking that I hear, it's "I didn't go to law school to be a salesperson!" 

Don't confuse networking with a sales call. Remember, networking is about sharing information and listening for ways to be of mutual assistance. 

Letting people you meet know that you practice law in a firm that offers a range of services is information, not sales.  Most people are grateful to know where to find a lawyer when they need advice about estate planning, protecting a company's intellectual property, completing a business transaction, or trying to keep someone out of jail. And all lawyers can be proud of the fact that they earn their living by helping people. 

It's out of my comfort zone.

Just as networking is not handing out business cards at receptions, it is also not cold calling complete strangers. Rather, think of it as developing relationships with people with whom you may be acquainted, but would like to know better. 

Is a cup of coffee or lunch out of your comfort zone? I have coached well over one hundred lawyers from across the nation who practice at firms of all sizes. Rarely have I worked with an attorney who could not carry on a pleasant conversation in a one-on-one setting. 

Start with people you already know, professionally or personally, to create a contact list. Think about people who can benefit from an enhanced relationship with you. Here's a starter list of prospects:

*   Law firm (cross-sell) 

*   Clients   

*   People from bar association or trade/industry organizations 

* People from organizations where you volunteer

* Opposing counsel from past cases

*   Extended family members

* Friends (and their friends)

* Neighbors (do you ever wonder what to talk about at the annual block party?)

* People you went to college or law school with

* People from previous jobs

* Members of your church or synagogue

Then what?  

It's called a contact list for a reason. Prioritizing the list, contact these people to set up a casual get-together. Be prepared that not everyone will accept your outreach, so don't take it personally. They are either too busy or are too shortsighted to see the benefits of networking. 

Building a network is a numbers game. It's not about having the best personality or leading the popularity chart. To be successful at it, you must continuously circulate, adding new names to your contact list.  Building your network within groups where prospective clients or referral sources are likely to be found. You can do that by attending conferences, becoming active in professional and community organizations where you interact with many individuals and where your contributions to the organization are visible. Networking doesn't happen in your office: Get out and meet someone new. 

Practical Tips for Effective Networking

If I have achieved my goal, I've made the case for the value of networking and that it doesn't have to be an uncomfortable exercise. Here are some general tips to make those networking efforts more effective:

1.      Network systematically. Make a contract with yourself that you will spend a certain amount of time networking. For example, your contract could be a commitment to have a certain number of coffees, lunches, or association gatherings per month. Keep the commitment realistic. The goal is eventually to make networking a seamless habit.

2. Listen. Remember the ears-to-mouth ratio. You have two ears and one mouth. Listen at least twice the amount of time you talk. If you don't listen, you will not learn how you can help this person. 

3. Be enthusiastic. Few people hire lawyers who don't enjoy what they do. When I was an in-house attorney, I wanted lawyers who truly loved what they did. I was once involved in a First Amendment case and was seeking counsel. I obtained three referrals. On paper, they all had the necessary credentials and experience. I then interviewed all three. One lawyer in particular simply exuded a passion for the First Amendment when we talked. Guess which one I hired? 

4. Be confident, not arrogant. Many lawyers find it difficult to strike the proper balance. Of course, I always wanted to hire lawyers who sounded like they knew what they were doing. Unfortunately, there were many who crossed the line, boasting about themselves or their law firm. I was never impressed, but I was always incredibly bored.

5. Be patient. How many people do you know who got married after only one date? Then why expect to be hired after one lunch? Remember, networking is a process of building relationships. It may take years of staying in contact before being retained. 

The ROI

There's the cliche, "it's not what you know that counts, it's who you know." Well, in the legal industry, we know for sure that what you know is of primary importance. But it doesn't do much good if others don't know you know it.  

Investing the time to develop a wide network of informational resources, advisors, and prospects yields a return that exponentially increases over the years. And that's because just about all the contacts you make, at some point in their personal or professional lives, will need legal services. Wouldn't it be great if you popped into their minds? Networking effectively will assure that outcome. 

The Ethics Rules Surrounding Networking

While there are no specific rules that have the word "networking" in them, certainly one of the primary goals of networking is business development. All lawyers seem to know the "rule" that attorneys are not supposed to ambulance-chase. But what does that really mean? According to Rule 1-400(C), an in person or by telephone solicitation "shall not be made ... to a prospective client ... with whom the member or law firm has no family or prior professional relationship ..."  

Of the three biggest misunderstandings many attorneys have about this rule, the first is that the rule applies only to hospital emergency rooms. In fact, the rule applies in any room in any type of building. 

The second common misunderstanding is that it's appropriate to solicit a "sophisticated" client -- for example, a corporate executive. There is no such exception in the rule. While the origin of the rule was likely intended to apply to environments such as hospitals where "unsophisticated" clients may be present, the rule is not written that way. If a lawyer reads in the newspaper about a company being sued and calls the CEO and asks to be considered as defense counsel, that is unethical unless the CEO falls within the exceptions noted above. If not, Rule 1-400(C) is violated. 

The third frequent mistake lawyers make concerns referrals. Those who are successful at networking frequently receive calls saying, "My friend's company really needs your help. Call so and so right now. Here's the phone number." Many lawyers think that it's permissible to make the call since, presumably, the potential client has somehow consented to being contacted. The rule, however, contains no such consent exception language. Unless the potential client falls within the rule's specific exceptions, the rule is violated. 

Then what do you say to the person who has been nice enough to provide your name to someone who may become a new client? You say something like "Thank you so much for thinking of me. However, I hope it's not too much of an inconvenience for you to have your contact call or email me. The ethics rules prohibit me from contacting your friend. I could get disciplined for doing that."

Besides the solicitation rules, lawyers should also be familiar with the rules regarding referral fees. After all, if your networking efforts are successful, you hopefully will be getting referrals. Do you know how to handle them?

Referral fees are strictly prohibited by the ethics rules for non-lawyers by Rule 1-320. Subdivision (A) states that lawyers are not permitted to "directly or indirectly share legal fees with a person who is not a lawyer." In addition, the rule provides that a lawyer "shall not compensate, give or promise anything of value to a person or entity for the purpose of recommending or securing employment."  

As for lawyers, referral fees are allowed, but you must follow certain requirements. Rule 2-200 states that they are permissible under these conditions:

*   Client consents in writing and is advised how fee is divided

*   Total fee is not increased by because of fee sharing

One final word of caution about networking. Many of your efforts may involve a meal or perhaps taking a potential client or referral source to a sporting or some other entertainment event. Is there anything unethical about picking up the tab? If you recall, Rule 1-320 states that "shall not compensate, give or promise anything of value to a person or entity for the purpose of recommending or securing employment."  Are $1000 courtside seats at Staples Center "anything of value?"  Under most circumstances, the answer is no. Most regulators would simply view client entertainment expenses as an accepted form of business development efforts and leave it at that. However, if there was ever any evidence that there was an explicit quid pro quo for the entertainment, i.e., "Client X, thank you very much for that case. Since you were so kind to give me that business, my firm will take your entire family to event Y," that would be a problem. 

After reading this article, attorneys can earn one hour of self-study "Legal Ethics" California MCLE credit by completing and submitting this associated exercise.

The post How to Network Comfortably and Ethically appeared first on Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) in California, MCLE Los Angeles, CLE Orange County, Irvine & San Francisco.

FAQs | Accessing Materials | What if I've Already Paid? | MCLE Video & Webinars | Information for Lawyers | Information for Paralegals | Deadlines

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

Click here to read answers to Frequently Asked Questions regarding completing and certifying California MCLE exercises completed with Internet For Lawyers.

ACCESS ALL MCLE EXERCISES AND ASSOCIATED MATERIALS

Click here to access the entire list of online MCLE exercises and associated reading materials.

California, Arizona & New York attorneys can also view the list of Online MCLE Quizzes

Select individual Continuing Legal Education exercises below, or visit our online MCLE catalog for money-saving multi-course bundles.

IF YOU HAVE ALREADY PAID FOR MCLE CREDITS

If you have already purchased individual exercises or multi-hour MCLE bundles, check your e-mail for a message containing instructions/links to access the exercise. Click here to visit a page with links to all of the associated reading materials. Note that the exercises themselves also include links to the reading materials.

Or, to locate MCLE exercises in particular categories, click subject areas below to locate quizzes, or click here to access the entire list of online MCLE exercises and associated reading materials.

• Elimination of Bias
• Prevention, Detection & Treatment of Substance Abuse
• Legal Ethics
• Law Practice Management
• General

RECORDED VIDEO & LIVE WEBINAR PROGRAMS

• See our new California MCLE video site CaliforniaVideoMCLE for video MCLE courses based on our books and live presentations.
• See our new CLEseminars.com MCLE webinar site law practice management, technology, and legal ethics webinars presented by some of the leading authorities in these areas.
  • MCLE credit for attending these webinars is currently available in the following jurisdictions:
  • Alabama | Alaska | California | Kansas | Missouri | Oklahoma | Wyoming

CALIFORNIA MCLE INFORMATION FOR LAWYERS & ATTORNEYS

California Legal Ethics, Elimination of Bias in the Practice of Law, Prevention, Detection & Treatment of Substance Abuse, Law Practice Management, or General Self-Study Continuing Legal Education credit may be earned online for only $20.00 per hour (when reading accompanying articles or code sections when applicable and answering related quiz questions). The exams can be viewed online for free prior to taking them by clicking the links above. For Attorneys or Paralegals requiring multiple hours, we have created a number of money-saving multi-course bundles. Save over $60 when completing 13 hours of our Continuing Legal Education courses online.

Additionally, these quizzes qualify for CLE credit for Arizona Attorneys. Courses offering two hours of credit also qualify for credit for New York lawyers. Attorneys in other jurisdictions may be able to submit the California MCLE Certificate of Completion for MCLE credit if they can claim credit for credits in their home jurisdictions from exercises earned from California MCLE providers. Internet For Lawyers is a California State Bar approved MCLE provider (California MCLE provider number #9836). 

Internet For Lawyers also custom-designs in-person MCLE training seminars for individuals, your practice group, law firm or professional organization. For more information, contact us at seminars@netforlawyers.com or 310/559-1632 - or view our online continuing legal education seminar calendar for our schedule of upcoming live MCLE events.

CALIFORNIA MCLE INFORMATION FOR PARALEGALS

*In the year 2000, the California State Assembly passed a bill (AB 1761) outlining, among other things, new MANDATORY continuing legal education requirements for Paralegals. The Bill provides under Business & Professions Section 6450 paragraph d that "all continuing education courses shall meet the requirements of [Business & professions Code] Section 6070.

Per Section 6070 only courses offered by State Bar of California approved MCLE providers are recognized when considering MCLE credit hours earned.

Additionally, the State Bar has gone on record stating that "If an activity is geared toward Paralegals or attended only by Paralegals, the activity DOES NOT qualify for MCLE credit and therefore does not meet either the Attorney's or the Paralegal's requirements."

When taking live or online MCLE courses, Attorneys and Paralegals should be certain that the provider is certified by the California State Bar.

Internet For Lawyers' California State Bar MCLE is a California State Bar approved MCLE provider (California MCLE provider #9836). 

Also in 2000, the California State Senate passed a bill (SB144) instructing the State Bar to "ensure that by July 1, 2000, any member possessing or having access to the internet or specified generally available computer technology shall be capable of satisfying the full self-study portion of his or her MCLE requirement [online] ... " (Paragraph d).

The Bar also allows Self-Study CREDIT online MCLE if the provider keeps record of the attorneys' usage of the materials. Internet For Lawyers keeps these records, and therefore our quizzes are eligible for Self-Study credit.

For a full list of the upcoming California State Bar MCLE deadlines visit click here.

For the full text of California Senate Bill 144 (2000) click here.

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

Congratulations on selecting one of our individual online continuing legal education exercises or one of our 4-, 6-, or 13-hour Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) compliance packages. Note that these Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) exercises qualify for Self-study California MCLE credit. In January 2019, we moved our text-based MCLE exercises to a new service provider. If you had bookmarked this page in the past, you can now find our online MCLE quizzes at this page. Save 25% With Our California MCLE Self-Study Bundles. Use the Discount Code IFL25.     Click here to read answers to Frequently Asked Questions regarding completing and certifying California MCLE exercises completed with Internet For Lawyers.
COURSE DESCRIPTION	READ ARTICLE	BUY NOW
LEGAL ETHICS EXERCISES (complete any FOUR of the following)
Legal Ethics Considerations for Lawyers' Use of Cloud Computing Services (one hour Self-study California MCLE credit)	MCLE ARTICLE
American Bar Association's Formal Ethics Opinion 10-457 Covering Attorneys' Use of Web Sites to Market Their Practices (one hour Self-study California MCLE credit)	INCLUDED IN QUIZ
How to Network Comfortably and Ethically (one hour Self-study California MCLE credit)	MCLE ARTICLE
The Ethical Case For Client Satisfaction (one hour Self-study California MCLE credit)	MCLE ARTICLE
Contacting Unrepresented Persons via Social Networking Sites - New York State Bar and Philadelphia Bar Ethics Opinions (one hour Self-study California MCLE credit)	MCLE ARTICLE
Contacting Unrepresented Persons via Social Networking Sites - New York City Bar Ethics Opinion (one hour Self-study California MCLE credit)	MCLE ARTICLE
Should You or Shouldn't You? Legal Advertising in California (one hour Self-study California MCLE credit)	INCLUDED IN QUIZ
Ethics of Attorney Web Sites in California (one hour Self-study California MCLE credit)	MCLE ARTICLE
Adhering to the California State Bar Rules of Professional Conduct (one hour Self-study California MCLE credit)	INCLUDED IN QUIZ
Ethical Requirements of Attorney Oversight & Supervision of Paralegal Staff in California (one hour Self-study California MCLE credit)	INCLUDED IN QUIZ
ELIMINATION OF BIAS EXERCISES (complete either of the following)
Diversity Makes Cents: The Business Case for Diversity (one hour Self-study California MCLE credit)	MCLE ARTICLE
Pipeline Programs Enhance Diversity in the Legal Profession  (one hour Self-study California MCLE credit)	MCLE ARTICLE
SUBSTANCE ABUSE EXERCISES (complete the following)
California Lawyers' Assistance Program-Prevention, Detection & Treatment of Substance Abuse (one hour Self-study California MCLE credit)	INCLUDED IN QUIZ
GENERAL CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION (LAW PRACTICE MANAGEMENT) EXERCISES
Congress.gov: How to Search for Federal Bills, Laws, the Congressional Record, and Committee Reports (one hour Self-study California MCLE credit)	MCLE ARTICLE
How to Research the U.S. Code Online (two hours Self-study California MCLE credit)	MCLE ARTICLE
From Due Diligence to Corporate Intelligence (two hours Self-study California MCLE credit)	MCLE ARTICLE-CURRENTLY BEING UPDATED
Finding Government Documents on the Internet (one hour Self-study California MCLE credit)	MCLE ARTICLE
How Public Are Public Records? (one hour Self-study California MCLE credit)	MCLE ARTICLE
Free California Internet Legal Research (two hours Self-study California MCLE credit)	MCLE ARTICLE	MCLE QUIZ-CURRENTLY BEING UPDATED
Finding Entertainment Law Resources Online: From Scholarship to Scandal (two hours Self-study California MCLE credit)	MCLE ARTICLE-CURRENTLY BEING UPDATED	MCLE QUIZ-CURRENTLY BEING UPDATED
Looking For Evidence in Virtual Places: Admissibility of Internet Evidence (one hour Self-study California MCLE credit)	MCLE ARTICLE

The post Access Page for Online Legal Ethics, General, Elimination of Bias and Substance Abuse Online California MCLE Exercises appeared first on Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) in California, MCLE Los Angeles, CLE Orange County, Irvine & San Francisco.

California Attorneys and Paralegals can satisfy all of their required MCLE credits by completing any four of the following (ten) self-study MCLE quizzes.

Internet For Lawyers offers California Attorneys & Paralegals who wish to complete all of their Legal Ethics MCLE requirement online a package price of only $60.00 to complete all four hours here. You may elect to complete any of the four exercises listed below. (This is a $20.00 savings over the regular price of $20.00 per hour.) Click here for more information.

Completing any of the exercises below earns you one hour of California self-study Legal ethics Continuing Legal Education credit.You can select any four of the following self-study MCLE exercises to complete your entire California Continuing Legal Education requirement of four hours of Legal Ethics credit and pay only $15/credit-hour.

(Note that some of these Legal Ethics MCLE exercises have reading material included in the quiz, while others have a separate article associated with them.)

Legal Ethics Considerations for Lawyers' Use of Cloud Computing Services

We often get questions about the security of "cloud computing" services like Google Apps and whether that security is tight enough for lawyers to use them. Google Apps, for example, meets the security standards put in place for the online storage of government agencies' information set out in the Federal Information Security Management Act of 2000 (FISMA 44 U.S.C. § 3541, et seq.). The ABA recently adopted changes to the Model Rules of Professional Conduct dealing with the question of whether and how lawyers might deal with "confidentiality issues arising from technology." The changes were, "designed to give lawyers more guidance regarding their confidentiality- related obligations when using technology." This excercise provides a compilation and overview of the existing Ethics Opinions produced, to date, by Bar Associations around the country.

Read the Article | Go to the Quiz

ABA Formal Opinion 10-457 Dealing With Lawyer Websites
As early as 1996, many state bar associations began issuing formal (or advisory) ethics opinions on the ethical uses of Internet technology. Many of those opinions relating to Web sites and online communications apply the advertising rules that already exist for print advertising. In the late Summer of 2010, the American Bar Association issued its Formal Opinion 10-457 discussing ethical concerns for lawyers who maintain Web sites.

Go to the Quiz

Client Service: The Ethical Case for Keeping Clients Satisfied
If you ask most attorneys whether their clients are satisfied, the vast majority would, of course, say "yes." If you then ask them "what makes you so sure?" the responses would typically range from "They don’t complain" and "They’re nice to me" to "They pay their bills" or "They continue to do business with us." A closer examination of these reasons, however, reveals that such client behavior hardly indicates satisfaction.

Read the Article | Go to the Quiz

How to Network Comfortably and Ethically
Everyone knows that, much like diet and exercise, networking is good for you and that, similarly, there are lots of excuses for avoiding it. This exercise applies specific Rules of Professional Conduct to effective networking strategies.

Read the Article | Go to the Quiz

Contacting Unrepresented Persons via Social Networking Sites - New York State Bar and Philadelphia Bar Ethics Opinions
More and more attorneys and judges are using social media. Some use it for its intended purpose of social networking (and, for the lesser intended purpose of marketing). Others take advantage of the information contained in these sites for an unintended purpose - investigative research. Legal pundits have argued (online and in print) about the ethical issues for attorneys utilizing this information in the matters they handle. Few Bar Associations have opined on the topic. Two exceptions are the Philadelphia Bar and the New York State Bar. They addressed the specific questions of whether it is ethical for an attorney to ask a non-lawyer assistant to "friend" an unrepresented witness even if the non-lawyer uses her real name but without also disclosing the reasons for making the request? Learn which ethics rules that these Ethics Opinions point out for potential violation by this activity.

Read the Article | Go to the Quiz

Contacting Unrepresented Persons via Social Networking Sites - New York City Bar Ethics Opinion
The Association of the Bar of the City of New York considered a question similar to the one presented to the New York State Bar and the Philadelphia Bar. The New York City Bar's Committee on Professional and Judicial Ethics' Opinion 2010-2 (Sept. 2010) concluded that there would be no violation of the rules of professional conduct if an attorney or her agent uses her real name and profile to send a "friend request" to obtain information from an unrepresented person's social networking website without also disclosing the reasons for making the request. Learn the New York City Bar's reasoning behind their decision.

Read the Article | Go to the Quiz

California Legal Ethics Quiz; Legal Advertising Should You or Shouldn't You?
There are numerous ethical considerations one makes in the day to day practice of law. While some seem to follow simple common sense, others are a bit less clear.

This ten question quiz will help you learn where to easily find answers to your ethical questions utilizing free State Bar and academic resources on the Internet.

Go to the quiz

The Ethics of Attorney Web Sites in California
The Bar's standing Committee on Professional Responsibility & Conduct has issued a Formal Opinion addressing ethical issues related to attorneys announcing their services via Internet web sites. Whether you already have your own web site or are just beginning to consider launching one, this ten question quiz will help you learn where to easily find answers to ethical questions regarding your web site.

Go to the quiz.

Back to the top of this page.

Adhering to the CA State Bar Rules of Professional Conduct
The California State Bar's Rules of Professional Conduct lay out very specific guidelines to regulate the professional conduct of its members - through discipline. These rules have been adopted by the Board of Governors of the Bar and approved by the Supreme Court of California pursuant to Business & Professions Code Sections 6076 and 6077 to protect the public and to promote respect and confidence in the legal profession.

This quiz is designed to give you an overview of some of the highlights of these rules to keep in mind as you build your practice.

Go to the quiz.

Ethical Requirements of Attorney Oversight & Supervision of Paralegal Staff in California
Recent changes to the California Rules of Professional Conduct spell out VERY specific requirements for minimum continuing legal education for Paralegals AND the responsibilities of Attorneys with whom they work.

This quiz is designed to give Paralegals AND Attorneys an overview of how these rules affect EACH of them.

Go to the quiz.

Back to the top of this page.

The post Online Legal Ethics MCLE Quizzes for California Lawyers & Paralegals appeared first on Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) in California, MCLE Los Angeles, CLE Orange County, Irvine & San Francisco.

Originally, this item was to be about VitalSearch's addition of the searchable databases to its site.

VitalSearch's searchable database of California births covers 1905-1995.

The Birth Index is searchable by any of nine criteria:

• Last Name
• First name
• Middle name
• Birth Year
• Birth Month
• Birth Day
• Mother's Last Name
• Sex
• County of Birth

Its California Death Index is spread over five databases:

• 1905-1929 Death Index Summary
• 1930-1939 Death Index Summary
• 1940-2000 Death Index Summary
• 1989-2000 Detailed Death Index (available to paid subscribers only)
• 1905-1929 Fetal Death Index (available to paid subscribers only)

The Death Index is searchable by any of 17 criteria:

• Last Name
• First name
• Middle name
• Birth Year
• Birth Month
• Birth Day
• Mother's Last Name
• Father's Last Name
• Birth Place
• County of Death
• Death Year
• Death Month
• Death Day
• Social Security Number
• Age

"Wildcard" searching is also available in both databases. the percent symbol (%) can be used to substitute for one (or more) letters in a name. For example, "Sam%" would return individuals named "Sam," "Sammy," "Sammie," "Samuel," etc.

VitalSearch provides free access to most searches, but users are required to register for a "Guest Pass" (username & password) to access the information.

Free users are subjected to innumerable, distracting pop-up ads and Flash ads that take up screen space and time to load. Click "Begin Search/Reset" at the bottom of the page to begin the search. VitalSearch also sells ad-free "Premium" search access for $57.95 per year or $24.95 for 90 days.

See Also:

• How Public are Public Records

The post VitalSearch Searchable Database of California Birth & Death Records Available Free Online appeared first on Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) in California, MCLE Los Angeles, CLE Orange County, Irvine & San Francisco.

There are several web sites where state and federal cases can be searched full-text, free of any charge such as: (1) FindLaw; (2) The Public Library of Law (PLoL); and (3) Google Scholar. Dates of coverage and the number of courts made available vary between these three sites.

There are also several sites that offer California state cases full-text for free: (1) FindLaw’s ACCESSLAW database and (2) the California Court’s official site, where Lexis provides a free database.

Free court forms are provided at the California Court’s official site. To search federal district and federal appellate court dockets for free, there are two sites: Justia and RECAP.

Each of the sites noted above differ in the courts they cover, the degree of user friendliness, date coverage, and currency. If I could combine the best features from each site, I'd have a near-perfect site, but I'll happily take what each site has to offer considering they are free.

LexisONE.com

On July 6, 2000 Lexis debuted LexisONE, which was the first web site to offer a FREE, FULL-TEXT searchable state and federal case-law database (federal district court cases were not included, however). Cases only went back five years and later were extended back to ten years. (Lexis later changed the name of LexisONE to LexisNexis Communities.) However, as of April 2012, Lexis took the free site down.

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

One month after the LexisONE debut, FindLaw.com (now owned by Westlaw) debuted a free California case-law database, powered by ACCESSLAW. (http://www.findlaw.com/cacases/index.html#dirsearch2). Though FindLaw trailed by a month, their debut did manage to trump Lexis--by extending its coverage of California case law back to 1934. 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.”

You can search by:

• (1) Citation by clicking on the Citation tab or
• (2) by Advanced Search by clicking on its tab.

Cases can be searched by the following criteria:

• (1) Keywords and Phrases (full text)
• (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.

Other FindLaw 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), 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 uses the Boolean connectors “and”, “or” and “not” and offers only one proximity connector, “near” (which means “one word within 50 words of another word”). To search for an exact phrase, enclose it in quotation marks. The single asterisk ( * ) wildcard is used to expand the root of a word. For example, fly* would bring back results with the word fly or flying. The double asterisk ( ** ) wildcard is used to include variations of a word. For example, fly** would bring back results with the word fly or flying, but also flown or flew.

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.)

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

Google Scholar

Late in the evening of November 17, 2009 a Google employee tweeted that something was new at Google Scholar and challenged readers to figure out what it was ... One of the authors of this article, a well-known late-night type, visited Google Scholar that evening and learned that Google had launched a free case law database Legal Opinions and Journals. You can reach Google Scholar from the Google.com home page by selecting the More tab, and then selecting Scholar (if the link is not displayed on the More tab, check the Even More tab) or you can use this direct URL: http://scholar.google.com/. Click “Revert to old venerable look” in the left lower corner.

Google Scholar contains opinions from: all U.S. state appellate and state supreme courts back to 1950, the U.S. federal district, appellate, tax, and bankruptcy courts back to 1923, and the U.S. Supreme Court back to 1791. Also included in this database are legal (and non-legal) journal articles. Google Scholar has no documentation about its currency. 

Google Scholar can be searched the same way you search at Google.com but it's better to use the Advanced Search (click “Advanced Scholar Search” located to the right of the search box) to construct a sophisticated search using the various search boxes that allow you to search with phrases, exclude words/phrases or search by author, publication name, date, etc. (The author and publication name are useful for searching the journals database.) There are no separate search boxes to search by citation, party name, counsel, or judge, so use the "all of the words" search box or the "exact phrase" search box.

In June 2012, Google Scholar's home page displayed a link, "Try our new modern look." We advise you not to try it. It appears that Google is testing a redesign to Scholar. While Google labels it “our new modern look,” we label it a major hindrance to those using Google Scholar to conduct case law research. It’s a hindrance for two reasons:

• (1) the Advanced Search is hidden behind the drop-down arrow to the right of the search box and
• (2) the Advanced Search no longer allows you to “Select specific courts” as you used to be able to.

Instead, Google forces you into a time consuming two-step process where you first run a search and then after viewing your results, which include every state and federal court, you are allowed to narrow down to the court(s) you wanted to search in the first place. If at some point in time Google doesn't allow you to avoid its "new modern look," read how to use it at http://www.netforlawyers.com/content/google-scholar-updates-search-interface-hides-reduces-advanced-search-functionality.

In Google Scholar, to search all California courts, scroll down to the bottom of the Advanced Search page and select "California" from the drop-down menu labeled "Search opinions of X court." To search other jurisdictions or combinations of jurisdictions, click the "Select specific courts to search" link.

To search Google Scholar, you use the same Boolean connectors that you use when you conduct a Google.com search. A space between words indicates "and," the minus sign indicates you are excluding a word, and "OR," which must be in upper case, indicates you want one or the other or both words. Google's proximity connector "AROUND(n)" is similar to Lexis' "w/" connector. AROUND must be in upper case and you replace the "n" with the number of words you want one word to be within another word.  Thus, a search can be constructed to find cases with the keywords “negligence” within 4 words of “automobile” by typing: negligence AROUND(4) automobile.  

You can, in the alternative, use the Advanced Search menu at http://scholar.google.com/advanced_scholar_search (discussed earlier) and enter your keywords into the various search boxes (but don’t use the Boolean or Proximity connectors discussed above).

Keywords are highlighted (in light yellow), but highlighting can be removed. Cases seem to be displayed in random date order in Google Scholar results.

Google Scholar offers a “Create email alert feature,” which allows researchers to receive alerts about cases on any chosen topic emanating from any chosen court (or alerts for articles or patents on any chosen topic). If your search included articles, legal journals, or patents, those would also be included in your alert results. You can choose to have your e-mail alert include a list of citations only or a summary. The alert defaults to your current search and current court choices, but you can revise the alert by typing in other keywords/phrases and even selecting one of the following: Legal opinions and journals, Articles and patents, Articles excluding patents, All federal courts, or Advanced Search. Choosing Advanced Search takes the researcher back to the search page to revise the search to include specific courts to include in the alert.

California Court’s Official Site: Lexis Case Law Database

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

Lexis uses the Boolean connectors “and”, “or” and “not” and, in addition to Boolean connectors, helps attorneys narrow down a search by offering proximity connectors (e.g. “one word within x words of another). Thus, a search can be constructed to find cases with the keywords “negligence” within 4 words of “automobile” by typing: negligence w/4 automobile.  Lexis also offers (in the left-hand column) the following field searches: By Terms (natural language words or phrases), By Citation, By Party Name, By Judge, and also an Advanced Search using keywords and connectors.

Lexis updates its California database once a month at the court's web site.

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 depublication 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 citator service for the U. S. Courts of Appeals or states other than California.

The "How cited tab" displayed to the right of the "View this case" tab in a Google Scholar case will help you conduct a citation check to ascertain whether your case is still good law.

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.

Registration and Log-On

Google Scholar and the Lexis California databases do not require registration, but FindLaw requires registration (free). .

Number of Cases Displayed

FindLaw results are limited to the first 100 cases while Lexis' California case results are limited to the first 25 cases. Google Scholar does not seem to have a limit.

California State Court Dockets

Case information (dockets) for California Supreme and Appellate Courts can be searched at 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 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.”

California Court Forms

Court forms can be viewed by number, name, or topic (http://www.courts.ca.gov/forms.htm). Also, you can view a list of recently changed forms only. If a form is interactive, it will be labeled “fillable.”

New Free Federal Docket Web Site-Justia

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.

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