Preparing a Casenote Professor Tobi Tabor Summer 2009

Legal Scholarship is Critical Writing “[A]lmost all legal scholarship is implicitly directed to the decision-makers in our society—legislative and executive as well as judicial.”  Legal scholarship is “characteristically normative (informed by a social goal) and prescriptive (recommending or disapproving a means to that goal).”   Elizabeth Fajans & Mary R. Falk, Scholarly Writing for Law Students 3 (3rd ed. 2005).

Characteristics of Good Scholarly Work* Original Says something not said before Comprehensive “provides sufficient background [so] any law- school-educated reader [can] understand... and evaluate the writer’s thesis.” “takes the reader from the known (background) to the unknown (the writer’s analysis ).” *Fajans & Falk at 5.

Good Scholarly Writing Factually Correct Logical Analysis “well and sufficiently reasoned and divided into mutually exclusive, yet related sections” Clear and readable Somewhat formal style Not pompous or colloquial

Steps Involved  Tasks Required  1. Inspiration 2. Research- preliminary 3. Research-close to complete 4. Drafting 5. More research-fill gaps 6. Revising 7. Polishing  Fajans & Falk at Outline/rough draft 2. Complete draft 3. Good draft 4. Final product  Mary Barnard Ray & Barbara J. Cox, Beyond the Basics (2d ed. 2003). You may not write all these stages, but you will need to address all tasks.

Steps & Tasks Integrated 1. Inspiration 2. Research-preliminary 3. Research-close to complete 4. Drafting Outline/Rough Draft Complete Draft 5. More Research 6. Revising Good Draft 7. Polishing Final Product

Write-on Competition You are given specific case Read all separate opinions As you read, formulate reaction to court’s reasoning (majority, concurrence, dissent), and from there, formulate your claim/original thesis. Check periodicals to see if your claim has already been addressed. You should read all the cases cited by the court in starting your research, and you may need to read them before you formulate your claim.

Step 1-Your inspiration* For Competition you will be assigned a recent opinion to analyze For this casenote previously unresolved or currently evolving areas of law provide most potential You will agree or disagree with all or part of what the Court did Something worth writing about—new issue, rule no longer practical, decision makes new law on old issue Hone it down to manageable size and scope

How to Narrow/Break down the Topic  : Montejo v. Louisiana, No , (U.S. May 26, 2009). History/facts: Δ charged w/ murder and court ordered appointment of counsel. After Miranda rights, Δ went with w/ officers to locate murder weapon. On trip Δ wrote inculpatory letter to victim’s widow. On return, Δ met for first time w/ appointed counsel. Letter admitted over objection, Δ convicted: death. St Sup Ct aff’d conviction & sentence, ruling Michigan v. Jackson, 475 U.S. 625, not require suppression unless Δ actually requested lawyer or otherwise asserted right to counsel. Proper inquiry only whether proper waiver of right to have counsel present during interrogation. Cert. granted 10/01/08, SCOTUS overruled Michigan v. Jackson and vacated and remanded for opinion consistent with this one.

Montejo

Montejo v. Louisiana, No , (U.S. May 26, 2009). Majority: Scalia joined by Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas, Alito Concurring: Alito joined by Kennedy Dissenting: Stevens joined by Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer (except for fn. 5) Dissenting: Breyer

How to Narrow/Break down the Topic  : Montejo v. Louisiana, No , (U.S. May 26, 2009). Ask series of questions How does this decision affect waiver of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel: a) when Δ requests counsel or otherwise asserts right, b) when counsel is appointed automatically at preliminary hearing/arraignment & Δ makes no response to accept or is absent from hearing? Does this opinion change the relationship between the Miranda waiver and validity of waiver of right to counsel once appointed? How does Court define valid Sixth Amendment waiver? How is Court’s analysis of stare decisis like/unlike analyses in precedent? Is Court’s expansion of question presented usual/unusual procedure? What evidence did Court consider in cost/benefit analysis of Jackson prophylactic rule? How does majority’s view of Jackson compare to Jackson itself? Dissenting opinion?  Fajans & Falk at

Managing topic More in series of questions What did majority leave open for lower court to assess? As concurrence proffers, does the Arizona v. Gant decision support the Montejo majority’s stare decisis analysis? Dissenting view? Does dissent’s assessment of valid Sixth Amendment waiver difeer from majority’s? If so, how? With what result for Δ? What significance in Breyer’s joining Stevens’ dissent but not joining in footnote 5, which discusses Alito’s faulty characterization of Gant?

Managing topic Up and down ladder of abstraction: macro focus (greatest level of generality) to micro focus (greatest detail & specificity) How many and which states have state constitutional or statutory right to counsel? How does this decision affect those provisions? What procedures do those states follow that align with/conflict with this ruling? What are the Texas law provisions that implicate/provide right to counsel? Does this decision affect how those provisions will be implemented?

Montejo Decide whether primarily legal or primarily interdisciplinary How will this decision affect Δs with deficiencies in English, mental or developmental disabilities? Determine Causation What is the impact of this decision on police procedures? Make comparisons How does the Court’s approach to stare decisis in this opinion compare to that in Fifth, Fourth, or Eighth Amendment jurisprudence?

Your original thesis Descriptive—the world as it was/is Historical question A claim about a law’s effects How courts are interpreting the law Prescriptive—what should be done How a law should be interpreted What new law should be enacted How a statute or common-law rule should be changed Probably a combination of both descriptive and prescriptive. * Eugene Volokh, Academic Legal Writing 9 (2d ed. 2005).

Characteristics of Claim “Good Legal Scholarship should (1) make a claim that is (2) novel, (3) nonobvious, (4) useful, (5) sound, and (6) seen by the reader to be novel, nonobvious, useful, and sound.”* You identify a problem—doctrinal, empirical, historical—your claim is your proposed solution to the problem.  * Eugene Volokh, Academic Legal Writing 9 (2d ed. 2005).  Id.

Your Claim You should be able to state your claim in In one sentence.* “Statute X does not provide adequate protection to those it was enacted to serve because ….” “This [ruling] is likely to result in the following consequences..., and therefore should be modified to provide....” * Volokh at 9.

Where would you start? Thesis/claim? Narrow topic Questions Macro-micro Interdisciplinary/law only Comparisons Causation Research sources? Who has authority Where find sources Lines of analysis?

Step 2-Preliminary Research Research Plan List major points—roadmap for research Develop search terms Known case or statute Annotated statutes Shepardize—headnote numbers Key Cite—Key numbers legislative history No specific starting point Secondary sources

Research Plan Has someone else looked into some aspects? Build checks into your research so you don’t stop too soon Logical and orderly documentation of what you have done What courts, governments, branches of government have authority to speak on the issues? Different places to find that authority?

Read critically while researching Take good notes so you don’t lose your original reactions to material. Don’t read just to summarize. Find the holes in what you’re reading, the inconsistent reasoning, conflict with precedent (will help you focus on thesis and analyze topic critically).

Step 3—Research-close to complete What sources might you be looking for? Statutes and regulations: U.S. & foreign Treaties, Conventions, Protocols Cases Secondary sources: academic perspective, practical perspective

Step 4-Drafting: How Do the Materials Fit Together? Organize your materials into issues, lines of cases and commentary, pro and con If you have a good grasp of a thesis, start with an outline Try a non-linear outline if you can’t decide how concepts fit together If you’re not ready for an outline, do “freewriting”—just “dump” all the thoughts you have onto the paper—from there you can derive an outline

The Parts of Your paper: start writing anywhere—end with 4 parts Scholarly papers have a basic four-part structure Introduction Background Analysis Conclusion

Introduction Goal--persuade people to read further Introduce topic & why it’s important Describe subject of paper Give enough background to make significance of your subject obvious State your claim Provide an explicit roadmap 5-7.5% of paper

Background: Two parts in casenote General background Genesis of subject Changes during development Reasons for changes How things are now Specific case description Issue court considered Facts as relevant to the issue Each separate opinion Decision Reasoning

Background: Both Parts Have to assume law-educated reader is relatively uninformed in the area Not tedious with detail but specific as to what is necessary for topic Be comprehensive judiciously Synthesize precedents No commentary, critique

Organization of Background: General section Topically re issue/strand of analysis Chronologically w/in topic Jurisdictionally w/in topic Courts Branches of government

Analysis The most important section (1) original thoughts (2) tightly, logically, and creatively reasoned Keep reader’s interest Build to a conclusion

Analysis Your critique and commentary Assess development of relevant case law: how law got where it is, where it should go, why, how? Usually several strands of analysis Background & Analysis 85-90% of paper: split 40/60 up to 50/50

Prove your thesis Prove your prescriptive proposal both doctrinally and as a matter of policy. Be concrete. Confront contrary arguments, but focus on your own. *Volokh, supra, at

Organization of Analysis Large-scale Divide into major issues/strands of analysis—use informative headings Subdivide--subheadings Order logically—headings & subheadings should be logical outline Small-scale Introduce and conclude on each issue Focus on your arguments Rebut major opposing arguments

Conclusion Restate thesis Summarize major points “[M]ay suggest related issues or ramifications, inviting the reader to further reflection.”* 5-7.5% of paper *Fajans & Falk at 9.

Step 5—More Research As you write, research to fill analytical gaps, provide examples, etc. Continuous process Don’t let research prevent or interrupt writing

UHLC Honor Code & Plagiarism Policy  A failure to review and familiarize yourself with these guidelines and how they apply to the assignment you have before turning in even a draft of a covered paper constitutes a violation of the University of Houston Law Center Honor Code, and that is so even if the paper ends up not violating this policy. In other words, there is no acceptable excuse for preparing a paper covered by this policy without having first reviewed this policy carefully and determining how it applies to the project in which you are engaged.

Plagiarism Policy “[A] writer may not appropriate in his writing either the language or the ideas of another without giving due credit to the source of such language or ideas, except as otherwise specifically provided [in the policy].”

“Giving Due Credit to the Source” “What constitutes giving credit to the source of borrowed language or ideas ‘in a way that clearly indicates the nature and extent of the source’s contribution to the student’s work’ varies according to the circumstances... [,]” and the Plagiarism Policy has examples.

Plagiarism intent not required plagiarism is still plagiarism, even when it is inadvertent product of careless research (i.e., save those pages from which you expect to quote, note pinpoint cites)

What is a paraphrase? Putting another’s ideas and words into your own words Not just changing a few words here and there, even if you cite the source—if you change only a few words, you still need to quote the author’s words Write your paraphrase relying on your memory, without looking at the original. Then compare “for content, accuracy, and mistakenly borrowed phrases.”* * agiar.html (10/01/02)

How Do I Use Quotes? Always provide an introduction that reflects significance of quote: Not “court held,” “commentator said” Minimize use of quotes, particularly block quotes. Quotes supplement text; they don’t supplant, i.e., if you take the quotes out, you still have clear, logically developed text.

Footnotes have three functions: provide authority for assertions attribute borrowed ideas & words to a source Provide discursive commentary to supplement text

Authority Footnotes --the general rules substantiate every proposition in text—not your own ideas and opinions No common knowledge in legal writing background sections need fewer and more general footnotes see generally and see, e.g., use appropriate signals when necessary be sure signal choice is not misleading do not quote work out of context use parenthetical explanations to make clear the relevance of citations

Authority Footnotes  --Quotes, Concepts, & Principles Only rights that are specifically enumerated in the Constitution or that are "'so rooted in the traditions and conscience of our people as to be ranked as fundamental"' qualify for this level of analysis. [FN81] Otherwise, courts apply rational basis review, under which a law affecting property or nonfundamental liberties is presumed valid and will survive judicial scrutiny if it is "rationally related to a legitimate state interest." [FN82] [FN81]. Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479, 487 (1965) (Goldberg, J., concurring) (citing Snyder v. Massachusetts, 291 U.S. 97, 105 (1934)). [FN82]. City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Ctr., 473 U.S. 432, 440 (1985).  Material illustrating types of footnotes in these footnote slides is quoted from Adrienne Butcher, Note, Selective Constitutional Analysis in Lawrence v. Texas: an Exercise in Judicial Restraint or a Willingness to Reconsider Equal Protection Classification for Homosexuals?, 41 Hous. L. Rev (2004).

Attribution Footnotes—Statements, Ideas, & Structure --the general rules footnote for borrowed language, facts or ideas 7 consecutive words – use quotation marks if distinctive language – use quotation marks 50 or more words – follow block quote rules footnote citing or quoting source “A” that in turn quotes or cites “B” Only one level of “quoting” or “citing” is necessary, unless second level particularly relevant. Rule reference source and significance as you introduce a quote The Shasta dissent criticized the majority’s construction of the phrase, remarking: “....”

Attribution Footnotes Constitutional due process does not operate as a categorical prohibition against state infringement on citizens' rights. [FN78] Rather, it requires a certain level of justification for each imposition, with the level of justification depending on the classification under which the affected rights fall. [FN79] [FN78]. See Mathews, 424 U.S. at 332 ("Procedural due process imposes constraints on governmental decisions which deprive individuals of 'liberty' or 'property' interests....") (emphasis added). [FN79]. See Washington v. Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702, (1997) (describing the two primary features of the Court's "established method" for classifying rights to determine the appropriate level of judicial scrutiny).

Textual Footnotes --how do I use them? Supplement your text clarify or qualify an textual assertion raise potential criticisms or complications relate anecdotes pertinent to text Use textual footnotes to enrich the theme of your argument

Textual Footnotes The issue in Griswold was whether a Connecticut statute criminalizing the use of contraceptives, as it applied to married couples, violated the Constitution. [FN84] The Court found that it did, reasoning that the Bill of Rights created "penumbras," or "zones of privacy," that enveloped marital privacy as a fundamental liberty interest. [FN85] [FN84]. Id. at 480. [FN85]. Id. at Justice Douglas, defining constitutional penumbras, explained that certain enumerated rights have implied corollaries that expand their meaning beyond what is written. Id. at For example, the First Amendment's "freedom of association" extends beyond mere attendance at meetings to include expressing one's ideals through organizational affiliations, although the latter is not enumerated. Id. at 483 (citing NAACP v. Alabama, 357 U.S. 449, 462 (1958)). Justice Douglas also described marital privacy rights as emanating from similar extensions of the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth, and Ninth Amendments. See id. at 484.

Citation Placement in Footnotes Citation Sentences If the unlicensed individual answers difficult or doubtful legal questions, she has committed the unlawful practice of law.   Gardner v. Conway, 48 N.W.2d 788, 796 (Minn. 1951). Citation Clauses If the unlicensed individual answers difficult or doubtful legal questions, she has committed the unlawful practice of law.   Gardner v. Conway, 48 N.W.2d 788, 796 (Minn. 1951). The courts have suggested that the drafting of a testamentary will by a nonlawyer is the unauthorized practice of law, Peterson v. Hovland, 42 N.W.2d 59, 63 (Minn. 1950), as is the preparation of complicated tax returns, Gardner v. Conway, 48 N.W.2d 788, 796 (Minn. 1951).

What Requires Citation? Quoting, paraphrasing, or otherwise using another's words or ideas-- must credit the source in a way that clearly indicates the nature and extent of the original source's contribution to your article

Proper Citation Form The Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation (18th Edition) Locate the Pertinent Rules Use Quick Reference Pages Use the Index Use the Table of Contents Read the Main Rules Covering Your Source Consult Applicable Tables

Different Parts of a Citation Typeface: main text, footnote text, and footnote citation Abbreviations Source material: case, book, statute, periodical Date Page: beginning and pinpoint Court/author

Typeface & Abbreviations: Case names in textual sentence & citations In main text: In Southern Pacific Co. v. Jensen,  Justice McReynolds stressed the value of uniform laws.  244 U.S. 205 (1917). In footnote text: In Southern Pacific Co. v. Jensen, 244 U.S. 205 (1917), Justice McReynolds stressed the value of uniform laws. One of the values stressed by the Supreme Court is uniform application of the law to persons similarly situated.   See, e.g., S. Pac. Co. v. Jensen, 244 U.S. 205 (1917).

Typeface & Abbreviations: Statutes Rule 12.3: Current Official & Unofficial Codes Large & small caps Table 1: Abbreviations for federal and state codes Which code to cite for each state

Typeface & Abbreviations: Books Rule 15.1: Author large & small caps Rule 15.3: Title no abbreviations large & small caps Rule 8(a):Capitalization in Titles

Typeface & Abbreviations: Periodicals Rule 16.1: Author Ordinary roman Rule 16.2: Title of article Ordinary roman No abbreviations Italics Rule 16.3: consecutively paginated Rule 16.4: nonconsecutively paginated Tables T.10 & T.13: Abbreviations Periodical Title Large & small caps

Electronic Media & Other Nonprint Sources: Rule 18 The Bluebook requires the use and citation of traditional printed sources unless: Information cited is unavailable in traditional printed source or Copy of source can not be located because it is so obscure it’s practically unavailable If one exception met, you can cite electronic source alone.

Electronic Media & Other Nonprint Sources: Rule 18 Rule : Cases-unreported but available on widely used database Include case name, docket number, database identifier, court name, full date, unique database identifier Gibbs v. Frank, No , 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS (3rd Cir. Oct. 14, 2004). Shelton v. City of Manhattan Beach, No. B171606, 2004 WL (Cal. Ct. App. Sept. 28, 2004).

Internet Rule 18.2: If available, cite to print source or widely available commercial database Use internet Source unavailable in print or on widely available commercial database Available in print but Internet version identical & will increase access: print citation with parallel cite to Internet, preceded by “available at”

Constitutions and Statutes Rules 11 and 12 for print sources Rule After citation through section number, give parenthetically Name of database Currency of database (rather than year in ) Publisher, editor, or compiler of database

Short Forms General: Rule 4 Cases: Rule 10.9 Statutes: Rule 12.9 Books: Rule 15.9 Periodicals: 16.7 Electronic: Rule 18.7

Particularly Helpful Tables Table 6: Case Names (335) Table 7: Court names (337) Table 10: Geographical Locations (342) Table 13: Periodicals (349)

Internal Cross References (63) Rule 3.5 “supra” and “infra” See supra notes and accompanying text. See infra pp