Shepardize Cases: A Step-by-Step Legal Guide

Hey guys! Have you ever heard of the term "Shepardizing a case" and wondered what it actually means? Well, you're in the right place! Shepardizing a case is a crucial step in legal research, and it's something every law student, paralegal, and attorney needs to master. In this comprehensive guide, we'll break down the concept of Shepardizing, why it's so important, and how to do it effectively. Think of it as your go-to resource for making sure your legal research is rock-solid. So, let's dive in and unravel the mysteries of Shepardizing!

What is Shepardizing?

At its core, Shepardizing is a method used to check the current status of a legal authority, such as a case, statute, or regulation. Imagine you've found a case that perfectly supports your argument. That's great! But what if that case has been overturned or criticized by a higher court? Yikes! That's where Shepardizing comes in. Shepardizing a case allows you to trace its history and see how it has been treated in subsequent court decisions. It’s like checking the vital signs of your legal authority to ensure it’s still "alive" and well. This process involves using a tool—typically LexisNexis’s Shepard’s Citations Service or Westlaw’s KeyCite—to track the judicial history of a case. These tools provide you with a detailed report on the case, showing you if it has been affirmed, reversed, distinguished, or even overruled by other courts. It also highlights any secondary sources, like law review articles, that have cited the case, giving you a broader understanding of its impact and interpretation. Why is this important? Because you don't want to base your legal arguments on a case that's no longer good law. It’s like building a house on a shaky foundation—it's bound to crumble. Shepardizing helps you ensure that the legal precedents you're relying on are still valid and persuasive.

Why is Shepardizing Important?

So, why should you care about Shepardizing? Let's get real – in the legal world, accuracy is everything. Imagine presenting a brilliant argument in court, only to have the judge point out that the case you're relying on has been overturned. Talk about embarrassing! That's why Shepardizing is so vital. It helps you avoid such scenarios by ensuring that the legal authorities you're citing are still valid. Think of it as your safety net in legal research.

Here are some key reasons why Shepardizing is crucial:

• Ensuring Good Law: This is the most fundamental reason. Shepardizing verifies that the case or statute you're relying on is still considered "good law." In other words, it hasn't been reversed, overruled, or significantly modified by subsequent decisions. This prevents you from making arguments based on outdated or invalid legal precedents.
• Identifying Negative Treatment: Shepardizing highlights any negative treatment a case has received. This includes situations where the case has been criticized, distinguished, or questioned by other courts. Knowing this helps you anticipate potential counterarguments and strengthen your own position by addressing these criticisms head-on.
• Finding Related Cases: Shepardizing not only tells you about the history of a case but also points you to other cases that have cited it. This is incredibly valuable for expanding your research and finding additional support for your arguments. By examining these related cases, you can develop a more comprehensive understanding of the legal issues at hand.
• Understanding the Case's Influence: The Shepard's report can show how influential a case has been by tracking how often it has been cited in other court decisions and legal publications. A case that has been cited frequently is likely to be more persuasive than one that has been largely ignored. This helps you gauge the strength of your legal authority.
• Maintaining Credibility: Citing cases that are no longer good law can seriously damage your credibility with the court. Shepardizing demonstrates that you've done your due diligence and are presenting well-researched and accurate information. This builds trust and enhances your reputation as a legal professional.
• Saving Time and Resources: While it may seem like an extra step, Shepardizing can actually save you time in the long run. By ensuring the validity of your research early on, you avoid wasting time developing arguments based on flawed precedents. This efficiency is crucial in the fast-paced legal field.

In essence, Shepardizing is about ensuring the integrity of your legal research. It's a critical step that helps you build strong, credible arguments and avoid costly mistakes. So, next time you're deep in legal research, remember to Shepardize – it's your best friend in the legal world!

How to Shepardize a Case: A Step-by-Step Guide

Okay, so now you know why Shepardizing is essential. But how do you actually do it? Don't worry, guys, it's not as complicated as it sounds! Here's a step-by-step guide to Shepardizing a case, making it super easy to follow along.

Step 1: Access a Shepardizing Service

The first thing you'll need is access to a Shepardizing service. The two main players in this game are LexisNexis’s Shepard’s Citations Service and Westlaw’s KeyCite. These are subscription-based services, so your law school, firm, or organization likely provides access. If you’re a student, you’ll probably get free access through your school’s library. If you're a practicing attorney, your firm will likely have a subscription. Once you have access, log in to the service of your choice.

Step 2: Enter the Case Citation

Once you're logged in, you'll see a search bar or a designated field where you can enter the case citation. The case citation is the unique identifier for a case, like its name and the volume and page number where it's reported. For example, a citation might look like "123 F.3d 456." Enter the full citation accurately into the search field. Double-check that you've typed it correctly, because even a small error can lead to incorrect results.

Step 3: Review the Shepard's Report

After you enter the citation, the Shepardizing service will generate a report. This report is the heart of Shepardizing. It provides a comprehensive overview of the case's history and treatment. The report typically includes:

• History of the Case: This section traces the case's journey through the court system, including any appeals and prior decisions. It shows you whether the case has been affirmed, reversed, or modified on appeal.
• Citing References: This part lists all the cases, statutes, regulations, and secondary sources (like law review articles) that have cited your case. This is gold for finding related authorities and understanding the case's influence.
• Treatment Analysis: This is where you see how other courts have treated your case. It uses a system of symbols and abbreviations to indicate whether the case has been followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled. This is critical for determining if your case is still good law.

Step 4: Interpret the Treatment Analysis

The treatment analysis is where the magic happens. Shepardizing services use a system of signals (usually symbols and abbreviations) to indicate the treatment of the case. Here’s a breakdown of some common signals:

• Positive Treatment: These signals indicate that the case has been viewed favorably by other courts.
  • Affirmed (A): The higher court has upheld the decision of the lower court.
  • Followed (F): Another court has relied on the case in its decision.
  • Cited (C): The case has been mentioned by another court, without necessarily indicating agreement or disagreement.
• Neutral Treatment: These signals indicate that the case has been cited without any specific judgment.
  • Explained (E): Another court has clarified or interpreted the case.
  • Distinguished (Q): Another court has identified differences between the case and the one before it, limiting its applicability.
• Negative Treatment: These are the red flags you need to watch out for.
  • Criticized (X): Another court has expressed disagreement with the case’s reasoning or holding.
  • Questioned (D): The validity of the case has been called into doubt.
  • Overruled (O): A higher court has reversed the case, meaning it's no longer good law.

Pay close attention to the negative treatment signals. If a case has been criticized, questioned, or overruled, it might not be a reliable authority to cite.

Step 5: Read the Citing Cases

The Shepard's report lists all the cases that have cited your case. Don't just skim the list – actually read the citing cases! This is crucial for understanding how your case has been interpreted and applied. Focus on the cases that have provided significant treatment, especially those with negative signals. Reading these cases will give you a deeper understanding of the current state of the law and help you refine your arguments.

Step 6: Update Your Research

Legal research is an ongoing process. Laws and court decisions change, so it's essential to update your research regularly. Before you submit a brief or present an argument in court, Shepardize your cases one last time to ensure they're still good law. This final check can save you from making a serious mistake.

Step 7: Document Your Shepardizing

It's a good practice to document your Shepardizing process. This includes noting the date you Shepardized the case and any significant treatment you found. This documentation can be helpful if you need to explain your research process to a supervisor, colleague, or the court. Plus, it helps you keep track of your research and avoid repeating steps.

Shepardizing might seem daunting at first, but once you get the hang of it, it becomes second nature. Follow these steps, and you'll be a Shepardizing pro in no time!

Common Mistakes to Avoid When Shepardizing

Alright, so you've got the basics of Shepardizing down. But, like with any skill, there are some common pitfalls to watch out for. Let's talk about some frequent mistakes people make when Shepardizing and how you can avoid them. This will help you ensure your research is as solid as possible.

Mistake 1: Not Shepardizing at All

Okay, this might seem obvious, but it's the biggest mistake of all! The most common error is simply not Shepardizing a case. People sometimes assume that if a case seems relevant, it must be good law. But as we've discussed, that's a dangerous assumption. Court decisions can change, and relying on an outdated case can undermine your entire argument.

How to Avoid It: Make Shepardizing a non-negotiable part of your research process. Before you start drafting a memo, brief, or any legal document, make it a habit to Shepardize every case you plan to cite. Think of it as your legal safety check.

Mistake 2: Only Checking the Signals and Not Reading the Citing Cases

The Shepard's report provides valuable signals about a case's treatment, but relying solely on these signals without reading the citing cases is a mistake. The signals give you a quick overview, but they don't tell the whole story. You need to understand the context in which the case was cited.

How to Avoid It: Always read the cases that have cited your case, especially those with negative signals (criticized, questioned, overruled). This will give you a deeper understanding of how your case has been interpreted and whether it's still a reliable authority. Pay attention to the specific points of law that were discussed in the citing case.

Mistake 3: Misinterpreting the Signals

Shepardizing signals can sometimes be nuanced, and misinterpreting them can lead to inaccurate conclusions. For example, a case that has been "distinguished" isn't necessarily bad law, but it might not be applicable to your specific situation. Similarly, a case that has been "cited" many times might not be as persuasive if those citations are mostly in dissenting opinions.

How to Avoid It: Familiarize yourself with the meaning of each Shepardizing signal. If you're unsure about a signal, consult the Shepard's or KeyCite guide or ask a law librarian for help. Consider the context of the citation – is it a majority opinion, a dissent, or a concurring opinion? This will help you gauge the weight of the citation.

Mistake 4: Not Updating Your Research

Legal research is a dynamic process, and new cases and statutes are constantly being added. A case that was good law last week might be overruled this week. Failing to update your research can lead you to rely on outdated authorities.

How to Avoid It: Make it a practice to Shepardize your cases shortly before you submit a legal document or present an argument in court. This ensures that your research is as current as possible. Set reminders to periodically check the status of key cases in your research.

Mistake 5: Relying on Headnotes Alone

Headnotes are brief summaries of the points of law discussed in a case, and they can be a useful starting point for research. However, relying solely on headnotes without reading the full text of the case and the citing cases is a mistake. Headnotes are written by editors and might not capture the full complexity of the court's decision.

How to Avoid It: Always read the full text of the case and the citing cases to understand the court's reasoning and the specific context of the decision. Don't rely on headnotes as a substitute for thorough reading and analysis.

Mistake 6: Neglecting Secondary Sources

Shepardizing services also track secondary sources, such as law review articles and legal treatises, that have cited a case. These sources can provide valuable insights and analysis, helping you understand the case's impact and interpretation.

How to Avoid It: Pay attention to the secondary sources listed in the Shepard's report. These sources can offer different perspectives on the case and help you develop a more nuanced understanding of the legal issues.

Mistake 7: Not Documenting Your Research

Failing to document your Shepardizing process can lead to confusion and wasted time. If you don't keep track of when you Shepardized a case and what you found, you might have to repeat your research later.

How to Avoid It: Develop a system for documenting your research, including the date you Shepardized each case, the signals you found, and the citing cases you read. This will help you stay organized and avoid unnecessary duplication of effort.

By avoiding these common mistakes, you can ensure that your Shepardizing is accurate and effective. Remember, Shepardizing is a critical part of legal research, and doing it well can make the difference between a strong argument and a flawed one.

Conclusion

So, there you have it, guys! We've covered pretty much everything you need to know about Shepardizing a case. From understanding what it is and why it's important, to mastering the step-by-step process and avoiding common mistakes, you're now well-equipped to make sure your legal research is top-notch. Shepardizing might seem like an extra step, but trust me, it's an essential one. It's like having a superpower that allows you to see into the legal future and avoid potential pitfalls. By taking the time to Shepardize, you're not just ensuring the accuracy of your research – you're also building credibility and demonstrating your commitment to thoroughness. So, go forth and Shepardize with confidence! You've got this!