Case citation is the system used in common law countries such as the United States, England and Wales, Canada, New Zealand, Australia and India to uniquely identify the location of past court cases in special series of books called reporters or law reports. Whilst case citations are formatted differently in different jurisdictions, they generally contain the same key information.
Where cases are published in bound volumes the citation will contain:
In some report series, for example in England and Australia, the volumes are not numbered independently of the year: thus the year and volume number (usually no greater than 4) are required to identify which book of the series has the case reported within its covers. In citations of this type it is usual for square brackets '*' to be applied to the year (which may not be the year that the case was decided: for example, a case decided in December 2001 may have been reported in 2002).
The Internet brought with it the opportunity for courts to publish their decisions on web sites. Decisions of courts from all over the world can now be found through the website WorldLII * and its member institutes.
Most decisions of courts are not published in printed law reports. The expense of typesetting and publishing them has limited the printed law reports to the significant cases. Internet publishing of court decisions resulted in a flood of information. The result was that a medium-neutral citation system had to be adopted. This usually contains the following information:
where:
These numbers are used to find a particular case, both when looking up a case in a reporter and when accessing it electronically on the Internet or through LexisNexis or Westlaw.
This format also allows different cases with the same parties to be easily differentiated. For example, looking for the U.S. Supreme Court case of Miller v. California would yield four cases, some involving different people named Miller, and all involving different issues.
Many court decisions are published by more than one reporter. A citation to two or more reporters for a given court decision is called a "parallel citation." For U.S. Supreme Court decisions, there are several unofficial reporters, including the Supreme Court Reporter (S. Ct.) and the Lawyer's Edition (L. Ed.), which are printed by private companies and provide further annotations to the opinions of the Court. Although a citation to the latter two is not required, some attorneys and legal writers prefer to cite all three case reporters at once:
The "2d" after the L. Ed. signifies the second series of the Lawyers' Edition. United States case reporters are sequentially numbered, but the volume number is never higher than 999. When volume 1,000 is reached, the volume number is reset to 1 and a "2d" is appended after the reporter's abbreviation (American lawyers have a tradition of using "2d" and "3d" rather than "2nd" and "3rd"). Some case reporters are in their third series, and a few are approaching their fourth.
Some very old Supreme Court cases have odd-looking citations, such as Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803). The "(1 Cranch)" refers to the fact that, before there was an official court reporter, cases were gathered, bound together, and sold by private individuals who had contracted with the Court for the right to do so. In this case, the case was first reported in an edition by William Cranch, who was responsible for publishing Supreme Court reports from 1801 to 1815. Such reports, named for the individual who gathered them, existed from 1790 to 1874.
When a case has been decided, but not yet transcribed into the case reporter, the citation may note the volume but leave blank the page of the case reporter until it is determined. For example, Gonzales v. Oregon, 546 U.S. ___ (2006).
See the Supreme Court of the United States Reporter of Decisions for other edition names.
In the caption of a Supreme Court case, the first name listed is the name of the appealing party, followed by the party responding to the appeal. In most cases, the appealing party was the losing party in the prior court. This is the same practice used in cases in the federal courts of appeal.
When lower federal court opinions are cited, the citation includes the name of the court. This is placed in the parentheses immediately before the year. Some examples:
In addition to the official reporters, Thomson West publishes several series of "regional reporters" which cover several states each. These include the North Eastern Reporter, Atlantic Reporter, South Eastern Reporter, South Western Reporter, North Western Reporter, and Pacific Reporter. California, Illinois, and New York also each have their own line of West reporters, because of the large volume of cases generated in those states. Some smaller states (like South Dakota) have stopped publishing their own official reporters, and instead have certified the appropriate West regional reporter as their "official" reporter.
Here are some examples of how to cite West reporters:
Abbreviations for lower courts vary by state, as each state has its own system of trial courts and intermediate appellate courts.
When a case appears in both an official reporter and a regional reporter, either citation can be used. Many lawyers prefer to include both citations. Some state courts require that parallel citations (in this case, citing to both the official reporter and an unofficial regional reporter) be used when citing cases from any court in that state's system.
Some states, notably California and New York, have their own citation systems which differ significantly from the various federal and national standards. Citations in California style put the year between the names of the parties and the reference to the case reporter. Citations in New York style wrap the year in brackets instead of parentheses. Both New York and California wrap an entire citation in parentheses when it is used as a stand-alone sentence. New York puts the terminating period outside the parentheses, but California puts it inside. New York wraps just the reporter and page references in parentheses when the citation is used as a clause.
Either way, both state styles differ from the national/Bluebook style of simply dropping in the citation as a separate sentence without further adornment. Both systems use less punctuation and spacing in their reporter abbreviations.
For example, assuming that it is being placed as a stand-alone sentence, the Brown case above would be cited (using the official reporter) to a New York court as:
And, again, as a stand-alone sentence, the famous Greenman product liability case would be cited to a California court as:
Like the United States Supreme Court, some very old state case citations include an abbreviation of the name of either the private publisher or a state-appointed officer who collected the cases. For example, the citation in Pierson v. Post, 3 Cai. R. 175 (1804), is an abbreviation for volume 3 of Caines' Reports, page 175, named for George Caines, who had been appointed to report New York cases. Most states gave up this practice in the mid- to late-1800s, but Delaware persisted until 1920.
Attorneys have several options in citing "unpublished" decisions:
Some court systems—such as the California state court system and the federal Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit—forbid attorneys to cite unpublished cases as precedent. Since 2004, federal judges have been debating whether the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure (FRAP) should be amended so that unpublished cases in all circuits can be cited as precedent. In 2006, the Supreme Court, over the objection of several hundred judges and lawyers, adopted a new Rule 32.1 of FRAP requiring that federal courts allow citation of unpublished cases effective January 1, 2007. The rule will take effect unless Congress vetoes it.McDonald, Molly, "Door slowly opens for unpublished opinions", ABA Journal eReport, April 21, 2006.
A vendor neutral citation movement led to provisions being made for citations to web-based cases and other legal materials. A few courts modified their rules to specifically take into account cases "published" on the web.
For example, in Roe v. Wade, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the word "person" as used in the Fourteenth Amendment does not include the unborn. A full pin cite to Roe for the page with that holding would be as follows:
And a parallel cite to all three U.S. Supreme Court reporters, combined with pin cites for all three, would produce:
But in its opinions, the Court usually provides a direct pin cite only to the official reporter, as follows:
Even then, such citations are still quite lengthy, and obviously look quite mysterious and intimidating to laypersons when they try to read court opinions. Since the 1980s, there has been an ongoing debate among American judges as to whether they should relegate such lengthy citations to footnotes to improve the readability of their opinions. Most judges do relegate some citations to footnotes (though Justice Stephen Breyer's refusal to use footnotes in his opinions is well-known).
States with their own unique style for court documents and case opinions also publish their own style guides which include information on their citation rules.
Law By State
| Style of cause | (year of decision), | of report | volume | report | (series) | page | jurisdiction/court |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Donoghue v Stevenson, | * | A.C. | 562 | (H.L.). | |||
| R v Dudley and Stephens, | (1884) | 14 | Q.B.D. | 273. |
In England and Wales as with most other Commonwealth countries, the abbreviation "R" for rex (king) or regina (queen), is used for cases in which the state is a party (typically criminal cases or judicial review cases). Square brackets "" are used when the year is essential to locating the report (e.g. the official law reports either - as with Donoghue v Stevenson, above - do not have volume numbers or, if there are multiple volumes in a single year, they are numbered 1, 2, etc.). Round brackets "( )" are used when the year is not essential but is useful for information purposes, e.g. in reports which have a cumulative volume number such as R v Dudley and Stevens, above.
Before 1865, English courts used a large number of privately-printed reports, and cases were cited based on which report they appeared in. (This system was also used in the United States and other common law jurisdictions during that period).
In 1865, many English cases were reprinted in a set of volumes called English Reports, abbreviated E.R. Between 1865 and 1875, decisions were published in a single series of law reports simply known as the "Law Reports" (L.R).
Since 1875 the official law reports have been split into a number of different series, the current series are the Appeal Cases (A.C.), Chancery (Ch.), Family (Fam.) and Queen's Bench (Q.B.) (or King's Bench—K.B.—depending on the monarch of the time). These 4 series are cited in preference to all others in court. There are 2 main unofficial law reports which report all areas of law, the Weekly Law Reports (W.L.R.) and the All England Reports (All E.R.). In addition there are a number of unofficial specialist law reports which focus on a particular area, e.g. the Entertainment and Media Law Reports (E.M.L.R.) or the Criminal Appeal Reports (Cr. App. R.). See the table below for a list of the most common current and past law reports.
| Abbreviation | Law Report | years |
|---|---|---|
| A. & E. | Admiralty and Ecclesiastical (L.R.) | 1865 - |
| A.C. | Appeal Cases (L.R.) | 1890 - |
| All E.R. | All England Law Reports | 1936 - |
| B.C.L.C. | Butterworths Company Law Cases | 1983 - |
| B.H.R.C. | Butterworths Human Rights Cases | 1996 - |
| B.M.L.R. | Butterworths Medico-Legal Reports | ???? - |
| C.C.R. | Criminal Cases Reserved (L.R.) | 1865 - 1875 |
| Ch. | Chancery (L.R.) | 1891 - |
| Ch. App. | Chancery Appeal(L.R.) | 1865 - 1874 |
| Ch. D. | Chancery Division (L.R.) | 1875 - 1890 |
| Con. L.R. | Construction Law Reports | 1985 - |
| C.P. | Common Pleas (L.R.) | 1865 - 1876 |
| Cr. App. Rep. | Criminal Appeal Reports | 1987 - |
| E.C.H.R. | European Court of Human Rights Cases | 1960 - |
| E.G.L.R. | Estates Gazette Law Reports | 1975 - |
| Eq. | Equity Cases (L.R.) | 1865 - 1875 |
| Ex. D. | Exchequer Division (L.R.) | 1875 - 1890 |
| F.C.R. | Family Court Reports | 1987 - |
| G.C.C.R. | Goode Consumer Credit Reports | 1882 - |
| H.L. | House of Lords (L.R.) | 1866 - 1875 |
| I.R.L.R. | Industrial Relations Law Reports | 1972 - |
| I.P. & T. | Butterworths Intellectual Property and Technology Cases | 1999 - |
| J.P. | Justice of the Peace Law Reports | 2003 - |
| I.T.L.R. | International Tax Law Reports | 1998 - |
| K.B. | King's Bench | 1901 - 1951 |
| L.G.R. | Butterworths Local Government Reports | 1997 - |
| L.R.C. | Law Reports of the Commonwealth | 1995 - |
| O.P.L.R. | Occupational Pensions Law Reports | 1992 - |
| P. & D. | Probate and Family | 1850 - |
| P.C. | Prive Council (L.R.) | 1865 - 1874 |
| P.L.R. | Estates Gazette Planning Law Reports | 1988 - |
| Q.B. | Queen's Bench (L.R.) | 1952 - |
| Q.B.D. | Queen's Bench Division (L.R.) | 1875 - 1890 |
| R.P.C. | Reports of Patent Cases | 1939 - |
| S.T.C. | Simon's Tax Cases | 1973 - |
| T.C. | Official Tax Case Reports | 1883 - |
| W.L.R. | Weekly Law Reports | 1953 - |
The format can be broken into its component parts:
| Style of cause | (year of decision), | of reporter | volume | reporter | (series) | page | jurisdiction/court |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R. v. Big M Drug Mart Ltd., | * | 1 | S.C.R. | 295. | |||
| R. v. Oakes, | * | 1 | S.C.R. | 103. | |||
| Re Canada Trust Co. and O.H.R.C. | (1990), | 69 | D.L.R. | (4th) | 321 | (Ont. C.A.). |
The Style of Cause is italicized as in all other countries and the party names are separated by "v." (english) or "c." (french). Prior to 1984 the appellant party would always be named first. However, since then case names do not switch order when the case is appealed.
Undisclosed parties to a case are represented by initials (eg. R. v. R.D.S.). Criminal cases are prosecuted by the Crown which is always represented by "R.". Constitutional references are always entitled "''Reference Re" followed by the subject title.
Usually either the year of the decision or the year of the reporter is cited, but not usually both. Only if they are different years can they both be cited at the same time. If they are the same, one should always use the reporter year.
| Abbreviation | Reporter | years |
|---|---|---|
| A.R. | Alberta Reports | 1976 - |
| B.C.L.R. | British Columbia Law Reports | 1977 - |
| D.L.R. (4th) | Dominion Law Reports | 1984 - |
| F.C. | Federal Court Reports | 1971 - |
| N.B.R. (2d) | New Brunswick Reports | 1969 - |
| N.S.R. (2d) | Nova Scotia Reports | 1969 - |
| O.R. (3d) | Ontario Reports | 1986 - |
| S.C.R. | Supreme Court Reports | 1970 - |
The standard format look like this:
| Year of decision | Court identifier | Ordinal number |
|---|---|---|
| 2000 | SCC | 1 |
There is a unique court identifier code for most courts. There are a few courts in Quebec and Ontario that have yet to adopt the system. A list of the court identifiers include:
| Court Identifier | Court | from year |
|---|---|---|
| SCC | Supreme Court of Canada | 2000 |
| FCT | Federal Court of Canada - Trial Division | 2001 |
| FCA | Federal Court of Canada - Appeal Division | 2001 |
| TCC | Tax Court of Canada | 2003 |
| Style of cause | (year of decision) | of reporter | volume | reporter | (series) | page |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mabo v State of Queensland 2 | (1992) | 175 | CLR | 1. |
| Abbreviation | Reporter | Years |
|---|---|---|
| AAR | Administrative Appeals Reports | - |
| ALJR | Australian Law Journal Reports | - |
| ALR | Australian Law Reports | 1983 - |
| CLR | Commonwealth Law Reports | 1903 - |
| FLC | Family Law Cases | |
| FLR | Federal Law Reports | - |
| NSWLR | New South Wales Law Reports | - |
| Qld R | Queensland Reports | - |
| VR | Victorian Reports | - |
The standard format looks like this:
| Year of decision | Court identifier | Ordinal number |
|---|---|---|
| * | HCA | 1 |
There is a unique court identifier code for most courts. The court and tribunal identifiers include:
| Court Identifier | Court |
|---|---|
| HCA | High Court of Australia |
| FCA | Federal Court of Australia |
| FCAFC | Federal Court of Australia - Full Court (Appeals bench) |
| FamCA | Family Court of Australia |
| FMCA | Federal Magistrates Court of Australia |
| FMCAfam | Federal Magistrates Court of Australia, family law decisions |
| AAT | Administrative Appeals Tribunal of Australia |
| Style of cause | (year of decision) | of reporter | volume | reporter | page |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Taylor v New Zealand Poultry Board | * | 1 | NZLR | 394 | |
| R v Howse | (2005) | 21 | CRNZ | 823 |
| Abbreviation | Reporter | Years |
|---|---|---|
| NZLR | New Zealand Law Reports | 1881 - |
| CRNZ | Criminal Reports of New Zealand | 1983 - |
| NZAR | New Zealand Administrative Reports | 1976- |
| NZFLR | Family Reports of New Zealand | 1981- |
| DCR | District Court Reports | 1981- |
Additionally, a number of other report series exist for specialist areas such as Family, Employment and Tax Law.
The standard format looks like this:
| Year of decision | Court identifier | Ordinal number |
|---|---|---|
| * | NZSC | 1 |
There is a unique court identifier code only for the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal. These identifiers are:
| Court Identifier | Court |
|---|---|
| NZSC | Supreme Court of New Zealand |
| NZCA | New Zealand Court of Appeal |
This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.
It uses material from the
"Case citation".
Home Page • arts • business • computers • games • health • hospitals • home • kids & teens • news • physicians • recreation• reference • regional • science • shopping • society • sports • world