Ny Supreme Court Citation Rules For Essays

OFFICIAL EDITION

NEW YORK

LAW REPORTS


STYLE MANUAL



Prepared By
The Law Reporting Bureau
of The State Of New York
2012


Compiled and Edited By

Kathleen B. Hughes
Michael S. Moran
Katherine D. LaBoda
Kelli J. Flansburg
Maureen L. Clements
Rocco J. Padula
Amanda FiggsGanter
Stephen M. Carroll


WILLIAM J. HOOKS
STATE REPORTER


COPYRIGHT © 2012
New York State Unified Court System
First Edition Published in 1956.

FOREWORD

I must start by thanking the Law Reporting Bureau of the State of New York for inviting me to write the Foreword for the 2012 Style Manual. I am so pleased to recognize our outstanding State Reporter, Bill Hooks, who succeeded to the position in June 2009. Bill is no stranger to the Law Reporting Bureau—having started his career there in 1981—and I know he will continue the great tradition of providing impeccable service for the entire Unified Court System.

Probably the most notable change reflected in the new Style Manual is the continuing movement toward the use of electronic sources. These changes demonstrate our increasing reliance on technology and the growing acceptance of the use of Internet material. Among other things, we now know how to cite materials such as e-books. I anticipate that this aspect of the Style Manual will only continue to develop.

The Law Reporting Bureau has continued to update the Style Manual to make this resource as clear and easy to use as possible. In addition, as a substantive matter, I would like to point out that the new Manual addresses our relatively recent change over from the Code of Professional Responsibility to the new Rules of Professional Conduct as the rules that govern attorney conduct.

As always, the staff of the Law Reporting Bureau deserves the highest praise for its absolutely meticulous work. On behalf of myself, the Court of Appeals and the rest of the Court System, I express the utmost respect and gratitude for their steadfast commitment to precision and their unmatched skill and dedication.

For more than 50 years, the New York Law Reports Style Manual has been issued by the Law Reporting Bureau with the approval of the Court of Appeals as a guide for New York judges and their staffs in the preparation of opinions for publication in the Official Reports. It also prescribes the style applied by the Law Reporting Bureau in editing the opinions for publication in the Reports. Although not binding on them, many lawyers find the Manual useful in preparing papers for submission to New York courts. The Style Manual provides a guide for opinion writers and editors in five primary areas: citation, abbreviation, capitalization, quotation, and word style and usage. Additionally, it specifies for editors the format and typographical standards for the Reports.

General References

This Manual supplements general citation and style authorities, providing more detail on New York materials and a more specific focus on judicial opinions. General authorities should be consulted on matters not covered by this Manual. These authorities include:

The Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation (19th ed 2010)

Association of Legal Writing Directors & Darby Dickerson, ALWD Citation Manual (4th ed 2010)

Bryan A. Garner, The Redbook: A Manual on Legal Style (2d ed 2006)

The Chicago Manual of Style (16th ed 2010)

Webster's Third New International Dictionary (2002)

Black's Law Dictionary (9th ed 2009)

Gerald Lebovits, Advanced Judicial Opinion Writing (7.4 ed 2004)

Richard C. Wydick, Plain English for Lawyers (5th ed 2005)

Important Changes

The 2012 Edition leaves largely intact the content of the 2007 Edition and 2009 Supplement. Users' input inspired several rule clarifications and additions. Sample citations have been updated and expanded and residual style inconsistencies have been resolved. Other revisions reflect a continuing commitment to conform to modern style practices and reduce unnecessary variations from standard sources. The most noteworthy of the changes found in this Manual are:

1. Citation Style:

  • In accordance with standard authorities, revised rules clarify that pertinent court and jurisdictional information should be included with full case citations (1.1 [a]) and that using full names of authors of secondary authority is preferred (7.1 [b]).


  • Continuing previous efforts to eliminate useless citation formalities and to promote cleaner text, the rule (1.3 [a]) governing subsequent references to previously cited authority has been recast to encourage the use of short-form citations and id. where appropriate. The use of supra to indicate that an authority has been cited previously is no longer recommended. Examples of short-form references are included for cases (1.3 [b] [2]), statutes (3.1 [b] [1] [c]) and secondary authorities (1.3 [b] [2]).


  • The 2012 Edition recognizes the further migration of legal research from print to electronic formats by providing guidance on the elements of electronic citation generally (1.5) and adding source specific rules and sample citations for electronic services (2.4 [a]); Internet material (2.4 [a] [3]; 7.1 [[d]); CD-ROM material (7.3 [c]); New York Law Journal and other online decisions (2.2 [a] [8]; 2.2 [b] [2], [3]); and e-books (7.9).


  • A revised rule (3.1 [b] [2] [c]) eliminates repetition of section signs in citations of multiple sections of a statute.


  • A revised rule (2.1 [a] [1]) provides guidance for citing companion cases and new samples illustrate the format when a "citing" or "quoting" reference is included in a citation.


  • Recurrent style inconsistencies have been addressed for pinpoint citation of single page decisions (2.2 [a] [2]) and the description of divisions of a statute in running text (3.1 [b] [1] [b]).


  • Additional or revised forms of citation have been provided for commission and agency documents and materials (2.4 [b] [1]); statutes (3.1 - 3.3; Appendix 4); regulations, court rules and jury instructions (4.1 - 4.2); legal periodicals, treatises and other works (7.2 - 7.6); and legal documents such as transcripts, exhibits, affirmations and affidavits(7.7).


  • A list of public domain citations adopted by various jurisdictions was added (Appendix 2 [D]).

2. Abbreviation:

  • New abbreviations have been added for case names, law reports, appellate history terms and statutes (Appendixes 1 - 4).

3. Quotations:

The Style Manual's section on omitting or altering language in quoted material has been reordered for clarity and revised to allow for more precise use of ellipses, to clarify the style where language is both altered and omitted and to provide guidance where emphasis is omitted.

  • New rules illustrate the use of an ellipsis with a period (11.1 [c] [2]) and with other punctuation (11.1 [c] [3]).


  • The style for joint alterations and omissions has been added to rule 11.1 (d).


  • In accordance with standard authorities, omission of emphasis that appears in the source is indicated by "emphasis omitted" (11.1 [f]).

4. Word Style and Usage:

  • The rule (12.4) on redaction of personal identifying information has been revised to accommodate heightened privacy and security concerns driven by greater accessibility of electronic judicial decisions. A clarification encourages authors to omit irrelevant information and additional examples of information that should be redacted have been included.


  • Examples have been added to the list showing the style of particular words, with a continuing modern style emphasis on reducing excessive use of hyphens and italics (Appendix 5), and recurrent style inconsistencies have been addressed by new illustrations (e.g. 10.2 [a] [5] [specifying "15 years' imprisonment," not "15 years imprisonment"]).

Other Notes:

The rules on capitalization are essentially unchanged and reflect the modern practice to avoid excessive capitalization.

The rules on formulation of case summaries (appeal statements) have been updated and examples have been added (Appendix 8). Guidance is now included for formatting data tables incorporated in decisions (13.3) and using supra and infra to cross-reference footnotes and sections of an opinion (12.6). The use of small capitals in the text of opinions and footnotes has been eliminated (13.5). The model citational footnote opinion has been updated (Appendix 7).

Exceptions and Changes

Deviations from the rules stated in this Manual are permitted where application of a rule would adversely affect the clarity or readability of an opinion. The Law Reporting Bureau welcomes suggestions for improvement of the Style Manual. Send them to: reporter@courts.state.ny.us.

Internet Version of this Manual

Changes to this Manual will be posted to the Bureau's Internet site at http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/styman_menu.htm. Use of the Internet version is strongly recommended not only for updates, but also to gain the advantages of word searching, hypertext linking and coordinating use of the Manual with the Official Case Name and Citation Locator.

RULES REQUIRING CITATION TO OFFICIAL REPORTS
"New York decisions shall be cited from the official reports, if any." (CPLR 5529 [e].)
"Where New York authorities are cited in any submissions, New York Official Law Report citations shall be included, if available." (Rules of Ct of Appeals [22 NYCRR] § 500.1 [g].)
"Where New York authorities are cited in any paper, New York Official Law Report citations must be included." (Rules of Ct of Appeals [22 NYCRR] § 510.1 [a].)
"New York decisions shall be cited from the official reports, if any." (Rules of App Div, 1st Dept [22 NYCRR] § 600.10 [a] [11].)
"New York decisions shall be cited from the official reports, if any." (Rules of App Div, 4th Dept [22 NYCRR] § 1000.4 [f] [7].)
Summary of Table of Contents
PART I: CITATION STYLE
 
1.0 CITATION STYLE IN GENERAL
2.0 CASES
3.0 STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE MATERIALS
4.0 REGULATIONS, COURT RULES, JURY INSTRUCTIONS AND COLLOQUIES
5.0 CONSTITUTIONS
6.0 TREATIES AND INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS
7.0 LEGAL PERIODICALS, TREATISES AND OTHER WORKS AND DOCUMENTS
 
PART II: OTHER STYLE ISSUES
 
8.0 TITLES OF ACTIONS AND PROCEEDINGS
9.0 APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
10.0 CAPITALIZATION, NUMERALS AND NUMBERS, DATES AND TIME, AND NAMES
11.0 QUOTATIONS AND QUOTATION MARKS
12.0 WORD STYLE IN GENERAL
 
PART III: TYPOGRAPHY AND SPACING
 
13.0 TYPOGRAPHY
14.0 SPACING
 
PART IV: APPENDIXES
 
APPENDIX 1 — COMMON CASE NAME ABBREVIATIONS
APPENDIX 2 — ABBREVIATION OF CASE LAW REPORTS
APPENDIX 3 — APPELLATE HISTORY AND OTHER ABBREVIATIONS USED IN CITATIONS
APPENDIX 4 — STYLE AND ABBREVIATION OF PARTICULAR STATUTES
APPENDIX 5 — STYLE OF PARTICULAR WORDS
APPENDIX 6 — TITLES IN VARIOUS ACTIONS AND PROCEEDINGS, WITH CASE NAMES
APPENDIX 7 — CITATIONAL FOOTNOTE STYLE (MODEL OPINION)
APPENDIX 8 — FORMULATION OF SUMMARIES (APPEAL STATEMENTS)
 
PART V: INDEX



1.0 CITATION STYLE IN GENERAL

1.1 ELEMENTS OF A CITATION

1.1 (a) Case Citation Elements

1.1 (b) Statutory Citation Elements

1.2 PLACEMENT OF CITATIONS

1.2 (a) Where to Place

1.2 (b)

1.2 (c) Citations within Parentheses

(1) How to Reference

(2) Punctuation

1.2 (d) Citations in Footnotes

1.2 (e) Citational Footnote Style

1.2 (f) Footnote Numbers in Relation to Punctuation

1.3 REFERENCE TO PREVIOUSLY CITED AUTHORITY

1.3 (a) Options for Referencing Previously Cited Authority

1.3 (b) Short-Form References

(1) Shortened Case Names and Popular Names

(2) Shortened Citations

1.3 (c) Subsequent Reference to Immediately Preceding Authority

1.3 (d) Subsequent Reference to Parallel Citations

1.4 INTRODUCTORY SIGNALS

1.4 (a) Citations Introduced by Signals

1.4 (b) Signal Word Serving as a Verb

1.5 ELECTRONIC SOURCES IN GENERAL

1.5 (a) Electronic Services

1.5 (b) Internet Material

1.5 (c) CD-ROM Material

1.5 (d) New York Slip Opinions

1.5 (e) Unreported and Unofficially Reported New York Opinions Published Online

1.5 (f) Unreported New York Appellate Motion Decisions Published Online

1.5 (g) E-Books

2.0 CASES

2.1 CASE NAMES

2.1 (a) New York Cases

(1) Cases Officially Reported

(2) Cases Not Officially Reported

2.1 (b) Supreme Court of the United States Cases

2.1 (c) Other Cases

2.2 NEW YORK COURT DECISIONS

2.2 (a) Decisions Officially Reported

2.2 (b) Unofficially Reported or Unreported Decisions

2.3 FEDERAL AND OUT-OF-STATE DECISIONS

2.3 (a) Supreme Court of the United States

2.3 (b) Other Federal Courts

2.3 (c) Out-of-State and Unofficial Case Citations

2.4 OTHER SOURCES OF DECISIONS

2.4 (a) Electronic Case Citations

(1) Online Services

(2) Citing Tabular Cases

(3) Internet Material

2.4 (b) Commission, Agency and Ethics Opinions

(1) Commission and Agency Documents and Materials

(2) Ethics Opinions

3.0 STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE MATERIALS

3.1 NEW YORK STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE MATERIALS

3.1 (a) Statutory Abbreviation Style in General

3.1 (b) Statutory Citation Style

(1) Basic Citation Form

(2) Citation Strings and Multiple Statutory Citations

(3) Statutory Amendments, Additions and Renumbering

(4) Former Statutes

3.1 (c) Statutory Compilations

3.1 (d) Session Laws and Unconsolidated Laws

3.1 (e) Model Codes, Proposed Codes and Uniform Laws

3.1 (f) Legislative and Other Materials

3.2 FEDERAL STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE MATERIALS

3.2 (a) Federal Statutory Abbreviations

3.2 (b) Federal Statutory Citation Style

3.2 (c) Federal Legislative Materials

3.3 OUT-OF-STATE STATUTES

4.0 REGULATIONS, COURT RULES, JURY INSTRUCTIONS AND COLLOQUIES

4.1 NEW YORK RULES, REGULATIONS, INSTRUCTIONS AND COLLOQUIES

4.1 (a) Basic Citation Form

4.1 (b) Particular Rules and Regulations

(1) Rules of the City of New York

(2) Rules of the Court of Appeals

(3) Rules of the Appellate Division

(4) Uniform Rules for the New York State Trial Courts

(5) Rules of the Chief Administrator of the Courts

(6) Rules of Professional Conduct, Code of Professional Responsibility, Rules Governing Judicial Conduct and Code of Judicial Conduct

(7) Rent Statutes and Regulations

(8) New York State Building Code

(9) New York City Building Code

(10) New York State Agency Regulations

4.1 (c) Pattern Jury and Criminal Jury Instructions

(1) Pattern Jury Instructions

(2) Criminal Jury Instructions

4.1 (d) Model Colloquies

4.2 FEDERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS

4.2 (a) Basic Citation Form

4.2 (b) Particular Rules and Regulations

(1) Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

(2) Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure

(3) Federal Rules of Evidence

(4) Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure

(5) Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure

5.0 CONSTITUTIONS

5.1 GENERAL RULE

5.2 EXAMPLES

5.3 HISTORICAL CONSTITUTIONAL MATERIAL

6.0 TREATIES AND INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS

6.1 GENERAL RULE

6.2 EXAMPLES

7.0 LEGAL PERIODICALS, TREATISES AND OTHER WORKS AND DOCUMENTS

7.1 GENERAL RULES

7.1 (a) Page References

7.1 (b) Names of Authors

7.1 (c) Titles

7.1 (d) Internet Material

7.2 PERIODICALS, NEWSPAPERS AND BOOKS

7.2 (a) General Style

7.2 (b) Student-Authored Works

7.3 TREATISES

7.3 (a) General Style

7.3 (b) Omitted Title Material

7.3 (c) CD-ROM Material

7.4 DICTIONARIES AND ENCYCLOPEDIAS

7.5 AMERICAN LAW REPORTS (ALR) ANNOTATIONS

7.5 (a) General Style

7.5 (b) Author's Name

7.6 RESTATEMENTS

7.7 LEGAL DOCUMENTS

7.8 MANUALS, HANDBOOKS, GUIDELINES AND REPORTS

7.9 E-BOOKS


8.0 TITLES OF ACTIONS AND PROCEEDINGS

8.1 GENERAL RULES OF TITLE FORMULATION

8.1 (a) Parties at Trial Level

8.1 (b) Parties at Appellate Level

8.1 (c) Parties with Same Status

8.1 (d) Full Names and Initials

8.1 (e) Representative or Official Capacity

8.1 (f) Terms Omitted

8.1 (g) Parties in Transferred Proceedings, etc.

8.1 (h) Nonappealing Parties

8.2 COMMON TITLE STYLES

8.2 (a) Action with Party Suing in a Representative Capacity

8.2 (b) Proceedings against an Unnamed Public Official

8.2 (c) Criminal Action against Multiple Defendants

8.2 (d) Appellate Action with Some Parties Not Participating in Appeal

8.2 (e) Appellate Proceedings with Cross-Appealing Parties

8.3 TITLES IN VARIOUS ACTIONS AND PROCEEDINGS

8.4 PERSONAL IDENTIFYING INFORMATION

9.0 APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

9.1 GENERAL STYLE

9.2 AMICUS CURIAE

9.3 APPEARANCES ON OWN BEHALF

9.3 (a) Non-Attorney Appearing on Own Behalf

9.3 (b) Non-Attorney Appearing on Own Behalf and by Attorney

9.3 (c) Attorney Appearing on Own Behalf

9.3 (d) Attorney Appearing on Own Behalf and for Client

9.3 (e) Attorney Appearing on Own Behalf and by Attorney

9.3 (f) Attorney Appearing on Own Behalf and by Attorney, and for Client

9.3 (g) Law Firm Appearing on Own Behalf

9.4 APPEARING SPECIALLY

9.5 NAME AND TITLE OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS

9.6 ATTORNEY GENERAL APPEARING IN CASES INVOLVING

CONSTITUTIONALITY OF STATUTE

9.7 OUT-OF-STATE ATTORNEY

10.0 CAPITALIZATION, NUMERALS AND NUMBERS, DATES AND TIME, AND NAMES

10.1 CAPITALIZATION

10.1 (a) Generally

10.1 (b) Government Bodies and Officials

10.1 (c) States and Political Subdivisions

10.1 (d) Branches of Government

10.1 (e) Government

10.1 (f) "Federal"

10.1 (g) "Capital" and "Capitol"

10.1 (h) Courts

10.1 (i) Judicial Officers

10.1 (j) Acts, Bills, Codes, Constitutions, etc.

10.1 (k) Crimes

10.1 (l) Parties

10.1 (m) Legal Documents

10.1 (n) Regional Names

10.1 (o) Animal Breeds

10.1 (p) Numbered Items

10.2 NUMERALS, NUMBERS AND SYMBOLS

10.2 (a) Numerals and Numbers

(1) Spelling Out

(2) Dollar Amounts

(3) Fractions

(4) Roman Numerals

(5) Criminal Sentences

(6) Firearms

(7) Sex Offender Risk Levels, Prisoner Disciplinary Hearings, Attorney Disciplinary Charges and State Retirement Tiers

(8) Ages

(9) Numbered Lists

10.2 (b) Symbols

(1) General Rule

(2) Distances and Measurements

(3) Percentage

10.3 DATES AND TIME

10.3 (a) Month, Day and Year

10.3 (b) Month and Year

10.3 (c) Day and Year

10.3 (d) Year Only

10.3 (e) Decades

10.3 (f) Centuries

10.3 (g) Abbreviation of Months

10.3 (h) Time

10.3 (i) Seasons

10.4 NAMES

10.4 (a) Names of Judges

10.4 (b) Personal Names

10.4 (c) Corporate Names

11.0 QUOTATIONS AND QUOTATION MARKS

11.1 QUOTATIONS

11.1 (a) General Rule

11.1 (b) Punctuation of Quotations

11.1 (c) Ellipsis; Omitted Material

11.1 (d) Brackets

11.1 (e) Using "[sic]"

11.1 (f) Material Emphasized

11.1 (g) Statutory and Regulatory Material

11.2 QUOTATION MARKS

11.2 (a) Single-Paragraph Quotations

11.2 (b) Multiple-Paragraph Quotations

11.2 (c) Multiple Quotation Marks

11.2 (d) Using Quotation Marks for Short-Form References

12.0 WORD STYLE IN GENERAL

12.1 GENDER NEUTRAL WRITING

12.1 (a) Using Inclusive Terms

12.1 (b) Using "He" or "She" as Generic Pronoun

12.1 (c) Additional Background

12.2 HYPHENATED WORDS AND PHRASES

12.2 (a) Compound Words

12.2 (b) Hyphenated Adjectival Phrase

12.2 (c) Hyphenated Prefix

12.3 AVOIDANCE OF LATINISMS AND LEGALISMS

12.3 (a) Using English Language Words and Phrases

12.3 (b) Exceptions to General Rule

12.3 (c) Typography

12.4 PERSONAL IDENTIFYING INFORMATION

12.4 (a) Personal Names

12.4 (b) Numerical Identifiers

12.4 (c) Other Identifying Information

12.5 DESCRIBING PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES

12.6 USING SUPRA AND INFRA


13.0 TYPOGRAPHY

13.1 TITLES OF DECISIONS

13.2 PARAGRAPH AND SECTION HEADINGS

13.3 TABLES

13.4 JUDGE NAME IN OPINION OPENING AND VOTE LINE

13.5 SMALL CAPITALS

13.6 ADDED EMPHASIS

13.7 FOREIGN WORDS AND PHRASES

13.8 NAMES OF NEWSPAPERS, MAGAZINES, BOOKS, ETC.

14.0 SPACING

14.1 ABBREVIATION SPACING

14.2 STATUTORY SPACING


APPENDIX 1 — COMMON CASE NAME ABBREVIATIONS
APPENDIX 2 — ABBREVIATION OF CASE LAW REPORTS
APPENDIX 3 — APPELLATE HISTORY AND OTHER ABBREVIATIONS USED IN CITATIONS
APPENDIX 4 — STYLE AND ABBREVIATION OF PARTICULAR STATUTES
APPENDIX 5 — STYLE OF PARTICULAR WORDS
APPENDIX 6 — TITLES IN VARIOUS ACTIONS AND PROCEEDINGS, WITH CASE NAMES
APPENDIX 7 — CITATIONAL FOOTNOTE STYLE (MODEL OPINION)
APPENDIX 8 — FORMULATION OF SUMMARIES (APPEAL STATEMENTS)

1.0 CITATION STYLE IN GENERAL

Contents of Section
1.1 ELEMENTS OF A CITATION

1.1 (a) Case Citation Elements

1.1 (b) Statutory Citation Elements

1.2 PLACEMENT OF CITATIONS

1.2 (a) Where to Place

1.2 (b) Citations in Running Text

1.2 (c) Citations within Parentheses

(1) How to Reference

(2) Punctuation

1.2 (d) Citations in Footnotes

1.2 (e) Citational Footnote Style

1.2 (f) Footnote Numbers in Relation to Punctuation

1.3 REFERENCE TO PREVIOUSLY CITED AUTHORITY

1.3 (a) Options for Referencing Previously Cited Authority

1.3 (b) Short-Form References

(1) Shortened Case Names and Popular Names

(2) Shortened Citations

1.3 (c) Subsequent Reference to Immediately Preceding Authority

1.3 (d) Subsequent Reference to Parallel Citations

1.4 INTRODUCTORY SIGNALS

1.4 (a) Citations Introduced by Signals

1.4 (b) Signal Word Serving as a Verb

1.5 ELECTRONIC SOURCES IN GENERAL

1.5 (a) Electronic Services

1.5 (b) Internet Material

1.5 (c) CD-ROM Material

1.5 (d) New York Slip Opinions

1.5 (e) Unreported and Unofficially Reported New York Opinions Published Online

1.5 (f) Unreported New York Appellate Motion Decisions Published Online

1.5 (g) E-Books

1.1 ELEMENTS OF A CITATION

1.1 (a) Case Citation Elements

Include the court, omitting any information made redundant by the citation itself, pertinent jurisdictional information and year of decision for all full case references, including references to appellate history.

1.1 (b) Statutory Citation Elements

1.2 PLACEMENT OF CITATIONS

1.2 (a) Where to Place

Citations in the traditional format of the Official Reports are embedded in the text of the opinion using citations in running text (§ 1.2 [b]) or within parentheses (§ 1.2 [c]). In this format, citations in footnotes, if any, are styled as provided in section 1.2 (d).

As an alternative to the traditional format, citations may be placed exclusively in footnotes using the citational footnote style (§ 1.2 [e]).

Unless otherwise indicated, the examples in this Manual are shown as citations within parentheses.

1.2 (b) Citations in Running Text

The term "citation in running text" indicates an authority referred to in the text of a sentence, as in the examples below:

The situation in Rogers v Rogers (63 NY2d 582 [1984], revg 98 AD2d 999 [2d Dept 1983]) mirrors the situation in this decision.

The clear and convincing evidence standard discussed in Solomon v State of New York (146 AD2d 439, 440 [1st Dept 1989], quoting Addington v Texas, 441 US 418, 427 [1979]) was not met here.

Plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d).

1.2 (c) Citations within Parentheses

The term "citation within parentheses" refers to any citation that appears entirely within parentheses.

(1) How to Reference

Citations within parentheses may be referenced as in the examples below:

The clear and convincing evidence standard was not met here (see Solomon v State of New York, 146 AD2d 439, 440 [1st Dept 1989], quoting Addington v Texas, 441 US 418, 427 [1979]).

The facts in this decision are not unusual (see George C. Miller Brick Co., Inc. v Stark Ceramics, Inc., 9 Misc 3d 151 [Sup Ct, Monroe County 2005, Fisher, J.]).

Plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury (Insurance Law § 5102 [d]).

(2) Punctuation

Place the final period in a sentence ending with a parenthetical as follows:

Such is the law (People v Moran, 2 AD3d 216 [1st Dept 2003]).

or

Such is the law. (People v Moran, 2 AD3d 216 [1st Dept 2003].)

not

Such is the law (People v Moran, 2 AD3d 216 [1st Dept 2003].)

Place the parenthetical within the sentence (as in first example above) if it relates to the sentence alone. Place it outside the sentence (as in second example above) if it relates to more than one preceding sentence.

1.2 (d) Citations in Footnotes

In a footnote containing text, citations in running text or within parentheses may be used. Some examples are:

* The holding in Solomon v State of New York (146 AD2d 439, 440 [1st Dept 1989]) remains good law. [Note: running text]

* The issue was last visited in 1989. (Solomon v State of New York, 146 AD2d 439, 440 [1st Dept 1989].) [Note: parenthetical]

In a footnote containing only a citation, use the parenthetical citation style, but omit the opening and closing parentheses and change the internal brackets to parentheses. Some examples are:

* Solomon v State of New York, 146 AD2d 439, 440 (1st Dept 1989).

* See e.g. Penal Law § 125.25 (1) (a).

1.2 (e) Citational Footnote Style

The citational footnote style is an alternative to the traditional placement of citations, using footnotes only for the citational content that would otherwise appear in the body of an opinion if either the running text citation style (§ 1.2 [b]) or the citations within parentheses style (§ 1.2 [c]) were used. If used, the citational footnote style should be used for all citations in the opinion. See Appendix 7 for a model opinion formatted in the citational footnote style. Apply the following rules based upon the location where citational content would be placed in the traditional format.

(1) Running Text Style

Place the case name in running text and the volume—report—page or other bibliographic information in the footnote and eliminate the parentheses enclosing the citation. The footnote number should be placed at the point in the text where the citation would appear if the citation were placed in the text.

Example:

The situation in Rogers v Rogers1 mirrors the situation in this decision.


1. 63 NY2d 582 (1984), revg 98 AD2d 999 (2d Dept 1983).

(2) Citations within Parentheses Style

Place the footnote number at the point where the parenthetical citation would appear if the parenthetical citation were placed in the body of the opinion. Place the citation in the footnote and eliminate the parentheses enclosing the citation.

Example:

The facts in this decision are not unusual.1


1.See George C. Miller Brick Co., Inc. v Stark Ceramics, Inc., 9 Misc 3d 151 (Sup Ct, Monroe County 2005, Fisher, J.).

(3) Textual Footnotes

When using the citational footnote style, citations that appear within textual footnotes should not be placed within parentheses.

Example:

2. The effect of the deregulation on the structure and organization of the natural gas industry is detailed in General Motors Corp. v Tracy, 519 US 278, 283-297 (1997).

1.2 (f) Footnote Numbers in Relation to Punctuation

Footnote numbers appearing in decisions follow punctuation marks.

Example:

County Court denied defendant's motion;16 the Appellate Division reversed, vacated the judgment, restored the indictment to the preplea stage and reinstated the prosecution's notice of intent to seek the death penalty.17

1.3 REFERENCE TO PREVIOUSLY CITED AUTHORITY

1.3 (a) Options for Referencing Previously Cited Authority

To reference previously cited authority use a short-form reference or "id." where appropriate. A full citation may be repeated if a short form or id. is unsuitable. The subsequent citation should omit any reference to optional information (§ 2.2 [a] [7]) and history. A short-form reference should provide sufficient information to avoid confusion with distinct previous citations.

1.3 (b) Short-Form References

(1) Shortened Case Names and Popular Names

Subsequent references to a case in running text or within parentheses may use a shortened case name. The shortened form of the case name is usually the name of the first nongovernmental party (for example, "Krom" for "People v Krom" and "Albouyeh" for "Albouyeh v County of Suffolk"). Popular names for cases (for example, "the Central Park Jogger case") may be used when desired.

(2) Shortened Citations

Subsequent references to cases and statutes may be shortened as follows:

(Matter of Murphy, 6 NY3d at 43)

(Murphy, 6 NY3d 36) [Note: shortened case name with citation to initial page of decision]

(Murphy, 6 NY3d at 43)

(Murphy at 43)

(6 NY3d at 43)

(§ 205.05)

Subsequent references to periodicals, treatises and similar works may be shortened by omitting the author's name or the title, in whole or in part, as follows:

(Harper Lee, To Kill a Mockingbird 49-50 [1982]) [Initial]

(Harper Lee [or Lee] at 53) [Subsequent]

(David H. Kaye et al., The New Wigmore: Expert Evidence § 4.5 at 148 [2004]) [Initial]

(Expert Evidence § 4.7) [Subsequent]

1.3 (c) Subsequent Reference to Immediately Preceding Authority

When a subsequent reference is made to an immediately preceding authority, "id." may be used:

(id.) [Note: identical reference to an immediately preceding authority]

(id. at 495) [Note: reference to an immediately preceding authority at a different page]

(id. § 468-a) [Note: reference to an immediately preceding authority at a different section]

Capitalize "Id." when it is the first term in a separate citational sentence (§ 1.2 [c] [2]).

1.3 (d) Subsequent Reference to Parallel Citations

Where parallel citations are provided in the first reference, subsequent references that include a pinpoint page should supply the pinpoint page for each parallel citation. Thus, (Newbold v Arvidson, 105 Idaho 663, 672 P2d 231 [1983]) becomes (Newbold, 105 Idaho at 667, 672 P2d at 235).

1.4 INTRODUCTORY SIGNALS

1.4 (a) Citations Introduced by Signals

Citations may be introduced by signals that indicate the purpose for which the citations are made and their degree of support or contradiction concerning a proposition. Do not place a comma between the signal and citation. Consult standard citation authorities for information regarding the use of signals, their order when using two or more and the order of authorities after each signal.

The following examples illustrate the use of introductory signals:

(e.g. Dalton v Pataki, 5 NY3d 243 [2005])

(see Dalton v Pataki, 5 NY3d 243 [2005])

(but see Dalton v Pataki, 5 NY3d 243 [2005])

(cf. Matter of Oglesby v McKinney, 28 AD3d 153 [4th Dept 2006])

(but cf. Matter of Oglesby v McKinney, 28 AD3d 153 [4th Dept 2006])

(accord Matter of Oglesby v McKinney, 28 AD3d 153 [4th Dept 2006])

(see also Penal Law § 20.00)

(compare Penal Law § 210.40 with CPL 320.10)

(see e.g. CPL 40.50)

(but see e.g. People v McConnell, 11 Misc 3d 57 [App Term, 2d Dept, 9th & 10th Jud Dists 2006])

(see generally People v McConnell, 11 Misc 3d 57 [App Term, 2d Dept, 9th & 10th Jud Dists 2006])

(compare Klein v Eubank, 87 NY2d 459 [1996], with Shapiro v McNeill, 92 NY2d 91 [1998])

(compare Klein v Eubank, 87 NY2d 459 [1996], and D'Amico v Crosson, 93 NY2d 29 [1999], with Shapiro v McNeill, 92 NY2d 91 [1998])

(contra Koehler v Koehler, 182 Misc 2d 436 [Sup Ct, Suffolk County 1999])

1.4 (b) Signal Word Serving as a Verb

Do not italicize a signal word that serves as a verb of a sentence:

For a discussion of Executive Law § 63 (2), see Matter of Johnson v Pataki (91 NY2d 214 [1997]).

1.5 ELECTRONIC SOURCES IN GENERAL

Cite an electronic source if it is the sole source of material referenced or if the print version is not readily available. A citation to an electronic source requires information identifying the particular material referenced, and is likely also to require information about the location where the source of that material may be accessed (e.g. a website or an online service). Where the location or content of an electronic source is subject to change, a "last updated" or "last accessed" date should be included. If the format of an electronic source prevents precise citation to particular material referenced, add the necessary navigation instructions to the citation. Pinpoint citation is not possible if the electronic source is in a format (e.g. HTML) that does not contain fixed reference points, but may be included if the source is in a format (e.g. PDF) that contains fixed pagination, paragraph numbering or location numbers. Electronic government sources designated "official" or authenticated by some method involving encryption should be cited when available. The rules for citing specific types of electronic sources appear in the sections listed below.

1.5 (a) Electronic Services

Electronic services (e.g. Westlaw, Lexis) are cited as indicated in section 2.4 (a) (1) and (2).

1.5 (b) Internet Material

Internet material is cited as indicated in section 2.4 (a) (3) and section 7.1 (d).

1.5 (c) CD-ROM Material

CD-ROM material is cited as indicated in section 7.3 (c).

1.5 (d) New York Slip Opinions

Slip opinions scheduled for publication in the print Official Reports are cited as indicated in section 2.2 (a) (8).

1.5 (e) Unreported and Unofficially Reported New York Opinions Published Online

Trial court and Appellate Term opinions published online only with or without abstracts published in the print Official Reports are cited as indicated in section 2.2 (b) (2). Opinions published in the online version of the New York Law Journal are cited as indicated in section 2.2 (b) (3).

1.5 (f) Unreported New York Appellate Motion Decisions Published Online

Appellate motion decisions published online but not in the print Official Reports are cited as indicated in section 2.2 (b) (2).

1.5 (g) E-Books

E-books are cited as indicated in section 7.9.

2.0 CASES

Contents of Section
2.1 CASE NAMES

2.1 (a) New York Cases

(1) Cases Officially Reported

(2) Cases Not Officially Reported

2.1 (b) Supreme Court of the United States Cases

2.1 (c) Other Cases

2.2 NEW YORK COURT DECISIONS

2.2 (a) Decisions Officially Reported

2.2 (b) Unofficially Reported or Unreported Decisions

2.3 FEDERAL AND OUT-OF-STATE DECISIONS

2.3 (a) Supreme Court of the United States

2.3 (b) Other Federal Courts

2.3 (c) Out-of-State and Unofficial Case Citations

2.4 OTHER SOURCES OF DECISIONS

2.4 (a) Electronic Case Citations

(1) Online Services

(2) Citing Tabular Cases

(3) Internet Material

2.4 (b) Commission, Agency and Ethics Opinions

(1) Commission and Agency Documents and Materials

(2) Ethics Opinions

2.1 CASE NAMES

2.1 (a) New York Cases

(1) Cases Officially Reported

First, Second and Third Series Cases

Case names for New York decisions reported in the first, second and third series of the New York Official Reports can be found in the Official Case Name and Citation Locator at http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/Citator_Menu.htm. The case name for a decision is also provided in the "Cite Title As" field in the online Official Reports. Case names found in the Table of Cases in the printed Official Reports should not be used when they differ from the electronic version. To cite a companion case whose title is different than the official case name, formulate a case name as described in section 2.1 (a) (2).

(2) Cases Not Officially Reported

If a case has not been officially reported, formulate a case name using the citation naming conventions found in standard citation manuals and apply the abbreviations listed in Appendix 1. Also see examples of case names in Appendix 6.

2.1 (b) Supreme Court of the United States Cases

Case names for the Supreme Court of the United States cases are found on the Supreme Court website at http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/casefinder.aspx. Retain the abbreviations provided. If the case does not appear in the Supreme Court's listing, formulate a case name using the citation naming conventions found in standard citation manuals and apply the abbreviations listed in Appendix 1.

2.1 (c) Other Cases

For any other case, use the case name found in standard citation services or formulate a name by applying citation naming conventions found in standard citation manuals. In either event, use the abbreviations listed in Appendix 1.

2.2 NEW YORK COURT DECISIONS

2.2 (a) Decisions Officially Reported

(1) Basic Citation Style

Cite to the Official Reports as follows:

(O'Connell v Corcoran, 1 NY3d 179 [2003])

(Matter of Cornell Univ. v Beer, 16 AD3d 890 [3d Dept 2005])

(Matter of Gernold, 9 Misc 3d 427 [Sur Ct, Erie County 2005])

(2) Pinpoint Page Citation

To refer to a pinpoint page in a decision:

(People v Ramos, 90 NY2d 490, 495 [1997])

(Matter of Cornell Univ. v Beer, 16 AD3d 890, 894 [3d Dept 2005])

Where the pinpoint page is the same as the initial page or where the decision comprises one page, repeat the initial page for a pinpoint citation as follows:

(Matter of Allen v Black, 275 AD2d 207, 207 [1st Dept 2000])

(3) Case Citation Containing Footnotes

Cases Containing Single Footnote

Citation to the sole footnote in a decision is designated by a lowercase "n" as follows:

(People v Wilson, 93 NY2d 222, 226 n [1999])

Cases Containing More Than One Footnote

Where a case contains more than one footnote, the citation should indicate the number of the footnote being cited as follows:

(Desiderio v Ochs, 100 NY2d 159, 168 n 3 [2003])

Case Citation Containing Multiple Footnotes

Cite multiple footnotes appearing on the same page as follows:

(Matter of Black Radio Network v Public Serv. Commn. of State of N.Y., 253 AD2d 22, 25 nn 2, 3 [3d Dept 1999])

Citation Referencing Pinpoint Page and Footnote

Cite to both a pinpoint page and a footnote on the same page as follows:

(City of New York v 330 Cont. LLC, 60 AD3d 226, 229-230, 230 n 3 [1st Dept 2009])

(People v Kozlowski, 11 NY3d 223, 242 and n 10 [2008])

(4) Citation Referencing Multiple Page Quotation

In citing a single quotation that runs over two or more pages, give the pages at which it begins and ends, separated by a hyphen, rather than a comma:

(Matter of Sayeh R., 91 NY2d 306, 316-317 [1997])

(5) Citation Including Appellate History

Show appellate history as follows:

(Flores v Lower E. Side Serv. Ctr., 3 AD3d 459 [1st Dept 2004], revd 4 NY3d 363 [2005])

(D'Angelo v Cole, 108 AD2d 541 [4th Dept 1985], mod 67 NY2d 65 [1986])

(National City Bank v Gelfert, 257 App Div 465 [2d Dept 1939], revd 284 NY 13 [1940], revd 313 US 221 [1941])

(Garden Homes Woodlands Co. v Town of Dover, 95 NY2d 516[2000], revg 266 AD2d 187 [2d Dept 1999])

(Matter of Rosenblum v New York State Workers' Compensation Bd., 309 AD2d 120 [1st Dept 2003], affg 190 Misc 2d 588 [Sup Ct, NY County 2002])

(Gross v Sandow, 5 AD3d 901 [3d Dept 2004], lv dismissed and denied 3 NY3d 735 [2004])

(People v Ferber, 96 Misc 2d 669 [Sup Ct, NY County 1978], affd 74 AD2d 558 [1st Dept 1980], revd 52 NY2d 674 [1981], revd 458 US 747 [1982])

(Kaufman v Eli Lilly & Co., 65 NY2d 449[1985], modfg 99 AD2d 695 [1st Dept 1984], which affd 116 Misc 2d 351 [Sup Ct, NY County 1982])

(Ferres v City of New Rochelle, 112 AD2d 918 [2d Dept 1985], lv granted 67 NY2d 603 [1986])

(Marco v Sachs, 10 NY2d 542 [1962], rearg denied 11 NY2d 766 [1962])

(People v Rowe, 152 AD2d 907 [4th Dept 1989], affdfor reasons stated below 75 NY2d 948 [1990])

(N.A. Kerson Co. v Shayne, Dachs, Weiss, Kolbrenner, Levy, 59 AD2d 551 [2d Dept 1977], affd on concurring op of Suozzi, J., 45 NY2d 730 [1978])

(Henderson v Manhattan & Bronx Surface Tr. Operating Auth., 74 AD3d 654 [1st Dept 2010], appeal dismissed 15 NY3d 951 [2010])

For a listing of appellate history abbreviations, see Appendix 3.

(6) Multiple Citations; Citation Quoting or Citing Another

Where multiple citations are given, the style is:

(cf. Edkins v Board of Educ. of City of N.Y., 261 App Div 1096 [2d Dept 1941], revd 287 NY 505 [1942]; Brown v Rosenbaum, 262 App Div 136 [1st Dept 1941], affd 287 NY 510 [1942]; Broderick v Aaron, 264 NY 368 [1934])

(see Hill v St. Clare's Hosp., 107 AD2d 557 [1st Dept 1985], mod 67 NY2d 72 [1986]; cf. McDermott v Torre, 56 NY2d 399 [1982]; Holzberg v Flower & Fifth Ave. Hosps., 32 NY2d 716 [1973], affg 39 AD2d 526 [1st Dept 1972])

(People v Alonzo, 16 NY3d 267, 270 [2011], quoting People v Moffitt, 20 AD3d 687, 690 [3d Dept 2005])

(People v Alonzo, 16 NY3d 267, 269 [2011], citing People v Bauman, 12 NY3d 152 [2009])

(7) Optional Information

Although including the precise date of decision and judge is not required, that information may be supplied in brackets, following the citation. Do not include optional information in references to previously cited authority. See section 1.3.

Examples:

(Iazzetti v City of New York, 94 NY2d 183 [Dec. 2, 1999, Kaye, Ch. J.])

(Ponce v St. John's Cemetery, 222 AD2d 361, 364 [1st Dept 1995, Rubin, J., dissenting])

(LaManna v Carrigan, 196 Misc 2d 98 [Civ Ct, Richmond County 2003, Vitaliano, J.])

Decision Type

Using decision type indicators is optional:

(Hernandez v Robles, 7 NY3d 338 [2006 plurality])

(Arbanil v Flannery, 31 AD3d 588 [2d Dept 2006 mem])

(Matter of Anonymous, 37 AD3d 970 [3d Dept 2007 per curiam])

Court Abbreviations

References to courts within citations should be abbreviated as follows:
Appellate Division App Div
Chancery Court Ch Ct
City Court [city name] City Ct
Civil Court of the City of New York Civ Ct, [county name] County
County Court [county name] County Ct
Court of Appeals (Federal) [circuit No.] Cir
Court of Appeals (State) Ct App
Court of Claims Ct Cl
Criminal Court of the City of New York Crim Ct, [county name] County
District Court (Federal) D [forum]
District Court (State) [Nassau or Suffolk] Dist Ct
Drug Treatment Court Drug Treatment Ct
Family Court Fam Ct
Housing Part Hous Part
Judicial District Jud Dist
Justice Court [town/village name] Just Ct
Police Court Police Ct
Superior Court Super Ct
Supreme Court (Federal) US
Supreme Court (State) Sup Ct
Supreme Court, Appellate Term App Term
Surrogate's Court Sur Ct

(8) Citation to Slip Opinions

Opinions scheduled for publication in the Official Reports are cited as follows:

(People v Daly, — Misc 3d —, 2011 NY Slip Op 21371 [Crim Ct, NY County 2011])

(Franklin Corp. v Prahler, — AD3d —, 2011 NY Slip Op 07947 [4th Dept 2011])

(Tkeshelashvili v State of New York, — NY3d —, 2011 NY Slip Op 08451 [2011])

2.2 (b) Unofficially Reported or Unreported Decisions

(1) New York Parallel Unofficial Citations

Parallel unofficial citations are not used for officially reported New York State cases.

(2) Citation to Unreported Cases

Unreported New York Slip Opinions with Published Abstracts

A number of opinions not selected for full publication in the Miscellaneous Reports are published in abstract form in the printed Miscellaneous 3d Reports and in full text in the Slip Opinion Service and online Official Reports. Each opinion is assigned a Miscellaneous 3d citation as well as a unique Slip Opinion citation that is paginated to permit pinpoint page references.

Cite as follows:

(Matter of Lee v Chin, 1 Misc 3d 901[A], 2003 NY Slip Op 51455[U] [Sup Ct, NY County 2003])

Pinpoint page reference:

(Matter of Lee v Chin, 1 Misc 3d 901[A], 2003 NY Slip Op 51455[U], *9 [Sup Ct, NY County 2003])

(Matter of Lee v Chin, 1 Misc 3d 901[A], 2003 NY Slip Op 51455[U], *1-3 [Sup Ct, NY County 2003])

(Matter of Lee v Chin, 1 Misc 3d 901[A], 2003 NY Slip Op 51455[U], *1, *3 [Sup Ct, NY County 2003])

Subsequent short form citation:

(Lee, 2003 NY Slip Op 51455[U], *7)

Unreported New York Slip Opinions without Published Abstracts

Unreported slip opinions not abstracted in the Miscellaneous Reports are cited as follows:

(Hwang v Cunningham, 2011 NY Slip Op 33038[U] [Sup Ct, Nassau County 2011])

Unreported Appellate Motion Decisions

Most Appellate Division and Appellate Term motion decisions are not published in print. They are cited as follows:

(Blair v Pierre, 2006 NY Slip Op 78812[U] [2d Dept 2006])

Other Unreported Cases

Cite unreported cases not published in the New York Slip Opinion Service in the following manner, including any information that would be useful in identifying the case:

(Keenan v Dayton Beach Park No. 1 Corp., Sup Ct, Queens County, June 5, 1990, Hentel, J., index No. 10302/84)

(Sinha v Sinha, Sup Ct, NY County, Oct. 3, 2003, Hoahng, Special Ref.)

(People v Moody, Sup Ct, NY County, Oct. 17, 1985, Neco, J., indictment No. 84-201)

(Paul v State of New York, Ct Cl, Mar. 14, 2008, Minarik, J., claim No. 109802, UID No. 2008-031-501)

(People v Boss, Sup Ct, Albany County, Feb. 17, 2000, Teresi, J., slip op at 4)

(3) Citation to the New York Law Journal

Where a case is not officially reported or published as an unreported case in the New York Slip Opinion Service, but appears in the New York Law Journal, cite as follows:

(Matter of Lutz, NYLJ, Mar. 28, 1986 at 15, col 5 [Sur Ct, NY County 1986])

(People v Shulman, NYLJ, Apr. 2, 1999 at 35, col 6, at 36, col 1 [Suffolk County Ct 1999])

(Tryon v Westermann, NYLJ, Oct. 6, 2000 at 30, col 5 [Sup Ct, Nassau County 2000, Austin, J.])

For online version of New York Law Journal:

(Matter of Parisi, NYLJ 1202538693000 [Sur Ct, Queens County 2011])

Pinpoint page reference:

(Matter of Parisi, NYLJ 1202538693000, *7 [Sur Ct, Queens County 2011])

(4) Discontinued Unofficial Report

Where the choice lies between an unofficial report that is current and a discontinued unofficial report, the current report should be cited:

(National Mahaiwe Bank v Hand, 30 NYS 508 [Sup Ct, Gen Term, 1st Dept 1894])

not

(National Mahaiwe Bank v Hand, 80 Hun 584 [Sup Ct, Gen Term, 1st Dept 1894])

2.3 FEDERAL AND OUT-OF-STATE DECISIONS

2.3 (a) Supreme Court of the United States

(1) Citation to Official Reports

Supreme Court of the United States cases are cited from the United States Reports where available:

(Ohralick v Ohio State Bar Assn., 436 US 447 [1978])

Include whatever optional information is desired:

(Sandin v Conner, 515 US 472 [1995, Rehnquist, Ch. J.])

(2) Citation to Unofficial Reports

When the citation to the United States Reports is unavailable, supply a blank citation to the United States Reports with a parallel citation to an unofficial report as follows:

(Greene v Fisher, 565 US —, —, 132 S Ct 38, 42-43 [2011])

or

(Greene v Fisher, 565 US —, —, 181 L Ed 2d 336, 339-340 [2011])

2.3 (b) Other Federal Courts

(1) Reported Federal Cases

Cite other federal court decisions as follows:

(United States v Seltzer, 227 F3d 36 [2d Cir 2000])

(Dennis v Warren, 779 F2d 245 [5th Cir 1985]; Schultz v Frisby, 619 F Supp 792 [ED Wis 1985])

(Mavrovich v Vanderpool, 427 F Supp 2d 1084 [D Kan 2006])

(United States v Gridley, 725 F Supp 398 [ND Ind 1989])

Include whatever optional information is desired:

(Jean v Collins, 221 F3d 656 [4th Cir 2000 en banc])

(2) Unreported Federal Cases

(Lonf v Apfel, 1 Fed Appx 326 [6th Cir 2001])

(Packer v City of Toledo, 1 Fed Appx 430 [6th Cir 2001])

(Lewis v Bloomburg Mills, US Dist Ct, SC, Dec. 30, 1982, Hemphill, J.)

(Govic v New York City Tr. Auth., US Dist Ct, SD NY, 89 Civ 7062, DiCarlo, J., 1989)

2.3 (c) Out-of-State and Unofficial Case Citations

(1) Where Official Reports Available

Out-of-state cases are cited to the state official reports where available, followed by the parallel National Reporter System citation:

(Newbold v Arvidson, 105 Idaho 663, 672 P2d 231 [1983])

(2) Where Official Reports Unavailable

Where an out-of-state case is cited only to the National Reporter System because no official citation is available, the name of the jurisdiction should be added in abbreviated form in brackets:

(Brinker v First Natl. Bank, 37 SW2d 136 [Tex Commn App 1931])

(3) Citing Reports Known by Name of Reporter

When citing reports known by name of the reporter, except New York and English reports, the jurisdiction should be added in abbreviated form in brackets after the name of the reporter:

(Meade v M'Dowell, 5 Binn [Pa] 195 [Sup Ct 1812])

(4) Public Domain (Vendor or Medium Neutral) Citation

When a public domain citation is provided, supply a parallel citation to a published source:

(Alberte v Anew Health Care Servs., 232 Wis 2d 587, 595, 605 NW2d 515, 519, 2000 WI 7, ¶ 12 [2000])

If the only source is a website, supply additional information using section 2.4 (a) (3). Appendix 2 (D) contains a list of jurisdictions that have adopted a public domain citation.

2.4 OTHER SOURCES OF DECISIONS

2.4 (a) Electronic Case Citations

(1) Online Services

Citation to a case contained in an electronic service (e.g. Westlaw or Lexis) is permissible only when the case is not published in book form. Provide the case name, citation, court, decision date and docket or index number. If the source is Westlaw or Lexis, and access to both is available, cite both services:

(Savitt v Vacco, 1998 WL 690939, *7, 1998 US Dist LEXIS 15582, *21-22 [ND NY, Sept. 28, 1998, No. 95-CV-1842 (RSP/DRH)])

(Beasley v Hub City Texas, L.P., 2003 WL 22254692, *2 n 3, 2003 Tex App LEXIS 8550, *5 n 3 [Sept. 29, 2003, No. 01-03-00287-CV])

(Fulton Bank, N.A. v UBS Sec., LLC, 2011 BL 286582 [ED Pa, Nov. 7, 2011, No. 10-Civ-01093]) [Bloomberg Law]

(2) Citing Tabular Cases

Citation for tabular cases where the full text is published only on Westlaw and Lexis:

(Regal v General Motors Corp., 266 Wis 2d 1060, 668 NW2d 562 [2003] [table; text at 2003 WL 21537821, *3, 2003 Wis App LEXIS 634, *13-14 (2003)])

(United States v Hollingsworth, 81 F3d 171 [9th Cir 1996] [table; text at 1996 WL 138583, 1996 US App LEXIS 8610 (1996)])

Pinpoint page reference:

(1996 WL 138583, *3, 1996 US App LEXIS 8610, *9)

(3) Internet Material

Citation to decisions posted on the Internet is permitted where the material is not readily available in print. Provide the uniform resource locator (URL) precisely as it appears in the Internet browser; the case name or document title; the precise identifier, such as case citation or number; and the date of the decision, adding if applicable the date that the decision was updated or corrected. Add pinpoint citations, if any, after the precise identifier. The name of the author may be added if desired:

(Applications of a Child with a Disability [Board of Educ. of Kenmore-Tonawanda Union Free Sch. Dist.], http://www.sro.nysed.gov/decisionindex/1996/96-55-96-66.htm [NY St Educ Dept, Off of St Review, Decision Nos. 96-55 & 96-66, Nov. 20, 1996, Eldridge, SRO, accessed Jan. 10, 2007])

(Application of Red & White Ferries, Inc., http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PUBLISHED/FINAL_DECISION/3598.htm [Cal Pub Util Commn Decision No. D0011040 (Nov. 21, 2000, as corrected through Nov. 27, 2000)])

(Gilbow v Travis, 2009 Ark App 254 [Apr. 8, 2009], http://opinions.aoc.arkansas.gov/WebLink8/ElectronicFile.aspx?docid=38737)

2.4 (b) Commission, Agency and Ethics Opinions

(1) Commission and Agency Documents and Materials

Cite as follows:

(31 PERB ¶ 3050 [1998])

(11 Ops Counsel SBRPS No. 37 [2002])

(9 Ops Counsel SBEA No. 84 at 153 [1991]) [Note: pre-1994]

(1937 Ops Atty Gen 113) [Note: pre-1983]

(1999 Ops Atty Gen No. 99-F3 at 1011) [Note: formal opinion]

(2006 Ops Atty Gen No. 2006-F4) [Note: formal opinion]

(1932 Atty Gen [Inf Ops] 206) [Note: pre-1983]

(1999 Ops Atty Gen No. 99-5) [Note: informal opinion]

(12 Ops St Comp No. 8208 at 276 [1956]) [Note: pre-1978]

(2001 Ops St Comp No. 2001-3)

(1998 Ops St Comp No. 98-10 at 26)

(39 US Atty Gen 132)

(NY Dept of Social Servs Admin Directive 96 ADM-8 at 20)

(Dept of Corr Servs Directive No. 4911 § III-A-2)

(NY City Campaign Fin Bd Advisory Op No. 2007-2)

(NY City Dept of Bldgs Operations Policy and Procedure Notice No. 4/98)

(NY St Div of Hous & Community Renewal Advisory Op No. 92-1)

(NY St Dept of Taxation & Fin Advisory Op No. TSB-A-O6[2]M)

(34 NY PSC 1524 [Op No. 94-24])

(2000 NY PSC Op No. 96-12 at 31) [Note: online opinions]

(Ruling on Confidential Trade Secret Status of Testimony and Exhibits, NY PSC Case No. 02-C-1425 [Oct. 8, 2004]) [Note: online documents]

(36 Ed Dept Rep 508 [Decision No. 13,787]) [Note: decisions in volumes 1-49]

(51 Ed Dept Rep, Decision No. 16,256) [Note: decisions in volume 50 and above]

(Comm on Open Govt OML-AO-3899 [2004]) [Note: Open Meetings Law Advisory Opinion]

(Comm on Open Govt FOIL-AO-13559 [2002]) [Note: FOIL Advisory Opinion]

(Ops Gen Counsel NY Ins Dept No. 02-07-23 [July 2002]) [Note: online opinions]

(NY St Ins Dept 2002 Circular Letter No. 25, RE: Applicability, Guidelines and Procedures for Compliance with the Provisions of the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002; Guidelines for the Use of Limitations for Acts of Terrorism in Commercial Property/Casualty Policies)

(Dept of Corr & Community Supervision Directive No. 6922 § II)

(NY St Off of Children & Family Servs Admin Directive 11-OCFS-ADM-01)

Some suggested forms of commission and agency document citations in running text are as follows:

New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal Advisory Opinion No. 92-1 provides . . .

2001 Opinions of the State Comptroller No. 2001-3 provides . . .

Supply case name information where applicable. For example:

(Matter of Freeport Union Free Sch. Dist. [Freeport Educ. Off. Assn.], 31 PERB ¶ 4021 [1998])

(AmBase Corp. v Commissioner of Internal Revenue, TC Memo 2001-122 [2001])

(Employer: NYC Tr. Auth., 2002 WL 231989, *1, 2002 NY Wrk Comp LEXIS 87935, *3 [WCB No. 0975 4254, Feb. 7, 2002])

(Matter of Monroe County Civ. Serv. Empls. Assn., Inc., Local 1000, AFSCME, AFL-CIO, Monroe County Part-Time Empl. Unit, Local 828 [County of Monroe], 44 PERB ¶ 4576 [2011, Fitzgerald, ALJ]) [Note: Acceptable PERB administrative law judge opinion; use of the ALJ's name is optional]

(Matter of Kyte, 2012 WL 2992105, 2012 NY Tax LEXIS 64 [NY St Div of Tax Appeals DTA No. 824871, July 12, 2012])

(2) Ethics Opinions

Cite as follows:

(11 Advisory Comm on Jud Ethics Op 91-68 [1991])

(Advisory Comm on Jud Ethics Op 06-82 [2006]) [Note: online opinions]

(NY St Ethics Commn Advisory Op 94-21 [1994])

(NY St Bar Assn Comm on Prof Ethics Op 656 [1993])

(Bar Assn of Nassau County Comm on Prof Ethics Op 2-89 [1989])

(ABA Comm on Ethics and Prof Responsibility Formal Op 342 [1975])

(NY City Bar Assn Comm on Prof Ethics Formal Op 2011-2 [2011])

(AMA Code of Med Ethics, Ops on Prac Matters E-8.081)

(2005 Ann Rep of NY Commn on Jud Conduct at 155)

(53 Rec of Assn of Bar of City of NY at 450 [1998])

Some suggested forms of ethics opinions in running text are as follows:

New York State Bar Association Committee on Professional Ethics Opinion 656 (1993) provides . . .

New York City Bar Association Committee on Professional Ethics Formal Opinion 2011-2 (2011) provides . . .

(Matter of Gomez, NY City Conflicts of Interest Bd Case No. 2012-095)

3.0 STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE MATERIALS

Contents of Section
3.1 NEW YORK STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE MATERIALS

3.1 (a) Statutory Abbreviation Style in General

3.1 (b) Statutory Citation Style

(1) Basic Citation Form

(2) Citation Strings and Multiple Statutory Citations

(3) Statutory Amendments, Additions and Renumbering

(4) Former Statutes

3.1 (c) Nonstatutory Material in Statutory Compilations

3.1 (d) Session Laws and Unconsolidated Laws

3.1 (e) Model Codes, Proposed Codes and Uniform Laws

3.1 (f) Legislative and Other Materials

3.2 FEDERAL STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE MATERIALS

3.2 (a) Federal Statutory Abbreviations

3.2 (b) Federal Statutory Citation Style

3.2 (c) Federal Legislative Materials

3.3 OUT-OF-STATE STATUTES

3.1 NEW YORK STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE MATERIALS

3.1 (a) Statutory Abbreviation Style in General

The statute name abbreviations listed in Appendix 4 should be used for statutory citations within parentheses. Either the full name or the abbreviated name may be used in running text.

3.1 (b) Statutory Citation Style

Use the basic citation form below for the initial citation to a statute.

(1) Basic Citation Form

(a) Citations within Parentheses

Citations should appear within parentheses as follows:

(Penal Law art 80)

(Penal Law, art 80, § 80.05)

(Town Law § 199 [1] [a])

(ECL 11-0703 [4] [b])

(General Municipal Law § 50-e [3] [d])

(CPLR 5602 [b] [2] [iii])

(Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [6] [a] [3])

(b) Citations in Running Text

Use the statute's terminology when specifying its divisions. For example, if the statute refers to its "subdivisions," "subsections," "paragraphs," "subparagraphs," etc., use that terminology. If the statute does not use any such terminology, use "subdivision," "paragraph," "subparagraph," "clause" in descending order.

Some suggested forms of statutory citations in running text are as follows:

Town Law § 199 provides . . .

Section 199 of the Town Law provides . . .

Penal Law article 80 provides . . .

Article 80 of the Penal Law provides . . .

Penal Law, article 80, § 80.05 provides . . .

Town Law § 199 (1) (a) provides . . .

Subdivision (1) of Town Law § 199 provides . . .

Paragraph (a) of Town Law § 199 (1) provides . . .

Subdivision (1) (a) of Town Law § 199 provides . . .

Subdivision (1) of section 199 of the Town Law provides . . .

Subparagraph (iii) of CPLR 5602 (b) (2) provides . . .

Civil Practice Law and Rules § 5602 (b) (2) (iii) provides . . .

CPLR 5602 (b) (2) (iii) provides . . .

Title 1 of article 3 of the RPTL provides . . .

As stated in article 23, title 27 of the Environmental Conservation Law . . .

(c) Short-Form References

A short-form reference may be used for subsequent citations to the same statute. See section 1.3.

(§ 205.05)

(id. § 468-a)

Defendant moved pursuant to CPL 440.10 to vacate the judgment of conviction. A 440.10 motion may be denied without a hearing when . . .

As stated in article 23, title 27 of the Environmental Conservation Law . . .

(2) Citation Strings and Multiple Statutory Citations

(a) Parallel Hierarchy

Citations within Parentheses

References to parts, subdivisions, paragraphs, subparagraphs, clauses, etc., of sections of statutes cited in parallel hierarchy (divisions of sections of the same rank or hierarchy) should appear within parentheses as follows:

(Town Law § 199 [1], [3])

(CPLR 5602 [a], [b])

(Mental Hygiene Law § 9.27 [b] [1]-[10])

(Penal Law § 125.25 [1] [a], [b])

The comma is inserted between divisions of the same rank.

Citations in Running Text

Some suggested forms of citation of parallel hierarchy in running text are as follows:

Town Law § 199 (1), (3) provide . . .

Subdivisions (1) and (3) of Town Law § 199 provide . . .

Penal Law § 125.25 (1) (a) and (b) provide . . .

Legal Research and
Citation Style in USA

Copyright 2000, 2004 by Ronald B. Standler


Table of Contents




Introduction

The format for citations to legal materials is different from the format for scholarly citations to books and periodicals in general. This handout is a terse guide to legal citation in the USA.

The generally accepted style manual for legal citations in the USA is the Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation, which is published by the editors of four prestigious law reviews at Columbia University, Harvard, Univ. of Pennsylvania, and Yale Law Schools. A copy of the Bluebook can be purchased in any law school bookstore. A comprehensive set of rules from the Bluebook is available on the Internet from Peter W. Martin at. In contrast, this handout here contains a terse set of rules that generally agrees with the Bluebook, but does not contain all of the fine points and options in the Bluebook.

Opinions of some courts use a different format from the Bluebook, but these alternative citation formats contains the same information. Be aware that citations in annotated statutes and other law books may use a different bibliographic format from the Bluebook. Furthermore, the proper format according to the Bluebook changes with time, so old sources (both cases and law review articles) do not use the modern format for citation.


1. Sources of Legal Materials in USA

Statutes and Regulations in the USA

The U.S. Government publishes each statute enacted by the U.S. Congress in U.S. Statutes at Large.

Except for doing historical research, a more convenient way to access federal statutes is to use the U.S. Code, which groups the original statute and all subsequent amendments together in one place. All statutes from the federal government are published by West in the United States Code Annotated. This Code is divided into fifty "titles":
15 is for Commerce and Trade, including trademark statutes
17 is Copyrights
18 is for all federal criminal statutes
26 is the Internal Revenue Code, which is the federal tax law
35 is for Patents
47 is for communications law: telephone, radio/television, etc.
Each "title" may fill multiple volumes on a bookshelf.

The regulations issued by agencies of the federal government, in order to implement law expressed in the statutes, is published in the Code of Federal Regulations.

In addition, each state has its own collection of statutes and regulations.

One frequently sees citations in opinions of state courts to decisions from other states, as the common law (i.e., judge-made law) does import rules from other states. In contrast, statutes of other states are irrelevant, because the only statutes that apply are the statutes in the state whose law is being applied. However, occasionally judges look to court opinions from other states in interpreting a word or phrase in a statute.

Reporters for Opinions of Federal Courts

The U.S. Government publishes U.S. Reports that contains the official version of all of the opinions of the U.S. Supreme Court.

West publishes:
  • Supreme Court Reporter that contains all of the opinions of the U.S. Supreme Court since 1882. West's publication is issued several years before the official U.S. Reports appears, and so is useful for citing recent Supreme Court cases.

  • Federal Reporter contains all of the published opinions of the U.S. Courts of Appeals, plus the few published opinions of Federal District Courts from 1880 to 1932.

  • Federal Supplement contains published opinions after 1932 of Federal District Courts, which are trial courts.

  • Federal Rules Decisions contains published opinions of Federal District Courts that pertain to the Rules of Civil (or Criminal) Procedure. These opinions are not also found in the Federal Supplement.

Lawyer Cooperative Publishing Company, now owned by Lexis, publishes the Lawyer's Edition of the U.S. Supreme Court opinions.

West's Reporters for Opinions of State Courts

There are seven regional reporters:

Atlantic: Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Maryland, Connecticut, Delaware, Rhode Island, Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine

North Eastern: New York, Massachusetts, Illinois, Ohio, Indiana

North Western: Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, North and South Dakota, Nebraska, Iowa

Pacific: Kansas, Oklahoma, and all states in and west of Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, and New Mexico

South Eastern: Georgia, North and South Carolina, Virginia, West Virginia

Southern: Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana

South Western: Texas, Missouri, Kentucky, Tennessee, Arkansas

In addition to these regional Reporters, West publishes
  • California Reporter
  • New York State Reporter
These two Reporters are not just extracts from the regional Reporters (i.e., Pacific for California and North Eastern for New York), but contain occasional opinions from other courts that are not found in the corresponding regional Reporters.

A few observations on the West regional reporter system:
  • The Pacific Reporter was begun in 1883, when there was little legal activity in the 13 western states in the USA, plus Alaska and Hawaii, so it made sense then to bundle all of those states into one Reporter.

  • New York State and Massachusetts are in the North Eastern Reporter, not in the Atlantic Reporter that serves the surrounding states.

  • These regional reporters generally only contain published opinions of the state appellate courts, not state trial courts. In fact, it is rare to see a published opinion of a trial court in the USA, because such opinions have no precedential value. However, a few decisions of trial courts in the USA are published:
    • Pennsylvania publishes a separate reporter, called Pennsylvania District and County Cases (abbreviated: Pa.D.&C.), that contains some decisions of trial courts
    • a few decisions of trial courts in New York state are published in West's New York State Reporter (N.Y.S.)
    • a few decisions of trial courts in New Jersey are published in the Atlantic reporter, the names of these trial courts are "New Jersey Superior Court Law Division" and "New Jersey Superior Court Chancery Division"
    • and, as mentioned above, some opinions of trial courts in the Federal court system are published in the Federal Supplement (F.Supp.).

misleading state court names

The highest state court in New York State is called the "Court of Appeals".
The trial courts in New York State are called the "Supreme Court".
The intermediate courts in New York State are called "Supreme Court, Appellate Division".
Beware of this misleading nomenclature!

In the federal courts, the Courts of Appeals are intermediate courts, between the trial courts and the U.S. Supreme Court. But in both New York and Maryland, their state Court of Appeals is the highest state court.

In most states, the Superior Court is a trial court, which handles larger cases than the ordinary trial court. However, the Pennsylvania Superior Court is an intermediate appellate court, between the trial courts and the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.


parallel citations

In addition to these regional reporters from West Publishing, many states publish their own opinions in an official state reporter. A law library will typically have the official state reporter of the state in which the library is located, but not the official state reporters of distant states. The West regional reporters are the standard source for finding opinions of courts in the USA. Nonetheless, one often finds parallel citations to both West's regional reporter and the official state reporter, particularly in Briefs submitted to that state's court.

Similarly, one often sees citations to opinions of the U.S. Supreme Court that cite in parallel to three different sources:
  1. the official U.S. Reports,
  2. West's Supreme Court Reporter (abbreviated "S.Ct."), and
  3. Lawyer Cooperative Publishing Company's Lawyer's Edition.
I prefer a citation only to U.S. Reports, if available; otherwise I only cite to S.Ct. The Lawyer's Edition includes the pagination to the other two editions.

secondary sources

The law in the USA is only expressed in constitutions, statutes, and opinions of appellate courts, which are known as primary sources. Secondary sources collect and explain rules of law from the primary sources.

There are several secondary sources commonly used by attorneys:
  1. American Law Reports, abbreviated "A.L.R.", contains annotations on a particular topic, which list the important cases in state and federal courts on that topic, along with a terse synopsis of the facts of the case and the judge's ruling. If one can find a relevant annotation in ALR, this may be a quick way of grasping the legal principles. Annotations in ALR are not commonly cited, except as authority for a statement of a legal rule in the majority of jurisdictions. Do not look for advocacy of a change in law in ALR, because ALR only reports what the law is.

  2. American Jurisprudence, abbreviated "Am.Jur.", is a legal encyclopedia that is relatively easy to read. It's a good starting point for someone unfamiliar with a particular area of law. Am.Jur. is not commonly cited in either law review articles or court opinions.

  3. Restatements of the Law, is an authoritative source, which summarizes the result of many reported court cases in the USA. The Restatements are written by a large committee of legal scholars, eminent litigators, and judges. The Restatements function as a statutory codification of the common law, i.e., law made by judges' decisions. In contrast to ALR and Am.Jur., the Restatements are commonly cited in scholarly articles and opinions of courts.

  4. Treatises written by law professors and other respected authorities. Examples include:
    William L. Prosser, TORTS, (4th ed. 1971).
    Arthur Linton Corbin, CONTRACTS, § 1374 (1962).

  5. Articles in law reviews. Most law reviews are published by a law school. A few law reviews are published by professional societies, such as the American Bar Association. Articles often advocate change(s) in law, which need to be distinguished from the current law.

  6. Since the year 1941, West publishes U.S. CODE CONGRESSIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE NEWS, (abbreviated "U.S.C.C.A.N."), which includes the legislative history of statutes passed by the U.S. Congress. Such material is useful in understanding why a statute was passed, and possibly useful in interpreting words or phrases in the statute.


2. Citation of Court Opinions in the USA

The general form consists of a series of information in the following format for example:
Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113, 118 (1973).
U.S. v. Carroll Towing Co., 159 F.2d 169 (2dCir. 1947).
Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad Co., 162 N.E. 99 (N.Y. 1928).
Ybarra v. Spangard, 154 P.2d 687 (Cal. 1944).
name of the parties
The full name of the case at the trial court is always in the format Plaintiff v. Defendant in civil cases and Government v. Defendant in criminal cases. Some appellate courts (e.g., the U.S. Supreme Court) give the name as Appellant v. Appellee, which may be the reverse of the order of names at the trial court.

Note that the names of the parties are always italicized when referring to the opinion of the court in their case. See my further remarks below.

In criminal cases where the government is formally listed as, for example, "People of California", omit "People of", or "State of", and use only the name of the state (e.g., California).

Omit first and middle names of people.

Omit the name of the second and subsequent plaintiffs and defendants, omit "et. al.", and omit alternative names for parties (e.g., "aka", "dba" "also known as" and "doing business as").

volume number
When the volume number would be greater than 999, a second series is begun, and "2d" added to the name of the reporter. Similarly, when the volume number in the second series would be greater than 999, a third series is begun, and "3d" added to the name of the reporter.

name of reporter
Note that the name of the reporter is in regular font, neither underlined nor italicized, even though it is the title of a book. This is a departure from usual scholarly bibliographic format.

The name of the reporter is always abbreviated when citing a case. The proper abbreviations follow:
U.S. Reports, abbreviated "U.S."
West's Supreme Court Reporter, abbreviated "S.Ct."
Federal Reporter, abbreviated "F."
Federal Supplement, abbreviated "F.Supp."
Federal Rules Decisions, abbreviated "F.R.D."

Atlantic, abbreviated "A."
North Eastern, abbreviated "N.E."
North Western, abbreviated "N.W."
Pacific, abbreviated "P."
South Eastern, abbreviated "S.E."
Southern, abbreviated "S."
South Western, abbreviated "S.W."

West's California Reporter, abbreviated "Cal.Rptr."
West's New York State Reporter, abbreviated "N.Y.S."

page number of first page of the opinion
[optional] comma followed by the specific page number where a quotation or particular holding is found.

location and level of court
This information may be omitted for citations to the U.S. Supreme Court, since it is obvious from the name of the reporter (e.g., U.S. or S.Ct. or L.Ed.).

For opinions of a U.S. Court of Appeals, include the circuit number (e.g., "2dCir." or "9thCir.").

For opinions of federal trial courts, include the district. Some states have only one district (e.g., "D.Mass.") while other states may have two or three districts (e.g., "S.D.N.Y." for Southern District of New York State).

For opinions of state supreme courts, use an abbreviation for the name of the state (e.g., "Cal." for California and "N.Y." for New York).

For opinions of intermediate state appellate courts (i.e., courts between the trial court and state supreme court) use the abbreviation for the state followed by "App." (e.g., "Cal.App." for California). (This rule is a little too terse and oversimplified: the precise form is given in Table 1 of the Bluebook.)

year opinion was issued or published
Note that there is no comma between the name of the court and the year of the opinion.

The citation to a single case always ends with a period.
When one mentions a rule of law and cites to more than one case in which the rule is stated, the individual cases are separated by a semicolon, with a period after the last case in the citation.
As stated in the Introduction to this handout, the proper format according to the Bluebook changes with time. One older form placed the identification of the court and the year of the opinion immediately after the name of the parties, for example:

I have put a line through this example, so students will not follow this obsolete example.

short form of citation

After the full citation has been given at least once in the preceding five citations, or after the case has been discussed by name in the text, the case may be referred to by the name of one party. In picking that one name, never pick the name of a government (e.g., U.S., California, ...), never pick the name of a government official (e.g., Janet Reno, being sued in her official capacity as Attorney General), and avoid choosing a frequent litigant (e.g., NAACP). My personal preference in civil cases is to pick the name of the plaintiff at the trial court level, who may be either the appellant or appellee on appeal, unless the plaintiff has a common name like "Smith" or "Jones" or unless the plaintiff is anonymous (e.g., "Doe"). In criminal cases, one always uses the name of the defendant as the short name of the case.

The short form of the citation has the following format:
Palsgraf, 162 N.E. at 100.
In this example, one cites a quotation or holding or fact that is located at page 100, without mentioning the first page number of the opinion.

citing an opinion that was later appealed

One must cite not only the opinion from which the quotation or holding was taken, but also cite the results (e.g., affirmed or reversed) of each appellate court that later considered the same case. This subsequent history of the case is important, because it strengthens the significance of the holding if affirmed, or vitiates the significance of the holding if reversed. It is a serious error to cite the opinion of a lower court that was later reversed by an appellate court, without explicitly mentioning the reversal, because the lower court's holding is no longer good law.

There are three common indicators of subsequent history:
  1. aff'd for affirmed
  2. rev'd for reversed
  3. cert. den. for cases appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, but which that Court declined to hear. This declining to hear may be an indication that the U.S. Supreme Court not only agreed with the lower court's opinion, but also saw no interesting legal issue worthy of discussion.
There are several less common indicators of subsequent history:
  1. aff'd without opinion when no published opinion is issued with the appellate court's decision
  2. overruled by when the rule is changed in a subsequent case with different parties
  3. rev'd on other grounds when the decision in that particular case was reversed, but without changing the particular rule of law that is cited. (Many cases involve more than one issue, so the decision of a lower court can be affirmed on one issue and reversed on another issue.)
  4. on remand when a trial court again considers the case after the ruling of appellate court(s). This is generally the final disposition of the case.
The full list of explanatory phrases is in Table 9 of the Bluebook.

Note that if one cites the opinion of the highest court to hear a case, then one does not also need to cite the lower courts that heard the same case. One must cite only subsequent history, not previous history. For example, one may cite a U.S. Supreme Court opinion, or a state supreme court opinion that was not appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, without mentioning any of the previous history.

My general advice is to ignore the prior opinions, unless the case is really important: either it makes a new rule of law or it contains a holding that is unfavorable to your position. My experience is that reading the prior opinions of a case often provides facts that were omitted from later opinions, and those omitted facts sometimes change my view of the final decision.

If I am only citing a fact that was mentioned in the opinion of a lower court (but not repeated in the opinion of a subsequent court hearing the same case), I generally do not give the subsequent history in that one citation, provided that a citation including subsequent history is located nearby. My practice is a departure from the accepted rule, but I think it makes sense.

citing a dissenting opinion

If one quotes from a dissenting opinion, one must indicate in the citation that the source is only a dissenting opinion, which is not law. One puts the name of the judge or justice who wrote the dissenting opinion plus the word "dissenting" in parenthesis at the end of the citation. For example:
Connick v. Myers, 461 U.S. 138, 156 (1983)(Brennan, J., dissenting).

Generally, one avoids quoting from dissenting opinions, unless one is arguing for a change in the law.

citing an unreported opinion

Unreported opinions are not law, but may be persuasive authority.

The format is the same as for a reported case, except the volume number and name of the reporter is replaced with a citation to the electronic database. For example:
1991 WL 55402, at *3
cites a case available in WESTLAW but not in published reporters. This particular example was the 55402th item added to the WESTLAW computer database in 1991, and the citation is to page *3. If one is citing the whole case, then one would omit because every case in an electronic database begins at page , there is no need to mention the first page number.

In January 2001, West began publishing the Federal Appendix, which includes the opinions that were not selected by the U.S. Courts of Appeals for publication in the Federal reporter. Citations to this source are in the same format as citations to regular reported cases, the name of the volume is always abbreviated as "Fed.Appx."

One can cite any credible source in an essay, but local rules of courts may prohibit citing to unpublished or unreported cases in a Brief filed in that court.

string cites

Sometimes one will cite more than one item to support a proposition, in what is called a "string cite". There is a rigid style for the order of the citations:
  1. Constitutions
    1. U.S. Constitution
    2. State Constitutions, arranged alphabetically by state
    3. constitutions of foreign nations
    4. charters of the United Nations and other international organizations
  2. Statutes
    1. U.S. federal statutes
    2. federal rules of evidence or procedure
    3. state statutes
    4. state rules of evidence or procedure
  3. Case Law
    1. U.S. Supreme Court
    2. U.S. Court of Appeals, and within this category: by order of the Circuit — First Circuit cases appear first, Eleventh Circuit cases appear last.
    3. U.S. District Court, and within this category: by alphabetical order of the states.
    4. State court cases, arranged by alphabetical order of the state. Within each state, that state's supreme court decisions appear first, decisions of intermediate appellate courts next, and decisions of trial courts appear last.
  4. Secondary materials
    1. Restatements of the Law
    2. Treatises (e.g., Prosser & Keeton, TORTS (5th ed. 1984);   Corbin, CONTRACTS)
    3. Articles in Law Reviews

Within each of the above categories of case law, the most recent case appears first, the oldest case appears last.

The organizing principle is that the strongest authority appears first. For example, the U.S. Supreme Court appears before other courts, because it is the highest court in the USA. Similarly, recent cases are more authoritative than a musty old case that may have been ignored for tens of years, but never overturned.

The above order for string cites is from the Bluebook, but I do not like this rule and I do not follow this rule in my essays that are posted at my websites. Personally, I favor a strict chronological order, with the oldest case first, to clearly show the historical evolution of the law. Old cases are not necessarily "musty" — citing an old case shows that the law is well established, and not some recent quirk.

A string cite as a single-spaced, fine-print footnote is useful for citing authorities to support an assertion that is commonly known amongst attorneys and judges. Because such string cites are difficult-to-read, I prefer to display a string cite as an indented list in the text (not as a footnote), with a blank line clearly separating each case. For example:
There is a long line of cases on Heckler's Veto:
  1. Terminiello v. City of Chicago, 337 U.S. 1 (1949) (speaker was arrested to prevent disturbance by crowd of approximately 1000 protesters);

  2. Edwards v. Louisiana, 372 U.S. 229 (1963);

  3. Cox v. Louisiana, 379 U.S. 536 (1965);

  4. Brown v. Louisiana, 383 U.S. 131 (1966) (The first use by the U.S. Supreme Court of the phrase "heckler's veto" is in footnote 1 at page 133.);

  5. Tinker v. Des Moines, 258 F.Supp. 971 (S.D.Iowa 1966), aff'd, 383 F.2d 988 (8thCir. 1967), rev'd, 393 U.S. 503, 508-509 (1969) (Fear of a disturbance in school was not adequate reason for school principals to forbid pupils to wear black armbands, as a symbol of their opposition to the war in Vietnam.);

  6. Gooding v. Wilson, 405 U.S. 518 (1972);

  7. Healy v. James, 408 U.S. 169 (1972);

  8. Forsyth County v. Nationalist Movement, 505 U.S. 123 (1992).
Putting only one case per element in the indented list, and putting a blank line between elements is especially helpful when one also cites earlier opinions in the same case, as I did above in the above-cited Tinker case.


3. Citation of Statutes and Regulations

federal

The general form for federal statutes and regulations consists of a series of information in the following format, for example:
17 U.S.C. § 102.
title number

name of statute or regulation
Note that the name of the statute or regulation is in regular font, neither underlined nor italicized, even though it is the title of a book. This is a departure from usual scholarly bibliographic format.
The name is always abbreviated as follows:
United States Code, abbreviated "U.S.C."
Code of Federal Regulations, abbreviated "C.F.R."

§ section number
There is one blank space between the section symbol and the number.
[optional] subsection
It is conventional to denote subsections with lower-case letters of the alphabet. The second sublevel of organization uses numbers. The third sublevel uses upper-case letters. The fourth sublevel uses lower-case roman numerals. Enclose each level of organization in separate parentheses. For example:
17 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1).

period at the end of the citation.
Citations to U.S. Statutes at Large are in the following format:
48 Stats. 112, 113 (1933).
Where 48 is the volume number, 112 is the first page number of the statute, 113 is the page number of the quoted material, and 1933 is the year that the statute was enacted. The U.S. Statutes at Large are cited when the history of a statute is discussed, but citations to the United State Code (abbreviated "U.S.C.") are more common in court cases.

state statutes

The format for citation to state statutes varies among the states, here are two examples:
Illinois: Ill.Rev.Stat. ch. 3, para. 4.
Massachusetts: Mass.Gen.L. ch. 3, § 4.
The states in these two examples use the word "chapter" where the federal government uses the word "title".

The statutes of California, Maryland, New York State, and Texas use words (e.g., "Education", "Penal") instead of title numbers, or chapter numbers, in their statutes. For example:
Cal. Penal Code § ##.
N.Y. Educ. Law § ##.
where ## is an integer number.


4. Bluebook format for citing secondary sources

citation of books

The Bluebook has a really strange format for citing books that is a radical departure from scholarly practice in other fields. In a multi-volume book, the volume number is placed to the left of the author's name! This practice is not only confusing to nonlawyers, but also ugly. There is no good reason for books to be cited differently by lawyers than by any other learned profession.

The title of a book is set in small capitals.   (Some wordprocessors have a command to automatically convert a block of normal text to small capitals.)

Examples of citing books or chapters in books:
  • Michael P. Sullivan, Annotation, Products Liability: Electricity, 60 A.L.R.4th 732 (1988).

  • Leonard I. Reiser, Privacy, 62A AM.JUR.2d 623 (1990).

  • RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF CONTRACTS § 206 (1981).

  • RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS § 652A (1977).
Some attorneys omit the "of" in citing the Restatement, but the Bluebook includes the "of", and the inclusion makes the title easier to read.
  • William L. Prosser, TORTS, (4th ed. 1971).

  • 6A Arthur Linton Corbin, CONTRACTS, § 1374 (1962).

A citation to a specific item in a book can be by section number or by page number.

articles in periodicals

The Bluebook uses a format for citing articles in periodicals (e.g., law reviews and other scholarly journals) that is different from conventional scholarly bibliographic format. For example:
  • Warren & Brandeis, The Right to Privacy, 4 HARV.L.REV. 193, 196 (1890).

  • William L. Prosser, Privacy, 48 CAL.L.REV. 383 (1960).
Note that:
  1. the author's name is in conventional order, not: last name, first name.
  2. the title of the article is in italics, not inside quotation marks
  3. the name of the periodical is in small capitals
  4. the volume number, name of the journal, page number(s), and year of publication are all given in the same format used for court cases.

After experimenting with different formats, I prefer the Bluebook format for volume and page numbers, because it is more compact than the traditional scholarly format (e.g., Vol. 4, p. 193). However, I prefer to put the title of an article in quotation marks, instead of italic typeface, since italics are traditionally reserved for titles of books. The really important thing in a citation is that a citation must accurately include all of the information that a reader needs to find and verify the source. The format of the citation is of secondary importance, although professional editors often care more about the format than the accuracy of the information, or the appropriateness of the author's choice of the cited source.

articles/notes

Papers published in law reviews are divided into two classes:
  1. Articles are written by professors or practicing attorneys
  2. Notes are written by law students.
The distinction is one of rank. As one arrogant law professor once confided to me, "Who cares what a 25 year old kid thinks?" The traditional Bluebook form for citing a Note is to use the word Note in place of the author's name. Astounding! Just because of rank, the student is forced to be anonymous, even if he/she wrote an outstanding scholarly work. The difference between an author of a Note and an author of an Article may be as slight as both passing the bar examination and one or two years of experience as an attorney. Surely, this is not a significant difference that affects one's ability to synthesize legal principles from many cases, or to suggest better law. Indeed, court opinions that cite law reviews often also cite Notes, which is proof that some Notes are taken seriously. In writing essays for my web sites during 1996-99, I used the law student's name in place of the word Note, in defiance of the traditional Bluebook rule, and to give the author of a good Note proper recognition for his/her work. The sixteenth edition of the Bluebook abandoned the traditional rule, in favor of writing the name of the student-author of the Note, followed by the word "Note" as, for example:
J. Peter Shapiro & James F. Tune, Note, Implied Contract Rights to Job Security, 26 Stanford L.Rev. 335 (1974).
This citation form was used by Judge Schiller at 737 A.2d 1250, 1256, n.12 (Pa.Super. 1999). Particularly when writing a memorandum of law, or a Brief to submit to a court, one should include the word "Note", to avoid misrepresenting that a Note is an Article.


Alternatives to the Bluebook

As mentioned in the introduction of this handout, the generally accepted style manual for legal citations in the USA is the Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation, which is published by the editors of four prestigious law reviews at Columbia University, Harvard, Univ. of Pennsylvania, and Yale Law Schools. The Bluebook has a website.

The Bluebook is really only a style manual for authors of law reviews. There is a brief section in the Bluebook titled "Practitioners' Notes" that purports to give rules for style in both briefs filed in a court and legal memoranda. However, the Bluebook — which is written by law students who edit their school's law reviews — has no authority to establish rules for documents submitted to courts.

Further, there are many objections to the rules in the Bluebook. I mentioned my distaste for their rule on citing a multi-volume book, with the volume number to the left of the author's name, instead of a format consistent with citation style for court cases and law reviews, in which the volume number goes to the left of the name of the book.

There are some alternatives to the Bluebook, but these alternatives are not commonly used in the legal profession:
  1. The American Bar Association (ABA) has created the .

  2. The (ALWD) has published a citation manual for use in teaching students in the first semester of law school. The ALWD publication simplifies some of the Bluebook rules and removes some of the inconsistencies among the Bluebook rules. And, unlike the Bluebook, the ALWD includes the citation rules promulgated by each state in the USA.

  3. The University of Chicago Manual of Legal Citation, printed in 1989 by Lawyers' Cooperative Publishing Company. The Chicago Manual is often called "The Maroon Book".

  4. Various state supreme courts have published a style manual, some of which are available on the Internet. For example:

The common Bluebook style for citing court cases mentions page numbers in a printed copy of an opinion, contained in a bound volume on a library shelf. These bound volumes are published by West (e.g., the seven regional reporters, Federal Reporter, and Federal Supplement), the U.S. Reports, or an official reporter that is published by a state. WESTLAW, which is West's collection of online databases, and the LEXIS online databases, both contain page numbers in the common printed reporters, so these online databases are substitutes for printed copies in bound volumes.

In contrast, the ABA style for citing court cases cites to a paragraph number in each opinion, instead of page numbers in the bound volume of a reporter. The ABA style is thus independent of printed reporters, most of which are proprietary products of West Publishing Company. The ABA style — which the Bluebook calls the "public domain format" — will become more important as attorneys find cases from a variety of different sources on the Internet. I expect to see courts post all of their opinions at their own website, instead of relying on West or Lexis to publish the opinions, but courts have been glacially slow to embrace the Internet.

I have one quibble with the public-domain format that cites to paragraph numbers: I always insert a paragraph symbol (¶) immediately to the left of each paragraph number in my citation. I do this to distinguish paragraph numbers from the long tradition of citing only page numbers.

Personally, I like references to generic sources, instead of references to a proprietary product. However, it is an established fact that West Publishing Company is the dominant source of reported court opinions in the USA. In September 2000, the seven regional reporters, F.Supp., and the Federal Reporter — all published by West — occupied 16631 volumes on library shelves. It will be a long time before any other source scans all of those old volumes (or purchases a license to West's database); deletes West's proprietary synopsis, deletes references to West's key numbers, and deletes West's headnotes from each opinion; then inserts paragraph numbers, and makes those old opinions available online. Therefore, I expect attorneys to continue to cite to the page numbers in West's Reporters for a long time.


5. Legal Writing Style

Legal writing is a type of scholarly writing by an educated person, so the comments in my handout, , and also in my other on writing are also applicable to legal writing. However, there are a few matters of style that are unique to legal writing; some of these are discussed below.

I recommend the following books:
  • The Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation. (I do not like many of the rules in this book, but it is the conventional authority on style of citation in legal writing.) The publisher of the has a website.

  • BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY, published by West, is the standard legal dictionary in the USA.

  • Bryan A. Garner, THE ELEMENTS OF LEGAL STYLE, published by Oxford University Press in 1991, is readable and his advice is good.

  • Bryan A. Garner, A DICTIONARY OF MODERN LEGAL USAGE, also published by Oxford University Press, is a useful reference book.

plain English is better

There are two opposing points of view about legal writing style. The traditionalists advocate bloated or archaic legal prose, such as the following examples:
Wherefore, the party of the first part and the party of the second part do covenant and agree ....

Further, affiant sayeth not.
Such writing deserves to be set in a fancy black letter typeface, then ridiculed. The modernists, led by Bryan Garner, whose books I mentioned above, advocate writing in plain English. I am firmly in the modernists camp. Traditionalist attorneys have sometimes commented that my writing "doesn't look like it was written by a lawyer". They are criticizing me, I take it as a compliment.   <laughing>

Having advocated using plain English, I must also say that it is entirely appropriate to use conventional legal terms-of-art (e.g., due process, res judicata, amicus curiae, spoliation of evidence, etc.), even though someone without a legal education will probably not understand these terms. I do object to using an uncommon word where there is a common synonym with equivalent meaning (e.g., I object to eleemosynary when one could use charitable or nonprofit.). But, if an uncommon word has a nuance that makes it more appropriate, then use the uncommon word without hesitation. Garner, in The Elements of Legal Style at page 38, says "Arguments against big words have a way of descending into anti-intellectualism, so we ought to recognize that a liberal use of the English vocabulary ought not to be stifled."

specific comments on legal style

capitalization

The names or designation of the parties in a court case always begin with an upper-case first letter. This is obvious when the parties are called by their real name (e.g., Myers), but it is also true when the parties are called by their role in the case (e.g., Plaintiff, Defendant, Appellant, etc.). On the other hand, if one is speaking of a plaintiff or defendant in general, then the word has a lower-case first letter.
Consider the following examples of the distinction between Plaintiffs and plaintiffs:
This is the only cloud seeding case in the USA in which plaintiffs won.
The above sentence means that different plaintiffs (e.g., Slutsky, Duncan, Lunsford, Saba, ..., etc.) each filed one case, but the plaintiffs lost in all but one case.
This is the only cloud seeding case in the USA in which Plaintiffs won.
The above sentence means that one group of Plaintiffs filed several court cases, and those Plaintiffs lost all but one case.

The name of a party in italics (e.g., Myers) is a short way of referring to the written opinion of the court that heard the case in which Myers (N.B. no italics) was a party (i.e., the Appellee in Connick v. Myers, a famous U.S. Supreme Court case on freedom of speech for government employees). Note the distinction between the italics and plain typeface: italics designates the opinion of a court, plain typeface designates the person.

The word Court has an upper-case C whenever it refers to either:
  1. the U.S. Supreme Court,
  2. the full name of the court (e.g., "the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit"), or
  3. the specific court that receives the document (i.e., in a document written for submission to a court).

innocent ?

A criminal court never finds a defendant to be "innocent". The result in a criminal court can only be "guilty" or "not guilty". Journalists often write that a defendant pled "innocent" or a jury found a defendant "innocent", but the correct phrase is "not guilty".

There are only three possible pleas:
  1. guilty, which means that the state does not need to prove its case, and the court only needs to decide the punishment of the defendant.
  2. not guilty.
  3. nolo contendere, in which the defendant does not admit his/her guilt, but also does not demand that the state prove its case. The court then decides the punishment of the defendant. The nolo plea is allowed only with the approval of the judge.
"Innocent" is not a possible plea in a court in the USA.

conclusory phrases

Be careful of using words such as "unfair, unjust, malicious". Those words express a conclusion, not a fact. The conventional names of many torts have such words included: unfair competition, wrongful death, malicious prosecution, etc. It is not adequate to merely assert unfairness or malice — one must provide evidence that leads a reasonable person to that conclusion.

signal phrases

The Bluebook says that "signal" phrases in footnotes or citations in text ("See, see also, accord, but see, compare, contra, see generally, cf., e.g.") are italicized. This Bluebook rule conflicts with generally accepted scholarly practice in other disciplines (e.g. The Chicago Manual of Style, the Modern Language Association Style Manual), and I think the result looks strange, so I refuse to follow this Bluebook rule.

rules of style

Lawyers in the USA sometimes appear to follow different rules of style from other users of English:
  1. Most lawyers do not know the difference between that and which, to introduce clauses. See my handout on .
  2. Lawyers generally consider or to be exclusive, while scientists and logicians consider or to be inclusive. See my handout on .
  3. Lawyers commonly omit the comma before the last item in a list of items. As Bryan Garner says in his book, The Elements of Legal Style, pages 17-18, the omission of a comma before and can cause ambiguity.
  4. Judges use the subjunctive mood of verbs when appropriate more frequently than other learned professionals in the USA. I like the , but it is rarely used in the USA, even among university professors and other educated people.

out-of-place technical jargon

From time to time, one sees allusions in court opinions to technical words or phrases from mechanics, electricity, magnetism, nuclear physics, etc. Such allusions are objectionable because they are jarring to the reader (i.e., they stick out like a sore thumb) and — to a scientifically literate reader — they show that the writer does not understand scientific terms. The latter point raises the question, if the writer uses scientific terms that the writer does not understand, then what else in the document has a weak justification?

In the interest of keeping this essay short, I have posted examples of by judges in the USA in a separate document.



This document is at  
first posted 30 July 2000,   last modified 16 Dec 2009.

Go to my collection of to legal resources on the Internet.

Return to my


0 Thoughts to “Ny Supreme Court Citation Rules For Essays

Leave a comment

L'indirizzo email non verrà pubblicato. I campi obbligatori sono contrassegnati *