Module 11 Research Problem

docx

School

University of California, Berkeley *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

234

Subject

Law

Date

Apr 26, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by sierralyssa

Advanced Legal Research Module 11 Research Problem Answer the following questions: Question 1: Find Thing v. La Chusa , 48 Cal.3d 644 (1989) on Westlaw. What KeyCite symbol does Westlaw assign to this case? What does that symbol mean? Yellow Flag. A yellow flag signals that the decision has questioned validity, or that a prior version received negative treatment from a court. Question 2: How many total Citing References are listed for Thing v. La Chusa on Westlaw? 4,060 Citing References. Question 3. How many of those are cases ? [Note: If more than one opinion is issued as the case moves through the courts, count each opinion as a case. In other words, just cite the number after "Citing References" at the top of the screen and don't worry about a case involving more than one decision.] 569 Cases. Question 4: How many of those are California state court cases (published or unpublished)? 221 California State Court Cases. 136 Published. 85 Unpublished. Question 5: How many of those California state court cases are reported/published ? 136 are Published. Question 6: How many of those reported/published California state court cases are marked as having negative treatment of Thing ? List them, including the full case citation. 10 Schwarz v. Regents of U. of California , 276 Cal. Rptr. 470 (Cal. App. 2d Dist. 1990)

Burgess v. Super. Ct. , 831 P.2d 1197 (Cal. 1992) S. California Gas Leak Cases , 441 P.3d 881 (Cal. 2019) Christensen v. Super. Ct. , 820 P.2d 181 (Cal. 1991) Ortiz v. HPM Corp. , 285 Cal. Rptr. 728 (Cal. App. 2d Dist. 1991) Potter v. Firestone Tire and Rubber Co. , 274 Cal. Rptr. 885 (Cal. App. 6th Dist. 1990), review granted and opinion superseded, 806 P.2d 308 (Cal. 1991), and rev'd, 863 P.2d 795 (Cal. 1993) Ballinger v. Palm Springs Aerial Tramway , 269 Cal. Rptr. 583 (Cal. App. 4th Dist. 1990) Kesner v. Super. Ct. , 171 Cal. Rptr. 3d 811 (Cal. App. 1st Dist. 2014), review granted and opinion superseded sub nom. Kesner v. S.C. (Pneumo Abex LLC) , 331 P.3d 179 (Cal. 2014), and vacated, 384 P.3d 283 (Cal. 2016) Brewer v. Teano , 47 Cal. Rptr. 2d 348 (Cal. App. 2d Dist. 1995) Adams v. Murakami , 268 Cal. Rptr. 467 (Cal. App. 2d Dist. 1990), modified (Apr. 17, 1990), review granted and opinion superseded, 793 P.2d 22 (Cal. 1990), and rev'd in part, 813 P.2d 1348 (Cal. 1991) Question 7: Find Thing v. La Chusa , 48 Cal.3d 644 (1989) on Lexis. What Shepard’s symbol does Lexis assign to this case? What does that symbol mean? Yellow Triangle (Shepards signal). A yellow triangle indicates that citing references in the Shepard’s citations service contain history or treatment that may have a significant negative impact on the case (i.e. limited or criticized by) Question 8: Using Lexis, shepardize Thing v. La Chusa . How many total Citing Sources are there (including Citing Decisions and other Citing Sources)? 2,282 total. 814 citing decisions. 1468 other citing sources. How does this compare to Westlaw? There are significantly fewer citing sources on lexis in comparison to Westlaw. Although the categories are tagged differently on each platform.

Question 9: How many of the Citing Sources you found for Question 8 are Citing Decisions ? 814 citing decisions How does this compare to Westlaw? I believe that this is more citing decisions than Westlaw. On Westlaw there were only 569 cases in comparison to Lexis having 814. Question 10: How many of the Citing Decisions you found for Question 9 are California state court citing decisions (published or unpublished)? 470 citing decisions. 120 published, 343 unpublished. How does this compare to Westlaw? Overall, there are more citing decisions on Lexis. But Westlaw has more published and less unpublished whereas Lexis has more unpublished and less published. Question 11: How many of those California citing decisions are reported/published ? 120 published, 343 unpublished. How does this compare to Westlaw? Westlaw has more published and less unpublished whereas Lexis has more unpublished and less published. Question 12: How many of those reported/published California citing decisions are marked as having negative treatment of Thing (including "caution" or "distinguished by" treatment)? List them, including the full case citation. 6 Kesner v. Superior Court , 1 Cal. 5th 1132 (2016) Christensen v. Superior Court , 54 Cal. 3d 868 (1991) Zuniga v. Hous. Auth. , 41 Cal. App. 4th 82 (1995) Brewer v. Teano , 40 Cal. App. 4th 1024 (1995)

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

Meighan v. Shore , 34 Cal. App. 4th 1025 (1995) Ortiz v. HPM Corp. , 234 Cal. App. 3d 178 (1991) Question 13: Compare the lists you compiled for Questions 6 and 12. Some court opinions appear on one list, but not the other. For example, Lexis might mark a court opinion as having negative treatment of Thing , while Westlaw marks the same opinion as having neutral treatment of Thing . In that circumstance, the case would appear on your list for Question 12, but not your list for Question 6. Identify the opinions that only appear on one list, providing the full citation. For example, if a citation appears on your Westlaw list, but not your Lexis list, you would include it in your answer to this question, and vice versa. Included on Westlaw but not Lexis: Schwarz v. Regents of U. of California , 276 Cal. Rptr. 470 (Cal. App. 2d Dist. 1990) Burgess v. Super. Ct. , 831 P.2d 1197 (Cal. 1992) S. California Gas Leak Cases , 441 P.3d 881 (Cal. 2019) Potter v. Firestone Tire and Rubber Co. , 274 Cal. Rptr. 885 (Cal. App. 6th Dist. 1990), review granted and opinion superseded, 806 P.2d 308 (Cal. 1991), and rev'd, 863 P.2d 795 (Cal. 1993) Ballinger v. Palm Springs Aerial Tramway , 269 Cal. Rptr. 583 (Cal. App. 4th Dist. 1990) Adams v. Murakami , 268 Cal. Rptr. 467 (Cal. App. 2d Dist. 1990), modified (Apr. 17, 1990), review granted and opinion superseded, 793 P.2d 22 (Cal. 1990), and rev'd in part, 813 P.2d 1348 (Cal. 1991) Included on Lexis but not Westlaw: Zuniga v. Hous. Auth. , 41 Cal. App. 4th 82 (1995) Meighan v. Shore , 34 Cal. App. 4th 1025 (1995) Question 14:

Select two court opinions from the list you identified for Question 13. Read the two court opinions you chose and explain which system’s citator - Lexis or Westlaw - you believe to be more accurate, analyzing and quoting the language of the case. For example, if Westlaw marks a case as having negative treatment of Thing and Lexis marks it as positive or neutral, explain which you believe to be a more accurate representation based on the language in the case. Potter v. Firestone Tire and Rubber Co. , 274 Cal. Rptr. 885 (Cal. App. 6th Dist. 1990), review granted and opinion superseded, 806 P.2d 308 (Cal. 1991), and rev'd, 863 P.2d 795 (Cal. 1993) Lexis marks Potter as neutral. I believe lexis was correct because the opinion is not completely opposed to Thing and talks about it neutrally and never mentions that the case should be overruled or not used. For instance the opinion uses the language “ Nor do we believe that Thing, requires a different result.” Burgess v. Super. Ct. , 831 P.2d 1197 (Cal. 1992) Lexis marks Burgess as neutral. I believe Westlaw was correct because the opinion is a bit more negative towards Thing. For instance the opinion uses the language “ As the majority of lower courts have recognized, Thing does not control recovery by a mother for emotional distress suffered as a result of the negligent injury of her child during labor and delivery. I believe that the opinion is negative towards thing because they determine that it is not applicable but that a claim still exists.

Module 11 Research Problem

Related Documents