Presentation Transcript

1. Volume 40

   Law Review Orientation & Training

2. Introductions: Editor-in-Chief
3. Introductions: Executive Editors Manage an Issue Work with Authors Choose a Topic
4. Introductions: Editors Pod Leaders Manage Editing Process Assign Authority Checks
5. Introductions 18 Assistant Editors Library Liaison (Emily Plunkett) Formatters (Scott Peterson& Kyle Evens) Accountability & Support (Jacob McKnite) Operations Manager (Brieanna Hoban) Faculty Advisor (Prof. Mike Steenson)
6. Introductions: Staff Members Help with Projects Complete Authority Checks Ensure Bluebook Accuracy Leave Detailed Comments to Editors Write Long Paper
7. The Life of an Issue
8. Receiving an AC
9. Check Range
10. Check the due date
11. Note the notes
12. Save it correctly Saving format: Author_stage_Footnote.start#_Footnote.end#_your.last.name
13. Send it Back
14. Source Pull
15. Collateral Service (CS) Hours Requirements Minimum 6 hrs/semester; 20 hrs/year How to Sign up Ways to Get Hours Source Pulls Proofs Quote Proofs Put-togethers Report Hours to Brie Hoban
16. Roles/Responsibilities of Law Review staff members Your role in this process: Authority Check #1 Authority Check #2 Additional Roles: Source Pull Proof #1 or Proof #2 Quote Proof Put-together Great way to accumulate CS hours Considered in Law Review Editorial Board election process
17. Editor Comments Special article instructions before AC1/AC2 Type of comments to leave for editor Bluebook CMOS and Grammar Responding to editor comments (especially in AC2)
18. Long Paper Read the Guidelines Selecting a topic Any topic of your choice “Notes” v. “Comments” Preemption checks Managing your writing Start your research early Start writing before research is complete Do not neglect your ACs
19. Long Paper Deadlines August 24: Topics selected September 7: Outline completed and Major Sources Selected September 14: Complete Very Rough Draft and Most Sources Selected October 1: 30-page draft, plus an outline of remaining content November 1: 50-page final draft due
20. Long Paper Opportunity to be published 4 student notes in Issue 4 Selection based on significance of topic, depth of research, strength of arguments, quality of writing and citations, etc. Law Review Online Publication TBD
21. Faculty Advisor: Prof. Steenson Brief History of the William Mitchell Law Review
22. Library Introduction http://youtu.be/IMz6uSFdeZc
23. Library Logistics Law Review Shelves are in the Law Review Room on the lower level of the library Source Pull Label a Shelf with Author’s Last Name / Editor Keep Shelves Organized Be nice to the Librarians and Circulation Staff
24. Exhaust Your Resources Catalog HeinOnline EBSCO Subscription Databases Internet Worldcat Reference Librarian Editor Only THEN do you do an ILL
25. Sources You Can Use: Catalog
26. Sources You Can Use: Catalog
27. Sources You Can Use: Catalog
28. Sources You Can Use: Subscription Databases
29. Sources You Can Use: Subscription Databases
30. Sources You Can Use: WorldCat
31. Sources You Can Use: WorldCat
32. Sources You Can Use: WorldCat
33. Sources You Can Use: WorldCat
34. Sources You Can Use: WorldCat
35. Sources You Can Use: WorldCat
36. Sources You Can Use: WorldCat
37. Sources You Can Use: HeinOnline
38. Sources You Can Use: HeinOnline
39. Sources You Can Use: HeinOnline
40. Sources You Can Use: HeinOnline
41. Sources You Can Use: HeinOnline
42. Sources You Can Use: HeinOnline
43. Sources You Can Use: HeinOnline
44. Sources You Can Use: HeinOnline
45. Sources You Can Use: HeinOnline
46. Contact Information Questions: Ask emily.plunkett@wmitchell.edu Problems: Ask your editor!
47. Break
48. Reminders of CMOS and BB rules and the dreaded author’s voice

    Substantive Training

49. ChicagoManual of Style

50. Chicago Manual of Style
51. Chicago Manual of Style William Mitchell Law Review Staff Manual
52. Chicago Manual of Style Hyphens CMOS Hyphenation Table Used with compound words Do not flank with spaces No hyphen for adverbs that end in -ly
53. Chicago Manual of Style En-dashes CMOS § 6.78 Most commonly used between ranges Larson: Page 4, Footnote 21 Samesv. State, 805 N.W.2d 565, 567-70 (Minn. Ct. App. 2011).
54. Chicago Manual of Style En-dashes Sames v. State, 805 N.W.2d 565, 567–70 (Minn. Ct. App. 2011).
55. Chicago Manual of Style Em-dashes CMOS § 6.82 Most commonly used to set off explanatory element Larson: Page 2 “[A] prosecutor can consider whether the alleged conduct- abstracted from all other case dynamics- at least fits the elements of some potential charge and then move on to . . . .”
56. Chicago Manual of Style Em-dashes “[A] prosecutor can consider whether the alleged conduct—abstracted from all other case dynamics—at least fits the elements of some potential charge and then move on to . . . .”
57. Chicago Manual of Style Spaces Between Sentences CMOS § 2.9 Only one spacebetween sentences or after other punctuation
58. Chicago Manual of Style That vs. Which CMOS § 6.22 That: used if restrictive Clause is essential to the meaning of the sentence Larson: Page 28–29 “This article has presented reasons and examples intended to compel the reader to believe that the Minnesota legislature should improve and clarify the definitions of substantial bodily harm and great bodily harm.”
59. Chicago Manual of Style That vs. Which CMOS § 6.22 Which: used if nonrestrictive Clause could be omitted and the sentence would still be okay Larson: Page 26 “It also would save jurors from having to make the difficult evaluations of injuries in their deliberation rooms, which indeed should be less mysterious places than The Twilight Zone.”
60. Chicago Manual of Style Semicolons in a Series CMOS § 6:58 Separate items with a semicolon when the items in the series themselves contain punctuation Larsen: Page 23–24 “In Wisconsin, ‘substantial bodily harm’ means ‘bodily injury that causes a laceration which requires stitches, staples, or a tissue adhesive; any fracture of a bone; a broken nose; a burn; a petechial; a temporary loss of consciousness, sight, or hearing; a concussion; or a loss or fracture of a tooth.’”

61. Common Bluebook Errors

    Examples from the Larson Article
62. Sections of the Bluebook Blue pages (ignore these!) Generally applicable rules Source specific rules Tables Index
63. Generally Applicable Rules (1–9) Signals (R. 1.2–1.3) Order Signals (R. 1.3) Authorities (R. 1.4) Parenthetical Elements within a citation (R. 1.5(b)) Subdivision abbreviations (R. 3) Internal Cross-References (R. 3.5) Short Form (R. 4) Source-specific short forms Quotations (R. 5) Abbreviations (R. 6.1) Numbers (R. 6.2) Italicization (R. 7) Capitalization (R. 8)
64. Source Specific Rules (10–21) Cases (R. 10) Constitutions (R. 11) Statutes (R. 12) Legislative Material (R. 13) Administrative and Executive Material (R. 14) Books, Reports, and nonperiodicMaterial (R. 15) Periodical material (R. 16) Unpublished and Forthcoming Sources (R. 17) The Internet (R. 18) Foreign Materials (R. 20) International Materials (R. 21)
65. Tables Jurisdiction Tables (T. 1) Federal (T. 1.1–1.2) State (T. 1.3) Foreign (T. 2) Intergovernmental (T. 3) Case and institutional author abbreviations (T. 6) Explanatory Phrases (T. 8) Geographic Terms (T. 10) Months (T. 12) Periodicals (T. 13)
66. Original Footnotes 46-48 46- Compare Minn. Stat. § 609.02, subd. 8 (1963) and Minn. Stat. § 609.02, subd. 8(2012). 47- Minn. Stat. §609.225, subd. 1(1963) 48- Minn. Stat. § 609.225, subd. 2(1963)
67. Corrected Footnotes 46-48 46- Compare Minn. Stat. § 609.02, subdiv. 8 (1963), with Minn. Stat. § 609.02, subdiv. 8 (2012). 47- Minn. Stat. § 609.225, subdiv. 1 (1963). 48- Id. § 609.225,subdiv. 2. “compare” signal Rule 1.2 MN statute cites Handbook/Rule 12 statute short cites Handbook/Rule 12.10 don’t forget periods!
68. Original Footnote 160 Wis. Stat.§ 940.19 (2012).
69. Corrected Footnote 160 Wis. Stat. Ann§ 940.19 (West, Westlaw through 2011 Act 286). Non-Minnesota Statutes Handbook Be sure to check the statute’s currentness on Westlaw and cite accordingly See Handbook on where to go to do this
70. Original Footnote 65 Minn. Stat. ch. 609 (1963), Session Laws, available at https://www.revisor.mn.gov/data/revisor/law/1979/0/1979-258.pdf.
71. Corrected Footnote 65 See Act of May 29, 1979, ch. 258, secs. 4–7, §§ 609.221–.224, 1979 Minn. Laws 548, 549–50. session laws Rule 12.4
72. Original Footnote 82 State v. Dunn, 2003 WL 282454, at *3 (Minn. Ct. App. Feb. 11, 2003).
73. Corrected Footnote 82 State v. Dunn, No. CX-02-872, 2003 WL 282454, at *3 (Minn. Ct. App. Feb. 11, 2003). unpublished cases Rule 10.8.1
74. Original Footnote 104 The supreme court has not always followed this practice. See, e.g., State v. Peters, 274 Minn. 309, 143 N.W.2d 832 (Minn. 1966) (holding . . .); State v. Johnson, 322 N.W.2d 358, 359 (Minn. 1982) (holding . . .).
75. Corrected Footnote 104 The supreme court has not always followed this practice. See, e.g.,State v. Johnson, 322 N.W.2d 358, 359 (Minn. 1982) (holding . . .); State v. Peters, 274 Minn. 309, 316–17, 143 N.W.2d 832, 837 (1966) (holding . . .). “see, e.g.” signal Rule 1.2 order of citations within a signal Rule 1.4 adding pincites
76. Hints to Catching BB Errors: figure out what rule applies when you’re lost, check the index! always double check that rule make sure nothing in the LR manual trumps the Bluebook when in doubt, leave a comment with what rule guided you in making the change
77. Bluebook Rule 1.2

    Checking Authority &Introductory Signals

78. AC = Authority Check Ensure that the cited source supports the proposition stated in the text. Think about what the source says and what the author has written. Do they match up? How closely do they match up? Does the reader make an inferential step, need to compare two sources, etc.?
79. When to use no signal Larson article, page 3: In Minnesota, a person commits an assault if he “intentional[ly] inflict[s] . . . bodily harm upon another.”10 10Minn. Stat. § 609.02, subdiv. 10 (2012). _________________________________________ Use no signal only when cited authority (1) directly states proposition, (2) identifies source of a direct quote, or (3) identifies authority referred to in the text.
80. E.g., Larson article, page 15: 104 The supreme court has not always followed this practice. See, e.g.,State v. Johnson, 322 N.W.2d 358, 359 (Minn. 1982) (holding . . .); State v. Peters, 274 Minn. 309, 317, 143 N.W.2d 832, 837 (1966) (holding . . .). _______________________________________________________________ Careful with commas! Precede with italicized comma Follow with non-italicized comma
81. Accord When two or more sources clearly support the proposition, but the text quotes or refers to only one source. The other sources are introduced by accord. The law of one jurisdiction may be cited as being in accord with the law of another jurisdiction.
82. See Larson article, page 1: Generating a complaint is “mathematical” in the straightforward sense that a prosecutor must identify alleged conduct that adds up to meet the elements of the charged offense(s).5 5 See Minn. R. Crim. P. 2.01 (“The complaint is a written signed statement of the facts establishing probable cause to believe that the charged offense has been committed and that the defendant committed it . . . .”).
83. See also Larson article, page 11: 77 277 Minn. 230, 237, 152 N.W.2d 768, 773 (1967); see also State v. Bowser, 307 N.W.2d 778, 779 (Minn. 1981) (holding . . .). _____________________________________________ Parenthetical encouraged.
84. Cf. When the proposition in the citation is analogous to proposition in the text Parenthetical is strongly recommended
85. Compare . . ., with . . . . Larson article, page 10 footnote 71: Originally: See Minn. Stat. § 609.02, subdiv. 7a (1979). AC changed it to: Compare Minn. Stat. § 609.02, subdiv. 7a (Supp. 1979), withMinn. Stat. § 609.02, subdiv. 7a (2012). Because of what the text said and what the authority cited was supposed to support. _____________________________________________________ Parenthetical strongly encouraged
86. See generally Larson article, page 1 footnote 4: See generally, e.g.,Minn. Rules of Prof’l Conduct (2011), available at http://lprb.mncourts.gov/rules/Documents/MN%20Rules%20of%20Professional%20Conduct.pdf. _____________________________________________________ Parenthetical encouraged
87. String cites No signal, e.g., accord, see, see also, and cf. all belong in one string citation sentence. Contra, but see, and but cf. all belong in one string citation sentence. Compare . . . , with . . . is its own string citation sentence. See generally is its own string citation sentence.
88. Signal Reminders 1.2(e) – Signals as verbs 1.3 – Order of signals 1.4 – Order of authority within each signal Often not black or white rules. Leave comments for the editor..
89. What do I do when…
90. When there is no footnote: You are not required to find the proper authority Leave a comment and suggest a possible source if you know one Identify this in your submission email to the Editor Do NOT add a footnote Comment
91. When a footnote is blank: You are not required to do anything, but you can suggest a source in a comment if you know one Do NOT delete the footnote Comment
92. When a pincite is wrong: Read the source to try to locate the correct pincite and change the pincite in the footnote if you can Consider the possibility of typos For example, the footnote says: State v. Bradford, 618 N.W.2d 782, 798 (Minn. 2000). Try page 789
93. When the authority does not support the proposition in the text: Check surrounding footnotes to see if another source nearby might support the proposition Leave a comment explaining why the cited authority doesn’t support the text and suggesting a possible correct source if you know one Comment
94. Authority Check Reminder Making sure the cited authority supports the proposition in the text and to what extent (which signal to use) is THE MOST IMPORTANT PURPOSE OF THE AC PROCESS
95. Author’s Voice—Correct Ex. #1 Larson, pg. 22
96. Author’s Voice—Correct Ex. #2 Larson, pg. 13
97. Author’s Voice—Questionable Ex. #1 Larson, pg. 17
98. Author’s Voice—Questionable Ex. #2 Reminder: Be professional in your comments. Expect that comments will be communicated directly to the author. Larson, pg. 20
99. Tips for Author’s Voice Only correct blatant grammatical errors If you think the error is Author’s Voice, don’t make a correction; instead, leave a detailed comment that identifies the problem and provides a potential solution.
100. AC Checklist
101. Break

102. Staff MemberExpectations

103. Staff Member Expectations Time commitment Expect a heavier load in the fall (2-3 ACs at a time) Lighter in the spring Work over school breaks Long paper break No work during finals Support Pods Monthly Staff Meetings (1st Thursday each month)
104. Staff Member Expectations Accountability (5) – Greatly Exceeds Expectations (4) – Exceeds Expectations (3) – Meets Expectations (2) – Below Expectations (1) – Fails to Meet Expectations Deadlines

105. Q & A

106. Pod Time
107. Law Review Jeopardy! Let’s…Play…Jeopardy!