Tag Archives: string citations

Using Introductory Signals for Citations

Leave a reply

imagesContext helps define words. In a tennis score, “love” means nothing. Lawyers often say “consideration” without meaning kindness.

The same is true for “see,” “see also,” “but see,” and the other ways of introducing citations in an appeal brief. These ordinary words carry specific meanings when introducing citations. The Redbook: A Manual on Legal Style (West, 2d ed. revised 2006), explains:

  • No signal - the cited authority contains the text’s quote, states the definition or proposition, or directly supports the proposition.
  • See - the cited authority implicitly supports the proposition.
  • See also - the cited authority in not mentioned in the text and provides additional supporting material
  • Cf. - the cited authority provides an analogy that indirectly supports the proposition
  • E.g. - the cited authority is one of many that similarly state or support the proposition.
  • Compare . . . with - the cited authority support the stated proposition in different ways or the authorities arrive alternative analysis and arrive at different conclusions.
  • Contra. - the cited authority directly contradicts the stated proposition.
  • But see – the cited authority implicitly contradicts or limits the proposition.
  • See generally – the cited authority provides useful background information.
  • Accord – the cited authority is not mentioned in the text and states or directly supports the proposition.

The Redbook on usage notes that the Bluebook and ALWD citation systems may differ on a signal’s precise meaning and that not all citation systems use all these signals. The point here is consistency.

by Antonin Scalia and Bryan A. Garner

by Antonin Scalia and Bryan A. Garner

Why care? Why quibble over using see or cf. or nothing at all? The book, Making Your Case: The Art of Persuading Judges, explains that it boils down to credibility. Without an introductory signal, you are telling the court that the cited authority holds — explicitly — what you just said. If the holding is only implicit, use the see; if only analogous, use the cf. 

 

 

Anyone else have trouble keeping “see” and “accord” straight? Please leave me a reply or reach me at www.attorneyroberthill.com.

 

 

 

Cite Authority or Waive Point on Appeal

1 Reply
Judges of the SC Court of Appeals

Judges of the SC Court of Appeals

An earlier post discouraged string citing cases but cautioned to include at least one supporting citation for a point raised on appeal, or risk the Court holding that the point is waived. A decision issued last week proves the point.

In Southern Glass & Plastics Co., Inc. v. Kemper, 399 S.C. 483, 732 S.E.2d 205 (Ct.App. 2012), the appellant argued on appeal that the trial court erred by admitting certain documents into evidence. One of the several problems with the argument is that the brief only made a passing reference to the issue without citing any case law for the argument. The Court concluded that the issue was waived because, “[S]hort, conclusory statements made without supporting authority are deemed abandoned on appeal and therefore not presented for review.” Id. at 498-499, 732 S.E.2d at 213.

Lesson learned.

Has anyone else caught opposing counsel not citing any authority for a point? Please let me hear from you. You may reach me at www.attorneyroberthill.com.

 

Appellate Briefs – String Citations?

1 Reply

The last two posts covered a brief’s Table of Authorities, including proper citation form and citing unpublished opinions in the South Carolina appellate courts. This post finishes up the Table of Authorities by condemning string citations.

Judges and legal writing gurus uniformly criticize string citations. In her treatise, for example, Chief Justice Toal advises that a brief need not be cluttered with long string citations for simple propositions. One citation will do. For more significant and contested rules, three of four citations may be necessary. Yet no more is needed unless one is presenting a nationwide survey. Jean H. Toal, et. al., Appellate Practice in South Carolina (2d Ed. 2002) at 225.

Justice Antonin Scalia agrees, In his and Bryan Garner’s book, Making the Case, the authors advise at pp. 125-126 to cite authorities sparingly  and liken string citations to showing off to an unappreciative audience.

Lastly, legal writing expert Steven D. Stark, in his book Writing to Win, notes at page 159 that his has yet to meet the judge who looks at the fifth case cited in a long string and exclaims, “I love that case! You win!”

Many other authorities likewise condemn string citations, but it would be too ironic to cite them.

Please note, however, that you need at least one citation to argue a point. The Court will likely hold that a point is abandoned if unsupported by any authority. As with other areas of the law, and with life, the Goldilocks approach is best.

Has anyone else seen briefs cite a half dozen or more cases on the standard for granting summary judgment? Please let me hear from you. You can reach me at www.attorneyroberthill.com.