> In the concurring opinion, Judge Voros says that "getting a sense of
> the common usage or ordinary and plain meaning of a contract term is
> precisely the purpose for which the lead opinion here cites Wikipedia.
> Our reliance on this source is therefore, in my judgment,
> appropriate."
>
> On
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 2:42 PM, Newyorkbrad wrote:
> And the best post I've found on the current case:
>
> http://www.volokh.com/2012/08/16/citing-wikipedia-in-court-opinions/
Am I missing something? That's just a cut and paste of the concurring
opinion and a paragraph of the ruling.
_
- Original Message -
From: "Newyorkbrad"
To: "English Wikipedia"
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2012 4:54 PM
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] on citing Wikipedia in U.S. court opinions
(Caution: the facts of the case are unpleasant.)
"Unpleasant" is relative. B
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 10:51 PM, Fred Bauder wrote:
> In the court's opinion judicial notice was not taken, but information
> obtained about common usage of the term, "jet ski," used in the insurance
> contract. Judicial notice seems to be out of bounds under some reasoning;
> doubtless I do not
I didn't realize it until just now, but we (En-WP) have articles about this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_in_judicial_opinions
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_as_a_court_source
These clearly need to be updated, but might be of interest.
Also of note, albeit
In the concurring opinion, Judge Voros says that "getting a sense of
the common usage or ordinary and plain meaning of a contract term is
precisely the purpose for which the lead opinion here cites Wikipedia.
Our reliance on this source is therefore, in my judgment,
appropriate."
On this, he is g
I've collected a few of these over the years, in preparation for an article
I've never found the time to write ... here's another example from earlier
this year where the majority and dissenting opinions differ over
the propriety of a Wikipedia citaiton:
http://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2
>> Making the blog-rounds, there was a Utah court case that includes
>> surprisingly lengthy (and generally positive) discussion on whether and
>> when to cite Wikipedia in court decisions:
>>
>> * http://www.utcourts.gov/opinions/appopin/fire_insurance081612.pdf
>>
>> See footnote 1 (page 5) in th
> Making the blog-rounds, there was a Utah court case that includes
> surprisingly lengthy (and generally positive) discussion on whether and
> when to cite Wikipedia in court decisions:
>
> * http://www.utcourts.gov/opinions/appopin/fire_insurance081612.pdf
>
> See footnote 1 (page 5) in the major
Making the blog-rounds, there was a Utah court case that includes
surprisingly lengthy (and generally positive) discussion on whether and
when to cite Wikipedia in court decisions:
* http://www.utcourts.gov/opinions/appopin/fire_insurance081612.pdf
See footnote 1 (page 5) in the majority opini
10 matches
Mail list logo
