by Jim Corbett, Casemaker Director of Business
Development
8/8/16
A number of attorneys have recently asked why they should
use Casemaker through their bar association’s member benefits program rather
than the legal research tool available on Google Scholar. It may seem like a
legitimate question, but even the most cursory glance at a comparison of the
content, features and capabilities of the two services shows that Casemaker is
far superior in all of these important aspects as applied to legal research.
Content
Federal Cases – both
services have complete and current collections of federal case law.
Federal Code – Google has NO
codes online because it is very difficult to keep them up to date; Casemaker
boasts the most current version of the U.S. Code online. Casemaker’s U.S. Code
is also annotated, providing links to all cases citing each section of the
code.
State Cases - Google has state cases from all 50 states
with coverage back to 1950; Casemaker has state court cases from all 50 states
with coverage back to statehood and in many cases, back to territorial
decisions.
State Codes – Google has NO
state codes on line because it is very difficult to keep them up to date;
Casemaker boasts the most current version of the codes from all 50 states
online. All state codes are annotated.
In addition to the standard federal and state appellate courts,
Casemaker also provides many other specialty federal courts (i.e., Tax,
Bankruptcy, etc) and many state agency decisions. And in addition to the full
collection of state and federal codes, Casemaker also provides current admin
codes, sessions law and Public Laws.
Citator
It is impossible to conduct thorough and accurate legal
research without the benefit of a citator to tell you whether the cases you are
viewing are still good law. Impossible and inadvisable.
Google has NO Citator.
CaseCheck+ is Casemaker’s
citator and it tracks a wide variety of negative treatments in the subsequent
history of cases from all jurisdictions on Casemaker, for example: overruled,
reversed, modified, vacated, superseded and it also includes criticized and
questioned.
CiteCheck is a service that
allows the user to upload a brief, the brief is scanned by CiteCheck and the
user receives a report that includes a list of all cases cited in that document
with a determination as to the validity of each case. The process takes about
60 seconds.
Search Capabilities
Casemaker and Google each allow the user to enter search
terms with no restrictions, or with quotations (“equal protection”) to get
specific phrases. But only Casemaker allows the use of Boolean Connectors
(evict* w/5 noti*), which is the most powerful and effective way to conduct
legal research.
Conclusion
Google Scholar is a powerful search engine that is available
for free, so many people think it provides an authoritative solution for legal
research.
But, through the bar member benefits program Casemaker is
also free. And it provides a more powerful and flexible search engine with far
broader and deeper content and tools specifically designed to enhance and
support your legal research. When you can get more content, more precise search
results and a verification that your cases are still good law, it is clear that
Casemaker is the better choice for serious legal research.