Source: https://cbaclelegalconnection.com/2011/08/04/
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 08:34:10+00:00

Document:
There are an abundance of free or low-cost legal research sites available on the Internet. Some sites provide all of their content for free; others provide a mixture of free and fee-based information. Although each site is different, there can be significant overlap among the materials available.
Many of the free sites are “mega-sites,” which are ideal for accessing a wide range of information. Many universities and nonprofit organizations also provide legal resources on their sites, either as a free service to the public or as a free service to paying members. Government sites also are valuable for free legal research at both the federal and state levels.
This article discusses a few key sites from each of these categories. It provides an overview of the site, as well as some background information and the type of information that can be located through each resource.
Legal mega-sites provide access to a wide variety of information, including summaries of legal topics, cases, statutes, legal news, and directories of legal professionals and experts. Two of the most well-known mega-sites are FindLaw and Justia. Neither site charges users to access its content.
FindLaw, which is owned by Thomson Reuters, claims to be the “world’s leading provider of online legal information” and initially was launched in 1996 by two attorneys. FindLaw maintains two versions of its site—one for the public and one for legal professionals. Though each version is a comprehensive portal to legal information, this discussion will focus on the version for legal professionals.
FindLaw provides a number of high-level options for searching or browsing cases and codes, practice management topics, jobs and careers, legal news, legal blogs, and service providers. It also offers a number of “quick links” that lead users directly to main points of interest, including forms, law technology information, and newsletters. The newsletter quick link also contains case summaries and blogs.
From the home page, researchers can use the general search box to search across the entire site and retrieve the broadest number of results. A section called “Research the Law” allows users to narrow their search to find specific cases, contracts, or articles. The home page also enables users to browse research materials by type, jurisdiction, or practice area, and to review the latest blog posts and legal news headlines.
The “Cases & Codes” section provides access to federal laws, U.S. Court of Appeals opinions and resources, federal trial courts, and state resources. Coverage varies depending on the court. Additionally, researchers can use the “Search Opinion Summaries” feature to look for specific legal topics in selected courts.
Consider using the advanced search option when searching from the home page or from the cases and codes section. Use the operators AND, OR, and NOT and the proximity locator NEAR, which searches for terms within fifty words of one another. Use the asterisk (*)—which acts as the truncation symbol—to find multiple roots for the indicated search term.
Justia’s mission is to “advance the availability of legal resources for the benefit of society,” and its site is “focused on making primary legal materials and community resources free and easy to find on the Internet.” From the home page, users can search the entire Justia site by using the keyword search box, or can limit their search to a specific legal practice area by clicking on an area of law listed. Selecting a specific legal practice area brings up a custom search box, as well as an overview of the practice area and related information, including Web resources, important cases, legislation and regulations, articles, and news.
The Justia home page also has a legal research section where users can gain access to information regarding cases and codes, federal and state courts, federal and state government, blogs, legal forms, and podcasts. A section discussing cases that are currently in the news is accessible through the home page, as well.
Justia maintains a U.S. Supreme Court Center that is useful when researching information or cases at this level. It can be accessed by clicking on the “more” tab on the home page. Justia also provides the option to search dockets and court filings, which also is located under the “more” tab.
A unique feature of Justia is its Latin America section. Here, researchers can access laws, codes, and cases for Mexico and countries in Central and South America. Most of this information is provided in the specific country’s language but can be translated into English by clicking the “translate” button on the Google toolbar. Keep in mind that when using any type of free translation service, there may be nuances that are lost or errors in translation that may occur.
When searching in Justia, use the operators AND and OR. A space between keywords defaults to the use of the AND operator. To exclude a term from the search query, place a minus sign (-) directly to the left of the term to exclude, with no space in between.
In addition to FindLaw and Justia, mega-sites worth exploring are MegaLaw, the Public Library of Law, LexisOne Community, HG, LexisNexis InfoPro—Zimmerman’s Research Guide, and Google Scholar. As with any resource, users will discover that one is more valuable than another for particular types of research.
Many universities and nonprofit organizations provide legal information online. Some organizations provide free access to all of the information on their site; others require membership to gain full access to their legal research tools.
One of the best sites is the Legal Information Institute (LII), which is hosted by the Cornell University Law School. The site was created to further the school’s belief that “everyone should be able to read and understand the laws that govern them, without cost.” To that end, LII publishes laws, creates materials that help assist in understanding the law, and explores technologies that allow people to find the law easily.
Unlike many home pages on legal research sites, the LII page is clutter-free and easy to navigate due to its simplicity. From the home page, researchers can use the keyword search box to search across the entire site or can choose to explore one of LII’s sections in more depth.
Within the site’s “Read the Law” section, researchers can access both federal and state constitutions, laws, codes, statutes, and cases. Where applicable, the site provides links to other sites where this information is available, rather than creating a repository for the data. The “Popular Topics” section allows users to explore specific legal topics. In many instances, LII provides a narrative overview of the topic and supplies a list of relevant resources, including applicable statutes, recent court decisions, and other key Internet resources. In the “Learn More” section, searchers can access the online legal dictionary called Wex, the Supreme Court bulletin, the annotated U.S. Constitution, and the LII legal blog. LII also has sections to assist in locating a lawyer, asking a question, or following the site via a social network.
When searching within LII, use the operators AND, OR, and NOT. If an operator is not indicated, the default is AND. The asterisk (*) acts as the truncation symbol and finds multiple roots of the search term.
Although the American Bar Association (ABA) is member-driven, the organization’s site contains both free and fee-based information. From the home page, researchers can use the keyword box to search the entire site. The home page also provides relevant news stories, a list of upcoming ABA events, and links to popular resources.
The “Resources for Lawyers” tab directs users to a page where they can access the career center, search practice management information, locate information based on the type of practice setting, and access the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct. Within the practice setting area, there is a section dedicated to solo practitioners that contains useful information. By clicking on the “Publications & CLE” tab, researchers can access the newsletters section. Many of these newsletters are available for free to non-ABA members.
The Colorado Bar Association (CBA) website offers a variety of legal information in its “For Lawyers,” “For the Public,” and “From the Courts” sections. Some of the information is available for free to anyone, and some of it is available only to CBA members. Other resources to check are local state bar associations, the American Association for Justice site, and the WWW Virtual Library—Law site.
Most federal and state government entities maintain a website. These sites include general information about the entity and often more specific information about that particular area of the law. Government sites can be very useful for legal research, because they have a more targeted focus.
Government agency sites generally include the relevant rules and regulations, administrative decisions, laws, forms, and staff directories pertinent to the applicable legal area. The official sites for the U.S. government and the Colorado state government contain a list of all the federal and state agencies, respectively. In addition, the U.S. Government Manual contains a listing of all federal agencies, including information regarding the formation of the agency and its enabling legislation, a brief description of the agency and its responsibilities, the organizational structure of the agency, contact information, and other relevant facts. Users can search or browse the Manual, and its content is updated on an annual basis.
Researchers will find that some agency sites are better structured and easier to search than others. When encountering a site that seems particularly difficult to search, users should consider using the Google advanced search option. The Google advanced search page allows users to create a search query and specify the domain for the search by including the desired URL in the specified box.
Conducting legislative history research often is a difficult and time-consuming task. When engaging in federal legislative research, two of the best sites to consult are FDsys, the new online version of the Government Printing Office, and Thomas, provided by the Library of Congress. At the state level, researchers should consult the Colorado General Assembly site for information regarding legislation, as well as the Colorado Legislative Council site.
Other useful government-produced websites are those for particular courts. At the federal level, the U.S. Courts site is an excellent starting point. From the “Federal Courts” tab, researchers can access links to all the federal courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, Courts of Appeals, District Courts, Bankruptcy Courts, and Courts of Special Jurisdiction. Under the “Rules & Policies” tab, researchers can find information on federal rulemaking, codes of conduct, and subpoena regulations. Within the “Forms & Fees” area, users can access information regarding various filing fees and a variety of free forms. Under the “Court Records” tab, users can find a link to PACER, the system that provides access to federal case files and dockets.
At the state level, the Colorado State Judicial Branch site provides access to the Colorado appellate and trial courts. From the home page, researchers can access a wealth of information, including court opinions, the self-help library (which contains forms), the e-filing system, and court dockets.
There are an overwhelming number of free and low-cost legal resources available on the Internet. This article has provided an overview of some of them. Users often will turn to one resource more than another, depending on the type of information they need and their practice area, and it’s helpful to be familiar with what is available before starting a search. Free resources usually are a good place to begin one’s research, and supplementing this research with fee-based resources likely produces the best results.
Reproduced by permission. ©2011 Colorado Bar Association, 40 The Colorado Lawyer 103 (August 2011). All rights reserved.
Stacey L. Bowers is the Outreach and Instructional Services Coordinator for the Westminster Law Library at the University of Denver Sturm College of Law. She can be reached at (303) 871-6079 or sbowers@law.du.edu.
On Tuesday, August 2, 2011, the United States Senate confirmed Jefferson County District Court Chief Judge R. Brooke Jackson as the final federal judge for the United States District Court for Colorado. Jackson will fill the second of two vacancies that have been open on the court since 2008. Judge Martinez was confirmed to the court last year.
Jackson has been a judge in the First Judicial District, which serves Jefferson and Gilpin counties, since 1998, and assumed the role of chief judge in 2003. He was first recommended for the United States District Court judgeship by Senators Mark Udall​ and Michael Bennet in 2009; President Obama nominated him in 2010, and renominated him in January when the new congress convened.
On Thursday, the Colorado Court of Appeals issued seven published opinions and twenty-seven unpublished opinions.
Tidwell v. Bevan Properties, Ltd.
The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Colorado issued its opinion in In re Graham (Musich v. Graham) on Monday, July 11, 2011.
Plaintiff filed an adversary proceeding to prevent the discharge of debt under 523(a)(6) for a “willful and malicious injury” arising out of an altercation during a baseball game. After the fight, the Defendant was criminally charged with felony assault. Defendant pled guilty to the felony assault. Moreover, the Defendant was sued in state court by the Plaintiff for civil assault and battery. Defendant agreed to settle the matter for $49,017.14. Defendant then filed bankruptcy and he seeks to discharge the settlement obligation.
The Plaintiff filed a Motion for Summary Judgment asserting that because the Defendant had pled guilty to felony assault and had agreed to settle the civil tort action, the obligation arising out of the settlement should be determined nondischargeable. Defendant asserted in response to the Motion for Summary Judgment – and for the first time in this adversary proceeding, or the prior civil action and criminal action – that Defendant’s actions were in self-defense and therefore the settlement should be discharged.
The Court determined that the claim of self-defense was of recent vintage and since it had not been raised previously would not be countenanced in this action. Moreover, despite the Defendant’s seemingly surprise that hitting someone in the face would result in injury, the Court concluded that the use of a fist to hit another’s face was both willful and malicious. The Court further found that despite the fact that the civil suit resulted in a settlement, under Archer v. Warner, 538 U.S. 314, 123 S.Ct. 1462, 123 S.Ct. 1462, 155 L.Ed.2d 454 (2003), it did not transform what would otherwise be a nondischargeable debt under 11 U.S.C. section 523(a)(6) into a dischargeable obligation.
The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Colorado issued its opinion in In re McGough (Wadsworth v. The Word Of Life Christian Center) on Wednesday, July 6, 2011.
This is an opinion of first impression involving a Trustee’s avoidance power of charitable contributions under 11 U.S.C. 548(a)(2).
The Debtors made numerous prepetition charitable contributions to their church throughout 2008 and 2009. The Debtors’ prepetition gross earned income was less than $10,000 each year, however, the Debtors also received over $20,000 in social security payments annually. After filing for Chapter 7 relief, the Trustee filed an adversary proceeding against the Debtors’ church seeking to avoid and recover the charitable donations received from the Debtors pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 548. The Trustee filed a Motion for Summary Judgment asserting that there were no material facts in dispute and that, as a matter of law, he should be awarded a judgement on the claims. The church responded to the Trustee’s motion (deleted phrase) by filing its own motion for summary judgment claiming that it is entitled to keep the Debtors’ donations pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 548(a)(2). Section 548(a)(2) provides a possible defense against avoidance and recovery of fraudulent transfers to qualified religious or charitable organizations – contributions under 15% of gross annual income (“GAI”) are excepted from avoidance.
The Court was presented with the following issues: (a) for purposes of § 548(a)(2), are social security payments included in GAI?; (b) for purposes of § 548(a)(2), is the 15% threshold applicable to transfers individually or transfers made in the aggregate on an annual basis?; and (c) if the transfers exceed 15%, is the entire transfer voidable or just the amount of the transfer that exceeds 15%?
The Bankruptcy Court concluded: (a) for purposes of § 548(a)(2), Social Security payments are not included in GAI and, thus, the 15% limit does not include the social security income; (b) for purposes of § (548)(a)(2)(A), the 15% threshold applies to transfers made in the aggregate on an annual basis; and (c) if the transfers exceed 15%, then only the transferred amount that exceeds 15% is avoided. The Debtors’ contributions exceeded their 15% GAI in both 2008 and 2009. The Trustee was entitled to an avoidance and recovery of $2,614.95.
On Wednesday, August 3, 2011, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals issued one published opinion and two unpublished opinions.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 548
 § 548
 § 548
 § 548
 § 548