Thread: Law School
View Single Post
  #9  
Old 01-22-2008, 11:31 AM
MysticCat MysticCat is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: A dark and very expensive forest
Posts: 12,737
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeekyPenguin View Post
Oh, that's bizarre. My boyfriend uses this made up system of citation that I can't believe nobody has called him out for yet. If he is referring to a case, he'll write:

The court held in Roe that abortion should be legal.

but if he's citing to the case, he'll put:

As the Court held, the Constitution has "penumbras, formed by emanations." Roe v. Wade, 410 US 113 (1973).
Heh. I see lawyers with some regularity who underline and italicize:

"As the Court held, the Constitution has "penumbras, formed by emanations." Roe v. Wade, 410 US 113 (1973)."

It drives me nuts. The whole thing is rather simple. Case names should always be italicized. Underlining is a typewriter convention to indicate text that would be italicized if possible. Italicizing is possible with a word processor, hence underlining is not needed as a substitute.

Of course, then there are the people who, for emphasis, will bold, italicize and underline. Because it's that important! LOL -- people who work with me know that I will never sign my name to a brief with any bolded text in it.
__________________
AMONG MEN HARMONY
1898
Reply With Quote