March 14, 1997 Appellate Court and Circuit Administration Division ATTN: ABA Citation Resolution Suite 4-512 Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts Washington, DC 20544 Re: ABA Citation Resolution It has been announced that the Judicial Conference of the United States will consider whether the federal courts should adopt the recommendations made by the ABA Citation Committee in 1996. The State Bar of South Dakota was a supporter of the ABA Resolution and urges the Judicial Conference to adopt a case citation incorporating its recommendations. The costs of implementing the system will be insignificant, but the benefits to the courts, the bar, and the public will be substantial. The creation of a permanent citation which is immediately available to the public will significantly enhance the utility of electronic legal research with little inconvenience to the traditional "paper" legal research. The South Dakota Bar bases its support on practical experience with "publishing" slip opinions of the South Dakota Supreme Court and the South Dakota Supreme Court's experience after adopting a "universal citation system" in October, 1995, effective January 1, 1996. The South Dakota Supreme Court has used the "universal citation system" since January 1, 1996, and has reported no problems instituting the paragraph numbering and case numbering requirements. Adding paragraph numbers using WordPerfect or Word requires only that the paragraph numbering feature be "turned on" and the style for the numbering established. Because the paragraph numbering is automatic, the numbering is automatically revised when a paragraph is added or deleted. (In fact, the increased use of footnotes in the opinions presents a more difficult publishing problem than paragraph numbering.) The sequential number for the case is assigned by the clerk when the opinion is released for publication. All concurrences and dissents are written before the case is released for publication. If a rehearing is granted and a new opinion issued, the new opinion receives a new sequential number, and the prior opinion remains "published." The sequentially numbered South Dakota opinions with paragraph numbers are posted to the State Bar's Internet page (http://www.sdbar.org/opinions/index.htm) within forty-eight hours. They are also posted on WestLaw, Lexis, and VersusLaw in approximately the same time period. The opinion is accessible and citeable by lawyers and judges with the same "universal citation" regardless of the online service used. When the official report of the opinion is published (usually about 2 1/2 months later), the court's official citation remains the same, only the North Western volume and initial page number is added. The few complaints from the lawyers using the system appear to fall into two areas: (1) those who object to any requirement to cite to a North Western volume and page number, and (2) those who want no changes to the "traditional" method. (Coincidently, the same type of complaints are made to the 1995 adoption in South Dakota of the Uniform Probate Code.) It was for that reason that the State Bar recommended and the South Dakota Supreme Court adopted the parallel cites as an accommodation. For those who use electronic research, the universal citation has provided an unchanging citation, easy location of pinpoint cites, and hypertext links with pinpoint accuracy. Research is done faster, more thoroughly, and at less expense using CD-ROM disks and online services. The dramatic increase in the Court's Internet websites, makes a "universal citation system" even more practical, and necessary, than it was in 1995 when the South Dakota State Bar first began using it. A short history and commentary on the adoption of the South Dakota rule follows. Respectfully submitted, Laurence J. Zastrow Deputy Director State Bar of South Dakota THE SOUTH DAKOTA CITATION RULE In 1976, the South Dakota Supreme Court published the final volume of the South Dakota Reports. In 1980, to meet the statutory requirement of an official reporter, the Court entered an Order designating West Publishing Company's North Western Reporter as the official reporter. In 1987, West Publishing requested that the South Dakota Supreme Court transmit its opinions to the publisher via modem. The State Bar supported the request because it would allow the official reporter to provide the decisions in a more timely fashion. At the 1987 hearing then Justice Frank Henderson, noting that WestLaw and Lexis were very expensive services, challenged the State Bar to make electronic services available to the small firms at a reasonable cost. In 1989, with the cooperation of the South Dakota Supreme Court, the State Bar began to provide the weekly slip opinions on floppy disks. Since the internal page numbers of the official reporter could not be used because of West's copyright claims, the State Bar added its own page numbers. However, the use of the electronic "slip opinions" was complicated because the trial courts and some lawyers were not subscribers to the Bar's publication. The Intellectual Property Committee was asked to study this problem and suggest a solution as part of its report. Professor Mary Brandt Jensen suggested that paragraph numbers be added to the SDOs as recommended by the American Association of Law Librarians (AALL). The paragraph numbering exposed the South Dakota practitioners to an alternative citation method and allowed the committee to evaluate their reactions. It also allowed the State Bar to respond to questions about the cost and mechanics of publishing opinions containing paragraph numbers. The format finally proposed by the Intellectual Property Committee was similar to that drafted by the American Association of Law Libraries but provided for the addition of the official reporter cite when it becomes available. This requirement was in response to concerns expressed by those researchers who did not use electronic databases. Pinpoint citations, however, would be to paragraph numbers, not page numbers. The proposed rule change was presented to the South Dakota Supreme Court on October 18, 1995. No parties appeared in opposition to the proposed citation rule. It was adopted by the South Dakota Supreme Court with an effective date of January 1, 1996. Thereafter, the ABA committee adopted its recommendation. The North Dakota and Maine Supreme Courts have implemented the "universal citation system" effective January 1, 1997.