Agenda1. Masthead2. Long paper clarification3. Plagiarism4. ILL requests5. Inputting CS hours6. Bluebook, CMOS and AC/PM notes7. Communication8. Upcoming events/meetings

Masthead• Sheet is being passed around the room right now• Please specify how you would like your name to appear on

the masthead

Long Paper Clarification• Deadlines• Rough draft: October 19 at 9:00 PM• Final draft: November 16 at 9:00 PM• Submission methods in Associate Manual

• Faculty Involvement• You will also submit your long papers to a faculty member

assigned to you

Plagiarism• Plagiarism is absolutely prohibited

• Law Review Consequences• Loss of long paper credit• Loss of credit• Expulsion from law review• Referral to the Dean• Misconduct may affect character & fitness portion of bar

• Consequences

What is Plagiarism?

Source: http://www.plagiarism.org/plagiarism-101/what-is-plagiarism

Plagiarism Examples

By not reaching the issue of educational malpractice, the court missed an

opportunity to definitively hold that there is no duty to effectively educate.

FROM: Joe Johnson, Torts: An Alternative Approach to Glorvigen v. Cirrus Design

Corp., 40 WM. MITCHELL. L. REV. 224, 251 (2014)

By not reaching the issue of educational malpractice, the court missed an opportunity to

definitively hold that there is no duty to effectively educate.

By not reaching the issue of educational malpractice, the court missed an opportunity to

definitively hold that there is no duty to effectively educate.1

1 Joe Johnson, Torts: An Alternative Approach to Glorvigen v. Cirrus Design Corp., 40 WM.

MITCHELL. L. REV. 224, 251 (2014).

By not deciding on the issue of the educational malpractice doctrine, the supreme court lost out

on an opportunity to hold that there is no obligation to effectively educate.

By not deciding on the issue of the educational malpractice doctrine, the supreme court lost out on an opportunity to hold that there is no duty

to effectively educate.1

1 Joe Johnson, Torts: An Alternative Approach to Glorvigen v. Cirrus Design Corp., 40 WM.

MITCHELL. L. REV. 224, 251 (2014).

The supreme court passed up the chance to clarify the state of the law when it elected not to resolve the educational malpractice question in

Glorvigen.

The supreme court passed up the chance to clarify the state of the law when it elected not to resolve the educational malpractice question in

Glorvigen.1

1 Joe Johnson, Torts: An Alternative Approach to Glorvigen v. Cirrus Design Corp., 40 WM.

MITCHELL. L. REV. 224, 251 (2014).

“By not reaching the issue of educational malpractice, the court missed an opportunity to

definitively hold that there is no duty to effectively educate.”1

1 Joe Johnson, Torts: An Alternative Approach to Glorvigen v. Cirrus Design Corp., 40 WM.

MITCHELL. L. REV. 224, 251 (2014).

Original Plagiarism

PlagiarismPlagiarismPlagiarism

Plagiarism

Not Plagiarism Not Plagiarism

1

76

543

2

Plagiarism Examples

The doctrine’s tort bar does not, however, cover claims involving personal injury.75

75 See Ralph A. Anzivino, The False Dilemma of the Economic Loss Doctrine, 93 MARQ. L. REV. 1121, 1121 (2010) (commenting that a

manufacturer can be sued in tort if its “defective product causes personal injury”)

FROM: Joe Johnson, Torts: An Alternative Approach to Glorvigen v. Cirrus Design Corp., 40 WM. MITCHELL. L. REV. 224, 231 (2014)

The doctrine’s tort bar does not, however, cover claims involving personal injury.20

20 See Ralph A. Anzivino, The False Dilemma of the Economic Loss Doctrine, 93 MARQ. L. REV. 1121, 1121

(2010) (commenting that a manufacturer can be sued in tort if its “defective product causes personal injury”).

“The doctrine’s tort bar does not, however, cover claims involving personal injury.”20

20 Joe Johnson, Torts: An Alternative Approach to Glorvigen v. Cirrus Design Corp., 40 WM. MITCHELL. L. REV. 224, 230 (2014); see also Ralph A. Anzivino, The

False Dilemma of the Economic Loss Doctrine, 93 MARQ. L. REV. 1121, 1121 (2010) (commenting that a

manufacturer can be sued in tort if its “defective product causes personal injury”).

If the claimant suffers personal injury, he or she will be allowed to sue in tort.20

20 See Ralph A. Anzivino, The False Dilemma of the Economic Loss Doctrine, 93 MARQ. L. REV. 1121, 1121

(2010) (commenting that a manufacturer can be sued in tort if its “defective product causes personal injury”).

If the claimant suffers personal injury, he or she will be allowed to sue in tort.20

20 Joe Johnson, Torts: An Alternative Approach to Glorvigen v. Cirrus Design Corp., 40 WM. MITCHELL. L.

REV. 224, 230 (2014).

“The doctrine’s tort bar does not, however, cover claims involving personal injury.”20

20 Joe Johnson, Torts: An Alternative Approach to Glorvigen v. Cirrus Design Corp., 40 WM. MITCHELL. L.

REV. 224, 230 (2014) (citing Ralph A. Anzivino, The False Dilemma of the Economic Loss Doctrine, 93 MARQ. L.

REV. 1121, 1121 (2010)).

Original

1 2

3 4 5

Plagiarism Plagiarism

Plagiarism Not Plagiarism Not Plagiarism

Plagiarism Final Thoughts

• Don’t plagiarize!

• When in doubt:• Consult a friend, colleague, professor, librarian, or board member• Err on the side of caution and add a citation/quotation marks/etc.

• Books checked out to the law review will be located in the Law Review Shelves, on the lower level of the library near the bottom of the stairs.• Your Mitchell ID should give you access to the room• Spare access key at the circulation desk

• Place book back on the Law Review Shelves in the correct article spot or, if the book is non-circulating, in its correct spot in the library stacks when finished.

• Keep books on the Law Review Shelves. • Non-circulating library books will be located in their usual place in

the library stacks. Do NOT place a non-circulating book on a Law Review Shelf.

• If a source is “on reserve,” you must check it out in your name, not Law Review.

General Library Procedures

• Consult Associate Manual• Associates doing a “Source Pull” requests the ILL• Source we need is not carried by the WMCL Library.• Fill out the online ILL form.

• Do not request an ILL in your own name, use "Law Review." • Unless it is for your long paper

Requesting an ILL

• Login to the ILLiad System (http://wmitchell.illiad.oclc.org/illiad). • Login: Law Review • Password: ill

• Fill out and submit the ILL form• Put “ILL Requested” on the source pull spreadsheet under

location and highlight the entire row in green.

Steps to Request ILL

• Fill out the form with as much information as possible. However, the following information must be entered: • Author/Editors • Title • Not Wanted After Date: [enter the date five days from the date of request]

• Ex: You are making the request on September 4, so you should enter September

9 as the “Not wanted after” date. • In the “Notes” section, include the article author’s name, the article

Editor’s name, and your name as person who made the request. For example: • Author: Steenson • Editor: Cronen• Submitter: Jenny Rochat• Also in the “Notes” section, include whether the book is available at a nearby

library. WorldCat is a great source (www.worldcat.org).

Filling Out the ILL Form

Recording CS HoursMitchell: Hours must be recorded online through your Student Records page.

Hamline: Email your hours to operations.lawreview@wmitchell.edu immediately after you complete a CS hour assignment.

Instructions:Project Name [AuthorLastName]_[ProjectName]Graham_SourcePull

Graham_Proof1

Assigned by Editor last name

Date Due date

Hours To the nearest tenth of an hour

Comments Describe what you did

Bluebook Rule 4.1• The period after id. is italicized.

•. .• They really are different!

Bluebook Rule 10.6.3• Nesting parentheticals• See United States v. Drayton, 536 U.S. 194, 206–07 (2002)

(quoting Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218, 227 (1973) (“While knowledge of the right to refuse consent is one factor to be taken into account, the government need not establish such knowledge as the sine qua non of an effective consent.”).

• See United States v. Drayton, 536 U.S. 194, 206–07 (2002) (“While knowledge of the right to refuse consent is one factor to be taken into account, the government need not establish such knowledge as the sine qua non of an effective consent.” (quoting Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218, 227 (1973))).

Abbreviation Tables• Table 6 is for • Case names

• Table 10 is for • Geographical terms

• Table 13 is for • Periodicals

Bluebook Rule 18• Very different from Rule 18 in the 19th edition.• No more “available at”

Chicago Manual of Style Rule 6.75–6.82• Hyphen: for compound words and word division• Also used to separate numbers, like in telephone numbers

• En dash: for ranges of numbers (acts as the word “to”)• One exception• From . . . to . . .

• Em dash: sets off words, and can act as parenthesis, commas, or a colon.

• - – —

Chicago Manual of Style Rule 13.48• Omissions in quoted material are noted by three spaced

periods. • …• . . .

Communication• Law Review Mentors/NCEs• Hamline and Mitchell Processes

Super Associates!Megan Odom• Receive a 5 on an AC. She “found a crucial issue with the whole

article that would affect all ranges.” She also “provid[ed] thoughtful comments and ideas to clarify the author’s intent with the article.” The editor also noted that she “noted that a parenthetical did not show the whole story of the case,” indicating that she read through the entire case “to determine if the parenthetical told the whole truth of the case.” She provided an alternative parenthetical that seemingly provid[ed] better information regarding the case cited.

Super Associates!Matt Hartranft and Elizabeth Scheibel• Each associate thought about the article critically. Their

comments went beyond correcting errors in the article to improving the substantive quality of the article. The associates asked questions during the production meeting that contributed to the meeting's productivity. The associates noticed if a cite would cause problems for other people and shared that information so that the problems could be resolved collaboratively. Even better, their Bluebooking skills were great. The associates even cited sections of the Bluebook in their comments in order to justify their changes.

Announcements

• Next Associate Meeting: Oct. 27 at 7:00 AM• Upcoming social events:• ACS Making Strides Against Breast Cancer Walk: Oct. 10

at 10:00 AM