Need advise - Black's Law Dictionary: Digital or Paper?

[Georgiana]

I agree.  Google anything you dont know (or wikipedia, that got me through Con Law).

Such a true statement!  I love that the big cases are all on wiki, it's so helpful   Esp when my casebook was terrible at "excerpts."  I don't have time for a 20 page majority, a 15 page concurrence and two 10-20 page dissents.   

[UnbiasedObserver]

Oyez.org is even better than wikipedia and google for con law, for what it's worth. 

[Georgiana]

Oyez.org is even better than wikipedia and google for con law, for what it's worth. 

I was never a huge fan of Oyez... not that many details.  I just looked up Roe v. Wade and it has like 9 lines of info.  Wiki on the other hand has great background as well as the decision of the court with summaries of the sections plus the dissent and then goes on to give overviews of subsequent cases and the controversy. 

To each their own.

[UnbiasedObserver]

I was never a huge fan of Oyez... not that many details.  I just looked up Roe v. Wade and it has like 9 lines of info.  Wiki on the other hand has great background as well as the decision of the court with summaries of the sections plus the dissent and then goes on to give overviews of subsequent cases and the controversy. 

To each their own.

Fair enough. 

[Dr. Balsenschaft]

Oyez and wikipedia are vastly different.  Listening to the oral arguments for any con law case is highly instructive (and not as time-wastey as it sounds).

It's a waste of time.  But it is interesting.  If you're only going to discuss one case in class (rare), maybe it's worth it just so you can listen to intelligent and knowledgeable people (presumably) discuss the case.  But it doesn't necessarily tell you much about what they based their decision on.  Neither does what they write in their opinion for that matter, but that's what we're suppose to rely on so you're better off just focusing on what they wrote. 

[Matthies]

It is emphatically not a waste of time.  The argument for each side is distilled to a t, and the justices point out the flaws in each.  It's really terrific.

law nerd

[Georgiana]

It is emphatically not a waste of time.  The argument for each side is distilled to a t, and the justices point out the flaws in each.  It's really terrific.

But you can't listen to them during class... which is what I usually use Wiki for  

If I had time the night before to listen to the oral args, I probably would have read the case as well. 

[thorc954]

Listening to the oral arguments does absolutely nothing come exam day.  Complete waste of time. 

[Matthies]

It is emphatically not a waste of time.  The argument for each side is distilled to a t, and the justices point out the flaws in each.  It's really terrific.

But you can't listen to them during class... which is what I usually use Wiki for  

If I had time the night before to listen to the oral args, I probably would have read the case as well. 

you wnat to be a lawyer, don't use wiki, if you cited to wiki in your brief or to a judge they would through you in jail for stupidy, get out of the wiki habbit. bad, wiki, bad.

[botbot]

you wnat to be a lawyer, don't use wiki, if you cited to wiki in your brief or to a judge they would through you in jail for stupidy, get out of the wiki habbit. bad, wiki, bad.

For your records,

http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200216886.pdf
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A07E0DF143FF93AA15752C0A9619C8B63