Family Law: Evaluating Websites

When starting a new research project, it is often helpful to get an overview of the available resources. Try a basic google search for "law library guide" and your subject area: copyright, evidence, employment law, whatever.

• More federal than state materials, and more state materials than local government info

• More government information than privately generated content
• generally more primary than secondary materials

• More recent information (1990s to present) than older items

• More case opinions than case dockets or filings

• More "just the document" rather than items with additional editorial content

• More unofficial (can't cite to it) information than official

• Comprehensive site featuring all types of materials collected from all jurisdictions

• Secondary sources that are excellent quality and from reliable publishers (law review articles are the exception)

• Digests, headnotes and other editorial content and finding aids

• Citator with broad reach
  • Some free-to-bar members or low-cost resources, like Fastcase, have citators but they are limited in scope

1. At the beginning of your search--for background information

2. To look up a discrete piece of information

- find a case/statute/regulation by citation 
- look up an article by name
- locate a person by name

3. To pinpoint a citation for a case/statute/regulation to run through a citator on Westlaw/Lexis

4. To generate search terms

5. To locate news articles about a topic

6. To locate contact or other directory information for a person or business

1. Authoritativeness/Accuracy—who’s the author/publisher?

2. Bias—is there an agenda?

3. Comprehensiveness

4. Timeliness—when was it last updated?

5. Interface design/user friendliness

-How can you search?

-Can you narrow or expand your results?

6. Editorial features

-Commentary?

-Links to additional resources?

-Other ways to expand your research?

The American Association of Law Libraries has put together additional criteria and searching tips that you may want to consider.

• Not Comprehensive
• Cover only a narrow subject matter
• Cover only a "snapshot" of time such as the most recent 5 years or may no longer be updated

• Limited Editorial Features
• May not offer keyword or subject searching options
• May not be indexed or tagged for easy sorting or filtering

• Possible bias or inaccuracies
• May provide only one perspective
• May not have an editor or a fact checker (especially crowdsourced sites like Wikipedia)

• Here today, gone tomorrow (“link rot”)
• URL may no longer be valid--site license has not been renewed or page has moved etc.