6.3 Case law citations

Elements of case citations

Case citations give every legal reader a shared address for finding judicial opinions. Each piece of the citation serves a specific function: identifying the parties, pointing to the right volume and page in a reporter, and telling you which court decided the case and when. Get comfortable with these building blocks now, because every other citation skill depends on them.

Case name components

The case name identifies the parties involved. A few rules govern how those names appear:

• Parties are listed in the order they appeared in the original proceeding, typically plaintiff v. defendant
• Individual names are shortened to last names only: Smith v. Jones
• Corporate and organizational names get standard abbreviations: Int'l Bus. Machines Corp. v. United States
• In criminal cases, the government appears as the prosecuting party: United States v. Nixon or State v. Williams

The "v." between party names is always lowercase and followed by a period. In case names within textual sentences, it's italicized; in citations standing alone, the Bluebook also italicizes the full case name.

Volume and reporter information

The volume number and reporter abbreviation tell you exactly which book (or database equivalent) contains the opinion.

• The volume number comes first, followed by the reporter abbreviation: 347 U.S. 483
• Official reporters are designated by jurisdiction. For the U.S. Supreme Court, that's United States Reports (U.S.)
• Unofficial reporters include the regional reporter system: N.E., N.W., S.E., S.W., P., A., and their subsequent series (e.g., N.E.2d)
• Specialized reporters cover particular courts or subject areas: F. Supp. (Federal Supplement) for federal district courts, F.3d (Federal Reporter, Third Series) for circuit courts

Page numbers and pinpoints

After the reporter abbreviation, you'll find page references that locate the opinion and, when needed, the exact passage you're relying on.

• The first page number is where the opinion begins in the reporter: Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137
• A pinpoint citation (pincite) directs the reader to a specific page within the opinion. Place it after a comma following the starting page: Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483, 495
• For multiple pinpoints, separate them with commas: 347 U.S. 483, 486, 495
• Pincites are essential whenever you quote language or reference a specific holding or point of law. Omitting them forces the reader to search the entire opinion.

Court and year details

A parenthetical at the end of the citation identifies the court and the year of the decision.

• The year of decision is always included: Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973)
• For U.S. Supreme Court cases cited to U.S. Reports, you only need the year in the parenthetical because the reporter itself identifies the court
• For lower court decisions, include the court abbreviation before the year: Smith v. Jones, 123 F.3d 456 (9th Cir. 1997)
• For very recent or unpublished opinions, the full date (month, day, year) may be required instead of just the year

Citation formats

Different contexts call for different levels of detail in your citations. A full citation gives the reader everything they need on first encounter. Short forms keep things efficient on repeat references. Parallel citations point to the same case across multiple reporters.

Full citation format

Use the full citation the first time you reference a case in a document or footnote. It follows this pattern:

Example: Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954)

Every element is present: party names, volume, reporter, starting page, and the court/year parenthetical. This gives the reader a complete roadmap to find the opinion.

Short form citations

Once you've provided a full citation, subsequent references can use a shortened form. There are a few options:

• Shortened case name with reporter info: Brown, 347 U.S. at 495
• Id.: Use id. when citing the same source as the immediately preceding citation. Add a pincite if you're pointing to a different page: Id. at 490
• Don't use a short form before the full citation has appeared. And if several other authorities have intervened since the last reference, provide a new full citation to avoid confusion.

Parallel citations

Parallel citations reference the same case as it appears in multiple reporters. Some state courts and certain contexts require them.

Example: Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S. Ct. 1602, 16 L. Ed. 2d 694 (1966)

The official reporter comes first, followed by unofficial reporters. Check your jurisdiction's local rules, as many courts specify whether parallel citations are required.

Bluebook rules for citations

The Bluebook is the dominant citation manual for U.S. legal writing. It's organized by source type, with specific rules for cases, statutes, secondary sources, and more. For case citations, you'll spend most of your time in Rule 10.

General rules for cases

Rule 10 sets out the basic framework for case citations:

1. Case name (Rule 10.2): Specifies which words to abbreviate, how to handle multiple parties, and when to italicize
2. Reporter information (Rule 10.3): Dictates the order of volume, reporter abbreviation, and page number
3. Court and jurisdiction (Rule 10.4): Explains what goes in the parenthetical
4. Date (Rule 10.5): Covers when to use just the year versus the full date
5. Subsequent history (Rule 10.7): Requires notation of later proceedings that affect the cited decision

Tables T1 through T16 in the back of the Bluebook contain the abbreviations you'll need for reporters, courts, and jurisdictions.

Specific court citation rules

Citation format varies depending on which court issued the opinion:

• U.S. Supreme Court: Cite to United States Reports (U.S.) when available. Only the year appears in the parenthetical because the reporter identifies the court: Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. 644 (2015)
• Federal circuit courts: Cite to the Federal Reporter (F., F.2d, F.3d, F.4th). Include the circuit in the parenthetical: (9th Cir. 2001)
• Federal district courts: Cite to the Federal Supplement (F. Supp., F. Supp. 2d, F. Supp. 3d). Include the district: (S.D.N.Y. 2019)
• State courts: Cite to the appropriate regional reporter or state-specific reporter, following Table T1 for your jurisdiction's preferences

Foreign case citation rules

Rule 20 governs citations to non-U.S. cases. The key differences:

• Include the court and jurisdiction in the parenthetical so readers know the source of authority
• You may follow the citation format customary in that jurisdiction when appropriate
• For cases from jurisdictions using non-Roman alphabets, transliteration rules apply
• Always provide enough information for a reader unfamiliar with the foreign system to locate the case

Electronic case citations

As legal research has shifted online, citation rules have adapted. Electronic citations are now standard for unpublished opinions and cases not yet available in print reporters.

Online database citations

When a case isn't available in a print reporter, cite to the electronic database where it can be found. The format includes a database identifier and a unique case number:

Example: United States v. Doe, No. 12-345, 2019 WL 1234567 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 1, 2019)

• WL indicates Westlaw; LEXIS indicates Lexis
• Include the docket number and the full date of the decision
• If the case is also available in a print reporter, cite to the print reporter instead

Unpublished opinion citations

Unpublished (or "non-precedential") opinions require extra care:

• Cite to the electronic database or a specialized reporter series for unpublished decisions
• Always include the docket number and full date
• Check the jurisdiction's rules on citing unpublished opinions. Some courts restrict or prohibit their use as authority
• Example: Smith v. Jones, No. 12-CV-3456, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12345 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 15, 2018)

Electronic case file citations

For documents filed through electronic court systems like PACER, use this format:

Example: Doe v. United States, No. 12-CV-3456, ECF No. 78, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 1, 2019)

The ECF number identifies the specific document in the docket, and the asterisk before the page number indicates an electronic page reference.

Citing specific parts of cases

A single case can contain a majority opinion, one or more concurrences, and one or more dissents. Your citation needs to tell the reader exactly which opinion you're referencing.

Citing majority opinions

The standard citation format defaults to the majority opinion, so no special designation is needed:

Example: Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. 644, 675 (2015)

Use a pincite to direct readers to the specific page or passage you're relying on. If you're citing a particular justice's majority opinion by name (which is uncommon), you'd add a parenthetical, but this is rarely necessary.

Citing concurring opinions

To cite a concurrence, add a parenthetical identifying the justice and the type of concurrence:

Example: Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Comm'n, 138 S. Ct. 1719, 1734 (2018) (Gorsuch, J., concurring)

• Use "concurring" for a full concurrence and "concurring in part" when the justice joins only part of the majority
• The pincite should point to the beginning of the concurring opinion or the specific passage you're referencing

Citing dissenting opinions

Dissents follow the same parenthetical format, substituting "dissenting":

Example: District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 636 (2008) (Stevens, J., dissenting)

• If there are multiple dissents, cite each one separately with the appropriate justice's name
• The pincite should reference the start of the dissent or the specific passage at issue

Citation in legal writing

How you present citations depends on the type of document you're writing. Court filings, legal memoranda, and law review articles each have their own conventions.

In-text citations vs. footnotes

• In-text citations are standard in court documents and legal memoranda. They appear in the body of the text, typically right after the sentence or clause they support.
• Footnotes are the norm in academic legal writing (law review articles, seminar papers). They move the citation apparatus out of the main text, which can improve readability.
• Some jurisdictions have local rules specifying which format to use. Always check before drafting.

Citation placement in briefs

When writing a brief, follow this general approach:

1. Provide a full citation the first time you reference a case
2. Use short form citations for all subsequent references
3. Place citations immediately after the proposition they support
4. String citations (multiple cases cited together) can support a single point, but use them sparingly. Courts generally prefer one strong authority over a long list of cases.

Integrate citations into the flow of your argument rather than dumping them at the end of a paragraph. A well-placed citation reinforces your point right where the reader needs it.

Citation in academic legal writing

Law review articles and other academic legal writing follow the Bluebook's "white pages" (the main body of rules), with additional guidance in Rule 1:

• Citations go in footnotes, not in the body text
• Footnotes can include brief substantive commentary, but keep this to a minimum in formal writing
• Academic writing often involves more extensive citation to secondary sources, legislative history, and comparative materials
• Rule 1.1 provides specific formatting guidance for footnote citations

Common citation errors

Citation mistakes can undermine your credibility and frustrate readers trying to verify your sources. Most errors fall into a few predictable categories.

Incorrect abbreviations

• Using the wrong reporter abbreviation (e.g., confusing N.Y.S.2d with N.Y.2d, which are different reporters)
• Getting court abbreviations wrong in parentheticals (e.g., writing "D.C. Mass." instead of "D. Mass.")
• Failing to abbreviate words that the Bluebook requires you to shorten (check Tables T6 and T10)
• Switching between abbreviation styles inconsistently within the same document

Missing or incorrect information

• Omitting the year or court from the parenthetical
• Transposing volume or page numbers
• Misspelling party names
• Failing to include subsequent history when the case was reversed, affirmed, or had certiorari denied

Improper use of short forms

• Using a short form before providing the full citation
• Formatting the short form incorrectly (e.g., omitting "at" before the pincite: Brown, 347 U.S. 495 instead of Brown, 347 U.S. at 495)
• Using id. when the immediately preceding citation refers to a different source
• Failing to reintroduce a full citation after many intervening authorities, which leaves the reader searching for the original reference

Advanced citation techniques

These techniques add precision and context to your citations. They help readers understand where a legal principle originated, what happened to a case after the decision you're citing, and how strongly a source supports your argument.

Citing cases within cases

When the language you're relying on was itself quoted or cited from an earlier case, you should trace that chain for the reader:

Example: Smith v. Jones, 123 F.3d 456, 460 (9th Cir. 1997) (quoting Doe v. Roe, 98 F.2d 765, 770 (9th Cir. 1990))

• Use (quoting ...) when the cited case directly quotes the earlier case
• Use (citing ...) when the cited case references but doesn't quote the earlier case
• This technique is valuable for tracing the origin of a legal standard or showing that a principle has been consistently applied

Subsequent history notations

Subsequent history tells the reader what happened to a case after the decision you're citing. This is critical because a reversed or vacated opinion may carry no precedential weight.

• Common abbreviations: aff'd (affirmed), rev'd (reversed), vacated, cert. denied, overruled by
• Place subsequent history after the main citation, separated by a comma

Example: Smith v. Jones, 123 F. Supp. 2d 456 (N.D. Cal. 2000), aff'd, 234 F.3d 789 (9th Cir. 2001)

Under Bluebook Rule 10.7, you must include subsequent history that affects the precedential value of the case. A denial of certiorari is generally omitted unless it's particularly relevant to your argument or the case is less than two years old.

Weight of authority signals

Introductory signals tell the reader how a cited source relates to the proposition in your text. They appear before the citation and are italicized:

• See : The cited authority supports the proposition but doesn't state it directly
• See also : Additional authority supporting the point
• Cf. : The cited authority supports the proposition by analogy
• But see : The cited authority contradicts the proposition
• Contra : The cited authority directly states the opposite

No signal means the source directly states the proposition, is the source of a quotation, or identifies the authority you're discussing. Choosing the right signal is a skill that develops with practice, and misusing signals is a common error in student writing.

Citation management tools

Several tools can help you format and verify citations, but none of them are a substitute for knowing the rules yourself. Treat these as time-savers, not replacements for your own knowledge.

Legal citation software

Dedicated citation software can extract, format, and organize legal citations:

• Tools like Citeus Legalus and Juris-M integrate with word processors to automate formatting
• These programs are most useful for large documents with many citations
• Complex or unusual citations may still require manual adjustment, so always review the output

Online citation generators

Web-based tools let you input case information and receive a formatted citation:

• Examples include resources from Cornell's Legal Information Institute and other legal technology providers
• These are handy for quick, one-off citations
• Their accuracy varies, so always verify the generated citation against the Bluebook or your jurisdiction's citation manual

Citation checking services

Professional-grade tools review citations across an entire document for accuracy and proper formatting:

• Services built into Westlaw and Lexis can flag broken citations, check whether cases are still good law, and verify page numbers
• Law firms and law review editorial boards rely on these tools during the editing process
• Even with these services, a final manual review is good practice, since automated tools can miss context-dependent errors