Study smarter with Fiveable
Get study guides, practice questions, and cheatsheets for all your subjects. Join 500,000+ students with a 96% pass rate.
Legal research isn't about finding a source—it's about finding the right source efficiently and understanding how that source fits into the broader legal landscape. In Advanced Legal Research, you're being tested on your ability to select the appropriate database for specific research tasks, understand the unique strengths and limitations of each platform, and leverage specialized features that distinguish professional-grade research from basic searches. The databases you'll encounter aren't interchangeable; each serves distinct purposes in case law research, statutory analysis, legislative history, and interdisciplinary scholarship.
Mastering these platforms means understanding their underlying architecture: how they organize information, what editorial enhancements they provide, and where they excel or fall short. Whether you're tracking a case's treatment across jurisdictions, tracing legislative intent, or finding historical legal scholarship, knowing which database to reach for—and why—separates competent researchers from exceptional ones. Don't just memorize database names; know what research problem each one solves best.
These are the workhorses of legal research—full-service databases offering case law, statutes, regulations, and secondary sources with sophisticated editorial enhancements. Their value lies not just in content breadth but in proprietary tools for citation analysis and research validation.
Compare: Westlaw vs. LexisNexis—both offer comprehensive primary law coverage with proprietary citators (KeyCite vs. Shepard's), but LexisNexis provides stronger international law resources while Westlaw's Key Number System offers superior topical organization. If asked to justify database selection for a multi-jurisdictional research project, articulate these specific distinctions.
These platforms challenge the traditional database model by leveraging artificial intelligence and competitive pricing to democratize access to legal research, particularly for solo practitioners and smaller firms.
Compare: Casetext vs. Fastcase—both target cost-conscious practitioners, but Casetext emphasizes AI-powered research assistance while Fastcase focuses on visualization tools and bar association partnerships. For questions about emerging legal technology, Casetext's CoCounsel represents the more advanced AI implementation.
When research requires tracing legal evolution, examining historical documents, or engaging with academic legal scholarship, these specialized databases provide depth that general platforms cannot match. Their strength lies in archival completeness rather than real-time currency.
Compare: HeinOnline vs. JSTOR—both serve scholarly research, but HeinOnline specializes in legal periodicals with complete runs and proper legal citation formatting, while JSTOR provides broader interdisciplinary coverage. For law review research requiring pinpoint citations, HeinOnline is the appropriate choice.
These platforms provide direct access to official government documents and court records, offering primary source materials unfiltered by commercial editorial enhancement. Understanding their scope and limitations is essential for litigation support and legislative research.
Compare: PACER vs. Bloomberg Law Dockets—both provide federal court filings, but PACER offers direct government access at lower cost while Bloomberg adds litigation analytics, judge information, and integration with legal research tools. PACER is authoritative but basic; Bloomberg adds analytical value at premium pricing.
These databases bridge legal research and current awareness, combining traditional legal materials with news, business information, and public records. They excel at understanding law in real-world context.
| Research Need | Best Database Options |
|---|---|
| Case law with citator verification | Westlaw (KeyCite), LexisNexis (Shepard's) |
| International and comparative law | LexisNexis, HeinOnline |
| Transactional and business intelligence | Bloomberg Law |
| AI-assisted research and drafting | Casetext (CoCounsel) |
| Cost-effective primary law access | Fastcase, Casetext |
| Law review articles with proper citations | HeinOnline |
| Federal court dockets and filings | PACER, Bloomberg Law |
| Legislative history research | ProQuest Congressional, HeinOnline |
| Interdisciplinary legal scholarship | JSTOR |
| News and current awareness | Nexis Uni, Bloomberg Law |
You need to verify that a 2019 Ninth Circuit decision hasn't been overruled and to find all subsequent cases that have cited it. Which two databases offer proprietary citator systems for this task, and what are those systems called?
A client asks you to research how courts in Germany and the UK have addressed a similar legal issue. Which comprehensive database offers the strongest international law coverage, and why might you supplement it with another source?
Compare and contrast HeinOnline and JSTOR for legal scholarship research. In what specific situation would you choose one over the other?
You're a solo practitioner looking to minimize research costs while still accessing primary law. Identify two platforms designed for cost-conscious users and explain what distinguishes their approaches.
An FRQ asks you to recommend a database strategy for a complex matter requiring both litigation monitoring in federal court and business intelligence on opposing parties. Which combination of databases would you select, and how would each contribute to the research plan?