Earlier this week, I noted that a Westlaw reference attorney informed me that Westlaw doesn’t correct transcription errors in its versions of old cases. (The error that I was trying to get corrected was in Thorn v. Blanchard, 5 Johns. 508 (N.Y. 1809); the Westlaw version incorrectly reported the name of the court that decided the case.) I argued in the post that this was a bad policy.
I’m pleased to report that Westlaw has made clear that what the reference attorney told me is not Westlaw’s policy:
Prof. Volokh,Thank you for bringing the error in the Thorn decision to our attention. While West processes are designed to ensure the accuracy of opinions in its collections, Thorn reminds me that there is no substitute for an extra set of eyes (or many extra sets of eyes, as provided by your readers), in reviewing legal documents. We appreciate that you, and your readers, provided input: whenever a researcher calls an issue to our attention, we look to the source data. For older materials (and for new materials that have been modified), this can be problematic as there may be discrepancies in source data. This is particularly true with respect to older text published in variant reporters.
Once a cover page from the print reporter was submitted, the courtline issue for the 1809 Thorn decision should have been reviewed and the decision promptly corrected by West. It has now been modified on Westlaw. Again, thank you for bringing this to our attention….
West continues to strive for 100% accuracy (every year our editors work with the courts to make more than 100,000 corrections to cases), so I take it personally when an error slips through. We truly appreciate that legal professionals care enough to bring these things to our attention.
David Spencer
Vice President
Legal Editorial Operations
Thomson Reuters, Legal
For more, see this post by Joe Hodnicki (Law Librarian Blog).
Jeff S. says:
Behold, the Power of the Volokh !
July 23, 2010, 7:26 pmrob says:
So, Westlaw’s policy is to correct old cases when they are called out on it by prominent legal bloggers, but not when they think the person notifying them of the mistake is of little significance.
I don’t intend to be mean, but their response provides no explanation as to why they initially refused to fix the error and little reason to think that they’ve implemented any policies to ensure that this won’t happen again.
July 23, 2010, 7:27 pmPetep says:
It’s good to be king :-)
July 23, 2010, 7:58 pmSkyler says:
It’s not good policy to tell customers that they fired someone or took other disciplinary measures.
July 23, 2010, 8:14 pmPeter says:
@ Rob: Ja I have to concur on that, I hate when the bureaucracy gets back with “You are good to go now” without explaining what actions were taken to resolve the problem, i.e. we have fired and/or force retired the person who initially responded. Until bureaucrats have a personal stake in the results of their action this will never change and default answer will always be to deny or ignore you.
@Skyler: I disagree. It may be bad for marketing as you admitting error and implying you can’t control your people but it’s definitely not bad policy.
July 23, 2010, 8:17 pmChris Travers says:
We know who to send correction requests that have been previously denied to now. Note it’s not any of the bloggers here.
July 23, 2010, 8:22 pmneurodoc says:
Someone (not me) owes zippypinhead 50 cents, since back on 7/10 @ 8:02PM he wagered that amount that within a week Westlaw would correct the error now that it had been ballyhooed on this blogsite. Three days later, EV shares their recantation with his readers.
I don’t know how much time, effort, and $$$, if any, it costs Westlaw to make such a correction, but even if it should be non-trivial, how stupid it would be for Westlaw to stand pat on the initial refusal to correct the error.
July 23, 2010, 8:50 pmSkyler says:
Peter, I meant it is bad policy from an HR perspective.
July 23, 2010, 10:31 pmMichael M. Butler says:
YES! [triumphant fistpump]
July 24, 2010, 4:28 amAlessandra says:
Pajama media, go!
July 24, 2010, 7:50 amDave N. says:
If I ever catch an error on Westlaw, I know I will track down David Spencer and bring it to HIS attention.
July 24, 2010, 10:52 amAlanDownunder says:
- David Spencer
I believe it. I know TR legal editors who process the raw RTFs that the courts here put out and who record cases-considered data. Typoed citations are not uncommon and the legal editing process picks them up.
More seriously, these editors occasionally also pick up failures to suppress content that is statutorily unpublishable (minors, victims etc) or subject to suppression orders.
July 24, 2010, 9:19 pmohwilleke says:
Way to go VC!
July 26, 2010, 5:18 pmEddy Mertens says:
OMG! I I came across this site on google. this is really great stuff! I have saved. I will be back!
August 16, 2010, 1:01 am