pageok
pageok
pageok
Three Cheers for Orin!

I'm delighted to report that our coblogger Orin Kerr is the second youngest law professor listed in these lists of most cited law professors by topic. The page doesn't report number of years as a scholar (however measured), but my guess that under that standard Orin would do at least as well, and likely better. Quite a feat!

Other Conspirators on the lists include David Bernstein, Randy Barnett, and Russell Korobkin. My colleague and fellow law blogger Stephen Bainbridge appears as well.

pg (mail):
Check again, Orin is the second youngest. [EV: D'oh -- fixed! That's what I get for late-night blogging.]
11.16.2007 3:32am
Robert Sitkoff:
Read it and weep. Harvard rules!
11.16.2007 6:06am
non-native speaker:
Orin Kerr (36) is the youngest in his category, but no the youngest of all:
WILLS, TRUSTS &ESTATES
...
Robert Sitkoff (Harvard University), 130 citations, age 33.
11.16.2007 7:13am
Jonathan H. Adler (mail) (www):
FWIW - based on a quick Westlaw search of my own, I think I was inadvertently omitted from the runners-up in Environmental Law (in betweek Karkkainen and Buzbee). Alas, I'm a wee bit older than Orin (and that much older than Prof. Sitkoff).

JHA
11.16.2007 8:22am
me myself and i:
Where's Ronald Allen under criminal law?
11.16.2007 8:26am
Jonathan H. Adler (mail) (www):
He's listed under criminal law among the "other highly cited scholars who don't work exclusively in this area," and he's listed under evidence as well.

JHA
11.16.2007 8:45am
GV_:
Adler, e-mail Leiter. He's taking corrections.
11.16.2007 8:46am
Extraneus (mail):
Shouldn't that be co-blogger? [EV: What do you mean? We took him on to log our cobs.]
11.16.2007 9:08am
DDG:
I says something very sad about the state of the legal academy and its lack of real-world impact that I recognize only 3 names from my area, IP, and at least one of them is a fool. (I also question lumping cyberlaw and IP together, or even patent and trademark/copyright)

I wonder who the scholars most cited by courts are?
11.16.2007 9:22am
DDG:
It says ...
11.16.2007 9:23am
breezy:
I think we all owe OK a beer.....
11.16.2007 9:44am
GV_:
To follow up on DDG's point, I was surprised that professor Berman wasn't cited. I suspect he has had more influence on the way judges thinking about his area of law (sentencing) than nearly any other academic. I also didn't recongnize a number of the names in which I've pracitced in, and I suspect most judges haven't heard of most of those professors as well.

Is there a separate breakdown for citations by court opinions?
11.16.2007 10:51am
Cory J (mail):
Congrats to the Conspirators!
11.16.2007 11:46am
Brian Leiter (mail) (www):
Andy Morriss (Illinois) already flagged the possible mistaken omission of Professor Adler, and so his name is on the list of about two-dozen scholars who are being checked (or double-checked) today. In general, the risk of mistaken omission was higher for scholars at schools (like Case Western) that were not part of the original overall impact study. Additional corrections are welcome.

Deborah Merritt (Ohio State) published an article a number of years back comparing citations to scholars in law reviews and in court opinions, and found that there was not much correlation. I'm afraid I do not have the precise reference. Bear in mind, of course, that courts do not cite legal scholars very often, and never did. Whether they do so less now than in the past would be an interesting topic for research, but I am not aware of anyone who has examined that question.
11.16.2007 12:34pm
Tony Tutins (mail):

courts do not cite legal scholars very often, and never did.

From what I've seen, outside of court cases, courts cite treatises far more often than they do law review articles.
11.16.2007 4:12pm
Kelvin McCabe:
Congratulations gentlemen. Now if I can only convince Orin to be more skeptical of the government...
11.17.2007 2:49am
Ignatius (www):
"I think we all owe OK a beer....."


No, OK owes a beer to those who cited him.
11.17.2007 9:11am