There isn't much description yet from Google, but Internet For Lawyers has a nice run down of the features. Here are some highlights:

Coverage of the database:

• 1 US 1 (pre 1776)
• 1 F 2d 1 (1924 +)
• F Supp Cases
• US State Cases (1950+)

Go to the Advanced Search page to limit results to:

• all legal opinions and journals
• only US Federal court opinions
• only state court opinions (where you can select any combination of the 50 states and the District of Columbia)

Google Scholar includes the full text of the returned case and links to other cases cited in the returned case.

As cool as this is, remember that free is free and this isn't Westlaw or Lexis. There will be inadequacies of the search and coverage of the database. According to the 2009 ABA Legal Technology Survey Report "respondents are significantly more satisfied with the characteristics of fee-based online legal research resources than they are with those of free online legal research resources."

In the early 1930s, lawmakers decided to hold wardens accountable for the proper disposal of confiscated animals. A new provision was inserted in the legal code requiring that seized fish and game be sent to the state Capitol. And so there a captured sturgeon was soon deposited, unpreserved, in a basement storage room.

Ever dignified, members of the Supreme Court initially ignored the stench rising up the elevator shaft from below. But as it intensified, the justices decided that laws about abating a public nuisance trumped those about confiscated game....

Many lawmakers were said to be so scarred by the stench that they swore off sturgeon altogether, even giving up caviar. In an effort to avoid another incident, the law was changed and conservation wardens were once again entrusted with selling confiscated sturgeon locally.

From the New York Times:

The settlement, of a 2005 lawsuit over Google's ambitious plan to digitize books from major American libraries, outlined a plan to create a comprehensive database of in-print and out-of-print works. But the original agreement, primarily between Google, the Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers, drew much criticism.

The Justice Department and others said Google was potentially violating copyright law, setting itself up to unfairly control access to electronic versions of older books and depriving authors and their heirs of proper compensation.

The revisions to the settlement primarily address the handling of so-called orphan works, the millions of books whose rights holders are unknown or cannot be found. The changes call for the appointment of an independent fiduciary, or trustee, who will be solely responsible for decisions regarding orphan works.

The Library Journal offers some additional analysis:

The one notable response to criticisms from the library community was an agreement that, as Google representatives had already stated, more than one free public access terminal per library building may be authorized.

The revised settlement also incorporates some other concerns raised by the library community and similarly interested parties. The settlement will allow for Creative Commons licensing, which means that rightsholders--notably academics--can ensure their works are available for no cost. And Google won't "provide personally identifiable information about end users to the Registry other than as required by law or valid legal process."

However, library critics were not pleased by the "vague--and, to critics, fatally inadequate--concession on orphan works. There was also no response to library concerns about pricing of the potentially monopolistic institutional database--an issue that Google representatives say can't be addressed in the settlement."

His defense lawyer, Robert Reuland, told a Brooklyn assistant district attorney, Lindsay Gerdes, about the Facebook entry, which was made at the time of the robbery. The district attorney subpoenaed Facebook to verify that the words had been typed from a computer at an apartment at 71 West 118th Street in Manhattan, the home of Mr. Bradford's father. When that was confirmed, the charges were dropped.

"This is the first case that I'm aware of in which a Facebook update has been used as alibi evidence," said John G. Browning, a lawyer in Dallas who studies social networking and the law. "We are going to see more of that because of how prevalent social networking has become."

No eBook reader is required to view the eBooks - any computer (Windows or Mac) will do. But they will also work with a Sony Reader, though unfortunately not with the Amazon Kindle or Palm/Pocket PC devices.

A small software download is required to "check out" both digital text or audio books. A public library card and PIN number are also needed.

For more information about the digital text eBooks or audio books, see the Wisconsin Public Library Consortium's Digital Download Center.

Source: TechBits

In United States v. Shelnutt (M.D. Ga. Nov. 2), a federal court in Georgia ruled that Rule 53 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure prohibits "tweeting" from the courtroom and that Rule 53 does not unconstitutionally restrict freedom of the press....

The immediate result of the court's decision is to reject a request from a reporter for the Columbus Ledger-Enquirer that he be allowed to use his BlackBerry during the Shellnutt criminal case in order to send updates to his newspaper's Twitter feed.

Milwaukee is one of the airports available. See the Google site for a list others.

No login or email is required, simply select the option for the complimentary WiFi and accept the terms of service. See the FAQ for more info.

Source: Social Media Law Student

From the announcement: It is called "Get Cases and Shepardize," and (as you may have guessed) allows users to get cases from Lexis.com and Shepardize them to make sure what they have found is still good law. Users must have a current account with Lexis.com and a valid password to use the application. The app itself is free at the iTunes App Store.

See the review at Legal Geekery

Source: Robert Ambrogi's LawSites

She reviews "Firefox 'add-ons' for attorneys" for archiving and citing resources, as well as "miscellaneous money-savers" for directory assistance, marketing, and domain name registration. A very handy list of useful little tools.

If you're not familiar with Refworks is one of several citation management applications. Other applications that support the Bluebook style include EndNote and Zotero.

Refworks offers the choice of Bluebook - Notes and Bibliography or Bluebook - Notes only. It does not have brief format. See a sample of the Notes and Bibliography style below.

Cleveland-Marshall College of Law Library has created a Refworks Quick Start guide tailored to law users. The guide notes that direct export is available from LexisNexis Academic, Newsbank, JSTOR, Google Scholar. Note direct export is not available for LexisNexis and Westlaw, but you can manually add references yourself.

CM Law Librarian Sue Altmeyer notes that Refworks appears to be more accurate than Zotero when putting citations into Bluebook form. And that both Zotero and Refworks can attach a copy of the article or case to the file.

The Assembly adjourned about 3:45 a.m. today, ending the floor sessions scheduled for 2009. Regular sessions will resume January 19, 2010.

However, legislative leaders are expected to call lawmakers back to Madison in the coming weeks to take up any agreement that can be worked out between the Senate and Assembly on stiffening drunken driving laws.

Also, there is a possibility Gov. Doyle will call the Legislature into special session to consider the proposed mayoral takeover of Milwaukee Public Schools.

On Thursday and early today, the Legislature completed action on additional Wisconsin Shares child welfare reform, provided for taxpayer funding of state Supreme Court races, took away the governor's authority to appoint the DNR secretary, and a package of bills providing Wisconsin the ability to seek federal Race to the Top funding.

The goal of the project is to record the oral histories of as many former legislators as possible; the purpose is to learn from the interviews how the legislature functions as a forum for determining public policy, what enables it to work well, and what prevents it from functioning better.

Each interview is about two hours long. The LRB will publish the entire series on DVDs and will eventually make them available as streaming video from their Web site. Brief excerpts are already viewable at the LRB's YouTube channel.

Thanks to LRB Chief, Steve Miller for sharing the news.