Saturday, July 16, 2005

Seventh Circuit Links Updated

We noticed a few weeks back that some of our links had been rendered obsolescent by a revamping of the Seventh Circuit's website. We kept procrastinating about fixing them, until we read Bob Ambrogi's critique of Findlaw, whose links are apparently in a state of some disrepair.

Well, when you think of legal websites, what sites do you think of? You think of Findlaw first, maybe. But our parent site is obviously a close second. So we became worried, naturally, that our own lassitude in link maintenance would soon become the focus of public scandal. In the effort to beat Bob Ambrogi to the punch, we woke up early this morning, brewed ourselves a pot of strong coffee, and repaired all the links on our Seventh Circuit page. (Note to Seventh Circuit webmaster: Kindly review our cri de couer of 8/7/04.)

Technically, we might have qualified for Bob Ambrogi's "mom-and-pop" exception. But resort to that excuse would not have been altogether free from ignominy. And the purpose of a site that provides links to judicial opinions, we suppose, is to supply working links.

We're still working on updating duplicate Seventh Circuit links on other pages at the site. And the Federal Circuit (where the links can't ever seem to stay put) is next. We promise.

Update 7/17/05: The duplicate Seventh Circuit links are now fixed too.


Post a Comment

<< Home

Fed. R. Evid. 702: If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise, if (1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data, (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods, and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case.