has been posted to SSRN and can be downloaded

Abstract:     
Wikipedia has been cited in over four hundred American judicial opinions. Courts have taken judicial notice of Wikipedia content, based their reasoning on Wikipedia entries, and decided dispositive motions on the basis of Wikipedia content. The impermanent nature of Wikipedia entries and their questionable quality raises a number of unique concerns. To date, no law review article has comprehensively examined the citation of Wikipedia in judicial opinions or considered its long-range implications for American law.

This article reports the results of an exhaustive study examining every American judicial opinion that cites a Wikipedia entry. The article begins with a discussion of cases that cite Wikipedia for a significant aspect of the case before the court. The impact of these citations on litigants’ constitutional and procedural rights, the law of evidence, judicial ethics, and the judicial role in the common law adversarial system are explored. Part II discusses collateral references to Wikipedia entries. Part III proposes a set of best practices for when and how Wikipedia should be cited. Detailed statistics on the quality of Wikipedia entries cited in judicial opinions and the completeness and accuracy of citations to Wikipedia entries are provided. The article concludes with a discussion of the impact of Wikipedia citations in judicial opinions on the future of the law.

Cheers, Shaunna

Alicia Woo made a update to the QLTips wiki that I  think everyone should know about.  She has found direct links to search some specific sources.  Read all about it at http://qltips.pbwiki.com/FrontPage.

Here are a couple of source links the I cobbled together from Alicia's excellent examples:

• Canadian Legal Words & Phrases

• Wrongful dismissal notice searcher

http://www.lexisnexis.com/ca/legal/api/version1/sf?sfi=CA02STWrngDismSrch&csi=281460

Cheers, and happy 4/4/08.  Shaunna