Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Full text search on 630M US court cases

judyrecords.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 289 posts

Re: Show HN: Full text search on 630M US court cases

#231

Post by Pixeleen »

amelius wrote: post #128
reaperducer wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Today I learned that my boss has a lead foot. 15 speeding tickets in six states, all over 85 MPH.

Sounds like a privacy nightmare, though.

There are records here connecting my legal name to my deadname, not even on a court name change order. I had gone to lengths to keep things private. This is devastating. I want to cry.

Re: Show HN: Full text search on 630M US court cases

#235

Post by michaelmrose »

richardbarosky wrote: post #91
drewmol wrote: post #83

I recently had some criminal charges expunged, and I notice they show up here. Is there any way to request removal of court records which are no longer publicly available from the originating court?

This is a possibility that there aren't any great solutions for currently. Can you message me on reddit with the link to check?

Wouldn't it be easier for people to just individually sue not so much to achieve the end result but to shut down your operation under the costs incurred?

Re: Show HN: Full text search on 630M US court cases

#236

Post by iudqnolq »

wolverine876 wrote: post #227
iudqnolq wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To clarify, that's not a bill you only have to pay if you get a windfall. That's a bill that (in some places) will be agressively collected as a part of your fines. If you're in prison you also have nearly no rights to a lawyer. (For example, if you want to sue the prison system for inhumane conditions) Edit: For ex you may need to pay fees to be allowed to drive, which you may need to go to work/buy food.

> that's not a bill you only have to pay if you get a windfall You can't get a windfall as a criminal defendant, just a conviction or not.

That's (mostly) true, but unrelated to what I meant. I meant to say if the government determines you can't afford a lawyer, it will (sometimes) bill you for the lawyer it provides. Sometimes if you're very poor you get debts that in theory you have to pay but in practice won't be pursued unless you get a windfall, because you don't have any money. This isn't one of those.

Re: Show HN: Full text search on 630M US court cases

#237

Post by pseingatl »

A lot of commentators are missing the point. Caselaw is what lawyers rely on to determine what the law is. For years, there was a monopoly, the privately-held West Corporation in Minnesota. In the 1970s, the field became a duopoly, with the advent of Lexis. West eventually sold out to Thompson, the company is now Thompson-West. Computer-assisted legal research was extremely expensive. The Air Force set up FLITE, but efforts to access their database of cases failed. Manual research is effective, but paper publication meant you ran the risk of not knowing yesterday's results. In the 90's with the advent of the Internet, a lot of new players moved into the scene; some more successful than the others. Public-interest organizations sued for access to the cases, which, after all, were all in the public domain. There was a Washington-based group that called the caselaw the "Crown Jewels" of this effort--though EDGAR filings probably have more significance for the public. Time has provided a solution; access to anything older than the most recent 400 volumes of the Federal Reporter is really not needed, as any Thompson-West salesman will tell you. But these efforts to open caselaw to the public is not scammy and has nothing to do with shaming. In the United States, these cases state the law which governs our lives. I'm glad they've succeeded in the effort.

Re: Show HN: Full text search on 630M US court cases

#240

Post by Too »

Tempest1981 wrote: post #144
bradknowles wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How are exact match searches supported? There is absolutely no evidence on the page that this is possible. How does searching for “brad knowles” match “brad alan knowles”, when I put my name in quotes? How does it match a case where “brad knowles” does not appear to be used anywhere on the page, but where one line matches “knowles” and then another line matches “brad”?

I think this is a smart-quotes issue -- smart-quotes are removed: “brad knowles” -> brad knowles "brad knowles" -> "brad knowles" I always set my OS to disable smart-quotes. Worst is when you paste them into source code.

What kind of smart-ass OS would do that in a single line text input form?

This is a feature that belongs to a word processor.

Post reply on HN