This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
I have been creating articles using my class notes. I break these cases up into "facts," "issue," "holding" etc, because that's the conventional way that law students are taught to organize cases ... you can see it for example at Eisner v. Macomber (facts, issue, decision).Agradman (talk) 19:43, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I get this a lot with cases I put up, the suggestion that they're not notable. Usually it's because the subject matter seems silly (like here, someone finding a tack in her pie ... or Haverly_v._United_States). But as ironic as it sounds, these cases are brought up in our law school curriculum to illustrate very large points of law. For example, in the Haverly case, you can see from the notes at the bottom that the case is important because it illustrates something about how the Tax Commissioner solved a difficult dilemma. This case (ash v. childs) was very important about determining whether injuries like this needed to be resolved in tort versus contract. Agradman (talk) 20:02, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
