freelawproject / reporters-db

A database of court reporters, tests and other experiments
BSD 2-Clause "Simplified" License
91 stars 33 forks source link

(fix) fix NY slip op reporter info #99

Closed ss108 closed 2 years ago

CLAassistant commented 2 years ago

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.

flooie commented 2 years ago

Hey @ss108 What is your basis for changing the default citation here?

flooie commented 2 years ago

The slip search page, as well as the opinions that Ive come across never use the period. I'm certainly no expert here.

Screen Shot 2022-06-29 at 11 42 17 AM Screen Shot 2022-06-29 at 11 42 22 AM Screen Shot 2022-06-29 at 11 41 53 AM Screen Shot 2022-06-29 at 11 42 31 AM
ss108 commented 2 years ago

@flooie

See, e.g., https://casetext.com/case/wells-fargo-bank-469? (using "N.Y. Slip Op.")

My belief that the version with periods is correct was founded on the normal way of abbreviating things in citations (for example, a Bluebook citation to a NY Court of Appeals opinion would not be correct if it ended with (NY 1989) as opposed to (N.Y. 1989)); the way we cite things at my firm; and also, to a lesser extent, what Casetext provides as the citation.

However, it appears you are correct: https://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/style-manual/2017/2017-SM.htm#2.2%20(a)%20(8)

(Note that unlike the case with California, where they take their custom style seriously, nobody in NY state courts seems to care what the official citation style is--not the lawyers, and not, from what I have seen, the judges. Thus, do not be alarmed by the weird citation formats you see in that link and worry that other updates need to be made to this repo or eyecite to handle them properly)

I will change this to revert to the old default citation and add the version with periods as a variation

To be clear, I forgot to add this comment to the PR, but the reason for this is that, given something like the following text, eyecite currently only gets the citation without periods:

woogie woogie woogie. Feldman v. 3588 Nostrand Ave. LLC, 2020 NY Slip Op 31274(U), 34-35 (Sup. Ct. Kings Cnty. 2020) (Ruchelsman, J.). some other stuff. Grand Pac. Fin. Corp. v. 97-111 Hale, LLC, 2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 32390, at *6 (Sup. Ct. N.Y. Cnty. Dec. 2, 2016)

It should be able to detect both.

flooie commented 2 years ago

@flooie

See, e.g., https://casetext.com/case/wells-fargo-bank-469? (using "N.Y. Slip Op.")

My belief that the version with periods is correct was founded on the normal way of abbreviating things in citations (for example, a Bluebook citation to a NY Court of Appeals opinion would not be correct if it ended with (NY 1989) as opposed to (N.Y. 1989)), as well as, to a lesser extent, what Casetext provides as the citation.

However, it appears you are correct: https://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/style-manual/2017/2017-SM.htm#2.2%20(a)%20(8)

(Note though that, unlike the case with California, where they take their custom style seriously, nobody in NY state courts seems to care what the official citation style is--not the lawyers, and not, from what I have seen, the judges)

I will change this to revert to the old default citation and add the version with periods as a variation

Thanks, sorry I responded before I saw your full comment. Thanks for clarifying and yes, it also is very much an aberration in style.

ss108 commented 2 years ago

@flooie NP, sorry I didn't check the official style guide first :sweat_smile:

ss108 commented 2 years ago

@flooie updated

flooie commented 2 years ago

@ss108 I still think we should remove the non required python requirements from requirements.txt. I could be wrong but in theory that just makes the package larger for people who want to install the project. Perhaps we could move them to a requirements-dev.txt file and note it in the readme.md

flooie commented 2 years ago

And do we really not need six anymore?

ss108 commented 2 years ago

I manually created a requirements.dev.txt file and split the dependencies. I don't know enough about six to be able to say, sorry.

I suppose it's being used for downstream users/consumers who are using Python 2?

flooie commented 2 years ago

I only asked about six - because I thought you removed it in the PR

flooie commented 2 years ago

@ss108 circling back to this today. I think we can approve it once we set the default to NY Slip Op. and point the variations towards it. Thanks and sorry for letting this hang for so long.

ss108 commented 2 years ago

@flooie Should be good now. NY Slip Op (no punctuation), as you guys originally had it, is correct, and this PR adds variations with punctuation.

flooie commented 2 years ago

Thanks @ss108

mlissner commented 2 years ago

Six will outlive us all.