Document 6533046

—PETITION 101 SAMPLE INSTRUCTIONS: DO NOT RELY ON FOR PETITION—
2014 General Petition Instructions
1. These instructions apply to the petition packet as a whole. You will also find included
detailed instructions regarding the Case Comment and the Bluebooking Exercise.
2. You should disregard anything you have heard contrary to this packet. Information in the
packet controls.
3. To pick up a packet in person, or to drop off your Bluebook exercise in person, go to the
Minnesota Law Review Office, on the Second Floor of the Law Library (through the
double doors and on the left) during the designated petition office hours.
4. The pick-up and drop-off time are not time sensitive. You may electronically submit your
petition any time before 11:59pm on the day it is due, but you must turn in the Bluebook
exercise during the designated office hours.
5. If you are returning the Bluebook exercise by mail, the petition does not need to be
received by the due date, but must be postmarked by that date. Please send completed
exercise to:
Minnesota Law Review
University of Minnesota Law School
229 19th Ave. South
Minneapolis, MN 55455
6.
If you pick-up the petition or, under extenuating circumstances, have the petition
emailed to you, you will have 14 days to complete the petition. If the petition is mailed
to you, you will have 16 days to complete it. All completed petitions must be received
electronically or postmarked by June 3 at the latest.
7. If you have questions during the petition period, email [email protected].
8. There should be one-inch margins on all sides of your petition.
9. Word document tips:
a. To add an endnote: click reference tab and insert endnote
b. To cross-reference: click insert tab and click cross-reference. Under the reference
type select endnote. Choose the desired endnote and click insert. Note, to update
the endnotes press F9 or go to print preview.
c. SMALL AND LARGE CAPS: select the text and select Ctrl + Shift + K. You can also
go into font and click small caps under effects.
—PETITION 101 SAMPLE INSTRUCTIONS: DO NOT RELY ON FOR PETITION—
10. X is the main case. It should be the focus of your Case Comment. Petitions must follow
the Case Comment Structure (see case comment instructions) and address the issues this
case raises. We have tried to present a balance array of viewpoints on issues pertinent to
X. You may find that some of the materials in this packet express ideological or political
points of view with which you disagree. We want to stress that we are not selecting staff
based on the personal political views expressed in the petition. Your chances of selection
will not depend on the position you take but rather on how well you support that position.
11. You should turn in:
a. By email to each journal you are applying to PDF versions of the:
i. Case Comment – saved as your three digit petition number, example: 015
ii. Personal Statement – saved as [petition number] Personal Statement
[Journal abbreviation], example: 015 Personal Statement JLI
iii. Cover Sheet – saved as [petition number] Cover Sheet [journal
abbreviation], example: 015 Cover Sheet JLEL
b. In person or by mail:
i. Bluebook Exercise – one original copy of your final hand-edited in dark
ink. Note that only one copy is needed no matter how many journals you
are applying to. Include your petition number on each page of the exercise.
12. Journal Abbreviations and Emails:
a. Minnesota Law Review:
i. Email: [email protected]
ii. Abbreviation for document title: MLR
b. Journal of Law & Inequality
i. Email: [email protected]
ii. Abbreviation for document title: JLI
c. Minnesota Journal of International Law
i. Email: [email protected]
ii. Abbreviation for document title: JIL
d. Minnesota Journal of Law, Science & Technology
i. Email: [email protected]
ii. Abbreviation for document title: JLST
—PETITION 101 SAMPLE INSTRUCTIONS: DO NOT RELY ON FOR PETITION—
e. ABA Journal of Labor & Employment Law
i. Email: [email protected]
ii. Abbreviation for document title: JLEL
—WWW.MINNESOTALAWREVIEW.ORG/ABOUT/MEMBERSHIP—
2014 LAW REVIEW/JOURNAL PETITIONING
CASE COMMENT INSTRUCTIONS
ABA JOURNAL OF LABOR & EMPLOYMENT LAW
JOURNAL OF LAW AND INEQUALITY
JOURNAL OF LAW, SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW
MINNESOTA LAW REVIEW
I.
GENERAL
A. Case Comments. The main part of your petition (in addition to the Bluebook
exercise and the personal statement, if any) will be comprised of a Case
Comment. A Case Comment centers on analyzing the holding of a particular case
(the “main case”) in the context of a variety of other sources, including other
cases, journal and law review articles, scholarly works, and other forms of
commentary and analysis such as internet blog posts.
B. There is no “right” answer. We grade the Case Comment portion of your
petition based on how well you make an argument, use the sources, and properly
structure and bluebook your Comment. We do not grade based on what argument
you make or whether we agree with it.
C. Only use the material in the packet. The petition packet contains all of the
research material you may use to write the Case Comment. Additional research
is prohibited; if it is discovered that you have done additional research, your
petition will be immediately disqualified. The cases and articles may have been
edited to reduce the size of the packet or remove extraneous material; do not
worry if a case or article is incomplete. You may not look up any outside
sources or the full text of any material that is in the packet. While writing the
petition, you may not consult any legal source outside of the petition packet
(whether in electronic or paper form), even if the source is not related to the
subject of the petition.
If a source within your petition packet cites to another source, cite directly to the
source included in the packet and include a “quoting” or “citing” parenthetical
to identify the external source.
Example:
See, e.g., Julia Zwak, How To Write a Petition, 99 MINN. L. REV. 199, 200 (2014)
(quoting LAUREN ROSO ET AL., THE BLUEBOOK IS YOUR FRIEND 76 (2014)).
In this example, the Zwak article is in the petition packet, and the Roso book is
not. A direct citation to Roso would be an improper citation to a source outside of
the packet.
1
—WWW.MINNESOTALAWREVIEW.ORG/ABOUT/MEMBERSHIP—
You also may not refer to any external sources for endnote and citation
purposes. Your petition packet contains all of the information needed to complete
citations for each source. If you believe you do not have enough information to
accurately cite a source, do your best with the information that is provided.
The only outside references you may consult are the Bluebook, dictionaries (legal
or otherwise), a thesaurus, and a grammar/writing manual; you may not, however,
cite to any of these sources in your Comment.
D. Do not talk to other people about your petition. Petitions must represent your
own work. You may not discuss the petition or any aspect of the petitioning
process with other people nor may you have anyone else proofread or
comment on your work. This includes the Case Comment, Bluebook exercise,
and personal statements. “Discuss” includes electronic communication such as
blog postings, social networking sites, instant messaging, text messaging, etc. It
does not matter if one or both of you may have already completed your petition or
decided not to petition at all—do not discuss the petition. Violation of these
instructions may constitute an Honor Code violation. Exception: You may look at
the petition samples on the Minnesota Law Review website for ideas about
formatting or style, but remember that these are on different topics. They also
might contain errors or outdated material. Treat them as a resource, but not
authoritative.
II.
FORMATTING
A. Fonts and Submission Formatting
1. Petitions should be completed in Times New Roman (12 point) or the
substantial equivalent (e.g. Times 12).
2. Margins should be 1” on all sides.
3. Petitions should be saved and submitted electronically in PDF format.
B. Header and Footer. The header on every page should contain your petition
number in the upper, right-hand corner. The header should contain no other
information. The footer on every page should include a page number in the
middle of the page. The footer should contain no information other than the page
number.
C. Text and Endnotes. Your petition should be roughly evenly split between text
and endnotes. Do not use footnotes. Both text and endnotes sections should be
double-spaced. The text section should be no more than 10 pages in length. The
endnotes section should be no more than 10 pages in length. If either section
exceeds 10 pages in length, your petition may be disqualified. Double check
2
—WWW.MINNESOTALAWREVIEW.ORG/ABOUT/MEMBERSHIP—
that your page lengths remain consistent after converting your Petition to PDF
format.
D. Citations. Citations should be in endnotes only. All citations should conform to
the rules in the Bluebook, 19th Edition. You should use the “white pages” section
of the Bluebook, not the “blue pages” section that you may have used in your
Legal Writing course. Do not use parallel citations unless the Bluebook calls for
them.
E. Cite Original Page Numbers Only. All sources have been specially edited for
the petition packet. Information concerning reporter/journal name and initial page
number appears at the top of the first page for each source. When the source is
paginated, subsequent page numbers are indicated by an asterisk (Ex. *545).
These numbers correspond to those in the reporters/journals. Do not cite to the
petition packet page numbers written in the bottom center of each page in
the packet. Brackets indicate additions or omissions by petition editors.
Example:
*500 Marty McFly awoke in a pool of sweat to Huey Lewis blaring over his clock
radio. He quickly ran out of his house and got on his skateboard to meet Doc at
the mall. It was in the middle of the night.
…[*514]…
When he awoke for the second time, *515 Marty opened the door of his house
and saw, to his astonishment, Biff waxing the family car.
If you wanted to cite Marty skateboarding to the mall in the middle of the night,
that would be on page 500. If you wanted to cite Marty seeing Biff, that would be
on page 515. Don’t be alarmed that 14 pages are missing from the selection;
again, the cases and articles in the packet have been edited.
Note that the page number 514 has been added to let you know what was omitted.
This may not always be added for you. If no page number is added, you could still
deduce that Marty awaking for the second time was found on page 514, by the
fact that this information comes directly before page 515.
F. Cross-References. You may use supra cross-references in endnotes to refer to a
source that you have cited previously in accordance with Bluebook rules. You
may not use internal cross-references either in text or endnotes to refer forward
(infra) or back (supra) to your own text.
III.
ANALYTICAL PROCESS
A. Read the Main Case Thoroughly. No matter what analytical approach you take
and no matter what argument you make, the main case should be at the center of
your Comment. Make sure you understand all the arguments and reasoning
3
—WWW.MINNESOTALAWREVIEW.ORG/ABOUT/MEMBERSHIP—
contained in the redacted version in your packet, including any concurrences and
dissents.
B. Read the Entire Packet. Make sure you understand the relevance and
perspective of each source included. Think about what relationship it may have to
the main case, what perspective and arguments each author contributes, and how
you might use it in constructing your argument. You may conclude that a
particular source is not relevant or useful. That’s fine. But make sure you have a
reason for which sources you choose to use or not use.
C. Synthesize. Identify all of the relevant legal and policy issues raised or affected
by the main case.
D. Choose a theme. Identify the main argument you want to make. You can choose
any analytical approach that appeals to you, including a discussion of the impact
of the case on the law, what the Supreme Court (or other courts) should do in
response to the legal situation created by the main case, what policy actions
should be taken to address the issues raised by the main case, a critical theoretical
discussion of the assumptions underlying the main case, or any other approach
that you feel you can support with the materials provided and with your own
analysis. Remember, there is no “right answer” and this means there is also no
single “correct” analytical framework. Your petition should reflect what you have
to say about the main case.
E. Organize and Outline. Using the materials in the packet (and only those
materials), organize and outline the argument you will make in your Comment
and how you will support that argument.
F. General Advice.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Avoid passive voice.
Try to stick to one idea per paragraph.
Keep your sentences crisp. Avoid long, complex sentences.
Speak in plain language. Avoid “legalese.”
Write in the third person.
Use “pincites” where appropriate to direct the reader to specific material
within a source that supports your point.
7. Check the Bluebook for how to format each and every citation you make.
8. Look at old petitions for insights into formatting and structure.
IV.
WRITING THE COMMENT.
A. Title. The title should identify broadly your thesis about the main case that you
will discuss in your Comment. It should include the case name. The title should
be at the top of your Comment, in all caps, and centered.
4
—WWW.MINNESOTALAWREVIEW.ORG/ABOUT/MEMBERSHIP—
B. Introduction
1. First paragraph: A brief statement of the facts, the procedural posture, and
the holding of the main case, in that order. Use endnotes to elaborate. Do not
detail the holding yet. Save this for the case description.
2. Second paragraph: A description of the important issues raised in the main
case and the reason why the case and those issues are important.
3. Third paragraph: An outline of your Comment. First, state the goal of your
Comment; second, tell the reader what you will do in each section of your
Comment; and third, conclude with your thesis.
Use the device “this Comment” in the third paragraph and whenever you wish to
address the reader to map out what you plan to do. After the third paragraph,
however, you should keep such intrusions to a minimum.
C. Part I: Background Section. The background section introduces the cases and
principles that place the main case and your analysis in perspective.
1. Economy of Information. Your goal is only to introduce the information
necessary for the reader to understand the main case and the basis for your
argument about it. Do not actually discuss the details of the main case unless
they are directly relevant to your analysis. Use broad statements of the law in
the text, then support the with citations and parenthetical summaries of key
cases and arguments in endnotes.
2. Introductions. Your other goal here is to introduce other cases and important
journal articles that you will use. Do not discuss them in detail, but make the
reader aware of where they fit in the overall framework of law and policy
addressed by your Comment.
3. Relevance. Everything in the background section should relate directly to the
analysis you will give in Section E, below. Omit or endnote collateral
matters.
D. Part II: Case Description Section. The case description follows the background
section. This section should describe the holding and reasoning of the main case
in detail.
1. First paragraph: Link the main case into the overall state of the law as you
described it in your background section.
2. Next: Describe each holding in the main case and summarize the reasoning of
the court. Support your statements with citations in endnotes.
Resist the urge to analyze or critique the court’s holdings and arguments. You will
do that in the next section.
E. Part III: Analysis Section. Analyze and critique the main case in detail. Use any
intellectual framework or analytical bent you choose, provided that you feel you
can use the materials in the packet to adequately support it. Remember:
5
—WWW.MINNESOTALAWREVIEW.ORG/ABOUT/MEMBERSHIP—
1. There is no “right answer” or “wrong answer.” Your Comment will be
scored on how well you structure and support your argument. Your Comment
will not be scored on the substance of your argument.
2. Avoid introducing new material. Most of what you use should have been
introduced, albeit briefly, in the background section. You may refer to
material you discussed previously in the text (e.g. “As discussed in Part I . .
.”), but you should avoid using internal cross-references in endnotes (e.g. “See
supra, note X and accompanying text.”).
3. Support your arguments. Precedent does not bind you as it does a court, but
when you are critiquing any court’s holding, you should support your
argument with appropriate reasoning and, where possible, citations in
endnotes. Avoid making merely conclusory statements. Analyze; don’t just
assert.
4. Consider counterarguments. Likewise, make sure to explicitly discuss
arguments that disagree with your arguments and explain why your arguments
are better. Again, support these points with citations in endnotes.
5. Avoid repetition. Your space is very limited. Make each point, support it
with analysis in text and citations in endnotes. Then move on.
F. Conclusion. The conclusion is a very brief two-part summary of your comment.
The first part should outline the problem posed in the main case. The second part
should state and defend your analysis. After the reader skims your introduction
and your conclusion, she or he should be able to understand the issues raised in
the main case, the court’s holding, and your analysis.
6
Minnesota Law Review Petition Scoring Information
Score
Range
Organization
Legal Analysis
Use of Authority
Bluebook/
Mechanics
Writing Style
9-10
- Follows Note/Comment
format perfectly.
- Subsections and headings used
well.
- Introduction, background, and
analysis have appropriate
length and substance.
- Clear road-mapping.
- Always flows from section to
section.
- Author adopts an insightful
position and comes to a
logical conclusion.
- Note/Comment remains
focused.
- Author sets up analysis in
the background section and
uses all of the background
information.
- Demonstrates thoughtful,
creative analysis of sources
of all viewpoints.
- Frequent endnotes (every 1-2
sentences).
- Detailed and helpful endnotes
- Endnotes relate logically and
effectively to the above-the-line
statement.
- Endnotes use a majority of BB
signals.
- Endnotes contain explanatory
parenthetical sentences. whenever
appropriate
- Nearly all the petition packet
sources are cited.
- Few or no obvious
BB mistakes.
- Few or no obvious
grammatical
mistakes.
- Few or no general
errors.
- Clearly written
- Sentences all
complete and of
varying length .
- Word choice
consistent and
interesting.
- Writing is concise
and focused.
- Almost no passive
voice.
7-8
- Mainly follows
Note/Comment format.
- Most subsections and headings
used well.
- Introduction, background, and
analysis mostly have
appropriate length and
substance.
- Generally clear road-mapping.
- Usually flows from section to
section.
- Author adopts a position
and comes to a related
conclusion.
- Note/Comment generally
remains focused.
- Author generally sets up
analysis in the background
section and uses most of
the background
information.
- Demonstrates generally
insightful analysis of
multiple viewpoints.
- Frequent endnotes (every 2 or 3
sentences).
- Detailed and helpful endnotes.
- Endnotes relate logically and
effectively to the above-the-line
statement.
- Endnotes use many BB signals.
- Endnotes often contain
explanatory parenthetical
sentences when appropriate.
- A great majority of the petition
packet sources are cited.
- Some BB mistakes.
- Some grammatical
mistakes.
- Some general
errors.
- Generally,
noticeable number
of errors.
- Mostly clearly
written.
- Mostly simple
sentences and
some variety of
sentence length.
- Some interesting
word choices.
- Writing is fairly
focused.
- Very little passive
voice.
5-6
- Note/Comment format
generally followed, but there
are noticeable deviations from
the official format.
- Author adopts an obvious
position and comes to a
somewhat related
conclusion.
- More than one endnote per
paragraph.
- Endnotes could be more detailed
and helpful.
- Frequent BB
mistakes.
- Frequent
grammatical
- Some unclear
sentences, ideas.
- Some run-on or
fragmented
1
- Subsections and headings are
used, but not always
sequenced or logical.
- One or more of the
introduction, background,
and/or analysis section is too
long/short, and/or contains
inappropriate substance.
- Somewhat clear road-mapping.
- Occasionally flows from
section to section.
- Note/Comment often loses
focus.
- Analysis is minimally
related to the background
section and uses little of the
background information.
- Demonstrates only some
insightful analysis and
gives only cursory
treatment to contrary
viewpoints.
- Endnotes generally relate to the
above-the-line statement.
- Endnotes use few BB signals.
- Endnotes contain few explanatory
parenthetical sentences.
- Little more than ½ of the petition
packet sources are cited.
mistakes.
- Frequent general
errors.
- Generally,
distracting number
of errors
sentences and
little variety of
sentence length.
- Appropriate but
“boring” word
choices.
- Writing is
adequately
focused but goes
on some tangents.
- Some passive
voice.
3-4
- Attempt at Note/Comment was
made, but there are significant
deviations from the official
format.
- Subsections and headings are
used inconsistently and/or are
not sequenced or logical.
- The introduction, background,
and analysis sections are too
long/short, and do not tie
together to aid the argument in
the Note/Comment.
- Unclear or minimal roadmapping.
- Generally fails to flow from
section to section.
- Author fails to adopt a
position and fails to come
to a conclusion.
- Note/Comment lacks focus
- Analysis is not related to
the background section and
does not use the
background information.
- Mainly obvious, uncreative
analysis, and addresses
very contrary viewpoints.
- One or fewer endnotes per
paragraph on average.
- Endnotes lack detail/are unhelpful.
- Endnotes do not relate to the
above-the-line statement.
- Endnotes do not use BB signals.
- Endnotes contain few explanatory
parenthetical sentences.
- Less than 1/2 of the petition packet
sources are cited.
- Serious BB
mistakes.
- Poor grammar.
- Serious general
errors.
- Generally, BB and
grammatical errors
make it difficult to
read.
- Unclear sentences.
- Frequent run-on
or fragmented
sentences.
- No variety of
sentence length.
- Writing is poorly
focused and
wanders.
- Frequent use of
passive voice.
1-2
Little to no attempt.
Little to no attempt.
Little to no attempt.
Little to no attempt.
Little to no attempt.
2