Compilation of trial court documents

By Anonymous on Sat, 03/21/2015 - 15:27

Forums

I'm trying to come up with a citation for a book at the HathiTrust Digital Library website:

http://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/011985446.

It is a combination of abstracts of trial court documents in a particular case.  The case was appealed to the Wisconsin State Supreme Court.  I'm not sure whether this book was filed with the Court as part of the appeal or whether it was printed later by the plaintiffs/appellants, who were also the publishers.

My main bewilderment has to do with who the authors are.  The documents that are abstracted include the complaint of the plaintiffs and the answers of the defendants and orders of the trial court.  Worldcat.com has the authors as being just one of the plaintiffs and just two of the defendants, as well as the Wisconsin Supreme Court.  The latter just doesn't seem correct to me.  HathiTrust Digital Library has the same three parties, without the Supreme Court.  If the parties are being treated as the authors, it seems to me that all the parties would be authors.

Here is my citation so far:

W. A. Tracy and E. F. Gibbs, et al., W. A. Tracy, E. F. Gibbs, C. A. Van Vetzer, H. A. Miner, W. J. McFail, George Dow, Jr. and Robe Dow, plaintiffs and appellants, vs. Clarence L. Clark, George W. Peck, J. L. O'Connor, James M. Clancey, J. B Doe and R. Mr. Bashford, defendants and respondents (Madison [Wisconsin]: Tracy, Gibbs & Co., [1884]); digital images, HathiTrust Digital Library (http://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/011985446 : accessed 21 Feb 2015).

Is "W. A. Tracy and E. F. Gibbs, et al." okay for the author(s)?  Or should I go with "Tracy, Gibbs & Co."? Or something else?

Should the name of the case be in italics?

HathiTrust Digital Library adds on "case / John M. Olin, appellant's attorney; M.G. Jeffris, of counsel."  I'm not too sure about this.  And if I was inclined to make this part of the title, I'd also add:  "State of Wisconsin. State Supreme Court. August Term, 1894. No. 300 Calendar." at the beginning, which neither Worldcat.org or HathiTrust Digital Library does.  Yes? No?

Any other thoughts would be very appreciated.

Dennis

 

Submitted byEEon Sun, 03/22/2015 - 21:09

Dennis,

Good news. You can cite this like any other basic book. Yes, it deals with a court case, but it's not an official court reporter (EE 13.18 and QuickCheck Model at p. 729).  It apparently exists as a book because the plaintiff was a printing house that had easy means of making it's side of the issue public.

The title is long. In fact, it's longer than what you show because the first part is omitted above. But there's no way to substantially reduce the title, except to stop the title after the case name and then use an ellipsis in place of identifying the attorney. Those attorney names are not an essential part of a court case.

No author is needed. It would be doubly redundant to name the Tracy, Gibbs, et al. (1) authors—a la the HathiTrust cataloging entry, as (2) principal parties identified in the title, and (3) publisher.

State of Wisconsin in Supreme Court, August Term 1894; No. 300 Calendar; W. A. Tracy, E. F. Gibbs, C. A. Van Vetzer, H. A. Miner, W. J. McFail, George Dow, Jr. and Robe Dow, plaintiffs and appellants, vs. Clarence L. Clark, George W. Peck, J. L. O'Connor, James M. Clancey, J. B Doe and R. Mr. Bashford, defendants and respondents ... (Madison, Wisconsin: Tracy, Gibbs & Co., c.1894), p. ____; digital images, HathiTrust Digital Library (http://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/011985446 : accessed 21 Feb 2015).

The reasons for our alterations:

  • If you don't start with "State of Wisconsin ...," then you've left out an essential part of the identity.
  • You don't have to put the state in brackets. Brackets, in narrative and in citations, are for when you add something into a quote. Some cataloging conventions call for brackets when adding something that is not on the title page, but you are not cataloging the book; you're writing a citation and you know from all the context that both Madison and the printing house is in Wisconsin.
  • You show "[1884]" as the publication date. It would have to be at least 1894, since that's when the case was heard. Presumably, it was promptly published after that—i.e., 1894; but we don't know exactly from the volume itself. It would be better to use circa, or more commonly in citations, just c.
  • And, of course, you'll need to cite a specific page number for each piece of information you take from it.