« CA1: all sorts of evidence comes in | Main | CA1: how much Telecommunications companies can be taxed under the TCA »

June 07, 2006



This is used by many people and is recognized by the courts. Another familiar variant would be R. 5, 1071. This, too, is recognized by many judges. Either one beats omitting the volume number.


I use the "R. 5, 1071" method, simply because I think that putting the number first is a bit confusing, even though it is consistent with other parts of the bluebook. In some fora there might be additional variables such as page 3 of volume 5 of intervenor’s exhibit 10.

Usually people just copy someone else's format.

The comments to this entry are closed.