| 
Latest Release of LexisNexis® Public Records
Be confident in your investigations with the latest release of LexisNexis Public Records. We've improved accuracy, increased ease of use and expanded access to public and private database sources. These enhancements enable you to get more complete answers quickly and easily for due diligence, client screening and background checks.
We have provided a tutorial to assist you in using the new Public Records interface efficiently. You can launch the tutorial through the following URL:
web.lexis.com/help/multimedia/pubrecs.htm
For more information please contact your Sales Representative.
California Official Reports More Accurate Via lexis.com, Says State Reporter of Decisions
"With regard to California Supreme Court and published Court of Appeal opinions, and particularly recently filed opinions (i.e., filed within the last 15 months or so), LexisNexis is a more accurate, authentic, up-to-date, and reliable source for citing and quoting."
Edward Jessen, Reporter of Decisions, California Supreme Court, recently spoke about the court's relationship with LexisNexis and what researchers can expect from the "official reporter:"
"LexisNexis is, by state contract, the Official Reports print publisher, but it is also the publisher of the official online version of opinions on the LexisNexis service, and it has very significant responsibilities to conform to various contract requirements relating to authenticity, integrity, and accuracy.
"It also is obligated to work closely with this office in checking, verifying, and enhancing opinions for publication, and it must respond with overnight updates to lexis.com for any editorial directions we give. The versions of opinions as edited for the Official Reports advance pamphlets, including citations and point pages, must appear on lexis.com about a week before the advance pamphlets in which opinions appear are published.
"What this means is that when we call chambers with a problem, or vice versa, during the period for prepublication editing for the Official Reports advance pamphlets, those changes are made overnight on lexis.com. And the overall editing, styling, and enhancing for the Official Reports, including countless corrections of cites and quotes that can be resolved without bothering chambers, appear on lexis.com at least a week before printing.
"Notably, this means that official citations for recently filed opinions are available on the lexis.com service months-literally-before you will find Official Reports citations on the Westlaw® version of opinions, and you may never find on Westlaw's versions of opinions the countless other cite, quote, and clerical corrections made for Official Reports publication.
"The appellate court system in California, and particularly this office, can only fully support one opinion publisher, and by virtue of the Official Reports publication contract, that publisher has been LexisNexis for the last five years. We have a limited ability to pass along to West® very significant changes that arise in the prepublication editing process for the advance pamphlets, and West's editors do sometimes raise queries with this office based on something they come across in headnoting and otherwise preparing California opinions for print or Westlaw publication.
"But as a matter of policy, West waits until we send it a copy of the final bound-volume manuscript that was generated for the Official Reports before partially updating and correcting its versions of opinions to conform with the Official Reports. Our final bound-volume manuscript is not generated and made final for about 15 months after advance pamphlet publication. And I use the term "partially update" because West has a corporate editing style for the National Reporter System that is not particularly consistent with the California Official Reports, and its corporate editing styles will trump reconciling to the Official Reports.
"Meanwhile, the authentic, accurate, official, and most up-to-date computer versions of California opinions will have been available on lexis.com for all those 15 months. Sure, the difference is perhaps only (or mostly) in the details, but the anecdote I recall is when the California Supreme Court filed Sandoval (41 Cal.4th 825) and Black II (41 Cal. 4th 799). There were many opinions pending in the Courts of Appeal waiting for those opinions before, in turn, the Courts of Appeal could file their opinions. So I got 50 or more "how to cite" Sandoval and Black inquiries the first couple of weeks after those opinions were filed, and many came with excerpts of what was going to be cited and quoted in the Court of Appeal's opinion.
"Where Westlaw was the source, the corporate editing was palpable and the result was significantly different in styling from what the Supreme Court filed, and from what was published in the Official Reports, not to mention a couple of minor clerical corrections made by the author that added clarity to some key passages
in Sandoval and Black II."
"Official citations for recently filed opinions are available on the lexis.com service months-literally-before you will find Official Reports citations on Westlaw's version of opinions, and you may never find on Westlaw's versions of opinions the countless other cite, quote, and clerical corrections made for Official Reports publication."
-Edward Jessen, Reporter of Decisions, California Supreme Court
|