Bluebook Citation Guidelines
Summary
Bluebook citation involves formatting legal references with specific rules. For cases, include the case name in italics, volume number, reporter abbreviation, and page numbers. Quotations require proper punctuation and spacing, with [sic] for errors. For example, Charles Musgrove v. Mary Elliot is cited as Musgrove v. Elliot, 5 So. 3d 428, 440 (Ala. 1963) in the Southern Reporter. Understanding these rules is crucial for legal writing and research.Full Conversation
Please put the following case information in correct Bluebook citation form. Be clear about where your underline ende. Assume that you are referencing all materials in an office memo. To show accurate use of the Bluebook's rules on quotations, you should show your work in double and single spacing, as you would in an LRW assignment.
Hey there! Let me help you with the Bluebook citations for your office memo. Here's how to properly format the cases:
*. Charles Musgrove v. Mary Elliot:
- Double Spacing:
```As the Alabama high court has opined, "The action for malicious prosecution was designed for the benefit of the innocent and not of the guilty. It matters not whether there was probable cause for the prosecution, nor how malicious may have been the motives of the prosecutor, if the accused is guilty, he has no legal cause of complaint. His guilt, therefore, may always be shown, notwithstanding his acquittal." Charles Musgrove v. Mary Elliot, * So. 2d *, * (Ala. *).```
- Single Spacing:
```As the Alabama high court has opined, "The action for malicious prosecution was designed for the benefit of the innocent and not of the guilty. It matters not whether there was probable cause for the prosecution, nor how malicious may have been the motives of the prosecutor, if the accused is guilty, he has no legal cause of complaint. His guilt, therefore, may always be shown, notwithstanding his acquittal." _
- Double Spacing:
```As the Alabama high court has opined, "The action for malicious prosecution was designed for the benefit of the innocent and not of the guilty. It matters not whether there was probable cause for the prosecution, nor how malicious may have been the motives of the prosecutor, if the accused is guilty, he has no legal cause of complaint. His guilt, therefore, may always be shown, notwithstanding his acquittal." Charles Musgrove v. Mary Elliot, * So. 2d *, * (Ala. *).```
- Single Spacing:
```As the Alabama high court has opined, "The action for malicious prosecution was designed for the benefit of the innocent and not of the guilty. It matters not whether there was probable cause for the prosecution, nor how malicious may have been the motives of the prosecutor, if the accused is guilty, he has no legal cause of complaint. His guilt, therefore, may always be shown, notwithstanding his acquittal." _
*. Charles Musgrove v. Mary Elliot:
- Double Spacing:
```As the Alabama high court has opined, "The action for malicious prosecution was designed for the benefit of the innocent and not of the guilty. It matters not whether there was probable cause for the prosecution, nor how malicious may have been the motives of the prosecutor, if the accused is guilty, he has no legal cause of complaint. His guilt, therefore, may always be shown, notwithstanding his acquittal." Charles Musgrove v. Mary Elliot, * So. 2d *, * (Ala. *).```
- Single Spacing:
```As the Alabama high court has opined, "The action for malicious prosecution was designed for the benefit of the innocent and not of the guilty. It matters not whether there was probable cause for the prosecution, nor how malicious may have been the motives of the prosecutor, if the accused is guilty, he has no legal cause of complaint. His guilt, therefore, may always be shown, notwithstanding his acquittal." _Musgrove v. Elliot_, * Ala. *, * (*).```
- Double Spacing:
```As the Alabama high court has opined, "The action for malicious prosecution was designed for the benefit of the innocent and not of the guilty. It matters not whether there was probable cause for the prosecution, nor how malicious may have been the motives of the prosecutor, if the accused is guilty, he has no legal cause of complaint. His guilt, therefore, may always be shown, notwithstanding his acquittal." Charles Musgrove v. Mary Elliot, * So. 2d *, * (Ala. *).```
- Single Spacing:
```As the Alabama high court has opined, "The action for malicious prosecution was designed for the benefit of the innocent and not of the guilty. It matters not whether there was probable cause for the prosecution, nor how malicious may have been the motives of the prosecutor, if the accused is guilty, he has no legal cause of complaint. His guilt, therefore, may always be shown, notwithstanding his acquittal." _Musgrove v. Elliot_, * Ala. *, * (*).```
*. Johnny Chriscoe v.
*. You write the following: As the Alabama high court has opined, "The action for malicious prosecution was designed for the benefit of the innocent and not of the guilty. It matters not whether there was probable cause for the prosecution, nor how malicious may have been the motives of the prosecutor, if the accused is guilty, he has no legal cause of complaint. His guilt, therefore, may always be shown, notwithstanding his acquittal."********The quote is from the * Alabama Supreme Court case of Charles Musgrove versus Mary Elliot, which appears in volume *, page * of the Southern Reporter, third series. The quoted material appears on page *. This case also appears in the Alabama Reports in volume *, page *. The quoted material appears on page *.
It looks like you're working on a Bluebook citation exercise. Here is how you would cite the given cases correctly in Bluebook format:
*. Charles Musgrove v. Mary Elliot
- Southern Reporter:
_Musgrove v. Elliot_, * So. 3d *, * (Ala. *).
- Alabama Reports:
_Musgrove v. Elliot_, * Ala. *, * (*).
*. Johnny Chriscoe v. Matt Sawchak
- South Eastern Reporter:
_Chriscoe v. Sawchak_, * S.E.2d *, * (S.C. *).
- South Carolina Reports:
_Chriscoe v. Sawchak_, * S.C. *, * (*).
*. Alva Smith v. William Vanderbilt
- Atlantic Reporter:
_Smith v. Vanderbilt_, * A.2d *, * (Md. *).
- Maryland Appellate Reports:
_Smith v. Vanderbilt_, * Md. *, * (*).
- U.S. Supreme Court:
_Maye v. Univ. of N.C._, * U.S. *, *-* (*).
*. Damar Hamlin v. Tee Higgins
- Atlantic Reporter:
_Hamlin v. Higgins_, * A.2d *, * (Conn. *).
- Connecticut Reports:
_Hamlin v. Higgins_, * Conn. *, * (*).
*. Wicker v. Worcester Metropolitan Sports Department
- North Eastern Reporter:
_Wicker v. Worcester Metro. Sports Dep't_, * N.E.2d *, * (Mass. App. Ct. *).
- Massachusetts Appeals Court Reports:
_Wicker v. Worcester Metro. Sports Dep't_, * Mass. App. Ct. *, * (*).
*. Bobbi Jo Boyd v. Michael Kent
- Pacific Reporter:
_Boyd v. Kent_, * P.3d *, * (Or. *).
- Oregon Reports:
_Boyd v. Kent_, * Or. *, * (*).
Feel free to ask if you need further help!
*. Charles Musgrove v. Mary Elliot
- Southern Reporter:
_Musgrove v. Elliot_, * So. 3d *, * (Ala. *).
- Alabama Reports:
_Musgrove v. Elliot_, * Ala. *, * (*).
*. Johnny Chriscoe v. Matt Sawchak
- South Eastern Reporter:
_Chriscoe v. Sawchak_, * S.E.2d *, * (S.C. *).
- South Carolina Reports:
_Chriscoe v. Sawchak_, * S.C. *, * (*).
*. Alva Smith v. William Vanderbilt
- Atlantic Reporter:
_Smith v. Vanderbilt_, * A.2d *, * (Md. *).
- Maryland Appellate Reports:
_Smith v. Vanderbilt_, * Md. *, * (*).
- U.S. Supreme Court:
_Maye v. Univ. of N.C._, * U.S. *, *-* (*).
*. Damar Hamlin v. Tee Higgins
- Atlantic Reporter:
_Hamlin v. Higgins_, * A.2d *, * (Conn. *).
- Connecticut Reports:
_Hamlin v. Higgins_, * Conn. *, * (*).
*. Wicker v. Worcester Metropolitan Sports Department
- North Eastern Reporter:
_Wicker v. Worcester Metro. Sports Dep't_, * N.E.2d *, * (Mass. App. Ct. *).
- Massachusetts Appeals Court Reports:
_Wicker v. Worcester Metro. Sports Dep't_, * Mass. App. Ct. *, * (*).
*. Bobbi Jo Boyd v. Michael Kent
- Pacific Reporter:
_Boyd v. Kent_, * P.3d *, * (Or. *).
- Oregon Reports:
_Boyd v. Kent_, * Or. *, * (*).
Feel free to ask if you need further help!