| Revision as of 03:47, 23 August 2007 editFlyguy649 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users21,390 editsm bold article name in text← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:20, 19 February 2009 edit undoSoap (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Rollbackers29,063 editsm Typo fixing, Replaced: to insure that → to ensure that using AWBNext edit → | ||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
| :STATUTES §26 | :STATUTES §26 | ||
| :state criminal abortion statute -- pregnant woman -- standing to challenge -- | :state criminal abortion statute -- pregnant woman -- standing to challenge -- | ||
| :Headnote: A pregnant single woman, thwarted by her state's criminal abortion laws from obtaining an abortion which she desired, has standing to challenge those laws, since the logical nexus between her asserted status and the claim she seeks to have adjudicated, and the necessary degree of contentiousness, are both present to |
:Headnote: A pregnant single woman, thwarted by her state's criminal abortion laws from obtaining an abortion which she desired, has standing to challenge those laws, since the logical nexus between her asserted status and the claim she seeks to have adjudicated, and the necessary degree of contentiousness, are both present to ensure that the dispute will be presented in an adversary context and in a form historically viewed as capable of judicial resolution. | ||
| This headnote points to the section of 410 U.S. 113 which states | This headnote points to the section of 410 U.S. 113 which states | ||
| :Viewing Roe's case as of the time of its filing and thereafter until as late as May, there can be little dispute that it then presented a case or controversy and that, wholly apart from the class aspects, she, as a pregnant single woman thwarted by the Texas criminal abortion laws, had standing to challenge those statutes. * * * Indeed, we do not read the appellee's brief as really asserting anything to the contrary. The "logical nexus between the status asserted and the claim sought to be adjudicated," * * * and the necessary degree of contentiousness, * * * are both present. | :Viewing Roe's case as of the time of its filing and thereafter until as late as May, there can be little dispute that it then presented a case or controversy and that, wholly apart from the class aspects, she, as a pregnant single woman thwarted by the Texas criminal abortion laws, had standing to challenge those statutes. * * * Indeed, we do not read the appellee's brief as really asserting anything to the contrary. The "logical nexus between the status asserted and the claim sought to be adjudicated," * * * and the necessary degree of contentiousness, * * * are both present. | ||
| ] | ] | ||
Revision as of 01:20, 19 February 2009
A headnote is a brief summary of a particular point of law that is added to the text of a court decision to aid readers in interpreting the highlights of an opinion. As the term implies, they appear at the beginning of the published opinion.
Frequently, headnotes are "value-added" components appended to decisions by the publisher who compiles the decisions of a court for resale. Often, as handed down by the court, a decision or written opinion does not contain headnotes. These are added later by an editor not connected to the court, but who instead works for a legal publishing house.
In some cases, as with in the decisions of the United States Supreme Court, headnotes are added by the reporter of decisions. Other times, headnotes are included in the decision by the court itself. Headnotes added by the court may be considered part of the opinion if court rules allow it.
The text of headnotes are often drawn from the text of the opinion itself and not rewritten.
For example, here is a headnote added by the Supreme Court from Roe v. Wade (Note: this particular case was chosen as an example only because it is perhaps the best-known U.S. Supreme Court decision of the modern era and thus most readers will be able to see how a headnote relates to the text within a court decision.)
- STATUTES §26
- state criminal abortion statute -- pregnant woman -- standing to challenge --
- Headnote: A pregnant single woman, thwarted by her state's criminal abortion laws from obtaining an abortion which she desired, has standing to challenge those laws, since the logical nexus between her asserted status and the claim she seeks to have adjudicated, and the necessary degree of contentiousness, are both present to ensure that the dispute will be presented in an adversary context and in a form historically viewed as capable of judicial resolution.
This headnote points to the section of 410 U.S. 113 which states
- Viewing Roe's case as of the time of its filing and thereafter until as late as May, there can be little dispute that it then presented a case or controversy and that, wholly apart from the class aspects, she, as a pregnant single woman thwarted by the Texas criminal abortion laws, had standing to challenge those statutes. * * * Indeed, we do not read the appellee's brief as really asserting anything to the contrary. The "logical nexus between the status asserted and the claim sought to be adjudicated," * * * and the necessary degree of contentiousness, * * * are both present.