CITATION OF AUTHORITIES

4 definitions found across Law Mind sources

CITATION OF AUTHORITIESAuthored
The Law Mind • 939 words
Definition
The practice of referring to legal authorities — constitutions, statutes, reported cases, treatises, and similar sources — in support of legal propositions advanced in court arguments, briefs, or legal writings. Citation of authorities is the mechanism by which legal reasoning is grounded in precedent and authoritative text rather than mere assertion. The term encompasses both the act of reference (pointing to a source) and the substantive reliance on that source to establish, support, or fortify a legal argument. In modern practice, citation of authorities appears in: 1. Judicial briefs and memoranda, where parties direct courts to controlling or persuasive precedent. 2. Judicial opinions themselves, where courts cite prior decisions, statutes, and secondary sources to explain and justify holdings. 3. Legal scholarship and treatises, where writers support propositions of law by anchoring them in primary and secondary authorities. The governing standard is not simply that a citation exists, but that the cited authority actually supports the proposition for which it is offered.
Common Confusion
"Citation of authorities" in the legal sense is not the same as the procedural device called a citation — a summons-style document directing a party to appear or respond. The two senses of "citation" share a root meaning (to call, to summon) but operate in completely different contexts. Researchers working in older materials must distinguish between a citation as a writ-type process and citation of authorities as a practice of legal argumentation. The historical sources partially conflate these by including the maxim "Citationes non concedantur priusquam exprimatur super qua re fieri debet citatio" (Citations should not be granted before it is stated about what the citation is to be made) — which concerns procedural citations, not the citation of authorities in the argumentative sense.
Why It Matters in Research
Researchers working in the Law Mind corpus encounter citation of authorities as both a described practice and a structural feature of the documents themselves. Several research traps are worth flagging: Shifting authority hierarchies. What counted as a proper authority has changed significantly over time. Early American courts routinely cited English common law decisions, civilian authorities, and natural law treatises as primary support for propositions. By the mid-twentieth century, citation practice narrowed toward controlling domestic precedent. When reading older briefs and opinions, researchers should not assume that a cited authority carried the weight it would today, or that absence of a modern authority type signals weakness in the argument. Treatise authority. Bouvier's framing — that "knowledge of the law is to a great degree a knowledge of precedents" — reflects a period when elementary treatises (Blackstone, Kent, Story) carried near-primary authority. Researchers should recognize that a citation to Blackstone in a nineteenth-century American case was a substantive legal citation, not merely decorative. Secondary vs. primary distinction. Historical sources do not always draw a sharp line between primary authorities (constitutions, statutes, cases) and secondary authorities (treatises, encyclopedias). Modern citation practice treats this distinction as fundamental, with secondary authorities carrying persuasive weight at best. Reading historical arguments requires recalibrating this hierarchy. Citation format evolution. The mechanical form of citations — how cases and statutes were referenced — changed dramatically across the corpus. Early American legal writing cited cases by party names alone, by reporter's name, or by volume-and-page conventions that varied by jurisdiction. Uniform citation systems (like the Bluebook) are twentieth-century developments. Researchers tracing a cited authority in older materials should expect non-standard formats. Cross-corpus connections. Citation practice in briefs connects directly to the body of reported cases in the Law Mind corpus. The quality and completeness of law reporting determined what could be cited at all. Gaps in reporting — particularly for lower courts and early state courts — shaped which authorities were available and thus which arguments could be made with authority support.
Historical Dictionary Support
Black's Law Dictionary (both editions) and Bouvier's define citation of authorities in substantially the same terms: reference to constitutions, statutes, reported cases, and treatises to establish or fortify propositions. The definitions are in agreement on scope and function. Bouvier adds the more theoretically grounded observation that because legal knowledge is largely knowledge of precedents, reference to prior decisions is a necessary feature of legal argument — not merely a convention. This reflects the common law epistemology underlying the practice: law is discovered in precedent, not invented in argument. Both Black's editions append the maxim "Citationes non concedantur priusquam exprimatur super qua re fieri debet citatio" — which is a rule about procedural citations (writs), not citation of authorities in the argumentative sense. Its inclusion is potentially misleading and illustrates the dual meaning problem identified in COMMON CONFUSION above. Researchers should not take this maxim as governing the practice of citing legal authorities in briefs or opinions. What the historical sources do not address: citation ethics and duties, the distinction between controlling and persuasive authority, the obligation to cite adverse authority (a modern professional responsibility concept), and citation format standards. These are substantive lacunae for researchers interested in the evolution of citation practice as a professional norm.
Jurisdictional Note
Federal courts and most state courts now operate under formal citation rules — whether local rules, standing orders, or adopted uniform systems. The obligation to cite adverse controlling authority is codified in professional conduct rules in most U.S. jurisdictions. Researchers working across jurisdictions should not assume uniform standards governed citation practice historically, particularly before the twentieth century.
Related Terms
Authority — Precedent — Stare Decisis — Brief — Legal Argument — Primary Authority — Secondary Authority — Citation (procedural) — Law of Citations — Reported Cases — Treatise
CITATION OF AUTHORITIESmain
Black's Law Dictionary • 1891
The reading of, or reference to, legal authorities and precedents, (such as constitutions, stat- utes, reported cases, and elementary trea- tises,) in arguments to courts, or in legal text-books, to establish or fortify the propo- sitions advanced. G H J Citationes non concedantur priusquam exprimatur super qua re fieri debet ci- tatio. Citations should not be granted be- fore it is stated about what matter the cita- K tion is to be made. A maxim of ecclesiastical law. 12 Coke, 44.
CITATION OF AUTHORITIESmain
Bouvier's Law Dictionary • 1928
The production of or reference to the text of acts of legislatures, treatises, or cases of similar nature decided by the courts, in order to support propositions advanced. As the knowledge of the law is to a great degree a knowledge of precedents, it fol- lows that there must be necessarily a fre- quent reference to these preceding deci- sions to obtain support for propositions ad- vanced as being statements of what the law is. Constant reference to the law as it is enacted is, of course, necessary. Ref- erences to the works of legal writers are also desirable for elucidation and explana- tion of doubtful points of law. In the United States, the laws of the general government are generally cited by their date: as, Act of Sept. 24, 1789, § 35; or, Act of 1819, c. 170; or by reference to the statutes, as 24 Stat. L. 505; or by the section of the Revised Statutes of 1878, or its supplements. The same practice prevails in Pennsylvania, and in most of the other states, when the date of the statute is im- portant. Otherwise, in most of the states, reference is made to the revised code of laws or the official publication of the laws: as, Va. Rev. Code, c. 26; N. Y. Rev. Stat. 8th ed. 400. Books of reports and text- books are generally cited by the number of the volume and page: as, 2 Washburn, R. P. 350; 4 Pa. 60. Sometimes, however, the paragraphs are numbered, and refer ence is made to the paragraphs: as, Story, Bailm. § 494; Gould, Pl. c. 5, § 30. The civilians on the continent of Europe, in referring to the Institutes, Code, and Pandects or Digest, usually give the num- ber, not of the book, but of the law, and the first word of the title to which it be- longs; and, as there are more than a thou- sand of these, it is no easy task for one not thoroughly acquainted with those collec- tions to find the place to which reference is made. The American writers generally follow the natural mode of reference, by putting down the name of the collection, and then the number of the book, title, law, and section. For example, Inst. 4. 15. 2. signifies Institutes, book 4, title 15, and section 2; Dig. 41. 9.1.3. means Digest, book 41, title 9, law 1, section 3; Dig. pro dote, or ff pro dote, signifies section 8, law 1, of the book and title of the Digest or Pandects entitled pro dote. It is proper to remark that Dig. and ff are equivalent: the former signifies Digest, and the latter -which is a careless mode of writing the Greek letter ㅠ​, the first letter of the word πανδεκται-signifies Pandects; and the Di- gest and Pandects are different names for one and the same thing. The Code is cited in the same way. The Novels are cited by their number, with that of the chapter and paragraph: for example, Nov. 185. 2. 4. for Novella Justiniani 185, capite 2, para- grapho 4. Novels are also quoted by the Collation, the title, chapter, and paragraph, as follows: In Authentico, Collatione 1, titulo 1, cap. 281. The Authentics are quoted by their first words, after which is set down the title of the Code under which they are placed for example, Authentica, cum testator. Codice ad legem fascidiam. See Mackeldey, Civ. Law § 65; Domat, Civ. Law, Cush. ed. Index. The system of citations in the present and the last editions of this work differs somewhat from that adopted in the earlier editions, in order that such citation might occupy as little space as pos sible. The briefest possible citation, that will avoid ambiguity, has been adopted in this work; the table of abbreviations (see ABBREVIATIONS) gives. the full name of the book or volume of reports re ferred to. Statutes of the various states will be cited by giving the number of the volume (where there are more volumes than one), the name of the state (using the common geographical abbreviation), the designation of the code, and the page where the statute or provision in consideration is found: thus, 1 N. Y. Rev. Stat. 4th ed. 68. To this it is desirable to add, when regard for space allows, the chapter and section of the statute referred to. In some cases the system of citing state statutes adopted in Stimson's Am. Stat. Law is resorted to, and the statutes of a state are referred to by the name of the state, the year, the page or chapter and section by number, omitting the letters c., p., and s. or §: thus, R. I. 1893, 65. 12., meaning Rhode Island Laws, 1893, chap. 65, § 12. United States statutes, and statutes of the states not included in the codified collection of the state. are cited as statutes of the year in which they were enacted, or by the proper section of the Revised Statutes. English statutes are referred to by indicating the year of the reign in which they were enacted, the chapter and section thus, 17 & 18 Vict. c. 96, § 2. Text-books are referred to by giving the number of the volume (where there are more volumes than one), and the name of the author, with an abbrevia- tion of the title of the work sufficiently extended to distinguish it from other works by the same a
CITATION OF AUTHORITIESmain
Black's Law Dictionary (2nd Ed.) • 1910
The reading of, or reference to, legal authorities and precedents, (such as constitutions, statutes, reported cases, and elementary treatises,) in arguments to courts, or in legal text-books, to establish or fortify the propositions advanced. Law of citations. See Law. Citationes non concedantur priusquam exprimatur super qua re fieri debet citatio. Citations should not be granted before it is stated about what matter the citation is to be made. A maxim of ecclesiastical law. 12 Coke, 44.

Explore the full Law Mind legal research platform.

SubscribeEncyclopediaSign In