Uh-oh. Look at LEXIS’s online version of United States v. Michael, 66 M.J. 78 (C.A.A.F. 2008) (2008 CAAF LEXIS 256). Notice that its synopsis of the case tells us that “BAKER, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which EFFRON, C.J., and STUCKY, J., joined. RYAN, J., filed a separate opinion concurring in part and in the result in which ERDMANN , J., joined.” (emphasis added). Problem: LEXIS doesn’t include the separate opinion, which you can read by looking at the case on CAAF’s web site here.
This suggests to me that I’ve trusted LEXIS entirely too much in the past. It will substantially add to my research and writing time if I have to double check everything I find on LEXIS.
Have others seen similar problems on LEXIS or is this a highly atypical quality control lapse?
I don’t have access to WESTLAW, but I’ll look at the Military Justice Reporter tomorrow to see if the separate opinion appears there.