Publisher of Law

Sharon Schmickle and Tom Hamburger

By the turn of the century, West was publishing regional and Supreme Court decisions	The Founding Fathers didn't say who should publish the opinions of the courts they created. England had a tradition of leaving that business to the private sector. America followed suit. Court fights over publishers' rights started almost as soon as the first comprehensive volume of legal opinions was produced, in Connecticut in 1789. Flash forward to the 1870s. Minnesota has been a state for more than a decade. Here comes John B. West, 20, selling office supplies, dictionaries, legal forms and law treatises. The St. Paul lawyers who buy West's wares complain that it takes too long to get published court proceedings. So John and his brother, Horatio, launch a weekly newspaper containing court opinions. By 1879, the West brothers are publishing the output of courts from Iowa, Michigan, Nebraska, Wisconsin and the Dakota Territory as well. By the turn of the century, the company formed by the West brothers is publishing regional reports nationwide as well as Supreme Court decisions.
The courts provide the raw material for a profitable publishing business	West does more than simply regurgitate the output of the courts. It screens court opinions, selecting those considered most important for publication. It edits them, cleaning up the judges' grammar and spelling. Most important, West organizes the material it publishes, setting up numbering systems that give each opinion the equivalent of an address of a house on a city street. Hand judges and lawyers the map and they can easily find what they need. The benefits of the relationship flow both ways. The courts provide the raw material -- opinions -- for a profitable publishing business. The resulting law books facilitate the work of the courts. Fast forward another century, to the 1970s. West is now run by Dwight Opperman, an Iowan who started working for the company in 1951.
In practice, West and a few competitors function almost as an arm of the court	Over the decades, West has come to enjoy a special standing with lawyers and judges. The company's representatives are welcomed by judges and provide free law books, calendars and appointment books to them. Officially, West and a few competitors are private companies. Practically, they function almost as an arm of the court. They find frequent opportunities to assist judges and court officials with legal seminars, court historical projects and receptions at conferences. The American Bar Association issues its Codes of Judicial Conduct in 1972, suggesting restrictions in the gifts judges should take. But so accepted is the relationship with West and the other publishers, that complimentary books supplied by publishers are exempted. Now, move ahead to the 1980s. Computer bytes and online databases have begun to replace the handsomely bound volumes that adorn nearly every law office. The electronic revolution fosters new competition in the legal publishing industry. And West aggressively defends its position, often in the courts. In a prepared statement to the Star Tribune, West's spokeswoman Ruth Stanoch emphasized the competition the company now faces: "American legal publishing is a highly competitive business. There are more and bigger players, and exploding numbers of legal products and services." Can West's adversaries expect fairness in the courts given the close relationship that the judges have allowed -- even invited -- for more than a century? "For so long it was assumed, with good reason, that West was -- if not part of the judiciary -- at least essential to its function. And a good citizen thereof, even if it made a lot of money," said Stephen Gillers, a law professor at New York University and an expert in judicial ethics. "American law would be poorer today without West's contribution." But we have edged into a new age, Gillers said. "Events have altered the map," he said. "We have to think about a company like West in an information age in a new way. The symbiosis that might previously have been acceptable to some extent now must be reexamined."