How to Shepardize or KeyCite a case without Westlaw or Lexis (check good law for free)

Short answer: Without a paid citator you can still check good law by hand. Check the case's own later history (appeals, rehearing, review). Read the later cases that cite it, starting with the highest courts. Search for words like overruled and abrogated next to the case name. And check whether a statute or rule change has replaced the rule. It takes longer than Shepard's or KeyCite and can miss things, so give more time to the cases your argument depends on.

What "good law" means

A case can stop being reliable authority in several ways:

Step 1: Check the case's own later history

• Look for later decisions in the same case: rehearing, an appeal to the state supreme court, or a petition for certiorari.
• On CourtListener, open the case and check the docket and related opinions. On the court's website, search the docket number.
• A denial of certiorari by the US Supreme Court is not a ruling on the merits. The decision below still stands.
• If the opinion you have is a slip opinion, confirm it wasn't withdrawn or replaced before it was published.

Step 2: Read the cases that cite it

• Use CourtListener's "cited by" list or Google Scholar's "How cited" tab.
• Sort or filter by court. Read higher courts first, then the same court, then the newest decisions.
• You don't need to read every citing case in full. Find where your case is cited (search the page for its name) and read that paragraph.
• Watch for signal words around the cite: overrule, abrogate, disapprove, no longer, decline to follow, limit, call into question.

Step 3: Search for negative words directly

Run searches that combine the case name with negative terms, for example:

• "Smith v. Jones" overruled
• "Smith v. Jones" abrogated OR disapproved
• "123 N.E.3d 456" "no longer good law"

Try both the case name and the citation, because courts cite cases in different ways.

Step 4: Check the rule itself, not only the case

• If the case interprets a statute or court rule, open the current version and its history notes. Has the section been amended since the decision?
• Check for a later controlling decision on the same issue that doesn't cite your case at all. That is the risk the other steps can miss. A quick topic search in the same jurisdiction, limited to dates after your case, helps.

Step 5: Record what you checked

Write a short note with the date, the sources you checked and what you found. If a court or client later asks how you confirmed the authority, you'll have the answer.

What the manual method can miss

• Implicit overruling. A later case can change the rule without citing your case.
• Coverage gaps. Free sources may lack some trial-court and unpublished decisions.
• Very new decisions. Opinions from the last few days may not be indexed yet. Check the court's own website.

For important authorities, an automated or editorial citator is a useful second check. Many state bars include a research database with a citator feature as a membership benefit, and public law libraries often offer free access to commercial citators.

Frequently asked questions

What does it mean to Shepardize a case?

To check a case's later history and treatment - whether it was reversed, overruled, questioned or followed - before relying on it. The term comes from Shepard's Citations (now in Lexis); KeyCite is Westlaw's equivalent. The manual method above does the same job without either service.

Is there a free version of Shepard's or KeyCite?

Not the same thing. Free sources show citing cases but don't systematically classify treatment. Some bar-provided databases include automated negative-history tools, and law libraries often give free walk-in access to commercial citators.

Does a case being "distinguished" mean it's bad law?

No. Distinguishing means a later court found the facts different enough that the rule didn't apply. The case is still good law, but note the limits.

How far back should I check citing cases?

Check every citing decision from higher courts. For the same court and lower courts, focus on the newest decisions and on any that use negative signal words.

Can AI tools check good law?

Some tools flag likely negative treatment automatically. Treat any flag, or the lack of one, as a lead to verify by reading the citing case. Under ABA Formal Opinion 512, the lawyer stays responsible for checking AI output.

Sources

• Free Law Project, CourtListener (courtlistener.com)
• Google Scholar case law search (scholar.google.com)
• Supreme Court of the United States, Rules of the Supreme Court (supremecourt.gov)
• ABA Formal Opinion 512, Generative Artificial Intelligence Tools (July 29, 2024)