-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 111
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Implement Lousiana Court of Appeals Circuits: 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th #1197
Comments
grossir
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 18, 2024
Part of #1197 - new return value for OpinionSite: "attorneys" - new function in date_utils: `unique_year_months` to generate the backscrape iterable - refactor `oral_args.cadc` and `state.sc` to use new `unique_year_months` function
grossir
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 18, 2024
Part of #1197 - new return value for OpinionSite: "attorneys" - new function in date_utils: `unique_year_months` to generate the backscrape iterable - refactor `oral_args.cadc` and `state.sc` to use new `unique_year_months` function
grossir
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Oct 18, 2024
Part of #1197 - new return value for OpinionSite: "attorneys" - new function in date_utils: `unique_year_months` to generate the backscrape iterable - refactor `oral_args.cadc` and `state.sc` to use new `unique_year_months` function
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
We only have a scraper for the First Circuit
lactapp_1
. There are more circuits which publish opinions. At first glance, the sites do not share structure, so each would need a different scraperFrom the sample docket numbers, it seems we won't need docket number disambiguation
When we implement these, we should backscrape from July 17th, 2019 to present. Before that date, we have the opinions from different sources. For
lactapp_1
there is gap from July 17th, 2019 to December 29th, 2021The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: