Sources & Methodology
Start with the document that establishes the fact
Court opinions, orders, filed complaints and docket records are the preferred sources for case facts. CourtListener and RECAP copies can provide access to filed documents. A complaint establishes what a party alleges; it does not establish that the allegation is true.
Regulatory explanations should cite the applicable regulation, FDA guidance or other official agency material. Guidance and regulations must be described separately. A company statement can establish the company’s position, but not the truth of a disputed claim.
Reputable legal reporting and institutional analysis help discover and cross-check developments. Litigation marketing pages, social posts and search snippets are research leads. They cannot substitute for an available court document on a material ruling, settlement or deadline.
Verify identity before publishing a case
The publication gate requires verification of the case caption, defendant, court, docket number and filing date, together with support for the challenged product and label claim. Conflicting material facts must be resolved or withheld before publication.
The court and docket number distinguish one action from another. Cases involving the same brand may have different parties, products, dates and outcomes. A company page can group related records, but each docket remains a separate case.
Describe status precisely
Status summaries identify the development supported by the sources reviewed and the date of that review. Filing a proposed class action does not establish class certification. Reversal of a dismissal does not establish liability. A preliminary settlement approval is not final approval.
Settlement amounts, claims procedures, deadlines and certification require strong documentary support. When research has not identified a development, we say what was not found in the sources reviewed. We do not turn that limitation into a categorical claim that the development does not exist.
Make the evidence visible
Substantial case pages should identify the source documents supporting the principal facts and explain any material research limitation. A primary-source verification label is appropriate only when the important facts are directly supported by those documents.
Cross-checked secondary reporting must remain distinguishable from primary-source verification. Discovery-only material and unresolved conflicts belong in the research queue, not in published statements of established fact.
Updates follow verified developments
There is no guaranteed daily or real-time monitoring schedule. A last-reviewed date refers to a check of the factual and procedural record, not simply an edit to the page or a new site build.
When a material development is verified, the workflow is to update the structured record, sources, timeline and status, then review the related case, company and explanatory pages. Source access can be limited, and an older review date should be read in that context.