Replies: 1 comment
-
The reason for this is that the parties data is pulled from the PACER system, and costs money, so unless somebody has contributed the case to us, or we've gotten it via one of our other sources on our coverage page, we don't have the parties information normalized into the parties table. The other reason is that the opinions data is state and federal, so for state content the party data is even harder to come by. Sorry we don't have a better answer. If there's a subset of federal cases that need party information, we could certainly do that as a data gathering exercise, but you'd have to pay us and the PACER fees to do so. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
-
I'm pulling cases from the opinions table, then linking to the parties table by way of the docket table. Why is it that I don't see any entries in the parties table for the vast majority of the cases I'm pulling?
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions