Bloomberg Law vs. Thomson Reuters Westlaw

Perhaps well-suited in enterprise agreements where many users need access to many areas, and a giant contract is cost effective. This was a good company to work with as a student and instructor where value was not my specific concern. I cannot speak to the value paid by the responsible party in that context.

• Public Records Research
• Inventory of case, laws, and legal precedents to research
• Showing good vs. bad case law based on court decisions

Incentivized

• Some functions/features may seem less familiar if you are used to other platforms
• Certain resources are not the very best (and are available on other engines)
• Costly!

Incentivized

The specific product ordered was fine, but it was far too easy to mindlessly incur ancillary charges without warning. This is much less user friendly than other, similar providers of services such as LexisNexis. The Thomson Reuters Westlaw experience is not intuitive when compared to other, similar providers and ended up being less cost effective.

I was passed around like a hot potato and nameless responders were somewhat disrespectful and "snippy." There was no offer to resolve the issue I complained about, and I was basically made to feel as though I was lying about the problem. The solution was easy: fix my customized home screen to remove the possibility of wandering into a non-subscription area. This fix was never offered or pursued. Instead, I was offered the option of signing up for additional services.

We considered switching to Bloomberg Law because of the contractual provisions with Westlaw but ultimately decided to stay. The cost of getting out of the contract term was cost-prohibitive and left us with no choice.

Incentivized

• Positive return by making legal research more efficient.
• Cost more to use however saves time and allows for more work to get done.

Incentivized