I do pretty much all of my research on Canlii. On the rare occasions when I cannot find something there, I head for the local law library. It’s actually nice to visit the law library; it gets so little use that it’s always quiet, and all the materials are in their proper places.
I just did a quick search and it looks like West still uses their key number system. Is that still the primary route into Westlaw or do you use search terms. I loved the key numbers for a variety of reasons but one thing in particular that I remember was that if you had no idea even what area of the law was primarily involved in a particular issue, you could root around in CJS and then take those key numbers to the state digest (IIRC anyway). I still keep a look out for a copy of CJS but oddly enough, even these days, no one is giving them away (actually, I’ve found one or two over the years but of course you had to pay for the shipping - which gets pricey for a set that’s approaching 200 volumes)
They’re about to shut down Westlaw proper and replace it with WestlawNext, which is something akin to a web search engine. You type in words and it gives you results arranged by source type. LexisNexis has already shut down its traditional search engine in favor of a similar system called Lexis Advance. Personally, I find both about a million times easier to use than the old systems (which were ridiculously complicated). I suspect mileage may vary.
Personally, I’ve never had to refer to anything by key number (either in law school or as a paralegal) but I suspect it’s still useful for areas of law which are mostly based on judge-made law.
We didn’t have to do it at all. There was some pointless exercise where we had to find a search term in a physical copy of AmJur or CJS or something and photocopy the page, but that was about it. I wrote my upper-level paper without ever needing to consult a hard copy source (though I cited a few criminal procedure books just in case my professor was the type who cares about such things.)
One nitpick: Even in the federal courts that have gone to all e-filing, many (all?) filings under seal still have to be done in person.
Those electronic tasks can still get passed along to the client, though. Lexis/Westlaw, office phones, and copiers can be configured to require the entry of a client code for individual tasks.
I was class of '92, and we were probably among the last to ever use the books professionally. When I started at the law firm, we young associates were regularly in the library in great numbers. A few years later, no one went there anymore. When the firm relocated a couple of years ago, the new space had essentially no library.
As a federal government lawyer, I’m obliged to archive my files on paper.
From what people have told me, while the volume of paper has greatly reduced from about a decade ago, it is still greater than what was the case 3 or so decades ago. Apparently, the proliferation of word processors and printers did not help.
Libraries do have advantages. You might still need them on occasion to find some obscure point, it’s a great place to snooze and the librarian is sorta hot.
I rarely have occasion to use law reporters anymore. Ditto print journals.Which is a pity, they look great. On the other hand, I will use paper practitioners texts more often as some of them are highly specialized.
That’s true. I’ve occasionally had to pull some of my old files from archives, and I’m amazed at how thin they are. That was back when I didn’t have a computer. It also predates e-mails - I now keep paper copies of all e-mails on the file, which thickens it considerably.
According to my dad (at least a few years ago), all proceedings in Connecticut must be submitted by… floppy disk!
Since the e-filing is only at the Court of Appeal, there aren’t limitation periods in play; if the Queen’s Bench goes to e-filing, they’ll no doubt have to address that issue.
But, there are of course filing deadlines for the Court of Appeal, and if you miss one, you need to chat with the court staff to get it on the system. Technology has not done away with the time-honoured process of schmoozing the court staff in such circumstances. 
It’s now just LexisNexis.
Close. It’s “shepardizing,” named after Shepard’s Citations.
The major law book publishers are pretty much the same operations that provide most electronic legal information: Thomson Reuters (Westlaw), Reid Elsevier (Lexis-Nexis), Wolters Kluwer (CCH). Bloomberg Law is a more recent competitor. It absorbed BNA a couple of years ago.