1057 INTRODUCTION Creighton Law Review is to be commended for instituting a survey, intended to be done annually, of the decisions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Other law reviews have done this* and I think that those projects have been generally successful. The Eighth Circuit, of course, is a rich source of legal materi- als. The circuit, while perhaps not so celebrated as the Second, because of its location away from the Eastern Seaboard and the "name" law schools, has been a staunch and solid court since its founding, has enunciated federal law for a substantial portion of the Nation's heartland and (prior to 1929 when the Tenth Circuit was formed from it) for the Rocky Mountain area as well. The cir- cuit's geographical location, stretching from the Canadian border to the Louisiana line, lends variety and strengthens its Bar in a way not enjoyed by any other circuit except, perhaps to a degree, the Sixth. The Eighth Circuit has produced its share of Justices of the Supreme Court-David Josiah Brewer, Willis Van Devanter, and Charles Evans Whittaker-by elevation from its own ranks and others-Samuel Freeman Miller, Pierce Butler, Wiley Blount Rut- ledge, and Warren E. Burger-from the States that it serves. There have been other equally distinguished figures of the law upon its own bench: the two Sanborns (Walter H. and John B.), Kimbrough Stone, William S. Kenyon, Wilbur F. Booth, Archibald K. Gardner, Harvey M. Johnsen, Martin D. Van Oosterhout, in years past. There are others yet alive, and there will be more in the years yet to come. There is a tendency, of course, for law reviews and commenta- tors to stress and to be primarily occupied with the decisions and personnel of the Supreme Court of the United States. This is un- derstandable and, to an extent, is perhaps proper. But many sig- nificant cases do not reach the Supreme Court. Those deemed * See Suffolk University Law Review for the First Circuit; Brooklyn Law Re- view and St. John's Law Review for the Second Circuit; Villanova Law Review for the Third Circuit; Washington and Lee Law Review for the Fourth Circuit; Mercer Law Review, Loyola Law Review, and Texas Tech Law Review for the Fifth Cir- cuit; University of Toledo Law Review for the Sixth Circuit; Chicago-Kent Law Re- view and Notre Dame Lawyer for the Seventh Circuit; Loyola (L.A.) Law Review and Golden Gate University Law Review for the Ninth Circuit; Utah Law Review and Denver Law Review for the Tenth Circuit. See 26 DRAKE L. REV. 509 (1976-1977) for the Eighth Circuit. See also 57 MiNN. L. REV. 1105 (1973), and 22 ST. Louis U.L.J. 547 (1978). 1058 CREIGHTON LAW REVIEW [Vol. 13 rightly decided in the courts of appeals, despite the importance of their legal issues, are usually allowed to stand in the absence of conflict. That does not make them any less significant for the law or for those who practice it. And so I compliment the Editors of the Creighton Law Review for undertaking this project, particularly with the advent of an- other Nebraskan as Chief Judge of the Eighth Circuit. If it is well done, it should prove popular in the same way that Judge Robert Van Pelt's survey of the Eighth Circuit evidence decisions at the circuit's annual conference has proved so welcome and rewarding. Washington, D.C. Harry A. Blackmun June 1980.