Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Judges Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 9 of 9

Full-Text Articles in Judges

A Simple Theory Of Complex Valuation, Anthony J. Casey, Julia Simon-Kerr May 2015

A Simple Theory Of Complex Valuation, Anthony J. Casey, Julia Simon-Kerr

Michigan Law Review

Complex valuations of assets, companies, government programs, damages, and the like cannot be done without expertise, yet judges routinely pick an arbitrary value that falls somewhere between the extreme numbers suggested by competing experts. This creates costly uncertainty and undermines the legitimacy of the court. Proposals to remedy this well-recognized difficulty have become increasingly convoluted. As a result, no solution has been effectively adopted and the problem persists. This Article suggests that the valuation dilemma stems from a misconception of the inquiry involved. Courts have treated valuation as its own special type of inquiry distinct from traditional fact-finding. We show …


Conjunction And Aggregation, Saul Levmore Feb 2001

Conjunction And Aggregation, Saul Levmore

Michigan Law Review

This Article begins with the puzzle of why the law avoids the issue of conjunctive probability. Mathematically inclined observers might, for example, employ the "product rule," multiplying the probabilities associated with several events or requirements in order to assess a combined likelihood, but judges and lawyers seem otherwise inclined. Courts and statutes might be explicit about the manner in which multiple requirements should be combined, but they are not. Thus, it is often unclear whether a factfinder should assess if condition A was more likely than not to be present - and then go on to see whether condition B …


An Outsider's View Of Common Law Evidence, Roger C. Park May 1998

An Outsider's View Of Common Law Evidence, Roger C. Park

Michigan Law Review

same line by a Newton. There have been improvements since Bentham's jeremiad. But Anglo-American evidence law is still puzzling. It rejects the common-sense principle of free proof in favor of a grotesque jumble of technicalities. It has the breathtaking aspiration of regulating inference by rule, causing it to exalt the foresight of remote rulemakers over the wisdom of on-the-spot adjudicators. It departs from tried-and-true practices of rational inquiry, as when it prohibits courts from using categories of evidence that are freely used both in everyday life and in the highest affairs of state. Sometimes it seems to fear dim light …


Controlling The Police: The Judge's Role In Making And Reviewing Law Enforcement Decisions, Wayne R. Lafave, Frank J. Remington Apr 1965

Controlling The Police: The Judge's Role In Making And Reviewing Law Enforcement Decisions, Wayne R. Lafave, Frank J. Remington

Michigan Law Review

We have chosen to focus here upon judicial involvement (1) in determining whether arrest and search warrants should issue and (2) in reviewing such decisions after they have been executed (and, perhaps, made) by police officials. A comparison of some recent findings respecting the actual practice at the trial level with the "ideal" as set forth in appellate opinions may allow some conclusions to be drawn both as to the present effectiveness of appellate rulings on these subjects and as to the ultimate feasibility of further implementation of those rulings. Finally, since the exclusionary rule is, theoretically at least, one …


Eminent Domain - Procedure - Relation Of Judge And Jury In Michigan Condemnation Proceedings, John H. Jackson S.Ed. Dec 1959

Eminent Domain - Procedure - Relation Of Judge And Jury In Michigan Condemnation Proceedings, John H. Jackson S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

The relationship of judge to jury in Michigan condemnation proceedings presents in many ways a merger of some of the problems and questions contained in the relationship of judge to jury in civil trials, and of court to tribunal in administrative law. Theorists as well as the practicing lawyer in Michigan and some other states" may well find in the development of the Michigan condemnation proceeding an interesting example of the growth of a procedure for adjudication, in a context of cross-fire between legislative ideas and judicial interpretation of a constitutional provision.


Criminal Law - Trial - Duty Of Judge To Instruct On Lesser And Included Crimes, Paul A. Heinen S.Ed. Mar 1956

Criminal Law - Trial - Duty Of Judge To Instruct On Lesser And Included Crimes, Paul A. Heinen S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Appellant was one of four defendants who were charged in three separate counts of an indictment with the crimes of attempted robbery in the first degree, attempted grand larceny in the first degree, and assault in the second degree with intent to commit robbery and grand larceny. After all the evidence had been entered, the trial judge submitted only the count of attempted robbery to the jury, instructing them that they return a verdict of guilty or not guilty of that crime. The defense excepted to the court's refusal to submit the other counts charged in the indictment. The defendant …


Judge And The Crime Burden, John Barker Waite Dec 1955

Judge And The Crime Burden, John Barker Waite

Michigan Law Review

One does not happily charge the judiciary with responsibility for the country's burden of crime, but the responsibility does in fact exist. Judges, though they may not encourage crime, interfere with its prevention in various ways. They deliberately restrict police efficiency in the discovery of criminals. They exempt from punishment many criminals who are discovered and whose guilt is evident. More seriously still, they so warp and alter the public's attitude toward crime and criminals as gravely to weaken the country's most effective crime preventive.


In Suport Of The Thayer Theory Of Presumptions, Charles V. Laughlin Dec 1953

In Suport Of The Thayer Theory Of Presumptions, Charles V. Laughlin

Michigan Law Review

A learned judge once said to a young lawyer, "If you are ever a trial court judge, never give reasons for your decisions. Your rulings will probably be right, but your reasons will likely be wrong." That statement may aptly apply to judicial pronouncements relating to the subject of presumptions. Decisions are largely free from criticism so far as concerns the results reached, but the reasoning processes by which they are reached appear to be in hopeless confusion. It is believed that a theory can be presented which will both reconcile these confusions of judicial techniques and explain the general …


Recent Important Decisions, Michigan Law Review Jun 1922

Recent Important Decisions, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

No abstract provided.