Jurisprudence Commons^™

Convocatoria A Junta General: Resolución Nº 018-1999-Orlc/Tr, Abelardo D. Chalán

Abelardo D. Chalán

No abstract provided.

The Antinomy Of Coherence And Determinacy, William A. Edmundson

William A. Edmundson

Coherence and determinacy are both apparent desiderata for bodies of law and legal systems. Unfortunately, in legal systems of any complexity, increasing the degree of one invariably brings about a lessening of the other. For theories of law - such as Ronald Dworkin's - that emphasize the importance of coherence in judicial reasoning, while requiring as a condition of legitimacy that legal rights pre-exist judicial decisions, this must be an unwelcome fact.

The Easy Case Against Tax Simplification, Samuel A. Donaldson

Samuel A. Donaldson

There is growing political momentum to simplify the Internal Revenue Code. While the federal tax laws should be no more complex than necessary, this Article demonstrates that tax complexity is not as bad as political rhetoric leads us to believe. The Article makes four arguments in support of this thesis. First, the forces comprising tax complexity are either inevitable or net beneficial, so calls for simplification are ultimately pointless. Second, the alleged harms of tax complexity are either unproven or overstated, so the need for simplification is questionable. Third, significant proposals for simplification are flawed because they either overcorrect for …

A Linguistic Analysis Of The Meanings Of "Search" In The Fourth Amendment: A Search For Common Sense, Clark D. Cunningham

Clark D. Cunningham

This article offers a new technique for analyzing and evaluating competing interpretations of a legal text and applies that technique to one of the most debated questions of modern constitutional interpretation: the meaning of "searches" in the first clause of the fourth amendment. This Technique is called the "common sense" approach because it begins with a semantic analysis of the text in terms of the sense that the key words have in everyday speech. Such analysis reveals a complex of interlocked concepts that underlies the ability of speakers to recognize meaningful uses of these words. The common sense approach then …

Taking It To The Streets: Putting Discourse Analysis To The Service Of A Public Defender's Office, Clark D. Cunningham, Bonnie S. Mcelhinny

Clark D. Cunningham

No abstract provided.

Using Common Sense: A Linguistic Perspective On Judicial Interpretations Of "Use A Firearm", Clark D. Cunningham, Charles J. Filmore

Clark D. Cunningham

No abstract provided.

Temporary Insanity: The Strange Life And Times Of The Perfect Defense, Russell D. Covey

Russell D. Covey

The temporary insanity defense has a prominent place in the mythology of criminal law. Because it seems to permit factually guilty defendants to escape both punishment and institutionalization, some imagine it as the “perfect defense.” In fact, the defense has been invoked in a dizzying variety of contexts and, at times, has proven highly successful. Successful or not, the temporary insanity defense has always been accompanied by a storm of controversy, in part because it is often most successful in cases where the defendant’s basic claim is that honor, revenge, or tragic circumstance – not mental illness in its more …

Rules, Standards, Sentencing, And The Nature Of Law, Russell D. Covey

Russell D. Covey

Sentencing law and practice in the United States can be characterized as an argument about rules and standards. Whereas in the decades prior to the 1980s when sentencing was largely a discretionary activity governed only by broad sentencing standards, a sentencing reform movement in the 1980s transformed sentencing practice through the advent of sentencing guidelines and mandatory minimum provisions. As a result, sentencing became far less standard-like and far more rule-like. Although reform proponents believed that this "rulification" of sentencing would reduce unwarranted sentencing disparities and enhance justice, it is far from clear that these goals were achieved. Indeed, the …

Euclid Lives: The Survival Of Progressive Jurisprudence, Charles M. Haara, Michael Allan Wolf

Michael A Wolf

The Supreme Court's expanded use of regulatory takings is making a highly controversial and confusing concept more difficult to apply and defend. The Court and commentators are invited to explore a different approach-- Progressive jurisprudence, as represented by the Court's enduring opinion in Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co . This Commentary examines the reinvigoration of the Takings Clause and, in historical and ideological terms, discusses the Progressiveness of Euclid and of the regulatory scheme the Euclid Court approved. Professors Haar and Wolf identify and explore five inquiries concerning the character of regulations affecting the use, ownership, and value …

Dividing Crime, Multiplying Punishments, John F. Stinneford

John F. Stinneford

When the government wants to impose exceptionally harsh punishment on a criminal defendant, one of the ways it accomplishes this goal is to divide the defendant’s single course of conduct into multiple offenses that give rise to multiple punishments. The Supreme Court has rendered the Double Jeopardy Clause, the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause, and the rule of lenity incapable of handling this problem by emptying them of substantive content and transforming them into mere instruments for effectuation of legislative will. This Article demonstrates that all three doctrines originally reflected a substantive legal preference for life and liberty, and a …

Embodying The Population: Five Decades Of Immigrant/Integration Policy In Sweden, Leila Brännström

Leila Brännström

Dealing With Dirty Deeds: Matching Nemo Dat Preferences With Property Law Pragmatism, Donald J. Kochan

Donald J. Kochan

European Court Of Justice Rules In Favour Of Greater Transparency In Accessing Efsa Data, Luis González Vaqué

Luis González Vaqué

This commentary looks at an interesting judgment by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on 16 July. The judgment relates to plant protection products, but as it seeks to achieve levels of transparency capable of overcoming the lack of trust towards the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) - often accused of being biased for using experts with vested interests because of their industry associations - it may also be relevant to the food sector, given that the EFSA deals with many authorization procedures, opinions, etc. related to food products.

Resumen de la conferencia pronunciada el 10.11.2015 en San Cugat del …

El Tjue Confirma Y Precisa Su Jurisprudencia Sobre La Eficacia Informativa De La Lista De Ingredientes: La Sentencia “Teekanne” De 4 De Junio De 2015, Luis González Vaqué

Luis González Vaqué

The ECJ Chamber) ruled that articles 2(1)(a)(i) and 3(1)(2) of Directive 2000/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 March 2000 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the labelling, presentation and advertising of foodstuffs, as amended by Regulation (EC) No 596/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2009, must be interpreted as precluding the labelling of a foodstuff and methods used for the labelling from giving the impression, by means of the appearance, description or pictorial representation of a particular ingredient, that that ingredient is present, …

"La Buena Fe Registral" ... ¿A Favor De La Propiedad No Inscrita?, Julio Eduardo Pozo Sánchez

Julio Eduardo Pozo Sánchez

El autor comenta la contradicción entre dos (2) ejecutorias de la Corte Suprema, expedidas por la misma Sala Civil Permanente casi inmediatamente. Además, critica que se utilice un mismo criterio ("la buena fe registral") para favorecer una u otra posición en el conflicto: propiedad no inscrita vs. embargo inscrito.

Access To Justice For A New Century: The Way Forward, Julia H. Bass, W. A. Bogart, Frederick H. Zemans

Frederick H. Zemans

This book is a timely addition to the literature on access to justice. The book's essays address all aspects of the topic, including differing views on the meaning of access to justice; ways to improve access to legal services; litigation and its role in achieving social justice; and the roles of lawyers, citizens, and legal insitutions.

Access to Justice for a New Century is based on papers given at an international symposium presented by the Law Society of Upper Canada, sponsored by the Law Foundation of Ontario.

The Intelligibility Of Extralegal State Action: A General Lesson For Debates On Public Emergencies And Legality, François Tanguay-Renaud

François Tanguay-Renaud

Some legal theorists deny that states can conceivably act extralegally in the sense of acting contrary to domestic law. This position finds its most robust articulation in the writings of Hans Kelsen and has more recently been taken up by David Dyzenhaus in the context of his work on emergencies and legality. This paper seeks to demystify their arguments and ultimately contend that we can intelligibly speak of the state as a legal wrongdoer or a legally unauthorized actor.

The Amazing Three-Headed Limited Partner: Reflections On Old Loopholes And New Jurisprudence, Lisa Philipps

Lisa Philipps

No abstract provided.

The Last Emperor?, Allan C. Hutchinson

Allan C. Hutchinson

No abstract provided.

In The Park: A Jurisprudential Primer, Allan C. Hutchinson

Allan C. Hutchinson

No abstract provided.

Governance And Anarchy In The S.2(B) Jurisprudence: A Comment On Vancouver Sun And Harper V. Canada, Jamie Cameron

Jamie Cameron

The article identifies and explains a double standard in the Supreme Court of Canada jurisprudence. The contrast is between the open court jurisprudence, which is a model of good constitutional governance – or principled decision making – and the Court’s s.2(b) methodology, which is “anarchistic” or capricious and undisciplined, in the sense of this article. Two landmark cases decided in 2004 illustrate the double standard: the first is Re Vancouver Sun, [2004] 2 S.C.R. 332, which dealt with the open court principle under Parliament’s anti-terrorism provision for investigative hearings, it represents a high water mark for open court and s.2(b) …

Are Jurisprudential Debates Conceptual?: Some Lessons From Democratic Theory, Dan Priel

Dan Priel

The dominant view among legal philosophers is that jurisprudential debates about the nature of law are conceptual. In this article I challenge this view. I do so by comparing these debates to debates about the justification of democracy and showing that the arguments found in both are often very similar. I demonstrate that in both domains, there are arguments on one side that explain an institution (either law or democracy) in terms of its ability to help people lead a better life, and there are arguments on the other side that highlight the value of these institutions in promoting political …

Jurisprudence And (Its) History, Dan Priel, Charles L. Barzun

Dan Priel

It is not obvious that philosophers and historians of law should take much interest in the scholarly enterprises of the other. Many legal philosophers understand their task as one of clarifying the meaning of such familiar legal concepts as “right,” “duty,” or “law” by offering analyses of them that purport to be general, abstract, and timeless. Meanwhile, historians tend to be suspicious of speculative claims ungrounded in fact and so often prefer to focus on the concrete, particular features of actual legal regimes. But surface appearances can deceive. Unlike some other areas of philosophy, the subject matter of jurisprudence is …

The Place Of Legitimacy In Legal Theory, Dan Priel

Dan Priel

In this essay I argue that in order to understand debates in jurisprudence one needs to distinguish clearly between four concepts: validity, content, normativity, and legitimacy. I show that this distinction helps us, first, make sense of fundamental debates in jurisprudence between legal positivists and Dworkin: these should not be understood, as they often are, as debates on the conditions of validity, but rather as debates on the right way of understanding the relationship between these four concepts. I then use this distinction between the four concepts to criticize legal positivism. The positivist account begins with an attempt to explain …

Book Review: Justice In Robes By Ronald Dworkin (2006), Dan Priel

Dan Priel

Since the 1960's Ronald Dworkin has been arguing for a particular account of law that he believed was both explanatorily superior to the one offered by competing theories, and also the basis for normative arguments for producing right answers to legal questions. Justice in Robes collects Dworkin's most recent essays on this subject and thus provides the appropriate opportunity for assessing the legal theory of one of the more influential legal philosophers. In this Review I seek to offer a clearer account than appears in the book itself of Dworkin's project, and in this way offer a measured assessment of …

The Jurisprudence Of Nature: The Importance Of Defining What Is "Natural", Jill M. Fraley

Jill M. Fraley

Informal regulations defining nature, natural, and organic have proliferated across diverse fields of law from patents to agriculture, from taxation to gemstones. The unwritten jurisprudence of defining nature is primarily a story of the struggle to isolate mankind’s manipulations and interventions, creating a man-nature dichotomy that frustrates more than it explicates. This failure to define nature continues with the Supreme Court’s recent Myriad decision, which struggles to define the law of nature exception to patentability, highlighting the challenge of measuring levels of human intervention and manipulation. Our dichotomous definitions do not generate neat, binary answers, but rather complicated scales of …

Precedent And Legal Authority: A Critical History, Charles W. Collier

Charles W. Collier

In this Article, Professor Charles Collier traces out a general theory of precedential authority through historical sources. The Article focuses on three particularly influential views of precedent: Wambaugh's concept of dictum, Oliphant's concept of stare decisis, and Goodhart's concept of ratio decidendi. These views illustrate an underlying tension between two distinct doctrines of precedential authority. The first doctrine, derived from humanistic thought, restricts-legal authority as narrowly as possible to the express terms of an original text. The second doctrine draws on the broad, generalizing tendencies of the empirical sciences and their corresponding conceptions of scientific authority. The two doctrines coexist …

The Constitution And Informational Privacy, Or How So-Called Conservatives Countenance Governmental Intrustion Into A Person's Private Affairs, 18 J. Marshall L. Rev. 871 (1985), Michael P. Seng

Michael P. Seng

No abstract provided.

Patent Claim Construction: A Modern Synthesis And Structured Framework, Peter S. Menell, Matthew D. Powers, Steven C. Carlson

Peter Menell

No abstract provided.

El Tribunal De Justicia De La Ue Se Pronuncia A Favor De Una Mayor Transparencia En El Acceso A Los Datos De La Aesa (Efsa), Luis González Vaqué

Luis González Vaqué

El TJUE anuló la sentencia del Tribunal General de la Unión Europea ‘ClientEarth y PAN Europe/AESA’ (T 214/11, EU:T:2013:483), así como la decisión de la Autoridad Europea de Seguridad Alimentaria (AESA) de 12 de diciembre de 2011.