Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Civil procedure (1)
- Clean Water Act (1)
- Conclusory (1)
- Concurrence (1)
- Constitutional Interpretation (1)
-
- Contextual interpetation (1)
- Courts (1)
- Definitions (1)
- Dictionaries (1)
- Dissent (1)
- Environmental Law (1)
- Iqbal (1)
- Jurisprudence (1)
- Law and Economics (1)
- Legal usage (1)
- Lexicography (1)
- Marks (1)
- Pleadings (1)
- Plurality (1)
- Practice and Procedure (1)
- Precedent (1)
- Rapanos (1)
- Stare Decisis (1)
- Statutory Interpretation (1)
- Twombly (1)
- Word meanings (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Legal History
While Effusive, "Conclusory" Is Still Quite Elusive: The Story Of A Word, Iqbal, And A Perplexing Lexical Inquiry Of Supreme Importance, Donald J. Kochan
While Effusive, "Conclusory" Is Still Quite Elusive: The Story Of A Word, Iqbal, And A Perplexing Lexical Inquiry Of Supreme Importance, Donald J. Kochan
Donald J. Kochan
The meaning of the word “conclusory” seems really, quite elusory. Conclusory is a widespread, common, and effusive word in the modern legal lexicon. Yet you would not necessarily know that by looking through many dictionaries. “Conclusory” has been a late comer to the pages of most dictionaries. Even today, not all dictionaries include the word “conclusory”, those that do have only recently adopted it, and the small number of available dictionary definitions seem to struggle to capture the word’s usage in the legal world. Yet the word “conclusory” has taken center stage in the procedural plays of civil litigation with …
Much Ado About Pluralities: Pride And Precedent Amidst The Cacophy Of Concurrences, And Re-Percolation After Rapanos, Donald J. Kochan, Melissa M. Berry, Matthew J. Parlow
Much Ado About Pluralities: Pride And Precedent Amidst The Cacophy Of Concurrences, And Re-Percolation After Rapanos, Donald J. Kochan, Melissa M. Berry, Matthew J. Parlow
Donald J. Kochan
Conflicts created by concurrences and pluralities in court decisions create confusion in law and lower court interpretation. Rule of law values require that individuals be able to identify controlling legal principles. That task is complicated when pluralities and concurrences contribute to the vagueness or uncertainty that leaves us wondering what the controlling rule is or attempting to predict what it will evolve to become. The rule of law is at least handicapped when continuity or confidence or confusion infuse our understanding of the applicable rules. This Article uses the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Rapanos v. United States to …