Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Upc Substituted Judgment/Best Interest Standard For Guardian Decisions: A Proposal For Reform, Lawrence A. Forlik, Linda S. Whitton
The Upc Substituted Judgment/Best Interest Standard For Guardian Decisions: A Proposal For Reform, Lawrence A. Forlik, Linda S. Whitton
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
The introduction in 1997 of "substituted judgment" as a guiding principle for guardian decisions was a key contribution of the UPC to guardianship reform. The current UPC Section 5-314(a) instructs guardians to "consider the expressed desires and personal values of the ward" when making decisions and to "at all times ... act in the ward's best interest." This dual mandate for guardian decisions was intended to promote the self-determination interests of incapacitated adults. This Article argues that in practice the standard has failed to achieve this goal. It analyzes the shortcomings of UPC Section 5-314(a) and other statutory decision-making standards …
The Role Of "Stories" In Civil Jury Judgments, Reid Hastie
The Role Of "Stories" In Civil Jury Judgments, Reid Hastie
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
A brief review of psychological theories of juror decision making is followed by an introduction to "explanation-based" theories of judgment. Prior empirical studies of explanation-based processes in juror decision making are then reviewed. An original empirical study of jurors' judgments concerning liability for punitive damages is presented to illustrate the explanation-based approach to civil decisions.
The Arizona Jury Reform Permitting Civil Jury Trial Discussions: The Views Of Trial Participants, Judges, And Jurors, Valerie P. Hans, Paula L. Hannaford, G. Thomas Munslerman
The Arizona Jury Reform Permitting Civil Jury Trial Discussions: The Views Of Trial Participants, Judges, And Jurors, Valerie P. Hans, Paula L. Hannaford, G. Thomas Munslerman
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
In 1995, the Arizona Supreme Court reformed the jury trial process by allowing civil jurors to discuss the evidence presented during trial prior to their formal deliberations. This Article examines and evaluates the theoretical, legal, and policy issues raised by this reform and presents the early results of afield experiment that tested the impact of trial discussions. Jurors, judges, attorneys, and litigants in civil jury trials in Arizona were questioned regarding their observations, experiences, and reactions during trial as well as what they perceived to be the benefits and drawback of juror discussions. The data revealed that the majority of …