Common Law Commons^™

Reshaping The Traditional Limits Of Affirmative Duties Under The Third Restatement Of Torts, 44 J. Marshall L. Rev. 319 (2011), Victor E. Schwartz, Christopher E. Appel

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Samantar And Executive Power, Peter B. Rutledge

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

This essay examines Samantar v. Yousuf in the context of broader debate about the relationship between federal common law and executive power. Samantar represents simply the latest effort by the Executive Branch to literally shape the meaning of law through a process referred to in the literature as "executive lawmaking." While traditional accounts of executive lawmaking typically have treated the idea as a singular concept, Samantar demonstrates the need to bifurcate the concept into at least two different categories: acts of executive lawmaking decoupled from pending litigation and acts of executive lawmaking taken expressly in response to litigation. As Samantar …

The Conflicted Assumptions Of Modern Constitutional Law, H. Jefferson Powell

Faculty Scholarship

Contribution to Symposium - The Nature of Judicial Authority: A Reflection on Philip Hamburger's Law and Judicial Duty

"Our Cities Institutions" And The Institution Of The Common Law, Bernadette Meyler

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

The audiences of early modern English drama were multiple, and they intersected with the legal system in various ways, whether through the cross-pollination of the theaters and the Inns of Court, the representations of the sovereign’s justice performed before him, or the shared evidentiary orientations of jurors and spectators. As this piece written for a symposium on “Reasoning from Literature” contends, Shakespeare’s Measure for Measure addressed to these various audiences the question of whether the King should judge in person. In doing so, it drew on extant political theories suggesting that the King refrain from exposing himself to public censure …

Minimalism And Deliberative Democracy: A Closer Look At The Virtues Of "Shallowness", Matthew J. Steilen

Journal Articles

Cass Sunstein has long argued that judicial minimalism promotes democracy. According to Sunstein’s view, a court can encourage the political branches of government to address an issue by using doctrines such as vagueness, nondelegation, and desuetude. Although much has been written about minimalism, very little has been said about the democracy-promotion thesis in particular. Yet it is one of the central claims of contemporary minimalism. This article attempts to remedy the deficiency. It argues that minimalism does not promote democracy because minimalist decisions lack the depth necessary to trigger democratic deliberation. The argument occurs in three steps. First, the article …

Judicial Discretion In Talmudic Times And The Modern Era, A. David Pardo

Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal

The article explores the concept of judicial discretion within the Talmud, particularly comparing the approaches of the Palestinian Talmud (Yerushalmi) and the Babylonian Talmud (Bavli). It highlights how the Yerushalmi adheres to a stricter, more unified interpretation of the Halakhah, while the Bavli adopts a more flexible approach, incorporating extralegal considerations and societal context. The analysis demonstrates that these differences reflect broader jurisprudential theories about the role of discretion in legal decision-making.

Case For A Constitutional Definition Of Hearsay: Requiring Confrontation Of Testimonial, Nonassertive Conduct And Statements Admitted To Explain An Unchallenged Investigation, The, James L. Kainen, Carrie A. Tendler

Faculty Scholarship

Crawford v. Washington’s historical approach to the confrontation clause establishes that testimonial hearsay inadmissible without confrontation at the founding is similarly inadmissible today, despite whether it fits a subsequently developed hearsay exception. Consequently, the requirement of confrontation depends upon whether an out-of-court statement is hearsay, testimonial, and, if so, whether it was nonetheless admissible without confrontation at the founding. A substantial literature has developed about whether hearsay statements are testimonial or were, like dying declarations, otherwise admissible at the founding. In contrast, this article focuses on the first question – whether statements are hearsay – which scholars have thus far …

The Supreme Common Law Court Of The United States, Jack M. Beermann

Faculty Scholarship

The U.S. Supreme Court's primary role in the history of the United States, especially in constitutional cases (and cases hovering in the universe of the Constitution), has been to limit Congress's ability to redefine and redistribute rights in a direction most people would characterize as liberal. In other words, the Supreme Court, for most of the history of the United States since the adoption of the Constitution, has been a conservative force against change and redistribution. The Court has used five distinct devices to advance its control over the law. First, it has construed rights-creating constitutional provisions narrowly when those …

Judges As Rulemakers, Emily Sherwin

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

In Do Cases Make Bad Law?, Frederick Schauer raises some serious questions about the process of judicial lawmaking. Schauer takes issue with the widely held assumption that judge-made law benefits from the court's focus on a particular real-world dispute. Writing with characteristic eloquence, Schauer argues that the need to resolve a concrete dispute does not enhance the ability of judges to craft sound rules, but instead generates cognitive biases that distort judicial development of legal rules.

Schauer's observations about the risks of rulemaking in an adjudicatory setting are very persuasive. Yet his overall assessment of the common law process …

What Appellate Judges Do, Rick Sims

The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process

No abstract provided.

Rule-Oriented Realism, Emily Sherwin

Michigan Law Review

In his new book The Law and Ethics of Restitution, Hanoch Dagan undertakes to explain and justify the American law of restitution. He offers a broad theoretical account of this poorly understood subject, designed not only to fortify the substantive law of restitution but also to clarify the role and methodology of courts in developing the field. Dagan's book also provides lively discussion of the role of restitution in some of the most highly publicized legal developments of recent years. Those who think of restitution as an obscure branch of "legal remedies" may be surprised to read about the …

The Immense Rumor, Peter Goodrich

Articles

The article explores the intersection of friendship and law, particularly through the lens of Jacques Derrida's theory, which posits that the concept of friendship is inherently paradoxical and shaped by legal and theological frameworks. Derrida argues that the "immense rumor" of friendship reflects a historical inability to articulate amity publicly, leading to a repression of friendship in the public sphere. This repression is rooted in the humanist tradition, which draws from Graeco-Roman and Judeo-Christian influences, emphasizing the primacy of political or communal bonds over individual friendships. The analysis reveals that legal discourses have imposed prohibitions on the role of friendship, …

Holmes, Common Law Theory, And Judicial Restraint, 36 J. Marshall L. Rev. 457 (2003), Frederic R. Kellogg

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Objective Interpretation And Objective Meaning In Holmes And Dickerson: Interpretive Practice And Interpretive Theory, Patrick J. Kelley

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Do Judges Deploy Policy?, Mitchel De S.-O.-L'E. Lasser

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Are Some Words Better Left Unpublished?: Precedent And The Role Of Unpublished Decisions, K.K. Duvivier

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

The practice of unpublished decisions and their precedential value causes much controversy. The practice of unpublished opinions creates a solution for how to deal effectively with heavy caseloads. Electronic databases make unpublished decisions readily available, which removes any secrecy that critics fear. Unpublished opinions are treated in one of three ways by the courts. In addition, three pragmatic issues are created by allowing opinions to go unpublished: 1) the availability of these decisions, 2) the quality of the reasoning in unpublished decisions, and 3) the treatment of unpublished opinions as precedent.

Free-Standing Due Process And Criminal Procedure: The Supreme Court's Search For Interpretive Guidelines, Jerold H. Israel

Articles

When I was first introduced to the constitutional regulation of criminal procedure in the mid-1950s, a single issue dominated the field: To what extent did the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment impose upon states the same constitutional restraints that the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendments imposed upon the federal government? While those Bill of Rights provisions, as even then construed, imposed a broad range of constitutional restraints upon the federal criminal justice system, the federal system was (and still is) minuscule as compared to the combined systems of the fifty states. With the Bill of Rights provisions …

A Defense Of Analogical Reasoning In Law, Emily Sherwin

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

This Article defends the practice of reasoning by analogy on the basis of its epistemic and institutional advantages. The advantages identified for analogical reasoning include that it produces a wealth of data for decisonmaking; it represents the collaborative effort of a number of judges over time; it tends to correct biases that might lead judges to discount the force of prior decisions; and it exerts a conservative force in law, holding the development of law to a gradual pace. Notably, these advantages do not depend on the rational force of analogical reasoning. Rather, the author contends that, as open-ended reasoning …

The Recognition And Enforcement Of Foreign Equitable Remedies And Other Types Of Non-Money Judgments In United States And French Courts: A Comparative Analysis, Noele Sophie Rigot

LLM Theses and Essays

Courts of industrialized nations are often faced with adjudication of cases which involve foreign components. It is common for those courts to be asked by individuals or legal entities from a transnational environment to adjudicate with regard to some elements already adjudged in a different legal system as if it were a local judgment. The question that arises is how effects should be given when dealing with prior adjudications. Most countries agree to recognize some effects determined by foreign jurisdictions, as long as those determinations meet standards that guarantee proper integration of the foreign decision into the domestic setting. These …

Overview Of The Role Of Precedent In The Legal System Of The United States, Ana Elena Fierro

LLM Theses and Essays

Traditionally, legal systems have been classified as either Common Law or Civil Law; scholars distinguish these systems based on their origins, as well their attitudes towards stare decisis. Common law considers precedent as a source of binding rules, while civil law does not. However, some scholars consider the methods for legal reasoning to be almost the same in every legal system. These scholars maintain that regardless of the source of law in a particular country, once a judge determines that the facts of one case are similar to those regulated by a certain rule, the judge will apply that particular …

Foreword Evidence Symposium: A Comparative Study Of Federal And New York Evidence Practice, Honorable Frank X. Altimari

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Survey Of Article Iii Procedural Issues Considered At The Federal Circuit During Its First Decade, 27 J. Marshall L. Rev. 25 (1993), Jerry R. Selinger

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Philosophical Reconstruction Of Judicial Review, Carlos Santiago Nino

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Praetorianism & Common Law In Post-Colonial Settings: Judicial Responses To Constitutional Breakdowns In Pakistan, Tayyab Mahmud

Faculty Articles

The successive constitutional crises that confronted the Pakistani courts were not of their own making. But the doctrinally inconsistent, judicially inappropriate, and politically timid responses fashioned by these courts ultimately undermined constitutional governance. When confronted with the question of the validity and scope of extra constitutional power, the courts vacillated between Hans Kelsen's theory of revolutionary validity, Hugo Grotius's theory of implied mandate, and an expansive construction of the doctrine of state necessity. A more principled and realistic response would have been to declare the validity of extra constitutional regimes a nonjusticiable political question. Besides ensuring doctrinal consistency, a refusal …

An "Internal" Critique Of Justice Scalia's Theory Of Statutory Interpretation, William D. Popkin

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

A Plea For Help: Pleading Problems In Section 1983 Municipal Liability Claims, Evan S. Schwartz

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Critical Approach To Section 1983 With Special Attention To Sources Of Law, Jack M. Beermann

Faculty Scholarship

The Civil Rights Act of 1871¹ ("§ 1983") establishes a tort-like remedy for persons deprived of federally protected rights "under color of law."'² While the statute's broad language provides a remedy for violations of federal constitutional and statutory rights, the statute itself provides little or no guidance regarding important subjects such as the measure of damages, the availability of punitive damages, the requirements for equitable relief, the statute of limitations, survival of claims, proper parties, and immunities from suit.³...

...The first part of this article examines the narrowly "legal" analysis of § 1983 in the cases …

Tennessee V. Garner And The Democratic Practice Of Judicial Review, Steven L. Winter

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.

The Politics Of Statutory Construction, Daniel M. Harris

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Book Review Of Passion: An Essay On Personality , Richard F. Devlin Frsc

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

Passion is a cogently structured, compel Jingly argued and seductively enthralling masterpiece which, in years to come, will undoubtedly stand out as an inspirational source for many who seek social transformation. Unger's style, in this essay at least, is lucid and inviting. Substantively, Passion demonstrates not only the depth of his penetrating intellect but also his command of an array of' disciplines. Unger's polymathy is all the more impressive when we remember that ours is an era in which idiosyncratic specialization is the norm.