Decision Making in the U.S. Courts of Appeals


Book Description

This book studies the decisions of the United States circuit courts and their grounding in law and judicial ideology.




Standards of Decision in Law


Book Description

A standard of decision is the law's designation of how certain a decisionmaker must be to render a decision. Because all decisionmaking takes place in a world of uncertainty, the law requires every legal actor before making any sort of decision to measure his or her degree of certainty against the applicable standard. Because in every corner of law the lawmakers must set standards in accordance with policy objectives, the standards prove essential to understanding any branch of law. Because those standards have an intensely practical impact on legal outcome, they merit careful study by all lawyers. Despite the subject being thus both wide-ranging and critically important, this book is the first to treat it in depth. The book first catalogs the variety of standards that exist in law. A pattern emerges, which advances in cognitive psychology nicely explain. The book then zeros in on the most conspicuous yet peculiarly distinctive of the standards of decision, which is called the standard of proof and which specifies the sureness required of a factfinder to decide that a contested fact exists. After surveying relevant empirical research and past theoretical explanations, the book constructs a new understanding by drawing on recent breakthroughs in the field of logic. Historical and comparative perspectives on the standard of proof then provide angles from which to illuminate the new understanding. In sum, this book synthesizes decades of thinking and research on standards of decision and pushes forward to elaborate and explain the subject. It does so in a way that will be useful to a broad readership among all those who study the law. "Legal decisionmaking requires judicial actors to decide cases despite inherent uncertainty Although this practice is ubiquitous, the standards for how certain a decisionmaker must be to render a decision have gone underexplored. In Standards of Decision in Law, Professor Kevin M. Clermont presents a comprehensive examination of the topic, employing empirical research, cognitive psychology, and logic to explain why certain standards are suitable to certain contexts. ...Standards of Decision in Law offers much-needed insight into the rationale behind different standards of proof, concluding that, although 'room for reform exists,' our current probabilistic standards are most appropriate given the cognitive limitations of decisionmakers (p. 282)." -- Harvard Law Review




Structures of Judicial Decision Making from Legal Formalism to Critical Theory


Book Description

To order a paperback version of this book, please click here. This is a general book on jurisprudence designed for both the novice and more experienced student, which makes it suitable for first-year law students. It is the first book to distinguish and connect traditional theories of judicial decision-making (e.g., legal formalism, textualism, legal realism, and legal process) with "critical process" (which is critical theory transformed from a theory of legal criticism into a theory of judicial decision-making). Brooks breaks new ground on several other fronts as well -- he employs an innovative framework that divides judicial decision-making models into the "logical method" and the "policy method;" offers a more nuanced conceptualization of judicial policy-formulation in which judges are seen as not only making policy, but also (and more typically) as discovering and vindicating policy; redefines "policy-making" in a manner that is different from our traditional understanding of the term; and synthesizes critical process into three judicial models: symmetrical, asymmetrical, and hybrid. The book is written in two parts. Part 1 (Traditional Process) discusses five major traditional judicial models, each reflective of either the logical method or the policy method. Part 1 ends with a synthesis of the traditional models (dividing them into three categories), which judges who have used the book find to be most useful. Part 2 (Critical Process) begins with a discussion of critical theory's central theme and operating elements and then transforms these features into a theory of outsider-oriented judicial decision making, something judges can actually use in deciding cases. Critical theory is thus transformed into "critical process."




Supreme Court Decision-Making


Book Description

What influences decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court? For decades social scientists focused on the ideology of individual justices. Supreme Court Decision Making moves beyond this focus by exploring how justices are influenced by the distinctive features of courts as institutions and their place in the political system. Drawing on interpretive-historical institutionalism as well as rational choice theory, a group of leading scholars consider such factors as the influence of jurisprudence, the unique characteristics of supreme courts, the dynamics of coalition building, and the effects of social movements. The volume's distinguished contributors and broad range make it essential reading for those interested either in the Supreme Court or the nature of institutional politics. Original essays contributed by Lawrence Baum, Paul Brace, Elizabeth Bussiere, Cornell Clayton, Sue Davis, Charles Epp, Lee Epstein, Howard Gillman, Melinda Gann Hall, Ronald Kahn, Jack Knight, Forrest Maltzman, David O'Brien, Jeffrey Segal, Charles Sheldon, James Spriggs II, and Paul Wahlbeck.




Selection and Decision in Judicial Process Around the World


Book Description

Leading empirical legal scholars from around the world explore whether and under what conditions the judicial process is efficient.




The Supreme Court in the American Legal System


Book Description

This book examines the American legal system, including a comprehensive treatment of the U.S. Supreme Court. Despite this treatment, the 'in' from the title deserves emphasis, for it extensively examines lower courts, providing separate chapters on state courts, the US District Courts, and the US Courts of Appeals. The book analyzes these courts from a legal/extralegal framework, drawing different conclusions about the relative influence of each based on institutional structures and empirical evidence. The book is also tied together through its attention to the relationship between lower courts and the Supreme Court. Additionally, Election 2000 litigation provides a common substantive topic linking many of the chapters. Finally, it provides extended coverage to the legal process, with separate chapters on civil procedure, evidence, and criminal procedure.




Model Rules of Professional Conduct


Book Description

The Model Rules of Professional Conduct provides an up-to-date resource for information on legal ethics. Federal, state and local courts in all jurisdictions look to the Rules for guidance in solving lawyer malpractice cases, disciplinary actions, disqualification issues, sanctions questions and much more. In this volume, black-letter Rules of Professional Conduct are followed by numbered Comments that explain each Rule's purpose and provide suggestions for its practical application. The Rules will help you identify proper conduct in a variety of given situations, review those instances where discretionary action is possible, and define the nature of the relationship between you and your clients, colleagues and the courts.




The Psychology of Judicial Decision Making


Book Description

Over the years, psychologists have devoted uncountable hours to learning how human beings make judgments and decisions. As much progress as scholars have made in explaining what judges do over the past few decades, there remains a certain lack of depth to our understanding. Even where scholars can make consensual and successful predictions of a judge's behavior, they will often disagree sharply about exactly what happens in the judge's mind to generate the predicted result. This volume of essays examines the psychological processes that underlie judicial decision making.




The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Administrative Law


Book Description

In this Handbook, distinguished experts in the field of administrative law discuss a wide range of issues from a comparative perspective. The book covers the historical beginnings of comparative administrative law scholarship, and discusses important methodological issues and basic concepts such as administrative power and accountability.




Lawyers in Practice


Book Description

How do lawyers resolve ethical dilemmas in the everyday context of their practice? What are the issues that commonly arise, and how do lawyers determine the best ways to resolve them? Until recently, efforts to answer these questions have focused primarily on rules and legal doctrine rather than the real-life situations lawyers face in legal practice. The first book to present empirical research on ethical decision making in a variety of practice contexts, including corporate litigation, securities, immigration, and divorce law, Lawyers in Practice fills a substantial gap in the existing literature. Following an introduction emphasizing the increasing importance of understanding context in the legal profession, contributions focus on ethical dilemmas ranging from relatively narrow ethical issues to broader problems of professionalism, including the prosecutor’s obligation to disclose evidence, the management of conflicts of interest, and loyalty to clients and the court. Each chapter details the resolution of a dilemma from the practitioner’s point of view that is, in turn, set within a particular community of practice. Timely and practical, this book should be required reading for law students as well as students and scholars of law and society.