Judicial opinion

About: Judicial opinion is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 5300 publications have been published within this topic receiving 64803 citations.

Structure and design of the british law report corpus (blrc): a legal corpus of judicial decisions from the uk

Abstract: The aim of this paper is to describe and justify the structure and design criteria to create a legal English corpus of judicial decisions. The authors, lecturers of this ESP variety, decided to engage into specific corpus design due to the small variety of teaching materials and corpora available. Judicial decisions are essential wheels in the legal machinery of common law systems and, precisely because of that fact, they are fundamental as a legal genre. This is why we intend to compile a 6m word legal corpus of UK judicial decisions in order to establish the core vocabulary of the genre and use it for further linguistic analysis and the elaboration of didactic materials.

The Interplay of Ideological Diversity, Dissents, and Discretionary Review in the Judicial Hierarchy: Evidence from Death Penalty Cases

Abstract: We use an original dataset of death penalty decisions on the Courts of Appeals to evaluate how the institutions of multimember appellate courts, dissent, and discretionary higher-court review interact to increase legal consistency in the federal judicial hierarchy. First, beginning with three-judge panels, we show the existence of ideological diversity on a panel—and the potential for dissent—plays a significant role in judicial decision making. Second, because of the relationship between panel composition and panel outcomes, considering only the incidence of dissents dramatically underestimates the influence of the institution of dissent—judges dissent much less frequently than they would in the absence of this relationship. Third, this rarity of dissent means they are informative: when judges do dissent, they influence en banc review in a manner consistent with the preferences of full circuits. Taken together, these results have important implications for assessing legal consistency in a vast and divers...

When Is Knowing Less Better than Knowing More? Unpacking the Controversy over Supreme Court Reference to Non-U.S. Law

Abstract: The first has to do with democratic theory. Judicial decisions in this country—judges of course are not accountable to the people, but we are appointed through a process that allows for participation of the electorate, the President who nominates judges is obviously accountable to the people. The senators who confirm judges are accountable to the people. In that way the role of the judge is consistent with the democratic theory. If we’re relying on a decision from a German judge about what our Constitution means, no President accountable to the people appointed that judge, and no Senate accountable to the people confirmed that judge; and yet he’s playing a role in shaping a law that binds the people in this country. I think that’s a concern that has to be addressed.

Judicial deference under the Human Rights Act 1998

Abstract: Examines the constitutional boundaries of the judicial function in the light of the Human Rights Act 1998, focusing on the courts approach to the interpretive obligations under s3, the power to make declarations of incompatibility under s4, and the concept of judicial deference to statute law and parliamentary sovereignty Discusses the debate around judicial deference and the background to enactment of the 1998 Act, the rules of statutory interpretation and the judiciary's views on the meaning of the obligation to read legislation to give effect to rights under the European Convention on Human Rights 1950 "so far as it is possible to do so" Argues that the concept of judicial deference was not contained within the 1998 Act and that judicial decisions, exemplified by R v A (Complainant's Sexual History), have failed to reflect the structure of the ss3 and 4 which sought to enable the courts to uphold rights while also maintaining the legislature's authority Suggests that the proper application of this dialogue or relational scheme would obviate the need for a further concept of judicial deference

Geriatrics and the law : understanding patient rights and professional responsibilities

Abstract: The updated Third Edition of "Geriatrics and the Law" by the leading scholar in law and old age belongs on the desk of every hospital and long-term care administrator, Director of Nursing, and Medical Director. It is the most comprehensive volume available on the topic. The book provides clearly written legal and ethical principles and their implications and applications."--Elias S. Cohen, JD, Executive Director, Community Services Systems, Inc. Significant changes in the law are affecting patients' rights and professionals' responsibilities in providing clinical services to the elderly. This edition of Kapp's successful text continues to inform and sensitize health care professionals about the legal issues, and offers practical advice and guidance to practitioners in a variety of disciplines. The text has been thoroughly updated and, where appropriate, expanded. Topics woven into each chapter include: implications of the relevant statutes, regulations, judicial opinions, private guidelines, and discussion of new laws. This practical book is a valuable and useful resource for practitioners, health care students, and educators. It contains extensive references and a helpful Appendix of Resources.