Topic
Majority opinion
About: Majority opinion is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 4107 publications have been published within this topic receiving 54845 citations. The topic is also known as: opinion of the court.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
Book•
01 Jan 2003
TL;DR: Merkle as mentioned in this paper concludes that the two terms are used interchangeably, representing the same office, in the New Testament and concludes that they represent the same authority in the Church.
Abstract: New York, Bern, Berlin, Bruxelles, Frankfurt/M, Oxford, Wien Recent challenges to the traditional view that the terms "elder" and "overseer" in the New Testament refer to the same office has caused the majority opinion to shift After examining the background of the terms in Jewish and Greco-Roman sources, Paul's view of organized ministry in his letters to churches, and the relevant material in Acts and the Pastoral Epistles, Merkle concludes that the two terms are used interchangeably, representing the same office
10 citations
10 citations
TL;DR: This paper examined the relationship between public opinion, crime rates, and sentencing in routine cases, including armed and unarmed robbery, burglary, larceny, and possession of narcotics, and found that high crime rates generally produced lenient sentences.
Abstract: Much recent research on public opinion and trial courts demonstrates a link between local attitudes and sentencing in highly visible criminal cases. However, such crimes are not typical of most trial court work. Our research examines relationships between public opinion, crime rates, and sentencing in routine cases, including armed and unarmed robbery, burglary, larceny, and possession of narcotics. The research includes over 6000 cases and measures public opinion in all twenty of Florida's trial court circuits. Except for possession of narcotics, no significant correlations were discovered between public opinion and sentencing, but high crime rates generally produced lenient sentences. The research questions the impact of public opinion on most litigation and suggests that judicial elites usually act without concern for local public opinion.
10 citations
Journal Article•
TL;DR: The U.S. experience shows that a well functioning open market can exist despite some level of tax distortion resulting from the disparate choices of the states as mentioned in this paper, and the ECJ should allow them to protect their base by measures such as thin capitalization, prevention of loss importation, or CFC rules.
Abstract: Comparing the US and EU experiences shows that there is more than one way of constructing a single market without tax distortions, and that some level of distortion can be accepted. Thus, the U.S. Supreme Court can afford to be a bit harsher on state tax competition without trampling down on state sovereignty on tax matters, and the ECJ can afford to be more lenient without creating unacceptable barriers to trade and investment within the EU. As long as Member States continue to have different tax rates, which is a likely and in my view desirable outcome, the ECJ should allow them to protect their base by measures such as thin capitalization, prevention of loss importation, or CFC rules. While these rules may deviate from strict open market orthodoxy, I believe that the U.S. experience shows that a well functioning open market can exist despite some level of tax distortion resulting from the disparate choices of the states.
10 citations