Showing papers on "Principal (commercial law) published in 1976"

The neutralization of severe penalties: some traffic law studies

Abstract: Between the formal law of statute books and appellate courts and the informal law of routine dispositions intervene a variety of actors, exemplified by policemen and insurance adjusters, some of whom have not traditionally been regarded as "legal" actors. However, one of the most important contributions of sociology to the understanding of law has been the demonstration that the attitudes and values of these actors and the pressures embodied in their roles produce a comprehensible divergence between the prescriptions of the formal law and the regularities exhibited in the informal law (Skolnick, 1966; Ross, 1970). This paper discusses some instances of discrepancy between the formal and informal law when formal penalties are suddenly and greatly increased. Its principal hypothesis is that sharp increases in formal penalties tend to be subverted by contrary adjustments in the behavior of those who apply the law. The data to be presented come from four of my studies on the effectiveness of changing traffic laws. As these studies were not designed to test the present hypothesis, their evidence is indirect, and the presentation is exploratory rather than demonstrative. The hypothesis is consistent with empirical generalizations by observers of legal institutions as well as with the high-level generalizations of functionalist theory in sociology. An example of the former is James Q. Wilson's (1975: 187) observation on the tendency to legislate mandatory penalties to deter currently fashionable crimes: "No one should assume that any judicial outcome can be made truly 'mandatory'-discretion removed from one place in the criminal justice system tends to reappear elsewhere in it." Functionalist theory's "homeostatic principle" is exemplified by such assertions as "So far as it impinges on institutionalized patterns of action and relationship, therefore, change is never just 'alteration of pattern' but alteration by the overcoming of resistance" (Parsons, 1951:491, italics in original).

Allocation of child medical care decision-making authority: a suggested interest analysis.

Abstract: L EGAL responsibility for medical care decisions about children is shared at present by parents, children, medical practitioners, and the state. The division of authority is often prescribed by largely unrelated rules in several areas of law, including the common law of battery, family law principles of intrafamilial rights and duties, child neglect statutes, public health laws, and school codes. The result is a great deal of tension and inconsistency in the overall allocational scheme. Difficulties in the rules of each area simply multiply the overall confusion. Reform has begun, primarily in the form of state legislative changes. The law of children generally is in a state of flux, and the arrival of national health insurance may provide further impetus for a rethinking of the rules allocating child medical care decisionmaking authority. This article will review the present allocational scheme and then suggest some guidelines for reform, based on an analysis of the interests and roles of each of the four principal actors in the decisionmaking process. Although this type of interest analysis is not new to legal literature, it has played surprisingly little part in the development of the present allocational rules.

A historical survey of delictual liability in Scotland for personal injuries and death

Abstract: In Part Three, we surveyed the principal areas in which English law has influenced the Scottish law of reparation for personal injuries and death. In Part Four, we shall attempt to isolate and discuss under specific headings the principal remaining distinctions between the English and Scottish systems in this branch of the law of delict.