In this collection of essays, leading legal historians address significant topics in the history of judges and judging, with comparisons not only between British, American and Commonwealth experience, but also with the judiciary in civil law countries. It is not the law itself, but the process of law-making in courts that is the focus of inquiry. Contributors describe and analyse aspects of judicial activity, in the widest possible legal and social contexts, across two millennia. The essays cover English common law, continental customary law and ius commune, and aspects of the common law system in the British Empire. The volume is innovative in its approach to legal history. None of the essays offer straight doctrinal exegesis; none take refuge in old-fashioned judicial biography. The volume is a selection of the best papers from the 18th British Legal History Conference.
This is a time when the rule of law is seriously challenged, when governments threaten deliberately to break the law, and the independence of justice is jeopardised by unrelenting pressure from both the executive and the media. This book aims at contributing to restoring trust in judges as custodians of the law and justice, through a comparison between Civil and Common Law countries. It offers a rare opportunity to gather the expertise of eminent judges and legal authorities from five different countries, providing a unique insight into their work and the way they deliver justice based on their respective professional experience and practise of the law. Far from being a highly technical debate between experts, however, the book is accessible to students and the general public, and raises important contemporary legal issues that involve them both as citizens, with justice as a shared aspiration, and a common attachment to the rule of law.
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.
Judicial systems are under increasing pressure: from rising litigation costs and decreased accessibility, from escalating accountability and performance evaluation expectations, from shifting burdens of case management and alternative dispute resolution roles, and from emerging technologies. For courts to survive and flourish in a rapidly changing society, it is vital to have a clear understanding of their contemporary role – and a willingness to defend it. This book presents a clear vision of what it is that courts do, how they do it, and how we can make sure that they perform that role well. It argues that courts remain a critical, relevant and supremely well-adjusted institution in the 21st century. The approach of this book is to weave together a range of discourses on surrounding judicial issues into a systemic and coherent whole. It begins by articulating the dual roles at the core of the judicial function: third-party merit-based dispute resolution and social (normative) governance. By expanding upon these discrete yet inter-related aspects, it develops a language and conceptual framework to understand the judicial role more fully. The subsequent chapters demonstrate the explanatory power of this function, examining the judicial decision-making method, reframing principles of judicial independence and impartiality, and re-conceiving systems of accountability and responsibility. The book argues that this function-driven conception provides a useful re-imagining of some familiar issues as part of a coherent framework of foundational, yet interwoven, principles. This approach not only adds clarity to the analysis of those concepts and the concrete mechanisms by which they are manifest, but helps make the case of why courts remain such vital social institutions. Ultimately, the book is an entreaty not to take courts for granted, nor to readily abandon the benefits they bring to society. Instead, by understanding the importance and legitimacy of the judicial role, and its multifaceted social benefits, this books challenge us to refresh our courts in a manner that best advances this underlying function.
Part I of this book describes the newly emerging problem-solving courts (such as drug treatment courts, domestic violence courts, mental health courts, etc.) and other related approaches to problem-solving judging and judging with an explicit ethic of care. Authors Winick and Wexler show how judges can use therapeutic jurisprudence not only in specialized problem-solving courts, but in general civil and criminal judicial settings as well. In Part II, the book covers emerging "principles" of therapeutic jurisprudence that seem to be at work in successful judicial approaches: how courts can encourage offender reform, how they can help offenders develop problem-solving and coping skills, how they can encourage offender compliance with release conditions, how they can serve as effective risk managers, and much more. "Rarely does the academic work of law scholars have such a clear-cut impact in shaping the research agendas of a broad range of legal academics. Rarer still are the times when such legal scholarship positively impacts the working lives of judges and practicing lawyers. As these essays make abundantly clear, therapeutic jurisprudence has come of age as a legal discipline in its own right, ready to be further tested carefully and strategically within our judicial system... The authors assembled in this worthy volume believe strongly in the law's potential to serve as a 'healing agent' and seek to cast judges and lawyers in the roles of peacemakers and creative problem-solvers. Their vision deserves our serious consideration." -- The Journal of Legal Medicine "Winick and Wexler have gathered an impressive collection that both introduces the topic to newcomers and provides additional depth for those already generally aware of the concepts." -- Steve Leben in The Justice System Journal
In an ideal world, the laws of Congress--known as federal statutes--would always be clearly worded and easily understood by the judges tasked with interpreting them. But many laws feature ambiguous or even contradictory wording. How, then, should judges divine their meaning? Should they stick only to the text? To what degree, if any, should they consult aids beyond the statutes themselves? Are the purposes of lawmakers in writing law relevant? Some judges, such as Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, believe courts should look to the language of the statute and virtually nothing else. Chief Judge Robert A. Katzmann of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit respectfully disagrees. In Judging Statutes, Katzmann, who is a trained political scientist as well as a judge, argues that our constitutional system charges Congress with enacting laws; therefore, how Congress makes its purposes known through both the laws themselves and reliable accompanying materials should be respected. He looks at how the American government works, including how laws come to be and how various agencies construe legislation. He then explains the judicial process of interpreting and applying these laws through the demonstration of two interpretative approaches, purposivism (focusing on the purpose of a law) and textualism (focusing solely on the text of the written law). Katzmann draws from his experience to show how this process plays out in the real world, and concludes with some suggestions to promote understanding between the courts and Congress. When courts interpret the laws of Congress, they should be mindful of how Congress actually functions, how lawmakers signal the meaning of statutes, and what those legislators expect of courts construing their laws. The legislative record behind a law is in truth part of its foundation, and therefore merits consideration.
This book is the only comprehensive treatment of judicial decision-making that combines social science with a sophisticated understanding of law and legal institutions. It is designed for everyone from undergraduates to law students and graduate students. Topics include whether the identity of the judge matters in deciding a case, how different types of lawyers and litigants shape the work of judges, how judges follow or defy the decisions of higher courts, how judges bargain with one another on multi-member courts, how judges get and keep their jobs, and how the judicial branch interacts with the other branches of government and the general public. The book explains how these individual and institutional features affect who wins and loses cases, and how the law itself is changed. It is built around well-known and accessible disputes such as gay marriage, women's rights, Obamacare, and the death penalty; and it offers students a new way to think about familiar legal issues and demonstrates how legal and social-science perspectives can produce a better understanding of courts and judges.
"This book delves into issued of 'Civil justice' which refers to that part of a legal system that is concerned with the legal relations between people (including 'legal persons') as distinct from 'criminal justice' i.e. that part of the legal system concerned with actions by the state against people and looks at contracts, personal injury, property and the breakdown of family relations as familiar examples of civil disputes"--