The Appearance of Impropriety offers a bracing antidote for executives, group leaders, and anyone in public life: A reminder of some basic rules of good conduct that must be taken back from the pundits and bureaucrats that surround us. As Peter Morgan and Glenn Reynolds entertainingly and devastatingly describe, Americans have made legitimate ethical concerns into absurd standards, and wielded our moral whims like dangerous weapons.
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 notion of conflict of interest is more relevant today than ever. Ethical sensitivities about the relationship between professionals and those they serve is a source of constant debate. This book sets a new standard for work on this perennial topic, collecting a set of practical essays by top applied ethicists on a wide variety of professions and occupations. Some conflicts of interest arise because a profession takes on many roles while serving one goal; others take on one role but serve multiple goals. Some conflicts are internal to the profession; others (such as family or business connections) are external. The essays in this volume address such diverse conflicts in a comprehensive way, in an attempt to make useful comparisons across professions. Containing fifteen original chapters by noted scholars of applied ethics, this volume systematically explores professions including law, medicine, journalism, engineering, financial services, anthropology, film, physical therapy, and literary criticism. An introductory chapter surveys and contextualizes work on the topic, while the concluding chapter offers us a new way to compare conflicts of interest across professions and occupations. Conflict of Interest in the Professions will be of great practical interest to scholars of applied ethics and law, as well as to professionals in the fields discussed
This publication is the latest in a series of steps to assist judges in carrying out their onerous responsibilities, and represents a concise yet comprehensive set of principles addressing the many difficult ethical issues that confront judges as they work and live in their communities. It also provides a sound basis to promote a more complete understanding of the role of the judge in society and of the ethical dilemmas they so often encounter. Sections of the publication cover the following: the purpose of the publication; judicial independence; integrity; diligence; equality; and impartiality, including judicial demeanour, civic and charitable activity, political activity, and conflicts of interest.
A distinguished and experienced appellate court judge, Richard A. Posner offers in this new book a unique and, to orthodox legal thinkers, a startling perspective on how judges and justices decide cases. When conventional legal materials enable judges to ascertain the true facts of a case and apply clear pre-existing legal rules to them, Posner argues, they do so straightforwardly; that is the domain of legalist reasoning. However, in non-routine cases, the conventional materials run out and judges are on their own, navigating uncharted seas with equipment consisting of experience, emotions, and often unconscious beliefs. In doing so, they take on a legislative role, though one that is confined by internal and external constraints, such as professional ethics, opinions of respected colleagues, and limitations imposed by other branches of government on freewheeling judicial discretion. Occasional legislators, judges are motivated by political considerations in a broad and sometimes a narrow sense of that term. In that open area, most American judges are legal pragmatists. Legal pragmatism is forward-looking and policy-based. It focuses on the consequences of a decision in both the short and the long term, rather than on its antecedent logic. Legal pragmatism so understood is really just a form of ordinary practical reasoning, rather than some special kind of legal reasoning. Supreme Court justices are uniquely free from the constraints on ordinary judges and uniquely tempted to engage in legislative forms of adjudication. More than any other court, the Supreme Court is best understood as a political court.
It's not the best of times for the San Francisco GoldenGaters. But their win-loss record suddenly takes a back seat to the rumor that somebody is throwing games--and a crusading sports columnist finds that nobody on the basketball team is above suspicion. Now the game gets really rough. . . .
