Alabama Law Scholarly Commons - The University of Alabama
Not a member yet
1539 research outputs found
Sort by
Case Law
Get PDFAlthough case law plays a crucial role in the American legal system surprisingly little consensus exists on how to determine the law that any given case generates Lawyers judges and scholars regularly note the difference between holdings and dicta and between necessary and unnecessary parts of a precedentsetting decision but such concepts have eluded coherent application in practice There remains considerable uncertainty about which aspects of a judicial decision impose prospective legal obligations as a matter of stare decisis and to what extentThis Article develops a counterintuitive but productive way to conceptualize case law the lawmaking content of a judicial decision should be only those decisional rules that the court states explicitly and that can be framed in the form If P then Q Future courts would not however be required to reconcile their decisions with other findings conclusions or reasons that the precedentsetting court offers Although these other elements of a judicial decision could remain influential they would not impose binding obligations as a matter of hierarchical stare decisisThis rulecentered approach would allow judicial decisions to clarify the law when such clarifying rules are justified and desirable but otherwise leave the slate clean for courts to confront unresolved questions in future cases with the full participation of future litigants As to the concern that judicially announced rules may sweep too broadly this Article\u27s approach would leave future courts free to develop distinguishing rules in a way that serves many of the same purposes as the conventional understanding of how cases may be distinguished but that reduces the risk of disingenuous distinctions enhances rather than muddies case law\u27s clarifying benefits and avoids conceptual and definitional problems inherent in the current approach This Article\u27s framework also helps to resolve a host of other difficult puzzles relating to judicial decisionmaking including the controversy surrounding unpublished opinions the stare decisis effect of decisions that lack a majority opinion and how to identify and resolve tensions within case la
Whipped
No full textNow in paperback! Montreal journalist Lou Sabatino, under witness protection after nearly being gunned down by the Mafia, is sucked into the quirky world of a conniving Russian dominatrix who has secretly recorded herself putting the whip to the bare bottom of a high-ranking federal cabinet minister. It’s the scoop of the century, but too hot a potato ― if Lou breaks the story, he risks exposing himself to the mercies of the Mafia. Instead, he shows the video to Green Party leader Margaret Blake. The video is leaked, and Margaret is sued by the minister for $50 million. Enter Arthur Beauchamp, Margaret’s husband and famed criminal lawyer, who had found ― or so he hoped ― blissful retirement on idyllic Garibaldi Island on the West Coast. But now he’s representing the woman he loves while tormented by fears that she’s embroiled in an affair. Whether you’re encountering Arthur Beauchamp for the first time or have followed him from his first case, the paperback release of award-winning William Deverell’s Whipped is not to be missed.https://scholarship.law.ua.edu/harper_lee_prize_books_2018/1004/thumbnail.jp
Constitutional Law: Cases, Materials, and Problems
No full textConstitutional Law: Cases, Materials, and Problems, Fourth Edition uses a thought-provoking problem approach that encourages students to delve deeper into constitutional doctrine and gives them an accessible and interesting way to learn constitutional issues. Problems at the beginning of each chapter are referenced throughout the text for continuity. Principal constitutional law cases are edited as lightly as possible to allow the Supreme Court to speak for itself, and shorter notes accompany the problems.https://scholarship.law.ua.edu/fac_books/1054/thumbnail.jp
Bum luck
No full textSecond-string linebacker turned trial lawyer Jake Lassiter squares off against his toughest, most unpredictable adversary yet: himself. The downward spiral begins when Jake\u27s client, Miami Dolphins\u27 running back Thunder Thurston, is cleared of murdering his wife. Jake didn\u27t expect to win, didn\u27t want to win, since he is sure his client is guilty. When Thurston walks free, Lassiter vows to seek his own kind of justice. Street justice. Vigilante justice. Law partners Steve Solomon and Victoria Lord can\u27t believe their friend has become so deeply, inexplicably obsessed with killing Thurston. Convinced Jake\u27s unhinged behavior is due to concussive brain injuries suffered during his pro football career, they beg him to seek treatment. But as Lassiter\u27s raging fixation on vengeance grows, Solomon and Lord wonder if they\u27re too late to help. Is it game over for Jake\u27s career ... and his life? -- From back coverhttps://scholarship.law.ua.edu/harper_lee_prize_books_2018/1013/thumbnail.jp