Because lawmakers cannot conceive of every future application of the laws they enact, courts rely on case law to decide legal questions before them in a manner consistant with prior decisions. Those prior decisions are referred to as precedent. Courts are bound to issue decisions that are consistant with binding precedent, which is all precedent issued by appellate courts that are higher in stature. For instance, a federal district court is bound to issue decisions consistant with Courts of Appeals and the Supreme Court.
This may seem extreemly complicated, but it makes sense when one reads court opinions. Most court opinions are written in a similar manner. They contain the following elements:
(1) A recitation of the facts that are important to resolving the conflict before it. As court do not issue opinions unless there is an actual substantive controversy, the factual recitation should be written in such a manner that the reader can understand what the controversy is and why it would matter to the parties themselves.
(2) An identification of the legal framework which will be utilized to decide the controversy. The paragraphs that make up this framework often cite not only to the laws themselves, but to the relevant case law. Through the language used to describe the applicable precedent, the court will usually show its obligation to rule in a manner consistant with applicable precedent. When there is a dispute between the parties about how the precedent and law should apply in the dispute at hand, the court will often describe the arguments put forward by both sides, and the reasoning used by the court to come to a conclusion about what law applies.
(3) Analysis of the facts against the legal framework presented.
(4) Conclusion
It could be said that the essence of law school today is the formation of the skill of reading case law and interpreting new factual scenarios in a manner consistant with how judges are likely to interpret it.
No comments:
Post a Comment