Stare decisis and information abundance in a common law jurisdiction

In a common law jurisdiction, according to the principle of stare decisis judges are bound to interpret a constitutional or common law principle by applying authoritative cases already decided. Parties in disputes pending before the courts must find and assess the prior cases on which they can expe...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Emily Roscoe, Charles Szypszak
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin 2022-05-01
Series:Review of European and Comparative Law
Subjects:
Online Access:https://czasopisma.kul.pl/index.php/recl/article/view/13248
_version_ 1797254992693821440
author Emily Roscoe
Charles Szypszak
author_facet Emily Roscoe
Charles Szypszak
author_sort Emily Roscoe
collection DOAJ
description In a common law jurisdiction, according to the principle of stare decisis judges are bound to interpret a constitutional or common law principle by applying authoritative cases already decided. Parties in disputes pending before the courts must find and assess the prior cases on which they can expect that judges will rely. Not very long ago, research for such precedent involved reviewing known cases and linking them to other cases using topical digests and citators. Success with this approach required a patient, persistent, thorough, and open-minded methodology. Modern information accessibility gives previously unimaginable quick access to cases, including with tools that promise to predict judicial tendencies. But this technological accessibility can have negative side effects, including a diminished research aptitude and a stilted capacity to synthesize information. It can also lead to an inadequate account of the human factors that often cause judges to depart from predictions based on logical inference from prior cases. This article considers the extent to which the identification of precedent is essential in legal analysis, yet is of limited value in predictability as a result of judges’ unavoidably human perspectives. With examples from landmark cases, the article illustrates that judges sometimes make decisions based on considerations that will not be revealed in a mechanistic application of precedent. The article considers how evolving legal research tools and methods give access to precedent that in some respects makes the process more scientific, but in other respects can obscure the realities of how cases are decided. The article also gives examples of this paradox as demonstrated by today’s students who are learning how to do research, drawn from years of the authors’ teaching experience.
first_indexed 2024-04-24T21:58:46Z
format Article
id doaj.art-387e4b7b2e38431a9b6e55bbafaadfb3
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2545-384X
language English
last_indexed 2024-04-24T21:58:46Z
publishDate 2022-05-01
publisher The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin
record_format Article
series Review of European and Comparative Law
spelling doaj.art-387e4b7b2e38431a9b6e55bbafaadfb32024-03-20T13:39:23ZengThe John Paul II Catholic University of LublinReview of European and Comparative Law2545-384X2022-05-0149210.31743/recl.13248Stare decisis and information abundance in a common law jurisdictionEmily Roscoe0Charles Szypszak1University of North Carolina at Chapel HillUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill In a common law jurisdiction, according to the principle of stare decisis judges are bound to interpret a constitutional or common law principle by applying authoritative cases already decided. Parties in disputes pending before the courts must find and assess the prior cases on which they can expect that judges will rely. Not very long ago, research for such precedent involved reviewing known cases and linking them to other cases using topical digests and citators. Success with this approach required a patient, persistent, thorough, and open-minded methodology. Modern information accessibility gives previously unimaginable quick access to cases, including with tools that promise to predict judicial tendencies. But this technological accessibility can have negative side effects, including a diminished research aptitude and a stilted capacity to synthesize information. It can also lead to an inadequate account of the human factors that often cause judges to depart from predictions based on logical inference from prior cases. This article considers the extent to which the identification of precedent is essential in legal analysis, yet is of limited value in predictability as a result of judges’ unavoidably human perspectives. With examples from landmark cases, the article illustrates that judges sometimes make decisions based on considerations that will not be revealed in a mechanistic application of precedent. The article considers how evolving legal research tools and methods give access to precedent that in some respects makes the process more scientific, but in other respects can obscure the realities of how cases are decided. The article also gives examples of this paradox as demonstrated by today’s students who are learning how to do research, drawn from years of the authors’ teaching experience. https://czasopisma.kul.pl/index.php/recl/article/view/13248Keywords: legal research, case law, stare decisis, common law, American law
spellingShingle Emily Roscoe
Charles Szypszak
Stare decisis and information abundance in a common law jurisdiction
Review of European and Comparative Law
Keywords: legal research, case law, stare decisis, common law, American law
title Stare decisis and information abundance in a common law jurisdiction
title_full Stare decisis and information abundance in a common law jurisdiction
title_fullStr Stare decisis and information abundance in a common law jurisdiction
title_full_unstemmed Stare decisis and information abundance in a common law jurisdiction
title_short Stare decisis and information abundance in a common law jurisdiction
title_sort stare decisis and information abundance in a common law jurisdiction
topic Keywords: legal research, case law, stare decisis, common law, American law
url https://czasopisma.kul.pl/index.php/recl/article/view/13248
work_keys_str_mv AT emilyroscoe staredecisisandinformationabundanceinacommonlawjurisdiction
AT charlesszypszak staredecisisandinformationabundanceinacommonlawjurisdiction