This preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.
This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: Jurisprudence 1. The Philosophy of Law – schools of thought: 1. Natural Law - Oldest, believe in natural law and hold that there is a universal law applicable to all human beings and is discoverable through reason and is of a higher order than positive (national) law. 2. Positivist – Centered on the assumption that there is no law higher than the laws created by the government: all laws must be obeyed even if they are unjust, to prevent anarchy 3. Historical – Stresses the evolutionary nature of law and looks to historical doctrines that have withstood the test of time for guidance in shaping present laws 4. Legal Realism – They advocate a less abstract and more realistic and pragmatic approach taking into account customary practices and the circumstances in which transactions take place. 2. Common Law vs. Civil Law 1. Common Law (C/L) – What we use 1. Beg an in En gla nd 2. Star e De cisi s ~ “L et the De cisi on Sta nd ” 1. Sim ila r Fa cts in pas t, si mil ar De cisi on 2. Civil Law (LA, UK/EU, Mex, S. Am, Canada) 1. Bas ed on Ju sti nia n (R om an) co de 2. Cod e im pli es sta tut ory La w (le gis lat ure wri tes the la w) 3. Criminal Vs. Civil Cases 1. Criminal (state/fed vs. defendant) 1. Mu st ha ve bu rde n of pro of to co nvi ct 1. Cas e mu st be pro ve n bey on d a rea so na ble do ubt 2. Def en da nt is eit her gui lty/ not 2. All co nst itut ion al rig hts res erv ed 2. Civil cases (Plaintiff vs. Defendant 1. Onl y ne eds sci ntil la (lit tle bit) of pro of 1. Def en da nt is eit her lia ble or not lia ble Jurisdiction The court must have both Personal and Subject Matter jurisdiction over the case for it to be heard. 1. Personal and Subject matter Jurisdiction: 1. Personal 1. ‘in re m’ lati n for lan d 1. Wh at ha pp ens in Ve gas is trie d in Ve gas 2. The inc ide nt mu st ha ve ha pp en ed in the sa me ph ysi cal are a as the co urt for in re m to ap ply 2. ‘in per so na m’ (mi ni mu m co nta cts ap ply ) 1. The per so n ca n be fro m out of to wn but as lon g as the inc ide nt in qu esti on ha pp en ed in the ge ner al are a of the co urt or if it inv olv es so me on e fro m the co urt s’ jur isd icti on the n in per so na m ap pli es 2. Subject Matter 1. Stat e 1. Offi cia ls are ele cte d by vot ers 2. Exc lus ive Ju ris dic tio n – Ltd to 1 co urt 3. Con cur ren t Ju ris dic tio n – ma ny cts 4. Ori gin al Ju ris dic tio n ~ wh ere cas es are firs t he ard 1. Questions of fact and of law 2. General Vs. Specific 1. 2. 5. App ell ate Ju ris dic tio n ~ if the pla inti ff/ def en da nt dis agr ee wit h cts dec isi on: per so n dis agr eei ng (ap pel lan t) file s ag ain st ap pel lee 1. Minimum of 3 Judges 2. Only Qs of Law 3. 3 Possible Outcom es: 1....
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 04/21/2008 for the course BLAW 2361 taught by Professor Bible during the Fall '08 term at Texas State.
- Fall '08