LAWSO 1 11-29-07

LAWSO 1 - State of New York Rationales for Stare Decisis • Predictability equality efficiency and the appearance of justice • A doctrine that

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–10. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
LAWS0 1 November 29, 2007
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
The Power of Precedent
Background image of page 2
Objectives When should precedent be overturned? Langan v St Vincent’s Hospital (2005) Buckley v City of New York (1982) Herrera v Quality Pontiac (2003)
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) Signed into law Sept. 21, 1996 Two effects No State required to recognize a marriage between persons of the same sex The Federal government may not recognize same sex marriages, even if lawful in one of the states.
Background image of page 4
Legal history of DOMA Baehr v Lewin, Hawaii (1993) Baker v Nelson (1972) Langan v St Vincent’s Hospital (2005) Citations Baker Lawrence v Texas (2003) Valentine v American Airlines
Background image of page 5

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Langan majority There is no cogent reason to depart from established precedent of both the courts of the United States and the courts of the
Background image of page 6
Background image of page 7

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 8
Background image of page 9

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 10
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: State of New York . . . . Rationales for Stare Decisis • Predictability, equality, efficiency and the appearance of justice • A doctrine that can be easily manipulated – how? Rationales for overturning precedent • A subsequent development in the law • The ruling has proven to be unworkable • Underlying reason has become outdated Buckley v City of NY (1982) • Fellow servant rule – is it still in force? • Think about the reasoning in Buckley – are there reasons precedent should not be honored? Herrera v Quality Pontiac (2003) • Stare decisis promotes principles in the maintenance of a sound judicial system. • Stability of law • Fairness in assuring that all cases are treated similarly • Judicial economy...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 03/05/2009 for the course LAWSO 1 taught by Professor Spearit during the Fall '07 term at UCSB.

Page1 / 10

LAWSO 1 - State of New York Rationales for Stare Decisis • Predictability equality efficiency and the appearance of justice • A doctrine that

This preview shows document pages 1 - 10. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online