Exploring the little-known history behind the legal doctrine of prior appropriation-"first in time is first in right"-used to apportion water resources in the western United States, this book focuses on the important case of Wyoming v. Colorado (1922). U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Willis Van Devanter, a former Chief Justice of Wyoming, ruled in that state's favor, finding that prior appropriation applied across state lines-a controversial opinion influenced by cronyism. The dicta in the case, that the U.S. Government has no interest in state water allocation law, drove the balkanization of interstate water systems and resulted in the Colorado River Interstate Compact between Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada and California. The exhaustive research that has gone into this book has uncovered the secret that Associate Justice Van Devanter had waited eleven years to publish his opinion in this important, but politically self-serving, case, at last finding a moment when his senior colleagues were sufficiently absent or incapacitated to either concur or dissent. Without the knowledge of his "brethren," save his "loyal friend" Taft, and without recusal, Van Devanter unilaterally delivered his sole opinion to the Clerk for publication on the last day of the Supreme Court's October 1921 Term.

This clear and practical book gives a thorough exposition of the law governing dilapidations in Scotland. It covers the underlying common law; interpretation of the lease; remedies for breach of repairing obligation; common parts and service charge; and dispute resolution.

As our 27th president from 1909 to 1913, and then as chief justice of the Supreme Court from 1921 to 1930, William Howard Taft was the only man ever to lead two of America's three governing branches. But between these two well-documented periods in office, there lies an eight-year patch of largely unexplored political wilderness. It was during this time, after all, that Taft somehow managed to rise from his ignominious defeat by both Woodrow Wilson and Theodore Roosevelt in the 1912 election to achieve his lifelong goal of becoming chief justice. In the first in-depth look at this period in Taft's singular career, eminent presidential historian Lewis L. Gould reveals how a man often derided for his lack of political acumen made his way through the hazards of Republican affairs to gain his objective.

In the years between the presidency and the Supreme Court Taft was, as one commentator observed, "the greatest of globe trotters for humanity." Gould tracks him as he crisscrosses the country from 1913 through the summer of 1921, the inveterate traveler reinventing himself as an elder Republican statesman with no visible political ambition beyond informing and serving the public. Taft was, however, working the long game, serving on the National War Labor Board, fighting for the League of Nations, teaching law and constitutional history at Yale, making up his differences with Roosevelt, all while negotiating the Republican Party's antipathy and his own intense dislike of Woodrow Wilson, whose wartime policies and battle for the league he was bound to support. Throughout, his judicial ambition shaped his actions, with surprising adroitness.

This account of Taft's journey from the White House to the Supreme Court fills a large gap in our understanding of an important American politician and jurist. It also discloses how intricate and complicated public affairs had become during the era of World War I and its aftermath, an era in which William Howard Taft, as a shrewd commentator on the political scene, a resourceful practitioner of party politics, and a man of consummate ambition, made a significant and lasting mark.

Sociolinguists and lawyers will find insight and relevance in this account of the language of the courtroom, as exemplified in the criminal trial of O.J. Simpson. The trial is examined as the site of linguistic power and persuasion, focusing on the role of language in (re)presenting and (re)constructing the crime. In addition to the trial transcripts, the book draws on Simpson's post-arrest interview, media reports and post-trial interviews with jurors.

In 1976, the US Supreme Court ruled in Gregg v. Georgia that the death penalty was constitutional if it complied with certain specific provisions designed to ensure that it was reserved for the 'worst of the worst.' The same court had rejected the death penalty just four years before in the Furman decision because it found that the penalty had been applied in a capricious and arbitrary manner. The 1976 decision ushered in the 'modern' period of the US death penalty, setting the country on a course to execute over 1,400 inmates in the ensuing years, with over 8,000 individuals currently sentenced to die. Now, forty years after the decision, the eminent political scientist Frank Baumgartner along with a team of younger scholars (Marty Davidson, Kaneesha Johnson, Arvind Krishnamurthy, and Colin Wilson) have collaborated to assess the empirical record and provide a definitive account of how the death penalty has been implemented. Each chapter addresses a precise empirical question and provides evidence, not opinion, about whether how the modern death penalty has functioned. They decided to write the book after Justice Breyer issued a dissent in a 2015 death penalty case in which he asked for a full briefing on the constitutionality of the death penalty. In particular, they assess the extent to which the modern death penalty has met the aspirations of Gregg or continues to suffer from the flaws that caused its rejection in Furman. To answer this question, they provide the most comprehensive statistical account yet of the workings of the capital punishment system. Authoritative and pithy, the book is intended for both students in a wide variety of fields, researchers studying the topic, and-not least-the Supreme Court itself.

It is generally accepted that men commit more crimes than women. The widespread acceptance of this view is based primarily on the number of convictions with most jurisdictions reporting considerably fewer incarcerated women/girls than men/boys. This manuscript argues however that decisions made by the various stakeholders that play a role in the incarceration of men are inherently gendered. These decisions are based on patriarchal perceptions and stereotypes related to the familial roles of men and women, and by extension their motivations or offending. Few studies have sought to explore the nature of these perceptions, and the effect these may have on incarceration patterns. Indeed, this form of inquiry remains absent from the research agenda of Caribbean criminologists. Using qualitative data from Barbados, this book analyses the extent to which these factors are taken into consideration not only by the police and members of the judiciary, but by examining the gendered decisions made by shop managers and proprietors in cases involving shoplifting, it seeks to analyse the extent to which these factors are taken into consideration before incidents reach the justice system. Critically, this book seeks also to juxtapose these assumptions against testimony from men incarcerated at Her Majesty's Prison. The large proportion of males in Caribbean prisons when compared to their female counterparts necessitates an investigation into the factors that may contribute to differential treatment as they move through the justice system. Using data from Barbados, the present study seeks to fill this need.

Measuring Judicial Activism supplies empirical analysis to the widely discussed concept of judicial activism at the United States Supreme Court. Complaints about activist Court decisions are common within contemporary political discourse, but these objections often have little substantive meaning beyond the speaker's disagreement with particular case outcomes. Frequently debated by legal scholars, judicial activism is shaped by the participants' ideological perspectives as well as by their subjective views regarding ambiguous constitutional provisions. Although no study can be perfectly objective, Measuring Judicial Activism seeks to move beyond these more subjective debates by conceptualizing activism in non-ideological terms, identifying specific empirical dimensions to the concept, and measuring those dimensions using systematic social scientific techniques. In so doing, the book allows the authors to assess the relative "activism" of recent justices on the Court.
Stefanie Lindquist and Frank B. Cross's work is guided theoretically by the notion that, at its core, the concept of activism involves concerns over the judiciary's institutional aggrandizement at the expense of the elected branches. An important corollary idea is that such efforts are particularly "activist" when they further the justices' own policy or ideological objectives. From these core theoretical ideas, the authors identify specific empirical manifestations that reflect the expansion of judicial power. In particular, the authors evaluate the Court's exercise of judicial review to invalidate legislative and executive action. Lindquist and Cross also analyze the justices' willingness to expand the Court's power by granting litigants increased access to the courts and overruling the Court's own precedents. In these contexts, Measuring Judicial Activism considers the extent to which these actions are consistent with the justices' ideological predilections.

Arbitration is the dominant method in the world for resolving international commercial disputes. As compared with institutional arbitration, ad hoc arbitration has many advantages that make it a preferred way to resolve commercial disputes on many occasions. The Arbitration Law of the People's Republic of China, however, requires that parties appoint an arbitration institution in their arbitration agreement; otherwise an ad hoc arbitration agreement is invalid. This rule seems to preclude ad hoc arbitration under Chinese law and threatens the validity of many arbitration agreements that are imperfectly drafted. Fortunately, however, this does not mean Chinese courts will never enforce an ad hoc arbitration agreement or an ad hoc arbitration award. This book informs parties and practitioners of potential pitfalls related to ad hoc arbitration in China and offers practical guidance. It also conducts a comparative study of the history of arbitration in the Western world and in China, to identify the reasons for this hostility to ad hoc arbitration and calls for changes to this requirement under Chinese law.

This revised second edition takes account of developments in the field of dispute resolution, including mediation and arbitration. The book presents a concise account of the English system of civil litigation, covering court proceedings in England and Wales. It is an original and important study of a system which is the historical root of the US litigation system. The volume offers a comprehensive and properly balanced account of the entire range of dispute resolution techniques. As the first (revised) book on this subject to be published in the USA, it enables American lawyers to gain an overview of the main institutions of English Civil Procedure, including mediation and arbitration. It will render the English system of civil justice accessible to law students in the US, practitioners of law, professors, judges, and policy-makers.

In Patching Up the Cracks Michael D. Grimes evaluates the American juvenile court system, specifically looking at its ability to address child abuse and neglect cases. This project is both a specific case study focusing on the Orleans Parish Juvenile Court in New Orleans, Louisiana, and a discussion of the need to examine the juvenile court system within its larger social and institutional context. Grimes persuasively argues that in order to better evaluate the potential for juvenile court reform, it is crucial to understand the health of the larger community environment within which the court system operates. The book begins with a chronological overview of the evolution of children's rights and a brief history of juvenile justice in America, culminating in a thoroughgoing assessment of its current status. Grimes concludes with a discussion of the need for more adequate studies-researchers and students will appreciate the discussion of his own research design and methodology-of the ways that juvenile courts treat dependency cases and the processes through which these courts can improve their performance.

This volume in ABC-CLIO's About Federal Government set looks at the history and daily operations of the federal judiciary, from district courts, to courts of appeal, to the Supreme Court. The Judicial Branch of Federal Government: People, Process, and Politics shows how the federal courts act as interpreters of the law, definers of rules, and shapers of policy, covering the judiciary throughout U.S. history and as it functions today. In one concise yet comprehensive resource, The Judicial Branch of Federal Government describes the constitutionally ascribed roles and structures of the courts. It looks at the men and women who serve on the federal bench (who they are and how they are appointed), as well as the fascinating relationship of the federal courts with the legislative and executive branches and with the 50 state court systems. Provides a detailed timeline of the legislative history of the federal courts, from the Supreme Court to the district courts by state Primary sources include Article III of the U.S. Constitution, the Judiciary Acts of 1789 and 1801, the Evarts Act of 1891 (creation of Circuit Courts of Appeals), the Judiciary Act of 1911 (disbanding the old Circuit Courts), landmark cases such as Marbury v. Madison (judicial review) and a complete listing of all who served as federal judges by name and by the court they served in

Exploring the role played by cooperation in the law and management of modern, complex contracts, this book contrasts an in-depth review of case law with a large-scale empirical study of the views of commercial actors responsible for the outcomes of these contracts. The possibility of aligning these expectations with the law is considered from the perspective that there is a general duty for parties to cooperate and ensure constructive engagement. The book examines how this might translate into constructive communication, professional governance, genuine attempts to settle issues, a right to fix defects and a duty to take decisions in a fair and rational manner. It argues that statutory adjudication should be extended to all commercial contracts and more ambitious use of available remedies, including those for prevention and cost penalties, would help provide incentives for parties to cooperate more fully. The book will be of interest to academics in the fields of contract law and of contract management, as well as legal and commercial practitioners.

On the eve of a presidential election that may determine the makeup of Supreme Court justices for decades to come, prominent attorney James D. Zirin argues that the Court has become increasingly partisan, rapidly making policy choices right and left on bases that have nothing to do with law or the Constitution. Zirin explains how we arrived at the present situation and looks at the current divide through its leading partisans, Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor on the left and Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas on the right. He also examines four of the Court's most controversial recent decisions - Hobby Lobby, Obamacare, gay marriage, and capital punishment - arguing that these politicized decisions threaten to undermine public confidence in the Supreme Court.

This book examines the role, the general framework and the empirical effectiveness of the main alternative dispute resolution tools (administrative appeals, mediation, and ombudsman) in administrative matters, within the broader context of the administrative justice system. The book uses approaches from the fields of law, public administration, public policy and political science to assess the importance of different instruments for alternative dispute resolution, with an emphasis on administrative appeals.

Professional Emotions in Court examines the paramount role of emotions in the legal professions and in the functioning of the democratic judicial system. Based on extensive interview and observation data in Sweden, the authors highlight the silenced background emotions and the tacitly habituated emotion management in the daily work at courts and prosecution offices. Following participants 'backstage' - whether at the office or at lunch - in order to observe preparations for and reflections on the performance in court itself, this book sheds light on the emotionality of courtroom interactions, such as professional collaboration, negotiations, and challenges, with the analysis of micro-interactions being situated in the broader structural regime of the legal system - the emotive-cognitive judicial frame - throughout. A demonstration of the false dichotomy between emotion and reason that lies behind the assumption of a judicial system that operates rationally and without emotion, Professional Emotions in Court reveals how this assumption shapes professionals' perceptions and performance of their work, but hampers emotional reflexivity, and questions whether the judicial system might gain in legitimacy if the role of emotional processes were recognized and reflected upon.

One of the most important problems faced by the United States is addressing its broken criminal justice system. This collection of essays offers a thorough examination of incarceration as a form of punishment. In addition to focusing on the philosophical aspects related to punishment, the volume's diverse group of contributors provides additional background in criminology, economics, law, and sociology to help contextualize the philosophical issues. The first group of essays addresses whether or not our current institutions connected with punishment and incarceration are justified in a liberal society. The next set of chapters explores the negative effects of incarceration as a form of punishment, including its impact on children and families. The volume then describes how we arrived at our current situation in the United States, focusing on questions related to how we view prisons and prisoners, policing for profit, and the motivations of prosecutors in trying to secure convictions. Finally, Rethinking Punishment in the Era of Mass Incarceration examines specific policy alternatives that might offer solutions to our current approach to punishment and incarceration.

This book provides a systematic and interdisciplinary examination of law and legal institutions in Malaysia. It examines legal issues from historical, social, and political perspectives, and discusses the role of law in relation to Malaysian multiculturalism, religion, politics, and society. It shows how the Malaysian legal system is at the heart of debates about how to deal with the country's problems, which include ethnic and religious divisions, uneven and unsustainable development, and political authoritarianism; and it argues that the Malaysian legal system has much to teach other plural polities, nations within the common law tradition, and federal states.

Environmental mediation continues to develop and evolve in different jurisdictions across the world in order to prevent potential environmental conflicts or to resolve the conflicts while avoiding the inherent drawbacks of an adjudicated solution. This book takes a comparative approach to explore the legal framework of environmental mediation with a focus on the judicial, administrative and private procedures and the criteria for accrediting mediators in a range of jurisdictions across the world. It also examines practical considerations for environmental mediators while analysing the effectiveness of different mediation processes.

U.S. Supreme Court justices are studied publicly, but scant attention is generally paid to the judges who function daily in other courts of the world. Trends in the Judiciary: Interviews with Judges Across the Globe assembles a collection of interviews conducted by international scholars and researchers. It provides an insider's perspective of how members of the worldwide judiciary cope with significant legal developments and the issues they face in criminal and procedural law. The subjects of these interviews administer justice in Australia, Austria, Bosnia-Herzegovina, the Republic of Slovenia, Canada, India, and the United States. Representing a variety of cultures, political environments, and economic systems, the interviewees each discuss their background, education, and career; their judicial role; the major changes and challenges they have experienced; and the relationship between theory and practice. In addition to the candid observations of the interview subject, each chapter provides a brief portrait of the national judicial system and court in which each judge serves. Continuing the work of the International Police Executive Symposium (IPES) and the CRC Press series Interviews with Global Leaders in Policing, Courts, and Prisons, the book enhances readers' understanding of the judiciary and opens a dialogue between scholars, researchers, and practitioners. It is a major contribution to the study and practice of judging around the world.

It is essential that those in the criminal justice system understand the tasks that police dogs perform and the evidence that their work produces. Police and Military Dogs: Criminal Detection, Forensic Evidence, and Judicial Admissibility examines the use of police and military dogs for a wide variety of functions and explores canine biology and behavior as it applies to police work. The book begins with an overview of the changes that have occurred in the field in the past four decades as discoveries have been made about canine capabilities. The author examines how a canine handler's work with a skilled police dog can affect the subsequent investigation and prosecution of the crime. He discusses optimal procedures for finding and processing evidence and describes the boundaries of admissibility of evidence produced by police dogs. The book examines the many diverse detection functions police dogs are being trained to perform, ranging from cadaver detection to the discovery of explosives. It also describes the use of dogs to apprehend criminals and in search and rescue operations. Written for a wide audience including canine handlers, forensic scientists, attorneys, and the judiciary, this volume covers topics pertinent to all aspects of the police dog in contemporary law enforcement.

The third volume in the Interviews with Global Leaders in Policing, Courts, and Prisons series, Trends in the Judiciary: Interviews with Judges Across the Globe, this book provides an insider's view of the judicial system. Offering interviews from judges in Africa, Asia, Australasia, Europe, North America, and the West Indies, it explores the behind-the-scenes motivations of judges on a global scale, delving into the interviewees' opinions on diverse legal systems, the interpretation of legal developments, and current issues in criminal law. Readers of this text will be experience the judicial system from within-the plans, protests, and thought processes of practicing judges. Criminal justice students and practitioners alike will benefit from this unique examination of judges around the world.

A new installment of the series of Interviews with Global Leaders in Policing, Courts, and Prisons, this book expands upon the criminal justice coverage of earlier volumes, offering the voices of 14 lawyers from 13 diverse locales, including countries in Africa, North America, South America, Europe, and the Asia-Pacific region. This book is intended for students and others focusing on law and legal studies, policing, psychology and law, criminology, justice studies, public policy, and for all those interested in the front lines of legal change around the world. Featuring versatile chapters perfect for individual use or as part of a collection, this volume offers a personal approach to the legal world for students and experienced professionals.

American criminal justice is a dysfunctional mess. Cops are too violent, the punishments are too punitive, and the so-called Land of the Free imprisons more people than any other country in the world. Understanding why means focusing on color-not only on black or white (which already has been studied extensively), but also on green. The problem is that nearly everyone involved in criminal justice-including district attorneys, elected judges, the police, voters, and politicians-faces bad incentives. Local towns often would rather send people to prison on someone else's dime than pay for more effective policing themselves. Local police forces can enrich themselves by turning into warrior cops who steal from innocent civilians. Voters have very little incentive to understand the basic facts about crime or how to fix it-and vote accordingly. And politicians have every incentive to cater to voters' worst biases. Injustice for All systematically diagnoses why and where American criminal justice goes wrong, and offers functional proposals for reform. By changing who pays for what, how people are appointed, how people are punished, and which things are criminalized, we can make the US a country which guarantees justice for all. Key Features: Shows how bad incentives, not "bad apples," cause the dysfunction in American criminal justice Focuses not only on overincarceration, but on overcriminalization and other failures of the criminal justice system Provides a philosophical and practical defense of reducing the scope of what's considered criminal activity Crosses ideological lines, highlighting both the weaknesses and strengths of liberal, conservative, and libertarian agendas Fully integrates tools from philosophy and social science, making this stand out from the many philosophy books on punishment, on the one hand, and the solely empirical studies from sociology and criminal science, on the other Avoids disciplinary jargon, broadening the book's suitability for students and researchers in many different fields and for an interested general readership Offers plausible reforms that realign specific incentives with the public good.

American criminal justice is a dysfunctional mess. Cops are too violent, the punishments are too punitive, and the so-called Land of the Free imprisons more people than any other country in the world. Understanding why means focusing on color-not only on black or white (which already has been studied extensively), but also on green. The problem is that nearly everyone involved in criminal justice-including district attorneys, elected judges, the police, voters, and politicians-faces bad incentives. Local towns often would rather send people to prison on someone else's dime than pay for more effective policing themselves. Local police forces can enrich themselves by turning into warrior cops who steal from innocent civilians. Voters have very little incentive to understand the basic facts about crime or how to fix it-and vote accordingly. And politicians have every incentive to cater to voters' worst biases. Injustice for All systematically diagnoses why and where American criminal justice goes wrong, and offers functional proposals for reform. By changing who pays for what, how people are appointed, how people are punished, and which things are criminalized, we can make the US a country which guarantees justice for all. Key Features: Shows how bad incentives, not "bad apples," cause the dysfunction in American criminal justice Focuses not only on overincarceration, but on overcriminalization and other failures of the criminal justice system Provides a philosophical and practical defense of reducing the scope of what's considered criminal activity Crosses ideological lines, highlighting both the weaknesses and strengths of liberal, conservative, and libertarian agendas Fully integrates tools from philosophy and social science, making this stand out from the many philosophy books on punishment, on the one hand, and the solely empirical studies from sociology and criminal science, on the other Avoids disciplinary jargon, broadening the book's suitability for students and researchers in many different fields and for an interested general readership Offers plausible reforms that realign specific incentives with the public good.

This book discusses how UNIDROIT principles are viewed and interpreted in different countries, presenting various perspectives and practical lessons learned. It also offers a detailed analysis of the use of the UNIDROIT principles to interpret and supplement domestic contract law. Written by experts in the field, it provides insights into how the principles are being used and applied in their respective countries. The findings are also summarized in a General Report that was presented at the 20th IACL General Congress in Fukuoka, Japan.