Legal history studies have often focused mainly on codified law, without attention to actual practice, and on the past, without relating it to the present. As the title-Research from Archival Case Records: Law, Society, and Culture in China-of this book suggests, the authors deliberately follow the research method of starting from court actions and only on that basis engage in discussions of laws and legal concepts and theory. The articles cover a range of topics and source materials, both past and present. They provide some surprising findings-about disjunctures between code and practice, adjustments between them, and how those reveal operative principles and logics different from what the legal texts alone might suggest. Contributors are: Kathryn Bernhardt, Danny Hsu, Philip C. C. Huang, Christopher Isett, Yasuhiko Karasawa, Margaret Kuo, Huaiyin Li, Jennifer M. Neighbors, Bradly W. Reed, Matthew H. Sommer, Huey Bin Teng, Lisa Tran, Elizabeth VanderVen, and Chenjun You.

Few would disagree that neighborhood and place are important dimensions of reentry from prison, but we have a less clear sense of why or how they matter-and we rarely get a view of the lived social-interactional dynamics between people returning from incarceration and receiving communities. Intersecting Lives focuses on the processes by which neighborhood and place influence reentry experiences and how these shape community life. Through interviews and ethnographic observations, Andrea M. Leverentz brings readers into three very different Boston communities. These places and the interactions they foster shape reentry outcomes, including reoffending, surveillance, relationship formation, and access to opportunities. This book sheds crucial new light on the processes of reentry and desistance, tying them intimately to space and community, including dynamics around race, gender, gentrification, homelessness, and transportation.

Legal education systems, like legal systems themselves, were framed across Asia without exception according to foreign models. These reflect the vestiges of colonialism, and can be said to amount to imitating the style and purposes of legal education typical in Western and relatively "pure" common law and civilian systems. Today, however, we see Asian legal education coming into its own and beginning to accept responsibility for designing curricula and approaches that fit the region's particular needs. This book explores how conventional "transplanted" approaches as regards program design as well as modes of teaching are, or are on the cusp of being, reimagined and discerns emerging home-grown traces of innovation replacing imitation in countries and universities across East Asia.

Combines academic rigour with case studies and activities designed to aid learning Suitable for courses both in the UK and internationally, and it uses international examples

Combines academic rigour with case studies and activities designed to aid learning Suitable for courses both in the UK and internationally, and it uses international examples

The onset of the 2004 EU enlargement witnessed a number of predictions being made about the approaches, capacity and ability of Central European judges who were soon to join the Union. Optimistic voices, foreshadowing the deep transformative power that Europe was bound to exercise with respect to the judicial mentality and practice in the new Member States, were intertwined with gloomy pictures of post-Communist limited formalism and mechanical jurisprudence that could not be reformed, which were likely to undermine the very foundations of mutual trust and recognition the judicial system of the Union is built upon. Ten years later, this volume revisits these predictions and critically assesses the evolution of Central European judicial mentality, institutions and constitutionality under the influence of the EU membership. Comparatively evaluating the situation in a number of Central European Member States in their socio-legal contexts, notably Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Slovenia, Bulgaria and Romania, the volume offers unique insights into the process of (non) Europeanisation of national legal systems and cultures.

Technology has had a prevalent impact on nearly all social domains, one being the judicial system. Advancements such as computer-generated demonstrations and electronic filing can enhance presentations and give a clearer, well-organized case.""E-Justice: Using Information Communication Technologies in the Court System"" presents the most relevant experiences and best practices concerning the use and impact of ICTs in the courtroom. This groundbreaking title draws upon the leading academic and practicing perspectives from around the globe to provide academics and professionals throughout the legal system with the most comprehensive overview of present developments in e-justice.

This book provides international readers with basic knowledge of Chinese civil procedure and succinct explanations of essential issues, fundamental principles and particular institutions in Chinese civil procedure and the conflict of laws. The book begins with a survey of the Chinese procedural law and an overview of Chinese civil procedure and then focuses on essential aspects of court jurisdiction and trial procedure in civil matters. In view of the traditional importance of alternative dispute resolution in China, mediation (conciliation) and arbitration are also discussed with corresponding comparisons to civil procedure. The book also discusses issues relating to the conflict of laws, i.e. international jurisdiction under the Chinese international civil procedure law, recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments as well as Chinese choice of law rules. Focus is directed toward the Chinese Statute on the Application of Laws to Civil Relationships Involving Foreign Elements of 28 October 2010, which entered into force on 1 April 2011. CHEN Weizuo is Director of the Research Centre for Private International Law and Comparative Law at Tsinghua University's School of Law in Beijing. He has a Doctor of Laws degree from Wuhan University, China; an LL.M. and doctor iuris, Universit t des Saarlandes, Germany; professeur invit la Facult internationale de droit compar de Strasbourg, France (since 2003); professeur invit l'Universit de Strasbourg, France. He has published extensively on the international laws and his publications have appeared both in and outside China. He has taught a special course in French at the Hague Academy of International Law during its 2012 summer session of private international law.

Meet Thaddeus Sikorski, a herculean third-generation American, courageous, persevering, and surprisingly steadfast father of this tragic odyssey to love and protect his angel children. After losing his first love, 18-year-old Thad enlist, and goes on to become a Vietnam War combatant, a San Francisco progressive street revolutionary, a graduate business student, an Internet-related technology visionary, husband, and a global business leader. In between entrepreneurial misadventures, he manages to save the life of an American President, struggles with a psychopathy attorney and murderer, discovers the truth about Silicon Valley's justice system, experiences the economic hollowing out brought on by the outsourcing of Silicon Valley technologies, and survives the emotions of remaining true to his love for his children. This extraordinary journey travels through three decades of the American technology and cultural landscape. Author Richard Kusiolek paid much attention to the details of everyday life of an entrepreneur in Silicon Valley. Angels in the Silicon encapsulates the experience of living in Silicon Valley for three decades of rapid technology progress, economic change, and a politically correct progressive judiciary. The novel, "Angels in the Silicon," has a powerful American story to tell. You will learn the naked truth of living in Northern California's Silicon Valley.

This book explores some of the most glaring misunderstandings about the U.S. Supreme Court-and makes a strong case for why our Supreme Court Justices should not be entrusted with decisions that affect every American citizen. Supreme Myths: Why the Supreme Court is Not a Court and its Justices are Not Judges presents a detailed discussion of the Court's most important and controversial constitutional cases that demonstrates why it doesn't justify being labeled "a court of law." Eric Segall, professor of law at Georgia State University College of Law for two decades, explains why this third branch of the national government is an institution that makes important judgments about fundamental questions based on the Justices' ideological preferences, not the law. A complete understanding of the true nature of the Court's decision-making process is necessary, he argues, before an intelligent debate over who should serve on the Court-and how they should resolve cases-can be held. Addressing front-page areas of constitutional law such as health care, abortion, affirmative action, gun control, and freedom of religion, this book offers a frank description of how the Supreme Court truly operates, a critique of life tenure of its Justices, and a set of proposals aimed at making the Court function more transparently to further the goals of our representative democracy.

An authoritative guide designed for Illinois criminal trial attorneys, appellate practitioners, and judges. This book provides an in-depth review of the new Illinois Rules of Evidence along with the authors' commentaries and a compilation of the most recent Illinois decisions, statutes, and Supreme Court Rules. In addition to the new rules, the book addresses complementary Illinois common law evidence rules and provides a thorough constitutional analysis of evidence law. This comprehensive guide explains everything you need to know about the new Illinois Rules of Evidence and their impact on your daily criminal litigation practice. Ralph Ruebner is a Professor of Law and the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs at The John Marshall Law School. He has taught evidence, criminal procedure, and international human rights law. He previously served as the Executive Director of the John Marshall Law School Criminal Justice Clinic and as the Deputy State Appellate Defender in both the First and Second Appellate Districts in Illinois. He is a 1969 graduate of the American University Washington College of Law. Katarina Durcova is a Staff Attorney at the Criminal Division of the Circuit Court of Cook County. She is a 2011 graduate of The John Marshall Law School and was a John Marshall Law School Library Research Fellow. She previously worked as a judicial extern for Justice Margaret O'Mara Frossard (ret.) at the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court and as a summer law clerk in the Pre-Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in the Hague, the Netherlands.

The criminal trial is under attack. Traditional principles have been challenged or eroded; in England and Wales the right to trial by jury has been restricted and rules concerning bad character evidence, double jeopardy and the right to silence have been substantially altered to "rebalance" the system in favour of victims. In the pursuit of security, particularly from terrorism, the right to a fair trial has been denied to some altogether. In fact trials have for a long time been an infrequent occurrence, most criminal convictions being the consequence of a guilty plea. Moreover, while this very public struggle over the future of the criminal trial is conducted, there is also a less publicly observed controversy about the significance of trials in modern society. Trials are under normative attack, their value being doubted by those who seek different kinds of process - conciliatory or restorative - to address the needs of victims and move away from the imposition of state power through trials and punishments. This book seeks to develop a normative theory of the criminal trial as a way of defending the importance of trials in our criminal justice system. The trial, it is suggested, calls defendants to answer a charge and, if they are criminally responsible, to account for their conduct. The trial is seen as a communicative process through which the defendant can challenge claims of wrongdoing made against him, including the norms in the light of which those claims are made. The book develops this communicative theory by first making a careful study of the history of trials, before moving on to outline the theory, which is then developed through chapters looking at the practices and principles of trials, alternative regulatory models, the roles of participants, the relationship between investigation and trial and trials as public fora.

How do judges sentence? In particular, how important is judicial discretion in sentencing? Sentencing guidelines are often said to promote consistency, but is consistency in sentencing achievable or even desirable? Whilst the passing of a sentence is arguably the most public stage of the criminal justice process, there have been few attempts to examine judicial perceptions of, and attitudes towards, the sentencing process. Through interviews with Scottish judges and by presenting a comprehensive review and analysis of recent scholarship on sentencing - including a comparative study of UK, Irish and Commonwealth sentencing jurisprudence - this book explores these issues to present a systematic theory of sentencing. Through an integration of the concept of equity as particularised justice, the Aristotelian concept of phronesis (or 'practical wisdom'), the concept of value pluralism, and the focus of appellate courts throughout the Commonwealth on sentencing by way of 'instinctive synthesis', it is argued that judicial sentencing methodology is best viewed in terms of a phronetic synthesis of the relevant facts and circumstances of the particular case. The author concludes that sentencing is best conceptualised as a form of case-orientated, concrete and intuitive decision making; one that seeks individualisation through judicial recognition of the profoundly contextualised nature of the process.

Since America's founding, the U.S. Supreme Court had issued a vast number of decisions on a staggeringly wide variety of subjects. And hundreds of judges have occupied the bench. Yet as Cass R. Sunstein, the eminent legal scholar and bestselling co-author of Nudge, points out, almost every one of the Justices fits into a very small number of types regardless of ideology: the hero, the soldier, the minimalist, and the mute. Heroes are willing to invoke the Constitution to invalidate state laws, federal legislation, and prior Court decisions. They loudly embrace first principles and are prone to flair, employing dramatic language to fundamentally reshape the law. Soldiers, on the other hand, are skeptical of judicial power, and typically defer to decisions made by the political branches. Minimalists favor small steps and only incremental change. They worry that bold reversals of long-established traditions may be counterproductive, producing a backlash that only leads to another reversal. Mutes would rather say nothing at all about the big constitutional issues, and instead tend to decide cases on narrow grounds or keep controversial cases out of the Court altogether by denying standing. As Sunstein shows, many of the most important constitutional debates are in fact contests between the four Personae. Whether the issue involves slavery, gender equality, same-sex marriage, executive power, surveillance, or freedom of speech, debates have turned on choices made among the four Personae-choices that derive as much from psychology as constitutional theory. Sunstein himself defends a form of minimalism, arguing that it is the best approach in a self-governing society of free people. More broadly, he casts a genuinely novel light on longstanding disputes over the proper way to interpret the constitution, demonstrating that behind virtually every decision and beneath all of the abstract theory lurk the four Personae. By emphasizing the centrality of character types, Sunstein forces us to rethink everything we know about how the Supreme Court works.

The first full-scale historical account of the rise and growth of the jury system in England. The American edition adds a number of notes, as well as making several corrections to American references.

2007 Ruth Shonle Cavan Young Scholar Award presented by the American Society of Criminology

2007 American Society of Criminology Michael J. Hindelang Award for the Most Outstanding Contribution to Research in Criminology

By comparing how adolescents are prosecuted and punished in juvenile and criminal (adult) courts, Aaron Kupchik finds that prosecuting adolescents in criminal court does not fit with our cultural understandings of youthfulness. As a result, adolescents who are transferred to criminal courts are still judged as juveniles. Ultimately, Kupchik makes a compelling argument for the suitability of juvenile courts in treating adolescents. Judging Juveniles suggests that justice would be better served if adolescents were handled by the system designed to address their special needs.

This book offers a new interpretation of judicial review in England and Wales as being concerned with the advancement of justice and good governance, as opposed to being concerned primarily with ultra vires or common law constitutionalism. It is developed both from examining the functions and values that ought to be served by judicial review, and from analysis of empirical 'social' facts about judicial review primarily as experienced in the Administrative Court. Based on ground-up case law analysis it constructs a new taxonomy on the grounds of judicial review: mistake, procedural impropriety, ordinary common law statutory interpretation, discretionary impropriety, relevant/irrelevant considerations, breach of an ECHR protected right or equality duty, and constitutional allocation of powers, constitutional rights, or other complex constitutional principles. It explains each of these grounds, what academic and judicial support there might be for them outside case law analysis, and their similarities and differences when viewed against popular existing taxonomies. It concludes that Administrative Court judges are engaged in ordinary common law statutory interpretation in approximately half of all cases, and that where discretionary judgement is involved on the part of the initial decision-maker, judges do indeed consider their task to be one of determining whether the challenged decision was justified by reasoning of adequate quality. It finds that judges apply ordinary common law principles of statutory interpretation with historical pedigrees, including assessing the initial decision-maker's reasoning with reference to statutory purpose, and sifting relevant from irrelevant considerations, including moral considerations. The result is a ground-breaking reassessment of the grounds of judicial review in England and Wales and the practice of the Administrative Court.

The Lawyers' Guide to Personal Injury Law is an instructional textbook for attorneys who want to become experts in the field of negligence law. The book provides a comprehensive analysis of the law in a multitude of areas within the field, including the various types of construction accidents, motor vehicle accidents, premises accidents, and more. The Lawyers' Guide to Personal Injury Law also provides a detailed roadmap - from intake through trial - to successfully litigating each of these claims and, ultimately, maximizing monetary compensation for accident victims and their families.

Anatomy of a Trial. Volume V, Trying Cases to Win. Description (3900 characters maximum): Originally published: New York: Aspen Publishers, 1999. Reprinted 2013 by The Lawbook Exchange, Ltd. xviii, 584 pp. The trial process is the sum of its parts-opening argument, direct and cross examination, and summation. In Trying Cases to Win, nationally known trial lawyer Herbert J. Stern provides an overall blueprint for conduct in the courtroom as he guides the reader through each of these segments. Rather than a collection of anecdotal war stories from various trials, Stern outlines the nuts and bolts of the right-and wrong-approach, processes and strategies for every component needed for trial success. Each volume is available separately.
In this volume, Anatomy of a Trial, Stern and his co-author, Stephen A. Saltzburg, bring the principles of the other volumes in the Trying Cases to Win series into action. They offer a line-by-line review of all of the parts of a trial while looking at the importance of emotion in the decision process and its relationship to the facts presented. This detailed analysis, from the viewpoints of the attorney and the jury, demonstrates good and bad advocacy in every stage of the trial.
Contents:
1. Opening Instructions;
2. The Opening Arguments;
3. The First Witness;
4. The Second Witness: Nick Craggs;
5. The Sweeney Deposition;
6. The First of "The Blues" Witnesses: Brian Sullivan;
7. The Alleged Villain: Helen Hardy;
8. Concluding the Plaintiff's Case and Motions;
9. The Defendant's First Witness: Mr. Maresca;
10. The Trustee Witnesses;
11. Ms. Hardy Returns;
12. The Ruling on Defendants' Motion;
13. Ms. Hardy Continues and the Defense Rests;
14. Final Motions, Closing Argument, and Verdict;
15. Epilogue;
Index. Author Bio (3900 characters maximum): Herbert J. Stern is a highly regarded trial lawyer and accomplished teacher of trial techniques. A partner and founding member in the New Jersey law firm of Stern & Kilcullen, Stern is a former Federal Judge, having served as United States district judge for the District of New Jersey from 1974 to 1987. He established his reputation as an advocate while serving as a trial attorney with the Organized Crime and Racketeering Section of the United States Department of Justice from 1965 to 1969 and as United States attorney for the District of New Jersey from 1970 to 1974 when he won a national reputation for unprecedented convictions of numerous public officials. He was founder and Co-Director of the Advocacy Institute at the University of Virginia School of Law from 1980 to the present. He was Special Counsel for Hon. Lawrence Walsh, Independent Counsel, Iran-Contra Prosecution, 1988. Judge Stern was the subject of the book, Tiger in the Court (Chicago: Playboy Press, 1973). He is the author of Judgment in Berlin (New York: Universe Books, 1984) which was made into a major motion picture with Sean Penn, and Martin Sheen playing Judge Stern; and, most recently, Diary of a DA: The True Story of the Prosecutor Who Took On the Mob, Fought Corruption, and Won (New York: Skyhorse Publishing, 2012). Review 1 (3900 characters maximum): ... a crowning achievement in a career devoted to helping all lawyers, from beginners to veterans, become more knowledgeable in the art of advocacy. Source: -- Arthur J. Greenbaum, Cowan, Liebowitz & Latman, PC, New York, NY