|
Showing 1 - 5 of
5 matches in All Departments
Civil justice in the United States is neither civil nor just.
Instead it embodies a maxim that the American legal system is a
paragon of legal process which assures its citizens a fair and
equal treatment under the law. Long have critics recognized the
system's failings while offering abundant criticism but few
solutions. This book provides a comparative-critical introduction
to civil justice systems in the United States, Germany, and Korea.
It shows the shortcomings of the American system and compares them
with German and Korean successes in implementing the rule of law.
The author argues that these shortcomings could easily be fixed if
the American legal systems were open to seeing how other legal
systems' civil justice processes handle cases more efficiently and
fairly. Far from being a treatise for specialists, this book is an
introductory text for civil justice in the three aforementioned
legal systems. It is intended to be accessible to people with a
general knowledge of a modern legal system.
In this book, James R. Maxeiner takes on the challenge of
demonstrating that historically American law makers did consider a
statutory methodology as part of formulating laws. In the
nineteenth century, when the people wanted laws they could
understand, lawyers inflicted judge-made, statute-destroying,
common law on them. Maxeiner offers the cure for common law, in the
form of sensible statute law. Building on this historical evidence,
Maxeiner shows how rule-making in civil law jurisdictions in other
countries makes for a far more equitable legal system. Sensible
statute laws fit together: one statute governs, as opposed to
several laws that even lawyers have trouble disentangling. In a
statute law system, lawmakers make laws for the common good in
sensible procedures, and judges apply sensible laws and do not make
them. This book shows how such a system works in Germany and how it
would be a solution for the American legal system as well.
A remarkable reversal in popular satisfaction with antitrust law
has occurred: Germany--once the classic land of cartels--now
enforces an antitrust law vigorously and subject to little
meaningful opposition, while the United States--itself the home of
antitrust law--enforces its antitrust law erratically and against
significant criticism. Whatever may be the precise measure of
support in each country for antitrust laws, even the most cursory
observation discloses a criticism of antitrust law in the United
States not matched in kind or degree in the Federal Republic of
Germany. This work investigates aspects of some of the many
possible explanations--legal, social, and economic--for this
remarkable turnaround. It considers perhaps the most obvious
question: How do the two antitrust laws differ? In partial answer,
it suggests that certain principal criticisms of American antitrust
law reflect dissatisfaction as much with the legal methods by which
that law is applied as with the law itself. German cartel law,
Maxeiner suggests, utilizes different legal methods which avoid or
mitigate many of the problems encountered in American antitrust
law.
Civil justice in the United States is neither civil nor just.
Instead it embodies a maxim that the American legal system is a
paragon of legal process which assures its citizens a fair and
equal treatment under the law. Long have critics recognized the
system's failings while offering abundant criticism but few
solutions. This book provides a comparative-critical introduction
to civil justice systems in the United States, Germany, and Korea.
It shows the shortcomings of the American system and compares them
with German and Korean successes in implementing the rule of law.
The author argues that these shortcomings could easily be fixed if
the American legal systems were open to seeing how other legal
systems' civil justice processes handle cases more efficiently and
fairly. Far from being a treatise for specialists, this book is an
introductory text for civil justice in the three aforementioned
legal systems. It is intended to be accessible to people with a
general knowledge of a modern legal system.
In this book, James R. Maxeiner takes on the challenge of
demonstrating that historically American law makers did consider a
statutory methodology as part of formulating laws. In the
nineteenth century, when the people wanted laws they could
understand, lawyers inflicted judge-made, statute-destroying,
common law on them. Maxeiner offers the cure for common law, in the
form of sensible statute law. Building on this historical evidence,
Maxeiner shows how rule-making in civil law jurisdictions in other
countries makes for a far more equitable legal system. Sensible
statute laws fit together: one statute governs, as opposed to
several laws that even lawyers have trouble disentangling. In a
statute law system, lawmakers make laws for the common good in
sensible procedures, and judges apply sensible laws and do not make
them. This book shows how such a system works in Germany and how it
would be a solution for the American legal system as well.
|
You may like...
Imperial Rule
Alexei Miller, Alfred J. Rieber
Paperback
R642
Discovery Miles 6 420
|