Lawyers Judges

This publication is the latest in a series of steps to assist judges in carrying out their onerous responsibilities, and represents a concise yet comprehensive set of principles addressing the many difficult ethical issues that confront judges as they work and live in their communities. It also provides a sound basis to promote a more complete understanding of the role of the judge in society and of the ethical dilemmas they so often encounter. Sections of the publication cover the following: the purpose of the publication; judicial independence; integrity; diligence; equality; and impartiality, including judicial demeanour, civic and charitable activity, political activity, and conflicts of interest.

Virtually all American judges are former lawyers. This book argues that these lawyer-judges instinctively favor the legal profession in their decisions and that this bias has far-reaching and deleterious effects on American law. There are many reasons for this bias, some obvious and some subtle. Fundamentally, it occurs because - regardless of political affiliation, race, or gender - every American judge shares a single characteristic: a career as a lawyer. This shared background results in the lawyer-judge bias. The book begins with a theoretical explanation of why judges naturally favor the interests of the legal profession and follows with case law examples from diverse areas, including legal ethics, criminal procedure, constitutional law, torts, evidence, and the business of law. The book closes with a case study of the Enron fiasco, an argument that the lawyer-judge bias has contributed to the overweening complexity of American law, and suggests some possible solutions.

Subtitle: Canada's lawyers & judges take the stand to relate their funniest stories. A collection of anecdotes, reminiscences and inadvertent one-liners from hundreds of lawyers, judges and court reporters.

In recent years, business leaders, policymakers, and inventors have complained to the media and to Congress that today's patent system stifles innovation instead of fostering it. But like the infamous patent on the peanut butter and jelly sandwich, much of the cited evidence about the patent system is pure anecdote--making realistic policy formation difficult. Is the patent system fundamentally broken, or can it be fixed with a few modest reforms? Moving beyond rhetoric, Patent Failure provides the first authoritative and comprehensive look at the economic performance of patents in forty years. James Bessen and Michael Meurer ask whether patents work well as property rights, and, if not, what institutional and legal reforms are necessary to make the patent system more effective. Patent Failure presents a wide range of empirical evidence from history, law, and economics. The book's findings are stark and conclusive. While patents do provide incentives to invest in research, development, and commercialization, for most businesses today, patents fail to provide predictable property rights. Instead, they produce costly disputes and excessive litigation that outweigh positive incentives. Only in some sectors, such as the pharmaceutical industry, do patents act as advertised, with their benefits outweighing the related costs. By showing how the patent system has fallen short in providing predictable legal boundaries, Patent Failure serves as a call for change in institutions and laws. There are no simple solutions, but Bessen and Meurer's reform proposals need to be heard. The health and competitiveness of the nation's economy depend on it.

Canada's Supreme Court decides cases with far-reaching effects on Canadian politics and public policies. When the Supreme Court sets cases on its agenda, it exercises nearly unrestrained discretion and considerable public authority. But how does the Court choose these cases in the first place? From the several hundred requests for judicial review filed every year, how and why do the justices pick some cases but not others for review? Tournament of Appeals investigates the leave to appeal process in Canada and explores how and why certain cases "win" a place on the Court's agenda and others do not. Taking the approach that the process mimics a sports tournament, this study raises several vital questions. For example, is there an elite Supreme Court "bar" that routinely wins the tournament? Do the Court's rules affect the tournament's outcomes? Or does winning and losing reflect the resources of the parties? As players in this tournament, how do the judges play the game and how does it affect their votes to grant or deny judicial review? Drawing from systematically collected information on the process, applications, and lawyers that has never before been used in studies of Canada's Supreme Court, Roy B. Flemming offers both a qualitatively- and quantitatively-based explanation of how Canada's justices grant judicial review. The first of its kind, this innovative study will draw the attention of lawyers, academics, and students in Canada as well as in the Commonwealth, and European countries whose high courts share many features of the appeals process in Canada.

Brain science in the form of neuroscientific evidence now appears frequently in courtrooms and policy discussions alike. Many legal issues are at stake, such as how to separate the best uses of brain science information from those that are potentially biasing or misleading. It is crucial to evaluate brain science evidence in light of relevant legal standards (such as the Daubert and Frye Rules). Brain Science for Lawyers, Judges, and Policymakers responds to this rapidly changing legal landscape, providing a user-friendly introduction to the fundamentals of neuroscience for lawyers, advocates, judges, legal academics, and policymakers. It features detailed but clear illustrations, as well as a comprehensive and accessible overview of developments in legally relevant neuroscience. Readers will learn brain science terms, how to understand and discuss brain structure and function in legally relevant contexts, and how to avoid over- or under-interpreting neuroscientific evidence. The book begins with a survey of the kinds of litigation, legislation, and regulation where neuroscience is currently being used. It provides accessible descriptions of basic brain anatomy and brain function as well as an overview of how modern technologies can reveal the brain structures and brain functions of individuals. It finishes with cautions and limitations, including timely and thought-provoking observations about where the future of neurolaw might lead. Throughout, the authors offer clear and concise guidance on understanding both the promise and the limitations of using brain science in law and policymaking.