|
Legal Syllogism
Legal syllogism is a legal concept concerning the law and its application, specifically a form of argument based on deductive reasoning and seeking to establish whether a specified act is lawful. A syllogism is a form of logical reasoning that hinges on a question, a major premise, a minor premise and a conclusion. If properly plead, every legal action seeking redress of a wrong or enforcement of a right is "a syllogism of which the major premise is the proposition of law involved, the minor premise is the proposition of fact, and the judgment the conclusion." More broadly, many sources suggest that every good legal argument is cast in the form of a syllogism. Fundamentally, the syllogism may be reduced to a three step process: 1. " law finding", 2. " fact finding", and 3." law applying." See Holding (law). That protocol presupposes someone has done "law making" already. This model is sufficiently broad so that it may be applied in many different nations and legal systems. ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Deductive Reasoning
Deductive reasoning is the mental process of drawing deductive inferences. An inference is deductively valid if its conclusion follows logically from its premises, i.e. if it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion to be false. For example, the inference from the premises "all men are mortal" and "Socrates is a man" to the conclusion "Socrates is mortal" is deductively valid. An argument is ''sound'' if it is ''valid'' and all its premises are true. Some theorists define deduction in terms of the intentions of the author: they have to intend for the premises to offer deductive support to the conclusion. With the help of this modification, it is possible to distinguish valid from invalid deductive reasoning: it is invalid if the author's belief about the deductive support is false, but even invalid deductive reasoning is a form of deductive reasoning. Psychology is interested in deductive reasoning as a psychological process, i.e. how people ''actually'' dra ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Holding (law)
The holding is a court's determination of a matter of law based on the issue presented in the particular case. In other words: under ''this'' law, with ''these'' facts, ''this'' result. It is the same as a 'decision' made by the judge; however "decision" can also refer to the judge's entire opinion, containing, for example, a discussion of facts, issues, and law as well as the holding. The ''holding'' is the "legal principle to be drawn from the opinion (decision) of the court." Appellate review "The word 'holding' is indefinite and may refer to a trial ruling of the court upon evidence or other questions presented during the trial. Of course, no oral statement made by the court at the close of a trial, nor any written memorandum opinion filed, may be assigned as error on appeal, as the final decision in a law action is the judgment signed, based upon the court's findings of fact and conclusions of law."''Edward L. Eyre & Co. v. Hirsch'', 36 Wn.2d 439, 446 (1950) See also *''Rati ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Deductive Reasoning
Deductive reasoning is the mental process of drawing deductive inferences. An inference is deductively valid if its conclusion follows logically from its premises, i.e. if it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion to be false. For example, the inference from the premises "all men are mortal" and "Socrates is a man" to the conclusion "Socrates is mortal" is deductively valid. An argument is ''sound'' if it is ''valid'' and all its premises are true. Some theorists define deduction in terms of the intentions of the author: they have to intend for the premises to offer deductive support to the conclusion. With the help of this modification, it is possible to distinguish valid from invalid deductive reasoning: it is invalid if the author's belief about the deductive support is false, but even invalid deductive reasoning is a form of deductive reasoning. Psychology is interested in deductive reasoning as a psychological process, i.e. how people ''actually'' dra ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Case-based Reasoning
In artificial intelligence and philosophy, case-based reasoning (CBR), broadly construed, is the process of solving new problems based on the solutions of similar past problems. In everyday life, an auto mechanic who fixes an engine by recalling another car that exhibited similar symptoms is using case-based reasoning. A lawyer who advocates a particular outcome in a trial based on legal precedents or a judge who creates case law is using case-based reasoning. So, too, an engineer copying working elements of nature (practicing biomimicry), is treating nature as a database of solutions to problems. Case-based reasoning is a prominent type of analogy solution making. It has been argued that case-based reasoning is not only a powerful method for computer reasoning, but also a pervasive behavior in everyday human problem solving; or, more radically, that all reasoning is based on past cases personally experienced. This view is related to prototype theory, which is most deeply explo ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Syllogism
A syllogism ( grc-gre, συλλογισμός, ''syllogismos'', 'conclusion, inference') is a kind of logical argument that applies deductive reasoning to arrive at a conclusion based on two propositions that are asserted or assumed to be true. In its earliest form (defined by Aristotle in his 350 BCE book '' Prior Analytics''), a syllogism arises when two true premises (propositions or statements) validly imply a conclusion, or the main point that the argument aims to get across. For example, knowing that all men are mortal (major premise) and that Socrates is a man (minor premise), we may validly conclude that Socrates is mortal. Syllogistic arguments are usually represented in a three-line form: All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore, Socrates is mortal.In antiquity, two rival syllogistic theories existed: Aristotelian syllogism and Stoic syllogism. From the Middle Ages onwards, ''categorical syllogism'' and ''syllogism'' were usually used interchangeably. Thi ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Springer Science+Business Media
Springer Science+Business Media, commonly known as Springer, is a German multinational publishing company of books, e-books and peer-reviewed journals in science, humanities, technical and medical (STM) publishing. Originally founded in 1842 in Berlin, it expanded internationally in the 1960s, and through mergers in the 1990s and a sale to venture capitalists it fused with Wolters Kluwer and eventually became part of Springer Nature in 2015. Springer has major offices in Berlin, Heidelberg, Dordrecht, and New York City. History Julius Springer founded Springer-Verlag in Berlin in 1842 and his son Ferdinand Springer grew it from a small firm of 4 employees into Germany's then second largest academic publisher with 65 staff in 1872.Chronology ". Springer Science+Business Media. In 1964, Springer expanded its business internationa ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Judicial Interpretation
Judicial interpretation is the way in which the judiciary construes the law, particularly constitutional documents, legislation and frequently used vocabulary. This is an important issue in some common law jurisdictions such as the United States, Australia and Canada, because the supreme courts of those nations can overturn laws made by their legislatures via a process called judicial review. For example, the United States Supreme Court has decided such topics as the legality of slavery as in the ''Dred Scott'' decision, and desegregation as in the ''Brown v Board of Education'' decision, and abortion rights as in the ''Roe v Wade'' decision. As a result, how justices interpret the constitution, and the ways in which they approach this task has a political aspect. Terms describing types of judicial interpretation can be ambiguous; for example, the term ''judicial conservatism'' can vary in meaning depending on what is trying to be "conserved". One can look at judicial int ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Law Making
Lawmaking is the process of crafting legislation. In its purest sense, it is the basis of governance. This form of law making is also applied in India. It is a process which works in India on the basis of the Constitution of India. Lawmaking in modern democracies is the work of legislatures, which exist at the local, regional, and national levels and make such laws as are appropriate to their level, and binding over those under their jurisdictions. These bodies are influenced by lobbyists, pressure groups, sometimes partisan considerations, but ultimately by the voters who elected them and to which they are responsible, if the system is working as intended. Even the expenditure of governmental funds is an aspect of lawmaking, as in most jurisdictions the budget is a matter of law. In dictatorships and absolute monarchies the leader can make law essentially by the stroke of a pen, one of the main objections to such an arrangement. However, a seemingly-analogous event can oc ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Judgment (law)
In law, a judgment, also spelled judgement, is a decision of a court regarding the rights and liabilities of parties in a legal action or proceeding. Judgments also generally provide the court's explanation of why it has chosen to make a particular court order.''Black’s Law Dictionary'' 970 (10th ed. 2014). The phrase "reasons for judgment" is often used interchangeably with "judgment," although the former refers to the court's justification of its judgment while the latter refers to the final court order regarding the rights and liabilities of the parties. As the main legal systems of the world recognize either a common law, statutory, or constitutional duty to provide reasons for judgment, drawing a distinction between "judgment" and "reasons for judgment" may be unnecessary in most circumstances. Spelling Judgment is considered a "free variation" word, and the use of either ''judgment'' or ''judgement'' (with an e) is considered acceptable. This variation arises depen ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Cornell University Press
The Cornell University Press is the university press of Cornell University; currently housed in Sage House, the former residence of Henry William Sage. It was first established in 1869, making it the first university publishing enterprise in the United States, but was inactive from 1884 to 1930. The press was established in the College of the Mechanic Arts (as mechanical engineering was called in the 19th century) because engineers knew more about running steam-powered printing presses than literature professors. Since its inception, The press has offered work-study financial aid: students with previous training in the printing trades were paid for typesetting and running the presses that printed textbooks, pamphlets, a weekly student journal, and official university publications. Today, the press is one of the country's largest university presses. It produces approximately 150 nonfiction titles each year in various disciplines, including anthropology, Asian studies, bio ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Trier Of Fact
A trier of fact or finder of fact is a person or group who determines which facts are available in a legal proceeding (usually a trial) and how relevant they are to deciding its outcome. To determine a fact is to decide, from the evidence presented, whether something existed or some event occurred. The factfinder differs by the type of proceeding. In a jury trial, it is the jury; in a non-jury trial, the judge is both the factfinder and the trier of law. In administrative proceedings, the factfinder may be a hearing officer or a hearing body.Law Dictionary: Fact-Finder Accessed 17 November 2008. Juries In a jury trial, a is the trier of fact. The |
Legal Research
Legal research is "the process of identifying and retrieving information necessary to support legal decision-making. In its broadest sense, legal research includes each step of a course of action that begins with an analysis of the facts of a problem and concludes with the application and communication of the results of the investigation." The processes of legal research vary according to the country and the legal system involved. Legal research involves tasks such as: # Finding primary sources of law, or primary authority, in a given jurisdiction ( cases, statutes, regulations, etc.). # Searching secondary authority, for background information about a legal topics. Secondary authorities can come in many forms (for example, law reviews, legal dictionaries, legal treatises, and legal encyclopedias such as American Jurisprudence and Corpus Juris Secundum). # Searching non-legal sources for investigative or supporting information. Legal research is performed by anyone with ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
.svg "Click for more on -> Deductive Reasoning")
