Download Free The Reasonableness Of Law Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online The Reasonableness Of Law and write the review.

Reasonableness is at the centre of legal debate, both in academic circles and in practice. This unique reference work adopts an interdisciplinary perspective, merging jurisprudence, legal theory, political philosophy and the different branches of law. All aspects relating to reasonableness and law are addressed by the most prominent scholars in the field. In the first part of the book, the focus is on jurisprudential analyses of the concept of reasonableness and on its moral, political and constitutional implications. In the second part, reasonableness is examined in the different fields of law like Public, Private and International Law. Here in more detail the practical consequences of reasonableness are worked out, making this work of interest to practitioners as well as legal theorists.
Argues that treating people and artificial intelligence differently under the law results in unexpected and harmful outcomes for social welfare.
If, as John Rawls famously suggests, justice is the first virtue of social institutions, how are we to understand the institution of contract law? This book proposes a Rawlsian theory of contract law. It argues that justice requires that we understand contract rules in terms of the idea of reasonable, terms of interaction – that is, terms that would be accepted by reasonable persons moved by a desire for a social world in which they, as free and equal, can cooperate with others on terms they accept. On that basis, the book explains the main doctrines of contract law, including those governing third parties, in both the Common Law and the Civil Law.
A man murders his wife after she has admitted her infidelity; another man kills an openly gay teammate after receiving a massage; a third man, white, goes for a jog in a “bad” neighborhood, carrying a pistol, and shoots an African American teenager who had his hands in his pockets. When brought before the criminal justice system, all three men argue that they should be found “not guilty”; the first two use the defense of provocation, while the third argues he used his gun in self-defense. Drawing upon these and similar cases, Cynthia Lee shows how two well-established, traditional criminal law defenses—the doctrines of provocation and self-defense—enable majority-culture defendants to justify their acts of violence. While the reasonableness requirement, inherent in both defenses, is designed to allow community input and provide greater flexibility in legal decision-making, the requirement also allows majority-culture defendants to rely on dominant social norms, such as masculinity, heterosexuality, and race (i.e., racial stereotypes), to bolster their claims of reasonableness. At the same time, Lee examines other cases that demonstrate that the reasonableness requirement tends to exclude the perspectives of minorities, such as heterosexual women, gays and lesbians, and persons of color. Murder and the Reasonable Man not only shows how largely invisible social norms and beliefs influence the outcomes of certain criminal cases, but goes further, suggesting three tentative legal reforms to address problems of bias and undue leniency. Ultimately, Lee cautions that the true solution lies in a change in social attitudes.
The Model Rules of Professional Conduct provides an up-to-date resource for information on legal ethics. Federal, state and local courts in all jurisdictions look to the Rules for guidance in solving lawyer malpractice cases, disciplinary actions, disqualification issues, sanctions questions and much more. In this volume, black-letter Rules of Professional Conduct are followed by numbered Comments that explain each Rule's purpose and provide suggestions for its practical application. The Rules will help you identify proper conduct in a variety of given situations, review those instances where discretionary action is possible, and define the nature of the relationship between you and your clients, colleagues and the courts.
The 'reasonable person' is used to assess the acceptability of behaviour in many areas of the law. This notion has attracted a great deal of criticism as it presupposes uncontested notions of 'normal' behaviour. This book explores whether there are deeper foundations to these criticisms.
For the criminal justice system to work, adequate resources must be available for police, prosecutors and public defense. This timely, incisive and important book by Professor Norman Lefstein looks carefully at one leg of the justice system's "three-legged stool"public defenseand the chronic overload of cases faced by public defenders and other lawyers who represent the indigent. Fortunately, the publication does far more than bemoan the current lack of adequate funding, staffing and other difficulties faced by public defense systems in the U.S. and offers concrete suggestions for dealing with these serious issues.
Judges in most societies often resort to resolving disputes by means of applying a criterion of reasonableness. In The Demise of the'Reasonable Man' Michael Saltman explores the ways in which reasonableness varies from one legal culture to another, defined by the relative presence or absence of centralized political power. In non-politically centralized societies, Saltman says, judges seek meanings underlying human behavior, and try to place reasonableness within a societal and cultural context. This is possible because primitive societies are relatively homogenous in their values and tend towards consensus when determining what constitutes reasonable behavior. In contrast, modern judges resort to standards of reasonableness only when the legal standard is unclear. Saltman contrasts judges in politically centralized societies, who, in the absence of such consensus, have the authority to determine, on the basis of that authority, what constitutes reasonableness. This rich volume references case studies drawn from ethnographic fieldwork, historical sources, and law reports to demonstrate differences in judicial attitudes toward reasonableness.