Formats
| Format | |
|---|---|
| BibTeX | |
| MARCXML | |
| TextMARC | |
| MARC | |
| DublinCore | |
| EndNote | |
| NLM | |
| RefWorks | |
| RIS |
Items
Details
Title
The five types of legal argument / Wilson Huhn.
Distributed
Durham, North Carolina : Carolina Academic Press, [2014]
Call Number
KF380 .H84 2014
Edition
Third edition.
ISBN
9781611635881 (pbk.)
1611635888 (pbk.)
1611635888 (pbk.)
Description
xv, 228 pages ; 22 cm
System Control No.
(OCoLC)869881371
Bibliography, etc. Note
Includes bibliographical references and indexes.
Record Appears in
Gift
Purchased from the income of the Jaffe Fund
Gift
The Arthur W. Diamond Law Library
Purchased from the income of the Jaffe Fund
Table of Contents
Preface
xi
Preface to the Second Edition
xiii
Preface to the Third Edition
xv
Introduction the Voices of the Law
3
ch. 1
The Purpose of Legal Education
7
ch. 2
The Five Types of Legal Arguments
13
1.
The Five Types of Legal Argument Arise from Different Sources of Law
13
2.
The Five Types of Legal Argument Function as Rules of Recognition
13
3.
The Five Types of Legal Argument Are Rules of Evidence for Determining What the Law Is
14
4.
The Five Types of Legal Argument Embody the Underlying Values of Our System of Laws
15
ch. 3
Text
17
1.
Plain Meaning
19
2.
Canons of Construction
22
3.
Intratextual Arguments
25
ch. 4
Intent
31
1.
The Intent Behind the Constitution, Statutes, Regulations, Contracts, and Wills
31
2.
Evidence of Intent
34
a.
Evidence of Intent in the Text Itself
34
b.
Previous Versions of the Text
35
c.
The History of the Text
37
d.
Official Comments
38
e.
Contemporary Commentary
39
ch. 5
Precedent
41
ch. 6
Tradition
45
ch. 7
Policy
51
1.
The History of Policy Arguments
53
2.
The Structure of Policy Arguments
63
a.
The Predictive Statement
63
b.
The Evaluative Judgment
67
ch. 8
Identifying the Five Types of Legal Arguments
71
ch. 9
Creating Persuasive Arguments
85
ch. 10
How to Attack Legal Arguments
93
ch. 11
Intra-Type Attacks on Textual Arguments
97
A.
Intra-Type Attacks on Plain Meaning Arguments
97
1.
The Text Is Ambiguous
97
2.
The Text Has a Different Plain Meaning
100
B.
Intra-Type Attacks on the Canons of Construction
101
3.
The Canon of Construction Does Not Apply
101
4.
A Conflicting Canon of Construction Applies
102
C.
Intra-Type Attacks on Intratextual Arguments
103
5.
There Is a Conflicting Intratextual Inference Drawn from the Same Text
103
6.
There Is a Conflicting Intratextual Inference Drawn from Different Text
104
ch. 12
Intra-Type Attacks on Intent Arguments
107
7.
The Intent Was Different
107
8.
The Evidence of Intent Is Not Sufficient
109
9.
The Framers of the Law Did Not Anticipate Current Conditions
111
10.
The Person Whose Intent Was Proven Did Not Count
111
ch. 13
Intra-Type Attacks on Precedent Arguments
115
11.
The Court's Opinion Was Not Holding but Rather Obiter Dictum
115
12.
The Opinion Did Not Command a Majority of the Court
117
13.
The Opinion Was Not Issued by a Controlling Authority
119
14.
The Case Is Distinguishable Because of Dissimilar Facts
119
15.
The Case Is Distinguishable for Policy Reasons
122
16.
There Are Two Conflicting Lines of Authority
125
17.
The Case Has Been Overruled
126
18.
The Case Should Be Overruled
127
ch. 14
Intra-Type Attacks on Tradition Arguments
131
19.
No Such Tradition Exists
131
20.
There Have Been Competing Traditions
132
21.
A New Tradition Is Emerging
133
ch. 15
Intra-Type Attacks on Policy Arguments
135
22.
The Factual Prediction Is Not Accurate
135
23.
The Policy Is Not One of the Purposes of the Law
137
24.
The Policy Is Not Sufficiently Strong
141
25.
The Policy Is Not Served in This Case
142
26.
The Policy Is Outweighed by a Competing Policy
143
ch. 16
Cross-Type Arguments
147
ch. 17
Foundational Cross-Type Arguments
149
ch. 18
Relational Cross-Type Arguments
155
ch. 19
Text versus Intent
163
ch. 20
Precedent versus Policy
169
1.
Jacob & Youngs v. Kent
169
2.
Denver Area Educational Telecommunications Consortium v. F.C.C.
173
ch. 21
Text versus Policy
179
1.
Text versus Policy in the Law of Negotiable Instruments
179
2.
Text versus Policy in Separation of Powers Cases
182
ch. 22
Text versus Precedent
189
ch. 23
A Logical Demonstration of the Theory of the Five Types of Legal Argument
193
ch. 24
Reasoning by Analogy Is the Bridge Between Formalism and Realism
201
1.
From Formalism to Realism in the Gestational Surrogacy Cases
203
2.
Analogical Reasoning in the Evolution of Rules and Standards
209
ch. 25
Discovering a Court's Judicial Philosophy and Your Own Philosophy of Life
217
Index to Authors and Judges
221
Index to Cases
225
Topical Index
227