TAGS: Burden of proof; Criminal law information systems; Criminal procedure information systems; Defeasible reasoning; Defeasible reasoning in law; Evidence and legal reasoning; Evidence information systems; Evidentiary decisionmaking; Evidentiary decisions; Evidentiary reasoning; Gender and evidentiary reasoning; Gender and legal reasoning; Inference and legal evidence; Inference in law; Inference in legal information systems; Inference in legal reasoning; Legal argument; Legal argumentation;
Legal decisionmaking; Legal defeasible reasoning; Legal evidence; Legal evidence information systems; Legal inference; Legal logic; Legal reasoning in the process of proof; Legal statistical evidence; Modeling burdens of proof; Narrative based legal reasoning; Narrative in legal evidence; Process of proof in law; Schemes in legal narrative analysis; Statistical evidence in law; Legal informatics monographs; Legal informatics article collections.
TAGS: Legal informatics journals; Law and psychology; Cognitive science and legal informatics; Psychology and legal informatics; Legal information behavior; Legal reasoning; Legal logic; Jurors» legal information behavior; Juries» legal information behavior; Empirical legal studies; Empirical legal scholarship; Statistical methods in legal informatics; Social science research methods in legal informatics; Legal communication; Legal rhetoric;
Legal decisionmaking.
Address to the Joint OFL / ONIWG Conference focuses on major problems in Ontario's system: experience rating; OH&S inspection; role of doctors, objective medical evidence and statistics in
legal decisionmaking; actuaries; claims procedures — and whether judicial review, Charter are effective legal remedies.
Not exact matches
It then identifies how this form of cognitive
decisionmaking bias generates «cognitive illiberalism,» a
legal and political
decisionmaking bias that poses the same threat to constitutional freedoms as consciously illiberal forms of state action.
But perhaps the most scholarly perspective came from law professor and blogger Eugene Volokh, who reported that «such random (or close to random)
decisionmaking isn't entirely novel to the
legal system.»
«Why is it not a good thing to have one person on the Court who approaches constitutional
decisionmaking the way a lawyer would deal with the next
legal problem that comes across the desk?
IWC calls for
legal discipline in Board policy and
decisionmaking (i.e. adjudication in adherence with the law and
legal principles rather than the current aggressive and «cost - effective» approach), and for consideration of institutional memory and historical perspective in adjudication (Meredith and Weiler principles).
Generally the court favors joint
legal and physical custody but there are many situations where a court will give sole physical to one parent and joint
legal (
decisionmaking) custody to both parents.
Legal experts are adamant that the nature of lawyers» work will remain fundamentally unchanged, removing much of the slow, manual elements of the job in order to enhance executive
decisionmaking.
The latest book by Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and
legal writing guru Bryan Garner takes a skeptical look at judicial
decisionmaking, criticizing judges who stray from the text in interpreting statutes and constitutional provisions.
Fineman, Martha, «Dominant Discourse, Professional Language, and
Legal Change in Child Custody
Decisionmaking,» Harvard Law Review, Vol.