DOC PREVIEW
Mizzou JOURN 4000 - Overview of US Law
Type Lecture Note
Pages 3

This preview shows page 1 out of 3 pages.

Save
View full document
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 3 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 3 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Unformatted text preview:

JOURN 4000 1st Edition Lecture 1Outline of Last LectureOutline of Current LectureI. Sandra Hyde caseII. LA Times caseIII. History of British LawIV. Overview of US LawCurrent LectureSandra Hyde case:-Started in Columbia, MO-1st negligence law case in the USA foreseeable risk of harm-1980, attacked but escaped-Name and number published in the paper-Stalked by attacker-Sues city of Columbia, the Tribune, and the Missourian-Reductio ad absurdum-Name/address of victim while assailant is still at large is not public record-1988 LA, woman finds roommate being raped and murdered at apartment-LA Times intern found woman’s name on roommate’s coroner’s report-Published, the woman sued-Inculpatory, exculpatory-US law has roots in British lawThese notes represent a detailed interpretation of the professor’s lecture. GradeBuddy is best used as a supplement to your own notes, not as a substitute.-First treatise: Glanvill (1187)13 century:-King Henry II created national court system-Judges of king’s courts presided over jury cases-“Circuit judges” rode around countryside to hear cases-Judges created “common law”14th Century:-Dual court system-Chancellor’s courts no juries-Dual system affects law today-Libel? Jury case-Prior restraint? No jury-William Blackstone: Commentaries on the Laws of England (1765-69)Sources of law:1. Judge made law: common law2. Legislative law: statutes and constitutions 3. Bureaucracy made law: administrative law-Stare decisis- doctrine that precedents should be followed-Precedents- earlier court decisions-the “holding”: actual decision in the case sets precedent-Dicta: collateral unnecessary statements in cases-Shows courts’ passionPolicy:-Behind appointments-Strict constructionists (conservative)-Judicial activists (liberals)-Precedents= persuasive and binding-Only trial courts hear testimony-Courts on same level do not bind each other-Lower federal courts do not bind state courts (not even on questions of federal law)-Appellate courts work from cold records-Interplay between federal and state systems-US Supreme Court binds every court-US Supreme Court only hears cases involving federal laws-Federal law= 1) US Constitution 2) treaties 3) statutes passed by Congress-State law= law of everyday life-State courts bind federal courts on manners of state law-State judges make common law (judge-made law), which is constantly created-Federal judges can’t make common law-Double jeopardy: doesn’t apply if prosecuted by state and federal governments-There is no federal common law-Supreme Court only hears cases with sufficient and general significance -Do federal courts hear cases involving state laws? Yes, diversity


View Full Document

Mizzou JOURN 4000 - Overview of US Law

Type: Lecture Note
Pages: 3
Download Overview of US Law
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Overview of US Law and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Overview of US Law 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?