Yale Law School
نویسندگان
چکیده
Part I of this Article provides an overview of path dependence theory. It outlines the theory and briefly describes three separate strands of the theory: increasing returns path dependence, evolutionary path dependence, and sequencing path dependence, which are rooted in the economics, biological, and rational choice theory literatures, respectively. Although each of these strands has specific and unique characteristics, they are linked by a central insight: In each, an outcome or decision is shaped in specific and systematic ways by the path leading to it. Each of these strands of path dependence in turn has important implications for the course and pattern of change in the common law system. Accordingly, Part II applies path dependence theory to the common law. At the core of the common law system is the requirement that courts adhere to the body of principles and rules of action that derive their authority “solely from usages and customs of immemorial antiquity, or from the judgments and decrees of the courts recognizing, affirming, and enforcing such usages and customs.” Under the doctrine of stare decisis, higher courts’ previous decisions are controlling, courts give their own decisions significant weight, and courts look to non-binding decisions for persuasive precedent. Consequently, although there is some flexibility in the system, precedent remains central to legal deliberation. The doctrine of stare decisis thus creates an explicitly path-dependent process. Later decisions rely on, and are constrained by, earlier decisions. More important, the way in which history shapes legal outcomes corresponds to the three-fold division introduced in Part I. Because each legal decision increases the probability that the next will take a particular form, the common law exhibits increasing returns path dependence. Because the law changes through a process of punctuated yet historically constrained evolution, the common law exhibits evolutionary path dependence. And because the legal process involves sequential decisionmaking in a process marked by competing alternatives and multiple actors, the common law exhibits sequencing path dependence. Therefore, just as biological and social processes are constrained by history, the law is firmly guided by the heavy hand
منابع مشابه
The distributional preferences of an elite.
We studied the distributional preferences of an elite cadre of Yale Law School students, a group that will assume positions of power in U.S. society. Our experimental design allows us to test whether redistributive decisions are consistent with utility maximization and to decompose underlying preferences into two qualitatively different tradeoffs: fair-mindedness versus self-interest, and equal...
متن کاملAccuracy of eyewitness memory for persons encountered during exposure to highly intense stress.
Charles A. Morgan III*, Gary Hazlett, Anthony Doran, Stephan Garrett, Gary Hoyt, Paul Thomas, Madelon Baranoski, Steven M. Southwick Associate Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine, Connecticut Mental Health Center, Law and Psychiatry Division, 34 Park Street, New Haven, CT 06519-1187, USA Major, JFK Special Warfare Training Center and School, Uni...
متن کاملThe evolution of forensic psychiatry at Yale: a Festschrift honoring Howard Zonana and the discipline of forensic psychiatry.
On April 22 and 23, 2010, the Law and Psychiatry Division of the Yale School of Medicine Department of Psychiatry hosted a tribute to Howard V. Zonana, MD, to acknowledge his contributions to forensic psychiatry in scholarship, teaching, ethics, policy development, and clinical work. In the tradition of a Festschrift, forensic scholars, faculty, and former and current fellows demonstrated Dr. Z...
متن کاملNational Initiative for Building Community Trust and Justice: Research Roundtable Yale Law School November 19-20, 2015
متن کامل
The constitutionality of regulating human genetic engineering: where procreative liberty and equal opportunity collide.
t Associate Professor, Notre Dame Law School; LL.M., Yale Law School; Dipl. in Law, University of Oxford; J.D., New York University School of Law; B.A., University of Virginia. As this project has been in the works for quite some time, I can only mention some of those who generously contributed their time and wisdom. Earlier drafts were reviewed by Guido Calabresi, Stephen Carter, Donald Elliot...
متن کاملThe Separation of Funds and Managers: A Theory of Investment Fund Structure and Regulation
This Article offers a broad theory of what distinguishes investment funds from ordinary companies, with ramifications for how these funds are understood and regulated. The central claim is that investment funds (i.e., mutual funds, hedge funds, private equity funds, and their cousins) are distinguished not by the assets they hold, but by their unique organizational structures, which separate in...
متن کامل