92. See Emily Sherwin, Reparations and Unjust Enrichment, 84 B.U. L. Rev. 1443, 1459-1460. In the event of misconduct, a reduction in the defendant`s welfare may be justified by retaliation, but not all claims of unjust enrichment involve fault and, in all cases, legal responses to unjust enrichment are generally not measured by fault, as must be retaliation. For a discussion of the moral value of retaliation, see, for example, Robert Nozick, Philosophical Explanations 374-380 (1981) (states that retaliation is necessary to associate the wrongdoer with moral values); Jean Hampton, The Retributive Idea, in Forgiveness and Mercy 111, 122-147 (Jeffrie G. Murphy & Jean Hampton eds., 1988) (explains retaliation as a means of confirming the value of the victim); Michael S. Moore, The Moral Worth of Retribution, in Responsibility, Character, and the Emotions 179 (Ferdinand Schoeman ed., 1987); Herbert Morris, Persons and Punishment, 52 Monist 475, 482–486 (1968) (explains retaliation as a balancing of moral scores). 85. A particularly broad interpretation of this principle is that unjust enrichment can and should play the role formerly played by equity, allowing courts to provide exceptions to legislation otherwise applicable in all areas of law.
See Peter Linzer, Rough Justice: A Theory of Restitution and Reliance, Contracts and Torts 2001 Wis. L. Rev. 695, 700–702, 773–775 (2001); Barry Nicholas, Unjust Enrichment in Civil Law and Louisiana Law, 36 Tul. Rev. L. 605, 607–610 (1962) (suggesting that unjust enrichment serves as a corrective to legal norms and to fill gaps when rules fail). In other words, where one party benefits from the technical application of a rule at the expense of another party, the principle of unjust enrichment empowers courts to correct the result of the rule.
This year marks the 150th anniversary of the founding of West Publishing Company, the predecessor of Thomson Reuters Legal. The mission that this company began so long ago is alive and well at Thomson Reuters today. What began as innovations in legal analysis methods and publication ingenuity is now complemented by significant investments in innovative computer technology. 39. See Summers and Others, cited in footnote 10, paragraph 10. xi (enumeration of public safety as a possible justification for legal regulations and procedures). 33. Functional categories comprising primary substantive law provisions are likely to correspond directly to social activities or conflicts in society. Functional categories that include remedies or secondary rules for the creation and application of the law may include concepts of legal function arising from the fundamental objective of the resolution. For examples of function-based healing taxonomy, see Douglas Laycock, Modern American Remedies 3 (3rd edition 2002); Laycock, Douglas, The Scope and Significance of Restitution, 67 Tex. L.
Rev. 267 (1997)Google Scholar. […] Article URL: www.openlawlab.com/2020/10/06/taxonomy/ […] The Western key number system was bold in its scope to cover the entire extent of American jurisdiction. It was organized throughout the federal and state jurisdiction, using an organizing taxonomy and a series of summaries that allowed the researcher to quickly narrow down and examine relevant summary points of law to find the necessary precedent. Then there are more technocratic measures – whether taxonomy will be used and useful at all. These questions are more about fixing bugs and usability issues to create a taxonomy that will survive (many don`t. They are built and quickly forgotten). When building this taxonomy, I explored how we can assess the quality + impact of a taxonomy project. 44. In his discussion of the law, the current judges formulate principles of law as standards for the resolution of certain disputes. A legal principle is not based on the intentions of the authorities that first announced the rules and decisions from which it is derived, which may have another principle or no principle in mind.
Instead of trying to discern the intentions of previous legislators, the current judge begins with the data of the results of the decision and the established rules, formulates a principle or set of principles that meet the two criteria of moral appeal and explanatory agreement with the legal data, and then applies the principle to decide an ongoing trial. See Dworkin, Law`s Empire, note 18, pp. 240-250. A taxonomist classifying the law according to the reasoning attributed would use the same method to provide judges with standard principles extracted from the existing law and compiled into a complete scheme. If you have any ideas on creating a good taxonomy or how you can use a huge list of people`s legal problems, please contact us! And check out our working version of LIST as we work out all the terms. 58. Perhaps this effect could be avoided by limiting access to the taxonomy of ideal legal bases to drafters of legislation and denying access to those who are supposed to respect and enforce legislation. But the prospect of an esoteric legal taxonomy, hidden from most legal actors, raises a host of practical and moral problems. See Alexander & Sherwin, Rules of Rules, supra note 12, pp. 86-91; Larry Alexander and Emily Sherwin, The Deceptive Nature of Rules, 142 U.
Pa. 1191, 1211-1222 (1994). Last but not least, one of these practical difficulties is that, in a system that accepts the doctrine of precedent, arbitrators are legislators. There are more than 150 popular enterprise applications that can use taxonomies covering categories such as artificial intelligence, search, B.I. analytics, big data, records management, data mining, knowledge graphs, predictive analytics, CRM customer classification, expertise identification, document tagging, and sentiment analysis. This article examines the ambition to taxonomize the law and the different methods that a legal taxonomian might use. There are three possibilities. The first is a formal taxonomy that classifies legal documents according to rules of order and clarity. Formal taxonomy is mostly conventional and has no normative impact on judicial decision-making. The second option is a function-based taxonomy that classifies laws according to their social functions. As a control mechanism, function-based taxonomy may indirectly influence legal decision-making, but does not provide decision-making standards for courts. Its purpose is to assist in the analysis and criticism of the law by providing an overview of legal doctrine.
The third option is a reason-based taxonomy that classifies legal rules and decisions according to the moral principles, or “legal principles,” that are supposed to justify them. Such a reason-based taxonomy provides courts with a set of high-level decision-making rules derived from legal data. The goal is to help courts decide new cases and evaluate precedents. A primarily formal taxonomy facilitates legal analysis and communication. A functional taxonomy can help those who enact and enforce laws by providing a focused overview of the field. A reason-based taxonomy may be useful to legislators, but it is not useful when proposed as a guide to resolving disputes. Using rigorous editorial standards, our editorial editors` editorial improvements, supported by state-of-the-art technology, enable lawyers to make better decisions faster and act with confidence. As taxonomy and U.S. law developed, the West Key Number System expanded to merge case law with laws, regulations, legal encyclopedias, and other legal commentaries into a comprehensive library that supported the pursuit of the rule of law through advocacy through access. increased transparency and consistency.
He discovered that access to justice was expensive and difficult to obtain, so he developed a method to solicit the opinions of a multi-state region to provide more scale at a fraction of the cost, and hired lawyers to develop expertise in organizing and structuring that corpus in a way that made sense for a growing legal community – and the West Key Number System was born. 51. Birks speaks with some derision about the storage of information and suggests that the best storage tool is literacy. Birks, English Private Law, op. cit. Note 1, p. xlviii. But in fact, the storage of information is very important, and a reasonable classification system greatly facilitates the storage and retrieval of legal information. 82. See, for example, Peter Birks, Introduction, in Unjust Enrichment 18–25 (2003); Dagan, Law and Ethics of Restitution, op. cit.
Fußnote 2, S. 12–18, 25–33 ; Birks, Définition et division, a. a. O. Fußnote 4, a. 21; Kull, Andrew, Rationalizing Restitution, 83 Cal.