Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In Ancient Rome, declamation was a genre of ancient rhetoric and a mainstay of the Roman higher education system. It was separated into two component subgenres, the controversia, speeches of defense or prosecution in fictitious court cases, and the suasoria, in which the speaker advised a historical or legendary figure as to a course of action.
At the International Court of Justice, the term "separate opinion" is used and judges can also add declarations to the judgment. The term concurring opinion is used at the Supreme Court of the United States. The European Court of Human Rights uses the term concurring opinion and calls both concurring and dissenting opinions separate opinions ...
Elocution is the study of formal speaking in pronunciation, grammar, style, and tone as well as the idea and practice of effective speech and its forms. It stems from the idea that while communication is symbolic, sounds are final and compelling.
A judicial opinion is a form of legal opinion written by a judge or a judicial panel in the course of resolving a legal dispute, providing the decision reached to resolve the dispute, and usually indicating the facts which led to the dispute and an analysis of the law used to arrive at the decision.
Elocutio (lexis or phrasis in Greek) [1] [2] is a Latin term for the mastery of rhetorical devices and figures of speech in Western classical rhetoric. [2] Elocutio or style is the third of the five canons of classical rhetoric (the others being inventio, dispositio, memoria, and pronuntiatio) that concern the craft and delivery of speeches and writing.
According to Cross, "Interpretation is the process by which the courts determine the meaning of a statutory provision for the purpose of applying it to the situation before them", [6] while Salmond calls it "the process by which the courts seek to ascertain the meaning of the legislature through the medium of authoritative forms in which it is ...
A court of appeals may also pose questions to the Supreme Court for a ruling in the midst of reviewing a case. This procedure was formerly used somewhat commonly, but now it is quite rare. For example, while between 1937 and 1946 twenty 'certificate' cases were accepted, since 1947 the Supreme Court has accepted only four. [12]
As with concurring opinions, the difference in opinion between dissents and majority opinions can often illuminate the precise holding of the majority opinion. The dissent may disagree with the majority for any number of reasons: a different interpretation of the existing case law, the application of different principles, or a different ...