Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Precedent is a judicial decision that serves as an authority for courts when deciding subsequent identical or similar cases. [1] [2] [3] Fundamental to common law legal systems, precedent operates under the principle of stare decisis ("to stand by things decided"), where past judicial decisions serve as case law to guide future rulings, thus promoting consistency and predictability.
overturning prior precedent based on its negative effects or flaws in its reasoning; distinguishing a new principle that refines a prior principle, thus departing from prior practice without violating the rule of stare decisis; establishing a test or a measurable standard that can be applied by courts in future decisions.
Common law (also known as judicial precedent, judge-made law, or case law) is the body of law primarily developed through judicial decisions rather than statutes. [ 2 ] [ 3 ] Although common law may incorporate certain statutes , it is largely based on precedent —judicial rulings made in previous similar cases. [ 4 ]
Hazelwood School District et al. v. Kuhlmeier et al., 484 U.S. 260 (1988), was a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States which held, in a 5–3 decision, that student speech in a school-sponsored student newspaper at a public high school could be censored by school officials without a violation of First Amendment rights if the school's actions were "reasonably related" to a ...
The Supreme Court established a precedent for judicial review in Marbury v. Madison. There were protests by some at this decision, born chiefly of political expediency, but political realities in the particular case paradoxically restrained opposing views from asserting themselves.
These past decisions are called "case law", or precedent. Stare decisis —a Latin phrase meaning "let the decision stand"—is the principle by which judges are bound to such past decisions, drawing on established judicial authority to formulate their positions.
Whereas an opinion that fewer than half of the justices join is known as a "plurality opinion" and is only partially binding precedent. Concurring: a justice agrees with and joins the majority opinion but authors a separate concurrence to give additional explanations, rationales, or commentary. Concurrences do not create binding precedent.
Obiter dictum (usually used in the plural, obiter dicta) is a Latin phrase meaning "said in passing", [1] that is, any remark in a legal opinion that is "said in passing" by a judge or arbitrator.