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.
Establishing a "test" (that is, a measurable standard that can be applied by courts in future decisions), such as the Oakes test (in Canadian law) or the Bolam test (in English law). Sometimes, with regard to a particular provision of a written constitution, only one court decision has been made.
Salinas v. Texas, 570 U.S. 178 (2013) The Fifth Amendment's protection against self-incrimination does not protect an individual's refusal to answer questions asked by law enforcement before the individual has been arrested or given the Miranda warning. A witness cannot invoke the privilege by simply standing mute; the witness must expressly ...
If the court believes that developments or trends in legal reasoning render the precedent unhelpful, and wishes to evade it and help the law evolve, it may either hold that the precedent is inconsistent with subsequent authority, or that it should be distinguished by some material difference between the facts of the cases; some jurisdictions ...
The primary contrast between the two systems is the role of written decisions and precedent as a source of law (one of the defining features of common law legal systems). [42] [15] While Common law systems place great weight on precedent, [90] civil law judges tend to give less weight to judicial precedent. [91]
Texas, [7] a case to determine whether a parcel of land belonged to the United States or to Texas, and Virginia v. Tennessee (1893), [ 8 ] a case turning on whether an incorrectly drawn boundary between two states can be changed by a state court, and whether the setting of the correct boundary requires Congressional approval.
By changing a penalty after a delay of a few minutes, officials in the Georgia-Texas game gave the appearance of caving to angry fans. 'Bad call' in Georgia-Texas game set bad precedent as refs ...
The various courts of appeals occasionally but rarely hand down conflicting rulings on the same legal issue. In large part, the Texas Supreme Court (in civil cases) or Court of Criminal Appeals (in criminal cases) exist to resolve these rare conflicts and to set forth consistent legal precedent for the state's litigants.