Author Archives: F. E. Guerra-Pujol

Chapter 2 of “Settled Versus Right” weighs the pros and cons of stare decisis. Let’s jump in with the cons. Kozel sums up the main argument against stare decisis as follows (p. 50): “The job of judges is to interpret … Continue reading →

Chapter 1 of “Settled Versus Right” identifies three main aspects of stare decisis: the source of a given precedent (what court issued the decision in the previous case?); the strength and scope of the precedent (how much weight, if any, … Continue reading →

Editor’s note: this is the first of several blog posts reviewing Randy Kozel’s important new book (pictured below) Settled Versus Right: A Theory of Precedent, Cambridge University Press, 2017. In a previous blog post, (16 June 2016), we conjectured that … Continue reading →

That is the title of this thought-provoking paper by Christina Mulligan, a professor at Brooklyn Law School. Some background: “orginalism” refers to a common sense method of interpreting the Constitution. Broadly speaking, constitutional originalists believe that the meanings of the … Continue reading →

Out of intellectual curiosity, we have decided to read and review Paras Chopra’s excellent review of Robin Hanson and Kevin Simler’s new book Elephant in the Brain (pictured below the fold). Mr Chopra’s comprehensive review consists of a series of … Continue reading →

Updated on 5/10: With summer recess around the corner, here is a partial list of what we will be reading this month (we say “partial” because we’re always reading a mix of new and old things): 1. Randy Kozel’s new … Continue reading →

#18. Bayes Theorem:

In this post, we conclude our review of Part I of “Framing Contract Law” with Victor Goldberg’s expert analysis of Wood v. Lucy, one of the most famous “consideration” cases ever decided. The facts of this great case are as … Continue reading →