[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/r/oup/jleorg/v8y1992i3p441-70.html
   My bibliography  Save this item

Modeling Collegial Courts. II. Legal Doctrine

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as


Cited by:

  1. Conal Duddy & Ashley Piggins, 2012. "A measure of distance between judgment sets," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 39(4), pages 855-867, October.
  2. Pablo T Spiller & Rafael Gely, 2007. "Strategic Judicial Decision Making," Levine's Working Paper Archive 122247000000001409, David K. Levine.
  3. Dietrich, Franz & Mongin, Philippe, 2010. "The premiss-based approach to judgment aggregation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(2), pages 562-582, March.
  4. List, Christian & Polak, Ben, 2010. "Introduction to judgment aggregation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(2), pages 441-466, March.
  5. Keith Carlson & Michael A. Livermore & Daniel N. Rockmore, 2020. "The Problem of Data Bias in the Pool of Published U.S. Appellate Court Opinions," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(2), pages 224-261, June.
  6. Whitman, Douglas Glen, 2005. "The Role of Panels in Enhancing Legal Predictability," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 541-555, December.
  7. Mongin, Philippe & Dietrich, Franz, 2011. "An interpretive account of logical aggregation theory," HEC Research Papers Series 941, HEC Paris.
  8. Andrew Knops, 2011. "Representing collective reasons for group decisions: The judgment aggregation problem revisited," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 23(4), pages 448-462, October.
  9. Philippe Mongin, 2012. "The doctrinal paradox, the discursive dilemma, and logical aggregation theory," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 73(3), pages 315-355, September.
  10. Hein Duijf & Frederik Putte, 2022. "The problem of no hands: responsibility voids in collective decisions," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 58(4), pages 753-790, May.
  11. Álvaro Bustos & Nuno Garoupa, 2020. "An Integrated Theory of Litigation and Legal Standards," Documentos de Trabajo 536, Instituto de Economia. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile..
  12. Clark, Tom S. & Montagnes, B. Pablo & Spenkuch, Jörg L., 2022. "Politics from the Bench? Ideology and Strategic Voting in the U.S. Supreme Court," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 214(C).
  13. Niblett, Anthony, 2013. "Tracking inconsistent judicial behavior," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 9-20.
  14. Eisenberg, Theodore & Huang, Kuo-Chang, 2012. "The effect of rules shifting supreme court jurisdiction from mandatory to discretionary—An empirical lesson from Taiwan," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 3-18.
  15. List, Christian, 2010. "The theory of judgment aggregation: an introductory review," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 27596, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
  16. Charles M. Cameron & Lewis A. Kornhauser, 2017. "Rational choice attitudinalism?," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 535-554, June.
  17. Jonathan P. Kastellec, 2010. "The Statistical Analysis of Judicial Decisions and Legal Rules with Classification Trees," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(2), pages 202-230, June.
  18. Jeffrey R. Lax, 2003. "Certiorari and Compliance in the Judicial Hierarchy," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 15(1), pages 61-86, January.
  19. Gennaioli, Nicola & Shleifer, Andrei, 2007. "Overruling and the instability of law," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 309-328, June.
  20. Tom S Clark, 2016. "Scope and precedent: judicial rule-making under uncertainty," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 28(3), pages 353-384, July.
  21. Aureli Alabert & Mercè Farré & Rubén Montes, 2023. "Optimal Decision Rules for the Discursive Dilemma," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 889-923, August.
  22. JBrandon Duck-Mayr, 2022. "Explaining legal inconsistency," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 34(1), pages 107-126, January.
  23. Bustos, Álvaro & Tiller, Emerson H., 2021. "Authorial control of the Supreme Court: Chief Justice Roberts and the Obamacare surprise," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
  24. Bernardo Guimaraes & Bruno Meyerhof Salama, 2023. "Permitting Prohibitions," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 52(1), pages 241-271.
  25. Guimarães, Bernardo de Vasconcellos & Salama, Bruno Meyerhof, 2017. "Contingent judicial deference: theory and application to usury laws," Textos para discussão 440, FGV EESP - Escola de Economia de São Paulo, Fundação Getulio Vargas (Brazil).
  26. Miller, Alan D., 2013. "Community standards," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 148(6), pages 2696-2705.
  27. Amaral-Garcia Sofia & dalla Pellegrina Lucia & Garoupa Nuno, 2023. "Consensus and Ideology in Courts: An Application to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 19(2), pages 151-184, July.
  28. Brennan, Geoffrey, 2001. "Collective coherence?," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 197-211, June.
  29. Dietrich, Franz & List, Christian, 2014. "From degrees of belief to beliefs: Lessons from judgment-aggregation theory," MPRA Paper 58257, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  30. Giri Parameswaran, 2012. "Ruling Narrowly: Learning and Law Creation," Working Papers 1419, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Econometric Research Program..
  31. Guimaraesy, Bernardo & Meyerhof Salama, Bruno, 2017. "Contingent judicial deference: theory and application to usury laws," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 86146, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.