Legal Realism

HideShow resource information
  • Created by: Launston
  • Created on: 12-05-14 17:48

1. How do judges really decide cases?

  • They have a gut instinct to cases and find material to back this up
  • The follow public policy
  • They only apply the law as it is set out in statutes
  • They choose the most moral outcome
1 of 15

Other questions in this quiz

2. Why does Jerome Frank believe that even if rules are clear, outcomes in cases will always be different?

  • The findings of judges cannot be predicted
  • Judges often disregard rules
  • The rules may be clear but not be moral
  • Rules do not determine the outcome of a case

3. What is Hart's major criticism of Llewellyn's theory?

  • Eternal factors are explanations for judicial decision-making
  • It does not fit our legal practices
  • It leaves out the normativity of law as being guides to conduct
  • Precedents can be interpreted differently

4. What is the traditional view that legal realists seek to challenge?

  • Judges should be criticised for departing from standards
  • The existing legal doctrine supplies uniquely correct answers to legal problems
  • Judges must use their own judgements when deciding cases
  • Law must be moral in order to be valid

5. Llewellyn distinguishes between which kinds of rules?

  • Established rules and Temporary rules
  • Moral rules and Legal rules
  • Real rules and Paper rules
  • Sovereign rules and Judge-made rules

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all LSR resources »