Stare Decisis Case Study

* Case Law/Precedent/STARE DECISIS – Case Law is the doctrines and principles announced in cases. It governs all areas not covered by statutory law or administrative law and is part of our common law tradition. A Precedent is a decision that furnished an example of authority for deciding subsequent cases involving identical or similar legal principles or facts. For example, when a judge is making a ruling on a case, the judge may refer back to a similar case to see what the previous ruling was to keep the result similar. Stare Decisis is the practice of this process, deciding new cases with reference

In addition, Case Law Reasoning was used to determine the outcome. Case Law Reasoning is when courts take prior cases, also known as precedents, and apply these cases to guide in the decision making processes. This application of taking prior cases to assist in the conclusion of current cases is known as stare decisis. Because case facts often vary, several cases are usually brought up to expand and make it possible to have a factual determination. In addition, several cases are brought up because moral ideas and the acceptance of such will change over time. Having

e.  stare decisis: A judicial policy that guides courts in making decisions, normally requiring lower-level courts to follow the legal precedents that have been established by higher-level courts.

The concept of stare decisis today still serves the purpose of bringing consistency into a decision rendered by the court; however, this concept has its limitations. In order for stare decisis to be used the lower court must be confronted with a factual issue already decided by the higher court. Also, the decision of state court can only be precedent within the state where the decision was made. Lastly, precedence only applies when the courts opinion has been published per court orders.

By not overruling, court is in fact honoring a precedent previously held. Precedent is reflected in the obligation of lower courts to honor decisions made by higher courts (Vertical) and the binding of judges by decisions of earlier judges in similar matters (Horizontal/ Stare Decisis).

Stare decisis “to let the decision stand” operates in a pyramid-type fashion and is the doctrine that judicial decisions stand as precedent for cases arising in the future. It is a fundamental policy of our law that, except in unusual circumstances, a court’s determination on a point of law will be followed by courts of the same or lower rank in later cases presenting the same legal issue, even though different parties are involved and any years have elapsed.

According to Author: Hon. John M. Walker, Jr., Senior Circuit Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. " The American case system is based on the principle of stare decisis and the idea that like cases should be decided alike" What I take from this passage is the equal rights of decision making from both parties. The judge decide matters depending no external authority designates precedents. Most cases will fall under the stare decisis in some sense.

65: Appellate jurisdiction, which means that it may try (if the judges so decide) all cases tat re rightfully appealed to it; for example, cases dealing with such subjects as:

27). By following this doctrine of precedent, stare decisis, judges are bound to follow the ratio decidendi, the reasons given, for the rulings in previous cases from higher up in their jurisdictional hierarchy. Rulings from other jurisdictions can also be used as persuasive force and argument, as can the obiter dicta, the judges’ comments other than those given as the reason for the ruling. In this way Judge made law resolves conflict and injustice by ruling consistently with rulings made in previous, characteristically similar cases. An inconsistent approach to similar situations cannot equate to being fair, just or equitable. In this way the ALS is not biased or prejudice, is applied equally to all, and ensures that the law is based on fairness and justice.

a. Stare decisis is the legal principle of determining points in law according to precendets set by previous legal cases with similar conditions .

Historically, common law emphasized the importance of judicial decisions rather than utilizing the structure of codes, legal rules, and statutes as courts do today. In the past, judges documented and issued their decisions which were later circulated from one court to another and became known as common law. In cases where parties disagreed, common law court would look at previous decisions made in related cases and incorporate those decisions into the current case (Siegel, et al., 2011). If similar disputes had been resolved in the previous case, the court would utilize the same perspective to resolve their current case. This became known as precedent and like common law, continues to be utilized in today’s court system (Siegel, et al., 2011).

The doctrine of Judicial precedent applies the principles of stare decisis which ‘lets the decision stand’. ‘Whenever a new problem arises in law the final decision forms a rule to be followed in all similar cases, making the law more predictable’ making it easier for people to live within the law.

It is often believed that the relationship between certainty and flexibility in judicial precedent has struck a fine line between being necessary and being precarious. The problem is that these two concepts of judicial precedent are seen as working against each other and not in tandem. There is proof, however, that as contrasting as they are on the surface they are actually working together to achieve one common goal.

The doctrine of judicial precedent is based on the principle of stare decisis which means ‘to stand by what has been decided’. It is a common law principle whereby judges are bound to follow previous decisions in cases where the material facts are sufficiently similar and the earlier decision was made in a court above the current one in the court hierarchy. This doctrine of precedent is extremely strong in English law as it ensures fairness and consistency and it highlights the importance of case law in our legal system. Black's Law Dictionary defines "precedent" as a "rule of law established for the first time by a court for a particular type of case and thereafter referred to in deciding similar cases."

The judges in the lower courts are bound to follow previous decision of the higher courts. It is an essential component of the common law as it is important of adequate law reporting. It is a decision of the court used as a source for future decision-making.