司法判决与其他案例中的法律推理方法研究──说理的艺术

法律推理是一种说理的艺术。法律推理的难题是在不可能讲理的情况 下讲理、与“不讲理的人”讲理;既要法官能动地审理案件,又要防止法官专横审理。法律 推理的目的是寻求以法律为根据的正当理由。演绎推理、归纳推理、辩证推理是法律推 理的基本方法;它们按照不同的思维路径与规则寻求推理结论,但都面临其自身无法解 决的问题。法律价值在解决这些问题中具有主导性、基础性的作用。法官的法律价值判 断行为非常重要,从人类学的角度看这是一种四维框架中的判断行为。规范说理的艺术 可以防止法官在法律推理中的任意、专断,其方法包括培养法律感觉、进行法律价值判断 的合理化作业,养成法律惯例和法律信念,完善法律推理的制度与规则保证等,最终,法 律推理应当以人为本。     

司法裁判中法律事实与法律规范的关系

目前,学界关于司法裁判中法律事实与法律规范关系的论述,可以概括为以下四种推论关系、归类与涵摄关系、等置关系、评价关系。这四种方法在司法判决中各有其作用,但是学者们往往各执一端,将四者割裂开来。而实际上,逻辑推论关系确保了推理形式的正确性,而价值评价则保障了推理的实质合理性,归类与涵摄关系重点关注的是法律推理大小前提如何结合的问题,而等置关系似乎可以作为衡量归类或涵摄是否妥当的一个检测器。司法裁判中将四者有机结合起来,才能保证判决的合法性。     

The Tort Remedy in Search and Seizure Cases: A Case Study in Juror Decision Making

Civil suits for damage awards against police officers alleged to have engaged in illegal searches have long been suggested as an alternative to the exclusionary rule as a remedy for police misconduct. A review of empirical literature on the incidence and outcomes of such suits suggests that defendant officers often prevail and that the awards do not seem large enough to produce the punishment and deterrence effect often claimed by proponents of the tort remedy. Using an experimental technique involving simulated trials and adults called for jury service as subjects, we examine the effects of two procedural aspects of such suits on juror awards. The extent of municipal liability and the substitution of the U.S. government as plaintiff do not appear to affect the incidence or size of compensatory or punitive damage awards. Denying jurors information about the outcome of the search does appear likely to increase damage awards. The article both explores factors affecting juror decision-making in these cases and illustrates the utility and limitations of the experimental method for testing suggested policy innovations.     

软件侵权计算机取证方法的法律推理

随着计算机越来越广泛地应用于国家和社会的各行各业中,软件带来的经济利益不断增多。各种软件不断地开发和应用,随之而来对软件的侵权行为也越来越多,只有完善法律法规,并大力打击侵权行为,才能有效保障软件开发者的利益。如何判断软件侵权行为是保护正版打击盗版的前提条件,这就是侦查和司法鉴定的计算机取证。     

完善司法机关内部司法职权的法律制约机制

司法机关内部检察权与审判权的相互制约 ,是依法独立行使司法职权的重要环节。制约的目的在于防止滥用其司法职权。但制约必须通过法定的程序与制度进行 ,否则构成对司法职权的不当影响和非法干扰     

判断余地与司法救济

一、案例事实① 简某为成功大学(以下简称成大)交通管理学系兼任副教授,参加该校1992学年度教师升等教授案,经成大初审总成绩达88分极力推荐的特优标准;复审总成绩亦达82分特别推荐的优等标准;送请校外专家审查,分别经3位专家审查结果全部获得通过(依规定以2人以上通过即属及格),且其中一位评分高达80分,评语颇佳.惟成大教评会以"无记名"且"不具理由"的投票方式作成未通过升等的决议;另依<成大教师升等办法>规定,教师升等须经成大教评会出席委员2/3以上同意始获通过,成大计算的可决额数,简某无法赞同.简某爰主张成大前开行政处分②违法,提出申诉遭驳回,嗣向原诉愿决定机关提出诉愿,③惟遭以不得提起行政救济驳回,向行政院提起再诉愿,④亦遭驳回,再向行政法院提起行政诉讼,仍遭行政法院1983年度裁字第293号裁定驳回.     

三段论推理在法律论证中的作用探讨

司法三段论这一近代以来占主导地位的法律推理模式,当今的法学家对其提出了诸多批判,法律方法论亦由此从总体上实现了向法律论证理论的转换。但是,三段论推理本身的合理价值依然应当予以承认。在法律论证中,形式方法仍然具有无可替代的作用。法律论证的逻辑有效性对于实际的论证活动依然是个比较重要的评价标准。足见三段论推理在法律论证理论中具有重要意义。可以说,演绎模式的说理规则表达了对于法律论证最低限度的理性要求。在事实与规范相互对应的法律适用观念下,三段论推理继续在法律论证,尤其是在内部证立当中发挥作用。     

Automating the legal Reasoning Process: A Computer That Uses Regulations and Statutes to Draft Legal Documents

Several years ago, the American Bar Foundation initiated a modest investigation into the feasibility of designing a computer that could automate the assembly of form legal documents such as wills, trusts, complaints, and the like. The investigation has since matured into a major research effort to design an entirely new kind of computational processor. A prototype processor has now been constructed, and it is undergoing field tests to determine whether it truly fulfills the specialized needs of the legal drafter. This article briefly traces the history of the project, explaining the motivation behind it and describing the role of the participants. The article then introduces a new language—the principal result of the research effort—that may be used to draft both form documents and statutes, regulations, and other “instructions” defining how form documents are to be assembled. The new language, a subset of English, is fully comprehensible both to attorneys and to a properly designed computational processor. An attorney or paraprofessional may redraft form legal documents, statutes, and regulations in the new language and then feed them directly into the computer; no conventional programming is required. The computer asks questions couched in language taken from the forms and statutes, performs any necessary computations, and draws any necessary legal conclusions. The computer then returns client-customized legal documents ready for court filing. The article tells how the new processor may be set up to perform even the most complex drafting tasks—even complex tax-return preparation. Particular emphasis is placed on having the computer force the attorney or paraprofessional to proceed in a highly organized fashion with the development of a complex delivery system so that the computer, and not the attorney or paraprofessional, keeps track of the complex linkages between the elements of the system as it evolves. In its concluding section, the article explores the possible impact of this new technology upon the legal profession and the public, and the author expresses his view that centralized systems set up by legal specialists to support the work of numerous nonspecialists may expand the areas in which the generalist may do competent work and may enable the general practitioner to buck the current trend toward specialization.     

Extra-Legal Values in Judicial Interpretation of Law: A Model Reasoning and Few Examples

International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique - The aim of the paper is to analyze the types of interpretative reasoning determining the content...     

Challenging Civil Contempt: The Limits of Judicial Power in Cases Involving Journalists

Despite their assertion of a First Amendment or common law reporter's privilege in federal courts, journalists continue to face jail sentences and exorbitant fines for refusing to divulge their confidential sources when subpoenaed. Efforts to pass even a limited federal shield law have failed so far. This article offers another avenue to protect journalists—examining the roots of contempt law and policy to highlight limits on the contempt power of judges. It argues that because journalists are part of a group resting on steadfast moral and professional convictions, they may validly argue that confinement and excessive fines are improper sanctions. The article also suggests refinements in shield law proposals and other legislation to clarify the extent of judicial contempt power.     

推理与解释：寓于其中的法律思维

法律解释与法律推理是两种相对独立的法律方法,它们对法治建设有着不同的意义。法律解释的功能是要充分展示法律文本的各种可能意义,而法律推理则强调结论的必然得出。由于二者都强调根据法律进行解释或推理,因而拥有大体相似的思维走向,但作为不同的方法却有着许多细微的区分。正是这些既相互联系又有区别的方法(如法律发现、法律解释、法律论证、价值衡量、法律推理等)构成了法律方法论体系。当我们对这些法律方法有了深入系统的了解后,方法论向本体论的转向就水到渠成了。     

清代官员的鬼神信仰及其司法实践——从汪辉祖“刘开扬案”和蓝鼎元“幽魂对质案”的比较出发

清代官员在一些司法实践中,有时会采用到"动用鬼神"的方法。通过比较两名清代著名官员蓝鼎元和汪辉祖的动用鬼神的司法实践及他们关于鬼神的思想观念,可以发现,这种"动用鬼神"的司法实践虽然表面相似,但其背后的理念可能并不一致:蓝鼎元纯粹是在"利用鬼神",而汪辉祖则相信鬼神介入司法的力量,希望得到鬼神的帮助。实际上,清代官员的司法实践,或多或少都会受到其鬼神信仰的影响。     

网络传销犯罪的司法认定逻辑及其修正

基于传销犯罪的诈骗本质以及网络传销所衍生的诸多形式,原有的组织、领导传销活动罪的界定已经无法适应惩治网络传销犯罪的需要,应当基于体系与实践的双重考量,对网络传销犯罪的立法和司法作出相应的调适。组织、领导传销活动罪与集资诈骗罪系交叉竞合关系,两者在量刑上应保持平衡。网络传销犯罪在法益侵害程度方面未必高于传统传销犯罪。司法解释性文件对于网络传销犯罪的认定不应囿于组织内部参与传销活动人员30人三级的标准。网络团队计酬不应当构成犯罪。对于混合型传销,则应当结合"骗取财物"的要件予以全面判断。对为网络传销犯罪提供网络服务的行为,应区分情况适用共同犯罪、非法利用信息网络罪与帮助信息网络犯罪活动罪。对网络传销犯罪作证据综合认定时,应优先客观性证据,确立互联网电子数据的中枢证明作用,修正逐一收集参与传销活动人员的言词证据规则。     

既判力的界限研究

既判力的界限,是指既判力作用范围的范畴。它是既判力的核心,包括主体的界限、客体的界限和时间的界限。主体界限,指既判力作用的主体范围。客体界限,指判决中发生既判力效果的判断事项。时间界限,指判决确定当事人间权力义务关系状态的时间,包括既判力的基准时点、既判力的发生和消灭三个方面。     

关于集体土地征收案件的争议焦点和裁判结果的调查与思考

来自数据库"北大法宝"和中国裁判文书网的22篇关于集体土地征收案件的终审裁判文书揭示了如下事实:集体土地征收案件的争议焦点主要集中在受案范围、原告资格、诉讼请求、起诉期限、起诉程序、管辖法院、土地征收程序及土地征收补偿等方面,而法院大多支持原审被告。这一现象说明,只有通过制度设计来降低司法维权的成本和提高司法维权的实效,才能引导土地被征收人通过司法途径维权。同时,还应当完善行政程序违法的判决形式、驳回诉讼请求判决的适用条件以及管辖权转移制度,加强涉农法制宣传教育。     

Power,National Security and Transparency: Judicial Decision Making and Social Architecture in the Federal Courts

Even in a democratic society, the need for transparency must be balanced with an important countervailing interest: the occasional, legitimate need for government secrecy. This article, based on an examination of opinions in federal cases dealing with national security and transparency, explores how judges identified the main legal issues presented by a case and the legal factors or mode of legal interpretation used to reach or justify their conclusions. The article concludes that many of these opinions are as much about judges’ attempts to balance the judicial branch's power with the powers of the executive and legislative branches as they are about national security and transparency. Furthermore, the article contends these opinions have created an “architecture of power” that determines how national security information is controlled. The final section also suggests that judges should be mindful of the original architecture of power established by the Constitution and the First Amendment when writing their opinions.     

Juror Perceptions of the Legitimacy of Legal Authorities and Decision Making in Criminal Cases

Literature on trust in legal authorities and institutions demonstrates that trust affects individual behavior, yet there is little research on whether attitudes toward legal authorities such as the police or courts influence juror behavior as a third party assessing evidence and determining legal outcomes for others. Additionally, the literature on juror decision making confirms that juror race is an important predictor of juror decisions, but explanations for differences among racial groups are not clear. Since minority groups hold less favorable attitudes toward legal authorities generally, legitimacy theory may help explain racial differences in decision making among jurors. Using data from nearly 2,000 jurors in felony trials, this research utilizes multilevel modeling techniques to find that jurors' trust in legal authorities is related to juror outcomes, though the effect of juror trust and confidence in the police is opposite that of juror trust and confidence in the courts. Additionally, juror race conditions the effect of trust in police and courts. Trust is a stronger predictor of both perceptions of evidence and voting for black jurors than it is for white jurors.     

论法学教育与司法考试的衔接——法律职业准入控制的一种视角

法学教育与司法考试的关系,是国家司法资格统一考试制度实施以来,为人们所关注和焦虑的一个重要课题。司法考试作为一种非常典型的法律职业准入控制措施,帮助我们营造了一个共同的语言、解释、价值、经历和身份的共同体,从而也决定性地正面促进了我国的法治建设。但是我们应该认识到司法考试不是万能的,它不能对法律从业者的法律素养作有效的考察和衡量,因此我们必须寻求有效的替代途径,而这正是法学教育,特别是法学院教育本身所具备的。美国法学院模式的成功对于我们构建法学院教育与司法考试的理想关系,提供了非常有意义的启发。     

法律推理及其在司法审判中的适用

独特的法律推理模式是现代法治条件下司法运行的一个重要特征,研究和丰富法律推理这一课题,对提高法官司法能力,做好新形势下司法审判工作具有重要的现实意义.