140,99 €
inkl. MwSt.
Versandkostenfrei*
Versandfertig in über 4 Wochen
  • Gebundenes Buch

For the last fifty years, intermediate federal appellate courts have produced "published" and "unpublished" opinions at the discretion of the judge ruling on the case. When an opinion is labelled as published, it is something that all future judges in that jurisdiction must follow, but when a ruling is designated as unpublished, it only resolves the isolated dispute instead of creating a legal precedent. Selective Publication in the U.S. Courts of Appeals compares these two types of opinions to reveal and understand inequalities created by the practice of selective publication.

Produktbeschreibung
For the last fifty years, intermediate federal appellate courts have produced "published" and "unpublished" opinions at the discretion of the judge ruling on the case. When an opinion is labelled as published, it is something that all future judges in that jurisdiction must follow, but when a ruling is designated as unpublished, it only resolves the isolated dispute instead of creating a legal precedent. Selective Publication in the U.S. Courts of Appeals compares these two types of opinions to reveal and understand inequalities created by the practice of selective publication.
Hinweis: Dieser Artikel kann nur an eine deutsche Lieferadresse ausgeliefert werden.
Autorenporträt
Rachael K. Hinkle is an Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science at the University at Buffalo, SUNY. Her research agenda focuses on judicial politics with particular attention to gleaning insights into legal development from the content of judicial opinions and other legal texts through the use of computational text analytic techniques. Her work includes The Elevator Effect: Contact and Collegiality in the American Judiciary. She received her B.A. from Huntington University, J.D. from Ohio Northern, and her Ph.D. from Washington University in St. Louis. She clerked in the District of Arizona and the Sixth Circuit.