How To Do Things With Hohfeld

Wesley Newcomb Hohfeld’s 1913 article, Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning, is widely viewed as brilliant. A thrilling read, it is not. More like chewing on sawdust. The arguments are dense, the examples unfriendly, and the prose turgid. “How to Do Things With Hohfeld” is an effort to provide an accessible and sawdust-free account of Hohfeld’s article, as well as to show how and why his analysis of “legal relations” (e.g., right/duty, etc.) matters. Perhaps the principal reason is that the analysis furnishes a discriminating platform to discern the economic and political import of legal rules and legal regimes. My project here is to offer a forward-leaning interpretation of Hohfeld — to show how and why his insights remain highly relevant today. The article engages with the jural relations, decomposition and recomposition, the bundle of relations, the critique of reification, and recent discussions in property theory as well as the “New Private Law.” I am keen on protecting Hohfeld’s platform from some (legal realist) over-extensions as well as showing how the views of the “Hohfeld critics” are in many ways consonant with Hohfeld’s own thinking. The article closes with some questions about the limitations of Hohfeld’s approach

How To Do Things With Hohfeld

The Kvarken Ferry Link is a maritime transport connection between Sweden and Finland. This report is a deliverable from the Centre for Regional Science (CERUM) at Umeå University to the Midway Alignment project. The purpose of the report is to analyse the freight demand for the ferry by estimating the maximum potential freight transport in the catchment area of the ferry. The analysis is based on a model analysis of the maximum potential freight volumes in the catchment area of the ferry across the Kvarken strait using input data from the Swedish national freight modelling system Samgods. The results are combined with a scenario analysis where the effect of different forecasts for the Kvarken ferry is studied. The analysis might serve as an input in a subsequent analysis of the market potential and transport demand for the ferry link between Vaasa in Finland and Umeå in Sweden.The Midway Alignment of the Bothnian Corridor is co-financed by the European Union. The sole responsibility of this publication lies with the author. The European Union is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein.Midway Alignmen

John R. Commons, Wesley N. Hohfeld and the Origins of Transactional Economics

The aim of this paper is to provide an assessment of John R. Commons’ adoption of Wesley N. Hohfeld’s framework of jural opposites and correlatives in order to construct his transactional approach to the study of institutions. Hohfeld’s influence on Commons, it is argued, was both positive and negative. On the one hand, Commons, followed Hohfeld and recognized that such concepts as property and inheritance actually represent an aggregation of numerous types of legal relations. Hohfeld’s schema provided a powerful rhetorical and analytical tool whereby these highly abstracts conceptions could be reduced to a limited number of primary elements. Moreover, Hohfeld’s schema appeared to be consistent with Commons’ general methodological and psychological commitments. On the other hand, Commons’ forging of “transaction” as the elementary unit of economic analysis can be seen as an attempt to go beyond Hohfeld. Commons was in fact unsatisfied with Hohfeld’s bi-lateral treatment of jural relations and with his neglect of the role played by state officials in enforcing transactions and, in so doing, in promoting specific individual interests as collective public policies

Foreword

Little information exists about the loss of all one’s teeth (edentulism) among older adults in low- and middle-income countries. This study examines the prevalence of edentulism and associated factors among older adults in a cross-sectional study across six such countries. Data from the World Health Organization (WHO’s) Study on global AGEing and adult health (SAGE) Wave 1 was used for this study with adults aged 50-plus from China (N = 13,367), Ghana (N = 4724), India (N = 7150), Mexico (N = 2315), Russian Federation (N = 3938) and South Africa (N = 3840). Multivariate regression was used to assess predictors of edentulism. The overall prevalence of edentulism was 11.7% in the six countries, with India, Mexico, and Russia has higher prevalence rates (16.3%–21.7%) than China, Ghana, and South Africa (3.0%–9.0%). In multivariate logistic analysis sociodemographic factors (older age, lower education), chronic conditions (arthritis, asthma), health risk behaviour (former daily tobacco use, inadequate fruits and vegetable consumption) and other health related variables (functional disability and low social cohesion) were associated with edentulism. The national estimates and identified factors associated with edentulism among older adults across the six countries helps to identify areas for further exploration and targets for intervention

Rights

No abstract available

Rights, Harming and Wronging: A Restatement of the Interest Theory

This article introduces a new formulation of the interest theory of rights. The focus is on ‘Bentham’s test’, which was devised by Matthew Kramer to limit the expansiveness of the interest theory. According to the test, a party holds a right correlative to a duty only if that party stands to undergo a development that is typically detrimental if the duty is breached. The article shows how the entire interest theory can be reformulated in terms of the test. The article then focuses on a further strength of the interest theory, brought to the fore by the new formulation. In any Western legal system, the tortious maltreatment of a child or a mentally disabled individual results in a compensatory duty. The interest theory can account for such duties in a simple and elegant way. The will theory, on the other hand, struggles to explain such compensatory duties unless it abandons some of its main tenets

Authority and Interest in the Theory of Right

I suggest a new role for authority and interest in the theory of right: Rights can be explicated as sets of prohibitions, permissions and commands, and they must be justified by interests. I argue as follows: (1) The two dominant theories of right—“Will Theory” and “Interest Theory”—have certain standard problems. (2) These problems are systematic: Will Theory’s criterion of the ability to enforce a duty is either false or empty outside of its original legal context, whereas Interest Theory includes in the definition of a right what actually belongs to the justification of the practice within which that right is assigned. (3) I recast the connection between authority, interests and rights in a way that avoids each theory’s standard problem. (4) The resulting theory also has three further advantages: It analyzes rights in terms of very basic and familiar concepts; it mirrors the understanding of rights in actual public discourse, and it is compatible with a wide selection of moral theories. Since its core is about a specific use of modal auxiliary verbs, I call this new theory the “Modal Theory of Right.