Discovery of Federal Income Tax Returns and the New “Qualified” Privileges

The notion of scale selection refers to methods for estimating characteristic scales in image data and for automatically determining locally appropriate scales in a scale-space representation, so as to adapt subsequent processing to the local image structure and compute scale invariant image features and image descriptors. An essential aspect of the approach is that it allows for a bottom-up determination of inherent scales of features and objects without first recognizing them or delimiting alternatively segmenting them from their surrounding. Scale selection methods have also been developed from other viewpoints of performing noise suppression and exploring top-down information.QC 20130111</p

Precedens i amerykańskie prawo administracyjne

In the common law order, precedent is not only a matter of applying law but also of making law. The crucial function of stare decisis is to relieve the appearance of judicial arbitrariness. Precedent also applies in the domain of administrative law in the context of judicial control of administrative policy making. Federal courts treat administrative agencies as having precedent-setting powers comparable to their own, under what is referred to as the Chevron doctrine. This doctrine determines the scope of judicial control of the decisional process performed by an administrative agency, particularly when the court is called upon to enforce a limitation to the administrative discretion delegated by the agency’s governing statute.Precedens w porządku common law jest nie tylko elementem stosowania, ale też środkiem tworzenia prawa, niezależnie od trudności, jakie w tym kontekście płyną z zasady podziału władz. Decydujące znaczenie dla przyjęcia tej tezy ma ograniczenie arbitralności sędziowskiej, wynikające z formuły stare decisis, wpływającej na konkretny proces decyzyjny. Dotyczy to także stosowania prawa administracyjnego w kontekście sądowej kontroli działań administracji. W jej ramach sądy posługują się precedensami w sposób, który jest określony jako doktryna Chevron, określająca zakres sądowej kontroli procesu wykładni dokonanej przez organ administracyjny, zwłaszcza w sytuacji konieczności limitowania swobody administracyjnej wykreowanej przez ustawę

Lawyer\u27s Justice

A Review of Lawyers and Justice: An Ethical Study by David Luban, and The Social Responsibilities of Lawyers: Case Studies by Philip B. Heymann and Lance Liebma

The Antinomy of Coherence and Determinacy

Coherence and determinacy are both apparent desiderata for bodies of law and legal systems. Unfortunately, in legal systems of any complexity, increasing the degree of one invariably brings about a lessening of the other. For theories of law - such as Ronald Dworkin\u27s - that emphasize the importance of coherence in judicial reasoning, while requiring as a condition of legitimacy that legal rights pre-exist judicial decisions, this must be an unwelcome fact

Law’s Evolution and Law as Custom

normative, and law works by channeling custom-in-gross into progressively finer and more precise grooves. If there is normative moral value resident in the custom of elevating and following leaders, then that normativity ought to flow downstream into the finer channels officials carve and into the fresh territory they wish us to occupy. In places, that flow is too diluted, and normativity trails off. In places, officials direct the stream over a cliff, and it is no longer normative at all. In places, the stream is overtaken by stronger normative streams and can only make a difference yet farther downslope, where it reaches to details of procedure, compensation, and punishment. Empty channels into which custom does not reach are simply not law. Nothing is gained by saying that legal normativity flows there

The Antinomy of Coherence and Determinacy

Coherence and determinacy are both apparent desiderata for bodies of law and legal systems. Unfortunately, in legal systems of any complexity, increasing the degree of one invariably brings about a lessening of the other. For theories of law - such as Ronald Dworkin\u27s - that emphasize the importance of coherence in judicial reasoning, while requiring as a condition of legitimacy that legal rights pre-exist judicial decisions, this must be an unwelcome fact