[WikiEN-l] The boundaries of OR

[Daniel P. B. Smith]

> From: Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net>
>
> Lawyers' opinions
> are still just opinions no matter how many of them are given.  A  
> single
> unappealed decision by a low-level judge would be a precedent that  
> could
> throw all 20 scholarly opinions out the window.

If I correctly understood what a first-year law student once told  
me... and if _he_ correctly understood what _he_ was told... even a  
Supreme Court (of the U. S.) ruling is just a set of opinions about  
an individual case... and all cases are different.

So, when a lawyer says "thus-and-such is the law because of thus-and- 
such Supreme Court ruling," this is shorthand for saying "if your  
particular case were taken to court, the lawyers would probably point  
out to the judge that there was a Supreme Court ruling in a somewhat  
similar case.  I predict that the judge would think the opinions of a  
Supreme Court justices are legally sound. And I your case is similar  
enough that the judge will feel that their opinions pretty much apply  
in your case. Therefore I predict that it is very likely that the  
judge will rule thus-and-such way in your case."