Adjudication proceeds through adversarial claims, proofs, and counterproofs to a decision

Evidence

The problems in the first three sections of this chapter all involve adjudication by a court, and they all involve entirely conventional types of adjudication. Lhe complaining party has become involved in a dispute with the defending party growing out of past events. He comes before a court which has been given a general jurisdiction to settle disputes of this kind. He asks the court to give him a remedy against the defendants of a familiar type which the court in an appropriate case is empowered to give. In support of his claim for relief, he relies upon one or more propositions of primary law and one or more propositions of remedial law, and he proves or offers to prove the existence of facts which bring these propositions into play. ‘he defendant answers, and submits his counter-proof or offers of counterproof. The court then comes to a decision one way or another. — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process, 17

Categorization

• DEFINE: Defines the conventional structure of adjudication: past dispute, pleading, proofs, counterproofs, decision.
• XREF: connects to: Adjudication requires impersonal criteria of decision applicable across similar cases — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process: Basic Problems in…, 3298; Judges must abandon adversarial advocacy for impartial detachment — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 555; Litigated cases self-select to those where both sides have plausible legal arguments — Frederick Schauer, Thinking Like a Lawyer, 253 (+4 more)

Broader Connections

• Litigated cases self-select to those where both sides have plausible legal arguments #expands (0.80) — Frederick Schauer, Thinking Like a Lawyer, 253
• Judges must abandon adversarial advocacy for impartial detachment #complicates (0.78) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 555