Like-cases-decided-alike leaves open what makes a case like another

Evidence

Because of the doctrine of stare decisis, however, the solving of problems cannot be done on an ad hoc basis. We must respect the overarching consideration that like cases be decided alike. But the beckoning question is always to decide what is a like case. — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1307

Categorization

• DEFINE: Pinpoints stare decisis’s core operational problem: determining likeness.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1307
• XREF: connects to: Valid legal analogies depend on relevant similarities rather than case quantities — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 343; Advocates debate whether case factual similarities are legally material — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 581; Analogical reasoning infers additional properties from shared case similarities — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 570 (+2 more)

Library Connections

• Advocates debate whether case factual similarities are legally material #complicates (0.60) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 581

Broader Connections

• A case is precedent only when material facts match exactly #qualifies (0.80) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1299
• Valid legal analogies depend on relevant similarities rather than case quantities #qualifies (0.75) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 343
• The formal principle of justice requires treating relevantly similar cases alike #complicates (0.70) — HLA Hart, The Concept of Law (Clarendon Law…, 418
• Analogical reasoning infers additional properties from shared case similarities #expands (0.65) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 570