Litigation arises because legal meaning is unstable and uncertain

Evidence

Lee v. Weisman’s exclusive focus on legal rather than factual questions is by no means exceptional. Often, in cases ranging from the most highly charged constitutional conflicts to the most mundane private disputes, the issue is solely the meaning of the law and how it applies. Many other cases raise issues of fact and law simultaneously. Yet the view that litigation is aimed at defining the what the law means is inconsistent with the notion that law is a set of rules whose meaning is stable and certain. Indeed, much litigation arises precisely because the meaning of the law is neither stable nor certain. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 186

Categorization

  • XREF: Central thesis of the course: interpretive disagreement, not factual dispute, drives much litigation; echoes Holmes’s concession in paragraph 183. — connects to: Legal disputes often turn on meaning, not facts — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 185; Most litigation arises because the meaning of law is uncertain — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 195; Legal uncertainty creates disputes, litigation, and judicial discretion — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 214 (+6 more)

Broader Connections