Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Toward representing interpretation in factor-based models of precedent.Adam Rigoni - forthcoming - Artificial Intelligence and Law:1-28.
    This article discusses the desirability and feasibility of modeling precedents with multiple interpretations within factor-based models of precedential constraint. The main idea is that allowing multiple reasonable interpretations of cases and modeling precedential constraint as a function of what all reasonable interpretations compel may be advantageous. The article explains the potential benefits of extending the models in this way with a focus on incorporating a theory of vertical precedent in U.S. federal appellate courts. It also considers the costs of extending (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Aa-rm wrestling: Comparing analogical approaches and rule models for legal reasoning.Adam Rigoni - 2021 - Legal Theory 27 (3):207-235.
    ABSTRACTLegal reasoning is commonly thought of as being based on either rules or analogies. More specifically, there is ongoing debate regarding whether precedential reasoning is best characterized as rule-based or analogical. This article continues that work by comparing recent and representative approaches from each camp, namely, Stevens's analogical model and the “rule-based” model of Horty and Rigoni. In the course of the comparison improvements on each approach are suggested and the improved models serve as the basis for the ultimate evaluation. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Two factor-based models of precedential constraint: a comparison and proposal.Robert Mullins - 2023 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 31 (4):703-738.
    The article considers two different interpretations of the reason model of precedent pioneered by John Horty. On a plausible interpretation of the reason model, past cases provide reasons to prioritize reasons favouring the same outcome as a past case over reasons favouring the opposing outcome. Here I consider the merits of this approach to the role of precedent in legal reasoning in comparison with a closely related view favoured by some legal theorists, according to which past cases provide reasons for (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation