Question

John’s company is involved in a lawsuit with a customer, Beth. John argues that for fifty years higher courts in that state have decided cases involving circumstances similar to his case in a way that indicates he can expect a ruling in his company’s favor. Write at least one paragraph discussing if this is a valid argument. Write another paragraph discussing whether the judge in this case must rule as those other judges did, and why.

Answer 1

Answer:

The argument that the higher courts had decided the cases of similar facts and circumstance in such a way that he can expect that the court rules in his company's favor is a valid argument. The argument is based on the doctrine of stare decisions. The meaning of the doctrine stare decisions is to stand on decided cases. It is a common practice to decide the case based on the former decisions of the judicial systems. It is a set principle that if the court of higher rank has set a precedent then lower court must adhere to it. Therefore, this argument is a valid argument.

The courts are bound to follow the rule set by its higher authority. However, it is not always necessary to obligate its precedents and sometimes, the court can depart from this rule. This could be done only in the circumstances where it is found that the precedent is simply incorrect or due to social changes or technological changes made the precedent inapplicable. Therefore, the court in this case can not necessarily be ruled as the other courts had done.