Stumbling Blocks in Empirical Legal Research: Case Study Research

This article examines the main assumptions and theoretical underpinnings of case study method in legal studies. It considers the importance of research design, including the crucial roles of the academic literature review, the research question and the use of rival theories to develop hypotheses and the practice of identifying the observable implications of those hypotheses. It considers the selection of data sources and modes of analysis to allow for valid analytical inferences to be drawn in respect of them. In doing so it considers, in brief, the importance of case study selection and variations such as single or multi case approaches. Finally it provides thoughts about the strengths and weaknesses associated with undertaking socio-legal and comparative legal research via a case study method, addressing frequent stumbling blocks encountered by legal researchers, as well as ways to militate them. It is written with those new to the method in mind.

Ten Questions for Future Regulation of Big Data: A Comparative and Empirical Legal Study

Much has been written about Big Data from a technical, economical, juridical and ethical perspective. Still, very little empirical and comparative data is available on how Big Data is approached and regulated in Europe and beyond. This contribution makes a first effort to fill that gap by presenting the reactions to a survey on Big Data from the Data Protection Authorities of fourteen European countries and a comparative legal research of eleven countries. This contribution presents those results, addressing 10 challenges for the regulation of Big Data.

Comparative effectiveness research across two spine registries.

BACKGROUND: Comparative effectiveness research in spine surgery is still a rarity. In this study, pain alleviation and quality of life (QoL) improvement after lumbar total disc arthroplasty (TDA) and anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) were anonymously compared by surgeon and implant. METHODS: A total of 534 monosegmental TDAs from the SWISSspine registry were analyzed. Mean age was 42 years (19-65 years), 59% were females. Fifty cases with ALIF were documented in the international Spine Tango registry and used as concurrent comparator group for the pain analysis. Mean age was 46 years (21-69 years), 78% were females. The average follow-up time in both samples was 1 year. Comparison of back/leg pain alleviation and QoL improvement was performed. Unadjusted and adjusted probabilities for achievement of minimum clinically relevant improvements of 18 VAS points or 0.25 EQ-5D points were calculated for each surgeon. RESULTS: Mean preoperative back pain decreased from 69 to 30 points at 1 year (ØΔ 39pts) after TDA, and from 66 to 27 points after ALIF (ØΔ 39pts). Mean preoperative QoL improved from 0.34 to 0.74 points at 1 year (ØΔ 0.40pts). There were surgeons with better patient selection, indicated by lower adjusted probabilities reflecting worsening of outcomes if they had treated an average patient sample. ALIF had similar pain alleviation than TDA. CONCLUSIONS: Pain alleviation after TDA and ALIF was similar. Differences in surgeon's patient selection based on pain and QoL were revealed. Some surgeons seem to miss the full therapeutic potential of TDA by selecting patients with lower symptom severity.

Comparative effectiveness research across two spine registries

Comparative effectiveness research in spine surgery is still a rarity. In this study, pain alleviation and quality of life (QoL) improvement after lumbar total disc arthroplasty (TDA) and anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) were anonymously compared by surgeon and implant.

Comparative legal philosophy applied to legal institutions.

Series title also at head ot t.-p.

Availability of legal research materials in Illinois State Library, Supreme Court Library, and Legislative Reference Bureau /

At head of title: Legal research materials.

The John P. Cook building in March, 1930; In the background, frame of the Legal Research Library.

York and Sawyer, architects. Given to the university by William W. Cook, the four buildings comprising the Law Quadrangle with their construction dates are: the Lawyers Club, 1924; the John P. Cook Dormitory, 1930; the Legal Research Building, 1931, and Hutchins Hall, 1933. The Legal Research Building includes the original library.

Legal Research Library

York and Sawyer, architects. The Wiliam W. Cook Legal Research Building was completed in 1931, the third of the four buildings William W. Cook gave to form the Law Quadrangle, 1924-1933. In 1955, the original six level stackroom was increased to ten levels. The underground addition designed by Gunnar Birkerts Associates was completed in 1981. On verso: Xmas card of Arthur Lyon Cross.

The back of the Legal Research Library

York and Sawyer, architects. The Wiliam W. Cook Legal Research Building was completed in 1931, the thirdof the four buildings William W. Cook gave to form the Law Quadrangle, 1924-1933. In 1955, the original six level stackroom was increased to ten levels. The underground addition designed by Gunnar Birkerts Associates was completed in 1981.

Legal Research Library

York and Sawyer, architects. The Wiliam W. Cook Legal Research Building was completed in 1931, the third of the four buildings William W. Cook gave to form the Law Quadrangle, 1924-1933. In 1955, the original six level stackroom was increased to ten levels. The underground addition designed by Gunnar Birkerts Associates was completed in 1981.