890 resultados para Massachusetts. Supreme Judicial Court.
Resumo:
Pesquisa realizada nos principais veículos da mídia impressa nacional, entre os meses de julho e dezembro de 2007, com o objetivo de verificar qual é a imagem do Poder Judiciário Brasileiro divulgada pelos veículos, interpretando os principais temas abordados nas publicações e a angulação das matérias. Utilizou-se a análise de conteúdo e a ferramenta da auditoria de imagem na mídia. Concluiu-se na pesquisa que o Poder Judiciário Brasileiro é foco da mídia impressa principalmente quando analisa processos relativos a pessoas públicas, especialmente parlamentares. Também por esse motivo, observou-se que a maior parte das matérias citava a atuação do Supremo Tribunal Federal, órgão máximo da justiça brasileira e responsável pelo julgamento de senadores, principais focos das matérias e autoridades com di-reito a foro privilegiado. Além disso, chegou-se à conclusão de que a maioria das matérias re-fere-se a processos ainda em curso, evidenciando-se que não há um acompanhamento fre-qüente das decisões e sentenças dos órgãos do judiciário. Embora a análise seja referente a um período delimitado, evidenciaram-se falhas na comunicação do judiciário e foram apresenta-das sugestões para aprimorar essa comunicação. (AU)
Resumo:
Police-suspect interviews in England & Wales are a multi-audience, multi-purpose, transcontextual mode of discourse. They are conducted as part of the initial investigation into a crime, but are subsequently recontextualised through the judicial process, ultimately being presented in court as evidence against the interviewee. The communicative challenges posed by multiple future audiences are investigated by applying Bell’s (1984) audience design model to the police interview, and the resulting "poor fit" demonstrates why this context is discursively counter-intuitive to participants. Further, data analysis indicates that interviewer and interviewee, although ostensibly addressing each other, may orientate to different audiences, with potentially serious consequences. As well as providing new insight into police-suspect interview interaction, this article seeks to extend understanding of the influence of audience on interaction at the discourse level, and to contribute to the development of theoretical models for contexts with multiple or asynchronous audiences.
Resumo:
This study examined the acceptability and utility of the content of an extensive automobile tort voir dire questionnaire in Florida Circuit Civil Court. The ultimate purpose was to find questionnaire items from established measures that have demonstrated utility in uncovering biases that were at the same time not objectionable to the courts. The survey instrument included a venireperson questionnaire that used case-specific attitudinal and personality measures as well as typical information asked about personal history. The venireperson questionnaire incorporated measures that have proven reliable in other personal injury studies (Hans, & Lofquist, 1994). In order to examine judges' ratings, the questionnaire items were grouped into eight categories. Claims Consciousness scale measures general attitudes towards making claims based on one's legal rights. Belief in a Just World measures how sympathetic the juror would be to people who have suffered injuries. Political Efficacy is another general attitude scale that identifies attitudes towards the government. Litigation Crisis scales elicits attitudes about civil litigation. Case Specific Beliefs about Automobile Accidents and Litigation were taken from questionnaires developed and used in auto torts and other personal injury cases. Juror's personal history was divided into Demographics and Trial Relevant Attitudes. Ninety-seven circuit civil judges critiqued the questionnaire for acceptability, relevance to the type of case presented, and usefulness to attorneys for determining peremptories. ^ The majority of judges' responses confirmed that the central dimension in judicial thinking is juror qualification rather than juror partiality. Only three of the eight voir dire categories were considered relevant by more than 50 percent of the judges: Trial Relevant Experiences, Juror Demographics, and Tort Reform. Additionally, several acceptable items from generally disapproved categories were identified among the responses. These were general and case specific attitudinal items that are related to tort reform. We discuss the utility of voir dire items for discerning juror partiality. ^
Resumo:
The Textual Analysis of Discourse has its origin in Text Linguistics and it aims at studying the co(n)text meaning production based on the analysis of concrete texts by offering elements to the understanding of the text as a discourse practice throughout the plans or levels of linguistic analysis. In this perspective, we intend to investigate the enunciative responsibility phenomenon in the sentencing court judgment. To do so, we review the theoretical contributions of Textual Analysis of Discourse (ADAM, 2011) and the Enunciative Linguistics from various authors, among them, Rabatel (1998, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2008, 2009, 2010), Nølke (2001, 2005, 2009, 2013), Nølke, Fløttum and Norén (2004), Guentchéva (1994, 1996) and Guentchéva et al. (1994). In this direction, we investigate the enunciative responsibility through a range that comprises the phenomenon from four gradations, each one with a kind of point of view (PoV) and with links that may mark the assumption or the distance from the point of view. Regarding the legal approach of the thesis, our theoretical anchoring follows several authors, among them, Petri (1994), Soto (2001), Alvarez (2002), Alves (2003), Cornu (2005), Albi (2007), Bittar (2010), Asensio and Polanco (2011), López Samaniego (2006), López Montolío and Samaniego (2008), Montolío (2002, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013), Sterling (2010), Prieto (2013), Lawrence and Rodrigues (2013) and Rodrigues, Passeggi and Silva Neto (2014). Our corpus is composed of 13 sentences from criminal cases arising from the district of Currais Novos-RN, completed in 2012. The results reveal how the judge, from various enunciative instances, builds the court decision, which allowed us to understand the configuration of (non) assumption of enunciative responsibility in the sentencing court judgment discourse genre. In conclusion, we perceive that the discourse units are envisaged or through the assumption, or the non assumption of PoV by the enunciative instances, what guides the producer organization argumentative text and his (her) communicative purposes. With that, the judge creates and/or modifies values and beliefs, induces and/or guides his (her) interlocutor by being able to demonstrate objectivity and/or preventing his (her) face through the mediated constructions or engage through the assumption of the enunciative responsibility of the propositional content of an utterance. In short, we reaffirm our belief that the (non) assumption of the enunciative responsibility configures as an argumentative mechanism strongly marked by the producer of the text with a view to their communicative purposes. The sentence, therefore, is constructed in this game of taking and/or not taking of statements according to argumentative orientation and the objectives of the text producer.
Resumo:
This dissertation aims to identify and describe the phenomenon of discursive representation of victim and defendant in court judgment genre. Researchis part of general theoretical framework of text linguistics and more specifically in textual discourse analysis (ATD) theory developed by Jean-Michel Adam ([2008] 2011). Discursive representation notion proposed by ATD is one of the most important aspects of semantic dimension of the text, being complemented in the work of Grize (1990, 1996) from schematization notion. In this perspective, this work is guided by studies of text linguistics with Koch (2012, 2005, 2004), Marcuschi (2012, 2008, 2005), Rodrigues, Passeggi and Silva Neto (2010, 2012, 2014), with genre Bazerman (2005), Bakhtin (1992) and the juridical discourse with Capez (2012), Pimenta (2007), Lourenço (2013) and Gomes (2013) . Methodologically, is a documentary research, presenting qualitative and descriptive characters and is guided by the inductivedeductive method. Corpus consists of a judicial sentence, criminal, collected electronically from Court of Justice of São Paulo - Judiciary website in consultation Judged1st Degree, with the theme of violence against women. Analysis procedures use semantic categories of discursive representation, such as referencing, predication, modification and the spatial and temporal location. Results are focused on the construction of discursive representation of (victim and defendant) from PdV distinct enunciators, which may approach or distance themselves according to argumentative text orientation. Thus, considering social importance of forensic text and, in particular, court judgment in the lives of citizens, it was possible to realize the importance of developing research that addresses the study of text semantic dimension, especially in construction of representations of discourse objects
Resumo:
The creation of the National Council of Justice (CNJ) through the Constitutional Amendment nº 45/2004, derived from countless gaps in Brazilian law, mainly relating to procedural delays, ineffectiveness of judicial decisions, and the lack of mechanisms that enable, effectively, disciplinary accountability of judges. The council is constitutionally designed as a member of the Judiciary, which has administrative nature and laid assignments in art. 103-B, § 4 of the current Constitution, among which is to edit regulations to instrument its performance. However, since it came into force, the amendment raised extensive discussions, linked in particular to the constitutionality of the CNJ, which was made through the direct action of unconstitutionality nº 3367, against the alleged violation of the principles of separation of powers and federative form, as well as the limits of its regulatory powers, as has fanned out in ADI nº 3823/ DF, this one dealing on Resolution nº 07, which regulates the seal of nepotism practice in the judiciary. However, despite the Supreme Court has already pronounced on the matter, recognizing the constitutionality of the council, as well as the resolution already said, the debate is in a state of latency, and may erupt again with each new manifestation of regulatory CNJ, given the lack of agreement between doctrine and jurisprudence around the constitutional treatment of its regulatory powers. In this context undeniably reflection on the definition of the regulatory power of the CNJ, presents itself as extremely relevant, and current, in particular in the ambience of the Constitutional Rule of Law, where he strives for legal certainty and consolidation of regulatory institutions. So that it could reach a satisfactory result, skilled at resolving the problems raised, the present study analyzed the reasons that gave rise to the creation of the CNJ, demonstrating their indispensability, but also sought to characterize the status of their administrative and constitutional body, noting finally, the compatibility of its regulatory activities to constitutional principles. From this perspective, we adopted the deductive method and carried out research and bibliographic nature documentary.
Resumo:
This master thesis aims to research the tension established between the judicial review and democratic theory which was always present in the constitutional doctrine of separation of powers. In this regard, the expansion of the Brazilian constitutional jurisdiction checked after the occurrence of the Federal Constitution of 1988 and the inertia of the Legislature in disciplinary relevant legal aspects of Brazilian society contributed to a hyperactivity of the Supreme Court. However, in a complex society of context, as is the Brazilian society, there are contained demands and political controversies that hardly would be well represented or resolved through the action of the Court of ministers at the expense of other government bodies. Among the supremacy of Parliament and the legitimacy deficit of these magistrates, is the constitutional text and the social fabric that makes this legal status of the political. Participatory democracy established by the guidelines of the Federal Constitution requires this perspective when the Supreme Court acting in place of concentrated constitutionality control. In a plural society, there is no reason to get rid of state decision moments popular participation. Lack the Supreme Court, this time, the democratizing perception that the institute brings to the interior of the Court, as state determination of space in which to come together and meet the aspirations of society and state claims. The dissertation investigates thus the possibility of amicus curiae Institute serve as a mediator of the democratic debate, to assist the Supreme Court in the preparation of the decision is, historically, that which is of greater legitimacy, from the perspective of a theory participatory democracy. Analyzes, likewise, the unfolding of abstract judicial review in the context of Brazilian law. Proposes, incidentally, a rereading of the separation of powers, with the call for the Judiciary be careful not to become the protagonist of national political decisions. It maintains, finally, that procedural opening the interpreters of the constitution, through the amicus curiae Institute, shows up as able to decrease the legitimacy deficit in the performance of the Brazilian Supreme Court.
Resumo:
We studied in this dissertation the argumentation in the court judgment, which goal was to identify, describe and explain the running of argumentative operators in the argumentative orientation of text and discourse built through the text of the judgment. We support our research in the constructs adopted for the ATD – (Textual Analysis of the Discourses) - Adam (2011), in the studies about the Aristotle’s Rhetoric (1959) and Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca (1996) and other works such as of the Alves (2005), Capez (2008), Charaudeau (2012), Keller and Bastos (2015), Koch (2009; 2011), Rodrigues, Silva Neto and Passeggi (2010), Trubilhano and Henriques (2013). In a methodological way, we made use of deductive-inductive method, because we analyzed the argumentation in an "unknown" text - particular case - based on a theory already known (about language, text and argumentation). About the nature and objectives, our search was characterized as qualitatively and as an explanatory and descriptive investigation, with technical procedures of documental collection of Bibliographic Search. As corpus, we use a court judgment of character condemnatory, issued on September 10, 2014 and taken from the online site of the Federal Court of Rio Grande do Norte (JFRN). The results revealed that the argumentative operators exercised decisive roles in the organization of argumentative strategies of the text and the speech , guiding the announcer to the Desired conclusion by the enunciator. It was also possible to conclude that the use of argumentative operators allowed syllogistic constructions in the form of presentation of the arguments and in the construction of argumentation. In addition, operators like "but", "until", "already", "although" etc. helped to identify in the data's analysis the point of view (PoV) of the enunciator, the expectation break about the previous enunciate and / or the value scale given to the argument. Finally, with the use of argumentative operators the enunciator introduced arguments able to demonstrate/justify a thesis and refute an opposing thesis towards a conclusion sought by the own enunciator.
Resumo:
We studied in this dissertation the argumentation in the court judgment, which goal was to identify, describe and explain the running of argumentative operators in the argumentative orientation of text and discourse built through the text of the judgment. We support our research in the constructs adopted for the ATD – (Textual Analysis of the Discourses) - Adam (2011), in the studies about the Aristotle’s Rhetoric (1959) and Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca (1996) and other works such as of the Alves (2005), Capez (2008), Charaudeau (2012), Keller and Bastos (2015), Koch (2009; 2011), Rodrigues, Silva Neto and Passeggi (2010), Trubilhano and Henriques (2013). In a methodological way, we made use of deductive-inductive method, because we analyzed the argumentation in an "unknown" text - particular case - based on a theory already known (about language, text and argumentation). About the nature and objectives, our search was characterized as qualitatively and as an explanatory and descriptive investigation, with technical procedures of documental collection of Bibliographic Search. As corpus, we use a court judgment of character condemnatory, issued on September 10, 2014 and taken from the online site of the Federal Court of Rio Grande do Norte (JFRN). The results revealed that the argumentative operators exercised decisive roles in the organization of argumentative strategies of the text and the speech , guiding the announcer to the Desired conclusion by the enunciator. It was also possible to conclude that the use of argumentative operators allowed syllogistic constructions in the form of presentation of the arguments and in the construction of argumentation. In addition, operators like "but", "until", "already", "although" etc. helped to identify in the data's analysis the point of view (PoV) of the enunciator, the expectation break about the previous enunciate and / or the value scale given to the argument. Finally, with the use of argumentative operators the enunciator introduced arguments able to demonstrate/justify a thesis and refute an opposing thesis towards a conclusion sought by the own enunciator.
Resumo:
The ideal conception of a judge is that of a neutral arbitrator. However, there exist good reasons to believe that personal characteristics, including professional experiences, bias judges. Such suspicions inspired two hypotheses: (1) judges that are former prosecutors are biased in favor of the government in criminal appeals; (2) judges that are former criminal defense attorneys are biased in favor of the criminal appellant. These hypotheses were tested by gathering professional information about state supreme court judges in the south during the years from 1995 until 1998. That was then matched to an existing database that recorded those judges’ demographics and decisions in criminal appeals during that time. Logistic regressions of that data revealed that despite when other characteristics, including gender, race, and legal experience, were accounted for, criminal defense remained a statistically significant predictor. Judges with a background in criminal defense were more likely to reverse criminal court decisions. In contrast, prosecutorial experience was not a good predictor of how a judge ruled. Judges that had backgrounds in prosecution did not rule much differently than those that did not have such a background.
Resumo:
The neoliberal period was accompanied by a momentous transformation within the US health care system. As the result of a number of political and historical dynamics, the healthcare law signed by President Barack Obama in 2010 ‑the Affordable Care Act (ACA)‑ drew less on universal models from abroad than it did on earlier conservative healthcare reform proposals. This was in part the result of the influence of powerful corporate healthcare interests. While the ACA expands healthcare coverage, it does so incompletely and unevenly, with persistent uninsurance and disparities in access based on insurance status. Additionally, the law accommodates an overall shift towards a consumerist model of care characterized by high cost sharing at time of use. Finally, the law encourages the further consolidation of the healthcare sector, for instance into units named “Accountable Care Organizations” that closely resemble the health maintenance organizations favored by managed care advocates. The overall effect has been to maintain a fragmented system that is neither equitable nor efficient. A single payer universal system would, in contrast, help transform healthcare into a social right.
Resumo:
At all normative levels, family migration law can disproportionally and negatively affect immigrant women’s rights in this field, producing gendered effects. In some cases, such effects are related to the normative and judicial imposition of unviable family-related models (e.g., the ʻgood mother ̕ the one-breadwinner family, or a rigid distinction between productive and reproductive work). In other cases, they are due to family migration law’s overlooking of the specific needs and difficulties of immigrant women, within their families and in the broader context of their host countries’ social and normative framework.To effectively expose and correct this gender bias, in this article I propose an alternative view of immigrant women’s right to family life, as a cluster of rights and entitlements rather than as a mono-dimensional right. As a theoretical approach, this construction is better equipped to capture the complex experiences of immigrant women in the European legal space, and to shed light on the gendered effects generated not by individual norms but by the interaction of norms that are traditionally assigned to separated legal domains (e.g., immigration law and criminal law). As a judicial strategy, this understanding is capable of prompting a consideration by domestic and supranational courts of immigrant women not as isolated individuals, but as ‘individuals in context’. I shall define this type of approach as ‘contextual interpretation’, understood as the consideration of immigrant women in the broader contexts of their families, their host societies and the normative frameworks applicable to them. Performed in a gendersensitive manner, a contextual judicial interpretation has the potential to neutralize the gendered effects of certain family migration norms. To illustrate these points, I will discuss selected judicial examples offered by the European Court on Human Rights, as well as from domestic jurisdictions of countries with a particularly high incidence of immigrant women (Italy and Spain).
Resumo:
Cette thèse examine l’interprétation et l’application, par l’Haute Cour d'Israël (HCJ), de principes du droit international de l’occupation et du droit international des droits de la personne dans le traitement de requêtes judiciaires formulées par des justiciables palestiniens. Elle s’intéresse plus particulièrement aux jugements rendus depuis le déclenchement de la deuxième Intifada (2000) suite à des requêtes mettant en cause la légalité des mesures adoptées par les autorités israéliennes au nom d’un besoin prétendu d’accroitre la sécurité des colonies et des colons israéliens dans le territoire occupé de la Cisjordanie. La première question sous étude concerne la mesure dans laquelle la Cour offre un recours effectif aux demandeurs palestiniens face aux violations alléguées de leurs droits internationaux par l’occupant. La recherche fait sienne la position de la HJC selon laquelle le droit de l’occupation est guidé par une logique interne tenant compte de la balance des intérêts en cause, en l’occurrence le besoin de sécurité de l’occupant, d’une part, et les droits fondamentaux de l’occupé, d’autre part. Elle considère, en outre, que cette logique se voit reflétée dans les principes normatifs constituant la base de ce corpus juridique, soit que l’occupation est par sa nature temporaire, que de l’occupation découle un rapport de fiduciaire et, finalement, que l’occupant n’acquiert point de souveraineté sur le territoire. Ainsi, la deuxième question qui est posée est de savoir si l’interprétation du droit par la Cour (HCJ) a eu pour effet de promouvoir ces principes normatifs ou, au contraire, de leur porter préjudice. La réunion de plusieurs facteurs, à savoir la durée prolongée de l’occupation de la Cisjordanie par Israël, la menace accrue à la sécurité depuis 2000 ainsi qu’une politique de colonisation israélienne active, soutenue par l’État, présentent un cas de figure unique pour vérifier l’hypothèse selon laquelle les tribunaux nationaux des États démocratiques, généralement, et ceux jouant le rôle de la plus haute instance judiciaire d’une puissance occupante, spécifiquement, parviennent à assurer la protection des droits et libertés fondamentaux et de la primauté du droit au niveau international. Le premier chapitre présente une étude, à la lumière du premier principe normatif énoncé ci-haut, des jugements rendus par la HCJ dans les dossiers contestant la légalité de la construction du mur à l’intérieur de la Cisjordanie et de la zone dite fermée (Seam Zone), ainsi que des zones de sécurité spéciales entourant les colonies. Le deuxième chapitre analyse, cette fois à la lumière du deuxième principe normatif, des jugements dans les dossiers mettant en cause des restrictions sur les déplacements imposées aux Palestiniens dans le but allégué de protéger la sécurité des colonies et/ou des colons. Le troisième chapitre jette un regard sur les jugements rendus dans les dossiers mettant en cause la légalité du tracé du mur à l’intérieur et sur le pourtour du territoire annexé de Jérusalem-Est. Les conclusions découlant de cette recherche se fondent sur des données tirées d’entrevues menées auprès d’avocats israéliens qui s’adressent régulièrement à la HCJ pour le compte de justiciables palestiniens.