Hiding with Words: Obfuscation, Avoidance, and Federal Jurisdiction Opinions
UCLA Law Review, Vol. 46, No. 1, 1998
86 Pages Posted: 10 Mar 1999 Last revised: 26 Nov 2008
Abstract
This article summarizes Professor Little's empirical study of linguistic devices appearing in the holdings of United States Supreme Court opinions. The linguistic devices scrutinized are those likely to obfuscate the meaning of communication. Comparing the holdings of federal jurisdiction opinions with those of "merits" decisions, Professor Little found that more obfuscatory devides appeared in the federal jurisdiction decisions. This finding supports federal jurisdiction scholars' view that Supreme Court Justices take license with jurisdiction rulings in order to disguise decisions on the merits of disputes, control the development of constitutional rights, or avoid difficult legal issues.
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?
Recommended Papers
-
By Christine Botosan and Marlene Plumlee
-
By Christine Botosan and Marlene Plumlee
-
By Paul M. Healy and Krishna Palepu
-
Information and the Cost of Capital
By Maureen O'hara and David Easley
-
Toward an Implied Cost of Capital
By William R. Gebhardt, Charles M.c. Lee, ...
-
Toward an Ex Ante Cost-of-Capital
By William R. Gebhardt, Charles M.c. Lee, ...
-
The World Price of Insider Trading
By Utpal Bhattacharya and Hazem Daouk
-
The Market Pricing of Earnings Quality
By Jennifer Francis, Ryan Lafond, ...