Para un análisis del discurso jurídico. Pierre Brunet

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ 188-206.

      BULYGIN, E., “Der Bregriff des Wirksamkeit”, Archiv für Recht und Sozial Philosophie, vol. 41, n.º 4.

      CAHN, E., “Fact-Skepticism and Fundamental Law”, New York University Law Review, vol. 33, n.º 1, 1958, pp. 1-17.

      CARDOZO, BENJAMÍN, The Nature of the Judicial Process, New Haven, Yale University Press, 1921, p. 113.

      EDWARDS, H. T., “The Effects of Collegiality on Judicial Decision Making”, University of Pennsylvania Law Review, vol. 151, n.º 5, 2003, pp. 1639-1690.

      EDWARDS, H. T., “Judicial Norms: a Judge’s Perspective”, en J. N. DROBAK (dir.), Norms and the Law, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2006, pp. 230-244.

      EDWARDS, H. T., “The Role of a Judge in Modern Society: Some Reflections on Current Practice in Federal Appellate Adjudication”, Cleveland State Law Review, vol. 32, n.º 3, 1984, pp. 385-430.

      EDWARDS, H. T. y M. A. LIVERMORE, “Pitfalls of Empirical Studies that Attempt to Understand the Factors Affecting Appellate Decisionmaking”, Duke Law Journal, vol. 58, n.º 8, 2009, pp. 1895-1989.

      EPSTEIN, L. y J. KNIGHT, The Choices Justices Make, Washington DC, Congressional Quarterly Press, 1998.

      EPSTEIN, L., W. M. LANDES y R. POSNER, The Behavior of Federal Judges. A Theoretical & Empirical Study of Rational Choice, Cambridge US, Havard University Press, 2013.

      ESKRIDGE, WILLIAM N., JR., “The judicial review game”, Northwestern University Law Review, vol. 88, n.º 1, 1993, pp. 382-395.

      FRANK, JEROME, Courts on Trial, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1949.

      GARZÓN VALDÉS, E., Lateinamerikanische Studien zur Rechtsphilosophie, Munich, Luchterhand, 1965, pp. 39-58.

      GOLDING, M. P., “A Note on Discovery and Justification in Science and Law”, Nomos, vol. 28, 1986, pp. 124-140.

      GUASTINI, R., “Rule-Scepticism Restated”, en L. GREEN y B. LEITER (dirs.), Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Law, Oxford University Press, 2011, pp. 138-161.

      GUASTINI, R., “Le réalisme juridique redéfini”, Revus, n.º 19, 2013, pp. 113-129, en línea [revus.revues.org/2511].

      GUASTINI, R., Interpretare e argomentare, Milano, Giuffrè, 2011, p. 258.

      GUASTINI, R., Dalle fonti alle norme, Turin, Giappichelli, 1992, p. 109.

      GUTTING, G., “The Logic of Invention”, en T. NICKLES (ed.), Scientific Discovery, Logic and Rationality, Boston-Dordrecht-London, Reidel, 1980, pp. 221-234.

      HART, H. L. A., American Jurisprudence Through English Eyes: The Nightmare and the Noble Dream, Sibley Lecture Series, vol. 33, 1977.

      HART, H. L. A., El concepto de derecho, Publicaciones de las facultades universitarias de San Luis, Bruselas, 1976.

      HART, H. L. A., “Scandinavian Realism”, The Cambridge Law Journal, vol. 17, n.º 2, 1959, pp. 233-240.

      HOLMES, O. W., Southern Pacific Company v. Jensen, 244 US 205, 221 (1917).

      HUTCHESON, J. C., JR., “Judgment Intuitive the Function of the Hunch in Judicial Decision”, Cornell Law Quarterly, vol. 14, 1929, pp. 274-288.

      KALMAN, L., Legal Realism at Yale: 1927-1960, Chapel Hill and London, University of North Carolina Press, 1986.

      LEITER, B., Naturalizing Jurisprudence. Essays on American Legal Realism and Naturalism in Legal Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2007.

      LEITER, B., “Legal Realism and Legal Positivism Reconsidered”, Ethics, vol. 111, n.º 2, 2001, pp. 278-301.

      LEITER, B., “Legal Formalism and Legal Realism: What is the Issue?”, Legal Theory, vol. 16, n.º 2, 2010, pp. 111-133.

      LLEWELLYN, K. N., “Some Realism about Realism. Responding to Dean Pound”, Harvard Law Review, vol. 44, 1931, p. 1237.

      LLEWELLYN, K. N., “A Realistic Jurisprudence. The Next Step”, Columbia Law Review, vol. 30, 1930, p. 444.

      LLEWELLYN, K. N., “Remarks on the Theory of Appellate Decision and the Rules and Canons about How Statutes are to Be Construed”, Vanderbilt Law Review, vol. 3, 1950, pp. 395-406.

      MAZZARESE, T., Forme di razionalità delle decisioni giudiziali, Turin, Giappichelli, 1996, pp. 105-157.

      MILLARD, É., “Réalisme scandinave, réalisme américain. Un essai de caractérisation”, Revus, n.º 24, 2014, pp. 81-97, en línea [revus.revues.org/2915].

      MORESO, J. J., Legal Indeterminacy and Constitutional Interpretation, Dordrecht, Kluwer, 1998.

      NICKLES, T. (ed.), Scientific Discovery, Logic and Rationality, Dordrecht-Boston-London, Reidel, 1980, pp. 1-59.

      OLIPHANT, H., “A Return to Stare Decisis”, American Bar Association Journal, vol. 14, 1928, pp. 71-72.

      PASSOS MARTINS, T., La Cour Suprême du Brésil et l’État démocratique de droit. Contribution à une théorie de la démocratie réflexive, Paris, Presses de l’Institut Universitaire Varenne, 2013.

      PAUL, J., “Jerome Frank’s Attack on the ‘Myth’ of Legal Certainty”, Nebraska Law Review, vol. 36, 1957, pp. 547-563.

      PAUL, J., The Legal Realism of Jerome N. Frank. A Study of Fact-Skepticism and the Judicial Process, The Hague-Boston-London, Springer, 1959.

      POSNER, R., How Judges Think, Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 2008, p. 80.

      POSNER, R., “Realism about Judges”, Northwestern University Law Review, vol. 105, n.º 2, 2011, pp. 577-588.

      REID, L., “The Judge as Law Maker”, Journal of the Society of Public Teachers of Law, vol. 12, n.º 1, 1972, pp. 22-29.

      ROBERTSON, D., The Judge as Political Theorist: Contemporary Constitutional Review, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2010.

      RUMBLE, W. E., JR., “Jerome Frank and His Critics: Certainty and Fantasy in the Judicial Process”, Journal of Public Law, vol. 10, 1961, pp. 125-138.

      RUMBLE, W. E., JR., “American Legal Realism and the Reduction of Uncertainty”, Journal of Public Law, vol. 13, n.º 1, 1964, pp. 45-75.

      RUMBLE, W. E., JR., “Rule-Skepticism and the Role of the Judge: A Study of American Legal Realism”, Journal of Public Law Emory Law School, vol. 15, 1966, pp. 251-285.

      RUMBLE, W. E., JR., American Legal Realism: Skepticism, Reform and the Judicial Process, Ithaca, NY, Cornell University Press, 1968.

      SEGAL, J. A. y H. J. SPAETH, The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Revisited, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2002.

      SHAPIRO, M., “Judges as СКАЧАТЬ