+- The South Pacific (https://tspforums.xyz)
+-- Forum: Hall of Historical Records (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-8.html)
+--- Forum: Archives (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-141.html)
+---- Forum: Fudgetopia Hall of Government (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-12.html)
+----- Forum: Judicial District (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-49.html)
+------ Forum: Conference Room (https://tspforums.xyz/forum-272.html)
+------ Thread: Marking Opinions as Current Precedent? (/thread-10158.html)
Marking Opinions as Current Precedent? - Griffindor - 01-18-2022
Good afternoon, everyone,
I was looking through various threads around the Court and noticed that several cases the Court has taken up over the years are no longer precedent due to changes in the law or other precedents being created in its place.
While it doesn’t particularly need to be addressed, how difficult (or potentially necessary) would it be for ORCS to include whether the case is still considered active precedent on the Court and region as a whole?
As I said, I don’t know how useful or necessary such a metric would be, but I think it would be a neat thing to be able to see.
Thoughts? Or did I even make sense? I’m typing this in the moment, so it might not make sense
RE: Opinions/Rulings/Verdicts still in force/precedent - Kris Kringle - 01-18-2022
I think it'd be complicated to find a reasonably objective way to determine whether a ruling is applicable or not. How much must a law have changed for an associated ruling to no longer constitute precedent?
RE: Opinions/Rulings/Verdicts still in force/precedent - Griffindor - 01-18-2022
Well, obviously, opinions from before the current charter would not be considered precedent.
As far as the current laws, I would say once our answer to an LQ would no longer answer the original LQ, or if the LQ's origins for being asked are no longer similar enough to justify referring to the question again.
In any case, I do see where you are coming from, it would be rather hard to tell.
RE: Opinions/Rulings/Verdicts still in force/precedent - Kris Kringle - 01-18-2022
(01-18-2022, 06:58 PM)Griffindor Wrote: Well, obviously, opinions from before the current charter would not be considered precedent.
Is it that obvious though? What about rulings from previous charters that involve provisions that still exist in current law? Or provisions that don't necessarily exist but haven't necessarily been reversed?
(01-18-2022, 06:58 PM)Griffindor Wrote: As far as the current laws, I would say once our answer to an LQ would no longer answer the original LQ, or if the LQ's origins for being asked are no longer similar enough to justify referring to the question again.
Those would be some significant judgement calls. What level of difference would have to be reached for an opinion not to apply anymore?
RE: Opinions/Rulings/Verdicts still in force/precedent - Griffindor - 01-19-2022
I see what you are saying.
Also, I did take a bit of time to go through some of the older opinions (still under the current charter) and it is a bit hard to determine if the precedent is still in force or not, so it would be rather impractical to determine in practice, as you said. Thanks for talking through it with me
