en pl
en pl

Krytyka Prawa. Niezależne studia nad prawem

Show issue
Year 2018 
Volume 10 
Issue 2

Geneza Case Method i jej wpływ na kształt amerykańskiej filozofii prawa

Jacek Srokosz
Uniwersytet Opolski

2018 10 (2) Krytyka Prawa. Niezależne studia nad prawem

DOI 10.7206/kp.2080-1084.204

Article contents

Abstract

Artykuł omawia Case Method – dominującą metodę edukacyjną stosowaną w amerykańskich szkołach prawa, która polega na nauczaniu prawa poprzez analizę orzeczeń sądowych, stworzoną w latach 70. XIX w. przez Christophusa Collumbusa Langdella. Langdell postrzegał prawo jako naukę, podobną do fizyki czy chemii, a więc jako uporządkowany system obiektywnej wiedzy. Stworzona przez niego metoda nauczania służyć miała przygotowaniu osób zajmujących się prawem w sposób naukowy. W artykule przedstawiona została koncepcja prawa Langdella, oraz wpływ, jaki jego metoda nauczania wywarła na nurty amerykańskiej filozofii prawa – klasyczną jurysprudencję oraz realizm prawniczy.

References

  1. Areeda P.E., The Socratic Method (SM) (Lecture at Puget Sound 1/31/90), „Harvard Law Review” 1996, 109(5), s. 911–922. [Google Scholar]
  2. Barnhizer D., The Purposes and Methods of American Legal Education, „Journal of the Legal Professions” 2011, 36(1), s. 1–76. [Google Scholar]
  3. Carrington P.D., Butterfly Effects: The Possibilities of Law Teaching in a Democracy, „Duke Law Journal” 1992, 41, s. 774–786. [Google Scholar]
  4. Carrington P.D., Heil Langdell!, „Law and Social Inquiry” 1995, 20. [Google Scholar]
  5. Christensen L.M., The Psychology Behind Case Briefing: A Powerful Cognitive Schema, „Campbell Law Review” 2006, 29. [Google Scholar]
  6. Cook N., Law as Science: Revisiting Langdell’s Paradigm in the 21th Century, „North Dakota Law Review” 2012, 82(2). [Google Scholar]
  7. Davison D.M., The Jeffersonian vision of Legal Education, „Journal of Legal Education” 2001, 51(2). [Google Scholar]
  8. Duxbury N., Patterns of American Jurisprudence, New York 1995. [Google Scholar]
  9. Edwards H.T., Growing Disjunction Between Legal Education and the Legal Professions, „Michigan Law Review”, 1992, 91(8), s. 34–76. [Google Scholar]
  10. Farnsworth A., Casebooks and Scholarship: Confessions of an American Opinion Clipper, „Southwestern Law Journal” 1988, 42. Fehrenbach H., Poiger U.G., Americanization Reconsidered, [w:] C. Neil, J. Davies, G. McKay (red.), Transactions, Transgressions, Transformations: American Culture in Western Europe and Japan, New York–Oxford 2000. [Google Scholar]
  11. Gantt L.O.N., Deconstructing Thinking Like a Lawyer: Analyzing The Cognitive Components of The Analytical Mind, „Campbell Law Review” 2007, 27. [Google Scholar]
  12. Garner D.D., The Continuing Vitality of the Case Method in the Twenty-First Century, „Brigham Young University Education & Law Journal” 2000, 2. [Google Scholar]
  13. Gerber R.J., Legal Education and Combat Preparedness, „The American Journal of Jurisprudence” 1989, 34(1). [Google Scholar]
  14. Gordon R.W., Legal Thought and Legal Practice in the Age of American Enterprise, 1870–1920, [w:] G.L. Gerson (red.), Professions And Professional Ideologies In America, Chapel Hill 1983. [Google Scholar]
  15. Gray T.C., Langdell’s Orthodoxy, „University of Pittsburg Law Review” 1983, 45. [Google Scholar]
  16. Hoeflich M.H., Law & Geometry: Legal Science from Leibniz to Langdell, „The American Journal of Legal History” 1986, 30(2). [Google Scholar]
  17. Holmes W., Book Review, „American Law Review” 1880, 14. [Google Scholar]
  18. Horwitz M.J., The Transformation Of American Law, 1870–1960: The Crisis Of Legal Orthodoxy, Cambridge–London 1992. [Google Scholar]
  19. Johnson K., Scales A., An Absolutely, Positively True Story: Seven Reasons Why We Sing, „New Mexico Law Review” 1986, 16. [Google Scholar]
  20. Kagan R.A., Globalization and legal change: The ‘Americanization’ of European law?, „Regulation & Governance” 2007, 1, s. 99–120. [Google Scholar]
  21. Kennedy D., Toward an Historical Understanding of Legal Consciousness: The Case of Classical Legal Thought in America, 1850–1940, „Research in Law & Sociology” 1980, 3, s. 3–24. [Google Scholar]
  22. Kimball B.E., The Inception of Modern Legal Education. C.C. Langdell 1826–1906, Chapel Hill 2009. [Google Scholar]
  23. Kissam C., The Ideology of the Case Method/Final Examination Law School, „University of Cincinnati Law Review” 2001, 70. [Google Scholar]
  24. Klafter C.E., The Influence of Vocational Law Schools on the Origins of American Legal Thought 1779–1829, „American Journal of Legal History” 1993, 37. [Google Scholar]
  25. Klein S.R., Legal Education in United States and England: A Comparative Analysis, „Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review” 1991, 13, s. 601–641. [Google Scholar]
  26. Kronman A., The Socratic Method and the Development of the Moral Imagination, „University of Toledo Law Review” 2000, 31. [Google Scholar]
  27. Langdell C.C., Harvard Celebration Speeches, „Law Quarterly Review” 1887, 3. [Google Scholar]
  28. Langdell C.C., Summary of the Law of Contracts, Boston 1880. [Google Scholar]
  29. Leiter B., Legal Realism, [w:] D. Patterson (red.), A Companion to Philosophy of Law and Legal Theory, Oxford 1996. [Google Scholar]
  30. Marshall D.G., Socratic Method and the Irreducible Core of Legal Education, „Minnesota Law Review” 2005, 90, s. 1–17. [Google Scholar]
  31. McMains C.R., The History of First Century American Legal Education: A Revisionist Perspective, „Washington University Law Review” 1981, 59(3), s. 597–659. [Google Scholar]
  32. Menkel-Meadow C., Taking Law and ____ Really Seriously: Before, During and after ‘The Law’, „Vanderbilt Law Review” 2007, 60. [Google Scholar]
  33. Mertz E., The Language of Law Schools: Thinking Like a Lawyer, Oxford–New York 2007. [Google Scholar]
  34. Moline B.J., Early American Legal Education, „Washburn Law Review” 2004, 42. [Google Scholar]
  35. Neal P.C., De Tocqueville and the Role of the Lawyer in Society, „Marquette Law Review” 1967, 50, s. 607–617. [Google Scholar]
  36. Neil C., Davies J., McKay G. (red.), Issues in Americanisation and Culture, Edinburgh 2004. [Google Scholar]
  37. Patterson D., Langdell’s Legacy, „Northwestern University Law Review” 1995, 90. [Google Scholar]
  38. Pollicino O., Against The Idea Of ‘Americanization’ Of European Judicature In The Context Of The New Era Of Judicial Globalization, „Panóptica” 2007, 8, s. 407–440. [Google Scholar]
  39. Pound R., Mechanical Jurisprudence, „Columbia Law Review” 1908, 8. [Google Scholar]
  40. Rubin E., What’s Wrong with Langdell’s Method, and What to Do About it, „Vanderbilt Law Review” 2007, 60. [Google Scholar]
  41. Samuelson P.A., The Convergence of the Law School and the University, „The American Scholar”, 1975, 44. [Google Scholar]
  42. Schauer F., Thinking Like a Lawyer: A New Introduction to Legal Reasoning, London 2009. [Google Scholar]
  43. Schofield W., Christophus Collumbus Langdell, „The American Law Register” 1907, 55(5). [Google Scholar]
  44. Schultz N.L., How Do Lawyers Really Think?, „Journal of Legal Education” 1992, 42. [Google Scholar]
  45. Siems M.M., World without Law Professors, [w:] Mark van Hocke (red.), Methodologies of Legal Disciplines. What kind of Method? What kind of Discipline?, Oxford–Portland 2011, s. 71–87. [Google Scholar]
  46. Srokosz J., The American discussion on the value of the Langdell’s education method of teaching students to „thinking like a lawyer”, and possibility of its implementation in Polish legal education, [w:] M. Večeřa, T. Machalová, J. Valdhans (red.), Aktuální otázky právní metodologie, Brno 2014, s. 132–146. [Google Scholar]
  47. Stein R.M., The Path of Legal Education from Edward I to Langdell: History of Insular Reaction, „Chicago–Kent Law Review” 1981, 57(2), s. 429–454. [Google Scholar]
  48. Stelmach J., Sarkowicz R., Filozofia prawa XIX i XX wieku, Kraków 1999. [Google Scholar]
  49. Stevens R., Law Schools: Legal Education in America from 1850s to 1980s, Chappel Hill–London 1983. [Google Scholar]
  50. Tocqueville A., De, Democracy in America, Old Maine 2002. [Google Scholar]
  51. Vandevellde K.J., Thinking Like a Lawyer: An Introduction to Legal Reasoning, Boulder 2011. [Google Scholar]
  52. Veblen T., The Higher Learning in America. A Memorandum on the Conduct of Universities by Business Man, New York 1918. [Google Scholar]
  53. Veysey L.R., The Emergence of the American University, Chicago 1970. [Google Scholar]
  54. Warren Ch., A History of the American Bar, New York 1921. [Google Scholar]
  55. Wiebe R.H., The Search for Order 1877–1920, New York 1967. [Google Scholar]
  56. Wiegand W., Americanization of Law: Reception or Convergence?, [w:] L.M. Friedman, H.N. Scheiber (red.), Legal Culture and the Legal Profession, Boulder 1996. [Google Scholar]
  57. Zoll F., Jaka szkoła prawa? Czy amerykańskie metody nauczania mogą być przydatne w Polsce?, Warszawa 2004. [Google Scholar]
  58. Areeda P.E., The Socratic Method (SM) (Lecture at Puget Sound 1/31/90), „Harvard Law Review” 1996, 109(5), s. 911–922. [Google Scholar]
  59. Barnhizer D., The Purposes and Methods of American Legal Education, „Journal of the Legal Professions” 2011, 36(1), s. 1–76. [Google Scholar]
  60. Carrington P.D., Butterfly Effects: The Possibilities of Law Teaching in a Democracy, „Duke Law Journal” 1992, 41, s. 774–786. [Google Scholar]
  61. Carrington P.D., Heil Langdell!, „Law and Social Inquiry” 1995, 20. [Google Scholar]
  62. Christensen L.M., The Psychology Behind Case Briefing: A Powerful Cognitive Schema, „Campbell Law Review” 2006, 29. [Google Scholar]
  63. Cook N., Law as Science: Revisiting Langdell’s Paradigm in the 21th Century, „North Dakota Law Review” 2012, 82(2). [Google Scholar]
  64. Davison D.M., The Jeffersonian vision of Legal Education, „Journal of Legal Education” 2001, 51(2). [Google Scholar]
  65. Duxbury N., Patterns of American Jurisprudence, New York 1995. [Google Scholar]
  66. Edwards H.T., Growing Disjunction Between Legal Education and the Legal Professions, „Michigan Law Review”, 1992, 91(8), s. 34–76. [Google Scholar]
  67. Farnsworth A., Casebooks and Scholarship: Confessions of an American Opinion Clipper, „Southwestern Law Journal” 1988, 42. Fehrenbach H., Poiger U.G., Americanization Reconsidered, [w:] C. Neil, J. Davies, G. McKay (red.), Transactions, Transgressions, Transformations: American Culture in Western Europe and Japan, New York–Oxford 2000. [Google Scholar]
  68. Gantt L.O.N., Deconstructing Thinking Like a Lawyer: Analyzing The Cognitive Components of The Analytical Mind, „Campbell Law Review” 2007, 27. [Google Scholar]
  69. Garner D.D., The Continuing Vitality of the Case Method in the Twenty-First Century, „Brigham Young University Education & Law Journal” 2000, 2. [Google Scholar]
  70. Gerber R.J., Legal Education and Combat Preparedness, „The American Journal of Jurisprudence” 1989, 34(1). [Google Scholar]
  71. Gordon R.W., Legal Thought and Legal Practice in the Age of American Enterprise, 1870–1920, [w:] G.L. Gerson (red.), Professions And Professional Ideologies In America, Chapel Hill 1983. [Google Scholar]
  72. Gray T.C., Langdell’s Orthodoxy, „University of Pittsburg Law Review” 1983, 45. [Google Scholar]
  73. Hoeflich M.H., Law & Geometry: Legal Science from Leibniz to Langdell, „The American Journal of Legal History” 1986, 30(2). [Google Scholar]
  74. Holmes W., Book Review, „American Law Review” 1880, 14. [Google Scholar]
  75. Horwitz M.J., The Transformation Of American Law, 1870–1960: The Crisis Of Legal Orthodoxy, Cambridge–London 1992. [Google Scholar]
  76. Johnson K., Scales A., An Absolutely, Positively True Story: Seven Reasons Why We Sing, „New Mexico Law Review” 1986, 16. [Google Scholar]
  77. Kagan R.A., Globalization and legal change: The ‘Americanization’ of European law?, „Regulation & Governance” 2007, 1, s. 99–120. [Google Scholar]
  78. Kennedy D., Toward an Historical Understanding of Legal Consciousness: The Case of Classical Legal Thought in America, 1850–1940, „Research in Law & Sociology” 1980, 3, s. 3–24. [Google Scholar]
  79. Kimball B.E., The Inception of Modern Legal Education. C.C. Langdell 1826–1906, Chapel Hill 2009. [Google Scholar]
  80. Kissam C., The Ideology of the Case Method/Final Examination Law School, „University of Cincinnati Law Review” 2001, 70. [Google Scholar]
  81. Klafter C.E., The Influence of Vocational Law Schools on the Origins of American Legal Thought 1779–1829, „American Journal of Legal History” 1993, 37. [Google Scholar]
  82. Klein S.R., Legal Education in United States and England: A Comparative Analysis, „Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review” 1991, 13, s. 601–641. [Google Scholar]
  83. Kronman A., The Socratic Method and the Development of the Moral Imagination, „University of Toledo Law Review” 2000, 31. [Google Scholar]
  84. Langdell C.C., Harvard Celebration Speeches, „Law Quarterly Review” 1887, 3. [Google Scholar]
  85. Langdell C.C., Summary of the Law of Contracts, Boston 1880. [Google Scholar]
  86. Leiter B., Legal Realism, [w:] D. Patterson (red.), A Companion to Philosophy of Law and Legal Theory, Oxford 1996. [Google Scholar]
  87. Marshall D.G., Socratic Method and the Irreducible Core of Legal Education, „Minnesota Law Review” 2005, 90, s. 1–17. [Google Scholar]
  88. McMains C.R., The History of First Century American Legal Education: A Revisionist Perspective, „Washington University Law Review” 1981, 59(3), s. 597–659. [Google Scholar]
  89. Menkel-Meadow C., Taking Law and ____ Really Seriously: Before, During and after ‘The Law’, „Vanderbilt Law Review” 2007, 60. [Google Scholar]
  90. Mertz E., The Language of Law Schools: Thinking Like a Lawyer, Oxford–New York 2007. [Google Scholar]
  91. Moline B.J., Early American Legal Education, „Washburn Law Review” 2004, 42. [Google Scholar]
  92. Neal P.C., De Tocqueville and the Role of the Lawyer in Society, „Marquette Law Review” 1967, 50, s. 607–617. [Google Scholar]
  93. Neil C., Davies J., McKay G. (red.), Issues in Americanisation and Culture, Edinburgh 2004. [Google Scholar]
  94. Patterson D., Langdell’s Legacy, „Northwestern University Law Review” 1995, 90. [Google Scholar]
  95. Pollicino O., Against The Idea Of ‘Americanization’ Of European Judicature In The Context Of The New Era Of Judicial Globalization, „Panóptica” 2007, 8, s. 407–440. [Google Scholar]
  96. Pound R., Mechanical Jurisprudence, „Columbia Law Review” 1908, 8. [Google Scholar]
  97. Rubin E., What’s Wrong with Langdell’s Method, and What to Do About it, „Vanderbilt Law Review” 2007, 60. [Google Scholar]
  98. Samuelson P.A., The Convergence of the Law School and the University, „The American Scholar”, 1975, 44. [Google Scholar]
  99. Schauer F., Thinking Like a Lawyer: A New Introduction to Legal Reasoning, London 2009. [Google Scholar]
  100. Schofield W., Christophus Collumbus Langdell, „The American Law Register” 1907, 55(5). [Google Scholar]
  101. Schultz N.L., How Do Lawyers Really Think?, „Journal of Legal Education” 1992, 42. [Google Scholar]
  102. Siems M.M., World without Law Professors, [w:] Mark van Hocke (red.), Methodologies of Legal Disciplines. What kind of Method? What kind of Discipline?, Oxford–Portland 2011, s. 71–87. [Google Scholar]
  103. Srokosz J., The American discussion on the value of the Langdell’s education method of teaching students to „thinking like a lawyer”, and possibility of its implementation in Polish legal education, [w:] M. Večeřa, T. Machalová, J. Valdhans (red.), Aktuální otázky právní metodologie, Brno 2014, s. 132–146. [Google Scholar]
  104. Stein R.M., The Path of Legal Education from Edward I to Langdell: History of Insular Reaction, „Chicago–Kent Law Review” 1981, 57(2), s. 429–454. [Google Scholar]
  105. Stelmach J., Sarkowicz R., Filozofia prawa XIX i XX wieku, Kraków 1999. [Google Scholar]
  106. Stevens R., Law Schools: Legal Education in America from 1850s to 1980s, Chappel Hill–London 1983. [Google Scholar]
  107. Tocqueville A., De, Democracy in America, Old Maine 2002. [Google Scholar]
  108. Vandevellde K.J., Thinking Like a Lawyer: An Introduction to Legal Reasoning, Boulder 2011. [Google Scholar]
  109. Veblen T., The Higher Learning in America. A Memorandum on the Conduct of Universities by Business Man, New York 1918. [Google Scholar]
  110. Veysey L.R., The Emergence of the American University, Chicago 1970. [Google Scholar]
  111. Warren Ch., A History of the American Bar, New York 1921. [Google Scholar]
  112. Wiebe R.H., The Search for Order 1877–1920, New York 1967. [Google Scholar]
  113. Wiegand W., Americanization of Law: Reception or Convergence?, [w:] L.M. Friedman, H.N. Scheiber (red.), Legal Culture and the Legal Profession, Boulder 1996. [Google Scholar]
  114. Zoll F., Jaka szkoła prawa? Czy amerykańskie metody nauczania mogą być przydatne w Polsce?, Warszawa 2004. [Google Scholar]

Full metadata record

Cite this record

APA style

Srokosz, Jacek (2018). Geneza Case Method i jej wpływ na kształt amerykańskiej filozofii prawa. (2018). Geneza Case Method i jej wpływ na kształt amerykańskiej filozofii prawa. Krytyka Prawa. Niezależne Studia Nad Prawem, 10(2), 283-303. https://doi.org/10.7206/kp.2080-1084.204 (Original work published 2018)

MLA style

Srokosz, Jacek. “Geneza Case Method I Jej Wpływ Na Kształt Amerykańskiej Filozofii Prawa”. 2018. Krytyka Prawa. Niezależne Studia Nad Prawem, vol. 10, no. 2, 2018, pp. 283-303.

Chicago style

Srokosz, Jacek. “Geneza Case Method I Jej Wpływ Na Kształt Amerykańskiej Filozofii Prawa”. Krytyka Prawa. Niezależne Studia Nad Prawem, Krytyka Prawa. Niezależne studia nad prawem, 10, no. 2 (2018): 283-303. doi:10.7206/kp.2080-1084.204.

Copyright info

copyright info

CC-BY-NC-ND

People also read: