Although judges frequently rely on legal precedent, there is no fixed standard by which judges must give a certain weight to precedent. In other words, judges differ in the degree to which they show...

Although judges frequently rely on legal precedent, there is no fixed standard by which judges must give a certain weight to precedent. In other words, judges differ in the degree to which they show deference to legal precedent and legislative acts. Consequently, several judges viewing the same case and same set of facts could reach conflicting decisions. As you learned in the chapter about the American legal system, judges work on the basis of different philosophies: some believe in judicial restraint and others believe in judicial activism.These underlying philosophies are in part responsible for the varying degrees of importance that judges give to the four primary ethical norms (see Chapter 1). In turn, the degree of importance that a judge attaches to each of these ethical norms plays a significant role in the shaping of a judge’s reasoning and the court’s conclusion. The following questions pertaining to Case 10-5 encourage you to consider the importance of primary ethical norms in a judge’s reasoning.

 1. Which primary ethical norm was guiding the judge’s reasoning in the majority opinion? Clue: Consider the factors the judge discussed in favoring the plaintiff’s interests over the defendant’s interests.

2. To further illustrate the significance of ethical norms, to which ethical norm did the dissenting judge give highest priority? Clue: Similar to the first question, why do you think the judge elevated the defendant’s interests over the plaintiff’s interests?

 3. What missing information would help you better evaluate the court’s reasoning? Clue: Find the reasons the plaintiff provides for rescission of the contract. What omitted evidence could have made the plaintiff’s case more convincing?