Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBrilmayer, Lea
dc.date2021-11-25T13:34:25.000
dc.date.accessioned2021-11-26T11:39:18Z
dc.date.available2021-11-26T11:39:18Z
dc.date.issued1986-01-01T00:00:00-08:00
dc.identifierfss_papers/2548
dc.identifier.contextkey1926925
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.13051/1875
dc.description.abstractWhat does it mean to say that a decision is a legal error? Does "legal error" have any real meaning? This Article approaches legal error in the same way that a scientific paper might approach perpetual motion machines. The purpose is to question whether anything really fits that description and to show that things which may seem at first to constitute legal error, upon closer inspection, do not. As usually understood, error requires two things. First, there must be a hypothetical result, determined by the relevant decisionmaking inputs, which is inconsistent with the actual result. This is the requirement of determinacy. Second, it must be the case that the actual result should have conformed to that hypothetical result. This is the requirement of direction of fit.
dc.titleWobble, or the Death of Error
dc.source.journaltitleFaculty Scholarship Series
refterms.dateFOA2021-11-26T11:39:18Z
dc.identifier.legacycoverpagehttps://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/fss_papers/2548
dc.identifier.legacyfulltexthttps://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3628&context=fss_papers&unstamped=1


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Wobble__or_the_Death_of_Error.pdf
Size:
1.312Mb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record