FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W142488178> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W142488178 abstract "In Empirical Research on Judicial Reasoning: Statutory Interpretation in Federal Tax Cases, Professor Daniel Schneider uses empirical research to examine the interplay between methods of statutory construction used by judges in federal tax decisions and the judges' social backgrounds. While tax scholarship has analyzed how the Internal Revenue Code is interpreted, it has not done so empirically. This article uses statistics, especially logistic regressions, to engage in such an analysis, taking judges' backgrounds into account. Professor Schneider's database consists of decisions from both the Tax Court and the district courts sitting in the Southern District of New York, the Northern District of Illinois, and the Central District of California that were rendered between 1979 and 1998. He has assembled data about both the decisions - the court where the decision was made, the year of the decision, the primary Code section at issue, and the rationale used to justify the decision (e.g., strict construction, reliance on legislative history) - and the social backgrounds of the judges who rendered the decisions - each judge's gender, race (for the district court judges) educational background, political affiliation, prior professional experience, and length of the judge's tenure when he rendered the decision. Some of Professor Schneider's descriptive statistics include his observations about judges that: - those who decided the Tax Court cases had gone to more elite colleges and less elite law schools than judges who decided the district court cases, and - relative to the Tax Court judges, the district court judges had served on the bench less when deciding the case before them and also were more likely to have come from private practice. His observations about the methods of interpretation used are that: - judges strongly favored nonliteral approaches, especially practical reasoning, to strict construction of the Code, - they used practical reasoning in a wide variety of substantive areas of tax law, and - they frequently mixed different approaches to interpretation, pairing strict construction, for example, with nonliteral approaches. Finally, Professor Schneider uses logistic regressions to predict what approaches judges in the sampled cases could be expected to use when justifying their decisions. Statistically significant correlations between factors in judges' social backgrounds and approaches existed for factors such as the judge's education, his professional background before being appointed to the bench, and the length of his tenure when rendering his decision." @default.
• W142488178 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W142488178 creator A5069136119 @default.
• W142488178 date "2002-01-01" @default.
• W142488178 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W142488178 title "Empirical Research on Judicial Reasoning: Statutory Interpretation in Federal Tax Cases" @default.
• W142488178 cites W1518550127 @default.
• W142488178 cites W1990777956 @default.
• W142488178 cites W2164581246 @default.
• W142488178 cites W2322583517 @default.
• W142488178 cites W2522720850 @default.
• W142488178 cites W4237709405 @default.
• W142488178 doi "https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.299567" @default.
• W142488178 hasPublicationYear "2002" @default.
• W142488178 type Work @default.
• W142488178 sameAs 142488178 @default.
• W142488178 citedByCount "4" @default.
• W142488178 countsByYear W1424881782014 @default.
• W142488178 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W142488178 hasAuthorship W142488178A5069136119 @default.
• W142488178 hasBestOaLocation W1424881782 @default.
• W142488178 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W142488178 hasConcept C120936955 @default.
• W142488178 hasConcept C121955636 @default.
• W142488178 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W142488178 hasConcept C158129432 @default.
• W142488178 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
• W142488178 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W142488178 hasConcept C190253527 @default.
• W142488178 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W142488178 hasConcept C2779204856 @default.
• W142488178 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W142488178 hasConcept C527412718 @default.
• W142488178 hasConceptScore W142488178C111472728 @default.
• W142488178 hasConceptScore W142488178C120936955 @default.
• W142488178 hasConceptScore W142488178C121955636 @default.
• W142488178 hasConceptScore W142488178C138885662 @default.
• W142488178 hasConceptScore W142488178C158129432 @default.
• W142488178 hasConceptScore W142488178C162324750 @default.
• W142488178 hasConceptScore W142488178C17744445 @default.
• W142488178 hasConceptScore W142488178C190253527 @default.
• W142488178 hasConceptScore W142488178C199539241 @default.
• W142488178 hasConceptScore W142488178C2779204856 @default.
• W142488178 hasConceptScore W142488178C41895202 @default.
• W142488178 hasConceptScore W142488178C527412718 @default.
• W142488178 hasLocation W1424881781 @default.
• W142488178 hasLocation W1424881782 @default.
• W142488178 hasOpenAccess W142488178 @default.
• W142488178 hasPrimaryLocation W1424881781 @default.
• W142488178 hasRelatedWork W1560802732 @default.
• W142488178 hasRelatedWork W2282626586 @default.
• W142488178 hasRelatedWork W2899084033 @default.
• W142488178 hasRelatedWork W3134363395 @default.
• W142488178 hasRelatedWork W4313489488 @default.
• W142488178 hasRelatedWork W4313489536 @default.
• W142488178 hasRelatedWork W4313489553 @default.
• W142488178 hasRelatedWork W4313489580 @default.
• W142488178 hasRelatedWork W575311308 @default.
• W142488178 hasRelatedWork W650454968 @default.
• W142488178 isParatext "false" @default.
• W142488178 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W142488178 magId "142488178" @default.
• W142488178 workType "article" @default.