1932

Abstract

This article reviews classic and contemporary case study research in law and social science. Taking as its starting point that legal scholars engaged in case studies generally have a set of questions distinct from those using other research approaches, the essay offers a detailed discussion of three primary contributions of case studies in legal scholarship: theory building, concept formation, and processes/mechanisms. The essay describes the role of case studies in social scientific work and their express value to legal scholars, and offers specific descriptions from classic and contemporary works.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-120814-121513
2018-10-13
2024-06-14
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/lawsocsci/14/1/annurev-lawsocsci-120814-121513.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-120814-121513&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Armour J, Lele P 2009. Law, finance, and politics: the case of India. Law Soc. Rev. 43:3491–526
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Babbie ER 2012. The Practice of Social Research Belmont, CA: Wadsworth
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Barker V 2009. The Politics of Imprisonment: How the Democratic Process Shapes the Way America Punishes Offenders New York: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Becker HS 1992. Cases, causes, conjunctions, stories, and imagery. See Ragin & Becker 1992 205–16
  5. Bell J 2002. Policing Hatred: Law Enforcement, Civil Rights, and Hate Crime New York: N.Y. Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Brady H, Collier D 2010. Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards New York: Rowman & Littlefield
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Brereton D, Casper JD 1981. Does it pay to plead guilty? Differential sentencing and the functioning of criminal courts. Law Soc. Rev. 16:145–70
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Bumiller K 1987. Victims in the shadow of the law: a critique of the model of legal protection. Signs 12:3421–39
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Burawoy M, Hendley K 1992. Between Perestroika and privatisation: divided strategies and political crisis in a Soviet enterprise. Sov. Stud. 44:3371–402
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Calavita K 1986. Worker safety, law and society change: the Italian case. Law Soc. Rev. 20:2189–228
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Campbell M 2011. Politics, prison and law enforcement: an examination of “law and order” politics in Texas. Law Soc. Rev. 45:3631–65
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Cheesman N 2011. How an authoritarian regime in Burma used special courts to defeat judicial independence. Law Soc. Rev. 45:4801–30
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Cichowski R 2007. The European Court and Civil Society: Litigation, Mobilization and Governance Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Coleman C, Nee LD, Rubinowitz LS 2005. Social movements and social change litigation: synergy in the Montgomery bus protest. Law Soc. Inq. 30:4663–736
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Collier D, Brady H, Seawright J 2010. Sources of leverage in causal inference: towards an alternative view of methodology. See Brady & Collier 2010 161–200
  16. Collier D, Gerring J 2008. Concepts and Method in Social Science: The Tradition of Giovanni Sartori New York: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Dudas J 2008. The Cultivation of Resentment: Treaty Rights and the New Right Palo Alto, CA: Stanford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Earl J 2008. Review: “The Process is the Punishment”: thirty years later. Law Soc. Inq. 33:3735–78
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Eisenstein J, Jacob H 1977. Felony Justice: An Organizational Analysis of Criminal Courts New York: Little Brown
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Elster J 1989. Nuts and Bolts for the Social Sciences Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Elster J 2007. Explaining Social Behavior: More Nuts and Bolts for the Social Sciences Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Ewick P, Silbey SS 1992. Conformity, contestation, and resistance: an account of legal consciousness. New Engl. Law Rev. 26:3731–50
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Ewick P, Silbey SS 1998. The Common Place of Law: Stories from Everyday Life Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Feeley M 1979. The Process Is the Punishment: Handling Cases in a Lower District Court New York: Russell Sage Found.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Ferrer A 2012. Haiti, free soil, and antislavery in the revolutionary Atlantic. Am. Hist. Rev. 17:140–66
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Flemming RB, Nardulli PF, Eisenstein J 1993. The Craft of Justice: Politics and Work in Criminal Court Communities Philadelphia: Univ. Pa. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Galanter M 1974. Why the “haves” come out ahead: speculations on the limits of legal change. Law Soc. Rev. 9:95–160
    [Google Scholar]
  28. George AL, Bennett G 2005. Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Gerring J 2007. Case Study Research: Principles and Practices New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Gerring J 2012. Mere description. Br. J. Political Sci. 42:2721–46
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Ginsburg T 2003. Judicial Review in New Democracies: Constitutional Courts in Asian Cases New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Goertz G 2006. Social Science Concepts: A User's Guide Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Goertz G, Mahoney J 2012. A Tale of Two Cultures: Qualitative and Quantitative Research in the Social Sciences Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Gómez LE 2016. Connecting critical race theory with second generation legal consciousness work in Obasogie's Blinded by Sight. Law Soc. Inq. 41:41069–77
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Gould JB, Barclay S 2012. Mind the gap: the place of gap studies in socio-legal scholarship. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 8:323–35
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Greenhouse CJ, Yngvesson B, Engle DM 1994. Law and Community in Three American Towns Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Hedström P, Swedberg R 1996. Social mechanisms. Acta Sociol 39:281–308
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Hedström P, Ylikoski P 2010. Causal mechanisms in the social sciences. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 36:49–67
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Hendley K 1993. The quest for rational labor allocation within Soviet enterprises: internal transfers before and during Perestroika. Beyond Sovietology: Essays in Politics and History S Solomon 125–58 Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Hendley K 2017. Everyday Law in Russia Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Heumann M 1978. Plea Bargaining Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Hilbink L 2011. Judges Beyond Politics in Democracy and Dictatorship New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Hirschl R 2009. Towards Juristocracy: The Origins and Consequences of the New Constitutionalism Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Holzmeyer C 2009. Human rights in the era of neoglobalization: the Alien Tort Claims Act and grassroots mobilization in Doe v. Unocal. Law Soc. Rev. 43:2271–304
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Jacob H 1983. Trial courts in the United States: the travails of exploration. Law Soc. Rev. 3:3407–24
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Kagan R 2003. Adversarial Legalism: The American Way of Law Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Kapiszewski D 2012. High Courts and Economic Governance in Argentina and Brazil New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Kawar LC 2014. Commanding Legality: The Juridification of Immigration Policymaking in France Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Kelemen RD, Sibbitt EC 2005. Lex Americana? A response to Levi-Faur. Int. Organ. 59:2463–72
    [Google Scholar]
  50. King G, Keohane RO, Verba S 1994. Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Lemaitre J, Sandvik KB 2015. Shifting frames, vanishing resources, and dangerous political opportunities: legal mobilization among displaced women in Columbia. Law Soc. Rev. 49:15–38
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Levi-Faur D 2005. The political economy of legal globalization: juridification, adversarial legalism and responsive regulation. a comment. Int. Organ. 59:2451–62
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Lipskey M 1979. Street-Level Bureaucracy: The Individual in Public Services New York: Russell: Sage Found.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Massoud MF 2013. Law's Fragile State: Colonial, Authoritarian and Humanitarian Legacies in Sudan New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Mather L 1979. Plea Bargaining or Trial: The Process of Criminal-Case Disposition Lexington, MA: Lexington Books
    [Google Scholar]
  56. McCann M 1992. Reform litigation on trial. Law Soc. Inq. 17:4715–43
    [Google Scholar]
  57. McCann M 1994. Rights at Work: Pay Equity Reform and the Politics of Legal Mobilization Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Merry SE 1990. Getting Justice and Getting Even: Legal Consciousness Among Working-Class Americans Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Miller LL 2008. The Perils of Federalism: Race, Poverty, and the Politics of Crime Control New York: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Miller LL, Eisenstein J 2005. The federal/state criminal prosecution nexus: a case study in cooperation and discretion. Law Soc. Inq. 30:2239–68
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Milner N 1987. The right to refuse treatment: four case studies of legal mobilization. Law Soc. Rev. 21:3447–86
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Moustafa T 2007. The Struggle for Constitutional Power: Law Politics, and Economic Development in Egypt Cambridge, MA: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Paris M 2001. Legal mobilization and the politics of reform: lessons from school finance litigation in Kentucky, 1984–1995. Law Soc. Inq. 26:3631–84
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Ragin CC, Becker HS 1992. What Is a Case? Exploring the Foundations of Social Inquiry New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Rosenberg G 1991. The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change? Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Roussell A 2015. Policing the anticommunity: race, deterritorialization, in labor market reorganization in South Los Angeles. Law Soc. Rev. 49:4813–45
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Ryan JP 1980. Adjudication and sentencing in a misdemeanor court: The outcome is the punishment. Law Soc. Rev. 15:80–107
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Sarat A 1990. The law is all over: power, resistance and the legal consciousness of the welfare poor. Yale J. Law Humanit. 2:343–79
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Sartori G 1970. Concept misinformation in comparative politics. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 64:41033–53
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Scheingold SA 1984. The Politics of Law and Order: Street Crime and Public Policy New York: Longman
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Scheingold SA 1991. The Politics of Street Crime: Criminal Process and Cultural Obsession Philadelphia: Temple Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Scheppele KL 2003. Constitutional negotiations: political contexts of judicial activism in post-Soviet Europe. Int. Sociol. 18:1219–38
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Scheppele KL 2004. Constitutional ethnography: an introduction. Law Soc. Rev. 38:3389–406
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Schoenfeld H 2010. Mass incarceration and the paradox of prison conditions litigation. Law Soc. Rev. 44:3/4731–67
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Seawright J 2016. Multi-Method Social Science: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Tools Cambridge, MA: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Seron C 1996. The Business of Practicing Lives: The Work Lives of Small-Firm and Solo Attorneys Philadelphia: Temple Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Shapiro M 1983. Courts: A Comparative Political Analysis Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Silbey SS 1981. Making sense of the lower courts. Justice Syst. J. 6:113–27
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Silbey SS 2005. After legal consciousness. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 1:323–68
    [Google Scholar]
  80. Silverstein G 2009. Law's Allure: How Law Shapes, Constrains, Saves, and Kills Politics New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  81. Skolnick JH 1967. Justice Without Trial: Law Enforcement in Democratic Society Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons
    [Google Scholar]
  82. Swedlow B 2009. Reason for hope? The spotted owl injunctions and policy change. Law Soc. Inq. 34:4825–67
    [Google Scholar]
  83. Tarrow S 2010. Bridging the quantitative-qualitative divide. See Brady & Collier 2010 101–10
  84. Tezcür GM 2009. Judicial activism in perilous times: the Turkish case. Law Soc. Rev. 43:2305–36
    [Google Scholar]
  85. Tilly C 2001. Mechanisms in political processes. Annu. Rev. Political Sci. 4:21–41
    [Google Scholar]
  86. Uggen C, Blackstone A 2004. Sexual harassment as gendered expression of power. Am. Sociol. Rev. 69:164–92
    [Google Scholar]
  87. Valverde M 2012. Everyday Law on the Streets: City Governance in an Age of Diversity Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  88. Yngvesson B 1993. Virtuous Citizens, Disruptive Subjects: Order and Complaint in a New England Court New York: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  89. Zackin E 2013. Looking for Rights in All the Wrong Place: Why State Constitution's Contain America's Positive Rights Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-120814-121513
Loading
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-120814-121513
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error