1932
0
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Annual Review of Law and Social Science
  4. Volume 2, 2006
  5. Article

Annual Review of Law and Social Science

Volume 2, 2006

In the Winter of Our Discontent: Law, Anti-Law, and Social Science

Abstract

▪ Abstract 

Law and social science took shape as a field of inquiry in the third quarter of the past century, an era of expanding rights and remedies and optimism about the capacity of law, government, and social science to address intractable social problems. It put down vigorous institutional roots in organizations, publications, teaching, and research that enabled it to survive the erosion of the reformist soil that nurtured it and to adapt to a new era in which the prevailing common sense is a jaundiced view that emphasizes the weaknesses, costs, and dangers of law. A significant body of research has rebutted many of the components of the jaundiced view, but with little effect on the prevailing folklore. The legal system's distinctive susceptibility to such misreadings and misrepresentations is aggravated by a late and weak development of empirical knowledge and a lack of credible guardians of its knowledge base.

Keyword(s): expansion of remedies, law schools, lawyers, legal knowledge, legalization
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev.lawsocsci.2.081805.105946
2006-12-01
2024-05-15
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/ls/2/1/annurev.lawsocsci.2.081805.105946.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev.lawsocsci.2.081805.105946&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Bailis DS, MacCoun RJ. 1996. Estimating liability risks with the media as your guide: a content analysis of media coverage of tort litigation. Law Hum. Behav. 20:419–29 [Google Scholar]
  2. Blumberg AS. 1967. The practice of law as a confidence game. Law Soc. Rev. 1:215–39 [Google Scholar]
  3. Brief as Amici Curiae of Certain Leading Business Corporations in Support of Petitioner. 2001. Cooper Industries, Inc. v. Leatherman Tool Group, Inc. 532 U.S. 424 (No. 99–2035)
  4. Brief as Amici Curiae of Certain Leading Business Corporations in Support of Petitioner. 2002. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. Curtis B. Campbell and Inez Preece Campbell 537 U.S. 1042 (No. 01–1289)
  5. Campos PF. 1998. Jurismania: The Madness of American Law New York: Oxford Univ. Press.198 pp.
  6. Carlin JE, Howard J, Messinger SL. 1966. Civil justice and the poor: issues for sociological research. Law Soc. Rev. 1:19–89 [Google Scholar]
  7. Carrillo J. 2005. Links and choices: the idea of popular legal culture in the work of Lawrence M. Friedman Presented at conference in honor of Lawrence M. Friedman, Stanford Law Sch., Oct. 1
  8. Carruth E. 1973. The “legal explosion” has left business shell-shocked. Fortune, April pp. 65–69
  9. Carson CN. 2004. The Lawyer Statistical Report: The U.S. Legal Profession in 2000 Chicago: Am. Bar Found250pp.
  10. Chase OG. 1995. Helping jurors determine pain and suffering awards. Hofstra Law Rev. 23:763–90 [Google Scholar]
  11. Cotterrell R. 1994. Law and Society Aldershot: Dartmouth
  12. Crews CWJ. 2005. Ten Thousand Commandments: An Annual Snapshot of the Federal Regulatory State Washington, DC: Cato Inst.
  13. Deal C, Doroshow J. 2000. The Cala Files: The Secret Campaign by Big Tobacco and Other Major Industries to Take Away Your Rights New York/Washington, DC: Cent. Justice Democr./Public Citizen67 pp.
  14. Edelman LB, Abraham SE, Erlanger HS. 1992. Professional construction of law: the inflated threat of wrongful discharge. Law Soc. Rev. 26:47–83 [Google Scholar]
  15. Edelman LB, Galanter M. 2001. Law: overview. Int. Encycl. Soc. Behav. Sci. 12:8538–44 [Google Scholar]
  16. Epp CR. 1998. The Rights Revolution: Lawyers, Activists, and Supreme Courts in Comparative Perspective Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press326 pp.
  17. Ewick P, Silbey S. 1998. The Common Place of Law: Stories from Everyday Life Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press.318pp.
  18. Forbes. 1976. Who Pays. Aug. 1, p. 57
  19. Freudenburg WR. 2005. Seeding science, courting conclusions: reexamining the intersection of science, corporate cash, and the law. Sociol. Forum 20:3–33 [Google Scholar]
  20. Friedman LM. 1985. Total Justice New York: Russell Sage.166pp.
  21. Friedman LM. 2005. Coming of age: law and society enters an exclusive club. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. 1:1–15 [Google Scholar]
  22. Galanter M. 1974. Why the ‘haves’ come out ahead: speculations on the limits of legal change. Law Soc. Rev. 9:95–160 [Google Scholar]
  23. Galanter M. 1992. Law abounding: legalisation around the North Atlantic. Mod. Law Rev. 55:1–24 [Google Scholar]
  24. Galanter M. 1994. Predators and parasites: lawyer-bashing and civil justice. Ga. Law Rev. 28:633–81 [Google Scholar]
  25. Galanter M. 1998. An oil strike in hell. Ariz. Law Rev. 40:717–52 [Google Scholar]
  26. Galanter M. 2005a. Lowering the Bar: Lawyer Jokes and Legal Culture Madison: Univ. Wis. Press.429pp.
  27. Galanter M. 2005b. Planet of the APs: reflections on the scale of law and its users. Buffalo Law Rev. 53:1369–417 [Google Scholar]
  28. Galanter M, Edwards MA. 1997. Introduction: the path of the law ands. Wis. Law Rev. 1997:375–87 [Google Scholar]
  29. Galanter M, Palay TM. 1991. Tournament of Lawyers: The Transformation of the Big Law Firm Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press.197pp.
  30. Garber S. 1998. Product liability, punitive damages, business decisions and economic outcomes. Wis. Law Rev. 1998:237–95 [Google Scholar]
  31. Garber S, Bower AG. 1999. Newspaper coverage of automotive product liability verdicts. Law Soc. Rev. 33:95–122 [Google Scholar]
  32. Gawalt GW. 1984. The New High Priests: Lawyers in Post–Civil War America Westport, CT: Greenwood.214pp.
  33. George TE. 2006. An empirical study of empirical legal scholarship: the top law schools. Indiana Law J. 81:141–61 [Google Scholar]
  34. Glazer N. 1975. Towards an imperial judiciary. Public Interest 41:104–23 [Google Scholar]
  35. Haltom W, McCann M. 2004. Distorting the Law: Politics, Media, and the Litigation Crisis Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press.347pp.
  36. Hans VP. 2000. Business on Trial: The Civil Jury and Corporate Responsibility New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press.269pp.
  37. Jarvis RM, Joseph PR. 1998. Prime Time Law: Fictional Television as Legal Narrative Durham, NC: Carolina Acad. Press.323pp.
  38. Johnson EJ. 1974. Justice and Reform: The Formative Years of the OEO Legal Services Program New York: Russell Sage.416pp.
  39. Kagan RA. 2001. Adversarial Legalism: The American Way of Law Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press339pp.
  40. Lande J. 1998. Failing faith in litigation? A survey of business lawyers' and executives' opinions. Harvard Negot. Law Rev. 3:1–70 [Google Scholar]
  41. Lipset SM, Schneider W. 1987. The Confidence Gap: Business, Labor, and Government in the Public Mind Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press.460 pp. Rev. ed.
  42. Loftus E, Beech LR. 1982. Human inference and judgment: Is the glass half empty or half full. Stanford Law Rev. 34:938–56 [Google Scholar]
  43. Luntz F. 1997. The Language of the 21st Century Alexandria, VA: Luntz Res.222pp.
  44. Macaulay S. 1979. Lawyers and consumer protection laws. Law Soc. Rev. 14:115–71 [Google Scholar]
  45. Mezey N, Niles MC. 2005. Screening the law: ideology and law in American popular culture. Columbia J. Law Arts 28:91–185 [Google Scholar]
  46. Miller MC. 1995. The High Priests of American Politics: The Role of Lawyers in American Political Institutions Knoxville: Univ. Tenn. Press.228pp.
  47. Nelson WE. 2001. The Legalist Reformation: Law, Politics and Ideology in New York 1920–1980 Chapel Hill: Univ. N. C. Press.457pp.
  48. Nielsen LB, Beim A. 2004. Media misrepresentation: Title VII, print media, and public perceptions of discrimination litigation. Stanford Law Policy Rev. 15:237–365 [Google Scholar]
  49. Nisbet RE, Ross L. 1980. Human Inference: Strategies and Shortcomings of Social Judgment Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall
  50. Olson TB. 1994. The parasitic destruction of America's civil justice system. SMU Law Rev. 47:359–68 [Google Scholar]
  51. Peterson MA, Priest GL. 1982. The Civil Jury: Trends in Trials and Verdicts, Cook County, Illinois, 1960–1979. Santa Monica: RAND Inst. Civ. Justice.73pp.
  52. Pound Conf. 1976. Addresses delivered at the National Conference on the Causes of Popular Dissatisfaction with the Administration of Justice. 70 F.R.D. 79–246
  53. Scheingold SA. 1974. The Politics of Rights: Lawyers, Public Policy and Political Change New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press.224pp.
  54. Schlegel JH. 1995. American Legal Realism and Empirical Social Science Chapel Hill: Univ. N. C. Press.418pp.
  55. Schrag P. 1972. Counsel for the Deceived: Case Studies in Consumer Fraud New York: Pantheon.200pp.
  56. Seron C. 2006. The Law and Society Canon Aldershot: Ashgate.604pp.
  57. Sharkey CM. 2003. Punitive damages: should juries decide. Tex. Law Rev. 82:381–411 [Google Scholar]
  58. Sherwin R. 2000. When Law Goes Pop: The Vanishing Line Between Law and Popular Culture Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press.325pp.
  59. Silberman LH. 1978. Will lawyering strangle democratic capitalism. Regulation March/April 1978:15–44 [Google Scholar]
  60. Silbey SS. 2000. From the editor. Law Soc. Rev. 34:859–72 [Google Scholar]
  61. Simon J. 1999. Law after society. Law Soc. Inq. 24:143–94 [Google Scholar]
  62. Strum P. 1984. Louis D. Brandeis: Justice for the People Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.508pp.
  63. Tamanaha BZ. 2006. The perils of pervasive legal instrumentalism Montesquieu Lect. Ser., Tilburg Univ., Vol. 1, 2005. http://ssrn.com/abstract=725582
  64. Trubek DM, Galanter M. 1974. Scholars in self-estrangement: some reflections on the crisis of law and development studies in the United States. Wis. Law Rev. 1974:1062–102 [Google Scholar]
  65. Trubek DM, Grossman JB, Felstiner WLF, Kritzer HM, Sarat A. 1987. Civil Litigation Research Project Final Report, 3 Vols. Madison: Univ. Wis. Sch. Law
  66. Tyack D, Benavot A. 1985. Courts and public schools: educational litigation in historical perspective. Law Soc. Rev. 19:339–80 [Google Scholar]
  67. van den Haag E. 1978. The growth of the imperial judiciary. Policy Rev. 4:57–67 [Google Scholar]
  68. Vidmar NJ. 1995. Medical Malpractice and the American Jury: Confronting the Myths about Jury Incompetence, Deep Pockets, and Outrageous Damage Awards Ann Arbor: Univ. Mich. Press.318pp.
  69. Vidmar NJ. 2004. Experimental simulations and tort reform: avoidance, error and overreaching in Sunstein et al.'s Punitive Damages. Emory Law J. 53:1359–403 [Google Scholar]
  70. Warren E. 2002. The market for data: the changing role of social sciences in shaping the law. Wis. Law Rev. 2002:1–43 [Google Scholar]
  71. Witte J. 2005. Law and religion: the challenges of Christian jurisprudence. Univ. St. Thomas Law J. 2:439–52 [Google Scholar]
  72. Yale Law J. 1970. 7961005–197 (May)
  73. Zarembo A. 2003. Column one: funding studies to suit need. Los Angeles Times Dec. 3, p. 1A
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev.lawsocsci.2.081805.105946
Loading
  • Article Type: Review Article

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

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