Legal Precedents and Judicial Decision-Making Quiz

Precedent is a legal decision or ruling serving as an authoritative example for similar cases.

Stare decisis is the Latin term commonly used to refer to legal precedents.

An opinion is a judge's written explanation of a decision in a case.

Jurisdiction refers to the authority of a court to hear and decide a case.

'Stare decisis' means to let the decision stand, indicating adherence to precedent.

Public opinion is not a factor influencing a judge's decision to depart from precedent.

Judicial activism refers to a judge deciding a case based on personal preferences, not legal principles or precedents.

France does not primarily use the common law system.

Mandatory authority is a court decision by a higher court binding lower courts in the same jurisdiction.

Doctrine of equity allows courts to adapt legal principles to new factual situations.

The Supreme Court in the United States is responsible for establishing federal legal precedents.

Persuasive precedent involves non-binding decisions from different jurisdictions that may be persuasive.

Persuasive authority is a legal principle allowing courts to consider past decisions without necessarily following them.

'Distinguishing a case' means identifying differences between the case and precedent in judicial decision-making.

A brief is a legal document submitted by a party with arguments and authorities in support of their position in a case.

Doctrine of stare decisis holds that a court should follow precedent unless there is a compelling reason to deviate.

Persuasive authority is a non-binding court decision considered persuasive in future cases.

'Affirming' describes a situation where a higher court adopts the reasoning of a lower court's decision.

Double jeopardy is the legal principle prohibiting the government from punishing an individual more than once for the same offense.

Common law is based on legal precedents established by courts, not statutes enacted by legislatures.

Stare decisis is the legal principle allowing a court to consider past decisions as a guiding factor in deciding a case.

An overruled precedent is one no longer considered valid or relevant in legal contexts.

Marbury v. Madison established the principle of judicial review in the United States.

Judicial activism allows judges to depart from precedent if they believe it was wrongly decided or is no longer applicable.

Res judicata is the legal principle preventing re-litigation of a decided case.