Should a lawyer keep a client's secrets even when disclosure would exculpate a person wrongly accused of a crime? To what extent should a lawyer exploit loopholes in ways that enable clients to gain unintended advantages? When can lawyers justifiably make procedural manoeuvres that defeat substantive rights? This book looks at these and other traditional questions about the ethics of lawyering. William Simon, a legal theorist with experience in practice, charges that the profession's standard approach to these questions is incoherent and implausible. At the same time, Simon reflects the ethical approaches most frequently purposed by the professions critics. The problem, he insists, does not lie with the profession's commitment to legal values over those of ordinary morality, nor does it arise from the adversary system. Rather, Simon shows that the critical weakness of the standard aproach is its reliance on a distinctive style of judgment - categorical, rule-bound, rigid - that is both ethically unattractive and rejected by most modern legal thought outside the realm of legal ethics. He develops an alternative approach based on a different, more contextual style of judgment widely accepted in other areas of legal thought. The author uses discussions of actual cases, including the Lincoln Savings and Loan scandal and the Leo Frank murder trial, as well as fictional accounts of lawyering, including Kafka's "The Trial" and the movie "The Verdict".
具體描述
讀後感
評分
評分
評分
評分
用戶評價
相關圖書
本站所有內容均為互聯網搜索引擎提供的公開搜索信息，本站不存儲任何數據與內容，任何內容與數據均與本站無關，如有需要請聯繫相關搜索引擎包括但不限於百度，google,bing,sogou 等
© 2025 book.quotespace.org All Rights Reserved. 小美書屋 版权所有