Aucun appareil Kindle n'est requis. Téléchargez l'une des applis Kindle gratuites et commencez à lire les livres Kindle sur votre smartphone, tablette ou ordinateur.

  • Apple
  • Android
  • Windows Phone
  • Android

Pour obtenir l'appli gratuite, saisissez votre numéro de téléphone mobile.

Prix Kindle : EUR 33,27

EUR 14,19 (30%)

TVA incluse

Ces promotions seront appliquées à cet article :

Certaines promotions sont cumulables avec d'autres offres promotionnelles, d'autres non. Pour en savoir plus, veuillez vous référer aux conditions générales de ces promotions.

Envoyer sur votre Kindle ou un autre appareil

Envoyer sur votre Kindle ou un autre appareil

Scalia and Garner's Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts par [Scalia, Antonin, Garner, Bryan A.]
Publicité sur l'appli Kindle

Scalia and Garner's Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts Format Kindle

Voir les formats et éditions Masquer les autres formats et éditions
Prix Amazon
Neuf à partir de Occasion à partir de
Format Kindle
"Veuillez réessayer"
EUR 33,27

Longueur : 567 pages Word Wise: Activé Composition améliorée: Activé
Page Flip: Activé Langue : Anglais

Descriptions du produit

Présentation de l'éditeur

In this groundbreaking book, Scalia and Garner systematically explain all the most important principles of constitutional, statutory, and contractual interpretation in an engaging and informative style – with hundreds of illustrations from actual cases. Is a burrito a sandwich? Is a corporation entitled to personal privacy? If you trade a gun for drugs, are you “using a gun” in a drug transaction? The authors grapple with these and dozens of equally curious questions while explaining the most principled, lucid, and reliable techniques for deriving meaning from authoritative texts. Meanwhile, the book takes up some of the most controversial issues in modern jurisprudence. The authors write with a well-argued point of view that is definitive yet nuanced, straightforward yet sophisticated.

Détails sur le produit

  • Format : Format Kindle
  • Taille du fichier : 1947 KB
  • Nombre de pages de l'édition imprimée : 608 pages
  • Editeur : West; Édition : 1 (5 juillet 2012)
  • Vendu par : Amazon Media EU S.à r.l.
  • Langue : Anglais
  • ASIN: B008MFO6YG
  • Synthèse vocale : Activée
  • X-Ray :
  • Word Wise: Activé
  • Composition améliorée: Activé
  • Moyenne des commentaires client : Soyez la première personne à écrire un commentaire sur cet article
  • Classement des meilleures ventes d'Amazon: n°360.145 dans la Boutique Kindle (Voir le Top 100 dans la Boutique Kindle)
  •  Voulez-vous faire un commentaire sur des images ou nous signaler un prix inférieur ?

click to open popover

Commentaires en ligne

Il n'y a pas encore de commentaires clients sur
5 étoiles
4 étoiles
3 étoiles
2 étoiles
1 étoile

Commentaires client les plus utiles sur (beta) 4.5 étoiles sur 5 62 commentaires
181 internautes sur 196 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
5.0 étoiles sur 5 Concise, Thoughtful, and in places even Humorous 27 juin 2012
Par Eros Faust - Publié sur
Format: Relié
I write this on the evening before the Supreme Court's expected ruling on the fate of the Affordable Health Care Act (a/k/a Obamacare) because I don't want the decision in that case to color my favorable opinion of the book, which it might.

Justice Scalia is well known, but Bryan Garner, the co-author and the editor of Black's Law Dictionary, is less so. They have collaborated on a prior book, The Art of Persuading Judges, which I liked, and I like this book even more. I don't think it is intended to be read cover-to-cover like the prior book, but as a condensation of the principles of constitutional and statutory interpretation, it is unrivaled. You could read cases for decades and not get as clear an understanding of how to interpret them as you would from thumbing through this book while attempting to interpret a particular statute.

The first 51 pages, which include the Introduction and Principles Applicable to All Texts fall into the category of exposition on theories of interpretation. It is humorous in places. For example, at one point the authors quote from a constitutional scholar who says "the language structure, and history of law serve best as mediums [sic.] of restraint rather than excuses for intrusion." The use of the Latin abbreviation "sic." for "sic erat scriptum" or "thus was it written" leads you to punchline contained in the footnote which says "unless the passage refers to clairvoyants, media is the proper term." I'm not sure if that is Scalia's or Garner's work on display, but I still found it funny.

In short, it is recommended for anyone who must interpret statutes. I consider it more a reference than an exposition, but one that save readers gobs of time when deciding what a statute does, or should mean.
59 internautes sur 66 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
5.0 étoiles sur 5 A Rich Guidebook 30 août 2012
Par C. E. Hughes - Publié sur
Format: Relié
I practice law in the areas of probate litigation and estate planning. For almost twenty years I argued probate cases before judges who ultimately had to interpret the meaning of probate statutes and a legal document (a trust for instance). Two years ago I quit litigation and devoted my practice to preventative law--that is, I am attempting on behalf of my clients to either prevent probate litigation with carefully drafted documents, resolve probate disputes outside of court with carefully customized probate ADR agreements, or contain litigation in court with the most carefully drafted estate planning documents I can write--documents that judges cannot misinterpret. I recently had one of my documents tested in the Utah Supreme Court, where the Court unanimously (5-0) found that the text was clear and unambiguous on the dispute in issue and overturned the trial court's decision to the contrary. A frustrating case in that I thought my writing was clear enough for the trial court to understand.

Then I read yesterday's WSJ review on Justice Scalia's and Mr. Garner's book "Reading Law" (I wish Amazon would give reviewers a little more control in utilizing underlining or italics.) I bought a copy last night and have not been able to put it down.

This book is a goldmine for drafters of legal documents. The fundamental, semantic, syntactic, and contextual canons are not only fascinating to read, but are providing eminently practical drafting guidelines that have me intellectually hopping for joy. This book has already taken its place within handreach of my beloved Ninth Edition Black's Law Dictionary (thank you, Mr. Garner), my Chicago Manual of Style (thanks again for Mr. Garner's contributions), and my battered twenty-year-old Roget's Thesaurus.

I am only one-third through the book (underlining, underlining, underlining), but I cannot help going back to some of my documents this afternoon and improving them in specific detail based solely on what I have read so far in this wonderful book. I am looking forward to reading the book over dinners, breakfasts, and lunches in the next few days.

Just the section titled "Principals Applicable to All Texts" should make this book required reading for a host of people: law students in their writing courses, legistators, attorneys in legislative offices overseeing the drafting of statutes, judges, and just plain old transactional attorneys like me who eschew boilerplate forms and instead want to draft their own careful documents benefitting their clients.

Thank you to the authors for this interesting and deeply practical book. I am not sure Justice Scalia and Mr. Garner intended (!) the book to be a manual for drafters of legal documents, but it has already become an indispensable drafing manual for me.
20 internautes sur 22 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
5.0 étoiles sur 5 America's judicial religion: A book every American should read 22 janvier 2013
Par Kurt S. Schulzke - Publié sur
Format: Relié
My professional interest as an attorney originally attracted me to Reading Law. Having finished the first 107 pages, I enthusiastically echo another Amazon reviewer who wrote, "This book is a goldmine for drafters of legal documents. The fundamental, semantic, syntactic, and contextual canons are not only fascinating to read, but are providing eminently practical drafting guidelines that have me intellectually hopping for joy."

But Reading Law is not just for attorneys. Every American should read this book, in part to create accountability among judges at every level of government. Every American should know how judges should interpret the vast array of statutes and regulations now so deeply embedded in the fabric of American life. Judges should read it, obviously. So should legislators, many of whom are legal laymen needing better understanding of how their legislation should be read and it should fit within the template of federal and state constitutions. Yet, ordinary Americans, those whose lives and livelihoods are later judged against legislative standards may need this book even more, to anticipate how they will be judged and, later, to comprehend why.
99 internautes sur 124 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
5.0 étoiles sur 5 A Phenomenal Book 29 juillet 2012
Par DC Comics Fan - Publié sur
Format: Relié
Being a graduate of both of MIT and the University of Michigan Law School, I have nothing but the utmost respect for the legal mind of Justice Scalia. While I may not agree with everyone of his votes while on the Supreme Court, I am in 100% agreement with using Textualism and Originalism in deciding constitutional law cases. At time where judges confuse their roles and attempt to subvert the Constitution's clear language and meaning, this book is a breath of fresh air. Highly recommended!
19 internautes sur 24 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
5.0 étoiles sur 5 A Must Read for Serious Lawyers - Serious Lawyers, not Egg-Sucking, Bottom-Feeding, Hallway Trash. 23 septembre 2012
Par A Guidice - Publié sur
Format: Relié Achat vérifié
To be the very best attorneys we can be, we must study. Don't ever hire a lawyer who has never read a case - without being paid to read it - since law school. Right? Thus, for attorneys committed to their professions, this book is essential.

I think my colleagues who dislike Scalia don't like his manner - his aloof, imperious, wheezy, almighty law-professor aura. We all remember that from law school and we detest it. Right? The real criticism isn't his devotion to textualism, it's our natural dislike for inflexible, close-minded people. Scalia is certainly that. (God help me if I ever appear before him...).

But the book is compelling. The Canons of statutory interpretation section is very useful, and very handy for legal subjects where statutes are bandied about constantly, and at every level (as they are with immigration law, for example). This section is where Garner's hand is most discernible, discussions of English usage are clear, bright, and rich with possibilities. And Garner's writing is a pleasure to read: as smooth and rich as oil. This is what you buy the book for.

Scalia is most prominent in the very lengthy introduction, with it's dogmatic insistence on textualist sensibilities. It's almost offensive. We feel almost as though we're being scolded from the bench, yes? Scalia is really answering his critics here much more than he is trying to enlighten the reader.

I'd be willing to bet that Garner strongly advised a heavy edit in the introduction, maybe to half the length, but was unsuccessful. And Scalia doesn't really write all that well either... it's not an elegant style. Reading Scalia is like trying to land a golf ball on a boulder-strewn fairway: uncomfortable, and downright trying at times. Many lawyers and judges find the "content" of his opinion (and other) writing objectionable, but I feel it'd be much easier to swallow if the "form" of the writing weren't so ponderous, and almost oppressive at times...

But the Canons of Construction section will stand you in good stead when you're writing briefs and memos. Buy the book, read half the introduction, then read the Canons section. Keep it close at hand when you're writing. It's good background, good fortification for serious, scholarly attorneys. (People Magazine will suffice for the rest of you...)

The book probably would have been better if Garner had written it alone, but it's still very much worth having. Even Scalia haters will like the book (c'mon, huh? The guy is from Trenton, after all...).
Ces commentaires ont-ils été utiles ? Dites-le-nous