9 Then came “Woe Unto You,. Lawyers!”. Rodell knew that it would make every lawyer bristle or snort. ‘By FRED RODELL, Professor of Law, Yale University. Here’s a book you don’t have to buy; the entire text is here, in glorious HTML. It’s Fred Rodell’s “lusty, gusty attack on ‘The Law’ as a curious. This Book Reviews is brought to you for free and open access by the College of Law at Via Sapientiae. It has been accepted for Leo Herzel, Rodell: Woe unto You, Lawyers!, 7 DePaul L. Rev. () You, Lawyers! By FRED RODELL.
|Published (Last):||3 July 2016|
|PDF File Size:||7.75 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||6.15 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The man kept right on enjoying his interest and his dividends until he died. Ten of the men under whom I took courses were sufficiently skeptical and common-sensible about the branches of law they were teaching eoe that, unwittingly of course, they served together to fortify my hunch about the phoniness of the whole legal process.
If a British barrister of years ago were suddenly to come alive in an American court-room, he would feel intellectually at home. But there cred another opening. Yeats lawters – Husserl Studies 5 2: The following excerpts are from the headnotes of its opinion which in Ohio constitute the law of the case: Back to the U. And so, for that matter, are all the Corcorans and Cohens and Thurman Arnolds rodel, the rest, whose chief value to the New Deal lies not in their political views nor even in their administrative ability but rather in their adeptness at manipulating the words of The Law so as to make things sound perfectly proper which other lawyers, by manipulating different words in a different way, maintain are terribly improper.
And the whole idea of taking two promises, made by separate people to a third person, and roeell one of them Consideration for the other sounds, of course, utterly fantastic.
There was the time the Court ruled that the clause of the Guffey Coal Act, directing that if part of the Act be declared unconstitutional the rest wos the Act should go into effect anyway, meant the exact opposite of what that clause said.
The Law would enforce it, all right, but not in those words. But the Supreme Court, as hou be expected, has an answer to all this. Even if it be true that The Law in the main amounts to the manipulation of impressive, irrelevant words by a closed corporation of well-trained word-jugglers, The Law as handed down from Supreme Court heights should surely have more sense and substance to it.
Now, Chief Justice Taft was in no position to know, yoou would have considered it irrelevant if he lawjers known, that the Clayton Act might not have been passed at all if it had not seemed clear to labor that Section 20 gave strikers the right to picket without constant interference by the federal courts. Yet part of the land that Max had a stake in was not outside Ohio at all; it was inside Ohio.
Merciless judges lurk there, ready to jump out at him.
Woe Unto You, Lawyers!
And each man agreed to contribute a thousand dollars. Preview — Woe Unto You, Lawyers! Michael Thaler – unknown. But Chief Justice Taft and his court of lawyers had the last word. And so, at long last, appears the question to which the Supreme Court devoted almost its entire opinion in Senior v.
Fred Rodell Quotes
Matt Seraph marked it as to-read Jul 11, Braden but of almost any Supreme Court case your could name, as nothing more nor less than an intellectual fraud. It is permanent and changeless — which means that it is not of this earth. Neither as advisers out of court nor as representative in court would the lawyers be able to sell their special brand of verbal skill. When one lawyer, discussing a case at a cocktail party as lawyers always do, shoots Interstate Commerce or Privileged Communication at a fellow member of the bar, with that well-known air of studied nonchalance which children affect when talking pig Latin before their elders, the second lawyer has a general idea what the first is talking about.
But even when the nine master jugglers are working at their smoothest, it requires only a trained eye to see that those weighty thoughts they seem to be tossing around are frfd reality no more than balloons, full of hot air and easily punctured. For the Law of Contracts rarely pays attention to surrounding circumstances. But neither the formulation nor the application of such principles and their sub-principles and the exceptions sheds even the dimmest light on the basic difficulties of the state governments and the taxpayers.
Thus, a common-or-garden digging of a ditch can be dignified by Wos Law into an Acceptance, a Consideration, and a Performance, all at the same time.
Jerome Hall, Book Review:Woe Unto You, Lawyers! Fred Rodell – PhilPapers
And though all of them would doubtless strenuously disown their godchild, I think I owe it to them to name them. And giving each of those silly little rules as much potency and prestige as if it had been adopted by the people as an amendment to the Uno.
Even the Highest Court of the Land laying down the Supreme Law of the Land reverts to the same old hocus-pocus of solemn words spoken with a straight face, and meaning, intrinsically, nothing. Refresh and try again.
Why should not a man who wants to leave his prop Law is a racket and maybe an unjust technique for controlling the world. Here the Supreme Court has the final word. oawyers
But if the mortgagor then wants to know if he can sell the unnto, and on what terms, and if he has to pay taxes on it, and if he can kick the mortgagee out if the mortgagee comes snooping around, the lawyers will begin to disagree.
Return to Book Page. Clearly, dred exception now applies. The Law is thus superior to constitutions, just as it is superior to statutes. Now a super-intelligent and super-outspoken lawyer or judge may occasionally admit that his legal brethren are either fools or liars when they claim that the words and concepts and principles of The Law are any more than statements of results in legal language.