Search results

In the Indian judicial system, the court considers interpretations of similar previous judgments for the present case. An essential requirement of legal practitioners is to determine the most relevant judgments from an enormous amount of judgments for preparing supportive, beneficial and favorable arguments against the opponent. It urges a strong demand to develop a Legal Document Recommendation System (LDRS) to automate the process. In existing works, traditionally preprocessed judgment corpus is processed by Doc2Vec to learn semantically rich judgment embedding space (i.e. vector space). Here, vectors of semantically relevant judgments are in close proximity, as Doc2Vec can effectively capture semantic meanings. The enormous amount of judgments produces a huge noisy corpus and vocabulary which possesses a significant challenge: traditional preprocessing cannot fully eliminate noisy data from the corpus and due to this, the Doc2Vec demands huge memory and time to learn the judgment embedding. It also adversely affects the recommendation performance in terms of correctness. This paper aims to develop an effective and efficient LDRS to support civilians and the legal fraternity.

To overcome previously mentioned challenges, this research proposes the LDRS that uses the proposed Generalized English and Indian Legal Dictionary (GEILD) which keeps the corpus of relevant dictionary words only and discards noisy elements. Accordingly, the proposed LDRS significantly reduces the corpus size, which can potentially improve the space and time efficiency of Doc2Vec.

The experimental results confirm that the proposed LDRS with GEILD yield superior performance in terms of accuracy, F1-Score, MCC-Score, with significant improvement in the space and time efficiency.

The proposed LDRS uses the customized domain-specific preprocessing and novel legal dictionary (i.e. GEILD) to precisely recommend the relevant judgments. The proposed LDRS can be incorporated with online legal search repositories/engines to enrich their functionality.

Small Claims Court Television Shows offer spectators an opportunity to re-envision their relationship to legal and civic judgment. Through presenting racial and regional judges, these shows re-imagine legal judgment as a necessary and inclusive component of everyday citizenship. Reflecting Reality TV, Tabloid TV Talk Shows, and the History of African-American representation on television, shows like Judge Mathis and Judge Judy demonstrate the contradictions inherent in racial representations on television. By showing the ways in which television performance reflects the performative aspect of legal discourse already operating upon us, the judges use stupidity as a way to pedagogically energize a lower class, disenfranchised viewership into newly rehearsing their roles as active citizens.

Predatory trading is a stock market trading technique in which certain market participants exploit information about other market participants' need to trade. Predatory trading often harms others. Hence, this paper examines the determinants and effects of financial practitioners' and lay people's judgments of predatory trading. Specifically, it investigates how the public availability and reliability of the exploited information affect their ethics and legality judgments and how the latter influence their behavioral intentions and regulation support.

The authors conducted two scenario judgment studies. In the first study, participants were financial practitioners, and in the second – lay people.

Practitioners often judge predatory trading to be ethical. Practitioners and lay people incorporate in their ethics and legality judgments the public availability of the exploited information but tend to discount the legal reliability criterion. Lay people justify their ethics judgments using harm, legal or profit maximization principles. Practitioners' intentions to engage in predatory trading and lay people's intentions to let predatory fund managers invest their money depend on their judgments, which influence their regulation support.

This paper is the first to explore people's judgments of predatory trading. It highlights that despite the harm that predatory trading involves, practitioners often judge it to be ethical. Although law tends to lag behind financial innovation, people base their judgments and hence also behavioral intentions on their interpretation of the regulation. Hence, it reveals a dark aspect of the relationship between ethics and legality judgments.

In crafting Auditing Standard No.3 (AS3), a primary objective of the PCAOB was to reduce auditors' exposure to litigation by raising the standard of care for audit documentation. We examine whether the increased documentation requirements of AS3 affect legal professionals' perceptions of audit quality and auditor responsibility in the event of an audit failure. Our experiment consists of a 3 × 2 between-participants design with law students serving as proxies for legal professionals. The results of our experiment indicate that when an audit procedure, namely the investigation of inconsistent evidence, is not required to be documented, legal professionals perceive the performance of the work itself but not its documentation to significantly increase audit quality and reduce the auditor's responsibility for an audit failure. When documentation of the procedure is required, as per AS3, legal professionals perceive enhanced audit quality and reduced auditor responsibility only if the performance of the work is documented.

Anatomy of a Murder, a beloved, highly influential, seemingly liberal 1959 classic law-film seems to appropriate some of the fading western genre’s features and social functions, intertwining the professional-plot western formula with a hero-lawyer variation on the classic western hero character, America’s 19th century archetypal True Man. In so doing, Anatomy revives the western genre’s honor code, embracing it into the hero-lawyer law-film. Concurrently, it accommodates the development of cinematic imagery of the emerging, professional elite groups, offering the public the notion of the professional super-lawyer, integrating legal professionalism with natural justice. In the course of establishing its Herculean lawyer, the film constitutes its female protagonist as a potential threat, subjecting her to a cinematic judgment of her sexual character and reinforcing the honor-based notion of woman’s sexual-guilt.

This study aims to demonstrate the need for further examination of legal judgments and the exercise of discretion in policing.

A factorial vignette survey with traffic stop scenarios based on US Court of Appeals decisions was administered to 396 police officers across six states. Officers were asked to indicate their assessment of the presence of reasonable suspicion and the likelihood that they would extend the stop for investigatory purposes.

Officers' reasonable suspicion judgments are significantly influenced by the vignette facts and align with court ruling expectations. However, even in the presence of reasonable suspicion, responses indicate a limited use of officer discretion to extend the stop.

Analyses of officer decision-making often rely on large datasets with easy indicators of location, officer demographics and citizen demographics, but rarely consider the facts of individual cases. This study suggests more experimental research is needed to consider the impact of case facts on officer judgments and discretionary activity.

Research has suggested that ethics judgments should be made from an impartial perspective. However, people are often partial about their money. This study aims to investigate the extent to which perspectives – the perspective of those who can gain from the use of a financial practice and the perspective of those who can incur losses due to it – affect lay people’s ethics and legality judgments of the practice. In addition, it asks which factors influence their investment intentions.

The study uses a between-participant scenario experiment, in which participants are presented with cases of predatory trading and front running. Each participant is asked to take either a gain or loss perspective through the formulation of the presented cases. Subsequently, all participants make ethics, legality and investment intention judgments.

The authors establish that perspectives significantly affect people’s ethics judgments and, to a lesser extent, their legality judgments. People’s investment intentions depend on their perspectives, too, as well as on their financial considerations, ethics judgments, legality judgments and trust.

Research has focused on relatively stable determinants of people’s ethics judgments of financial practices. This paper shows that the situational prospect of profit can sway lay people’s judgments. When people take the gain perspective, they judge financial practices to be more ethical than when they take the loss perspective. Furthermore, people’s perspectives can distort their legality judgments and influence their investment intentions.

This study aims to adopt a systematic review approach to examine the existing literature on law and LLMs.It involves analyzing and synthesizing relevant research papers, reports and scholarly articles that discuss the use of LLMs in the legal domain. The review encompasses various aspects, including an analysis of LLMs, legal natural language processing (NLP), model tuning techniques, data processing strategies and frameworks for addressing the challenges associated with legal question-and-answer (Q&A) systems. Additionally, the study explores potential applications and services that can benefit from the integration of LLMs in the field of intelligent justice.

This paper surveys the state-of-the-art research on law LLMs and their application in the field of intelligent justice. The study aims to identify the challenges associated with developing Q&A systems based on LLMs and explores potential directions for future research and development. The ultimate goal is to contribute to the advancement of intelligent justice by effectively leveraging LLMs.

To effectively apply a law LLM, systematic research on LLM, legal NLP and model adjustment technology is required.

This study contributes to the field of intelligent justice by providing a comprehensive review of the current state of research on law LLMs.

The purpose of the paper is to investigate how judges and the general population formulate judgments on legal cases, considering both legal and extralegal factors, with a focus on the significance of the defendant’s sex.

The first experiment aimed to determine if non-lawyers’ judgments are affected by the defendant’s sex, using brief excerpts from indictments with the defendant’s sex interchanged. Study 2 aimed to verify if this effect applies to future lawyers, suggesting a peculiar approval granted by men to women displaying illegal sexual behaviour towards young men.

The findings showed that the sex of the offender only influenced judgments in sexual offences, with male participants being more lenient towards female offenders.

The originality/value of the paper lies in its examination of the influence of the defendant’s sex on judgments made by both judges and the general population, specifically focussing on non-lawyers’ judgments. While previous studies have shown that judges tend to be more lenient towards women in certain cases, this paper adds novelty by investigating whether a similar effect is observed among non-lawyers. Moreover, the research sheds light on the relevance of the defendant's sex in cases of sexual offences and identifies a gender-specific leniency towards female offenders, particularly among male participants. The study also explores how this effect might extend to future lawyers, providing insights into societal attitudes regarding illegal sexual behaviour involving women and young men. Overall, the paper contributes valuable information to the understanding of how sex-based biases can influence legal judgments and decision-making processes.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the effect of ethical ideologies on ethical judgments of future Malaysian accountants in general situations and based on the legality of the situations. The examination covers the relationships of both the specific ethical dimension (i.e. idealism and relativism) and the specific categories of ideology (i.e. absolutist and subjectivist) on ethical judgments.

Using a questionnaire survey that comprises Ethical Position Questionnaire and ethical dilemma vignettes, 396 usable responses were received. In achieving the objectives, multivariate analysis of variance, correlations and univariate analysis of variance were performed.

The study discovered a significant impact of ethical ideology on judgments regardless of the legality of the cases. In addition, the study found a significant positive and negative impact of idealism and relativism, respectively, on ethical judgment. Moreover, the study reported that absolutists are stricter whilst situationists are more lenient in making ethical judgments compared to other ideologies.

The present study investigated the effect of ethical ideologies on ethical judgment, in general, as well as the effect on ethical judgment based on the legality of the ethical dilemma. This study also considered the effect of the two dimensions of ethical ideology – idealism and relativism – on ethical judgment and captured the four categories of ideology based on the taxonomy of ethical ideologies.