Indicators of obiter dicta. A pragma-dialectical analysis of textual clues for the reconstruction of legal argumentation

Artificial Intelligence and Law

Volumn 8, Issue 2, 2000, Pages 189-203

  Plug, José ^a  

^a ERASMUS UNIVERSITY ROTTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

LAWS AND LEGISLATION; PROBLEM SOLVING;

PRAGMA-DIALECTICAL ANALYSIS;

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE;

EID: 0034205349     PISSN: 09248463     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1008327715564     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Asser, W. D. H. and Doek, J. E. et al. 1994. Burgerlijke Rechtsvordering (loose-leaf system). Kluwer, Deventer
2. Eemeren, F. H. van and Grootendorst, R. 1992. Argumentation, Communication and Fallacies. Erlbaum, Hillsdale.
3. Franx, J. K. 1993. Motivering van de conclusie OM bij de Hoge Raad. In Gemotiveerd Gehuldigd. Opstellen Aangeboden aan Mr C.D. van Boeschoten. Tjeenk Willink, Zwolle, pp. 121-131.
4. Hollander, L. 1983. Cassatie (Suppl. 1987). Tjeenk Willink, Zwolle.
5. Knoop, S. W. and Krans, H. 1992. Model of legal reasoning in appellate court decisions. In H. J. Snijders and M. Ynzonides (eds.), Role and Organization of Judges and Lawyers in Contemporary Societies. Kluwer Law and Taxation Publishers, Deventer/Boston, pp. 155-173.
6. Plug, H. J. 1994. Reconstructing complex argumentation in judicial decisions. In Frans H. van Eemeren and Rob Grootendorst (eds.), Studies in Pragma-Dialectics, International Centre for the Study of Argumentation (Sic Sat), Amsterdam, pp. 246-253.
7. Plug, H. J. 1995. The rational reconstruction of additional considerations in judicial decisions. In Frans H. van Eemeren, Rob Grootendorst, J. Anthony Blair and Charles A. Willard (eds.), Special Fields and Cases. Proceedings of the Third ISSA Conference on Argumentation, Vol. IV. International Centre for the Study of Argumentation (Sic Sat), Amsterdam, pp. 61-73.
8. Plug, H. J. 1996. Complex argumentation in judicial decisions, analysing conflicting arguments'. In Dov M. Gabbay and Hans Jürgen Ohlbach (eds.), Practical Reasoning. Proceedings of the International Conference on Formal and Applied Practical Reasoning. Springer-Verlag, Bonn, pp. 464-480.
9. Prakken, H. and. Sartor, G. 1996. A dialectical model of assessing conflicting arguments in legal reasoning. Artificial Intelligence and Law 4(3/4), 331-368.
10. Snoeck Henkemans, A. F. 1992. Analysing Complex Argumentation; the Reconstruction of Multiple and Coordinatively Compound Argumentation in a Critical Discussion. Sicsat (proefschrift Amsterdam UvA), Amsterdam.
11. Snoeck Henkemans, A. F 1995. 'Anyway' and 'even' as indicators of argumentative structure. In Frans H. van Eemeren, Rob Grootendorst, J. Anthony Blair and Charles A. Willard (eds.), Reconstruction and Application. Proceedings of the Third ISSA Conference on Argumentation, Vol. III. International Centre for the Study of Argumentation (Sic Sat), Amsterdam, pp. 183-192.
12. Veegens, D. J. 1989. Cassatie in Burgerlijke Zaken. (3e dr. revised by E. Korthals Altes and H. A. Groen). Tjeenk Willink, Zwolle.
13. Winters, B. 1992. De Procedure na Cassatie en Verwijzing in Civiele Zaken. Tjeenk Willink, Zwolle.