Interpretive methodology and delegations to courts: Are “common law statutes” different?

Intellectual Property and the Common Law

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 89-106

  Lemos, Margaret H ^a  

^a DUKE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84925600231     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781139013550.006     Document Type: Chapter

References (40)

1. Miranda McGowan, Do as I Do, Not as I Say: An Empirical Investigation of Justice Scalia’s Ordinary Meaning Method of Statutory Interpretation, 78 Miss. L.J. 129, 134 (2008)
2. Frank Easterbrook, Statutes’ Domains, 50 U. Chi. L. Rev. 533, 544 (1983)
3. Cass Sunstein, Interpreting Statutes in the Regulatory State, 103 Harv. L. Rev. 405, 421–22 (1989)
4. William N. Eskridge, Public Values in Statutory Interpretation, 137 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1007, 1052 (1989)
5. Shyamkrishna Balganesh, Debunking Blackstonian Copyright, 118 Yale L.J. 1126, 1167 (2008)
6. Craig Allen Nard, Legal Forms and the Common Law of Patents, 90 B.U. L. Rev. 51, 53 (2010)
7. Ethan J. Leib & Michael Serota, The Costs of Consensus in Statutory Construction, 120 Yale L.J. Online 47, 53 (2010)
8. Margaret H. Lemos, The Other Delegate: Judicially Administered Statutes and the Nondelegation Doctrine, 81 S. Cal. L. Rev. 405 (2008).
9. Herbert Hovenkamp, Economics and Federal Antitrust Law 52 (student ed. 1985)
10. Thomas W. Merrill, The Common Law Powers of Federal Courts, 52 U. Chi. L. Rev. 1, 46 (1985)
11. Antonin Scalia, A Matter of Interpretation: Federal Courts and the Law 22 (1997).
12. Cass R. Sunstein & Adrian Vermeule, Interpretation and Institutions, 101 Mich. L. Rev. 885, 908 (2002).
13. Daniel A. Farber & Brett H. McDonnell, “Is There a Text in this Class?” The Conflict Between Textualism and Antitrust, 14 J. Contemp. Legal Issues 619, 621 (2004)
14. Amy Coney Barrett, Statutory Stare Decisis in the Courts of Appeals, 73 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 317, 348 (2004)
15. William N. Eskridge, Jr., Overruling Statutory Precedents, 76 Geo. L.J. 1361, 1366–68 (1987)
16. Lawrence C. Marshall, “Let Congress Do It”: The Case for an Absolute Rule of Statutory Stare Decisis, 88 Mich. L. Rev. 177, 200–19 (1989)
17. Frank E. Horack, Jr., Congressional Silence: A Tool of Judicial Supremacy, 25 Tex. L. Rev. 247, 250–51 (1947)
18. Margaret H. Lemos, The Consequences of Congress’s Choice of Delegate: Judicial and Agency Interpretations of Title VII, 63 Vand. L. Rev. 363, 387–433 (2010)
19. Edward L. Rubin, Law and Legislation in the Administrative State, 89 Colum. L. Rev. 369, 381 (1989)
20. Michael Rosensaft, The Role of Purposivism in the Delegation of Rulemaking Power to the Courts, 29 Vt. L. Rev. 611, 614, n.9 (2005)
21. Lisa Schultz Bressman, Chevron’s Mistake, 58 Duke L.J. 549, 559 (2008)
22. William N. Eskridge, Jr., Dynamic Statutory Interpretation, 135 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1479, 1488–96 (1986)
23. Peter L. Strauss, The Common Law and Statutes, 70 U. Colo. L. Rev. 225, 244 (1999)
24. Victoria F. Nourse & Jane S. Schacter, The Politics of Legislative Drafting: A Congressional Case Study, 77 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 575, 595–97 (2002)
25. Joseph A. Grundfest & A. C. Pritchard, Statutes with Multiple Personality Disorders: The Value of Ambiguity in Statutory Design and Interpretation, 54 Stan. L. Rev. 627, 665–66 (2002)
26. Adrian Vermeule, Interpretive Choice, 75 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 74, 103 (2000)
27. Richard A. Posner, Statutory Interpretation – in the Classroom and in the Courtroom, 50 U. Chi. L. Rev. 800, 818 (1983)
28. David Epstein & Sharyn O’Halloran, The Nondelegation Doctrine and the Separation of Powers: A Political Science Approach, 20 Cardozo L. Rev. 947, 967 (1998).
29. Lon L. Fuller, The Law in Quest of Itself 140 (1940)
30. Dan M. Kahan, Three Conceptions of Federal Criminal-Lawmaking, 1 Buff. Crim. L. Rev. 5, 6–9 (1997).
31. Caleb Nelson, The Persistence of General Law, 106 Colum. L. Rev. 503, 521–22 (2006)
32. Peter L. Strauss, Courts or Tribunals? Federal Courts and the Common Law, 53 Ala. L. Rev. 891, 895 (2001).
33. Peter Lee, Patent Law and the Two Cultures, 120 Yale L.J. 2, 16 (2010).
34. Robert P. Merges, As Many as Six Impossible Patents Before Breakfast: Property Rights for Business Concepts and Patent System Reform, 14 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 577, 585 (1999).
35. Michael J. Burstein, Rules for Patents, 52 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 1747, 1764–66 (2011)
36. Arti K. Rai, Engaging Facts and Policy: AMulti-Institutional Approach to Patent System Reform, 103 Colum. L. Rev. 1035 (2003).
37. John F. Duffy, Rules and Standards on the Forefront of Patentability, 51 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 609, 614 (2009)
38. Jeanne C. Fromer, Patentography, 85 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 1444 (2010)
39. Craig Allen Nard & John F. Duffy, Rethinking Patent Law’s Uniformity Principle, 101 Nw. U. L. Rev. 1619 (2007)
40. Daniel Crane, Rules Versus Standards in Antitrust Adjudication, 64 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. 49 (2007).