分类导航

    • 国际公法学(89)
    • 国际经济法学(76)
    • 宪法学(59)
    • 国际法学其他学科(41)
    • 刑法学(20)
    • 更多...

      选择学科(共有学科44类)

      • 拼音索引
      热门 A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
    • 2017(178)
    • 2016(155)
    • 2015(43)
    • 2013(7)
    • 不详(5)
    • 更多...

      选择年代(共有年代31个)

浏览排行

下载排行

收藏排行

总访问量:204219

总文献量:421

Administrative Justice and the Supremacy of law in the United States

收藏  纠错 浏览次数(548次)
字体大小:
作者/编者: John Dickinson 作者单位: 不详
学科分类: 行政法学 类型分类: 专著
创作年代: 1990年前 所属机构: 不详
出处/来源: HeinOnline Legal Classics 文献语种: 英文
发布时间: 2016-04-12 14:32:35 所需积分: 0

摘要Abstract

The first section of this classic is REGULATION BY GOVERNMENT VERSUS REGULATION BY LAW,it is detailedly demonstrated by Substitution of Administrative Regulation for Judicial Enforcement of Private Rights. "; Legislative" and "Judicial" aspects of Administrative Regulation. And Reasons for Distinguishing between different fields of Administrative Action. The second section of this classic is THE SUPREMACY OF LAW AND THE REVIEW OF ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATIONS BY THE COURTS,it is demonstrated by Meaning of "Supremacy of Law." and Relation of Court Review to Maintenance of the Supremacy of Law in details.The third section of this classic is THE CONCLUSIVENESS OF ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATIONS, it is demonstrated by Methods of Court Review for older types of Administrative Action; Methods of Court Review for newer types of Administrative Adjudication; "Questions of Law" and "Questions of Fact."; Different Scope of Judicial Review in different fields of Administrative Regulation; Different Scope of Judicial Review in different types of Review-Proceedings; Ambiguity of Principles of Review illustrated by Review of Administrative Regulation of Public Utilities and Arguments of Policy in favor of Broad and Narrow Review in details. The forth section of this classic is HISTORICAL DOCTRINE OF THE SUPREMACY OF LAW, it is demonstrated by Royal Power in Tudor England; The Idea of the Supremacy of Law as a check upon Royal Power; Conflict between Coke and the Crown; The Supremacy of Law and Political Responsibility as alternative methods of restraining abuses of Governmental Power; Distinctionbetween Judicial and Administrative Adjudications under a system of Legal Supremacy in details.The fifth section of this classic is PRACTICAL LIMITS OF THE SUPREMACY OF LAW, it is demonstrated by Law as an Instrument of Certainty;Relation of the Courts to Law; Technique of Legal Logic: Principles, Rules, Concepts, Standards; The Place of Discretion in the Legal System; Relation between Discretion and Rule and Judicial Control of the Discretion of "Fact-finding" Bodies. The sixth section of this claasic is COURT REVIEW OF ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATIONS IN THE FIELD OF PUBLIC-UTILITY REGULATION: DOCTRINE AND PRACTICE OF THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT,it is demonstrated by Review of Determinations of the Interstate Commerce Commission not involving Questions of Constitutionality; Meaning of the Distinction between "Questions of Law" and "Questions of Fact." ; Review of Determinations of the Interstate Commerce Commission involving Questions of Constitutionality; Review of Constitutionality of orders of State Administrative Agencies on Appeal from Injunction Proceedings in the Federal Courts; Review of Constitutionality of orders of State Administrative Agencies on Writ of Error from State Courts.;Constitutional Requirements as to Scope of Judicial Review available in State Courts and The case of Ohio Valley Water Co. v. Ben Avon Borough.The seventh section of this classic is LEGAL ORDER IN FIELDS OF DISPUTED SOCIAL POLICY, it is demonstrated by Judicial Review and the Growth of Law. - Efforts to develop a Law of " FairValue."; Obstacles to Development of Law in fields of disputed Social Policy. -" Mechanical Jurisprudence" and Legal Policy; The Law of "Fair Value," and competing Valuation Theories; The Substance of Legal Generalizations ; Courts and Administrative Bodies as Agencies for the Development of Law.The eighth section of this classic is COURT REVIEW OF DETERMINATIONS OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF A LAW OF UNFAIR COMPETITION, it is demonstrated by Unfair Competition. -The Gratz Case and "Full-line Forcing."; Development of Law as to Restriction of Resale Prices; Judicial Review of Findings of Federal Trade Commission on "Questions of Fact." The nineth section of this classic is COURT REVIEW OF ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATIONS IN THE FIELD OF GENERAL POLICE REGULATION,it is demonstrated by Arguments for broad and narrow review in the field of general Police Regulation; Controlling Distinctions: Necessity of Expert Knowledge and Summary Action; Review Procedure and its Defects: Review of Determinations of Industrial Accident Boards; Political Responsibility of Administrative Adjudicating Agencies.The tenth section of this claasic is COURT REVIEW OF ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATIONS MADE IN THE COURSE OF ADMINISTERING THE BUSINESS OF GOVERNMENT, it is demonstrated by Determinations made in the exercise of the Power to Appoint and Remove Government Employees;Tax Determinations and Determinations by Customs Officials; Determinations by the Public Land Officials of the Federal Government; Determinations by Immigration Officials; Determinations by Postal Officials; Determinations made in Administering the Municipal Supply of Water and Light. The eleventh section of this classic is COURT REVIEW OF ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATIONS OF "FACT", it is demonstrated by The "Ultra-Vires" Theory of Review; The Doctrine of "Jurisdictional Fact." ;" Questions of Law" and" Questions of Fact" again. - Findings based upon no Evidence; Findings based upon Insufficient Evidence and Confusion between Error in the application of Legal Rules and mere Errors of Inference.The twentieth section of this classic is THE SUPREMACY OF LAW AND THE PROBLEM OF LEGAL EDUCATION,it is demonstrated by Legal Premises;The Materials of Legal Premises;The Suggestion of a "Classified Bar."; Alternative Suggestion of Modifications in Legal Education.

备注

本书最初由哈佛大学出版社1927年出版

全文下载

文献纠错

文章标题 Administrative Justice and the Supremacy of law in the United States
错误内容
正确说法
  提交
文献星级
  • 共有0人评价过此文献,平均分为0

同作者

收藏信息