Paper Example. Judicial Decision-Making

Judicial decision-making refers to the process in which judges come into an agreement in the court (Miceli, & Cosgel, 1994). Attorney Joe's Smith experiences some advantages as a result of creating a professional relationship with the local judges in his town:

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Firstly, through a professional relationship, the attorney has been able to develop and establish a good reputation and respect for his hard work. A friendly and social person is more likely to listen to when he/she has an issue that someone who is anti-social and unfriendly. (Danziger, Levav, & Avnaim-Pesso, 2011)

For this reason, Attorney Joe, who proves to have a good association with the judges, stands at a better position of being heard when he sanitizes any issue. He has proven to be a hard-working attorney who always wants the best, and due to that, he will be considered. Having a good relation for an attorney with the judges he is working with also means that the judges will be a bit more considerate of his client's case and rule on the clients' favor.

A legal subculture is a collection of rules and practices that aid in decision making. It has both the strengths and weaknesses; one of its advantages is that it uses the rule of law in decision making, and as we know, laws are flexible. (Johnson, 1987) This means that laws can change now and then with others been implemented in case some get outdated. A legal substructure has consistency and certainty in the sense that all cases presented are ruled in the same manner since the rules are the same so that a claim can be predicted earlier (Danziger et al. 2011).

Some of the weakness affecting this local subcultures is that it is contentious on the use of precedence in the decision making. It is, however, questionable on the use of rules stated in the law and proper consultation in generating credible rulings and use of decisions stare (Johnson, 1987). However, use of this precedence contribute significantly where a quick response is required, but it is not applicable in all cases.

Conclusion

From the above arguments, it can thus be concluded that a good working relationship is essential for all workers since it unites them and they can understand each other better. It also enhances a good working environment for all workers.

References

Danziger, S., Levav, J., & Avnaim-Pesso, L. (2011). Extraneous factors in judicial decisions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(17), 6889-6892. Retrieved from https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/108/17/6889.full.pdf?nr_email_referer=1%29%2C

Johnson, C. A., (1987). Law, politics, and judicial decision making: Lower federal court uses of Supreme Court decisions. Law and Society Review, 325-340. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/3053525.pdf

Miceli, T. J., & Cosgel, M. M. (1994). Reputation and judicial decision-making. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 23(1), 31-51. Retrieved from https://lsr.nellco.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1048&context=nyu_lewp