Date sent: Sun, 16 Jul 2000 15:40:32 -0400
From: Chris Brenton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Send reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Copies to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: MAPS gets sued, could this get bigger?
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I have to disagree. US courts are based on precedence. Once one is set
> the preverbal floodgate gets opened up. I've sat in on cases where
> property law was used as precedence in cybercrimes. This case would be
> even less of a stretch. ;)
Not quite. Precedents can only be set at a certain level of court
and they are only binding on the courts directly beneath that court.
They are not binding on the same court; they are not binding on
higher courts; they are not binding on other courts at the same
level; and they are not binding on lower courts that are not beneath
that court. That's why it's common to have conflicting decisions in
various parts of the county on similar issues.
It is impossible for the lowest level courts in any court system to
set precedents since there are no courts underneath them that are
bound by that precedent.
Also, at least in some court systems (Texas, for example) courts
that can set precedents may be able to also make decisions that
do not set precedents. I don't know if federal courts are like that at
all.
Eric Johnson
--------------------
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
