NOTES

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1 A loose group of American law professors have been labelled the Critical Legal Studies Movement (“Crits” for short). The term “critical legal studies” as used in this book is not intended to refer to them, although the critical approach presented here has something in common with their work. Like the Crits, this text raises questions about the proper relation of law to society, but unlike them, it does not propose wide ranging changes to law and the legal system pursuant to a vision inspired by leftist politics.

2 Constitution Act 1982 [en. by the Canada Act 1982 (UK), c. 11, s. 1] pt. I (Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms), s. 7.

3 Canada (Attorney General) v. PHS Community Services Society, 2011 SCC 44, [2011] 3 S.C.R. 134.

4 Canada (Attorney General) v. Mavi, 2011 SCC 30, [2011] 2 S.C.R. 504.

5 R. v. Khan, 2001 SCC 86, [2001] 3 S.C.R. 823.

6 R. v. Lomage; Mallet v. Administrator of the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Act, [1991] 2 O.L.R. (3d) 621.

7 Rt. Hon. Beverley McLachlin, “Legal Writing: Some Tools,” quoted in P.D. v. British Columbia, 2010 BCSC 290 para. 114.

8 Burmah Oil Co. v. Bank of England, [1979] 1 W.L.R. 473 at 484 (Court of Appeal).

9 Air Canada v. Secretary of State for Trade, [1983] 2 A.C. 411.

10 U.S. v. Cronic, quoted in R. v. Joanisse, [1995] 102 C.C.C. (3d) 57.

11 William Felstiner, Richard L. Abel, and Austin Sarat, “The Emergence and Transformation of Disputes: Naming, Blaming, and Claiming,” Law & Society Review 15, no. 3–4 (1980): 631–54.

12 Do v. Sheffer, 2010 ABQB 86.

13 Use of Highway and Rules of the Road Regulation, AR 304/2002, s. 34(1).

14 Foundation for Public Legal Education, “Legal Capability Project: Law for Everyday Life,” http://www.lawforlife.org.uk/index.php/law-for-life-projects/legal-capability-for-everyday-life/.

15 “Measuring Young People’s Legal Capability,” Public Legal Education Network and Independent Academic Research Studies, http://www.lawforlife.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/measuring-young-peoples-legal-capability-2009-117.pdf.

16 Lucie E. White,” Subordination, Rhetorical Survival Skills, and Sunday Shoes: Notes on the Hearing of Mrs. G.” Buffalo Law Review 38, no. 1 (1990): 1–58.

17 White, “Subordination,” 58.

CHAPTER 2: LEGAL LITERACY AND OTHER LITERACIES

1 Paulo Freire and Donaldo Macedo, Literacy: Reading the Word and the World (London: Routledge, 1987), 9.

2 Council of Canadian Administrative Tribunals, Literacy and Access to Administrative Justice in Canada: A Guide for the Promotion of Plain Language (Ottawa: Council of Canadian Administrative Tribunals, 2005), 11.

3 James Boyd White, “The Invisible Discourse of the Law: Reflections on Legal Literacy and General Education,” University of Colorado Law Review 54 (1983): 144.

4 Mary Sarah Bilder, “The Lost Lawyers: Early American Legal Literates and Transatlantic Legal Culture,” Yale Journal of Law and the Humanities 11 (1999): 51.

5 Michael E. Manley-Casimir, Wanda M. Cassidy, and Suzanne de Castell, Legal Literacy: Toward a Working Definition, Report Submitted to the Canadian Law Information Council (Ottawa: Canadian Law Information Council, 1986), 47.

6 Ibid., 90; emphasis in original.

7 American Bar Association, Commission on Public Understanding about the Law, Legal Literacy Survey Summary (Chicago: American Bar Association, 1989), 5.

8 Canadian Bar Association, Reading the Legal World: Literacy and Justice in Canada, Report of the Canadian Bar Association Task Force on Legal Literacy (Ottawa: Canadian Bar Association, 1992), 23.

9 Fatema Rashid Hasan, “Limits and Possibilities of Law and Legal Literacy: Experience of Bangladesh Women,” Economic and Political Weekly 29, no. 44 (1994): 70.

10 Irving Rootman and Deborah Gordon-El-Bihbety, A Vision for a Health Literate Canada: Report of the Expert Panel on Health Literacy (Ottawa: Canadian Public Health Association, 2008), 1.

11 Anna-Maria Marshall and Scott Barclay, “Introduction: In Their Own Words: How Ordinary People Construct the Legal World,” Law & Social Inquiry 28, no. 3 (2003): 625.

12 June Louin Tapp and Felice J. Levine, “Legal Socialization: Strategies for an Ethical Legality,” Stanford Law Review 27, no. 1 (1974): 4.

13 Ibid., 8.

14 Asian Development Bank, Technical Assistance (Financed by the Government of the Netherlands) for Legal Literacy for Supporting Governance (Manila: Asian Development Bank, 1999), 2.

CHAPTER 3: LEGAL STRUCTURES

1 United Nations, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, (1948), Art. 6.

2 Constitution Act 1982, [en. by the Canada Act 1982 (UK), c. 11, s. 1] pt. I (Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms), s. 7.

3 Mather, Lynn and Barbara Yngvesson, “Language, Audience, and the Transformation of Disputes,” Law & Society Review 15, no. 3–4 (1981): 778.

4 Mabo and Others v. Queensland (No. 2), [1992] HCA 23; 175 C.L.R. 1.

5 Delgamuukw v. British Columbia, [1997] 3 S.C.R. 1010.

6 Michel Foucault, The Archaeology of Knowledge (New York: Pantheon Books, 1973); The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences (New York: Vintage Books, 1994).

7 Jacques Derrida, Writing and Difference, Trans. Alan Bass (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1978).

8 Peter Goodrich, “J.D.,” Cardozo Law Review 27, no. 2 (2005): 802.

9 Anthony Giddens, The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration, (Berkeley: University of California Press), 1984.

10 Clinton W. Francis, “Practice, Strategy and Institution: Debt Collection in the English Common-Law Courts, 1740–1840,” Northwestern University Law Review 80 (1986): 868.

CHAPTER 4: LEGAL SYSTEMS

1 Susan S. Silbey, “After Legal Consciousness,” Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 1 (2005): 323.

2 Alberta (Child, Youth and Family Enhancement, Director) v. B.M., 2009 ABCA 258.

3 R. v. Oakes, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 103.

4 William O. Douglas, “Stare Decisis,” Columbia Law Review 49, no. 6 (1949): 735–36.

5 Frederick F. Schauer, “Precedent,” Stanford Law Review 39, no. 3 (1987): 577.

6 Municipal Government Act RSA 2000, c. M-26, s. 617.

7 Schauer, “Precedent,” 601.

8 Alberta Ministry of Justice, “Alberta’s Justice System and You,” http://justice.alberta.ca/programs_services/public_education/Documents/ab_just_system_and_you.pdf.

9 See Rex E. Lee, “The Profession Looks at Itself—the Pound Conference of 1976,” Brigham Young University Law Review 3 (1981): 737–40.

CHAPTER 5: LEGAL PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES

1 Ronald W. Staudt and Paula L. Hannaford, “Access to Justice for the Self-Represented Litigant: An Interdisciplinary Investigation by Designers and Lawyers,” Syracuse Law Review 52 (2002): 1017–47.

2 Foundation for Public Legal Education, “Legal Capability Project: Law for Everyday Life,” http://www.lawforlife.org.uk/index.php/law-for-life-projects/legal-capability-for-everyday-life/, 7.

3 Frank Heckman, Stuart E. Rickerson, Bruce Kauffman, and Miles Zaremski, “Legal Strategic Analysis Planning and Evaluation Control System and Method,” United States Patent No. 5,875,431, http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect2=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/search-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&d=PALL&RefSrch=yes&Query=PN/5875431; David R. Johnson, “Serving Justice with Conversational Law,” The Futurist September-October (2012): 21–24.

4 John Thibaut and Laurens Walker, “A Theory of Procedure,” California Law Review 66, no. 3 (1978): 541–66.

5 Tom R. Tyler, “What is Procedural Justice? Criteria Used by Citizens to Assess the Fairness of Legal Procedures,” Law & Society Review 22, no. 1 (1988): 103–36.

6 Constitution Act, 1982, [en. by the Canada Act 1982 (UK), c. 11, s. 1] pt. I (Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms), s. 7.

7 Alberta Rules of Court. AR 124/2010. http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/rules2010/rules_vol_1.pdf. All subsequent quotations taken from this source appear in text boxes in section 5.2.

8 Criminal Code R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46 s. 504, http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/. All subsequent quotations in section 5.3’s text boxes are taken from this source.

9 Criminal Code R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46, s. 676(1)(a), http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-385.html#docCont

10 Paul R. Verkuil, “A Study of Informal Adjudication Procedure,” University of Chicago Law Review 43, no. 4 (1976): 739–96.

11 Paul R. Verkuil, “The Emerging Concept of Administrative Procedure,” Columbia Law Review 78, no. 2 (1978): 294.

12 Alberta Law Reform Institute, Powers and Procedures for Administrative Tribunals in Alberta (Edmonton, AB: University of Alberta, 1999), 19–25, http://www.alri.ualberta.ca/docs/fr079.pdf.

13 David Mullan, “The Supreme Court of Canada and Tribunals—Deference to the Administrative Process: A Recent Phenomenon or a Return to Basics?” Canadian Bar Review, 80 (2001): 402.

14 Administrative Procedures and Jurisdiction Act RSA 2000, c. A-3.

15 Carla Hotel and Joan Brockman, “The Conciliatory-Adversarial Continuum in Family Law Practice,” Canadian Journal of Family Law 12 (1994): 11–36.

16 Hotel and Brockman, “Continuum,” 33.

17 Carrie Menkel-Meadow, “The Trouble with the Adversary System in a Postmodern, Multicultural World,” William and Mary Law Review 38 (1996): 26.

18 Tom R. Tyler, “Citizen Discontent with Legal Procedures: A Social Science Perspective on Civil Procedure Reform,” American Journal of Comparative Law 45, no. 4 (1997): 876.

19 Marc Galanter, “Why the ‘Haves’ Come out Ahead: Speculations on the Limits of Legal Change,” Law & Society Review 9, no. 1 (1974): 95–160.

CHAPTER 6: LEGAL LANGUAGE

1 Aviam Soifer, “Beyond Mirrors: Lawrence Friedman’s Moving Pictures,” Law & Society Review 21 (1998): 998.

2 John M. Conley and William M. O’Barr, Just Words: Law, Language, and Power, 2nd ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005), 14.

3 Peter Goodrich, Legal Discourse: Studies in Linguistics, Rhetoric and Legal Analysis (New York: St Martin’s Press, 1987), 206.

4 William E. Conklin, The Phenomenology of Modern Legal Discourse: The Juridical Production and the Disclosure of Suffering (Aldershot: Ashgate Dartmouth, 1998), 57.

5 Conley and O’Barr, Just Words.

6 Judith D. Fischer, “Framing Gender: Federal Appellate Judges’ Choices About Gender-Neutral Language,” University of San Francisco Law Review 43 (2009): 504.

7 Mabo and Others v. Queensland (No. 2), [1992] HCA 23; 175 C.L.R. 1.

8 Rudolf Flesch, “More about Gobbledygook,” Public Administration Review 5, no. 3 (1945): 240–44.

9 George Orwell, “Politics and the English Language,” https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/orwell46.htm.

10 Ernest Gowers, The Complete Plain Words, 3rd ed., rev. Sydney Greenbaum and Janet Whitcut (London: H.M.S.O., 1986).

11 Richard Darville and Gayla Reid, Preparing Information on the Law: Guidelines for Writing, Editing and Designing (Ottawa: Canadian Law Information Council, 1985), 24–41.

12 Darville and Reid, Preparing Information on the Law, 40–41.

13 Ruth Sullivan, “The Promise of Plain Language Drafting,” McGill Law Journal 47 (2001): 20.

14 Re. Manitoba Language Rights, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 721.

15 Roderick A. MacDonald, “Legal Bilingualism,” McGill Law Review 42 (1997): 22–23.

16 Jeremy Bentham, quoted in David Mellinkoff, The Language of the Law (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1963), 4.

17 Alberta. Alberta Rules of Court, AR 390/68, Sched. A Form E.

18 Alberta. Alberta Rules of Court, AR 124/2010, Sched. A Form 31.

19 Alberta. Alberta Rules of Court, AR 124/2010, Sched. A Form 16.

20 Mellinkoff, Language of the Law, 11-23.

21 Peter M. Tiersma, Legal Language (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999), 141.

22 William J. Pencak, Ralph Lindgren, Roberta Kevelson, and Charles N. Yood, eds., “The Law” vs. “The People:” Twelfth Round Table on Law and Semiotics (New York: Peter Lang, 2000).

CHAPTER 7: LEGAL RESEARCH

1 Consultative Group on Research and Education in Law, Law and Learning: Report to the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada quoted in Paul Chynoweth, “Legal Research,” Advanced Research Methods in the Built Environment (Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2008), 29.

2 Council of Australian Law Deans, quoted in Terry Hutchinson, “Developing Legal Research Skills: Expanding the Paradigm,” Melbourne University Law Review 32 (2008): 1072.

3 Hutchinson, “Developing Legal Research Skills.”

4 Queen’s Printer, British Columbia, Glossary, http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/content/complete/statreg/?xsl=/templates/browse.xsl.

5 Government of Canada, Department of Justice, Glossary, http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/Glossary/.

6 Graham Garton, ed., Canadian Charter of Rights Decisions Digest, http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/charter_digest/index.html.

7 Canadian Law Blogs List, Lawblogs.ca (blog), http://www.lawblogs.ca/.

8 Judith Bannister, “Open Access to Legal Sources in Australasia: Current Debate on Crown Copyright and the Case of the Anthropomorphic Postbox,” Journal of Information, Law and Technology, 3 (1996), http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/law/elj/jilt/1996_3/bannister/.

9 Graham Greenleaf, Philip Chung, and Andrew Mowbray, “Emerging Global Networks for Free Access to Law: WorldLII’s Strategies 2002–2005,” Script-ed 4, no. 4 (2007): 319–66, http://www.law.ed.ac.uk/ahrc/script-ed/vol4-4/greenleaf.pdf.

10 Teresa Scassa, “The Best Things in Law are Free?: Toward Quality Free Public Access to Primary Legal Materials in Canada,” Dalhousie Law Journal 23, no. 2 (2000): 301–36; Janine Miller, “The Canadian Legal Information Institute—A Model for Success,” Legal Information Management 8 no. 4 (2008): 280–82.

11 WorldLII, “Declaration on Free Access to Law,” http://www.worldlii.org/worldlii/declaration/.

12 Vito Petretti, “Matthew Bender & Co. v. West Publishing Co.: The End of West’s Legal Publishing Empire?” Villanova Law Review 43 (1998): 873–922.

13 CCH Canadian Ltd. v. Law Society of Upper Canada 2004 SCC 13, [2004] 1 S.C.R. 339.

CHAPTER 8: LEGAL INTERPRETATION

1 This example was famously used by two leading legal scholars in the course of their debate over the nature of law. See H.L.A. Hart, “Positivism and the Separation of Law and Morals,” Harvard Law Review 71, no. 4 (1958): 593–629; Lon L. Fuller, “Positivism and Fidelity to Law—A Reply to Professor Hart,” Harvard Law Review 71, no. 4 (1958): 630–72.

2 These examples are taken from Linda D. Jellum, “The Art of Statutory Interpretation: Identifying the Interpretive Theory of the Judges of the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans’ Claims and the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit,” Louisville Law Review 49 (2010): 59–109.

3 Hart, “Positivism,” 614.

4 Omychund v. Barker, [1744], 1 Atk. 22, 26 E.R. 15, 22.

5 Alberta Union of Provincial Employees v. Lethbridge Community College, 2004 SCC 28, [2004] 1 S.C.R. 727.

6 Interpretation Act, R.S.A. 2000, c. I-8.

7 Alberta Union of Provincial Employees v. Lethbridge Community College.

8 See the discussion of Hart’s views in Wil Waluchow, “Indeterminacy,” Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence 9 (1996): 397–409.

9 Ronald Dworkin, Justice in Robes (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Harvard, 2006).

10 Irwin Toy Ltd. v. Québec (Attorney General), [1989] 1 S.C.R. 927.

11 Edwards v. A.G. of Canada, [1928] S.C.R. 276.

12 Edwards v. A.G. of Canada, [1930] A.C. 124.

CHAPTER 9: LEGAL COMMUNICATION

1 Antonin Scalia and Bryan A. Garner, Making Your Case: The Art of Persuading Judges (Saint Paul, MN: Thomson-West, 2008), 26–28.

2 Rt. Hon. Beverley McLachlin, “Legal Writing: Some Tools,” Alberta Law Review 39, no. 3 (2001): 700.

3 Charles J. Ten Brink, “A Jurisprudential Approach to Teaching Legal Research,” New England Law Review 39 (2005): 307–16.

4 Brian J. Foley et al., “Teaching Students to Persuade,” Second Draft: The Bulletin of the Legal Writing Institute 16, no. 1 (2001): 1–14; Cara Cunningham and Michelle Streicher, “The Methodology of Persuasion: A Process-based Approach to Persuasive Writing,” Legal Writing: The Journal of the Legal Writing Institute 13 (2007): 159–98.

5 Scalia and Garner, Making Your Case, 178–188.

6 Rupert Haigh, Legal English, 3rd ed. (London: Routledge, 2012), 190–191.

7 Scalia and Garner, Making Your Case, 178–183.

8 Robert Barr Smith, The Literate Lawyer: Legal Writing and Oral Advocacy. 4th rev. ed. (Lake Mary, FL.: Vandeplas, 2009), 151–161.

9 Scalia and Garner, Making Your Case, 157, 161–165, 189–200.

10 Donoghue v. Stevenson, [1932] A.C. 562.

11 Edward H. Levi, An Introduction to Legal Reasoning (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1949).

12 Scott Brewer, “Exemplary Reasoning: Semantics, Pragmatics, and the Rational Force of Legal Argument by Analogy,” Harvard Law Review 109, no. 5 (1996): 923–1028.

13 Frederick F. Schauer, Thinking Like a Lawyer: A New Introduction to Legal Reasoning (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2009).

14 Michael Scriven, “Methods of Reasoning and Justification in Social Science and Law,” Journal of Legal Education 23, no. 1 (1971): 189–99.

15 James F. Stratman, “The Emergence of Legal Composition as a Field of Inquiry: Evaluating the Prospects,” Review of Educational Research 60, no. 2 (1990): 153–235.