SOC205 - WEEK 8 - DISCUSSION 2

SOCIETY, LAW AND GOVERNMENT

"Factors in Accepting a Case"

Compare and contrast two (2) of the four (4) theories that influence acceptance of a case for appeal, as discussed in Chapter 13 of the text. Identify the theories that you believe are the most effective during the appeals process at increasing the likelihood that an appeal would be granted. Provide a rationale in your response.

Four theories that influence acceptance of a case for appeal is inclusive of the following:

Cue Theory
Small-Group Analysis
Attitude Theory
Rational Choice Theory

Cue Theory and Rational Choice Theory are both conditional and based on required criteria. For example, in the case of Cue Theory the U.S. government has to be a party to a case, a civil rights or civil liberties was debated and whether a dissension among the judges who had previously heard the case and if all three are factors these are conditional to gaining an appeal then the percentage rate of granting of certiorari would escalate and be granted.

Even though the Rational Choice Theory is conditional it depends on more than attitudinal position to determine. It relies on strategic or independent decision making contexts by the examining of values of other decision makers, e.g., colleagues on the bench, the President, members of Congress, and outcome desirability and affect on case outcome and how the outcome can be affected by decision of other actors. Therefore, it facilitates a purpose of three as follows: change, confirmation or counter, evolved.

These two theories are possibly the better of the four and the most effective because of clarity, simplicity, easier ability to analyze, detailed, and easier resolution to move to the process of appeal and the granting of appeal.

Imagine that you are a newly hired lawyer to a local law firm. An upset client has asked you to meet to discuss the fact that the court will not hear her case. Prepare a response for your client in which you illustrate the use of cue theory as an effective means of case handling. Provide a rationale in your response.

On condition of refusal of court unwillingness to hear a case as notified by client, the first objective is to evaluate based on Cue Theory and as such the petition has to first have merit and reasonable right to complain and plead relief. This is an identifiable characteristic that reflects a matter of legality can only be settled through petition to court to facilitate an act of justice. Three cues have to be met 1) government has to be a party to a case, 2) a civil rights or civil liberties was debated, and 3) whether a dissension among the judges who had previously heard the case exist in order for case reviewing and based upon the need to explore the why it was denied, clarify the reason an appeal is needed, determine if a fault occurred to prove certiorari is needed, warranted and should be granted, exploration of the lower court’s decision and gauge its effective weight and determination and fairness. Lastly, if there was a conflicting decision to grant merit of review.

In consequence, the matter of the client’s case is examination and subsequent review to determine by analysis if the above-mentioned choices can cause a reflective acceptance to hear case.

Thank you.

Felicia

SOCIETY, LAW AND GOVERNMENT
WEEK 8 - DISCUSSION 2
RESPONSE TO CO-STUDENT

The Cue method is rather clever and a self-facilitator in that it is almost automatic and allows the easy debate of allowance or refusal of granting a review of a case.

If I was an attorney, I would probably prefer the Cue Theory to ensure that my case is not lost in the shuffle.

I don't believe there is a law that forbids another appeal as long as it is approached differently.

Thank you.

Felicia