Lawyers in Society: Comparative Theories

Front Cover
Richard L. Abel, Philip Simon Coleman Lewis
Beard Books, 1989 - Law - 555 pages
Contains comparative and theoretical essays on the legal profession around the world.

From inside the book

Selected pages

Contents

The Comparative
196
The Legal Profession and the Rise and Fall of the New Class
256
A StateCentered Approach
289
Revolution as a Starting Point for the Comparative Analysis
322
Neocorporatist Variations
375
Putting Law Back into the Sociology of Lawyers
478
Contributors
527
Afterword The Reprint Edition
557

Conclusion
135
Deprofessionalization
154

Common terms and phrases

Popular passages

Page 205 - the redundant male', have entered contemporary discourse. The anthropologist, Margaret Mead, summed up the traditional situation: In every known society, the male's need for achievement can be recognized. Men may cook, or weave or dress dolls or hunt humming-birds, but if such activities are appropriate occupations for men, then the whole society, men and women alike, votes them as important. When the same occupations are performed by women, they are regarded as less important.
Page 380 - Corporatism can be defined as a system of interest representation in which the constituent units are organized into a limited number of singular, compulsory, non-competitive, hierarchically ordered and functionally differentiated categories, recognized or licensed (if not created) by the state and granted a deliberate representational monopoly within their respective categories in exchange for observing certain controls on their selection of leaders and articulation of demands and supports.
Page 455 - ... utterly incongruous with the new methods of power whose operation is not ensured by right but by technique, not by law but by normalization, not by punishment but by control, methods that are employed on all levels and in forms that go beyond the state and its apparatus.
Page 429 - a body of binding obligations regarded as right by one party and acknowledged as the duty by the other" which has been ^institutionalized within the legal institution so that society can continue to function in an orderly manner on the basis of rules so maintained. In short, reciprocity is the basis of custom; but the law rests on the basis of this double institutionalization. Central in it is that some of the customs of some of the institutions of society are restated in such a way that they can...
Page 322 - The one great principle of the English law is to make business for itself. There is no other principle distinctly, certainly, and consistently maintained through all its narrow turnings. Viewed by this light it becomes a coherent scheme and not the monstrous maze the laity are apt to think it. Let them but once clearly perceive that its grand principle is to make business for itself at their expense, and surely they will cease to grumble.
Page 459 - Rule change is in itself likely to have little effect because the system is so constructed that changes in the rules can be filtered out unless accompanied by changes at other levels. In a setting of overloaded institutional facilities, inadequate costly legal services, and unorganized parties, beneficiaries may lack the resources to secure implementation; or an RP may restructure the transaction to escape the thrust of the new rule. (Leff, 1970b; Rothwax, 1969:143; Cf. Grossman, 1970). Favorable...
Page 205 - In every known human society, the male's need for achievement can be recognized. Men may cook, or weave or dress dolls or hunt humming-birds, but if such activities are appropriate occupations of men, then the whole society, men and women alike, votes them as important. When the same occupations are performed by women, they are regarded as less important. In a great number of human societies men's sureness of their sex role is tied up with their right, or ability, to practice some activity that women...
Page 446 - ... homogeneity of power in these various instances corresponds the general form of submission in the one who is constrained by it — whether the individual in question is the subject opposite the monarch, the citizen opposite the state, the child opposite the parent, or the disciple opposite the master. A legislative power on one side, and an obedient subject on the other.

Bibliographic information