Статья: Взгляды М. Фрэнкеля на состязание сторон в судопроизводстве: опыт США

<28> Frankel M.E. The adversary judge... P. 474 - 476.

<29> Frankel M.E. The adversary judge... P. 476 - 477.

<30> Frankel M.E. The adversary judge... P. 482 - 484.

<31> Frankel M.E. The adversary judge... P. 485.

<32> Frankel M.E. The adversary judge... P. 486.

<33> Frankel M.E. The search for truth continued: more disclosure, less privilege // University of Colorado Law Review. 54. 1982. P. 51 - 66. См. также: Черных И.И. Вступительная статья // В кн.: Медведев И.Р. О науке гражданского процесса: Эссе. Ответственность сторон за ложные объяснения в суде: Научное исследование. М., 2006. С. VI.

<34> Frankel M.E. Partisan justice: a brief revisit // Litigation. 15. Summer. 1989. N 4. P. 43, 45.

<35> Freedman M.H. Judge Frankel's search for truth // University of Pennsylvania Law Review. 123. May 1975. P. 1060 - 1066; Patouris N. [Book review] Partisan justice and party-dominated justice // New York University Law Review. 57. April 1982. P. 203 - 211; Uviller R.H. The advocate, the truth, and judicial hackles: a reaction to Judge Frankel's idea // University of Pennsylvania Law Review. 123. May 1975. P. 1067 - 1082.

<36> Alschuler A.W. The preservation of a client's confidences: one value among many or a categorical imperative? // University of Colorado Law Review. 52. 1981. P. 349 - 356; Он же. The search for truth continued, the privilege retained: a response to Judge Frankel // University of Colorado Law Review. 54. 1982. P. 67 - 81; Nessen M.N. Rethinking the lawyer's duties to disclose information: a critique of some of Judge Frankel's proposals // New York Law School Law Review. 24. 1979. P. 677 - 712; Pizzi W.T. Judge Frankel and the adversary system // University of Colorado Law Review. 52. 1981. P. 357 - 366; Stempel J.W. [Book review] All stressed up but not sure where to go: pondering the teaching of adversarialism in law school // Brooklyn Law Review. 55. Spring. 1989. P. 165 - 196.

<37> Freedman M.H. Our constitutionalized adversary system // Chapman Law Review. 1. 1998. P. 57 - 90; Frankel M.E. Some comments on "Our constitutionalized adversary system" / By M.H. Freedman // Chapman Law Review. 2. 1999. P. 253 - 259.

<38> Из работ, вышедших в прошлом году, это отмечено в: Hazard G.C., Dondi A. Responsibilities of judges and advocates in civil and common law: some lingering misconceptions concerning civil lawsuits // Cornell International Law Journal. 39. 2006. P. 59 - 62; Henning P.J. Lawyers, truth, and honesty in representing clients // Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics & Public Policy. 20. 2006. P. 210 - 216; Redish M.H., Kastanek A.D. Settlement class actions, the case-or-controversy requirement, and the nature of the adjudicatory process // University of Chicago Law Review. 73. 2006. P. 573 - 575 и др.

К-во Просмотров: 173
Бесплатно скачать Статья: Взгляды М. Фрэнкеля на состязание сторон в судопроизводстве: опыт США