大学法学论文外文文献

法律方面的英语论文法律方面的英语论文该如何写呢？本文是小编精心整理的的法律方面的英语论文，希望能帮助到你!The theory of criminal law of shallow understanding errors1. irrtumslehreLegal irrtumslehre, namely, refers to the illegality mistake for own behavior in law, whether what crime constitutes a crime shall be punished by, or what is wrong, is to oneself the legal nature of the action of meaning or misunderstandings. Legal irrtumslehre usually includes three conditions: (1) the actor's behavior in law does t constitute a crime, the offender and constitutes a crime for which imaginary guilty, (2) the behavior in law constitutes a crime and does t constitute a crime, the offender mistaken assumptions that incent, (3) for act constitutes a crime shall be convicted and punishment in light of the existing errors, misunderstanding or punishment. Due to the legal irrtumslehre, only to the behavior of the offender is not correct understanding of the legal assessment, and for their actions in fact correct understanding of the situation is still there, so its act constitutes a crime shall be investigated for criminal responsibility is and how it is not usually occurs.（1）Imaginary innocent treatment principleThe principles for imaginary innocence, whether it involves a deliberately elements. Foreign criminal law theory basically has the following kinds:1）Should know that don't speak, just for criminal facts have understanding. Canada criminal code article 19 regulation: "the ignorance of the law excuses and crime can be ShuZui reason." Motto: "Roman law and legal disclaimer" somehow alsoexpressed a principle, namely: "in the crime as subjective FanYi established condition, not request to recognize behavior of richtswitrig".2）Should know the reason, according to two: moral responsibility theory, personality responsibility theory. Moral responsibility theory emphasizes on the rationality of free will blame illegal conduct, is considered to be objective stance.3）That said, the possible illegality of responsibility for deliberately, at least to the possibility of understanding illegality. While in China mainland, the introduction of the concept of crime has another concept -- social consciousness that harm to discuss richtswitrig already meaningless. Because the deliberate crime according to law condemn the illegality of the offender is not known, the law itself is not damaged, the law of the social consciousness is harm. Social harm consciousness is the essential contents of the crime, illegal consciousness is the legal form of social consciousness. Therefore, our country law more emphasis is on the rationality of essence, which is harmful to the society values.Just because of its social harmfulness, with a social moral evaluation colour, easier for people to grasp and observe. Therefore, the author thinks that, in general, the person need to recognize behavior may be the result of inevitable or harmful to the society, and has already know. With intentionally But in fact, the forbidden by law and mass that is harmful to the society in our country nowadays the behavior under the constitution should be consistent, in other words, know the social harmfulness also know the possibility of illegal, but know the possibility of illegal is inevitable should also realize social harmfulness, both are unified. Therefore, it is generally thoughtthat the law is no excuse, the reason of law does not exclude the misunderstanding in principle, but can be culpable for deliberately discretion.（2） Misunderstandings treatment principle. Punishment We might as well so the essence of blame for his due: the crime in the subjective should blame or blame, for the intent or negligence performance. If the offender because of misunderstanding that legal person very innocent, lack of this should blame or condemning sexual, from the fundamental measure, blame is absolutely not consider disclaimer. Especially in the modern society, the legal category SAN marino, legal entry in different fields and different levels of books, recognized, comprehend legal apparently endless and same, so the person of law and misunderstandings, not inexcusable. Now, both in theory and practice, the method not cling to forgive "seems to have in shake. Therefore, to a certain extent, can also think admits exceptions excusable is legal misunderstanding of criminal law is an important symbol of humanity. In addition, it was not in the act of which is prohibited by the laws and regulations, especially after a circumstance, should have knowledge of richtswitrig actor, constitute the understanding of deliberate point of view, with the attitude of this understanding, of course, that is not the illegality or by the simple statement actor. The author thinks that the only when the legal establishment of may, FangKeZu but intentionally.2. The fact mistakeThat mistake, is to determine its subjective behavior nature and the criminal responsibility of the relevant facts wrong understanding. From the wrong reasons and phenomenon of angles, generally known that there are several mistakes: （1） Object irrtumslehreThe object is known for errors, whether there is objectively error object. It includes actor in the implementation of the existing criminal behavior of the hazards for the object and actually does not exist, or for criminal object and actually does not exist, or infringe a criminal object and actually invaded another crime object. The object of objects is usually known errors caused by mistake, but the object of different social relationship reflects different. Evil doer of objects and actual expected in fact not only harm object does not agree, and in the nature of law is not consistent. Therefore, the object irrtumslehre may affect the form of sin, crime accomplishment, and may even attempted to influence the crime. For example, in view of the circumstances, not a thought before the enemy, and a party came to stick, afterwards just know the ox was wounded. A thought of damage is "people", and the actual wounded is "cow", do not belong to the same laws of the object. Similar situation and will generally be mistaken for drug trafficking items, Actor will stolen items in the theft of guns in stealing together. This object from the subjective errors, see, is a kind of mistake, From the objective, because the mistake crime to no avail, where the criminal attempted belongs.1）Object mistakeObjects can be generalized mistake, including object mistake to belong to the object know mistake is inevitable object irrtumslehre. These include, is known to be wrong object of legal property of the same object mistake and legal properties of different objects, namely the object irrtumslehre irrtumslehre. In order to distinguish with the object mistake here, the cognition to the same object only mean error between the different objects, namely the misunderstanding of the evil doer expected objectsand actual harm to the object, but not in fact in the legal nature of the same situation. This object mistake again say things on purpose mistake not criminal responsibility. As a reserve, killing b shall be killed as b and c, do not affect a rap. This is the need to consider that a kill b behavior "mistake" cause others (c), belong to an intentional crime (b) "death", for the excess result, according to the results, which determine the ordinary mail of death was deliberately recognized for deliberately, to the death of the fault is propylene, identified as negligence, according to the intention or negligence of the general mark recognized FanYi or state of mind, not applicable rules of the mistake.2） Behavior irrtumslehreBehavior mainly includes two kind of mistake: first, the behavior nature irrtumslehre. That actor has to its social harm nature, such as understanding not imaginary defense. Behavior nature mistake might affect the form of sin, and may also affect crime. Second, the behavior tools (methods) irrtumslehre. That person to use when the conduct of tool (methods), which affects not correct understanding of harm results, behavior tools (methods) mistake can affect crime or attempted was founded, also can affect crime or belongs to the incident, a typical for murder on hazardous substances, because the drug failure and failed to kill people, can think method or tools for error doer of consciousness beyond reason not to succeed. And as actor see armour, second coming together, hence shot to play, but can't hit by the party and. Look, this is from the phenomenon of an object, or the final results for the mistake, but this error is based on the fact that the wrong doer identify offender is carefully identify to begin, can think recognize is accurate, errors in ChaWu itself. The solution to this situation, "said", its legal with qualitative andrecognize wrong object is consistent, namely directly recognized as an intentional homicide accomplishment. The death of a person is directly intentionally to b, death is the indirect intentional, just for a to b is attempted, accomplished. Additionally, if in daily life because misidentification object and damage of consequences, the crime itself is not just any criminal negligence because of problems.3)Causality irrtumslehreCausality mistake, is on his behavior and harmful results of actual connection between errors. Generally include: first, not some harm result, as has happened actor. This generally constitute a crime. Second, has certain harm result, but not for actor or for his behavior is caused, and does not affect crime accomplishment. Third, really happened, the offender is aware of its behavior, but with the actual development between the harm to the process or a mistake, general to punish crime accomplishment. In theory, the offender is not only a crime, but continuous movement, this several continuous action is not a few crime, but a crime. In this sense, doesn't exist on the results of the sack.3.Legal irrtumslehre and facts mistake and proceduresscholars in fact know mistakes and errors between the issue legal representative views mainly include:（1）For own behavior whether in law constitutes a crime, criminal or what kind of criminal punishment shall be under the incorrect understanding is legal irrtumslehre for his behavior on the implementation of the incorrect understanding is the fact that mistake,（2）The objectivity of crime is a false understanding of crime, that mistake of objective facts have clear understanding,only to act in the evaluation of existing laws on the concept of law is not correct mistakes。

法学论文参考文献参考文献是对法学论文引文进行统计和分析的重要信息源之一，下文是店铺为大家整理的关于法学论文参考文献的材料，欢迎大家阅读参考!法学论文参考文献一：[1]陈新民:《中国行政法学原理》，中国政法大学出版社2002年版.[2]王和雄:《论行政不作为之权利保护》，台湾三民书局1994年版.[3]周佑勇:《行政不作为判解》，武汉大学出版社2000年版.[4]周佑勇《论行政不作为》，载于罗豪才主编《行政法论从》第2卷1999年版.[5]胡建淼：《行政违法问题探究》，法律出版社2000年版.[6]张树义：《行政法学》，高等教育出版社2007年版.[7]应松年主编：《当代中国行政法》(上、下)，中国方正出版社2006年版.[8]马怀德主编《：司法改革与行政诉讼制度的完善》，中国政法大学出版社2004年版.[9]姜明安主编：《行政诉讼法》，法律出版社2006年版.[10]马怀德：《行政法制度建构与判例研究》，中国政法大学出版社2004年版.[11]胡建淼：《行政法学》，法律出版社2003年版.[12]翁岳生主编：《行政法学》(上、下)，中国法制出版社2000年版.[13]吴庚：《行政法之理论与适用》，中国人民大学出版社2004年版.[14]黄竹胜：《行政法解释学建构》，山东人民出版社2007年版.[15]陈光中主编：《审判公正问题研究》，中国政法大学出版社2004年版.[16]陈光中主编：《中国司法制度的基础理论专题研究》，北京大学出版社2005年版.[17]江必新主编：《中国行政诉讼制度的完善——行政诉讼法修改问题实务研究》，法律出版社2005年版.[18]蔡小雪：《行政复议与行政诉讼的衔接》，中国法制出版社2003年版.[19]甘文:《行政诉讼法司法解释之评论》，中国法制出版社2000年版.[20]王名扬：《法国行政法》，中国政法人学出版社1989年版. 法学论文参考文献二：[1]王名扬:《英国行政法》，中国政法大学出版社1987年版.[2]黎宏:《不作为犯研究》，武汉大学出版社1997年版.[3]马生安：《行政行为研究—宪政下的行政行为基本理论》，山东人民出版社2008年版.[4]罗豪才主编：《中国司法审查制度》，北京大学出版社1993年版.[5]张文显：《法哲学范畴研究》，中国政法大学出版社2001年版.[6]陈新民：《公法学札记》，法律出版社2010年版.[7]陆伟明：《服务行政法论》，中国政法大学出版社2012年版.[8]周叶中：《代议制度比较研究》，武汉大学出版社2005年版.[9]袁裕来：《特别代理：民告官手记Ⅷ》，中国检察出版社2012年版.[10]张文显主编：《法理学》，高等教育出版社、北京大学出版社1999年版.[11]应松年主编：《外国行政程序法汇编》，中国法制出版社2004年版.[12]王利明：《侵权行为法归责原则研究》，中国政法大学出版社2003年版.[13]张明楷：《刑法格言的展开》，法律出版社2003年版.[14]梁津明、郭春明、郭庆珠、魏建新：《行政不作为之行政法律责任探究》，中国检察出版社2011年版.[15]王振宇：《行政诉讼制度研究》，中国人民大学出版社2012年版.[16]江必新：《中国行政诉讼制度之发展》，金城出版社2001年版.[17]田凯：《行政公诉论》，中国检察出版社2009年版.[18]蔡小雪、甘文：《行政诉讼实务指引》，人民法院出版社2014年版.[19]杨伟东：《行政行为司法审查强度研究—行政审判权纵向范围分析》，中国人民大学出版社2003年版.[20]胡建淼主编：《外国行政法规与案例评述》，中国法制出版社1997年版.。

法律论文参考文献分享法律论文的撰写需要很多参考文献，你知道有哪些文献可以参考吗?下面是小编为大家整理的法律论文参考文献，希望对大家有帮助。

篇一：参考文献1.赵维田著《世贸组织(WTO)的法律制度》，吉林人民出版社2000年版2.石广生主编《乌拉圭回合多边贸易谈判结果：法律文本》，人民出版社2002年版3.世界贸易组织秘书处编《乌拉圭回合协议导读》，索必成胡盈之译，法律出版社2000年版4.John H Jackson著《GATT/WTO法理与实践》，张玉卿、李成刚、杨国华等译，新华出版社2002年版5.李浩培著《条约法概论》，法律出版社2003年版6.周忠海等著《国际法学述评》，法律出版社2001年版7.李居迁著《WTO争端解决机制》，中国财政经济出版社2001年版8.宣增益主编《世界贸易组织法律教程》，中信出版社2003年版9.梁西著《国际组织法》(总论)，武汉大学出版社2001年版10.司法部法规教育司，国家外国专家科教文卫司编《WTO争端解决机制/规则、程序与实践》，法律出版社2002年版篇二：参考文献1. 郑成良主编：《现代法理学》，长春，吉林大学出版社，1999 。

2. 张文显，李步云主编：《法理学论丛》(第2卷)，北京，法律出版社，2000 。

3. 潘维大，刘文琦编著：《英美法导读》，北京，法律出版社，2000 。

4. 陈舜著：《权利及其维护：一种交易成本观点》，北京，中国政法大学出版社，1999 。

5. 刘湘廉主编：《刑法学总论论点要览》，北京，法律出版社，2000 。

6. 贺卫方编：《中国法律教育之路》，北京，中国政法大学出版社，1997 。

7. 阿计著：《法治备忘：共和国立法、执法实录》，北京，法律出版社，1999 。

8. 陈建新著：《依法治国论》，北京，中国检察出版社，1998 。

9. 黄文艺著：《当代中国法律发展研究：模式、传统与过程》，长春，吉林大学出版社，2000 。

10. 公丕祥主编：《当代中国的法律革命》，北京，法律出版社，1999 。

行政诉讼法中外文参考文献本文档格式为WORD,感谢你的阅读。

最新最全的学术论文期刊文献年终总结年终报告工作总结个人总结述职报告实习报告单位总结演讲稿行政诉讼法中外文参考文献1. 何华辉：《比较宪法学》，武汉大学出版社1988年版。

2. 李步云主编：《宪法比较研究》，法律出版社1998年版。

3. 刘海年、李林、托马斯.弗莱纳主编：《人权与宪政：中国——瑞士宪法国际研讨会论文集》，中国法制出版社1999年版。

4. 沈宗灵：《比较法研究》，北京大学出版社1998年版。

5. 周旺生：《立法学》，北京大学出版社1988年版。

6. 周旺生：《立法论》，北京大学出版社1994年版。

7. 陈云生：《权利相对论》，人民出版社1994年版。

8. 夏勇主编：《走向权利的时代》，中国政法大学出版社1995年版。

9. 龚祥瑞主编：《法治的理想与现实》，中国政法大学出版社1993年版。

10. 韩德培主编：《人权理论与实践》，武汉大学出版社1995年版。

11. 胡锦光韩大元：《当代人权保障制度》，中国政法大学出版社1993年版。

12. 柴发邦主编：《体制改革与完善诉讼制度》，中国人民公安大学出版社1991年版。

13. 顾培东著：《社会冲突与诉讼机制》，法律出版社2004年版。

14. 赵震江主编：《法律社会学》，北京大学出版社1998年版。

15. 王洪俊主编：《中国审判理论研究》，重庆出版社1993年版。

16. 程燎原王人博：《赢得神圣——权利及其救济通论》，山东人民出版社1998年版。

17. 孙笑侠：《法律对行政的控制——现代行政法的法理解释》，山东人民出版社1999年版。

18. 关保英：《行政法的价值定位》，中国政法大学出版社1997年版。

19. 方世荣：《论具体行政行为》，武汉大学出版社1996年版。

20. 罗豪才主编：《行政法学》，北京大学出版社1996年版。

21. 王连昌主编：《行政法学》，中国政法大学出版社1994年版。

U.S. Circuit Court Judges: Profile of Professional Experiences Prior to AppointmentBarry J. McMillionAnalyst on the Federal JudiciaryMay 9, 2014Congressional Research Service7-5700R43538SummaryThis report provides an analysis of the professional qualifications and experiences of U.S. circuit court judges who are currently serving on the federal bench. Interest in the professional qualifications of those nominated to the federal judiciary has been demonstrated by Congress and others. Congressional interest in the professional experiences of those nominated by a President to the federal courts reflects, in part, the evaluative role of Congress in examining the qualifications of those who are nominated to life-tenure positions. Other organizations, such as the American Bar Association (ABA), also have an ongoing interest in the professional qualifications of those appointed to the federal judiciary. Additionally, scholars have demonstrated an interest in this topic by examining whether a relationship exists between the professional or career experiences of judges and judicial decision making.The analysis in this report focuses on the professional experiences of 163 active U.S. circuit court judges who were serving as of February 1, 2014. Active judges are those who have not taken senior status, retired, or resigned. Consequently, the statistics provided do not necessarily reflect all circuit court judges who are sitting on the bench (which include judges who have assumed senior status).Some of this report’s findings include the following:• A majority, 54.6%, of active circuit court judges had prior judicial experience at some point before being appointed as circuit court judges (and 45.4% had nosuch experience).•Of the judges with prior judicial experience, 22.7% served solely as another type of federal judge (e.g., a U.S. district court judge), while 20.9% servedsolely as a state judge and another 11.0% had both prior federal and statejudicial experience.• A majority, 84.7%, of active circuit court judges had at least some priorexperience as an attorney in private practice at some point prior to theirappointment as a circuit judge.•Of active circuit court judges with private practice experience, a plurality(26.4%) had 15 or more years of experience as an attorney in privatepractice.•While 45.4% of active circuit judges do not have prior judicial experience, a much smaller percentage, 15.3%, have no prior experience in private practice.•Circuit court judges without either prior judicial experience or experience as an attorney in private practice had other professional experiences such as working asan attorney for the federal government or as a law professor.•Immediately prior to their appointment to the appellate bench, most circuit court judges were either serving as another type of judge or had been engaged inprivate practice for at least 10 years.•Approximately half, 50.3%, of all active circuit judges were serving asanother type of judge immediately prior to their appointment (i.e., serving asa district court judge, another type of federal judge such as a bankruptcyjudge, or a state judge).•Approximately one quarter, 25.8%, of active circuit court judges were working as attorneys in private practice immediately prior to being appointed as a circuitjudge (with 22.1% having worked in private practice for 10 years or more).ContentsIntroduction (1)Data Caveats (4)Most Common Types of Professional Experiences (4)Professional Position Immediately Prior to Appointment (6)Conclusion (8)FiguresFigure 1. Percentage of Active U.S. Circuit Court Judges with Judicial Experience andPrivate Practice Experience (5)Figure 2. Percentage of Active U.S. Circuit Court Judges by Type of ProfessionalPosition Immediately Prior to Appointment (7)ContactsAuthor Contact Information (8)Acknowledgments (9)IntroductionThis report provides an analytic overview of the professional experiences and qualifications of those individuals who are currently serving as active U.S. circuit court judges.1 Ongoing congressional interest in the professional experiences of judicial nominees reflects, in part, the evaluative role of Congress in examining the qualifications of those who are nominated by the President to life-tenure positions.Senators, when giving floor speeches supporting circuit court nominations, routinely highlight certain professional experiences or qualifications often considered important to serving as a federal judge. Examples of such statements include the following:A Senator noting that a nominee to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals had 22 years of priorjudicial experience “at the State courts and the Federal courts.” The Senator stated that thenominee “has not only served as a distinguished judge, but also he came to the courts as anexperienced prosecutor. He was with the Civil Rights Division at the Department of Justiceand with the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Maryland.”2A Senator noting that a nominee to the First Circuit had joined a prestigious law firm in theSenator’s home state, “where over the subsequent 32 years [he] specialized in complex civillitigation at both the trial and appellate levels.” The Senator also stated that the nominee hadserved as chairman of the state’s Professional Ethics Commission and as president of thestate’s bar association, and that “his 30-plus years of real-world litigation experience wouldbring a valuable perspective to the court.”3A Senator emphasizing that a nominee to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals would “bringalmost 12 years of judicial experience” to the bench as a result of her service on theWisconsin Supreme Court and as a trial judge on the Milwaukee County Circuit Court. TheSenator also noted that prior to the nominee’s service as a state judge, the nominee had“practiced commercial litigation for 7 years at one of Wisconsin’s most prestigious lawfirms.”4The professional experiences of judicial nominees are also of interest to interest groups, particularly professional organizations such as the American Bar Association (ABA).5 Judicial1 The analysis in this section provides statistics for active U.S. circuit court judges only (i.e., the professional experiences and qualifications of senior circuit court judges are not included in the analysis). Additionally, as of this writing, such statistics have not been calculated by CRS for active or senior U.S. district court judges.2 Sen. Barbara Mikulski, “Executive Session,” Remarks in the Senate, Congressional Record, daily edition, November 9, 2009,p.S11274.3 Sen. Susan Collins, “Executive Session,” Remarks in the Senate, Congressional Record, daily edition, February, 13, 2013, pp.S672-673.4 Sen. Orrin Hatch, “Nomination of Diane S. Sykes to be United States Circuit Judge for the Seventh Circuit,” Remarks in the Senate, Congressional Record, daily edition, June 24, 2004, p. S7360.5 According to the ABA, “in 1953, at the request of President Dwight D. Eisenhower, the ABA committee started to evaluate the professional qualifications of potential nominees to assist him in resisting growing pressure to repay political debts by appointing persons who might not have the professional qualifications to exercise the important responsibilities” of serving as a federal judge. Note that in 2001, “the Bush White House departed from long-standing practices and did not submit names of prospective nominees to [be evaluated by] the Standing Committee in advance of their nomination.” Senators serving on the Judiciary Committee, however, “asked the Standing Committee to continue to provide the Judiciary Committee with its evaluations of judicial nominees.” American Bar Association, “Frequently (continued...)nominees are evaluated by the ABA’s Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary.6 The committee’s evaluation criteria focus “strictly on professional qualifications: integrity, professional competence and judicial temperament.”7The committee “believes that a prospective nominee to the federal bench ordinarilyshould have at least twelve years’ experience in the practice of law” and that “substantial courtroom and trial experience as a lawyer or trial judge is important.”8 The committeealso notes, however, that “distinguished accomplishments in the field of law orexperience that is similar to in-court trial work ... may compensate for a prospective nominee’s lack of substantial courtroom experience.”9 For prospective circuit court nominees, the committee states that “because an appellate judge deals primarily with thereview of briefs and the records of lower courts, the committee places somewhat less emphasis on the importance of trial experience as a qualification for the appellatecourts.”10Additionally, the professional or career experiences of judges prior to the start of theirjudicial service has also been of interest to scholars examining whether particular professional experiences might influence or explain variation in aspects of judicialdecision making (e.g., whether a judge votes in a consistent ideological direction, thesources relied upon by a judge in reaching his or her decisions, whether a judge decidesto publish his or her opinions, etc.).11 For example, one study found that prior judicial(...continued)Asked Questions About the ABA Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary,” March 2009, available at/content/dam/aba/migrated/scfedjud/fjcfaq.authcheckdam.pdf. The process of submitting the names of prospective nominees to the Standing Committee for evaluation prior to individuals being nominated has resumed during the Obama presidency.6 In evaluating prospective nominees, the committee gives one of three possible ratings: “well qualified,” “qualified,” and “not qualified.” According to past statistics provided by the ABA, as of March 2009, all but 33 of over 2,000 individuals who were formally nominated by Presidents since 1960 were rated as “qualified” or “well qualified.” Ibid. For critical perspectives on the ABA’s ratings, see Maya Sen, “How Judicial Qualification Ratings May Disadvantage Minority and Female Candidates,” Journal of Law and Courts, vol. 2 (2014), pp. 33, 34 (finding that black and female U.S. district court nominees are more likely to be awarded lower qualification ratings by the ABA, even after matching on education, professional experience, years of legal experience, age, and ideology) (hereafter Sen, “How Judicial Qualification Ratings May Disadvantage”); Susan N. Smelcer et al., “Evaluating the ABA Ratings of Federal Judicial Nominees,” Political Research Quarterly, vol. 65 (2012), pp. 827, 836 (finding that, for U.S. circuit court nominees, “all else being equal, a Democratic nominee is more likely to be rated Well Qualified than a similarly qualified Republican nominee”); Susan Brodie Haire, “Rating the Ratings of the American Bar Association Standing Committee on Federal Judiciary,” Justice System Journal, vol. 22 (2001), pp. 1, 15 (finding that, for U.S. circuit court nominees, “caucasian males were more likely to receive a higher rating when compared to minorities or females, even after controlling for length of legal and judicial experiences. Overall, this analysis suggests an inherent bias in the rating process that favors traditional, establishment candidates” to the federal courts).7 American Bar Association, Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary, “What It Is and How It Works,” 2009, p. 1, available at /content/dam/aba/migrated/2011_build/federal_judiciary/federal_judiciary09.authcheckdam.pdf.8 Ibid., p. 3.9 Ibid.10 Ibid. Note that the committee also states that it “believes that prospective appellate court nominees should possess an especially high degree of legal scholarship, academic talent, analytical and writing abilities, and overall excellence. The ability to write clearly and persuasively, to harmonize a body of law, and to give meaningful guidance to the trial courts and the bar for future cases are particularly important skills for prospective nominees to” circuit court judgeships.11 See, for example, Deborah Jones Merritt & James J. Brudney, “Stalking Secret Law: What Predicts Publication in the United States Courts of Appeals,” Vanderbilt Law Review, vol. 54 (2001), pp. 71, 84-85 (finding that judges with prior (continued...)experience for U.S. circuit court judges did not influence variation in judicial decisionmaking in terms of the extent a judge voted in a consistent ideological fashion (such prior experience might have been hypothesized to be a source of consistency in judicialvoting).12 Another study found that district court judges whose primary work beforebecoming a judge involved non-private practice work experience (e.g., working as a government attorney or law professor) were less likely to rely on regulations and otherInternal Revenue Service pronouncements in interpreting the federal tax code than judges whose work prior to becoming a judge was predominately as an attorney in privatepractice.13Other scholars suggest that the lack of career diversity among federal judges might be problematic, in terms of the lack of diversity diminishing the institutional performance ofthe courts.14 Specifically, they argue that, given appropriate procedural conditions, “thegreater diversity of participation by people of different [professional] backgrounds and experiences, the greater the range of ideas and information contributed to the institutional process.”15 Consequently, in the context of judicial decision making, “judges with variedcareer experiences bring distinct perspectives to the bench—perspectives that ultimatelylead them to make distinct judicial choices—[and] merging jurists with diverse careerpaths on a particular court ought ... [to] lead to more effective decision making” by thatcourt.16In light of ongoing interest in the professional qualifications of those nominated to circuit court judgeships, this report seeks to inform Congress by providing statistics related to the professional(...continued)experience representing management were significantly less likely to publish their opinions, perhaps because such judges “have more experience implementing the NLRA [National Labor Relations Act] than judges lacking a management background”); Gregory C. Sisk et al., “Charting the Influences on the Judicial Mind: An Empirical Study of Judicial Reasoning,” New York University Law Review, vol. 73 (1998), pp. 1377, 1420-21 (finding that judges with criminal defense experience are more likely to invalidate federal sentencing guidelines than those without such experience); Orley Ashenfelter et al., “Politics and the Judiciary: The Influence of Judicial Background on Case Outcomes,” Journal of Legal Studies, vol. 24 (1995), p. 257 (finding no relationship between whether U.S. district court judges had prior judicial experience and judicial outcomes, e.g., whether judges rule for or against a plaintiff); Sheldon Goldman, “Voting Behavior on the United States Courts of Appeals Revisited,” American Political Science Review, vol. 69 (1975), pp. 491, 499-500 (generally finding no relationship between whether a U.S. circuit court judge had judicial experience on another court prior to appointment on the appeals court or public prosecutorial experience and his or her voting behavior on various categories of cases; but finding a statistically significant result suggesting that judges without previous judicial experience tended to dissent at a higher rate than those with such experience); S. Sidney Ulmer, “Social Background as an Indicator to the Votes of Supreme Court Justices in Criminal Cases: 1947-1956 Terms,” American Journal of Political Science, vol. 17 (1973), pp. 622, 623-24 (finding that justices with federal administrative experience voted more conservatively than justices without such experience); Kenneth N. Vines, “Federal District Judges and Race Relations Cases in the South,” Journal of Politics, vol. 26 (1964), p. 338 (finding evidence that judges who held state political office were more negatively disposed toward race relations cases than judges who did not hold such positions).12 Erin B. Kaheny et al., “Change over Tenure: Voting, Variance, and Decision Making on the U.S. Courts of Appeals,” American Journal of Political Science, vol. 52 (2008), pp. 490, 493, 497.13 Daniel M. Schneider, “Empirical Research on Judicial Reasoning: Statutory Interpretation in Federal Tax Cases,” New Mexico Law Review, vol. 31 (2001), pp. 325, 347.14 Lee Epstein et al., “The Norm of Prior Judicial Experience and Its Consequences for Career Diversity on the U.S. Supreme Court,” California Law Review, vol. 91 (2003), p. 903.15 Ibid., p. 944.16 Ibid., p. 956.qualifications or experiences of those currently serving on the bench as U.S. circuit court judges.17Specifically, this report provides statistics and analysis related to (1) the percentage of active circuit court judges with judicial experience, as well as the type of judicial experience; (2) the percentage of active circuit court judges with private practice experience, as well as the length of time of such experience; and (3) the percentage of active circuit court judges by professional experience immediately prior to their appointment to a circuit court judgeship.Data CaveatsNote that the statistics provided in this report are based upon the professional experiences of individuals serving, as of February 1, 2014, as active U.S. circuit court judges. Consequently, the statistics do not include circuit court judges who, prior to February 1, 2014, had assumed senior status, retired, or resigned.18The total number of circuit court judges included in the analysis is 163.19 Consequently, this is the denominator used to calculate most of the statistics included in the report. The analysis is based on information provided by the Biographical Directory of Federal Judges.20 This report will be updated annually by CRS at the beginning of each calendar year.Most Common Types of Professional Experiences Figure 1 provides statistics related to the two most common types of professional experiences of U.S. circuit court judges who are currently serving on the bench—prior judicial experience and experience working as an attorney in private practice.21 The percentages reported for the two types of experiences are not mutually exclusive, meaning that there is some overlap between the two categories. For example, 47.9% of all active circuit court judges have both prior judicial17 As of this writing, CRS has not compiled and analyzed similar data for active district court judges who are currently serving on the bench.18 Senior status judges are those judges who have retired from full-time service but continue, on a part-time basis, to hear cases or perform other duties related to judicial administration. Senior status eligibility is based upon a judge’s age as well as his or her length of service as an Article III judge. Specifically, beginning at age 65, a judge may retire from office or take senior status after performing 15 years of active service as an Article III judge. A sliding scale of increasing age and decreasing service results in eligibility for retirement compensation at age 70 with a minimum 10 years of service.19 As of February 1, 2014, there were 16 vacant U.S. circuit court judgeships. These vacancies are not included in the statistics provided in the report.20 Consequently, the data analyzed are limited to information provided by the Directory. The Directory is maintained by the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts and is available at /JudgesAndJudgeships/ BiographicalDirectoryOfJudges.aspx.21 Some organizations have called for broadening the professional diversity of judges serving on the federal bench. The Alliance for Justice, for example, has recently called upon the President to nominate individuals with experience working as attorneys for public interest organizations. Alliance for Justice, “Broadening the Bench: Professional Diversity and Judicial Nominations,” February 6, 2014, available at /wp-content/uploads/2014/02/ prof-diversity-report-3.2.2014-FINAL-Updated-with-Noms-Through-2.6.14.pdf.experience as well as experience as an attorney in private practice (while 9.0% have neither prior judicial nor private practice experience).22Altogether, 54.6% of U.S. circuit court judges who are currently serving had prior experience as another type of judge before their appointment to a circuit court (and 45.4% had no such experience). Of the judges with prior judicial experience, 22.7% served solely as another type of federal judge (e.g., a U.S. district court judge), while 20.9% served solely as a state judge and another 11.0% had both prior federal and state judicial experience. Of the 74 circuit judges with no prior judicial experience, 81.8% had worked as attorneys in private practice, including 39.2% who worked in private practice for 15 or more years (and another 14.9% who worked in private practice for 10 to 14 years).Although over half of active circuit court judges have prior judicial experience (54.6%), a greater percentage have at least some prior experience as attorneys in private practice (84.7%).23 Similarly, while 45.6% of active circuit judges do not have prior judicial experience, a much smaller percentage, 15.3%, have no prior experience in private practice.Figure 1. Percentage of Active U.S. Circuit Court Judges with Judicial Experience andPrivate Practice Experience(as of February 1, 2014)Source: CRS analysis of data provided by the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts.Note: This figure shows, as of February 1, 2014, the percentage of active U.S. circuit court judges with judicial experience and private practice experience.22 The lack of a nominee’s experience in a traditional legal occupation (such as an attorney in private practice) has, in some cases, led some Senators to oppose the nominee’s nomination. For example, J. Harvie Wilkinson III was nominated by President Reagan to the Fourth Circuit on January 30, 1984. At the time, Senator Edward M. Kennedy stated, during the debate to invoke cloture on the nomination, that the nominee was “the least qualified nominee ever submitted for an appellate court vacancy.” Senators’ opposition to the nomination were based, in part, on the nominee’s relatively young age (he was 39) and the fact that he had never practiced law. When nominated, Judge Wilkinson was a law professor at the University of Virginia and he had previously worked for a year as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General during the Reagan presidency. Linda Greenhouse, “Reagan Names 6 To Federal Appeals Courts,” New York Times, August 2, 1984, available at /1984/08/02/us/reagan-names-6-to-federal-appeals-courts.html.23 At least one study has found that judicial nominees receiving the highest ABA ratings include those with previous judicial experience and/or nominees with more years of legal practice experience. Sen, “How Judicial Qualification Ratings May Disadvantage,” p. 42.Figure 1 also shows that of active circuit court judges with private practice experience, a plurality (26.4%) had 15 or more years of experience as attorneys in private practice. Another 21.5% had less than 5 years of experience, while 17.2% had 5 to 9 years of experience and 19.6% had 10 to 14 years of experience. Altogether, 46.0% of active circuit court judges had 10 or more years of experience as attorneys in private practice (while 54.0% had less than 10 years of experience or no private practice experience).24Professional Position Immediately Prior to AppointmentFigure 2 reports the percentage of active U.S. circuit court judges who had a particular type of position or occupation immediately prior to their appointment as a circuit court judge.25 So, for example, a plurality of active circuit court judges, 27.0%, were U.S. district court judges immediately prior to being appointed as circuit court judges. Altogether, half (50.3%) of all active circuit court judges were serving as another type of judge (either a U.S. district court judge, another type of federal judge, or a state judge).26The percentage of circuit court judges serving as another type of judge immediately prior to appointment might be lower than what has been the case, historically, for circuit court judges (at least during the first half of the 20th century). For example, of circuit court judges appointed during the seven presidencies from Theodore Roosevelt to Franklin Roosevelt, 63.7% were serving as another type of judge at the time of appointment or promotion to the U.S. courts of appeals.27 Additionally, 55.6% and 57.5% of Eisenhower and Johnson circuit court appointees, respectively, were serving as judges prior to their appointment to a circuit court.28 In general, service as a U.S. district court judge was the most common type of judicial experience of those serving as judges immediately prior to their appointment as a circuit court judge. As noted by one 24 Overall, 89 of 163 circuit court judges included in the analysis had prior judicial experience (37 of the 89 had only federal experience, 34 only state experience, and 18 had served as a judge for both federal and state courts). Of the 163 judges, 74 had no prior judicial experience. For private practice experience, 138 of 163 judges had some experience as an attorney in private practice (while 25 had none). Of those with private practice experience, 43 had 15 or more years of experience, 32 had 10 to 14 years of experience, 28 had 5 to 9 years of experience, and 35 had less than 5 years of experience.25 Of the 163 active U.S. circuit court judges included in the analysis, 44 had been a U.S. district court judge immediately prior to their appointment, 8 had been another type of federal judge, 30 had been a state judge, 12 had been working as an attorney at the Department of Justice or in a U.S. Attorney’s Office, 6 had been working in private practice for less than 10 years, 36 had been working in private practice for more than 10 years, 11 had been working asa law professor, and 16 had other types of positions.26 Other types of federal judges included in the analysis were U.S. bankruptcy judges and U.S. magistrate judges.27 Rayman L. Solomon, “The Politics of Appointment and the Federal Courts’ Role in Regulating America: U.S. Courts of Appeals Judgeships from T.R. to F.D.R.,” American Bar Foundation Research Journal, vol. 9 (1984), pp. 285, 304. As indicated by the article, the percentage of circuit court appointees who were another type of judge at the time of being appointed or promoted to a circuit court judgeship, by President in chronological order, were 78.6% (T. Roosevelt), 75.0% (Taft), 52.6% (Wilson), 83.3% (Harding), 75.0% (Coolidge), 85.7% (Hoover), and 47.7% (F.D.R.).28 In contrast, 47.6% of President Kennedy’s circuit court appointees were judges immediately prior to their appointment or promotion to U.S. circuit courts of appeals. Sheldon Goldman, “Characteristics of Eisenhower and Kennedy Appointees to the Lower Federal Courts,” Western Political Quarterly, vol. 18 (1965), pp. 755, 758. See also Sheldon Goldman, “Johnson and Nixon Appointees to Lower Federal Courts: Some Socio-Political Perspectives,” Journal of Politics, vol. 34 (1972), pp. 934, 936.scholar, the “federal district court bench is a training camp for the federal courts of appeals bench.A president faced with a vacancy on a court of appeals looks, though not exclusively, to sitting district court judges.”29Of circuit court judges currently serving on the bench, approximately one-quarter (25.8%) were working as attorneys in private practice prior to being appointed as a circuit court judge, with 22.1% having worked in private practice for 10 years or more. Additionally, of those working in private practice for 10 years or more, 80.6% had been working as an attorney in private practice for at least 15 years.As the percentages reported in Figure 2 indicate, a relatively large majority of active circuit court judges (72.4%) were, prior to being appointed as circuit judges, serving as either another type of judge or engaged in private practice for 10 or more years (and often for 15 or more years).Figure 2. Percentage of Active U.S. Circuit Court Judges by T ype of ProfessionalPosition Immediately Prior to Appointment(as of February 1, 2014)Source: CRS analysis of data provided by the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts.Note: This figure shows, as of February 1, 2014, the percentage of active U.S. circuit court judges by type of professional position immediately prior to their appointment as a circuit judge.Other types of positions held by active U.S. circuit court judges prior to being appointed include working as an attorney at the Department of Justice (DOJ) or a U.S. Attorneys’ Office (7.4%) or working as a law professor (6.7%). Another 9.8% of active circuit court judges held other types of positions immediately prior to being appointed.3029 Karen Swenson, “Promotion of District Court Judges to the U.S. Courts of Appeals: Explaining President Reagan’s Promotions of His Own Appointees,” Justice System Journal, vol. 27 (2006), p. 208. Swenson examined whether Presidents seek to reward district court judges who vote the “right” way. She concludes that, “at least for Reagan-appointed judges considered ... , the most convincing conclusion to draw from these data is that district judges’ records of conservative voting and support for the federal government, relative to their benchmates, are irrelevant to the president’s decision” to nominate the district court judge to a vacant circuit court judgeship. Instead, the “decision to elevate a district judge may be ... influenced by factors not measured [in the article], such as pressure from a key senator or two, close friends of the president, or high-ranking officials in the president’s party.” Ibid., p. 217.30 Examples of other types of positions that circuit court judges held immediately prior to their appointment include state attorney general; deputy general counsel of a research university; assistant to the President of the United States and staff secretary; deputy secretary and general counsel of a state agency; and deputy secretary of a U.S. federal executive department.。

普通法和大陆法英文文献Common Law and Civil Law: A Comparative Analysis.Introduction.The legal systems of the world can be broadly divided into two major families: common law and civil law. Common law is based on the decisions of judges in previous cases, known as precedents, while civil law is based on comprehensive codes of law. This article will compare and contrast the two systems, examining their historical development, sources of law, and approaches to legal reasoning.Historical Development.Common law originated in England in the 11th century, when royal courts began to develop a body of law to govern the kingdom. This law was based on the decisions of individual judges, and over time, these decisions becamebinding precedents for future cases. Civil law, on the other hand, developed in continental Europe, where legal scholars in the Middle Ages compiled comprehensive codes of law. These codes were based on Roman law and were designed to provide a comprehensive and systematic body of law for the state.Sources of Law.The primary source of law in common law systems is judicial precedent. When a court decides a case, its decision is binding on lower courts in future cases with similar facts. This system of precedent creates a body of law that is constantly evolving, as new decisions are made and old ones are overturned. In civil law systems, the primary source of law is codified law. Codes are comprehensive statutes that set out the rules governing various areas of law. These codes are typically drafted by legal experts and are intended to provide a stable and predictable body of law.Approaches to Legal Reasoning.Common law systems use an inductive approach to legal reasoning. Judges start with the facts of the case and then apply the relevant precedents to reach a decision. This approach allows for a flexible and individualized application of the law. Civil law systems, on the other hand, use a deductive approach to legal reasoning. Judges start with the relevant code provisions and then apply them to the facts of the case. This approach is more systematic and predictable, but it can also be less flexible.Advantages and Disadvantages.Both common law and civil law systems have advantages and disadvantages. Common law systems are more flexible and adaptable, as they allow judges to consider the specific facts of each case when making decisions. However, they can also be less predictable, as the outcome of a case can depend on the individual judge's interpretation of the precedents. Civil law systems are more predictable and systematic, but they can be less flexible and may not be able to account for the unique circumstances of each case.Conclusion.Common law and civil law are two distinct legal systems with different historical origins, sources of law, and approaches to legal reasoning. Common law is based on the decisions of judges in previous cases, while civil law is based on comprehensive codes of law. Both systems havetheir own advantages and disadvantages, and the choice of which system to adopt is a matter of national preference.。

法学英文文献在法学领域，英文文献是研究和学习的重要资源。

以下是一些关于法学的英文文献综述。

1. "The Development of Environmental Law: A Comparative Analysis" - 本文综述了环境法的发展，探讨了不同国家环境法的异同，并对环境法的未来趋势进行了展望。

2. "The Evolution of Corporate Governance: A Global Perspective" - 本文回顾了公司治理结构的演变，探讨了不同国家和地区公司治理的差异，并分析了公司治理对企业发展的重要性。

3. "Human Rights Law: A Comprehensive Analy sis" - 本文对人权法进行了全面的分析，包括人权法的起源、发展、主要的人权公约以及人权法在实践中的应用。

4. "Intellectual Property Law: Key Issues and Ch allenges" - 本文讨论了知识产权法的重要问题和挑战，包括专利、商标、版权的保护范围、侵权行为以及知识产权的国际保护。

5. "Comparative Constitutional Law: A Study of Selected Countries" - 本文比较了不同国家的宪法法律制度，包括宪法的基本原则、权力机构的设置以及宪法的解释和适用。

6. "Criminal Law: Theory and Practice" - 本文综述了刑法的基本理论，包括犯罪、刑事责任、刑罚等概念，并分析了刑法在实践中的应用和挑战。

7. "Family Law: Trends and Reforms" - 本文讨论了家庭法的趋势和改革，包括婚姻、离婚、抚养权、家庭暴力等问题，并分析了不同国家和地区家庭法的差异。

法学专业论文文献外文有哪些法学论文外文参考文献(一)[1]范愉.司法制度概论[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,XX:23.[2]付子堂.法律功能论].北京:华夏出版社,1989,:353.[4]王利明.法治的社会需要司法公正[M].北京:法制出版社,XX.[5]程竹汝.司法改革与政治发展[M].北京:中国社会科学出版社,XX:5.[6]张晋藩.中国法律的传统和近代转型[M].北京:法律出版社,XX.[7]董必武.董必武政治法律文集[M]北京:法院出版社,1982.[8]罗.庞德.通过法律的社会控制､法律的任务[M]北京:商务印书馆,1984:8-9.[9]孟德斯鸠.论法的精神[M]北京:商务印书馆,1982:154.[10]庞德.通过法律的社会控制､法律的任务[M]北京:商务印书馆,1984:42.[11]孙万胜.司法权的法理之维[M]北京:法律出版社,XX:134.[12]苏力.送法下乡一中国基层司法制度研究[M].北京:中国政法大学出版社,XX:200.[13]范偷.纠纷解决的理论与实践[M].北京:清华大学出版社,XX:547-555.[14]田有成.乡土社会的民间法[M].北京:法律出版社,XX:4.[15]顾培东.构建和谐社会背景下的纠纷解决之道[M].北京:中国政法大学,XX:1.法学论文外文参考文献(二)1.沈跃东:《乡镇人民政.府环境保护职权的法规范分》,《法治研究》XX年第3期。

2.徐亚文:《口述历史与法律》,《中.共青岛市.委党校.青岛行政学院学报》XX年第1期。

3.陈瑞华:《从经验到理论的法学方法》,《法学研究》XX年第6期。

4.薛以胜:《法学研究方法初探》,《科技信息》XX年第3期。

5.崔二玲:《浅析法律方法》,《法制与社会》XX年第1期。

6.罗旭南:《法学方法多样化在中国法律史教学中的适用》,《海南大学学报》(文社会科学版)XX年第4期。

7.刘颖:《法学方法与法律方法的耦合》,《中南林业科技大学学报》(社会科学版)XX年第4期。

外文原文(一)Savigny and his Anglo-American Disciple s*M. H. HoeflichFriedrich Carl von Savigny, nobleman, law reformer, champion of the revived German professoriate, and founder of the Historical School of jurisprudence, not only helped to revolutionize the study of law and legal institutions in Germany and in other civil law countries, but also exercised a profound influence on many of the most creative jurists and legal scholars in England and the United States. Nevertheless, tracing the influence of an individual is always a difficult task. It is especially difficult as regards Savigny and the approach to law and legal sources propounded by the Historical School. This difficulty arises, in part, because Savigny was not alone in adopting this approach. Hugo, for instance, espoused quite similar ideas in Germany; George Long echoed many of these concepts in England during the 1850s, and, of course, Sir Henry Sumner Maine also espoused many of these same concepts central to historical jurisprudence in England in the 1860s and 1870s. Thus, when one looks at the doctrinal writings of British and American jurists and legal scholars in the period before 1875, it is often impossible to say with any certainty that a particular idea which sounds very much the sort of thing that might, indeed, have been derived from Savigny's works, was, in fact, so derived. It is possible, nevertheless, to trace much of the influence of Savigny and his legal writings in the United States and in Great Britain during this period with some certainty because so great was his fame and so great was the respect accorded to his published work that explicit references to him and to his work abound in the doctrinal writing of this period, as well as in actual law cases in the courts. Thus, Max Gutzwiller, in his classic study Der einfluss Savignys auf die Entwicklung des International privatrechts, was able to show how Savigny's ideas on conflict of laws influenced such English and American scholars as Story, Phillimore, Burge, and Dicey. Similarly, Andreas Schwarz, in his "Einflusse Deutscher Zivilistik im Auslande," briefly sketched Savigny's influence upon John Austin, Frederick Pollock, and James Bryce. In this article I wish to examine Savigny's influence over a broader spectrum and to draw a picture of his general fame and reputation both in Britain and in the United States as the leading Romanist, legal historian, and German legal academic of his day. The picture of this Anglo-American respect accorded to Savigny and the historical school of jurisprudence which emerges from these sources is fascinating. It sheds light not only upon Savigny’s trans-channel, trans-Atlantic fame, but also upon the extraordinarily*M.H.Hoeflich, Savigny and his Anglo-American Disciples, American Journal of Comparative Law, vol.37, No.1, 1989.cosmopolitan outlook of many of the leading American and English jurists of the time. Of course, when one sets out to trace the influence of a particular individual and his work, it is necessary to demonstrate, if possible, precisely how knowledge of the man and his work was transmitted. In the case of Savigny and his work on Roman law and ideas of historical jurisprudence, there were three principal modes of transmission. First, there was the direct influence he exercised through his contacts with American lawyers and scholars. Second, there was the influence he exercised through his books. Third, there was the influence he exerted indirectly through intermediate scholars and their works. Let us examine each mode separately.I.INFLUENCE OF THE TRANSLATED WORKSWhile American and British interest in German legal scholarship was high in the antebellum period, the number of American and English jurists who could read German fluently was relatively low. Even those who borrowed from the Germans, for instance, Joseph Story, most often had to depend upon translations. It is thus quite important that Savigny’s works were amongst the most frequently translated into English, both in the United States and in Great Britain. His most influential early work, the Vom Beruf unserer Zeitfur Rechtsgeschichte und Gestzgebung, was translated into English by Abraham Hayward and published in London in 1831. Two years earlier the first volume of his History of Roman Law in the Middle Ages was translated by Cathcart and published in Edinburgh. In 1830, as well, a French translation was published at Paris. Sir Erskine Perry's translation of Savigny's Treatise on Possession was published in London in 1848. This was followed by Archibald Brown's epitome of the treatise on possession in 1872 and Rattigan's translation of the second volume of the System as Jural Relations or the Law of Persons in 1884. Guthrie published a translation of the seventh volume of the System as Private International Law at Edinburgh in 1869. Indeed, two English translations were even published in the far flung corners of the British Raj. A translation of the first volume of the System was published by William Holloway at Madras in 1867 and the volume on possession was translated by Kelleher and published at Calcutta in 1888. Thus, the determined English-speaking scholar had ample access to Savigny's works throughout the nineteenth century.Equally important for the dissemination of Savigny's ideas were those books and articles published in English that explained and analyzed his works. A number of these must have played an important role in this process. One of the earliest of these is John Reddie's Historical Notices of the Roman law and of the Progress of its Study in Germany, published at Edinburgh in 1826. Reddie was a noted Scots jurist and held the Gottingen J.U.D. The book, significantly, is dedicated to Gustav Hugo. It is of that genre known as an external history of Roman law-not so much a history of substantive Roman legal doctrine but rather a historyof Roman legal institutions and of the study of Roman law from antiquity through the nineteenth century. It is very much a polemic for the study of Roman law and for the Historical School. It imparts to the reader the excitement of Savigny and his followers about the study of law historically and it is clear that no reader of the work could possibly be left unmoved. It is, in short, the first work of public relations in English on behalf of Savigny and his ideas.Having mentioned Reddie's promotion of Savigny and the Historical School, it is important to understand the level of excitement with which things Roman and especially Roman law were greeted during this period. Many of the finest American jurists were attracted-to use Peter Stein's term-to Roman and Civil law, but attracted in a way that, at times, seems to have been more enthusiastic than intellectual. Similarly, Roman and Civil law excited much interest in Great Britain, as illustrated by the distinctly Roman influence to be found in the work of John Austin. The attraction of Roman and Civil law can be illustrated and best understood, perhaps, in the context of the publicity and excitement in the English-speaking world surrounding the discovery of the only complete manuscript of the classical Roman jurist Gaius' Institutes in Italy in 1816 by the ancient historian and German consul at Rome, B.G. Niebuhr. Niebuhr, the greatest ancient historian of his time, turned to Savigny for help with the Gaius manuscript (indeed, it was Savigny who recognized the manuscript for what it was) and, almost immediately, the books and journals-not just law journals by any means-were filled with accounts of the discovery, its importance to legal historical studies, and, of course, what it said. For instance, the second volume of the American Jurist contains a long article on the civil law by the scholarly Boston lawyer and classicist, John Pickering. The first quarter of the article is a gushing account of the discovery and first publication of the Gaius manuscript and a paean to Niebuhr and Savigny for their role in this. Similarly, in an article published in the London Law Magazine in 1829 on the civil law, the author contemptuously refers to a certain professor who continued to tell his students that the text of Gaius' Institutes was lost for all time. What could better show his ignorance of all things legal and literary than to be unaware of Niebuhr's great discovery?Another example of this reaction to the discovery of the Gaius palimpsest is to be found in David Irving's Introduction to the Study of the Civil Law. This volume is also more a history of Roman legal scholarship and sources than a study of substantive Roman law. Its pages are filled with references to Savigny's Geschichte and its approach clearly reflects the influence of the Historical School. Indeed, Irving speaks of Savigny's work as "one of the most remarkable productions of the age." He must have been truly impressed with German scholarship and must also have been able to convince the Faculty of Advocates, forwhom he was librarian, of the worth of German scholarship, for in 1820 the Faculty sent him to Gottingen so that he might study their law libraries. Irving devotes several pages of his elementary textbook on Roman law to the praise of the "remarkable" discovery of the Gaius palimpsest. He traces the discovery of the text by Niebuhr and Savigny in language that would have befitted an adventure tale. He elaborates on the various labors required to produce a new edition of the text and was particularly impressed by the use of a then new chemical process to make the under text of the palimpsest visible. He speaks of the reception of the new text as being greeted with "ardor and exultation" strong words for those who spend their lives amidst the "musty tomes" of the Roman law.This excitement over the Verona Gaius is really rather strange. Much of the substance of the Gaius text was already known to legal historians and civil lawyers from its incorporation into Justinian's Institutes and so, from a substantive legal perspective, the find was not crucial. The Gaius did provide new information on Roman procedural rules and it did also provide additional information for those scholars attempting to reconstruct pre-Justinianic Roman law. Nevertheless, these contributions alone seem hardly able to justify the excitement the discovery caused. Instead, I think that the Verona Gaius discovery simply hit a chord in the literary and legal community much the same as did the discovery of the Rosetta Stone or of Schliemann’s Troy. Here was a monument of a great civilization brought newly to light and able to be read for the first time in millenia. And just as the Rosetta Stone helped to establish the modern discipline of Egyptology and Schliemann's discoveries assured the development of classical archaeology as a modern academic discipline, the discovery of the Verona Gaius added to the attraction Roman law held for scholars and for lawyers, even amongst those who were not Romanists by profession. Ancillary to this, the discovery and publication of the Gaius manuscript also added to the fame of the two principals involved in the discovery, Niebuhr and Savigny. What this meant in the English-speaking world is that even those who could not or did not wish to read Savigny's technical works knew of him as one of the discoverers of the Gaius text. This fame itself may well have helped in spreading Savigny's legal and philosophical ideas, for, I would suggest, the Gaius "connection" may well have disposed people to read other of Savigny's writings, unconnected to the Gaius, because they were already familiar with his name.Another example of an English-speaking promoter of Savigny is Luther Stearns Cushing, a noted Boston lawyer who lectured on Roman law at the Harvard Law School in 1848-49 and again in 1851- 1852.Cushing published his lectures at Boston in 1854 under the title An Introduction to the Study of Roman Law. He devoted a full chapter to a description of the historical school and to the controversy betweenSavigny and Thibaut over codification. While Cushing attempted to portray fairly the arguments of both sides, he left no doubt as to his preference for Savigny's approach:The labors of the historical school have established an entirely new and distinct era in the study of the Roman jurisprudence; and though these writers cannot be said to have thrown their predecessors into the shade, it seems to be generally admitted, that almost every branch of the Roman law has received some important modification at their hands, and that a knowledge of their writings, to some extent, at least, is essentially necessary to its acquisition.译文(一)萨维尼和他的英美信徒们*M·H·豪弗里奇弗雷德里奇·卡尔·冯·萨维尼出身贵族，是一位出色的法律改革家，也是一位倡导重建德国教授协会的拥护者，还是历史法学派的创建人之一。

中国法学英文文献格式？答：中国法学英文文献格式一般遵循国际通用的APA （American Psychological Association）或MLA（Modern Language Association）格式，具体格式要求如下：一、引用格式1. 期刊文章：作者姓氏，名字缩写. 出版年份. 文章标题. 期刊名（斜体）. 卷号（期号）：起止页码.例如：Wang，X. 2023. The Impact of Technology on the Legal Profession. Chinese Journal of Law 5（2）：34-45.2. 书籍：作者姓氏，名字缩写. 出版年份. 书名（斜体）. 出版社.例如：Li，M. 2022. Chinese Legal System. Peking University Press.3. 学位论文：作者姓氏，名字缩写. 出版年份. 论文标题（斜体）. 学位类型，学校名称.例如：Zhang，Y. 2021. A Study on the Application of Artificial Intelligence in Chinese Law. Master's thesis，Tsinghua University.二、注释格式1. 脚注：在引用文献的页面底部添加脚注，包括作者姓氏、名字缩写、出版年份、文章/书籍标题、期刊/出版社等信息。

例如：Wang，X.（2023）. The Impact of Technology on the Legal Profession. Chinese Journal of Law，5（2），34-45.2. 尾注：在文章末尾添加尾注，列出所有引用的文献信息。

尾注格式与脚注相同。

三、参考文献列表格式在文章末尾列出所有引用的参考文献，按照作者姓氏字母顺序排列。

每个参考文献包括作者姓氏、名字缩写、出版年份、文章/书籍标题、期刊/出版社等信息。