Descriptor
| Court Litigation | 1 |
| Creative Thinking | 1 |
| Discussion | 1 |
| Higher Education | 1 |
| Imagination | 1 |
| Laws | 1 |
| Legal Education | 1 |
| Logical Thinking | 1 |
| Policy Formation | 1 |
| Problem Solving | 1 |
| Theories | 1 |
| More ▼ | |
Source
| Journal of Legal Education | 1 |
Author
| Gerwirtz, Paul | 1 |
Publication Type
| Journal Articles | 1 |
| Opinion Papers | 1 |
Education Level
Audience
Location
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Peer reviewedGerwirtz, Paul – Journal of Legal Education, 1982
Two opinions are expressed: (1) that the notion that lawyers and judges are obliged to answer all hypothetical questions asked about laws and litigation is unrealistic and inappropriate, and (2) that hypotheticals can be intelligent questions illuminating some of the difficulties of legal theory. (MSE)
Descriptors: Court Litigation, Creative Thinking, Discussion, Higher Education
