Document Type
Book Review
Publication Date
2008
Publication Information
53 Am. J. Juris. 133 (2008) (book review)
Abstract
Sir James Fitzjames Stephen, embarking on a powerful critique of John Stuart Mill, says: "In stating the grounds of one's dissent from wide-spread and influential opinions it is absolutely necessary to take some definite statement of those opinions as a starting point, and it is natural to take the ablest, the most reasonable, and the clearest." This is my justification for reviewing the present work. My disagreement with it is broad and deep, but, unlike many proponents of similar views, Professor Benson writes clearly and without jargon, and he brings to his work the experience of a working lawyer and a teacher of working lawyers. He presents his doctrine in such a way that one can profitably engage with it.
Recommended Citation
Robert E. Rodes,
The Interpretation Game,
53 Am. J. Juris. 133 (2008) (book review).
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship/1090
