Statutory Law Vs Common Law

Chapter 1

1-1. Statutory Law versus Common Law. How does statutory law come into existence? How does it differ from the common law? If statutory law conflicts with the common law, which law will govern?

Statutory law comes into existence by Congress and the various state legislative bodies that make up another source of law. Courts develop the common law rules from the principles behind the decisions in actual disputes. Common law is the law created by judges when interpreting statutory law. If statutory law conflicts with common law, statutory law will govern because the body of statutory law has expanded greatly since the founding of this nation. This expansion has resulted in a proportionate reduction in the scope and applicability of the common law. However, the common law remains a significant source of legal authority. Even when legislation had been substituted for common law principles, courts often rely on the common law as a guide to interpreting the legislation on the theory that people who drafted the statute intended to codify an existing common law rule.

1-2. Stare Decisis. In the text of this chapter, we stated that the doctrine of stare decisis “became a cornerstone of the English and American judicial system.” What does stare decisis mean, and why has this doctrine been so fundamental to the development of our legal tradition?

Stare decisis comes from the Latin language and it means “to stand on decided cases.” Stare decisis is a flexible doctrine of the court, recognizing the value of following prior decisions or precedents in cases similar to the one before the court. The courts practice of being consistent with prior decision based on similar facts. This doctrine had become so fundamental to the development of ...

... middle of paper ...

.... Arkansas has one of the highest numbers of STLs in the United States. In an effort to recoup the costs of dealing with the meth epidemic, twenty counties in Arkansas filed a suit in a federal district court against Pfizer, Inc., and other companies that make or distribute cold and allergy medications. What is the defendants’ ethical responsibility in this case, and to whom do they owe it? Why? [Ashley County, Arkansas v. Pfizer, Inc., 552 F.3d 659 (8th Cir.2009)]

In my opinion, Pfizer Inc. and other companies that make or distribute cold and allergy medications are not responsible on how people use those medications. The responsibility of Pfizer Inc. is to provide those medications in a good condition and write on the container’s label a warning to the consumer that this medication can cause severe health damage if it is used without a prescription for a doctor.