Article contents
Annual Survey of American Law1
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 16 January 2009
Extract
The series to which the four volumes that are the subject of this article belong began in 1928, and appeared regularly until their production was held up by the recent war. The publication of the 1940 volume was delayed until 1943. Within the last year, activities have been renewed with such success that the volumes for 1942, 1943, 1944 and 1945 have been forwarded to us. The Foreword of Dean Arthur T. Vanderbilt gives impressive imformation about the magnitude of the task. He tells us that in 1942 American reported decisions filled seventy-four books totalling 76,362 pages, and that, although the sittings of most of the legislatures were suspended in that year, enactments nevertheless occupied 8,939 pages. Thus, great as is the burden on the editors of our Annual Survey of English Law (which Dean Vanderbilt courteously mentions as the source of inspiration of the American Annual Survey), it is light compared with that upon the shoulders of those who have to deal with legislation and judicial decisions in over fifty jurisdictions. The aim of each volume of the American Survey is modestly described as merely to present in orderly fashion the significant trends in the more important branches of the law through the year.' This underrates the scope of the work, for it is gratifying to both practitioners and teachers of law to find included in it chapters on ‘Jurisprudence,’ ‘Legal Education, Bar Organization and Economics,’ and ‘Administration of Justice—The Courts and Law Reform.’ Moreover, account is also taken of outstanding literature in the shape of textbooks and articles in law journals.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge Law Journal and Contributors 1947
References
2 Read v. Lyons & Co., Ltd. [1945] K. B. 216. See especially the judgment of Scott L.J.
3 1942 vol., 744–756, where the whole question of juvenile and adolescent offenders is treated by Mr. Morris Ploscowe.
4 1943 vol., 690, seq., where details are given by Mr. Ploscowe.
5 Commonwealth v. Welansky (1944) 55 N. E. (2nd) 902.
6 P. 1142.
7 (1942) 40 N. E. (2nd) 225.
8 1942 vol., 479–480.
9 Krause v. Swanson (1942) 3 N. W. (2nd) 407.
10 1942 vol., 480–481.
11 Pollock, Contract (12th ed.), 150–151.
12 1944 vol., 603.
13 1942 vol., 485–486.
14 (1942) 288 N.Y. 467.
15 Deibler v. Bernard Bros. Inc. (1943) 319 III. App. 504. 1943 vol., 461Google Scholar.
16 1944 vol., 610. See, too, 1945 vol., 696.
17 Pollock, op. cit., 230.
18 [1945] A. C. 221.
19 1945 vol., 696.
20 (1943) 168 S. W. (2nd) 784.
21 The most important case is Mersey Docks & Harbour Board v. Coggins & Griffiths, Ltd. [1947] A. C. I (H.L.).
22 1943 vol., 465–466.
23 1944 vol., 603, 608–610.
24 (1945) 162 P. (2nd) 901. 1945 vol., 682.
25 55 L. Q. R. 518–520.
26 McCawley v. Furness Ry. (1872)L. R. 8 Q.B. 57. Gallin v. L. & N.W. Ry. (1875) L. R. 10 Q. B. 212.
27 (1942) 26 A. (2nd) 489, 684.
28 1942 vol., 732.
29 8 Cambridge Law Journal (1942), 76—91.
30 1942 vol., 742.
31 (1942) 124F (2nd). 167.
32 The matter is discussed in my Textbook of Tort (3rd ed.), § 183.
33 Tolley v. Fry &Sons, Ltd. [1931] A. C. 333.
34 (1944) 139 F. (2nd), 14. 1944 vol., 948.
35 (1944) 310 Mich. 74. 1945 vol., 1105—1106.
36 Textbook of Tort (3rd ed.), 30–37.
- 1
- Cited by