The High Court's Artificial And Fictitious Patent Test: Part 2

Law360, New York (July 6, 2016, 12:01 PM EDT) -- As every first-year law student learns, the U.S. Supreme Court says what the law is,[1] and lower courts (as well as attorneys) have a duty to respect it.[2] In crafting the law, Supreme Court justices are supposed to exercise self-restraint using stare decisis as their guide.[3] Having observed that too many judicial opinions provide an appearance of stare decisis while actually straying from it, Justice Benjamin N. Cardozo cautioned in his article "A Ministry of Justice, "[t]here is a loss too of simplicity and directness, an increasing aspect of unreality, of something artificial and fictitious, when judges mask a change of substance, or gloss over its importance, by the suggestion of a consistency that is merely verbal and scholastic."[4] When the Supreme Court ignores this advice, it creates "artificial and fictitious" law that we attorneys must nonetheless respect and rely upon when representing and counseling clients....

Law360 is on it, so you are, too.

A Law360 subscription puts you at the center of fast-moving legal issues, trends and developments so you can act with speed and confidence. Over 200 articles are published daily across more than 60 topics, industries, practice areas and jurisdictions.


A Law360 subscription includes features such as

  • Daily newsletters
  • Expert analysis
  • Mobile app
  • Advanced search
  • Judge information
  • Real-time alerts
  • 450K+ searchable archived articles

And more!

Experience Law360 today with a free 7-day trial.

Start Free Trial

Already a subscriber? Click here to login

Hello! I'm Law360's automated support bot.

How can I help you today?

For example, you can type:
  • I forgot my password
  • I took a free trial but didn't get a verification email
  • How do I sign up for a newsletter?
Ask a question!