An implementation of Eisner v. Macomber

Subscribe (Full Service)


	Search: The ACM Digital Library The Guide

	Feedback

An implementation of Eisner v. Macomber

Full text

Pdf (1.16 MB)

Source

International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law archive
Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law table of contents

College Park, Maryland, United States

Pages: 276 - 286

Year of Publication: 1995

ISBN:0-89791-758-8

Author

L. Thorne McCarty

Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey

Sponsors

IAAIL : Intl Asso for Artifical Intel & Law
UMIACS : U of MD Inst for Advanced Comp Studies
SIGART: ACM Special Interest Group on Artificial Intelligence

Publisher

ACM New York, NY, USA

Bibliometrics

Downloads (6 Weeks): 2, Downloads (12 Months): 17, Citation Count: 15

Additional Information:

references cited by index terms collaborative colleagues

Tools and Actions:	Request Permissions Review this Article Save this Article to a Binder Display Formats: BibTeX EndNote ACM Ref

DOI Bookmark:	Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/222092.222258 What is a DOI?

REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

	1	W.D. Andrews. Federal Income Taxation:Cases, Problems and Notes. Little, Brown & Co., 1969.
	2	Kevin D. Ashley, Modelling legal argument: reasoning with cases and hypotheticals, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, 1988
	3	M. Keith Bellairs , Paul E. Johnson, Contextual relevance in analogical reasoning: a model of legal argument, 1989
	4	T.J.M. Bench-Capon and M.J. Sergot. Towards a rule-based representation of open texture in law. In C. Walter, editor, Computing Power and Legal Language. Greenwood/Quorom Press, 1987.
	5	B.I. Bittker and J.E. Eustice. Federal Income Taxation of Corporations and Shareholders. Federal Tax Press, 1966.
	6	L. K. Branting, Representing and reusing explanations of legal precedents, Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.103-110, May 1989, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada [doi>10.1145/74014.74029]
	7	R. Dworkin. Hard cases. Harvard Law Review, 88:1057-1109, 1975.
	8	H. Fiedler. Expert systems as a tool for drafting legal decisions. In A.A. Martino and F. Socci Natall, editors, Automated Analysis of Legal Texts: Logic, Informatics, Law, pages 607-612. Elsevier North-Holland, 1986.
	9	Anne von der Lieth Gardner, An artificial intelligence approach to legal reasoning, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1987
	10	T. F. Gordon, Issue spotting in a system for searching interpretation spaces, Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.157-164, May 1989, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada [doi>10.1145/74014.74035]
	11	S. Kedar-Cabelli and L.T. McCarty. Explanationbased generalization as resolution theorem proving. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Machine Learning, pages 383-389. Morgan Kaufmann, 1987.
	12	E.H. Levi. An Introduction to Legal Reasoning. University of Chicago Press, 1942.
	13	L. Thorne McCarty, Clausal intuitionistic logic I. Fixed-point semantics, Journal of Logic Programming, v.5 n.1, p.1-34, March 1988 [doi>10.1016/0743-1066(88)90005-2]
	14	L. Thorne McCarty, Clausal intuitionistic logic II. Tableau proof procedures, Journal of Logic Programming, v.5 n.2, p.93-132, June 1988 [doi>10.1016/0743-1066(88)90014-3]
	15	L. T. McCarty, A language for legal Discourse I. basic features, Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.180-189, May 1989, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada [doi>10.1145/74014.74037]
	16	L. Thorne McCarty, On the role of prototypes in appellate legal argument (abstract), Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.185-190, May 1991, Oxford, England [doi>10.1145/112646.112668]
	17	L.T. McCarty. Modalities over actions. In Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference (KR94), pages 437-448. Morgan Kaufmann, 1994.
	18	L.T. McCarty. OWNERSHIP: A case study in the representation of legal concepts. Presented at a Conference in Celebration of the 25th Anniversary of the Istituto Documentazione Giuridica, Florence, Italy, December, 1993.
	19	L.T. McCarty and N.S. Sridharan. The representation of an evolving system of legal concepts: II. Prototypes and deformations. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 246-53, 1981.
	20	L.T. McCarty and N.S. Sridharan. A computational theory of legal argument. Technical Report LRP-TR-13, Computer Science Department, Rutgets University, 1982.
	21	L.T. McCarty and R. van der Meyden. Reasoning about indefinite actions. In Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Third International Conference (KR92), pages 59-70. Morgan Kaufmann, 1992.
	22	T.M. Mitchell. Generalization as search. Artificial Intelligence, 18:203-226, 1982.
	23	E. Rosch and B.B. Lloyd. Cognition and Categorization. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1978.
	24	D.B. Skalak and E.L. gissland. Arguments and cases' An inevitable intertwining. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 1:3-44, 1992.
	25	E. Smith and D. Medin. Categories and Concepts. Harvard University Press, 1981.

CITED BY 15

	L. Karl Branting, A generative model of narrative cases, Proceedings of the 7th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.1-8, June 14-17, 1999, Oslo, Norway
	Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon , Pepijn R. S. Visser, Ontologies in legal information systems; the need for explicit specifications of domain conceptualisations, Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.132-141, June 30-July 03, 1997, Melbourne, Australia
	L. Karl Branting, A reduction-graph model of precedent in legal analysis, Artificial Intelligence, v.150 n.1-2, p.59-95, November 2003
	Trevor Bench-Capon , Giovanni Sartor, A model of legal reasoning with cases incorporating theories and values, Artificial Intelligence, v.150 n.1-2, p.97-143, November 2003
	L. Thorne McCarty, Some arguments about legal arguments, Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.215-224, June 30-July 03, 1997, Melbourne, Australia
	Katie Atkinson , Trevor Bench-Capon , Peter McBurney, Arguing about cases as practical reasoning, Proceedings of the 10th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, June 06-11, 2005, Bologna, Italy
	Katie Atkinson , Trevor Bench-Capon, Legal case-based reasoning as practical reasoning, Artificial Intelligence and Law, v.13 n.1, p.93-131, January 2005
	Michael Halper , Li-min Liu , James Geller , Yehoshua Perl, Ownership as a conceptual modeling construct, Data & Knowledge Engineering, v.62 n.2, p.248-273, August, 2007
	Alison Chorley , Trevor Bench-Capon, An empirical investigation of reasoning with legal cases through theory construction and application, Artificial Intelligence and Law, v.13 n.3, p.323-371, January 2005
	L. Thorne McCarty, Deep semantic interpretations of legal texts, Proceedings of the 11th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, June 04-08, 2007, Stanford, California
	Gian Piero Zarri, Ontologies and reasoning techniques for (legal) intelligent information retrieval systems, Artificial Intelligence and Law, v.15 n.3, p.251-279, September 2007
	T. J. M. Bench-Capon , Paul E. Dunne, Argumentation in artificial intelligence, Artificial Intelligence, v.171 n.10-15, p.619-641, July, 2007
	Katie Atkinson , Trevor Bench-Capon, Theory and Practice in AI and Law: A Response to Branting, Proceeding of the 2005 conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems: JURIX 2005: The Eighteenth Annual Conference, p.1-12, May 15, 2005
	Phan Minh Dung , Phan Minh Thang, Modular Argumentation For Modelling Legal Doctrines in Common Law of Contract, Proceeding of the 2008 conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems: JURIX 2008: The Twenty-First Annual Conference, p.108-117, July 08, 2008
	Phan Minh Dung , Phan Minh Thang , Nguyen Duy Hung, Modular argumentation for modelling legal doctrines of performance relief, Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, June 08-12, 2009, Barcelona, Spain