Professor Dr. Trevor Bench-Capon of the University of Liverpool Department of Computer Science, and Professor Dr. Henry Prakken of the University of Groningen Faculty of Law have published Using Argument Schemes for Hypothetical Reasoning in Law, forthcoming in Artificial Intelligence and Law. Here is the abstract:
This paper studies the use of hypothetical and value-based reasoning in US Supreme-Court cases concerning the United States Fourth Amendment. Drawing upon formal AI & Law models of legal argument a semi-formal reconstruction is given of parts of the Carney case, which has been studied previously in AI & law research on case-based reasoning. As part of the reconstruction, a semi-formal proposal is made for extending the formal AI & Law models with forms of metalevel reasoning in several argument schemes. The result is compared with Rissland’s (1989) analysis in terms of dimensions and Ashley’s (2008) analysis in terms of his process model of legal argument with hypotheticals.
Tags: Argument schemes in law, Artificial intelligence and law, California v Carney, Constitutional law information systems, Fourth Amendment, Henry Prakken, Legal argument, Legal argument schemes, Legal argumentation, Legal communication, Legal hypothetical reasoning, Legal logic, Legal reasoning, Modeling legal argument, Modeling legal argument schemes, Modeling legal argumentation, Modeling legal hypothetical reasoning, Modeling legal logic, Modeling legal reasoning, Trevor Bench-Capon, U.S. Supreme Court
