stare decisis

Also found in: Legal, Wikipedia.
Related to stare decisis: precedent

sta·re de·ci·sis

 (stâr′ē dĭ-sī′sĭs)
The doctrine or principle that precedent should determine legal decision making in a case involving similar facts.

[Latin stāre dēcīsīs (et nōn quiēta movēre), to stand by things decided (and not to move things at rest), stāre, to stand, dēcīsīs, ablative neuter pl. of dēcīsus, past participle of dēcīdere, to decide; see decide.]
American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition. Copyright © 2016 by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. All rights reserved.
References in periodicals archive ?
Quill rested on stare decisis as the basis for overturning the Due Process component of the physical presence requirement, and for sustaining the Commerce Clause physical presence requirement from Bellas Hess.
The panel in the current case stated that, under MCR 7.215(C)(2), a "published opinion of the Court of Appeals has precedential effect under the rule of stare decisis." Also, "the rule of stare decisis generally requires courts to reach the same result when presented with the same or substantially similar issues in another case with different parties," according to WA Foote Mem Hosp v.
Indeed, for departmentalists, liquidation could even go so far as to replace our current judge-centered doctrine of stare decisis.
(6) Why and whether stare decisis constrains decision making in a court of last resort is an intriguing and epic topic and the subject of this lecture, which focuses on the treatment of precedent at the New York Court of Appeals.
Kagan demanded that Louis Chaiten, a Cleveland lawyer representing an Alabama felon, explain why the court should not apply its usual standard of letting decided issues stand, referred to as stare decisis.
Note that under the principle of stare decisis, courts should follow its own prior decisions and once something has already been decided, it should be left decided.
Kozel's new book, Settled Versus Right: A Theory of Precedent, offers a timely and important contribution to the age-old debate over stare decisis. Advocating an institutional rather than personal view of judicial authority, he urges judges and Justices to focus on nonmerits factors such as workability, factual accuracy, and reliance in deciding whether to overrule most types of constitutional precedent.
(3) The core of the contribution is a proposed doctrine of stare decisis that disentangles deference to precedent from the interpretive methodologies that led to the precedent in the first place, and that so often determine the amount of deference a decision gets--a doctrine that aims to take disputes over interpretive methodology out of the stare decisis equation.
The Court brushed away stare decisis concerns by stating that "[a]lthough we approach the reconsideration of our decisions with the utmost caution, stare decisis is not an inexorable command.
Even some who opposed Roe also expressed an affinity for the certainty and stability that stems from the stare decisis principle.
"Rarely if ever has the court overruled a decision--let alone one of this import--with so little regard for the usual principles of 'stare decisis.' There are no special justifications for reversing Abood.