Artificial Intelligence and Law

, Volume 18, Issue 2, pp 153–174

Using argument schemes for hypothetical reasoning in law

Article

DOI: 10.1007/s10506-010-9094-8

Cite this article as:
Bench-Capon, T. & Prakken, H. Artif Intell Law (2010) 18: 153. doi:10.1007/s10506-010-9094-8

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.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of LiverpoolLiverpoolUK
  2. 2.Department of Information and Computing SciencesUtrecht UniversityUtrechtThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Faculty of LawUniversity of GroningenGroningenThe Netherlands