Abstract
n Russian legal discourse there are frequent attempts to apply the postulates of a realistic legal understanding, formed by US Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, to continental legal realities. The findings of the American lawyer in relation to the jurisprudence of the United States are transferring to the Russian legal institutions without regard neither to the difference the very essence of common law, which was studies by O. Holmes, nor to the difference of status and functions of the judiciary, of which he wrote, nor even difference of the historical process of formation of legal material which he explored. As a result, we have statements like the decisions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court or the decisions of the Constitutional Court of Russia are “judicial precedents”, and even the result of judicial law-making, as was described by O. Holmes and other legal realists. This article debunks the myths about the classification of the American legal understanding, about the real essence of judicial law-making in the United States and about its differences from its English predecessor, about the adequacy of the appeal to the American legal ideology without considering the cardinal features of the status and functioning of the US judicial system. The article offers a brief, but sufficient to overcome these errors, historical and theoretical essay on each of the identified areas.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
