Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2pzkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-01T00:46:08.832Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Farther Along

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 April 2024

Marc Galanter
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The universal spirit of Laws, in all countries is to favor the strong in opposition to the weak, and to assist those who have possessions against those who have none. This inconveniency is inevitable, and without exception.

Jean Jacques Rousseau (1762)

The “Haves” paper was written in a different age. Its core was composed in the fall of 1970 when I was a fellow at the Yale Law School's remarkably fruitful soft-money Program in Law and Modernization. This was before the ascent of law and economics, before the emergence of critical legal studies and its progeny, before the promotion of alternative dispute resolution, before the arrival of the new legal journalism and the informational opening of legal world in 1979. The Law and Society Association, founded in 1964, was largely a support group dedicated to publishing the Law & Society Review (then in volume 5) and had not yet held a national meeting.

Type
Comments
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 33 , Issue 4: Do the “Haves” Still Come Out Ahead? , 1999 , pp. 1113 - 1123
Copyright
Copyright © 1999 by the Law and Society Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

This piece is a revised version of my remarks at the conference on “Do the ‘Haves’ Still Come Out Ahead” held at the Institute for Legal Studies at the University of Wisconsin, 1-2 May 1998. I want to express my gratitude to Joel Grossman, who had the idea of doing something for the 25th birthday of the “Haves” paper; to Stewart Macaulay, Bert Kritzer, and Peter Carstensen, who joined him in organizing the event; to Joy Roberts and the institute staff for arrangements; and to the participants who made it a most singular and stimulating occasion. I would also like to take this occasion to mention my teachers Max Rheinstein and Karl Llewellyn who, I continually discover, anticipated many of the things I have managed to say, including the term haves, which Llewellyn used as long ago as 1933. He was not the first; the Oxford English Dictionary traces the term to 1836. Finally, I would like to salute my wife, Eve, whose experience in the consumer movement was the vivid example that brought these questions home to me, literally.

References

Abelson, Reed (1996) “Tax Reformers, Take Your Mark,” New York Times, 11 Feb. 11, Sec. 3, pp. 1, 12.Google Scholar
American Bar Association (1999) Perceptions of the U.S. Justice System. Chicago: American Bar Association.Google Scholar
Babcock, Richard F. (1969) The Zoning Game: Municipal Practices and Policies. Madison: Univ. of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Carlin, Jerome (1962) Lawyers on Their Own: A Study of Individual Practitioners in Chicago. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Carlin, Jerome (1966) Legal Ethics: A Survey of the New York City Bar. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Cheit, Ross E. (1991) “Corporate Ambulance Chasers: The Charmed Life of Business Litigation,” 11 Studies in Law, Politics, & Society 119–40.Google Scholar
Coffee, John C. Jr. (1981) “No Soul to Damn: No Body to Kick”: An Unscandalized Inquiry into the Problem of Corporate Punishment,“ 79 Michigan Law Rev. 386–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curran, Barbara (1977) The Legal Needs of the Public: The Final Report of a National Survey. Chicago: American Bar Foundation.Google Scholar
Dolbeare, Kenneth M. (1967) Trial Courts in Urban Politics: State Court Policy Impact and Functions in a Local Political System. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Droke, Maxwell (1956) The Speaker's Handbook of Humor. New York: Harper and Brothers.Google Scholar
Edelman, Lauren B., & Suchman, Mark C. (1999) “When the ‘Haves’ Hold Court: Speculations on the Organizational Internalization of Law,” 33 Law & Society Rev. 941–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, Gus C. [1915] (1993) Legal Laughs: A Joke for Every Jury. 2d ed.J. Wesley Miller, ed. Buffalo: William S. Hein.Google Scholar
Engel, David (1984) “The Oven Bird's Song: Insiders, Outsiders, and Personal Injuries in an American Community,” 18 Law & Society Rev. 551–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ernst, Theodore R. (1930) Laughter: Gems of the World's Best Humor. New York: Theodore R. Ernst.Google Scholar
Esar, Evan (1945) Esar's Joke Dictionary. New York: Harvest House.Google Scholar
Ewick, Patricia, & Silbey, Susan S. (1998) The Common Place of Law: Stories from Everyday Life. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galanter, Marc (1969) “Untouchability and the Law,” 4 Economic & Political Weekly 131–70.Google Scholar
Galanter, Marc (1992) “The Portable Soc 2; Or What to Do until the Doctrine Comes,” in MacAloon, J., ed., General Education in the Social Sciences: Centennial Reflections on the College of the University of Chicago. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Galanter, Marc (1994) “Predators and Parasites: Lawyer-Bashing and Civil Justice,” 28 Georgia Law Rev. 633–81.Google Scholar
Galanter, Marc (1998a) “The Faces of Mistrust: The Image of Lawyers in Public Opinion, Jokes, and Political Discourse,” 66 Univ. of Cincinnati Law Rev. 805–45.Google Scholar
Galanter, Marc (1998b) “An Oil Strike in Hell: Contemporary Legends about the Civil Justice System,” 40 Arizona Law Review 717–52.Google Scholar
Hagan, John (1982) “The Corporate Advantage: A Study of the Involvement of Corporate and Individual Victims in a Criminal Justice System,” 60 Social Forces 993–1022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haltom, William, & McCann, Michael (1998) “Law and Lore: Media, Common Knowledge, and the Politics of Civil Justice.” Presented at the meetings of the American Political Science Association, Boston, 3-6 Sept.Google Scholar
Hans, Valerie P. (1989) “The Jury's Response to Business and Corporate Wrongdoing,” 52 Law & Contemporary Problems 177–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hans, Valerie P. (1996) “The Contested Role of the Civil Jury in Business Litigation,” 79 Judicature 242–48.Google Scholar
Heinz, John P., & Laumann, Edward O. (1982) Chicago Lawyers: The Social Structure of the Bar. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Heinz, John P., Nelson, Robert L., Laumann, Edward O., & Michelson, Ethan (1998) “The Changing Character of Lawyers' Work: Chicago in 1975 and 1995,” 32 Law & Society Rev. 751–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Humes, James C. [1975] (1985) Podium Humor: A Raconteur's Treasury of Witty and Humorous Stories. New York: Harper Perennial.Google Scholar
Johnson, J. H., Sheridan, Jerry, & Lawrence, Ruth (1936) The Laughter Library. Indianapolis, IN: Maxwell Droke.Google Scholar
Johnston, William T., ed. (1922) Bill Johnston's Joy Book. Cincinnati: Stewart Kidd.Google Scholar
Kalven, Harry, & Zeisel, Hans (1966) The American Jury. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Laumann, Edward O., & Heinz, John P. (1977) “Specialization and Prestige in the Legal Profession: The Structure of Deference,” American Bar Foundation Research J. 155–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macaulay, Stewart (1966) Law and the Balance of Power: The Automobile Manufacturers and Their Dealers. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
MacCoun, Robert J. (1996) “Differential Treatment of Corporate Defendants by Juries: An Examination of the ‘Deep Pockets’ Hypothesis,” 30 Law & Society Rev. 121–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, Carl J. (1990) “Personalizing the Impersonal: Corporations and the Bill of Rights,” 41 Hastings Law J. 577–667.Google Scholar
Milburn, George (1927) The Best Jokes about Lawyers. (Girard, KS: Haldeman-Julius.Google Scholar
Mosher, Marion Dix, comp. [1922] (1932) More Toasts: Jokes Stories and Quotations. New York: H.W. Wilson.Google Scholar
National Center for State Courts (1999) How the Public Views the State Courts: A 1999 National Survey. Williamsburg, VA: National Center for State Courts.Google Scholar
National Conference on the Causes of Popular Dissatisfaction with the Administration of Justice (1976) 70 Federal Rules Decisions. 79–246.Google Scholar
Pendleton, Winston K. [1979] (1981) Complete Speaker's Galaxy of Funny Stories, Jokes, and Anecdotes. West Nyack, NY: Parker.Google Scholar
Ross, H. Laurence (1970) Settled Out of Court. New York: Aldine Publishing.Google Scholar
Sander, Richard H., & Williams, E. Douglass (1989) “Why Are There So Many Lawyers? Perspectives on a Turbulent Market,” 14 Law & Social Inquiry 432–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skolnick, Jerome (1966) Justice without Trial: Law Enforcement in a Democratic Society. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Taft, William Howard (1908) “The Delays of the Law,” 18 Yale Law J. 28–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trubek, David (1984) “Turning Away from Law,” 82 Michigan Law Rev. 824–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
U.S. Bureau of the Census (1972) Census of Service Industries. Washington, DC: GPO.Google Scholar
U.S. Bureau of the Census (1977) Census of Service Industries. Washington, DC: GPO.Google Scholar
U.S. Bureau of the Census (1982) Census of Service Industries. Washington, DC: GPO.Google Scholar
U.S. Bureau of the Census (1987) Census of Service Industries. Washington, DC: GPO.Google Scholar
U.S. Bureau of the Census (1992) Census of Service Industries. Washington, DC: GPO.Google Scholar
Williams, Leewin B., ed. (1938) Master Book of Humorous Illustrations. New York: Abingdon-Cokesbury Press.Google Scholar