Search

Your search keyword '"PROVENZANO, SUSAN E."' showing total 31 results
Start Over Author "PROVENZANO, SUSAN E."
31 results on '"PROVENZANO, SUSAN E."'

1. Cover

Author

Webb, Laura A., Sciullo, Nick J., Provenzano, Susan E., Meyer, Craig A., Langford, Catherine L., Hannah, Mark A., Garver, Eugene, Gagarin, Michael, Frank, David A., Britt, Elizabeth C., Adamidis, Vasileios, Tiscione, Kristen K., Larson, Brian N., Davis, Kirsten K., and Mootz, Francis J.

Published
2024

2. Half Title Page, Editorial Advisory Board, Title Page, Copyright, Dedication

Author

Webb, Laura A., Sciullo, Nick J., Provenzano, Susan E., Meyer, Craig A., Langford, Catherine L., Hannah, Mark A., Garver, Eugene, Gagarin, Michael, Frank, David A., Britt, Elizabeth C., Adamidis, Vasileios, Tiscione, Kristen K., Larson, Brian N., Davis, Kirsten K., and Mootz, Francis J.

Published
2024

3. Notes

Author

Webb, Laura A., Sciullo, Nick J., Provenzano, Susan E., Meyer, Craig A., Langford, Catherine L., Hannah, Mark A., Garver, Eugene, Gagarin, Michael, Frank, David A., Britt, Elizabeth C., Adamidis, Vasileios, Tiscione, Kristen K., Larson, Brian N., Davis, Kirsten K., and Mootz, Francis J.

Published
2024

4. Names and Subjects Index

Author

Webb, Laura A., Sciullo, Nick J., Provenzano, Susan E., Meyer, Craig A., Langford, Catherine L., Hannah, Mark A., Garver, Eugene, Gagarin, Michael, Frank, David A., Britt, Elizabeth C., Adamidis, Vasileios, Tiscione, Kristen K., Larson, Brian N., Davis, Kirsten K., and Mootz, Francis J.

Published
2024

5. 13. Quintilian: The Lawyer, Speaking—The Lawyer as Perfect Orator

Author

Webb, Laura A., Sciullo, Nick J., Provenzano, Susan E., Meyer, Craig A., Langford, Catherine L., Hannah, Mark A., Garver, Eugene, Gagarin, Michael, Frank, David A., Britt, Elizabeth C., Adamidis, Vasileios, Tiscione, Kristen K., Larson, Brian N., Davis, Kirsten K., and Mootz, Francis J.

Published
2024

6. Bibliography

Author

Webb, Laura A., Sciullo, Nick J., Provenzano, Susan E., Meyer, Craig A., Langford, Catherine L., Hannah, Mark A., Garver, Eugene, Gagarin, Michael, Frank, David A., Britt, Elizabeth C., Adamidis, Vasileios, Tiscione, Kristen K., Larson, Brian N., Davis, Kirsten K., and Mootz, Francis J.

Published
2024

7. Legal Materials Index

Author

Webb, Laura A., Sciullo, Nick J., Provenzano, Susan E., Meyer, Craig A., Langford, Catherine L., Hannah, Mark A., Garver, Eugene, Gagarin, Michael, Frank, David A., Britt, Elizabeth C., Adamidis, Vasileios, Tiscione, Kristen K., Larson, Brian N., Davis, Kirsten K., and Mootz, Francis J.

Published
2024

9. Afterword

Author

Webb, Laura A., Sciullo, Nick J., Provenzano, Susan E., Meyer, Craig A., Langford, Catherine L., Hannah, Mark A., Garver, Eugene, Gagarin, Michael, Frank, David A., Britt, Elizabeth C., Adamidis, Vasileios, Tiscione, Kristen K., Larson, Brian N., Davis, Kirsten K., and Mootz, Francis J.

Published
2024

10. 10. Aristotle: Aristotle's Topics and U.S. v. Lopez

Author

Webb, Laura A., Sciullo, Nick J., Provenzano, Susan E., Meyer, Craig A., Langford, Catherine L., Hannah, Mark A., Garver, Eugene, Gagarin, Michael, Frank, David A., Britt, Elizabeth C., Adamidis, Vasileios, Tiscione, Kristen K., Larson, Brian N., Davis, Kirsten K., and Mootz, Francis J.

Published
2024

11. 14. Saint Augustine: The Place of Rhetoric in the Law and Religion Interface

Author

Webb, Laura A., Sciullo, Nick J., Provenzano, Susan E., Meyer, Craig A., Langford, Catherine L., Hannah, Mark A., Garver, Eugene, Gagarin, Michael, Frank, David A., Britt, Elizabeth C., Adamidis, Vasileios, Tiscione, Kristen K., Larson, Brian N., Davis, Kirsten K., and Mootz, Francis J.

Published
2024

12. 9. Aristotle: Persuasion and Practical Reason

Author

Webb, Laura A., Sciullo, Nick J., Provenzano, Susan E., Meyer, Craig A., Langford, Catherine L., Hannah, Mark A., Garver, Eugene, Gagarin, Michael, Frank, David A., Britt, Elizabeth C., Adamidis, Vasileios, Tiscione, Kristen K., Larson, Brian N., Davis, Kirsten K., and Mootz, Francis J.

Published
2024

13. 5. Antiphon the Athenian: Probability Arguments in Ancient Greece and Today

Author

Webb, Laura A., Sciullo, Nick J., Provenzano, Susan E., Meyer, Craig A., Langford, Catherine L., Hannah, Mark A., Garver, Eugene, Gagarin, Michael, Frank, David A., Britt, Elizabeth C., Adamidis, Vasileios, Tiscione, Kristen K., Larson, Brian N., Davis, Kirsten K., and Mootz, Francis J.

Published
2024

14. 7. Isocrates: Fear of the Other in Classical and Modern Times

Author

Webb, Laura A., Sciullo, Nick J., Provenzano, Susan E., Meyer, Craig A., Langford, Catherine L., Hannah, Mark A., Garver, Eugene, Gagarin, Michael, Frank, David A., Britt, Elizabeth C., Adamidis, Vasileios, Tiscione, Kristen K., Larson, Brian N., Davis, Kirsten K., and Mootz, Francis J.

Published
2024

15. 8. Plato: Legal Argument as the Distortion of Reality

Author

Webb, Laura A., Sciullo, Nick J., Provenzano, Susan E., Meyer, Craig A., Langford, Catherine L., Hannah, Mark A., Garver, Eugene, Gagarin, Michael, Frank, David A., Britt, Elizabeth C., Adamidis, Vasileios, Tiscione, Kristen K., Larson, Brian N., Davis, Kirsten K., and Mootz, Francis J.

Published
2024

16. 12. Cicero: Legal Stases and the Supreme Court

Author

Webb, Laura A., Sciullo, Nick J., Provenzano, Susan E., Meyer, Craig A., Langford, Catherine L., Hannah, Mark A., Garver, Eugene, Gagarin, Michael, Frank, David A., Britt, Elizabeth C., Adamidis, Vasileios, Tiscione, Kristen K., Larson, Brian N., Davis, Kirsten K., and Mootz, Francis J.

Published
2024

17. III. Studies in Classical Rhetoric and Contemporary Law

Author

Webb, Laura A., Sciullo, Nick J., Provenzano, Susan E., Meyer, Craig A., Langford, Catherine L., Hannah, Mark A., Garver, Eugene, Gagarin, Michael, Frank, David A., Britt, Elizabeth C., Adamidis, Vasileios, Tiscione, Kristen K., Larson, Brian N., Davis, Kirsten K., and Mootz, Francis J.

Published
2024

18. 6. Dissoi Logoi: Speaking on Both Sides of a Question

Author

Webb, Laura A., Sciullo, Nick J., Provenzano, Susan E., Meyer, Craig A., Langford, Catherine L., Hannah, Mark A., Garver, Eugene, Gagarin, Michael, Frank, David A., Britt, Elizabeth C., Adamidis, Vasileios, Tiscione, Kristen K., Larson, Brian N., Davis, Kirsten K., and Mootz, Francis J.

Published
2024

19. 2. Classical Rhetoric: Then and Now

Author

Webb, Laura A., Sciullo, Nick J., Provenzano, Susan E., Meyer, Craig A., Langford, Catherine L., Hannah, Mark A., Garver, Eugene, Gagarin, Michael, Frank, David A., Britt, Elizabeth C., Adamidis, Vasileios, Tiscione, Kristen K., Larson, Brian N., Davis, Kirsten K., and Mootz, Francis J.

Published
2024

20. II. Back to the Future: The Eclipse and Revival of Rhetoric

Author

Webb, Laura A., Sciullo, Nick J., Provenzano, Susan E., Meyer, Craig A., Langford, Catherine L., Hannah, Mark A., Garver, Eugene, Gagarin, Michael, Frank, David A., Britt, Elizabeth C., Adamidis, Vasileios, Tiscione, Kristen K., Larson, Brian N., Davis, Kirsten K., and Mootz, Francis J.

Published
2024

21. 4. Chaïm Perelman and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca: Answering Vico's Lament

Author

Webb, Laura A., Sciullo, Nick J., Provenzano, Susan E., Meyer, Craig A., Langford, Catherine L., Hannah, Mark A., Garver, Eugene, Gagarin, Michael, Frank, David A., Britt, Elizabeth C., Adamidis, Vasileios, Tiscione, Kristen K., Larson, Brian N., Davis, Kirsten K., and Mootz, Francis J.

Published
2024

22. 3. Giambattista Vico: Lamenting the Decline of Classical Rhetoric

Author

Webb, Laura A., Sciullo, Nick J., Provenzano, Susan E., Meyer, Craig A., Langford, Catherine L., Hannah, Mark A., Garver, Eugene, Gagarin, Michael, Frank, David A., Britt, Elizabeth C., Adamidis, Vasileios, Tiscione, Kristen K., Larson, Brian N., Davis, Kirsten K., and Mootz, Francis J.

Published
2024

23. 1. Contemporary Law through the Classical Lens

Author

Webb, Laura A., Sciullo, Nick J., Provenzano, Susan E., Meyer, Craig A., Langford, Catherine L., Hannah, Mark A., Garver, Eugene, Gagarin, Michael, Frank, David A., Britt, Elizabeth C., Adamidis, Vasileios, Tiscione, Kristen K., Larson, Brian N., Davis, Kirsten K., and Mootz, Francis J.

Published
2024

24. I. Introductions

Author

Webb, Laura A., Sciullo, Nick J., Provenzano, Susan E., Meyer, Craig A., Langford, Catherine L., Hannah, Mark A., Garver, Eugene, Gagarin, Michael, Frank, David A., Britt, Elizabeth C., Adamidis, Vasileios, Tiscione, Kristen K., Larson, Brian N., Davis, Kirsten K., and Mootz, Francis J.

Published
2024

26. Worker Classification Conundrums in the Gig Economy.

Author

Provenzano, Susan E.

Subjects
*GIG economy, *EMPLOYEE loyalty, *CIVIL rights of people with disabilities, *EMPLOYEE Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, *BUSINESS enterprises, *CAREER development, CIVIL Rights Act of 1964. Title VII
Published
2023

28. HOW RHETORIC REVEALS JUDICIAL MOTIVES IN EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION CASES.

Author

PROVENZANO, SUSAN E.

Subjects
EMPLOYMENT discrimination lawsuits, DISCRIMINATION lawsuits, LAW & language, JUDICIAL opinions, SUMMARY judgments, LEGISLATORS
Abstract

Employment discrimination plaintiffs tend to lose on summary judgment. In these cases, judges are acting like juries and undermining anti-discrimination legislation while paying lip service to the law and the judicial role. How and why are courts doing this? Legal scholars blame bad doctrine and biased judging. But neither one tells the full story. The tell is in the opinions' strategic use of language, which shows how the court, as an institution, "sized up" the case and the motives of key actors the parties, the lawmakers, other courts, and the court itself. Conducting the first-ever rhetorical analysis of this problem, this Article reveals how these rhetorical innerworkings of judicial opinions can drive summary judgment in discrimination cases, forging pro-defendant and non-discrimination assumptions into law. To illustrate, this Article conducts a rhetorical case study showing how a notorious en banc opinion maneuvered within doctrinal spaces, presented rhetorical choices as commands of law, and concocted a version of motives that closed out any possibility of discrimination. The opinion also laundered its own judicial action, using error-correctinga nd procedure-protectingr hetoric as a cover for an implicit assumption that employers do not discriminate. Viewing the rush to summary judgment through this new theoretical and interdisciplinary lens, the case study provides a deeper understanding of the problem and suggests defensive litigation strategies. By understanding how opinion language strategically constructs motives, advocates can devise counternarratives, making it harder for courts to fill in the blanks with pro-employer rhetorical choices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2022

29. Can Speech Act Theory Save Notice Pleading?

Author

PROVENZANO, SUSAN E.

Subjects
*PLAUSIBILITY (Logic), *SPEECH act theory (Communication), *COMMUNICATION methodology, *CIVIL procedure, *PLAINTIFFS
Abstract

Countless scholars have debated--and lower courts have attempted to apply--the plausibility pleading regime that the Supreme Court introduced in Twombly and Iqbal. Iqbal took Twombly's requirement that a complaint plead plausibly and turned it into a two-step test. Under that test, the life or death of a lawsuit rests on the distinction between "well-pleaded" and "conclusory" allegations. Only the former are assumed true on a motion to dismiss. Seven decades of pleading precedent had taken a sensible, if unstable, approach to the truth assumption, making a single cut between factual contentions (assumed true) and legal conclusions (ignored). But Iqbal redrew those lines. It treats as legal conclusions an entire subset of factual allegations and does so whenever, in the Court's view, those facts are presented too generally or too rhetorically. To date, the contours of "conclusory" have not been pinned down by legal-theoretic approaches, while lower court reactions range from conflicting to confused to avoidant. It is clearer than ever that Iqbal left an analytical void in the wake of its novel pleading inquiry--a void that must be filled in a stable way while recognizing the FRCP's normative commitments. That way is through speech act theory. Speech act theory is a philosophy of language that employs a descriptive methodology for understanding what speakers mean with their words. A speech act-theoretic approach targets Iqbal's central flaws--failing to treat pleading as an act of communication and ignoring how the pleader intends her allegations to function in the pleading conversation. Indeed, Iqbal makes the judge's omniscient view of meaning the decisive factor. Furthermore, Iqbal conflates two types of speech acts whose difference was vital pre-Iqbal: allegations meant to report, which merit the truth assumption, and allegations meant to accuse, which do not. Speech act theory shores up pre-Iqbal instability and offers a consistent analytical approach for granting allegations the assumption of truth based on communicative meaning. Using speech act theory to set the parameters of "conclusory" also opens the doors of discovery to complaints that do their job as the FRCP intended: providing functional fair notice of the nature of the plaintiff's claims and the grounds on which they rest. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2021

31. CIVIL PROCEDURE AS A CRITICAL DISCUSSION.

Author

Provenzano, Susan E. and Larson, Brian N.

Subjects
CIVIL procedure, DEBATE, PROOF of concept, INTERPERSONAL confrontation, URBAN policy, ARGUMENT, ARBITRATORS
Abstract

This Article develops a model for analyzing legal dispute resolution systems as systems for argumentation. Our model meshes two theories of argument conceived centuries apart: contemporary argumentation theory and classical stasis theory. In this Article, we apply the model to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as a proof of concept. Specifically, the model analyzes how the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure function as a staged argumentative critical discussion designed to permit judge and jury to rationally resolve litigants' differences in a reasonable manner. At a high level, this critical discussion has three phases: a confrontation, an (extended) opening, and a concluding phase. Those phases are the umbrella under which discrete argumentation phases occur at points we call stases. Whenever litigants seek a ruling or judgment, they reach a stasis--a stopping or standing point for arguing procedural points of disagreement. During these stases, the parties make arguments that fall into predictable "commonplace" argument types. Taken together, these stock argument types form a taxonomy of arguments for all civil cases. Our claim that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure function as a system for argumentation is novel, as is our claim that civil cases breed a taxonomy of argument types. These claims also mark the beginning of a broader project. Starting here with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, we embark on a journey that we expect to follow for several years (and which we hope other scholars will join), exploring our model's application across dispute reso- lution systems and using it to make normative claims about those systems. From a birds-eye view, this Article also represents a short modern trek in a much longer journey begun by advocates in city states in and near Greece nearly 2500 years ago. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2020

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results