See also:
Profile: David Godden (Old Dominion University)
  1. David M. Godden & Douglas Walton (2008). Defeasibility in Judicial Opinion: Logical or Procedural? Informal Logic 28 (1):6-19.
    While defeasibility in legal reasoning has been the subject of recent scholarship, it has yet to be studied in the context of judicial opinion. Yet, being subject to appeal, judicial decisions can default for a variety of reasons. Prakken (2001) argued that the defeasibility affecting reasoning involved in adversarial legal argumentation is best analysed as procedural rather than logical. In this paper we argue that the defeasibility of ratio decendi is similarly best explained and modeled in a procedural and dialectical (...)
    Direct download (14 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Douglas Walton & David M. Godden (2007). Redefining Knowledge in a Way Suitable for Argumentation Theory. In Christopher W. Tindale Hans V. Hansen (ed.), Dissensus and the Search for Common Ground. Ossa. 1--13.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. David M. Godden & Douglas Walton (2006). Argument From Expert Opinion as Legal Evidence: Critical Questions and Admissibility Criteria of Expert Testimony in the American Legal System. Ratio Juris 19 (3):261-286.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation