Precedent: corpus forms

Analysis of real fragments: package identifier, act name, the key fragment, form rating (exemplary / debatable / wrong-form choice) and why.

Declaration search: limited-output searches for factors, precedent, holding/overruled/ratio and bare precedent mentions across the act corpus (the last with noise — see “False positives”).

OverviewBoundariesCorpus formsPitfalls

Common law

1. OfferFactors vocabulary — the closed “advertisement as offer” line (exemplary, inspected)

Package us.caselaw.advertisement_offers — US advertisement-offer cases (United States):

Arxo Law

factors OfferFactors {
    ...
    for c: Communication, i: Item;
    domain advertisement(c), announces_item_on_stated_terms(c, i);
    plaintiff clear_definite_and_explicit, leaves_nothing_open_for_negotiation,
        identifies_who_may_accept, states_steps_to_accept,
        invites_performance_of_a_specified_act, deposit_shows_sincerity,
        words_of_limitation, promises_reward_for_performance;
    defendant reserves_details_to_separate_writing, item_absent_from_referenced_writing,
        seeks_reciprocal_promise, evidently_done_in_jest, mere_puff;
    courts MN_SUPREME; EWCA; SDNY;
}

Exemplary: a two-variable signature, the domain binds both; side is a vocabulary property; the three jurisdictions’ courts incomparable — not one > chain, so no generated priorities between holdings and the honest conflict stays possible (file comment). The mere_puff judgment factor is in the vocabulary, hence the JUDGMENT_PENDING status.

2. Lefkowitz — a π-side outcome with ratio and prefer over (exemplary, inspected)

Package us.caselaw.advertisement_offers — Lefkowitz decision (United States):

Arxo Law

precedent Lefkowitz of OfferFactors {
    ...
    court MN_SUPREME;
    decided @1957-12-20;
    plaintiff clear_definite_and_explicit, leaves_nothing_open_for_negotiation,
        identifies_who_may_accept, states_steps_to_accept, words_of_limitation;
    outcome offer_of(c, i);
    ratio clear_definite_and_explicit, leaves_nothing_open_for_negotiation;
    prefer over AdvertisementIsNotAnOffer;
}

Exemplary: decided mandatory; ratio is a subset of X_π (reason model); prefer over beats a named general defeasible rule of the statutory line.

3. Leonard — a mirrored δ-side holding without priority (exemplary, inspected)

Package us.caselaw.advertisement_offers — Leonard decision (United States) (file head — the factor-set analysis):

Arxo Law

precedent Leonard of OfferFactors {
    ...
    court SDNY;
    decided @1999-08-05;
    defendant reserves_details_to_separate_writing, item_absent_from_referenced_writing,
        ...
}

Exemplary: the δ-side holding mirrored (body — all of X_δ plus not_known for every vocabulary π-factor); agrees with the general rule — no priority needed; no priority against the Lefkowitz/Carlill holdings — courts incomparable, and three holdings binding one case would honestly conflict.

4. Carlill — third node of the same base (exemplary)

Package us.caselaw.advertisement_offers — Carlill decision (United States):

Arxo Law

precedent Carlill of OfferFactors {

Rated exemplary by membership in the same link (vocabulary, courts, the abstract promises_reward_for_performance factor with the strict AdvertisementInvitingPerformanceIsAPromiseOfReward rule in the factors file). The body was not taken apart in detail during the research.

KZ law

5. Bank-loan NP — a resolution as a precedent base (exemplary, inspected)

Package kz.corpus.np_bank_loan_disputes — Kazakh bank-loan dispute resolutions (Kazakhstan):

Arxo Law

factors VinaKreditoraFactors {
    label ru-KZ official "словарь факторов пункта 11: ...";
    for sp: Spor;
    domain spor_iz_dogovora_bankovskogo_zayma(sp);
    plaintiff kreditor_sodeystvoval_uvelicheniyu_ubytkov, kreditor_ne_prinyal_razumnyh_mer,
        iskusstvennoe_zatyagivanie_podachi_iska, dolzhnik_obratilsya_pismenno_k_kreditoru,
        dolzhnik_raskryl_prichiny_zadolzhennosti;
    defendant kreditor_obratilsya_svoevremenno, dolzhnik_ne_obrashchalsya_k_kreditoru;
    courts VS_RK;
}

Arxo Law

precedent VinaKreditoraUmenshaetDolyu of VinaKreditoraFactors {
    ...
    court VS_RK;
    decided @2016-11-25;
    plaintiff kreditor_sodeystvoval_uvelicheniyu_ubytkov, kreditor_ne_prinyal_razumnyh_mer;
    outcome dolya_otvetstvennosti_umenshena(sp);
    ratio kreditor_sodeystvoval_uvelicheniyu_ubytkov, kreditor_ne_prinyal_razumnyh_mer;
    prefer over DolyaOtvetstvennostiNeUmenshaetsya;
}

Exemplary: the same form link as in the US cases, in another legal family. The file holds four vocabularies in total (VinaKreditoraFactors, VinaDolzhnikaFactors, SnizhenieNeustoykiFactors, NesorazmernostZalogaFactors) and five precedents. One court (VS_RK), each ratio named with support from the item text (“the ground named by the item ITSELF”). A form feature: the opponent general rule DolzhnikNeOsvobozhdaetsya is defeasible with a not ... head, and the wire to the Civil Code head (debtor_liable_for_breach) reads in the base rule, not in the domain — otherwise the domain would narrow the test’s scope with the very conclusion the test disputes.

Search false positives (not profile forms)

• condition precedent / conditions precedent in source texts (quoted act texts about conditions precedent) — quotes from English-language acts, not profile declarations.
• precedent in comments — colloquial “by the model”, not a form.
• ratio: Decimal (a coefficient field in benefit and allocation packages) — a coefficient field, not a precedent ratio item.
• factors uniquely as in a mathematical formalization package and factors and outcomes in a medical source — plain English text.

What the corpus lacks

• overruled in declarations: a corpus search gave no hits — holding repeal is not registered in the corpus (covered by a conformance scenario).
• A standalone holding as a declaration: a holding is only a generated <P>/holding node, never handwritten (no hits in code).
• argue/court as declarations: absent everywhere — see boundaries.md.