张泽涛.美国“法院之友”制度研究 .中国法学,2004,(1):174. See Jared B. Cawley,Friend of the Court: How the WTO Justifies the Acceptance of the Amicus Curiae Brief from Non-Governmental Organizations,Penn State International Law Review, Vol,23,p.47, 2004. 美国联邦最高法院于1939年首次颁布了“法庭之友”书状的提交规则,并先后进行了3次修订. See Jared B. Cawley,Friend of the Court: How the WTO Justifies the Acceptance of the Amicus Curiae Brief from Nongovernmental Organizations,Penn State International Law Review,Vol,23, p.47, 2004. 陈立虎.法庭之友陈述在WTO争端解决机制中的可接受性.中国民商法律网:http://www.civillaw.com.cn/weizhang/?id=19218. 张泽淘,陈斌.法学家论证意见书及其规范——美国“法庭之友”制度的启示.法商研究,2004,(4):132,127-134. See Brief of Professor Lawrence Lessig as Amicus Curiae,http://cyber.law.harward.edu/works/lessig/ab.pdf. Brief of Professor Lee A Hollaar as Amicus Curiae in Support of Neither Side,http://digital-law-online.info/papers/lah/ms-amicus.pdf. 张小燕,齐树洁.程序输入的新渠道 .厦门大学法律评论(总第十一辑),2006,58. 在该案中,美国民权联盟(ACLU)作为“法庭之友”在其提交的书状中指出,第四修正案保护公民不受非正当的搜查和没收的权利,而且该修正案也应适用于州法院。在该案被告律师提交的辩护状没有提及该意见的前提下,法官仍然采纳了“法庭之友”的意见,做出了有利于被告的判决. Philip B.Kurland & Dennis J.Hutchinson,With Friends Like These…,American Bar Association Journal,August,1984. See Ryan v.Commodity Futures Trading Comm’n,125 F.3d 1062,1063(7th Cir.1997). See Kelly J.Lynch,Best Friends:Supreme Court Law Clerks on Effective Amicus Curiae Briefs,Journal of Law & Politics,Vol,20,p.33,2004.
|