INTUITIVE FORMALISM IN CONTRACT

This Article starts with the proposition that most American contracting is consumer contracting, posits that consumer contracting has particular and even peculiar doctrinal features, and concludes that these features dominate the lay understanding of contract law. Contracts of adhesion constitute th...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:University of Pennsylvania law review 2015-06, Vol.163 (7), p.2109-2129
Main Author: Wilkinson-Ryan, Tess
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Analysis
CONSUMERS
Consumers' preferences
Contract law
CONTRACTS
Culture
Evaluation
EVIDENCE
Fairness
Intuition
JUDGMENTS
Laws, regulations and rules
Legal formalism
Legal realism
Reciprocity (Psychology)
Standardized terms of contract
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites
container_end_page 2129
container_issue 7
container_start_page 2109
container_title University of Pennsylvania law review
container_volume 163
creator Wilkinson-Ryan, Tess
description This Article starts with the proposition that most American contracting is consumer contracting, posits that consumer contracting has particular and even peculiar doctrinal features, and concludes that these features dominate the lay understanding of contract law. Contracts of adhesion constitute the bulk of consumer experience with contract law. It is not hard to see that someone discerning the nature of contract law from a sample composed almost entirely of boilerplate terms and conditions would come quickly to the conclusion that contract law is highly formal.
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_rmit_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_gale_infotracmisc_A430271535</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A430271535</galeid><informt_id>10.3316/agispt.20201113039612</informt_id><jstor_id>24752816</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>A430271535</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-g481t-43787b0a227d3f9d1c443bb3ced631e44ab53185144f8561ff41dc1c92c909f73</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqVjd9LwzAQx4soOKd_gjjw1UouSZvmcYzNFfYDZudrSNO0y9jamWQP_veWTdHhXuTgDu4-9_leBB3gFIdJRNhl0EGIQsg5YtfBjXNrhFAcAe8ED-ksW6ZZ-jbsjeaLaX-Svk576aw3mM-yRX-Q3QZXpdw4ffc1u8FyNMwG43Ayf0kH_UlY0QR8SAlLWI4kxqwgJS9AUUrynChdxAQ0pTKPCCQRUFomUQxlSaFQoDhWHPGSkW7wePTubPO-186LdbO3dRspgMUQY04o_6EqudHC1GXjrVRb45ToU4Iwg4hELRWeoSpdays3Ta1L065P-OczfFuF3hp19uHp10O-d6bWrm3OVCvvKrl37hSfHHG7NV7IyridFyvvd04U0stD4uHU2EoUjRGABCEQf6MYYQQABBEeA2514786p6VVq_-r7o-qtfONFTtrttJ-CExZhBOIySeqoazX</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1761629349</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>INTUITIVE FORMALISM IN CONTRACT</title><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Ultimate</source><source>JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection</source><creator>Wilkinson-Ryan, Tess</creator><creatorcontrib>Wilkinson-Ryan, Tess</creatorcontrib><description>This Article starts with the proposition that most American contracting is consumer contracting, posits that consumer contracting has particular and even peculiar doctrinal features, and concludes that these features dominate the lay understanding of contract law. Contracts of adhesion constitute the bulk of consumer experience with contract law. It is not hard to see that someone discerning the nature of contract law from a sample composed almost entirely of boilerplate terms and conditions would come quickly to the conclusion that contract law is highly formal.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0041-9907</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1942-8537</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Philadelphia: students of the University of Pennsylvania Law School</publisher><subject>Analysis ; CONSUMERS ; Consumers' preferences ; Contract law ; CONTRACTS ; Culture ; Evaluation ; EVIDENCE ; Fairness ; Intuition ; JUDGMENTS ; Laws, regulations and rules ; Legal formalism ; Legal realism ; Reciprocity (Psychology) ; Standardized terms of contract</subject><ispartof>University of Pennsylvania law review, 2015-06, Vol.163 (7), p.2109-2129</ispartof><rights>2015 University of Pennsylvania Law Review</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2015 University of Pennsylvania, Law School</rights><rights>Copyright University of Pennsylvania Law School Jun 2015</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/24752816$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/24752816$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,58236,58469</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Wilkinson-Ryan, Tess</creatorcontrib><title>INTUITIVE FORMALISM IN CONTRACT</title><title>University of Pennsylvania law review</title><description>This Article starts with the proposition that most American contracting is consumer contracting, posits that consumer contracting has particular and even peculiar doctrinal features, and concludes that these features dominate the lay understanding of contract law. Contracts of adhesion constitute the bulk of consumer experience with contract law. It is not hard to see that someone discerning the nature of contract law from a sample composed almost entirely of boilerplate terms and conditions would come quickly to the conclusion that contract law is highly formal.</description><subject>Analysis</subject><subject>CONSUMERS</subject><subject>Consumers' preferences</subject><subject>Contract law</subject><subject>CONTRACTS</subject><subject>Culture</subject><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>EVIDENCE</subject><subject>Fairness</subject><subject>Intuition</subject><subject>JUDGMENTS</subject><subject>Laws, regulations and rules</subject><subject>Legal formalism</subject><subject>Legal realism</subject><subject>Reciprocity (Psychology)</subject><subject>Standardized terms of contract</subject><issn>0041-9907</issn><issn>1942-8537</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqVjd9LwzAQx4soOKd_gjjw1UouSZvmcYzNFfYDZudrSNO0y9jamWQP_veWTdHhXuTgDu4-9_leBB3gFIdJRNhl0EGIQsg5YtfBjXNrhFAcAe8ED-ksW6ZZ-jbsjeaLaX-Svk576aw3mM-yRX-Q3QZXpdw4ffc1u8FyNMwG43Ayf0kH_UlY0QR8SAlLWI4kxqwgJS9AUUrynChdxAQ0pTKPCCQRUFomUQxlSaFQoDhWHPGSkW7wePTubPO-186LdbO3dRspgMUQY04o_6EqudHC1GXjrVRb45ToU4Iwg4hELRWeoSpdays3Ta1L065P-OczfFuF3hp19uHp10O-d6bWrm3OVCvvKrl37hSfHHG7NV7IyridFyvvd04U0stD4uHU2EoUjRGABCEQf6MYYQQABBEeA2514786p6VVq_-r7o-qtfONFTtrttJ-CExZhBOIySeqoazX</recordid><startdate>20150601</startdate><enddate>20150601</enddate><creator>Wilkinson-Ryan, Tess</creator><general>students of the University of Pennsylvania Law School</general><general>University of Pennsylvania, Law School</general><general>University of Pennsylvania Law School</general><scope>N95</scope><scope>XI7</scope><scope>ILT</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20150601</creationdate><title>INTUITIVE FORMALISM IN CONTRACT</title><author>Wilkinson-Ryan, Tess</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-g481t-43787b0a227d3f9d1c443bb3ced631e44ab53185144f8561ff41dc1c92c909f73</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Analysis</topic><topic>CONSUMERS</topic><topic>Consumers' preferences</topic><topic>Contract law</topic><topic>CONTRACTS</topic><topic>Culture</topic><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>EVIDENCE</topic><topic>Fairness</topic><topic>Intuition</topic><topic>JUDGMENTS</topic><topic>Laws, regulations and rules</topic><topic>Legal formalism</topic><topic>Legal realism</topic><topic>Reciprocity (Psychology)</topic><topic>Standardized terms of contract</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Wilkinson-Ryan, Tess</creatorcontrib><collection>Gale Business: Insights</collection><collection>Business Insights: Essentials</collection><collection>LegalTrac</collection><jtitle>University of Pennsylvania law review</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Wilkinson-Ryan, Tess</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>INTUITIVE FORMALISM IN CONTRACT</atitle><jtitle>University of Pennsylvania law review</jtitle><date>2015-06-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>163</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>2109</spage><epage>2129</epage><pages>2109-2129</pages><issn>0041-9907</issn><eissn>1942-8537</eissn><abstract>This Article starts with the proposition that most American contracting is consumer contracting, posits that consumer contracting has particular and even peculiar doctrinal features, and concludes that these features dominate the lay understanding of contract law. Contracts of adhesion constitute the bulk of consumer experience with contract law. It is not hard to see that someone discerning the nature of contract law from a sample composed almost entirely of boilerplate terms and conditions would come quickly to the conclusion that contract law is highly formal.</abstract><cop>Philadelphia</cop><pub>students of the University of Pennsylvania Law School</pub><tpages>21</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0041-9907
ispartof University of Pennsylvania law review, 2015-06, Vol.163 (7), p.2109-2129
issn 0041-9907
1942-8537
language eng
recordid cdi_gale_infotracmisc_A430271535
source EBSCOhost Business Source Ultimate; JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection
subjects Analysis
CONSUMERS
Consumers' preferences
Contract law
CONTRACTS
Culture
Evaluation
EVIDENCE
Fairness
Intuition
JUDGMENTS
Laws, regulations and rules
Legal formalism
Legal realism
Reciprocity (Psychology)
Standardized terms of contract
title INTUITIVE FORMALISM IN CONTRACT
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-14T00%3A55%3A31IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_rmit_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=INTUITIVE%20FORMALISM%20IN%20CONTRACT&rft.jtitle=University%20of%20Pennsylvania%20law%20review&rft.au=Wilkinson-Ryan,%20Tess&rft.date=2015-06-01&rft.volume=163&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=2109&rft.epage=2129&rft.pages=2109-2129&rft.issn=0041-9907&rft.eissn=1942-8537&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cgale_rmit_%3EA430271535%3C/gale_rmit_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-g481t-43787b0a227d3f9d1c443bb3ced631e44ab53185144f8561ff41dc1c92c909f73%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1761629349&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A430271535&rft_informt_id=10.3316/agispt.20201113039612&rft_jstor_id=24752816&rfr_iscdi=true