Case law in the United States

The legal system of the United States was formed under the laws of the Anglo-Saxon legal family, so the main source of law it is considered a legal precedent. A precedent called the court's decision in a particular case shall become effective source of law, that is, get the opportunity to establish, amend or abolish the rule of law. US case law suggests the existence of a hierarchy of precedents on which decisions taken by the higher courts are binding in cases in the lower courts.

US case law is in constant motion, it is created and is directly determined by the judges decision-makers on various matters. Adopted a decision in a particular case in the future become applicable to other cases of a similar nature. It often happens that the judges are faced with the lack of clear definitions in the law. In such cases, the US legal system gives them powers and even obliges the self to determine the legal rules setting a precedent. The total weight of common law precedents referred to, determinant judgments in certain categories of cases. In the future, when considering the different situation in case of disagreement, the parties to the terms of the law, the judge hearing the case in accordance with the provisions of the preceding precedent on a similar process. If a similar dispute has previously been considered in court, and it was a final decision, the judges are obliged to follow the arguments used in previous solutions. The court may determine that the essence of the case is different from what it was in previous processes. Then the solution in this case will be taken in consideration for the first time. The decision will also be considered as a precedent.

Anglo-Saxon common law differs significantly from the legal system of the Roman-German type, which is used, in particular, the countries of continental Europe and Russia. The concept of the Roman-Germanic legal family court precedent attached much less importance than the written law. For example, the Napoleonic Code directly prohibits judges to engage in the creation of legal precedents.