Skip to main content
Precedent and Reliance
Journal Articles
  • Randy J. Kozel, Notre Dame Law School
Document Type
Publication Date
Publication Information
62 Emory L.J. 1459 (2013)

Among the most prevalent justifications for deference to judicial precedent is the protection of reliance interests. The theory is that when judicial pronouncements have engendered significant reliance, there should be a meaningful presumption against adjudicative change. Yet there remains a fundamental question as to why reliance on precedent warrants judicial protection in the first place.

This Article explores the dynamics and implications of precedential reliance. It contends that the case for protecting reliance on precedent is uncertain. There are several reasons why reliance might potentially be worth protecting, but all are subject to serious limitations or challenges. To bolster the doctrine of stare decisis while the status of precedential reliance continues to be worked out, the Article suggests a conceptual move away from backwardlooking reliance and toward the forward-looking interest in managing the disruptive impacts of adjudicative change for society at large.


Reprinted with permission of Emory Law Journal.

Citation Information
Randy J. Kozel. "Precedent and Reliance" (2013)
Available at: