The King himself should be under no man, but under God and the Law.
Edward CokeRead
The agreement of the parties cannot make that good which the law maketh void.
Interpretation
Laws cannot be overridden by personal agreements if those agreements contradict legal rules.
Edward Coke's quote emphasizes the supremacy of law over personal agreements. It suggests that no matter how much two parties might agree on certain terms, if those terms are in violation of existing law, they hold no legal standing. This highlights the importance of respecting legal frameworks and the limitations they impose on private arrangements.
In practice
Citing this quote in a legal seminar to emphasize contractual obligations.
The King himself should be under no man, but under God and the Law.
For a man's house is his castle, et domus sua cuique tutissimum refugium [and one's home is the safest refuge to everyone].
There be three kinds of unhappie men. 1. Qui scit & non docet, Hee that hath knowledge and teacheth not. 2. Qui docet & non vivit, He that teacheth, and liveth not thereafter. 3. Qui nescit, & non interrogat, He that knoweth not, and doth not enquire to understand.
No man can be a compleat Lawyer by universalitie of knowledge without experience in particular cases, nor by bare experience without universalitie of knowledge; he must be both speculative & active, for the science of the laws, I assure you, must joyne hands with experience.
It is the worst oppression, that is done by colour of justice
So as grave and learned men may doubt, without any imputation to them; for the most learned doubteth most, and the more ignorant for the most part are the more bold and peremptory.
Lawsuits are rare and catastrophic experiences for the vast majority of men, and even when the catastrophe ensues, the controversy relates most often not to the law, but to the facts. In countless litigations, the law Is so clear that judges have no discretion.
The constitution controls any legislative act repugnant to it.
To force a lawyer on a defendant can only lead him to believe that the law contrives against him.
The critical point is that the Constitution places the right of silence beyond the reach of government.
The constitution is either a superior paramount law, unchangeable by ordinary means, or it is on a level with ordinary legislative acts, alterable when the legislature shall please to alter it. It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is. This is the very essence of judicial duty.
On the whole, we think of our consumers - other judges, lawyers, the public. The law that the Supreme Court establishes is the law that they must live by, so all things considered, it's better to have it clearer than confusing.
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.