litigated similar claims and lost. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed. See Johnson v. Bredesen, 356 Fed.Appx. 781, 785 (6th Cir.2009). IV. Stare decisis is, of course, among the most important principles of law. It has been described as “a fundamental jurisprudential policy that prior applicable precedent usually must be followed even though the case, if considered anew, might be decided differently by the current justices. This policy ... is based upon the assumption that certainty, predictability and stability in the law are the major objectives of the legal system.” Moradi-Shalal v. Fireman’s Fund Ins. Cos., 46 Cal.3d 287, 296, 250 Cal.Rptr. 116, 758 P.2d 58 (1988) (internal quotations marks omitted); see also In re Estate of McFarland, 167 S.W.3d 299, 306 (Tenn.2005) (<HOLDING>). Observing that the Latin phrase translated
recognizing a corporations legal rights to confidentiality and privilege holding that individuals have no expectation of privacy in their license registration or insurance documents and citing outofstate cases that have held that individuals do not have a privacy interest in their registration records recognizing legal services organizations first amendment right of associating to advocate legal rights recognizing that stability in the law permits individuals to safely judge their legal rights holding that private individuals who conspired with judge could be sued even though judge could not