My 1998 thesis and my 1999 book, DiaLaw - on legal justification and dialogical models of argumentation, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, Law and Philosophy Library, Volume 42 (my revised dissertation) reflects the research on the dialog game for legal justification DiaLaw.
In DiaLaw it is argued that legal justification can best be studied from a procedural, dialogical point of view: legal statements are justified, if the audience is convinced in an argumentative dialog. The formalized and implemented model DiaLaw guards the procedure in which two players aim at justifying statements.
DiaLaw shows the advances and problems linked to procedural models of legal justification. Moreover, an instructive discussion of the different models of procedural justification is provided.
It is stressed that in legal justification not only logically compelling arguments should be considered, but also convincing arguments. Therefore, DiaLaw also deals with the rhetorical, psychological aspects of argument.
This book is relevant for scholars in legal theory, artificial intelligence, and argumentation, and can be used in graduate courses on AI & Law, and legal argumentation.
References and abstracts of some of my papers can be found here.