York Law Research Articles

Rethinking Personal Jurisdiction and Choice of Law in Multistate Mass Torts

decision in In re DES Cases-involving New York's national market share approach to recovery for DES-related injuries-and explores the wider implications this decision holds for the law of judicial jurisdiction and its relation to choice-of-law doctrine. DES Cases presented a situation in which the effectuation of a state's constitutionally valid substantive law was jeopardized by the anomalous requirement, parsimoniously construed by the Supreme Court in its stream of commerce product liability cases, of a defendantforum territorial nexus as a sine qua non for the exercise of judicialjurisdiction. In practical terms, this requirement would have precluded proper application of New York law to the claims of New Yorkers injured in New York by denying New York courts personal jurisdiction over any out-of-state defendant who, notwithstanding its participation in the national marketing of DES, did not specifically target the New York market. Judge Weinstein avoided this outcome by fashioning a revolutionary new standard for judicial jurisdiction in DES and perhaps other mass tort cases that focuses on the forum state's interest in vindication of its law, rather than its territorial contacts with the defendant alone. Professor Korn's Essay argues for the soundness of this approach and explores the possible benefits of its broaderbased application to all multistate litigation.

Laura Kalman. The Strange Career of Legal Liberalism. New Haven: Yale University Press. 1996. Pp. viii, 375

Laura Kalman. The Strange Career of Legal Liberalism. New Haven: Yale University Press. 1996. Pp. viii, 375 Get access Kalman Laura. The Strange Career of Legal Liberalism. New Haven: Yale University Press. 1996. Pp. viii, 375. Edward A. Purcell, Jr. Edward A. Purcell, Jr. New York Law School Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The American Historical Review, Volume 102, Issue 4, October 1997, Pages 1264–1265, https://doi.org/10.1086/ahr/102.4.1264 Published: 01 October 1997

Explicit and Authentic Acts: Amending the U.S. Constitution, 1776-1995.

Journal Article Explicit and Authentic Acts: Amending the U.S. Constitution, 1776–1993. By David E. Kyvig. (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1996. xx, 604pp. $55.00, ISBN0-7006-0792-7.) Get access R. B. Bernstein R. B. Bernstein New York Law School, New York, New York Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar Journal of American History, Volume 84, Issue 1, June 1997, Pages 215–216, https://doi.org/10.2307/2952773 Published: 01 June 1997

Patterns of American Jurisprudence

Journal Article Patterns of American Jurisprudence Get access Duxbury Neil, Patterns of American Jurisprudence. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995. viii, 520 pp. $49.95. William P. LaPiana William P. LaPiana The New York Law School Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar American Journal of Legal History, Volume 41, Issue 1, January 1997, Pages 127–128, https://doi.org/10.2307/845474 Published: 01 January 1997

Directorial Fiduciary Duties in a Tracking Stock Equity Structure: The Need for a Duty of Fairness

* Associate Professor of Law, New York Law School. J.D. 1988, University of Pennsylvania. Ed. I would like to thank William Bratton and Lawrence Cunningham for their valuable suggestions on an earlier draft of this article, Stephen Gillers, Harvey Goldschmid, and Allan Vestal for their advice and encouragement, and Richard Kendall of Global Financial Press for his friendship and generosity. Special thanks go out to Laura Pentimone and D. Michael Roberts for their editorial assistance. Finally, no words can express my appreciation for my life partner, Anita Hass, whose unwavering support of my efforts means the world to me. 1. Stephanie Strom, It's Called Targeted Stock: Shun It, Some Experts Say, N.Y. TIMES, July 12, 1994, at D1. 2. See GENERAL MOTORS CORP., PROXY STATEMENT/PROSPECTUS (Sept. 21, 1984) [hereinafter GM-EDS PROXY STATEMENT] (used in connection with GM's acquisition of Electronic Data Systems Corp., which GM recently split-off (see infra note 41)); GENERAL MOTORS CORP., SOLICITATION STATEMENT (Nov. 13, 1985) [hereinafter GMHUGHES SOLICITATION STATEMENT] (used in connection with GM's acquisition of Hughes Aircraft Co.); TELE-COMMUNICATIONS, INC., PROXY STATEMENT AND PROSPECTUS (June 29, 1995) [hereinafter TCI PROXY STATEMENT]; U S WEST, INC., PROXY STATEMENT AND PROSPECTUS (Sept. 5, 1995) [hereinafter U S WEST PROXY STATEMENT]; USX CORP., PROXY STATEMENT AND PROSPECTUS (Apr. 10, 1991) [hereinafter USX-MARATHON PROXY STATEMENT]; USX CORP., PROXY STATEMENT (Apr. 13, 1992) [hereinafter USX-DELHI PROXY STATEMENT]; see also GENZYME CORP., PROSPECTUS AND JOINT PROXY STATEMENT (Nov. 10, 1994) [hereinafter GENZYME PROXY STATEMENT]; SEAGULL ENERGY CORP., PROXY STATEMENT (May 2, 1994) [hereinafter SEAGULL PROXY STATEMENT]. In addition to those companies discussed above, Ralston Purina Co. also adopted a tracking stock equity structure. See RALSTON PURINA CO., PROXY STATEMENT AND PROSPEcTUS (June 9, 1993) [hereinafter RALSTON PROXY STATEMENT]. However, Ralston Purina unwound its tracking stock equity structure in May 1995 by exchanging outstanding shares of Ralston-Continental Baking Group Common Stock for shares of Ralston-Ralston Purina Group Common Stock in anticipation of the sale of its Conti-

Moral consensus in public ethics: patient autonomy and family decision-making in the work of one state bioethics commission.

Focusing on the work of one bioethics commission, the New York State Task Force on Life and the Law, this article explores the role played by moral consensus in public ethics. Task Force members, who were appointed to represent diverse interests in New York State, identified a culturally strong value of individual autonomy as the ethical basis for their work on life-sustaining treatment. This moral consensus permitted the members to unite across their differences and develop public policy recommendations that substantially reformed a highly troubling New York law. However, the principle of autonomy insufficiently guides decisions by caring family members for incompetent adults in cases where little is known of patient preference. A different, more innovative moral vision is required--one that grants a more robust moral authority to the family. While government efforts that rely on moral consensus developed in a broad-based and well-reasoned manner can serve us well, in some cases the consensus will provide inadequate moral guidance. Government bioethical efforts must guard against the limits of moral vision in light of their disproportionate societal power.

Intellectual Property Rights in the P.R.C.: Impediments to Protection and the Need for the Rule of Law

ARTICLES INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS IN THE P.R.C.: IMPEDIMENTS TO PROTECTION AND THE NEED FOR THE RULE OF LAW Jeffrey W. Berkmant INTRODUCTION As the one year anniversary of the historic February 26, 1995 intellectual property agreement between the People's Republic of China (P.R.C. or China) and the United States ap- proached,' the Associated Press carried a prophetic, if not amus- ing, story touching upon the success of the Agreement. The story, which was widely publicized in the Chinese state press, concerned a retailer of condoms and sex aids that was going out of business because of its inability to compete with counterfeit- ers. 2 While to some the tale of the Chinese condom store may be of interest in light of China's one-child policy or the govern- ment's desire to crackdown on pornography, the story's real im- port is that it is a barometer of the status of intellectual property rights in the P.R.C. In the classic half full, half empty debate, the story presages both negative and positive developments. On the one hand, the plight of Chinese business is the type of anecdotal evidence supporting the argument that infringement of intellec- tual property rights in China remains unchecked, which suggests that the 1995 MOU has failed to provide greater protection for t Teaching Fellow 1996-97, Stanford Law School. J.D., New York Law School; LL.M., New York University School of Law. I am grateful for the inspira- tion and guidance of Professors Jerome A. Cohen, William E. Nelson and Hugh T. Scogin. 1. See China-United States: Agreement Regarding Intellectual Property Rights, Feb. 26, 1995, 34 I.L.M. 881 (1995) [hereinafter 1995 MOU or the Agree- ment] (containing both the Letter and the Action Plan). 2. See Elaine Kurtenbach, Condoms Among Latest Targets of Chinese Crack- down on Counterfeits, A.P., Feb. 2, 1996, available in 1996 WL 4409759.

Up-or-Out Rules in the Market for Lawyers

We examine how up-or-out rules operate as a screening device in the market for lawyers. Using data on large New York law firms, we show that firm growth is a slow and uncertain process because performance as an associate is not an especially informative signal about whether a lawyer will make a good partner and because the costs of mistaken promotion are relatively high. A newly hired associate is unlikely to be a suitable partner and the screening process is relatively imprecise. Firm growth therefore contributes between 5%-7% of the present value of profits of a law firm.

US bankruptcy reform: Chapter 11 ‐ in balance or in the balance (part I)

International Insolvency ReviewVolume 4, Issue 1 p. 54-93 Article US bankruptcy reform: Chapter 11 - in balance or in the balance (part I)† Marvin E Jacob, Marvin E JacobSearch for more papers by this authorGordon W Johnson, Gordon W JohnsonSearch for more papers by this authorPamela B Corrie, Pamela B Corrie Mr Jacob is a member of the New York bar and a partner in Weil, Gotshal & Manges (a partnership including professional corporations) (WGM) in New York, New York. Mr Jacob is also an Adjunct Professor of Law at New York Law School and is the co-editor and co-author of the treatise entitled “Restructurings,” recently published by Euromoney Books. Mr Johnson is a member of the Texas bar and is associated with WGM in London, England. Ms Corrie is a member of the New York and California bars and is associated with WGM in New York, New York. WGM has served as counsel in Chapter 11 cases to a variety of publicly-traded corporations, lenders, creditors' committees, institutional investors, bondholders and other parties. The views set forth in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of WGM.Search for more papers by this author Marvin E Jacob, Marvin E JacobSearch for more papers by this authorGordon W Johnson, Gordon W JohnsonSearch for more papers by this authorPamela B Corrie, Pamela B Corrie Mr Jacob is a member of the New York bar and a partner in Weil, Gotshal & Manges (a partnership including professional corporations) (WGM) in New York, New York. Mr Jacob is also an Adjunct Professor of Law at New York Law School and is the co-editor and co-author of the treatise entitled “Restructurings,” recently published by Euromoney Books. Mr Johnson is a member of the Texas bar and is associated with WGM in London, England. Ms Corrie is a member of the New York and California bars and is associated with WGM in New York, New York. WGM has served as counsel in Chapter 11 cases to a variety of publicly-traded corporations, lenders, creditors' committees, institutional investors, bondholders and other parties. The views set forth in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of WGM.Search for more papers by this author First published: Spring 1995 https://doi.org/10.1002/iir.3940040104 † This is a two-part article. Part II will appear in the next issue of this journal. Section III of this article is a revised version of portions of another article entitled “Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1994”, published recently in the Journal of Bankruptcy Law and Practice. AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Volume4, Issue1Spring 1995Pages 54-93 RelatedInformation

Lochner v. New York: Rehabilitated and Revised, but Still Reviled

Lochner v- New York: Rehabilitated and Revised, but Still Reviled Paul Kens1 The general right to make a contract in relation to his business is part of the liberty of the individualprotected by the Fourteenth Amendment of the Federal Constitution. Under that provision no State can deprive any person of life, liberty or property without due pro­ cess of law. The right to purchase or sell labor is part of the liberty protected by this amendment, unless there are circumstances which exclude the right. Justice Rufus Peckham in Lochner v. New York (1905) As he delivered the majority opinion in Lochner v. New York on April 17, 1905, Justice Rufus Peckham probably had no idea this would be the case for which he would be remembered.2 As Supreme Court cases go, this one seemed inconsequential. In a five to four vote the Court struck down a New York law that limited the hours a baker could work to ten hours a day and sixty hours a week. Yet, Lochner v. New York became in the Progressive and New Deal eras what Roe v. Wade has become in ours. For people who are unhappy with the Court’s direc­ tion it is the ultimate symbol ofjudicial over­ reaching. Few cases in American history con­ tinue to attract more attention than Lochner, and few have been more clearly identified with a dis­ tinct legal doctrine or a distinct era in constitu­ tional history. Perhaps the five to four vote should have pro­ vided some hint of the case’s importance. The majority’s decision reflected a controversial con­ stitutional theory that had been gaining ground in the 1880s and 1890s but had not yet been fully sanctioned by the Supreme Court. This theory was based upon the FourteenthAmendment guar­ antee that no state shall deny any person life, liberty, or property without due process of law, and it depended upon three interrelated concepts. First was substantive due process. In con­ trast to the traditional view that “due process” was a guarantee of correct judicial procedure, this idea held that the substance of a law could deny a person life, liberty, or property. The sec­ ond concept was liberty ofcontract, an idea that the Fourteenth Amendment guarantee ofliberty includes the freedom of two or more people to make any agreement they might desire. Of course this liberty could not be absolute. Con­ sequently the third concept, a narrow view of the police powers ofthe states, provided a coun­ terweight for determining whether laws that lim­ ited the right of contract were legitimate. Al­ though this theory of limited government was vague, it was captured by the notion that a state’s power was limited to making law that effected health, safety, morals, and peace and good or­ der. According to the conventional accounts of Supreme Court history, the Lochner-era Court molded these three ideas to fuse its own view of the neutral state into constitutional doctrine. In one of his most famous dissents, Justice OliverWendell Holmes, Jr., complained that the majority’s decision in Lochner was based “upon an economic theory which a large part of the 32 LOCHNER V. NEW YORK country does not entertain.”3 Holmes also ar­ gued that, “The FourteenthAmendment does not enact Mr. Herbert Spencer’s Social Statistics.” The theories to which he was referring were laissez-faire economics and Spencer’s version of Social Darwinism. Both reflected a brand ofin­ dividualism that ran afoul of Progressive and New Deal era reformers’ efforts to employ the state as an agent ofsocial change. Holmes’ terse comments thus captured the larger implications ofthe decision. He had recognized that Lochner v. New York touched a raw nerve connected to some deep-seated ideas about the American political system. It raised questions about the extent to which people could look to government to solve the economic and social problems brought on by the Industrial Revolution, or to redress hardships created by the operation ofthe free market. In addition, the Lochner decision intensified an ongoing debate over the extent to which the judiciary should be involved in answering those questions. In the period between 1905 and 1937, which became known as...

Give Them Back Their Lives: Recognizing Client Narrative in Case Theory

* Associate Professor of Law, The American University, Washington College of Law. B.A. 1978, Carleton; J.D. 1983, University of Chicago. Ed. I thank Robert Dinerstein, David Chavkin, Stephen Ellmann, and Nancy Polikoff for thoughtful responses to earlier drafts of this article, David Marin and Sara Shepard for helpful research assistance, and the participants in the Mid-Atlantic Clinical Theory and Practice Workshop and the New York Law School Clinical Theory Workshop for valuable comments. I am especially indebted to Miriam Ruttenberg for wide-ranging research support and astute feedback about the ideas in this article, Liz Seaton for incisive editing and farseeing conversations about the politics of sexual orientation and case theory, and my colleagues in the clinical program at The American University, Washington College of Law, whose insights about lawyering have shaped my work as a clinical teacher and scholar. I also thank my partner Ruth Eisenberg and my friend Michele Wolin for their generous personal support. Because all writing builds on lessons from the past, I dedicate this article to the memory of my mother, who loved unstintingly through pain and adversity, and who taught me the significance of perspective and the value of empathy. 1. See Symposium, Lawyers As Storytellers & Storytellers As Lawyers: An Interdisciplinary Symposium Exploring the Use of Storytelling in the Practice of Law, 18 VT. L. REV. 565 (1994); Symposium, Legal Storytelling, 87 MICH. L. REV. 2073 (1989); Symposium, Speeches from the Emperor's Old Prose: Reexamining the Language of Law, 77 CORNELL L. REV. 1233 (1992). 2. See, e.g., Clark D. Cunningham, A Tale of Two Clients: Thinking About Law as Language, 87 MICH. L. REV. 2459, 2463 (1989); Steven Lubet, The Trial as a Persuasive Story, 14 AM. J. TRIAL ADVOC. 77, 77 (1990); Sharon Creeden, Telling Your Client's Story to the Jury, TENN. B.J. May-June 1991, at 10, 10. 3. See, e.g., Charles R. Lawrence, III, The Word and the River: Pedagogy as Scholarship as Struggle, 65 S. CAL. L. REV. 2231, 2278 (1992); Kim Lane Scheppele, Foreword: Telling Stories, 87 MICH. L. REV. 2073, 2073 (1989). The relationship between law, storytelling, and progressive lawyering is brilliantly portrayed by Gerald L6pez, perhaps the foremost proponent of this genre, in his path-breaking work Rebellious Lawyering. See GERALD P. LOPEZ, REBELLIOUS LAWYERING: ONE CHICANO'S VISION OF PROGRESSIVE LAW PRACTICE (1992). For a thoughtful analysis of L6pez's ideas, see Anthony V. Alfieri, Practicing Community, 107 HARV. L. REV. 1747 (1994) (book review). The idea of voice and narrative is also the focus of much academic literature from other disciplines, including literature, anthropology, political science, and history. See, e.g., JAMES MCPHERSON, BATTLE CRY OF FREEDOM: THE CIVIL WAR ERA at ix-x (1988). For a critique of the legal narrative movement, see Daniel A. Farber & Suzanna Sherry, Telling Stories Out of School: An Essay on Legal Narratives, 45 STAN. L. REV. 807, 840-54 (1993) (arguing that objective standards should be used to evaluate narratives and that much narrative scholarship falls short of these standards).

EARLY EXPERIENCES OF AN ETHICS CONSULT TEAM

To the editor: We were troubled by the recent article by Olson et al1 describing the function of their ethics consult team. It appears that the major issues they deal with relate to family members’ requests to withhold or withdraw tube feeding for demented relatives. What was most disturbing to us were two aspects of their process. Our first concern is their nearly exclusive focus on the application of New York's “clear and convincing” evidence standard as the underlying guiding principle to follow in decision-making. Clearly this is a legal standard, not an ethical one, and yet there are no representatives of the legal profession on their consult team. Indeed, several of the decisions to deny requests to withhold or withdraw a feeding tube appear to have been based on incorrect interpretations of New York law. For example, the consult team unilaterally determined that one resident's proxy was acting in bad faith and that another resident had not been competent to sign a proxy form; the New York Health Care Proxy law clearly anticipates that these sorts of challenges must be brought before a court.2 Secondly, it appears that the ethics consult team is heavily involved in medical management itself. The development of care plans is described, and a high frequency of refusing requests to withhold or withdraw feeding tubes is reported. This makes one wonder whether the “consult team” is really a medical decision-making body rather than an ethics-based consultation for the primary team. In fact, it is unclear what ethical principles are used in the process. The team's function seems related more to risk management, in terms of protecting the institution from presumed liability. In defense of the team the article describes, there are few standards or guidelines on which to base ethical consultation in long-term care facilities. As greater numbers of facilities develop ethics committees, it becomes increasingly important that guidelines, at least for the composition and process of the committees, be developed. As part of its professional education and consultation services, Choice In Dying's lawyers, health care providers, and educators assist members of ethics committees address the questions that come before them. Ironically, the article immediately following the Olson paper describes the thoughts of a physician having trouble sleeping after learning that a nursing home patient for whom he refused to authorize a feeding tube had died peacefully. One wonders if Dr. Kane's Doctor Arden would have lost a few more hours of sleep if he had been visited by the Olson ethics consult team. Editors note: The above letter was referred to the authors of the original paper, and their reply follows.

State Plans for Surrogate Decision Making-Reply

In Reply. —In our federal system, states remain the laboratories for innovation. Dr Eckoff's account of Iowa's program for patients with disabilities, enacted 4 years after the New York law we described, affirms our conclusions: the New York approach is readily transferable to other states and it can and should be available to persons in mental disability facilities, to incapacitated nursing home residents, and to others in need of surrogate decision makers. Our concern is with Eckoff's view that a guardian need eventually be appointed if the patient requires substituted decision making over a period of time. The New York law has several features that allow a more flexible response to this type of situation. First, the New York State Surrogate Decision-Making Committee panels can be convened quickly (usually within 14 days), 1 and they are required to make their decisions on the day of the hearing where practicable. 2

State Plans for Surrogate Decision Making

To the Editor. —The recent Law and Medicine article 1 described the New York State Surrogate Decision-Making Committee program. A State Substitute Medical Decision-Making Board was established in Iowa by 1989 legislation, using the New York rules as a guide. The Iowa law also allows counties to appoint local boards, but is broader than the New York law. It can be applied to anyone who is unable to understand the nature and consequences of proposed medical care, and thus cannot give informed consent, and who does not have a guardian or family members. The rules in Iowa have been in effect for about 18 months. Seven counties have established local boards. Where there is no local board, the state board has jurisdiction and now has acted on 12 cases. The cases have involved people who ranged in age from 36 to 95 years and have included residents of nursing homes

Legitimacy and History: Self-Government in American Constitutional Theory.

Journal Article Legitimacy and History: Self-Government in American Constitutional Theory. By Paul W. Kahn. (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1992. xii, 260 pp. $27.50, ISBN 0-300-05499-8.) Get access Richard B. Bernstein Richard B. Bernstein New York Law School, New York, New York Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar Journal of American History, Volume 81, Issue 2, September 1994, Pages 667–668, https://doi.org/10.2307/2081230 Published: 01 September 1994

Constitutional Law and International Law in the United States of America

Constitutional Law and International Law in the United States of America Lung-Chu Chen Lung-Chu Chen 1Lung-Chu Chen is Professor of Law, The New York Law School and Research Affiliate in Law, Yale Law School. LL.B., National Taiwan University, 1958; LL.M., Northwestern University, 1961; LL.M., 1962 and J.S.D., 1964, Yale University Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The American Journal of Comparative Law, Volume 42, Issue suppl_2, Supplement 1994, Pages 453–515, https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcl/42.suppl2.453 Published: 01 December 1994

Amending America: If We Love the Constitution so Much, Why Do We Keep Trying to Change It?

Even as we marvel at the grandeur of our constitutional system, we can't resist tinkering with it. tells the dramatic story of how, over the past 206 years, the American people have reshaped the Constitution to meet the country's changing needs. It describes how we have adopted 27 amendments since 1789-and debated and rejected 10,000 more. provocative examination of one of America's most important yet least-known democratic tools, Amending America brings to life events in our history that continue to resonate today as, as various politicians have set their hearts on amendments to balance the budget, to ban abortion, or to allow school prayer. A wonderful book. . . . magnificent treasure trove of American history. Arthur R. Miller, Bruce Bromley Professor of Law, Harvard Law School. A skillfully rendered, comprehensive, and engaging study of Article V's procedures for amending the Constitution. Washington Post Instructive and fascinating. book is thorough, erudite, and packed with the anecdotes that make our political past so enjoyable to review. Minneapolis Tribune. Admirably illuminates the complex and remarkable history of the American people's repeated attempts to amend the Constituion, and captures that history's enduring significance. William E. Nelson, author of Fourteenth Amendment: From Political Principle to Judicial Doctrine Will amply repay its readers. Scholars of American constitutional development should find the book a useful addition to their shelves; general readers should find it an interesting and enjoyable way to learn about some often overlooked aspects of American history. Sanford Levinson, History Book Club Invaluable for just about anybody seeking to understand the contradictions of our approach to constitutional government. Herbert S. Parmet, author of Richard Nixon and His America. An intelligent, carefully researched, and highly readable account. Detroit News. The authors have made our country's charter the centerpiece of a suspenseful and still-unfolding national adventure. Norfolk Virginian-Pilot and Ledger-Star. An anecdotal guide to the debates and conflicts over each amendment. Publishers Weekly. A thoughtful history of the amendments ot the Constitution and an excellent delineation of issues debated by modern constitutional scholars. Kirkus Reviews. An excellent work about an often-ignored issue. Recommended for all libraries. Library Journal. A fresh and reassuring picture of a living, flexible document strong enough to accept constant challenge and occasional change. amending process, used wisely, helps meet the needs of an evolving nation. This is an unusual survey of this always-timely process. Anniston (Alabama) Star For a book with such a weighty subject, is surprisingly entertaining and humorous. Alan Mass in the New York Law Journal.

The Constitutional Amending Process in American Political Thought

Journal Article The Constitutional Amending Process in American Political Thought Get access Vile John R., The Constitutional Amending Process in American Political Thought, xvi, 207 pgs. New York: Praeger, 1992. $45.00. Richard B. Bernstein Richard B. Bernstein New York Law School Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar American Journal of Legal History, Volume 37, Issue 4, October 1993, Page 511, https://doi.org/10.2307/845816 Published: 01 October 1993

Handbook of GATT Dispute Settlement by Pierre Pescatore, William J. Davey, and Andreas F. Lowenfeld

Handbook of GATT Dispute Settlement by Pierre Pescatore. William J. Davey and Andreas F. Lowenfeld. Published by Transnational Juris Publications, New York and Kluwer Law & Taxation Publishers (1991, Deventer, Looseleaf, incl. Preface and Table of Contents ). Price Dfl. 395. For many years the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) has been an unknown entity to the general public. It was only after the commencement of the last eighth Round of Trade Negotiations, the so called Uruguay Round (1986), that awareness about GATT increased. The significant issues, which surrounded and still surround the unconcluded Uruguay Round and an underlying trade war between the European Community and USA, which centres, inter alia , around the problem of agricultural subsidies, made people realise that GATT can be an important vehicle in promoting trade between nations and, if the Round's agenda is adopted, in regulating services as well. Irrespective of these considerations, since 1947 GATT has been the principal international agreement regulating world trade. More than 100 states, belonging to different regional economic groups and accounting for 90 per cent of world trade, have signed and acceded to GATT in an effort to promote freer trade and restrict the use of trade barriers, which governments invariably impose in order to protect national producers. The imposition of such barriers may create frictions between countries and/or trade groups, which may escalate and lead to wider conflicts. The recent (November 1992) threat of imposition by US Trade authorities of import duties of 100 per cent or more on a series of products originating in Member States of the European Community, provides a good example. If these countries are signatory states to GATT, then they may try to resolve the conflict by invoking Article 23, which is the basic dispute settlement provision envisaged in GATT. The workings of this mechanism is exactly the purpose …

Tournament of Lawyers: The Transformation of the Big Law Firm

Tournament of Lawyers traces in detail rise of one hundred of nation's top firms in order to diagnose health of business of American law. and Palay demonstrate that much of large firm's organizational success stems from its ability to blend talents of experienced partners with those of energetic junior lawyers driven by a powerful incentive-the race to win the promotion-to-partner tournament. This calmly reasoned study reveals, however, that very causes of spiraling growth of large law firm may lead to its undoing. Galanter and Palay pose questions and offer some answers which are certain to change way big firm practice is regarded. To describe their work as challenging is something of an understatement: they at times delight, stimulate, frustrate and even depress reader, but they never disappoint. Tournament of Lawyers is essential to understanding of business of big law firms.-Jean and Colin Fergus, New York Law Journal