Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- Nova Southeastern University (41)
- University of Washington School of Law (20)
- Seattle University School of Law (19)
- University of Richmond (19)
- University of Miami Law School (18)
-
- UC Law SF (15)
- Penn State Law (14)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (9)
- UIC School of Law (9)
- Brigham Young University Law School (7)
- University of Michigan Law School (7)
- Golden Gate University School of Law (6)
- University of San Diego (6)
- University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law (5)
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas -- William S. Boyd School of Law (3)
- Pace University (2)
- University of the Pacific (2)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (2)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (2)
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (2)
- American University Washington College of Law (1)
- Chicago-Kent College of Law (1)
- Fordham Law School (1)
- North Carolina Central University School of Law (1)
- Schulich School of Law, Dalhousie University (1)
- William & Mary Law School (1)
- Keyword
-
- Law (20)
- Adolf Berle (19)
- Corporations (19)
- Seattle University (19)
- Seattle University Law Review (19)
-
- Berle (18)
- Berle & Means (18)
- Berle symposium (18)
- Berle's footsteps (18)
- Corporate power (18)
- Corporate social responsibility (18)
- Law Corporations and Society (18)
- Social welfare (18)
- Society (18)
- The Modern Corporation and Private Property (18)
- The modern corporation (18)
- Corporate law (6)
- Gardiner Means (6)
- United States (6)
- Corporate governance (5)
- WTO (4)
- World Trade Organization (4)
- Australia (3)
- Comparative law (3)
- GATT (3)
- Gaming law (3)
- International law (3)
- South Africa (3)
- TRIPS (3)
- Treaties (3)
- Publication
-
- ILSA Journal of International & Comparative Law (41)
- Washington International Law Journal (20)
- Richmond Journal of Global Law & Business (19)
- Seattle University Law Review (19)
- UC Law SF International Law Review (15)
-
- Penn State International Law Review (14)
- University of Miami Inter-American Law Review (13)
- UIC Law Review (8)
- Annual Survey of International & Comparative Law (6)
- Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies (6)
- San Diego International Law Journal (6)
- University of Miami International and Comparative Law Review (5)
- BYU Law Review (4)
- Michigan Journal of International Law (4)
- Brigham Young University International Law & Management Review (3)
- Maryland Journal of International Law (3)
- UNLV Gaming Law Journal (3)
- Federal Communications Law Journal (2)
- Global Business & Development Law Journal (2)
- Pace Law Review (2)
- Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law (2)
- Villanova Law Review (2)
- Washington and Lee Law Review (2)
- American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law (1)
- Canadian Journal of Law and Technology (1)
- Chicago-Kent Law Review (1)
- Fordham Urban Law Journal (1)
- Indiana Law Journal (1)
- Journal of Business & Technology Law (1)
- Michigan Law Review (1)
Articles 211 - 214 of 214
Full-Text Articles in Law
Corporate Power In The Public Eye: Reassessing The Implications Of Berle’S Public Consensus Theory, Marc T. Moore, Antoine Rebérioux
Corporate Power In The Public Eye: Reassessing The Implications Of Berle’S Public Consensus Theory, Marc T. Moore, Antoine Rebérioux
Seattle University Law Review
We analyze Berle’s overall corporate governance project in accordance with what we see as its four core sub-themes: (A) the limitations of external market forces as a constraint on managerial decision-making power; (B) the desirability of internal (corporate) over external (market) actors in allocating corporate capital; (C) civil society and the public consensus as a continuous informal check on managerial decision-making power; and (D) shareholder democracy (as opposed to shareholder primacy or shareholder wealth maximization) as a socially instrumental institution. We seek to debunk the popular misconception that Berle’s early work was a defense of the orthodox shareholder primacy paradigm …
Enumerating Old Themes? Berle’S Concept Of Ownership And The Historical Development Of English Company Law In Context, Lorraine E. Talbot
Enumerating Old Themes? Berle’S Concept Of Ownership And The Historical Development Of English Company Law In Context, Lorraine E. Talbot
Seattle University Law Review
This paper offers some tentative suggestions as to why Berle’s work has been read and interpreted so selectively in the United Kingdom. I suggest that this must be partly attributable to the historical developments in English company law that entrenched the notion of shareholder ownership claims. Specifically, unincorporated associations’ normative values—that members are owners and there is no distinction between small organizations with no share dispersal and large organizations with wide share dispersal—have a continuing influence on this entrenched notion of shareholder ownership claims. First, I provide an overview of the origins of English company law. Next, I address how …
Neo-Brandeisianism And The New Deal: Adolf A. Berle, Jr., William O. Douglas, And The Problem Of Corporate Finance In The 1930s, Jessica Wang
Seattle University Law Review
This essay revisits Adolf A. Berle, Jr. and The Modern Corporation and Private Property by focusing on the triangle of Berle, Louis D. Brandeis, and William O. Douglas in order to examine some of the underlying assumptions about law, economics, and the nature of modern society behind securities regulation and corporate finance in the 1930s. I explore Douglas and Berle’s academic and political relationship, the conceptual underpinnings of Brandeis, Berle, and Douglas’s critiques of modern finance, and the ways in which the two younger men—Berle and Douglas—ultimately departed from their role model, Brandeis.
The Birth Of Corporate Governance, Harwell Wells
The Birth Of Corporate Governance, Harwell Wells
Seattle University Law Review
Part I of this Article briefly examines the concept of “corporate governance” and argues for dating the concept’s origins to the debates of the 1920s. Part II then moves on to examine early scholarly and popular discussions of the separation of ownership and control. After surveying the historical developments that produced the recognizably modern corporate economy around the turn of the century, it examines early scholarly and popular discussions of the separation of ownership and control, focusing on three major thinkers, Louis D. Brandeis, Walter Lippmann, and Thorstein Veblen. It argues that, while each of these authors examined the separation …