Law Commons^™

In Defense Of Breakups: Administering A “Radical” Remedy, Rory Van Loo

Faculty Scholarship

Calls for breaking up monopolies—especially Amazon, Facebook, and Google—have largely focused on proving that past acquisitions of companies like Whole Foods, Instagram, and YouTube were anticompetitive. But scholars have paid insufficient attention to another major obstacle that also explains why the government in recent decades has not broken up a single large company. After establishing that an anticompetitive merger or other act has occurred, there is great skepticism of breakups as a remedy. Judges, scholars, and regulators see a breakup as extreme, frequently comparing the remedy to trying to “unscramble eggs.” They doubt the government’s competence in executing such a …

The Supreme Court Bar At The Bar Of Patents, Paul Gugliuzza

Faculty Scholarship

Over the past two decades, a few dozen lawyers have come to dominate practice before the U.S. Supreme Court. By many accounts, these elite lawyers—whose clients are often among the largest corporations in the world—have spurred the Court to hear more cases that businesses care about and to decide those cases in favor of their clients. The Supreme Court’s recent case law on antitrust, arbitration, punitive damages, class actions, and more provides copious examples.

Though it is often overlooked in discussions of the emergent Supreme Court bar, patent law is another area in which the Court’s agenda has changed significantly …

Corporate Personhood And The History Of The Rights Of Corporations: A Reflection On Adam Winkler’S Book We The Corporations: How American Businesses Won Their Civil Rights, Jack M. Beermann

Faculty Scholarship

Adam Winkler’s book We the Corporations: How American Businesses Won Their Civil Rights is an impressive work on several different levels. Because so much of the development of American constitutional law over the centuries has involved businesses, the book is a nearly comprehensive legal history of federal constitutional law. It certainly would be worthwhile reading for anyone interested in the constitutionality of economic regulation in the United States, spanning the controversies over the first and second Banks of the United States, through the Lochner era and present-day clashes over corporate campaign spending, and religiously-based exemptions to generally applicable laws such …

The New Financial Assets: Separating Ownership From Control, Tamar Frankel

Faculty Scholarship

This Article is organized in three parts. Part One examines the nature of financial assets and their transition by market transactions from contracts to property. The discussion highlights the gray areas which financial assets occupy in decoupling, falling within both contract and property law.

Part Two describes four types of decoupled financial assets. The first type separates into two financial assets: ownership benefits and ownership risks. The presumed reduction of owners' risks prompted some academics to justify reducing the owners' protection. I suggest that attempts to protect owners from ownership risk have failed. Therefore, the suggestion was ill-conceived. The second …

What Default Rules Teach Us About Corporations; What Understanding Corporations Teaches Us About Default Rules, Tamar Frankel

Faculty Scholarship

This Article addresses corporate law's default rules, which allow corporations to waive their directors' liability for damages based on a breach of their fiduciary duty of care. Most large publicly held corporations have adopted such a waiver in their articles of association. This Article suggests that courts should limit the range of the waivers to the circumstances that existed when the voters voted and to the information they received before they voted. This Article distinguishes between public contracts (legislation) and private contracts (commercial transactions) and the default rules that apply to each. The Article shows that courts view corporations and …

Why The Board Is Broken, Tamar Frankel, Joseph Anton

Faculty Scholarship

Boards of Directors are anachronistic to major companies in the 21^st century. Boards had their origin in an era when oversight was easily executed. Corporate directors were controlling shareholders or their nominees. As companies became truly public, directors were nominated by the chief operating officers and served as their advisers. Large companies needed the resources of outsiders to lend their collective genius in an era when outside knowledge, data, and experience were expensive to collect. But as businesses grew larger, the Board's responsibility as representative of the shareholders' interests became more important as well. To advise and supervise enormous …

The Power Struggle Between Shareholders And Directors: The Demand Requirement In Derivative Suits, Tamar Frankel, Wayne M. Barsky

Faculty Scholarship

This article examines the demand shareholders must make on a corporation's board of directors prior to bringing a derivative suit. ... Presented with the question of whether the court would give effect to a decision of a committee of disinterested directors to terminate a shareholder derivative suit alleging directors' breach of fiduciary duties, the court ruled that even if the special committee was truly disinterested and independent, "[t]he Court should determine, applying its own independent business judgment, whether the [corporation's] motion [to dismiss the derivative action] should be granted." ... A derivative suit is one of the means for conducting …