Law Commons^™

Stakeholderism Silo Busting, Aneil Kovvali

Articles by Maurer Faculty

The fields of antitrust, bankruptcy, corporate, and securities law are undergoing tumultuous debates. On one side in each field is the dominant view that each field should focus exclusively on a specific constituency—antitrust on consumers, bankruptcy on creditors, corporate law on shareholders, and securities regulation on financial investors. On the other side is a growing insurgency that seeks to broaden the focus to a larger set of stakeholders, including workers, the environment, and political communities. But these conversations have largely proceeded in parallel, with each debate unfolding within the framework and literature of a single field. Studying these debates together …

Taming Sherman's Wilderness, Derrian Smith

Indiana Law Journal

This Note proceeds in four Parts. Part I outlines the interpretive difficulties spawned by the vagueness of the Sherman Act—particularly, the judiciary’s necessary but undeniable departures from the text of the statute and the resulting doctrinal confusion. Part II considers ways in which the judiciary’s decision-making in Sherman Act cases approximates agency rulemaking and whether it makes sense to delegate interpretive authority to an antitrust agency. Yet, while the agency solution has upside, it would not easily escape criticisms that the Act does not provide sufficient notice of the conduct it proscribes and that the Act is an impermissible delegation …

Procompetitive Justifications In Antitrust Law, John M. Newman

Indiana Law Journal

The Rule of Reason, which has come to dominate modern antitrust law, allows defendants the opportunity to justify their conduct by demonstrating procompetitive effects. Seizing the opportunity, defendants have begun offering increasingly numerous and creative explanations for their behavior.

But which of these myriad justifications are valid? To leading jurists and scholars, this has remained an “open question,” even an “absolute mystery.” Examination of the relevant case law reveals multiple competing approaches and seemingly irreconcilable opinions. The ongoing lack of clarity in this area is inexcusable: procompetitive-justification analysis is vital to a properly functioning antitrust enterprise.

This Article provides answers …

Criminal Penalties Under The Sherman Act: A Study Of Law And Economics, Kenneth G. Dau-Schmidt, Joseph Gallo, Charles Parker, Joseph Craycraft

Articles by Maurer Faculty

This paper presents an empirical analysis of criminal antitrust prosecutions undertaken by the Department of Justice during the period 1955-1993. The authors report data on the number of criminal cases, the type of offense alleged, whether the defendants were individuals or firms, the position individual defendants held in their firm, the Department of Justice's won/lost record and the nature and amount of any sanctions imposed. A brief discussion of whether the reported sanctions have been adequate to promote efficient deterrence is also presented.

A Redrafted Section I Of The Sherman Act, Robert H. Heidt

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Decision Theory And Antitrust: Quantitative Evaluation For Efficient Enforcement, Ira Horowitz

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Possibilities And Limits Of Decision Theory In Antitrust: A Response To Professor Horowitz, Joseph F. Brodley

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.