Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 91 - 95 of 95

Full-Text Articles in Law

Asset Managers As Regulators, Dorothy S. Lund Jan 2022

Asset Managers As Regulators, Dorothy S. Lund

Faculty Scholarship

The conventional view of regulation is that it exists to constrain corporate activity that harms the public. But amid perceptions of government failure, many now call on corporations to tackle social problems themselves. And in this moment of dissatisfaction with government, powerful asset managers have stepped in to serve as regulators of last resort, adopting rules that bind corporate America on issues of great social importance, including climate change and workplace diversity. This Article describes this dynamic — where shareholders have become regulators — which has been made possible by the rise of institutional shareholding (and index investing in particular) …


In Search Of Good Corporate Governance, Dorothy S. Lund Jan 2022

In Search Of Good Corporate Governance, Dorothy S. Lund

Faculty Scholarship

In this Forum Response, Dorothy Lund considers whether the “corporate governance gap” between large and small public companies is the product of harmful or beneficial forces, and in so doing, rejects the idea that there is a single governance framework that is optimal for all public companies.


Tributes To Family Law Scholars Who Helped Us Find Our Path, Ann Laquer Estin, Melissa Murray, June Carbone, Barbara A. Atwood, Paul M. Kurtz, J. Thomas Oldham, Bruce M. Smyth, Brian H. Bix, Elizabeth S. Scott, R.A. Lenhardt, Jessica Dixon Weaver, Solangel Maldonado, Sacha M. Coupet Jan 2022

Tributes To Family Law Scholars Who Helped Us Find Our Path, Ann Laquer Estin, Melissa Murray, June Carbone, Barbara A. Atwood, Paul M. Kurtz, J. Thomas Oldham, Bruce M. Smyth, Brian H. Bix, Elizabeth S. Scott, R.A. Lenhardt, Jessica Dixon Weaver, Solangel Maldonado, Sacha M. Coupet

Faculty Scholarship

At some point after the virus struck, I had the idea that it would be appropriate and interesting to ask a number of experienced family law teachers to write a tribute about a more senior family law scholar whose work inspired them when they were beginning their careers. I mentioned this idea to some other long-term members of the professoriate, and they agreed that this could be a good project.

So I reached out to some colleagues and asked them to participate. Many agreed to join the team. Some suggested other potential contributors, and some of these suggested faculty members …


The In Rem/In Personam Distinction And Partitioning For Persistence, Shyamkrishna Balganesh, Leo Katz Jan 2022

The In Rem/In Personam Distinction And Partitioning For Persistence, Shyamkrishna Balganesh, Leo Katz

Faculty Scholarship

In the second of his two famous articles, Hohfeld seeks to do for the in rem/in personam distinction what he did so persuasively in his first for the terminology of rights, claims, duties, privileges, powers, immunities, and disabilities, which was to identify their essence, and to thereby describe the “natural kind” (in more modern parlance) lurking beneath the thicket of confused juristic rhetoric. The thesis in this second article, however, is a simpler and in some way more beguiling one than in his first. He claims that what the distinction between in rem and in personam jural relations comes down …


Remarks From The 2022 Symposium: The Equal Rights Amendment: A New Guarantee Of Sex Equality In The U.S. Constitution, Katherine M. Franke Jan 2022

Remarks From The 2022 Symposium: The Equal Rights Amendment: A New Guarantee Of Sex Equality In The U.S. Constitution, Katherine M. Franke

Faculty Scholarship

In so many respects, the culmination of Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s career took place in 1996, three years after she joined the Supreme Court and twenty-four years before her death. In U.S. v. Virginia, Justice Ginsburg convinced a majority of the Supreme Court to embrace the strongest formulation of a constitutional norm condemning sex inequality in the Court’s history. The new rule articulated in the U.S. v. Virginia case declared that “[s]ex classifications ... may not be used, as they once were, ... to create or perpetuate the legal, social, and economic inferiority of women.”