Law Commons^™

Private Ordering In The Market For Professional Services, Cassandra Burke Robertson

Faculty Publications

Freedom of contract is significantly restricted in the market for professional services. Under the so-called “corporate practice doctrine,” professionals such as doctors and lawyers are prohibited from practicing within corporate entities, and laypeople are likewise prohibited from investing in professional service firms. Defenders of this prohibition argue that it can be justified as a means of protecting professional independence and thereby increasing the quality of care. In fact, however, the available evidence suggests that investment restrictions are counterproductive to their stated goal. In practice, these restrictions raise costs and reduce access without measurably improving the quality of service at all. …

Learning Contracts Through Current Events: Lawrence Cunningham’S Contracts In The Real World: Stories Of Popular Contracts And Why They Matter, Miriam A. Cherry

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

In his recent book published by Cambridge University Press, Professor Lawrence Cunningham explores the nuances of contract law through current events. His decision to use the contracts of modern-day singers, actors, and entertainers to illustrate contract law principles is an inspired choice that will appeal to today’s law students. The book guides the reader down the well-trodden path of classic contract doctrines and applies those classics in modern, celebrity-laden contexts. In this regard, the book reads like an updated version of Marvin Chirelstein’s classic contracts primer— an easy-to-read and clearly written commentary. Cunningham’s version adds rollicking celebrity stories to …

Teaching Gender As A Core Value In The Firstyear Contracts Class, Kerri Lynn Stone

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Uncertainty, Reliance, Preliminary Negotiations And The Hold Up Problem, Juliet P. Kostritsky

Faculty Publications

Recently, two scholars, Alan Schwartz and Robert Scott, have cast doubt on the conventional view that courts would find liability and award reliance damages in precontractual cases that resembled the famous Hoffman v. Red Owl case. They have argued that courts deny recovery for reliance in cases involving precontractual preliminary negotiation but regularly grant reliance recovery following a preliminary agreement. They identify a pattern or sequence in which success is likely and then provide an analytical framework to justify liability. When parties reach a preliminary agreement that also includes an agreement that they both invest simultaneously and one party strategically …