Business Organizations Law Commons^™

Berle And The Entrepreneur, Charles R.T. O'Kelley

Seattle University Law Review

In the first and last four chapters (“the Five Chapters”) of The Modern Corporation and Private Property, Adolf Berle, Jr. describes in sweeping terms a fundamental transformation of the American economy. . . . Writing more than ten years before Berle, another seminal scholar, Frank Knight . . . developed a theory of the entrepreneur as part of his larger effort to more carefully explain the theoretical underpinnings of a free-market economy. . . . Given Knight’s prominence and the fact that Knight apparently reached dramatically different conclusions than did Berle concerning the consequences flowing from separation of ownership …

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 …

Tracking Berle’S Footsteps: The Trail Of The Modern Corporation’S Last Chapter, William W. Bratton, Michael L. Wachter

Seattle University Law Review

Readers game enough to work through all three hundred pages of The Modern Corporation and Private Property looking for insights on corporate law today encounter two, apparently contradictory, lines of thought. One line, set out in Books II and III, resonates comfortably with today’s shareholder-centered corporate legal theory. Here the book teaches that even as ownership and control have separated, managers should function as trustees for the shareholders and so should exercise their wide-ranging powers for the shareholders’ benefit. The other line of thought emerges in Books I and IV, where The Modern Corporation encases this shareholder trust model in …

Rethinking The Separation Of Ownership From Management In American History, Kenneth Lipartito, Yumiko Morii

Seattle University Law Review

In <em>The Modern Corporation and Private Property</em>, Adolf Berle and Gardiner Means would use AT&T as a prime example of what they saw as a dangerous new trend, the replacement of ownership-based capitalism with giant corporations controlled by a small group of propertyless managers. Indeed, AT&T became Berle and Means’ favorite example. . . . As we shall see, however, the claim that AT&T was a leading example of the separation of ownership from management is incomplete. More importantly, the common interpretation of Berle and Means’ work is mistaken, placing the emphasis incorrectly on the number of shareholders and reading …

Berle’S Vision Beyond Shareholder Interests: Why Investment Bankers Should Have (Some) Personal Liability, Claire Hill, Richard Painter

Seattle University Law Review

This essay, published in a symposium on the work of Adolf Berle, approaches the Berle-Dodd debate from the perspective that corporate managers have responsibilities beyond pursuing the interests of shareholders. Stock based executive compensation, designed to align managers’ interests with those of shareholders, has, in the investment banking industry in particular, failed to avert, and may have caused, managers (in this case, bankers) to take excessive risks that in the present financial crisis inflicted great damage on creditors and on society as a whole. We describe here the broad outlines of a proposal that we will discuss in future publications …

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 …

Monitoring To Reduce Agency Costs: Examining The Behavior Of Independent And Non-Independent Boards, Anita Anand, Frank Milne, Lynnette Purda

Seattle University Law Review

Berle and Means’s analysis of the corporation—in particular, their view that those in control are not the owners of the corporation—raises questions about actions that corporations take to counter concerns regarding management’s influence. What mechanisms, if any, do corporations implement to balance the distribution of power in the corporation? To address this question, we analyze boards of directors’ propensity to voluntarily adopt recommended corporate governance practices. Because board independence is one way to enhance shareholders’ ability to monitor management, we probe whether firms with independent boards of directors (which we define as boards with either an independent chair or a …

Securities Intermediaries And The Separation Of Ownership From Control, Jill E. Fisch

Seattle University Law Review

The Modern Corporation & Private Property is a paradigm-shifting analysis of the modern corporation. The book is perhaps best known for the insights of Berle and Means about the separation of ownership from control and the consequences of that separation for the allocation of power within the corporation. The Berle and Means story focuses on the shareholder as the owner of the corporation. Berle and Means saw the mechanism of centralized management—in which the shareholder retains the economic interest but not the control rights associated with ownership—as threatening the conception of shareholder interests in terms of property rights. In particular, …

The Modern Corporation As Social Construction, Mark S. Mizruchi, Daniel Hirschman

Seattle University Law Review

Classic works, Mark Mizruchi and Lisa Fein argued, share a particular fate. Authors often cite classic works without reading them—or without reading them carefully. . . . Yet perhaps no single work fits the above description better than one of the most important books on the large corporation ever published: Adolf Berle and Gardiner Means’s The Modern Corporation and Private Property. One can speculate that few works in the social sciences have been as often cited and as little read. As a consequence, we would expect The Modern Corporation to be a good candidate for either selective interpretation or …

Corporate Environmental Social Responsibility: Corporate "Greenwashing" Or A Corporate Culture Game Changer?, Hope M. Babcock

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This article focuses on the extent to which unenforceable voluntary initiatives undertaken by corporations can change corporate behavior to make businesses more environmentally responsible, i.e. not only comply with the law, but to do more than the law actually requires of them. These initiatives, loosely gathered under the umbrella of a movement called corporate social responsibility (CSR), are often proposed by the government as a way to fill regulatory and enforcement gaps or by industry, often as an alternative to regulatory requirements. In each case, their goal is to improve the compliance record of businesses and, in some cases, to …

Carpe Crisis: Capitalizing On The Breakdown Of Capitalism To Consider The Creation Of Social Businesses, Celia R. Tayloe

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

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 …

Economic Development At The Cost Of Human Rights: China Nonferrous Metal Industry In Zambia, Brian Chama

Human Rights Brief

No abstract provided.

The Corporate Lawyer's Role In A Contemporary Democracy, Colin P. Marks, Nancy B. Rapoport

Faculty Works

In this paper, we review the traditional arguments for corporate social responsibility and ask the question of what corporate lawyers should do to help their clients do the right thing ethically. We also set out a test - the technically test -- that highlights when something is usually on the wrong side of the ethical line. (If you have to give legal advice starting with Well, technically..., you're on the wrong side of the line.)

The Corporate Lawyer's Role In A Contemporary Democracy, Colin Marks, Nancy B. Rapoport

Scholarly Works

This paper reviews the traditional arguments for corporate social responsibility and asks the question of what corporate lawyers should do to help their clients do the right thing ethically. It also sets out a test - the technically test -- that highlights when something is usually on the wrong side of the ethical line. (If you have to give legal advice starting with "Well, technically...," you're on the wrong side of the line.)

The Dystopian Potential Of Corporate Law, D. Gordon Smith

Faculty Scholarship

The community of corporate law scholars in the United States is fragmented. One group, heavily influenced by economic analysis of corporations, is exploring the merits of increasing shareholder power vis-a-vis directors. Another group, animated by concern for social justice, is challenging the traditional, shareholder-centric view of corporate law, arguing instead for a model of stakeholder governance. The current disagreement within corporate law is as fundamental as in any area of law, and the debate is more heated than at any time since the New Deal. This paper is part of a debate on the audacious question, Can Corporate Law Save …

Corporate Law, Profit Maximization And The "Responsible Shareholder", Ian B. Lee

ExpressO

The article concerns the theorization of shareholder responsibility and ethical investing. The article develops the following arguments, among others:

If public corporations pursue stockholder profits “pathologically,” as claimed by some critical scholars, it is not because of any obligation arising under corporate law, but because the pursuit of stockholder profits is congenial to the stockholders.

For this reason (and others discussed in the article), shareholders have an ethical stake in the conduct of corporate business, quite apart from any notion that shareholders “own” the corporation.

A phenomenon which the article terms “bounded empathy,” analogous to “bounded rationality”, can help to …

One Nation, Individisible: The Use Of Diversity Report Cards To Promote Transparency, Accountability, And Workplace Fairness, Cyrus Mehri, Andrea Giampetro-Meyer, Michael B. Runnels

Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law

No abstract provided.

The New Mandate Of The Corporate Lawyer After The Fall Of Enron And The Enactment Of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act, Christina R. Salem

Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law

No abstract provided.

Pandora’S Box: Managerial Discretion And The Problem Of Corporate Philanthropy, Faith Stevelman

Articles & Chapters

Corporate giving to 501(c)(3) nonprofits (“charities”) is a more curious, varied and interesting phenomenon than commentators have recognized. Such “gifts” can be grouped generally into four categories. First, Giving to executives’ preferred charities represents an alternative form of compensation. Second, corporate philanthropy is often tied to the company’s commercial advertising, as a method of promoting consumer goodwill and sales. Thirdly, some corporate gifts may be motivated by their leaders’ desire to “give back” to the community, as an expression of corporate social responsibility. Finally, corporations may use contributions to politically enabled nonprofits, including think tanks and market-oriented/ “public interest” litigation …

Shareholders As Stakeholders: Changing Metaphors Of Corporate Governance, Ronald M. Green

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Confronting The Ethical Case Against The Ethical Case For Constituency Rights, William W. Bratton

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

Groundwork Of The Metaphysics Of Corporate Law, Lawrence E. Mitchell

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Modern Corporation: Private Agent Or Public Actor?, Alan Wolfe

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

What Difference Does It Make Whether Corporate Managers Have Public Responsibilities?, William H. Simon

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

In Defense Of The Shareholder Wealth Maximization Norm: A Reply To Professor Green, Stephen M. Bainbridge

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.

On The Frontier Of Capitalism: Implementation Of Humanomics By Modern Publicly Held Corporations: A Critical Assessment, Lewis D. Solomon

Washington and Lee Law Review

No abstract provided.