February 13, 2015: Why Does Isis Have Any Support?,
2015
Duquesne University
February 13, 2015: Why Does Isis Have Any Support?, Bruce Ledewitz
Hallowed Secularism
Blog post, “Why Does ISIS Have Any Support?“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.
February 10, 2015: The Deep Cynicism Of The Political Parties On The Electoral College,
2015
Duquesne University
February 10, 2015: The Deep Cynicism Of The Political Parties On The Electoral College, Bruce Ledewitz
Hallowed Secularism
Blog post, “The Deep Cynicism of the Political Parties on the Electoral College“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.
February 4, 2015: The Sanctions Crowd Want War With Iran,
2015
Duquesne University
February 4, 2015: The Sanctions Crowd Want War With Iran, Bruce Ledewitz
Hallowed Secularism
Blog post, “The Sanctions Crowd Want War with Iran“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.
The End Of Jurisprudence,
2015
University of Michigan Law School
The End Of Jurisprudence, Scott Hershovitz
Articles
For more than forty years, jurisprudence has been dominated by the HartDworkin debate. The debate starts from the premise that our legal practices generate rights and obligations that are distinctively legal, and the question at issue is how the content of these rights and obligations is determined. Positivists say that their content is determined ultimately or exclusively by social facts. Anti-positivists say that moral facts must play a part in determining their content. In this Essay, I argue that the debate rests on a mistake. Our legal practices do not generate rights and obligations that are distinctively legal. At best, …
Realism About Judges,
2015
Northwestern Pritzker School of Law
Realism About Judges, Richard A. Posner
Northwestern University Law Review
No abstract provided.
January 31, 2015: How To Think About Constitutional Government,
2015
Duquesne University
January 31, 2015: How To Think About Constitutional Government, Bruce Ledewitz
Hallowed Secularism
Blog post, “How to Think About Constitutional Government“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.
January 28, 2015: Politics At The Water's Edge,
2015
Duquesne University
January 28, 2015: Politics At The Water's Edge, Bruce Ledewitz
Hallowed Secularism
Blog post, “Politics at the Water's Edge“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.
January 24, 2015: More Nihilism On Abortion,
2015
Duquesne University
January 24, 2015: More Nihilism On Abortion, Bruce Ledewitz
Hallowed Secularism
Blog post, “More Nihilism on Abortion“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.
January 21, 2015: We’Re On A Crash Course,
2015
Duquesne University
January 21, 2015: We’Re On A Crash Course, Bruce Ledewitz
Hallowed Secularism
Blog post, “We’re On a Crash Course“ discusses politics, theology and the law in relation to religion and public life in the democratic United States of America.
Balance And Team Production,
2015
Seattle University School of Law
Balance And Team Production, Kelli A. Alces
Seattle University Law Review
For decades, those holding the shareholder primacy view that the purpose of a corporation is to earn a profit for its shareholders have been debating with those who believe that corporations exist to serve broader societal interests. Adolph Berle and Merrick Dodd began the conversation over eighty years ago, and it continues today, with voices at various places along a spectrum of possible corporate purposes participating. Unfortunately, over time, the various sides of the debate have begun to talk past each other rather than engage with each other and have lost sight of whatever common ground they may be able …
The Boundaries Of "Team" Production Of Corporate Governance,
2015
Seattle University School of Law
The Boundaries Of "Team" Production Of Corporate Governance, Anthony J. Casey, M. Todd Henderson
Seattle University Law Review
We examine the cooperative production of corporate governance. We explain that this production does not occur exclusively within a “team” or “firm.” Rather, several aspects of corporate governance are quintessentially market products. Like Blair and Stout, we view the shareholder as but one of many stakeholders in a corporation. Where we depart from their analysis is in our view of the boundaries of a firm. We suggest that they overweight the intrafirm production of control. Focusing on the primacy of a board of directors, Blair and Stout posit a hierarchical team that governs the economic enterprise. We observe, however, that …
The Team Production Model As A Paradigm,
2015
Seattle University School of Law
The Team Production Model As A Paradigm, Brian R. Cheffins
Seattle University Law Review
Margaret Blair and Lynn Stout suggested a few years after the publication of their 1999 Virginia Law Review article, A Team Production Theory of Corporate Law, that their team production model was poised to emerge as part of a new corporate law “paradigm.” In so doing, they specifically invoked Thomas Kuhn’s well-known analysis of scientific revolutions. This Article revisits Blair and Stout’s team production theory by offering a critique of their claim that their model is destined to become a new corporate law paradigm in the Kuhnian sense. In so doing the Article draws upon key corporate law theories and …
Testing The Normative Desirability Of The Mediating Hierarch,
2015
Seattle University School of Law
Testing The Normative Desirability Of The Mediating Hierarch, Zachary J. Gubler
Seattle University Law Review
In their influential article, A Team Production Theory of Corporate Law, Professors Margaret Blair and Lynn Stout explained how corporate law might be viewed as an attempt at solving what is known as the team production problem. At its core, this problem has to do with the opportunistic behavior that arises when multiple economic actors make investments—whether of labor, capital, or otherwise—in a business venture where these investments are said to be “firm specific” because they cannot be easily withdrawn and redeployed in other projects. The problem is how to construct a governance regime that will create incentives for the …
Team Production & The Multinational Enterprise,
2015
Seattle University School of Law
Team Production & The Multinational Enterprise, Virginia Harper Ho
Seattle University Law Review
Margaret Blair and Lynn Stout’s path-breaking article, A Team Production Theory of Corporate Law, advances a dual thesis: first, that team production theory does a better job than its competitors (in particular, principal–agent theory) of explaining the advantages of the public corporation and key features of corporate law; and second, that, as a matter of corporate law, corporate boards are charged with advancing the collective interest of all the contributors to the corporate enterprise rather than the shareholders’ interests alone. Its central insight is that the role of the independent, or insulated, corporate board is to serve as a “mediating …
Hostile Takeovers And Overreliance,
2015
Seattle University School of Law
Hostile Takeovers And Overreliance, Anthony Niblett
Seattle University Law Review
Commentators have argued that employees should be compensated in the event of a hostile takeover; otherwise, the threat of such a takeover will fail to incentivize firm-specific investments by employees. Such deferred compensation is analogous to the payment of damages following a breach of contract. The analogous breach, here, is the breach of an implicit contract between management and employees. Employees trusted management to compensate them for firm-specific investments not explicitly contracted for. This Article uses a familiar result from the contract law literature: There is no measure of damages for breach of contract that can generate both efficient breach …
Buying Teams,
2015
Seattle University School of Law
Buying Teams, Andres Sawicki
Seattle University Law Review
The Sixth Annual Berle Symposium reflects on Margaret Blair and Lynn Stout’s classic article: A Team Production Theory of Corporate Law. Blair and Stout recast the modern law of public corporations through the lens of the team production theory of the firm. Here, I apply Blair and Stout’s insights—emphasizing the value of team production, independent monitors, and intellectual property rights—to a novel corporate transaction structure: the acqui-hire. In an acqui-hire, a publicly owned technology firm wants to add a start-up’s engineers. Instead of simply hiring them, though, it buys the start-up, discards most of its assets, and retains the start-up’s …
Team Production And Securities Laws,
2015
Seattle University School of Law
Team Production And Securities Laws, Urska Velikonja
Seattle University Law Review
In the seminal paper that this symposium celebrates, A Team Production Theory of Corporate Law, Margaret Blair and Lynn Stout made two related points. First, that Delaware law does not require shareholder primacy in public corporations. Rather, the broad deference afforded to the decisions of predominantly independent corporate boards of directors is consistent with a contrary theory, that of team production, or, as they call it, “the mediating hierarch” theory. The fundamental role of the board of directors is to mediate between the interests of various stakeholders that contribute to the corporation’s output. As a result, Delaware courts have repeatedly …
With The Emergence Of Public Benefit Corporations, Directors Of Traditional For-Profit Companies Should Tread Cautiously, But Welcome The Opportunity To Invest In Social Enterprise,
2015
Seattle University School of Law
With The Emergence Of Public Benefit Corporations, Directors Of Traditional For-Profit Companies Should Tread Cautiously, But Welcome The Opportunity To Invest In Social Enterprise, Mckenzie Holden Granum
Seattle University Law Review
Social entrepreneurship has become the popular term used to describe business forms that aim to produce profits while also seeking to significantly advance one or more social or environmental goals. In response to an increase in social entrepreneurship across sectors—from progressive industries like organic farming to conservative industries such as insurance and banking—several states have adopted new corporate governance structures. Such legislation allows incorporating businesses to choose an off-the-shelf formation type that embeds a social mission into its legal structure. The bulk of the newly implemented statutory forms provide not only a new framework for social entrepreneurs to work within, …
Boards Of Directors As Mediating Hierarchs,
2015
Seattle University School of Law
Boards Of Directors As Mediating Hierarchs, Margaret M. Blair
Seattle University Law Review
In June of 2014, the board of directors of Demoulas Supermarkets, Inc.—better known as Market Basket, a mid-sized chain of grocery stores in New England—decided to oust the man who had been CEO for the previous six years, Arthur T. Demoulas. Most likely, the board of directors did not anticipate what happened next: Thousands of employees, customers, and fans of Market Basket boycotted the stores and staged noisy public protests asking the board to reinstate “Arthur T.” The reaction by employees and customers made what had been a simmering, nasty, intrafamily feud within the closely held Market Basket chain into …
The Long Road To Reformulating The Understanding Of Directors' Duties: Legalizing Team Production Theory?,
2015
Seattle University School of Law
The Long Road To Reformulating The Understanding Of Directors' Duties: Legalizing Team Production Theory?, Thomas Clarke
Seattle University Law Review
In this Article, the historical evolution of corporate governance is considered, highlighting the different eras of governance, the dominant theoretical and practical paradigms, and the reformulation of paradigms and counter paradigms. Two alternative and sharply contrasting theorizations, one collective and collaborative (the work of Berle and Means), the other individualistic and contractual (agency theory and shareholder value) are focused upon. The explanatory potential of Blair and Stout’s team production theory is elaborated, along with its conception of the complexity of business enterprise, with a mediating hierarch (the board of directors) securing a balance between the interests of different stakeholders. The …
