Volume 12.

Masthead

The Journal's 2015–16 volume was lead by Editor-in-Chief Rohan Dixit and his team. We invite you to explore the content; then contribute to the conversation. Submit a response, report a development, or pen the next article.

 
 

12.1

Published in Fall 2015. The first article explores the increasing role technology startups are taking with regulatory reform and whether this is a positive development for our political economy. The second article explores the difficulties with crafting a balanced regulatory framework for crowdfunding. Finally, the note explores the practice of providing employee perks from a shareholder governance perspective. This Note identifies the challenges shareholders face in properly assessing how the costs associated with in-kind perks affect share value under the current corporate legal framework. 

More detailed summaries below, as well as links to respond. What will you contribute? Responses will be published in our online pocket part on a rolling basis. 

 

12.2

Published in Winter 2016.  The first article discusses the revolutionary implications of Blockchain technology, the possibility for a peer-to-peer stock market, and the legal ramifications of this and similar innovations.  Then, using Abercrombie & Fitch and Hooters as case studies, the second article criticizes the Supreme Court’s recent jurisprudence which may allow certain corporations to qualify as “expressive organizations,” possibly protecting otherwise discriminatory employment practices.  The third article considers recent developments in judicial amenability to “jurisdictional piercing” and provides an empirical study of court decisions invoking this under-appreciated doctrine to ignore the corporate entity and subject shareholders to a court’s personal jurisdiction.  The first student note examines the current state of credit bidding in bankruptcy proceedings and offers some practical interpretations of developments for practitioners.  Finally, the second student note assesses the practice of recognition or “domestication” of foreign money judgments against foreign corporations and argues that this practice is unconstitutional unless the court has personal jurisdiction over the debtor. 

More detailed summaries are below, as well as links to engage and respond. What will you contribute? Responses will be published in our online pocket part on a rolling basis.

 

12.3

Published Spring 2016.  The first article discusses the term “accident” in the context of insurance agreements.  The second analyzes how piercing the corporate veil works with Limited Liability Companies.  The third discusses the risks of the crowdfunding model for investors.  The fourth assess the difficulty of successfully managing stockholder activism with the need for strong corporate governance.  The first student note looks at the changing legal landscape of series limited liability companies.  The second student note examines the need to keep transnational organizations in line to protect from human rights abuses. 

More detailed summaries are below, as well as links to engage and respond. What will you contribute? Responses will be published in our online pocket part on a rolling basis.