Author Archive for vanderbilt-law-review

Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc – Roundtable: The JOBS Act and SEC Rulemaking

posted by Vanderbilt Law Review

Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc is pleased to present our Spring 2013 Roundtable, which considers the SEC’s rulemaking authority under the JOBS Act of April 2012.

Practicing securities attorney Douglas Ellenoff, and Professors Usha Rodrigues and Andrew Schwartz each consider the public policy rationales of the JOBS Act, its legislative history, congressional intent, and practical considerations in order to offer some friendly advice to new Chairman Mary Jo White and the Commission.

Mr. Ellenoff and Prof. Schwartz focus on the rules required or allowed relating to crowdfunding under Title III of the Act, while Prof. Rodrigues examines the lifting of the ban on solicitation and advertising of securities offered to accredited investors under Title II. We hope you find this Roundtable informative and engaging.

Roundtable Essays

Making Crowdfunding CREDIBLE
Douglas S. Ellenoff · 66 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 19 (2013)

In Search of Safe Harbor: Suggestions for the New Rule 506(c)
Usha Rodrigues · 66 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 29 (2013)

Keep It Light, Chairman White: SEC Rulemaking Under the CROWDFUND Act
Andrew A. Schwartz · 66 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 43 (2013)

  May 10, 2013 at 9:41 pm   Posted in: Law Rev (Vanderbilt), Securities, Securities Regulation   Print This Post   No Comments

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 66, Number 1 (January 2013)

posted by Vanderbilt Law Review

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 66, Number 1 (January 2013).

The Vanderbilt Law Review is proud to announce the publication of our January issue.

 

ARTICLES

Tun-Jen Chiang, The Reciprocity of Search, 66 Vand. L. Rev. 1 (2013).

Michael D. Frakes & Melissa F. Wasserman, Does Agency Funding Affect Decisionmaking?: An Empirical Assessment of the PTO’s Granting Patterns, 66 Vand. L. Rev. 67 (2013).

Andrew Kent, Judicial Review for Enemy Fighters: The Court’s Fateful Turn in Ex parte Quirin, the Nazi Saboteur Case, 66 Vand. L. Rev. 153 (2013).

Joanna M. Shepherd, Products Liability and Economic Activity: An Empirical Analysis of Tort Reform’s Impact on Businesses, Employment, and Production, 66 Vand. L. Rev. 257 (2013).

 

NOTES

Taylor M. Owings, Identifying a Maverick: When Antitrust Law Should Protect a Low-Cost Competitor, 66 Vand. L. Rev. 323 (2013).

V. Blair Druhan, Severe or Pervasive: An Analysis of Who, What, and Where Matters When Determining Sexual Harassment, 66 Vand. L. Rev. 355 (2013).

 

Are you interested in writing a response to one of these pieces? Visit Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc for more details.

  January 28, 2013 at 12:59 pm   Posted in: Uncategorized   Print This Post   No Comments

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 65, Number 6 (November 2012): Supply and Demand: Barriers to a New Energy Future Symposium

posted by Vanderbilt Law Review

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 65, Number 6 (November 2012).

The Vanderbilt Law Review is proud to announce the publication of our November issue, featuring articles from the Symposium held at Vanderbilt Law School on February 24, 2012, Supply and Demand: Barriers to a New Energy Future.

 

ARTICLES

Michael P. Vandenbergh, J.B. Ruhl & Jim Rossi, Symposium: Introduction, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 1447 (2012).

Robert H. Socolow, Truths We Must Tell Ourselves to Manage Climate Change, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 1455 (2012).

Daniel A. Farber, Sustainable Consumption, Energy Policy, and Individual Well-Being, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 1479 (2012).

Michael P. Vandenbergh & Jim Rossi, Good for You, Bad for Us: The Financial Disincentive for Net Demand Reduction, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 1527 (2012).

Katrina Fischer Kuh, Personal Environmental Information: The Promise and Perils of the Emerging Capacity to Identify Individual Environmental Harms, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 1565 (2012).

Noah M. Sachs, Can We Regulate Our Way to Energy Efficiency? Product Standards as Climate Policy, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 1631 (2012).

Uma Outka, Environmental Law and Fossil Fuels: Barriers to Renewable Energy, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 1679 (2012).

Dan Tarlock, Hydro Law and the Future of Hydoelectric Power Generation in the United States, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 1723 (2012).

J.B. Ruhl, Harmonizing Commercial Wind Power and the Endangered Species Act Through Administrative Reform, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 1769 (2012).

Alexandra B. Klass & Elizabeth J. Wilson, Interstate Transmission Challenges for Renewable Energy: A Federalism Mismatch, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 1801 (2012).

Sara C. Bronin, Building-Related Renewable Energy and the Case of 360 State Street, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 1875 (2012).

Are you interested in writing a response to one of these pieces? Visit Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc for more details.

  November 26, 2012 at 12:12 pm   Posted in: Uncategorized   Print This Post   One Comment

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 65, Number 5 (October 2012)

posted by Vanderbilt Law Review

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 65, Number 5 (October 2012).

The Vanderbilt Law Review is proud to announce the publication of our October issue.

 

ARTICLES

Wayne A. Logan, Constitutional Cacophony: Federal Circuit Splits and the Fourth Amendment, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 1137 (2012).

Terry A. Maroney, Angry Judges, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 1207 (2012).

Morgan Ricks, A Regulatory Design for Monetary Stability, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 1289 (2012).

 

NOTES

Angela L. Bergman, For Their Own Good? Exploring Legislative Responses to the Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children and the Illinois Safe Children Act, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 1361 (2012).

Marcy Nicks Moody, WARNING: MAY CAUSE WARMING Potential Trade Challenges to Private Environmental Labels, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 1401 (2012).

Are you interested in writing a response to one of these pieces? Visit Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc for more details.

  October 24, 2012 at 2:40 pm   Posted in: Law Rev (Vanderbilt), Uncategorized   Print This Post   No Comments

Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc – New Publications

posted by Vanderbilt Law Review

Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc is pleased to announce several new publications.

Three response essays in our Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin Roundtable are now available, including:

Revisiting Grutter and Its Diversity Rationale: A Few Reactions to Professor Blumstein’s Critique
Vikram David Amar · 65 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 195 (2012)

Whatever
Girardeau A. Spann · 65 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 203 (2012)

The Education of an Admissions Office
Gerald Torres · 65 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 211 (2012)

We have also published two new book reviews:

American Legal History Revisited
James W. Ely, Jr. · 65 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 185 (2012), Reviewing: G. Edward White, Law in American History, Volume 1: From the Colonial Years Through the Civil War (Oxford University Press, 2012).

Justice for All?
Rebecca K. Lee · 65 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 217 (2012), Reviewing: Judith Resnik & Dennis Curtis, Representing Justice: Invention, Controversy, and Rights in City-States and Democratic Courtrooms (Yale University Press, 2011).

  September 26, 2012 at 8:55 am   Posted in: Constitutional Law, Law Rev (Vanderbilt), Law Rev Contents, Law Rev Forum, Supreme Court   Print This Post   No Comments

Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc Fisher v. University of Texas Roundtable

posted by Vanderbilt Law Review

Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc is pleased to present the first round of our current Roundtable, which looks at Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin. Fisher will be argued in the October 2012 Supreme Court Term and the Court will consider whether the University of Texas’s use of race in its undergraduate admissions process is lawful under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Professors Vikram Amar, James Blumstein, Tomiko Brown-Nagin, Girardeau Spann, and Gerald Torres consider the issues and offer their views on how the Court might—or should—approach this case in their “First Take” articles. In approximately eight weeks, these same scholars will offer responses to each other’s essays. We look forward to a spirited debate on these interesting and often contentious issues.

Roundtable: First Takes

Is Honesty the Best (Judicial) Policy in Affirmative Action Cases? Fisher v. University of Texas Gives the Court (Yet) Another Chance to Say Yes
Vikram David Amar · 65 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 77 (2012)

Grutter and Fisher: A Reassessment and a Preview
James F. Blumstein · 65 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 57 (2012)

The Diversity Paradox: Judicial Review in an Age of Demographic and Educational Change
Tomiko Brown-Nagin · 65 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 113 (2012)

Fisher v. Grutter
Girardeau A. Spann · 65 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 45 (2012)

Fisher v. University of Texas: Living in the Dwindling Shadow of LBJ’s America
Gerald Torres · 65 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 97 (2012)

  July 24, 2012 at 9:10 pm   Posted in: Constitutional Law, Law Rev (Vanderbilt), Law Rev Contents, Law Rev Forum, Race, Supreme Court, Uncategorized   Print This Post   No Comments

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 65, Number 4 (May 2012)

posted by Vanderbilt Law Review

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 65, Number 4 (May 2012).

The Vanderbilt Law Review is proud to announce the publication of our May issue. Congratulations to the Class of 2012 and a special thank you to the outgoing editorial board!

 

ARTICLES

Sergio J. Campos, Mass Torts and Due Process, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 1059 (2012).

David S. Rubenstein, Delegating Supremacy?, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 1125 (2012).

Franita Tolson, Reinventing Sovereignty?: Federalism as a Constraint on the Voting Rights Act, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 1195 (2012).

 

NOTES

Evie Whiting, Square Dance: Fitting the Square Peg of Fixation into the Round Hole of Choreographic Works, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 1261 (2012).

John C. Williams, Qualifying Qualified Immunity, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 1295 (2012).

Are you interested in writing a response to one of these pieces? Visit Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc for more details.

  May 31, 2012 at 4:03 pm   Posted in: Law Rev (Vanderbilt)   Print This Post   No Comments

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 65, Number 3 (April 2012)

posted by Vanderbilt Law Review

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 65, Number 3 (April 2012).

The Vanderbilt Law Review is proud to announce the publication of our April issue.

 

ARTICLES

David Fagundes & Jonathan S. Masur, Costly Intellectual Property, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 677 (2012).

Paul H. Robinson, Sean E. Jackowitz, Daniel M. Bartels, Extralegal Punishment Factors: A Study of Forgiveness, Hardship, Good Deeds, Apology, Remorse, and Other Such Discretionary Factors in Assessing Criminal Punishment, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 737 (2012).

Eyal Zamir, Loss Aversion and the Law, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 829 (2012).

 

ESSAY

Jill Elaine Hasday, Siblings in Law, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 897 (2012).

 

NOTES

Stephanie A. Kostiuk, After GINA, NINA? Neuroscience-Based Discrimination in the Workplace, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 933 (2012).

Mary Alexander Myers, Standing on the Edge: Standing Doctrine and the Injury Requirement at the Borders of Establishment Clause Jurisprudence, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 979 (2012).

Rachel A. Weisshaar, Hazy Shades of Winter: Resolving the Circuit Split over Preliminary Injunctions, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 1011 (2012).

Are you interested in writing a response to one of these pieces? Visit Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc for more details.

  April 27, 2012 at 3:47 pm   Posted in: Law Rev (Vanderbilt)   Print This Post   No Comments

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 65, Number 2 (March 2012)

posted by Vanderbilt Law Review

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 65, Number 2 (March 2012).

The Vanderbilt Law Review is proud to announce the publication of our March issue.

 

ARTICLES

Robert P. Bartlett, III, Making Banks Transparent, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 293 (2012).

Christine N. Cimini, Undocumented Workers and Concepts of Fault: Are Courts Engaged in Legitimate Decisionmaking?, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 389 (2012).

Brandon L. Garrett, Eyewitnesses and Exclusion, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 451 (2012).

Jonathan Remy Nash, On the Efficient Deployment of Rules and Standards to Define Federal Jurisdiction, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 509 (2012).

 

NOTES

Adam Pié, The Monster Under the Bed: The Imaginary Circuit Split and the Nightmares Created in the Special Needs Doctrine’s Application to Child Abuse, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 563 (2012).

Geraldine W. Young, A More Intelligent and Just Atkins: Adjusting for the Flynn Effect in Capital Determinations of Mental Retardation or Intellectual Disability, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 615 (2012).

Are you interested in writing a response to one of these pieces? Visit Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc for more details.

  March 31, 2012 at 4:33 pm   Posted in: Law Rev (Virginia)   Print This Post   No Comments

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 65, Number 1 (January 2012)

posted by Vanderbilt Law Review

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 65, Number 1 (January 2012).

The Vanderbilt Law Review is proud to announce the publication of our January issue.

 

ARTICLES

Darian M. Ibrahim, The New Exit in Venture Capital, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 1 (2012).

Lloyd Hitoshi Mayer, The “Independent” Sector: Fee-for-Service Charity and the Limits of Autonomy, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 51 (2012).

Timothy Zick, Falsely Shouting Fire in a Global Theater: Emerging Complexities of Transborder Expression, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 125 (2012).

 

NOTES

Caroline Cecot, Blowing Hot Air: An Analysis of State Involvement in Greenhouse Gas Litigation, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 189 (2012).

Mike Dreyfuss, My Fellow Americans, We Are Going to Kill You: The Legality of Targeting and Killing U.S. Citizens Abroad, 65 Vand. L. Rev. 249 (2012).

Are you interested in writing a response to one of these pieces? Visit Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc for more details.

  January 31, 2012 at 5:31 pm   Posted in: Law Rev (Vanderbilt), Uncategorized   Print This Post   No Comments

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 64, Number 6 (November 2011)

posted by Vanderbilt Law Review

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 64, Number 6 (November 2011)

The Vanderbilt Law Review is proud to announce the publication of our November issue. This issue follows a conference hosted on April 1, 2011 titled Rigs, Risk, and Responsibility: Conference on the BP Oil Spill.

CONFERENCE

W. Kip Viscusi & Richard J. Zeckhauser, Deterring and Compensating Oil-Spill Catastrophes: The Need for Strict and Two-Tier Liability, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 1717 (2011).

Kenneth S. Abraham, Catastrophic Oil Spills and the Problem of Insurance, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 1769 (2011).

Joseph E. Aldy, Real-Time Economic Analysis and Policy Development During the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 1795 (2011).

Edward B. Barbier, Coastal Wetland Restoration and the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 1821 (2011).

Mark A. Cohen, Madeline Gottlieb, Joshua Linn & Nathan Richardson, Deepwater Drilling: Law, Policy, and Economics of Firm Organization and Safety, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 1853 (2011).

Bruce L. Hay, Christopher Rendall-Jackson & David Rosenberg, Litigating BP’s Contribution Claims in Publicly Subsidized Courts: Should Contracting Parties Pay Their Own Way?, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 1919 (2011).

Erin O’Hara O’Connor, Organizational Apologies: BP as a Case Study, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 1959 (2011).

Steven Shavell, Should BP Be Liable for Economic Losses Due to the Moratorium on Oil Drilling Imposed After the Deepwater Horizon Accident?, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 1995 (2011).

Are you interested in writing a response to one of these pieces? Visit our website for more details.

  November 30, 2011 at 1:37 am   Posted in: Law Rev (Vanderbilt)   Print This Post   No Comments

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 64, Number 5 (October 2011)

posted by Vanderbilt Law Review

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 64, Number 5 (October 2011)

The Vanderbilt Law Review is proud to announce the publication of our October issue. This issue includes tributes to Professor Richard A. Nagareda.

 

RICHARD A. NAGAREDA, IN MEMORIAM

Andrew R. Gould, Foreword, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 1397 (2011).

J. Maria Glover, Tribute Essay, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 1401 (2011).

John C.P. Goldberg, Tribute Essay, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 1409 (2011).

Chris Guthrie, Tribute Essay, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 1415 (2011).

Samuel Issacharoff, Tribute Essay, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 1419 (2011).

Suzanna Sherry, Tribute Essay, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 1423 (2011).

 

ARTICLES

R. Michael Cassidy, Plea Bargaining, Discovery, and the Intractable Problem of Impeachment Disclosures, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 1429 (2011).

Sean B. Seymore, Patently Impossible, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 1491 (2011).

Tess Wilkinson-Ryan, Breaching the Mortgage Contract: The Behavioral Economics of Strategic Default, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 1547 (2011).

 

NOTES

Jenna G. Farleigh, Splitting the Baby: Standardizing Issue Class Certification, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 1585 (2011).

Nathan Pysno, Should Twombly and Iqbal Apply to Affirmative Defenses?, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 1633 (2011).

Gavin Reinke, When a Promise Isn’t a Promise: Public Employers’ Ability to Alter Pension Plans of Retired Employees, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 1673 (2011).

Are you interested in writing a response to one of these pieces? Visit our website for more details.

  October 26, 2011 at 4:40 pm   Posted in: Law Rev (Vanderbilt), Uncategorized   Print This Post   No Comments

Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc Golan Roundtable

posted by Vanderbilt Law Review

Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc is pleased to present our current Roundtable on Golan v. Holder, which is to be argued at the Supreme Court on October 5, 2011. In Golan, the Court will consider whether Congress may constitutionally confer copyright on works that have fallen into the public domain. Congress created a new class of “restored” works in 1996 in order to fulfill its obligations under the Berne Convention, an international copyright treaty. Professor Tyler T. Ochoa introduces the case, discusses the history of the Berne Convention, and analyzes how the Court’s decision will affect the idea of the public domain. Professor Daniel Gervais takes a closer look at the Berne Convention. He argues that Berne is a flexible document and that Congress provided greater protection to restored works than is actually required by the treaty. Dale Nelson, Senior Intellectual Property Counsel at Warner Bros., questions whether restoration has had as significant an effect on the public domain as its detractors believe. She argues that the benefits of restoring foreign works to copyright greatly outweigh the burdens to users. Professor David Olson looks at Golan’s constitutional questions from a perspective not emphasized in the parties’ briefs. He argues that, because restoration is in violation of the Progress Clause, the Government can assert no legitimate interest to support its claim that restoration does not unconstitutionally restrict the Petitioners’ First Amendment speech rights. Finally, Professor Elizabeth Townsend Gard takes a detailed look at the mechanics of the statute enacting copyright restoration. In her view, the statute does not achieve the Government’s stated interests and transgresses the traditional contours of copyright. She provides several recommendations for statutory amendments that would make determination of public domain status a more manageable exercise.

Tyler T. Ochoa, Is the Copyright Public Domain Irrevocable? An Introduction to Golan v. Holder, 64 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 123 (2011).

Daniel Gervais, Golan v. Holder: A Look at the Constraints Imposed by the Berne Convention, 64 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 147 (2011).

Dale Nelson, Golan Restoration: Small Burden, Big Gains, 64 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 165 (2011).

David S. Olson, A Legitimate Interest in Promoting the Progress of Science: Constitutional Constraints on Copyright Laws, 64 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 185 (2011).

Elizabeth Townsend Gard, In the Trenches with § 104A: An Evaluation of the Parties’ Arguments in Golan v. Holder as It Heads to the Supreme Court, 64 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 199 (2011).

  October 3, 2011 at 3:17 pm  Tags: copyright, First Amendment, Supreme Court  Posted in: Law Rev (Vanderbilt)   Print This Post   No Comments

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 64, Number 4 (May 2011)

posted by Vanderbilt Law Review

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 64, Number 4 (May 2011)

Congratulations and a special thank you to the outgoing editorial board!

ARTICLES

Eleanor Marie Lawrence Brown, Visa as Property, Visa as Collateral, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 1047 (2011)

Elizabeth Chamblee Burch, Optimal Lead Plaintiffs, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 1109 (2011)

O. Carter Snead, Memory and Punishment, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 1195 (2011)

NOTES

Michael G. Bowers, Implementing an Online Dispute Resolution Scheme: Using Domain Name Registration Contracts to Create a Workable Framework, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 1265 (2011)

Steven J. Haymore, Public(ly Oriented) Companies: B Corporations and the Delaware Stakeholder Provision Dilemma, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 1311 (2011)

Seth M. Hyatt, Text Offenders: Privacy, Text Messages, and the Failure of the Title III Minimization Requirement, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 1347 (2011)

Are you interested in writing a response to one of these pieces? Visit our website for more details.

  May 30, 2011 at 4:40 am   Posted in: Law Rev (Vanderbilt)   Print This Post   No Comments

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 64, Number 3 (April 2011)

posted by Vanderbilt Law Review

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 64, Number 3 (April 2011)

ARTICLES

Mark Bartholomew & Patrick F. McArdle, Causing Infringement, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 675 (2011)

Michelle M. Harner & Jamie Marincic, Committee Capture? An Empirical Analysis of the Role of Creditors’ Committees in Business Reorganizations, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 749 (2011)

Herbert Hovenkamp & Christopher R. Leslie, The Firm as Cartel Manager, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 813 (2011)

Jay Tidmarsh, Procedure, Substance, and Erie, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 877 (2011)

NOTES

Lauren Z. Curry, Agents in Secrecy: The Use of Information Surrogates in Trust Administration, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 925 (2011)

James M. Gottry, Just Shoot Me: Public Accommodation Anti-Discrimination Laws Take Aim at First Amendment Freedom of Speech, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 961 (2011)

Rachel E. Moore, Giving It Another Shot: A Reexamination of the “Second or Subsequent Conviction” Language of the Firearm Possession Sentencing Statute, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 1005 (2011)

Are you interested in writing a response to one of these pieces? Visit our website for more details.

  April 27, 2011 at 7:19 pm   Posted in: Law Rev (Vanderbilt)   Print This Post   No Comments

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 64, Number 2 (March 2011)

posted by Vanderbilt Law Review

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 64, Number 2 (March 2011)

SYMPOSIUM

Kenneth R. Feinberg, Symposium on Executive Compensation Keynote Address, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 349 (2011)

Ruth Bender, Paying for Advice: The Role of the Remuneration Consultant in U.K. Listed Companies, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 361 (2011)

Martin J. Conyon, Executive Compensation Consultants and CEO Pay, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 399 (2011)

Guido Ferrarini & Maria Cristina Ungureanu, Economics, Politics, and the International Principles for Sound Compensation Practices: An Analysis of Executive Pay at European Banks, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 431 (2011)

M. Todd Henderson, Insider Trading and CEO Pay, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 505 (2011)

Jennifer G. Hill, Ronald W. Masulis & Randall S. Thomas, Comparing CEO Employment Contract Provisions: Differences Between Australia and the United States, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 559 (2011)

David I. Walker, Evolving Executive Equity Compensation and the Limits of Optimal Contracting, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 611 (2011)

Are you interested in writing a response to one of these pieces? Visit our website for more details.

  March 30, 2011 at 5:01 pm   Posted in: Law Rev (Vanderbilt), Uncategorized   Print This Post   No Comments

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 64, Number 1 (January 2011)

posted by Vanderbilt Law Review

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 64, Number 1 (January 2011)

ARTICLES

J.B. Ruhl & James Salzman, Gaming the Past: The Theory and Practice of Historic Baselines in the Administrative State, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 1 (2011)

Anthony J. Sebok, The Inauthentic Claim, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 61 (2011)

Dan Simon, The Limited Diagnosticity of Criminal Trials, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 143 (2011)

NOTES

Barbara R. Barreno, In Search of Guidance: An Examination of Past, Present, and Future Adjudications of Domestic Violence Asylum Claims, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 225 (2011)

Carter T. Coker, Hope-Fulfilling or Effectively Chilling? Reconciling the Hate Crimes Prevention Act With the First Amendment, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 271 (2011)

Lauren N. Fromme, Unreliable Securities for Retirement Income Security: Certifying the ERISA Stock-Drop Class, 64 Vand. L. Rev. 301 (2011)

Are you interested in writing a response to one of these pieces? Visit our website for more details.

  January 30, 2011 at 8:26 pm   Posted in: Law Rev (Vanderbilt)   Print This Post   No Comments

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 63, Number 6 (November 2010)

posted by Vanderbilt Law Review

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 63, Number 6 (November 2010)

ARTICLES

Shyamkrishna Balganesh, The Pragmatic Incrementalism of Common Law Intellectual Property, 63 Vand. L. Rev. 1543 (2010)

David Gray, Punishment as Suffering, 63 Vand. L. Rev. 1619 (2010)

Jamie Henikoff Moffitt, Merging in the Shadow of the Law: The Case for Consistent Judicial Efficiency Analysis, 63 Vand. L. Rev. 1697 (2010)

NOTES

Anne D. Gooch, Admitting Guilt by Professing Innocence: When Sentence Enhancements Based on Alford Pleas Are Unconstitutional, 63 Vand. L. Rev. 1755 (2010)

Keith Hollingshead-Cook, Another Can of Crawford Worms: Certificates of Nonexistence of Public Record and the Confrontation Clause, 63 Vand. L. Rev. 1793 (2010)

Niels Jensen, How to Kill the Scapegoat: Addressing Offshore Tax Evasion with a Special View to Switzerland, 63 Vand. L. Rev. 1823 (2010)

Are you interested in writing a response to one of these pieces? Visit our website for more details.

  November 23, 2010 at 1:06 pm   Posted in: Law Rev (Vanderbilt)   Print This Post   No Comments

Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc Dukes Roundtable

posted by Vanderbilt Law Review

Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc is pleased to present its latest Roundtable on Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.. Professor Elizabeth Burch’s introductory piece lays the foundation for the debate. Professors Robert Bone, Alexandra Lahav, Greg Mitchell, and Richard Nagareda are providing their “first takes” on the case. We hope you find the Roundtable informative and engaging.

Elizabeth Chamblee Burch, Introduction: Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 63 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 77 (2010).

Robert G. Bone, Sorting Through the Certification Muddle, 63 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 105 (2010)

Alexandra D. Lahav, The Curse of Bigness and the Optimal Size of Class Actions, 63 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 117 (2010).

Gregory Mitchell, Good Causes and Bad Science, 63 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 133 (2010).

Richard A. Nagareda, Common Answers for Class Certification, 63 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 149 (2010).

  November 1, 2010 at 11:56 pm   Posted in: Law Rev (Vanderbilt)   Print This Post   No Comments

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 63, Number 5 (October 2010)

posted by Vanderbilt Law Review

Vanderbilt Law Review, Volume 63, Number 5 (October 2010)

ARTICLES

Afra Afsharipour, Transforming the Allocation of Deal Risk Through Reverse Termination Fees, 63 Vand. L. Rev. 1161 (2010)

Wayne A. Logan, Erie and Federal Criminal Courts, 63 Vand. L. Rev. 1243 (2010)

Neil M. Richards, The Puzzle of Brandeis, Privacy, and Speech, 63 Vand. L. Rev. 1295 (2010)

Paul Rose, Common Agency and the Public Corporation, 63 Vand. L. Rev. 1355 (2010)

NOTES

David M. Barnes, Shotgun Weddings: Director and Officer Fiduciary Duties in Government-Controlled and Partially-Nationalized Corporations, 63 Vand. L. Rev. 1419 (2010)

Ryan M. Davis, Trimming the “Judicial Oak”: Rule 10b5-2(b)(1), Confidentiality Agreements, and the Proper Scope of Insider Trading Liability, 63 Vand. L. Rev. 1469 (2010)

Jacob William Neu, “Workers of God”: The Holy See’s Liability for Clerical Sexual Abuse, 63 Vand. L. Rev. 1507 (2010)

Are you interested in writing a response to one of these pieces? Visit our website for more details.

  October 28, 2010 at 1:35 am   Posted in: Law Rev (Vanderbilt)   Print This Post   No Comments

• « Older Entries