ContractsProf Blog

Editor: Myanna Dellinger
University of South Dakota School of Law

Thursday, March 9, 2017

Weekly Top Ten SSRN Contracts Downloads (March 9, 2017)

Top10DeskSign

SSRN Top Downloads For
Contracts & Commercial Law eJournal

RECENT TOP PAPERS for all papers first announced in the last 60 days SSRN Logo2
8 Jan 2017 through 9 Mar 2017

Rank Downloads Paper Title
1 251 Rise of the Digital Regulator
Rory Van Loo
Boston University School of Law 
2 202 Notice and Takedown in the Domain Name System: ICANN's Ambivalent Drift into Online Content Regulation
Annemarie Bridy
University of Idaho College of Law
3 179 Choice of Law in the American Courts in 2016: Thirtieth Annual Survey
Symeon C. Symeonides
Willamette University - College of Law
4 168 Interpreting Contracts via Surveys and Experiments
Omri Ben-Shahar and Lior Strahilevitz
University of Chicago Law School and University of Chicago Law School
5 152 Interpretation and Construction in Contract Law
Gregory Klass
Georgetown University Law Center
6 144 What Brexit Means for the Interpretation and Drafting of Financial Contracts
Matthias Lehmann and Nihal Dsouza
University of Bonn and University of Bonn
7 137 The Deformation of Contract in the Information Society
Margaret Jane Radin
University of Michigan Law School
8 128 Contracting Over Privacy: Introduction
Omri Ben-Shahar and Lior Strahilevitz
University of Chicago Law School and University of Chicago Law School
9 93 Understanding the Consumer Review Fairness Act of 2016
Eric Goldman
Santa Clara University - School of Law
10 138 Comparative Contract Law and Development: The Missing Link?
Mariana Pargendler
Fundação Getulio Vargas Law School at São Paulo

 

SSRN Top Downloads For
Law & Society: Private Law - Contracts eJournal

RECENT TOP PAPERS for all papers first announced in the last 60 days SSRN Logo2
8 Jan 2017 through 9 Mar 2017

Rank Downloads Paper Title
1 251 Rise of the Digital Regulator
Rory Van Loo
Boston University School of Law
2 179 Choice of Law in the American Courts in 2016: Thirtieth Annual Survey
Symeon C. Symeonides
Willamette University - College of Law
3 168

Interpreting Contracts via Surveys and Experiments
Omri Ben-Shahar and Lior Strahilevitz
University of Chicago Law School and University of Chicago Law School

4 152 Interpretation and Construction in Contract Law
Gregory Klass
Georgetown University Law Center
5 138 Comparative Contract Law and Development: The Missing Link?
Mariana Pargendler
Fundação Getulio Vargas Law School at São Paulo
6 137 The Deformation of Contract in the Information Society
Margaret Jane Radin
University of Michigan Law School
7 128 Contracting Over Privacy: Introduction
Omri Ben-Shahar and Lior Strahilevitz
University of Chicago Law School and University of Chicago Law School
8 109 History and Theory of Good Faith Performance in the United States
Steven J. Burton
University of Iowa - College of Law
9 86 The International Task Force on Mixed Mode Dispute Resolution: Exploring the Interplay between Mediation, Evaluation and Arbitration in Commercial Cases
Thomas Stipanowich and Veronique Fraser
Pepperdine University School of Law and Université de Sherbrooke - Group for the Prevention and Resolution of Disputes (G-PRD)
10 80 Contract Exposition and Formalism
Gregory Klass
Georgetown University Law Center

March 9, 2017 in Recent Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)

Wednesday, March 8, 2017

Orit Gan (Sapir College, School of Law) - KCON Scholarship Spotlight

The conference is over but the scholarship lives on. This is one of a series of posts highlighting several KCON XII presenters who graciously provided me with abstracts or summaries of their presentations.

KCON12-Logo

Gett Abuse

Orit Gan (Sapir College, School of Law)

SapirLogoUnder Jewish law divorce occurs when the husband writes and delivers and the wife accepts a gett. Until wife is granted a gett she may not remarry or date. Some men use the gett as a bargaining chip to extort favorable economic divorce agreements. In other words men threaten women by refusing to grant them a gett unless they will succumb to their financial demands. This is gett abuse.

Women who pay for their gett resist enforcement of the divorce agreements by claiming duress, and U.S. courts usually accept such claims. However, based on anti-commodification theories I claim that trading the gett for money should be prohibited. I suggest that gett should be an inalienable right for two reasons. Women pay for a gett under conditions of severe inequality. They are coerced by the necessities of the situation. Moreover, this exchange has a degrading effect. Women's autonomy, dignity and freedom are corrupted and diminished by trading the gett. In an ideal world a gett should not be commodified.

However, we do not live in an ideal world. In today's reality, trading a gett also has advantages for women. Paying for a gett is their only way to break free from the marriage. The alternative is staying married against their will. Furthermore, women bring tort claims against their husbands in civil courts for gett refusal claiming emotional distress. Women then leverage the compensation that they are awarded to get a gett. They use the tort claim to improve their bargaining power and trade the damages awarded for a gett.

Therefore both commodification and non-commodification of gett have both advantages and disadvantages for women. A way out of this double bind dilemma is to recognize incomplete commodification.

The gett abuse analysis has broader implications. For example, the gett abuse analysis may be applicable to custody negotiations. Spouses bargain for their children's custody and maintenance upon divorce. Studies show that women are willing to waive financial rights in order to get custody. This transaction may have the corruption and coercion effects and therefore custody may also be an inalienable right.

March 8, 2017 in Conferences, Contract Profs, Recent Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)

Tuesday, March 7, 2017

Hila Keren (Southwestern Law School) - KCON Scholarship Spotlight

The conference is over but the scholarship lives on. This is one of a series of posts highlighting several KCON XII presenters who graciously provided me with abstracts or summaries of their presentations.

KCON12-Logo

Emotional Value and the Value of Emotions

Hila Keren, Ph.D. (Southwestern Law School)

Hila Keren (Southwestern)American contract law has demonstrated an ongoing and long-lasting reluctance to award remedies to a party to a contract who suffered an emotional harm due to a breach by the other party. Such reluctance stands in clear contrast to the treatment of other harms coming from a breach of contract, namely economic and physical harms. In this paper I argue for equal treatment of all harms caused by a breach of contract and against the legal marking of emotional harms as unfit for the general effort of contract law to compensate injured parties.

For many decades legal theorists have debated the aptness of a special and tightfisted legal response to emotional harms, highlighting both aspects relating to the nature of law and the qualities of the emotions. For example: Is the law, with its rational logic, able to address affective problems? Are emotions uniquely easier to fake or inflate?

Hila Keren KCON12 SlideMy paper brings to the debate a fresh set of arguments. Analyzing the issue from the perspective of the novel approach of law and emotions, I argue that the reluctance to award damages for emotional harms reflects and reinforces law’s “hyper-rationality,” i.e., the broader legal misunderstanding and mistreatment of emotions. More importantly, taking emotions seriously and in an interdisciplinary fashion, I contend that for the last four decades we have been subject to a rapidly increasing dominance of a neoliberal worldview that has operated to reconfigure the meaning of the emotions themselves. This significant shift, I submit, makes compensation for emotional harms more necessary than ever before. 

In particular, I show how neoliberalism has made key positive emotions, such as happiness, an essential part of our human capital and thus has turned these emotions into economic assets—indistinguishable from those the law is eager to protect by contractual remedies. Similarly, neoliberalism has reframed negative emotions of the sort engendered by breach of contract—anxiety or anger for example—as a cause of depreciation of one’s human capital, making such harms impossible to tell apart from other contractual injuries. In a neoliberal world that constantly requires people to invest expensive resources in maintaining their emotional “portfolio,” I conclude, there is an urgent need to bring the conventional reluctance to compensate for emotional harms to an end.

 

March 7, 2017 in Conferences, Contract Profs, Recent Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)

Allen Kamp (John Marshall - Chicago) - KCON Scholarship Spotlight

The conference is over but the scholarship lives on. This is one of a series of posts highlighting several KCON XII presenters who graciously provided me with abstracts or summaries of their presentations.

KCON12-Logo

WELLNESS PROGRAMS UNDER THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT—A STATUTORY DEFINITION OF “VOLUNTARY”

Allen R. Kamp (John Marshall Law School - Chicago)

          Can Congress force you to eat your broccoli?  To the Supreme Court in NFIB v. Sibelius, the answer is no under the Commerce Clause, but yes under the Taxation Clause.[1] But can your employer force you to eat it? The answer may well be yes.

Allen Kamp (JMLS Chicago)         An employer could have this ability under wellness programs.” Wellness program” is a defined term under the Affordable Care Act.[2] Wellness programs may include monitoring of vital functions and activity that may report activity 24/7.[3] A certain activity level may be required, for example, 5,500 steps a day. Wellness programs may also require meeting such goals as lowering body/mass ratio or cholesterol levels.[4]

          The ACA authorizes wellness programs if they are “voluntary.” The term is numerically defined, unlike legal definitions of duress and unconscionably, which may invalidate some contracts. Employers can reduce employees’ pay by 30% of the total amount of the insurance costs of the employee’s insurance and be “voluntary.” (The total cost includes both the employee and the employer’s contribution.[5] Thirty percent of the average cost of insurance is more than $5,000 per year.[6] For a low wage employee, this penalty is a high percentage of his income.[7]

          The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has issued a regulation that adopts the ADA definition of “voluntary.” [8]

          Although the definition of voluntary will probably not be decided for years, wellness programs starkly pose the issue of the limits of employer power under the employment contract  Thanks to modern technology, such biometric data as activity level and pulse can be monitored 24/7.[9] A blood test now can reveal he presence of nicotine, cholesterols, glucose, and a great amount of other data such as nicotine use.[10] Should the employer be allowed to monitor employee behavior and vitals 24/7? Wellness programs can include exercise programs (for example, 5,500 steps a day), taking part in health improvement counseling (e.g., weight loss or smoking cessation), and attainment of certain goals, such as lower cholesterol and body/mass index. Should an employer be able to mandate an exercise regime? Should an employer be able to require either achievement of a change in an employee’s body with the threat of sanctions or firing if the change fails to take place?

          The rule may well be that Congress cannot force one to eat one’s broccoli, at least under the Commerce Clause, but one’s employer may well be able to. One can, of course, find another job (one without a wellness program), while one cannot opt out of a federal law. But finding a new job for many is difficult and finding one without a wellness program could be harder.

          We can engage in law professor speculation. Given that assesment to contract terms is found in the most extenuated contexts (See, e.g., Carnival Cruise). Does the ADA definition actually represent  an advance towards a meaningful definition of consent?

          This leads to my final point, which is a dig at my libertarian friends and colleagues. The libertarian premise is that if government power is limited, human freedom is increased. Is there, however, a Law of Conservation of Power in a society parallel to the Law of Conservation of Energy, that the amount of energy in a closed system remains constant? Does the amount of power in a society remain constant, so that if power is diminished in one place it just goes somewhere else?

[1] Nat’l Fed'n of Indep. Bus. v. Sebelius, 132 S. Ct. 2566, 567 U.S.___ (2012).

[2] Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act § 1201(4), 42 U.S.C. § 300gg-4(j)(1)(A) (2012).

[3] E.g., the Fitbit.

[4] Although many federal statutes regulate wellness, none deal with the problems of employee privacy or employer control over employees per se. Statutes which may apply to wellness programs in are the Affordable Care Act (ACA), The Americans With Disability Act (ADA), the Genetic Information Non-Disclosure Act (GINA), HIPPA, and Title VII. The main current legal controversies center around the ACA, the ADA and GINA.

[5] 42 U.S.C. § 300gg-4(j)(3)(A) (2012).

[6] Letter from Congressional Members, Robert C. Scott, Elizabeth Warren, Patty Murray, Louis McIntosh Slaughter, Richard Blumenthal, Janice D. Schakowsky, and Sherrod Brown to Jerry R. Yang, Chair of the EEOC (Feb. 2, 2016), http://democrats.edworkforce.house.gov/sites/democrats.edworkforce.house.gov/files/2016-02-11%20Letter%20to%20EEOC%20Chair%20Yang%20re.%20GINA%20Proposed%20Rule.pdf

[7] This brings the ACA into conflict with at least two other federal acts, the ADA and GINA. Both prevent health information from being disclosed to the employer. Note that the ADA is a law designed to prevent discrimination against the disabled and focuses on that problem, not the privacy aspects of wellness programs. The ADA defines “voluntary” as not being based on any sanction for non-agreement to participation in a wellness program. GINA has a similar provision, with the non-disclosure extending to spouses. So which Act controls? At present it is open question. The ACA is the later act and following the ADA or GINA would make its voluntary section meaningless. But the ACA Regulations do say that the ACA does not limit the ADA. The AARP has sued the E.E.O. C., seeking to have the regulation invalidated. See Complaint,  ww.aarp.org/content/dam/aarp/aarp_foundation/litigation/pdf-beg-02-01-2016/AARP-v-EEOC-complaint.pdf

[8] (3) Incentives offered for employee wellness programs. The use of incentives (financial or in-kind) in an employee wellness program, whether in the form of a reward or penalty, will not render the program involuntary if the maximum allowable incentive available under the program (whether the program is a participatory program or a health-contingent program, or some combination of the two, as those terms are defined in regulations at 26 CFR 54.9802-1(f)(1)(ii) and (iii), 29 CFR 2590.702(f)(1)(ii) and (iii), and 45 CFR 146.121(f)(1)(ii) and (iii), respectively) does not exceed:

(i) Thirty percent of the total cost of self-only coverage (including both the employee's and employer's contribution) of the group health plan in which the employee is enrolled when participation in the wellness program is limited to employees enrolled in the plan;

(ii) Thirty percent of the total cost of self-only coverage under the covered entity's group health plan, where the covered entity offers only one group health plan and participation in a wellness program is offered to all employees regardless of whether they are enrolled in the plan;

(iii) Thirty percent of the total cost of the lowest cost self-only coverage under a major medical group health plan where the covered entity offers more than one group health plan but participation in the wellness program is offered to employees whether or not they are enrolled in a particular plan; and

(iv) Thirty percent of the cost of self-only coverage under the second lowest cost Silver Plan for a 40-year-old non-smoker on the state or federal health care Exchange in the location that the covered entity identifies as its principal place of business if the covered entity does not offer a group health plan or group health insurance coverage.

29 C.F.R. 1630 (d) (2). Published 5/17/16, e-version.

 [9] See webpage of Fitbit advertising the use of the device in wellness programs.

[10] My latest blood test showed that I drink too much water and consume too many saturated fats and sugars.

March 7, 2017 in Conferences, Contract Profs, Recent Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)

Monday, March 6, 2017

Guy Rub (Ohio State) - KCON Scholarship Spotlight

The conference is over but the scholarship lives on. This is one of a series of posts highlighting several KCON XII presenters who graciously provided me with abstracts or summaries of their presentations.

KCON12-Logo

Copyright Survives: Rethinking the Copyright-Contracts Conflict

Guy A. Rub (The Ohio State University Michael E. Moritz College of Law)

Guy Rub (Ohio State)Copyright law consists of legal norms that govern certain actions with respect to creative works fixed in a tangible medium of expression. Contracts allow individuals to create legal norms with respect to creative (and non-creative) works that are fixed (and those that are not fixed) in a tangible medium of expression. This potential overlap in legal norms can create tension between the two. This tension is typically discussed under the auspice of copyright preemption doctrine.

The leading decision on this matter is Judge Easterbrook’s 1996 decision in ProCD v. Zeidenberg. In that case, the Seventh Circuit held that a contract that restricted the use of factual information was not preempted by the Copyright Act and therefore enforceable. The reaction among copyright scholars was swift and passionate. In dozens of articles and books, spreading over two decades, scholars cautioned that if the ProCD approach is broadly adopted, the results would be dire. Through contracts, the rights of copyright owners would run amok, expand, and in doing so they would invade, shrink, and possibly destroy the public domain. Contracts, we were repeatedly warned throughout the years, would kill copyright law.

 This Article challenges this scholarly consensus by studying the 288 court opinions that have dealt with the copyright-contract conflict over the past four decades. This examination reveals surprising facts: Notwithstanding the scholars’ warnings, ProCD’s approach won the day and was embraced by most federal circuit courts. However, the doomsday scenarios scholars warned against did not materialize. The overall effect of contracts on the size and scope of the public domain, or over copyright law as a whole, seems minimal. The Article explains this discrepancy and shows that contracts are an ineffective tool to control information because they are too weak of a device to threaten or replace copyright law. Indeed, to paraphrase Mark Twain, the reports of the death of copyright were greatly exaggerated.

 The Article concludes by placing this analysis in context, as part of a broader ongoing discussion on the desirability and enforceability of standard-form agreements.

 The Article is available for SSRN download here: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2926253

March 6, 2017 in Conferences, Contract Profs, Recent Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)

Eric Zacks (Wayne State) - KCON Scholarship Spotlight

The conference is over but the scholarship lives on. This is one of a series of posts highlighting several KCON XII presenters who graciously provided me with abstracts or summaries of their presentations.

KCON12-Logo

The Statute of Limitations, Res Judicata, and Acceleration Clauses in Mortgage Foreclosures

Eric A. Zacks (Wayne State University Law School)

ABSTRACT

Eric Zacks (Wayne State)The high volume of foreclosures during and following the Great Recession in the United States has led to the revelation of many troubling lending practices. It also has led to problematic judicial decisions that erode borrower protection by curtailing or eliminating procedural requirements and substantive defenses with respect to foreclosure. My article examines the treatment of statute of limitation and related defenses after a loan has been accelerated following a default. In particular, one would expect the formalism that is used to justify strict enforcement of the loan instruments for foreclosure purposes would also be employed when mortgagors fail to comply with statutory, common law, or contractual requirements regarding mortgage assignment, enforcement, acceleration, or foreclosure. In each instance, however, mortgagors are often instead protected by a contextual or equitable approach that seeks to preserve their right to foreclose. Some courts have ignored the traditional rule that acceleration under a contract starts the clock for statute of limitation purposes or that acceleration consolidates the loan instrument into a single obligation as opposed to an installment obligation. Instead, these courts have permitted lenders to accelerate loans repeatedly without triggering the statute of limitations or res judicata defenses. Consequently, lenders are permitted to assert foreclosure claims with respect to the same underlying debt amount over and over again. Instead of being used as a last-resort, acceleration and the subsequent foreclosure process can now be wielded as a significant threat to borrowers throughout the life of their home loan. My article explores the tendency of, and justification for, adjudicators to liberalize the foreclosure process and provides a critique of this approach.

March 6, 2017 in Conferences, Contract Profs, Recent Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)

Friday, March 3, 2017

Michael Malloy (Pacific McGeorge) - KCON Scholarship Spotlight

The conference is over but the scholarship lives on. This is one of a series of posts highlighting several KCON XII presenters who graciously provided me with abstracts or summaries of their presentations.

KCON12-Logo

 

Michael P. Malloy, Ph.D. (University of the Pacific McGeorge School of Law)

Contracts in a Digital Age: My Teenaged Tech Advisors Rescue Dad

Abstract

Michael Malloy (Pacific McGeorge)Contracting in a digital age isn’t just a change in time or place, it is in many respects potentially a change in orientation. Confronting that change initially involved improvising an assimilation of e-contracting into our unstated assumptions about the way contracts are created and the way they are performed, but some adjustment in the framework has been necessary as e-contracting has flourished. It has now been 25 years since the Third Circuit decided Step-Saver Data Systems, Inc. v. Wyse Technology, subjecting box top terms to those assumptions, and 20 years since the Seventh Circuit decided ProCD, Inc. v. Zeidenberg, distinguishing Step-Saver and embracing shrink wrap terms, leading the way to the easy application of click wrap terms. As we have moved from telex to facsimile, to e-mail, to texting, to direct communication between computers, and so on to as yet unknown methods – new technology almost always creates new challenges for contract law. My paper calls for the recognition of new analysis and adaptable principles for electronic contracting on its own terms, but without abandoning the objectives underlying contract law.

 

March 3, 2017 in Conferences, Contract Profs, Recent Scholarship | Permalink

Eyal Zamir (Hebrew University of Jerusalem) - KCON Scholarship Spotlight

The conference is over but the scholarship lives on. This is one of a series of posts highlighting several KCON XII presenters who graciously provided me with abstracts or summaries of their presentations.

KCON12-Logo

Pricing Methods, Marketing Techniques, and the Law of Consumer Contracts

Eyal Zamir (Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Faculty of Law)

(Based on a forthcoming book, Behavioral Law and Economics (co-authored with Doron Teichman, OUP)) 

Introduction

  Eyal Zamir (Hebrew University)           In our daily life, we all manipulate, and are being manipulated by, others. As Eladar Shafir has put it, being manipulated is an integral part of the human condition. Marketeers do it for a living.

            Firms employ various marketing and pricing methods, which arguably exploit consumers’ heuristics and biases, to enhance their sales and profits. Some of these techniques are clearly illegitimate and even illegal. Others raise difficult questions regarding their legitimacy and the appropriate legal response to them. In my presentation I will describe a few pricing and marketing techniques that are not obviously illegitimate, and raise the question of whether they should be regulated. I intentionally use the language of “raise the question,” because I will not offer definitive answers.

            The methodological perspective I use is commonly described as behavioral law and economics. A primary contribution of behavioral law and economics lies in the identification of behavioral market failures. In addition to traditional market failures, such as monopolies and information problems, markets may fail to promote social utility due to deviations from the assumption that all players in the market are rational maximizers of their utility.

            However, I will not limit myself to the behavioral-economic perspective, as behavioral insights are equally relevant to non-economic perspectives that highlight other values in lieu of, or in addition to, maximizing aggregate human welfare. These include respect for autonomy, fairness, and distributive justice.

            However, due to time limitations, I will neither be able to consider all of these perspectives, nor to delve into the choice between different regulatory measures: disclosure duties, compulsory interventions, and mere nudges. Some people identify the behavioral perspective with the use of nudges, but this is a mistake. Behavioral findings may justify more intrusive regulation. I believe that mandatory regulation is often warranted, and that paternalism—despite its bad PR—is often justified. But I will not go into these issues today.

            Relatedly, the pricing and marketing techniques I will discuss are used not only in consumer transactions, but in commercial ones, as well. Hence, my discussion is not limited to the consumer sphere, although the normative considerations in commercial transactions may be different.

March 3, 2017 in Conferences, Contract Profs, Recent Scholarship | Permalink

Thursday, March 2, 2017

Weekly Top Ten SSRN Contracts Downloads (March 2, 2017)

Top-10-3D

SSRN Top Downloads For SSRN Logo2
Contracts & Commercial Law eJournal

RECENT TOP PAPERS for all papers first announced in the last 60 days
1 Jan 2017 through 2 Mar 2017

Rank Downloads Paper Title
1 785 Risk and Anxiety: A Theory of Data Breach Harms
Daniel J. Solove and Danielle Keats Citron
George Washington University Law School and University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law
2 312 Empirical Findings on International Arbitration: An Overview
Christopher R. Drahozal
University of Kansas School of Law
3 238 Rise of the Digital Regulator
Rory Van Loo
Boston University School of Law
4 157 Choice of Law in the American Courts in 2016: Thirtieth Annual Survey
Symeon C. Symeonides
Willamette University - College of Law
5 156 Interpreting Contracts via Surveys and Experiments
Omri Ben-Shahar and Lior Strahilevitz
University of Chicago Law School and University of Chicago Law School
6 146 Interpretation and Construction in Contract Law
Gregory Klass
Georgetown University Law Center
7 134 What Brexit Means for the Interpretation and Drafting of Financial Contracts
Matthias Lehmann and Nihal Dsouza
University of Bonn and University of Bonn
8 134 Notice and Takedown in the Domain Name System: ICANN's Ambivalent Drift into Online Content Regulation
Annemarie Bridy
University of Idaho College of Law
9 131 Comparative Contract Law and Development: The Missing Link?
Mariana Pargendler
Fundação Getulio Vargas Law School at São Paulo
10 124 Contracting Over Privacy: Introduction
Omri Ben-Shahar and Lior Strahilevitz
University of Chicago Law School and University of Chicago Law School

 

SSRN Top Downloads For SSRN Logo2
Law & Society: Private Law - Contracts eJournal

RECENT TOP PAPERS for all papers first announced in the last 60 days 
1 Jan 2017 through 2 Mar 2017

Rank Downloads Paper Title
1 238 Rise of the Digital Regulator
Rory Van Loo
Boston University School of Law
2 157 Choice of Law in the American Courts in 2016: Thirtieth Annual Survey
Symeon C. Symeonides
Willamette University - College of Law
3 156 Interpreting Contracts via Surveys and Experiments
Omri Ben-Shahar and Lior Strahilevitz
University of Chicago Law School and University of Chicago Law School
4 146 Interpretation and Construction in Contract Law
Gregory Klass
Georgetown University Law Center
5 131 Comparative Contract Law and Development: The Missing Link?
Mariana Pargendler
Fundação Getulio Vargas Law School at São Paulo
6 124 Contracting Over Privacy: Introduction
Omri Ben-Shahar and Lior Strahilevitz
University of Chicago Law School and University of Chicago Law School
7 122 The Deformation of Contract in the Information Society
Margaret Jane Radin
University of Michigan Law School
8 108 Failures in Law Making: The Case of Arbitration Law in India
Badrinath Srinivasan
Independent
9 107 History and Theory of Good Faith Performance in the United States
Steven J. Burton
University of Iowa - College of Law
10 92 The Limits of Interpretation in the Law of Contract
Andrew Robertson
Melbourne Law School

March 2, 2017 in Recent Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)

Michael Dorff (Southwestern Law School) - KCON Scholarship Spotlight

The conference is over but the scholarship lives on. This is one of a series of posts highlighting several KCON XII presenters who graciously provided me with abstracts or summaries of their presentations.

KCON12-Logo

Michael Dorff (Southwestern)

Assessing the Assessment: B Lab's Effort to Measure Companies' Benevolence, Seattle University Law Review, Vol. 40, No. 1, 2017

Michael B. Dorff, Southwestern University School of Law

For benefit corporations to persuade their various audiences that they are as beneficial for society as they claim, they need reliable assessments of their social performance. Even if assessments were not required by most states’ benefit corporation statutes, it is difficult to imagine the benefit corporation form could gain credibility without them. Creating measurement tools for these assessments poses the twin challenges of balancing simplicity against validity and weighing vision against inclusiveness. This article examines how B Lab’s popular assessment tool engages these challenges.

 

SSRN link:  https://ssrn.com/abstract=2911302

March 2, 2017 in Conferences, Contract Profs, Recent Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)

Carol Sanger (Columbia) - KCON Scholarship Spotlight

The conference is over but the scholarship lives on. This is one of a series of posts highlighting several KCON XII presenters who graciously provided me with abstracts or summaries of their presentations.

KCON12-Logo

Contracting for Abortion

KCON 12: Intimate Contracts, Consent, and Commodification Panel

Carol Sanger, Barbara Aronstein Black Professor of Law, Columbia University

Sanger_Carol (Columbia)Contracts between intimates or about intimate subjects are now a regular feature of regular contract law. I have recently written about post- adoption visitation agreements, where birthmothers agree to place a child with an adoptive couple in exchange for visitation rights; Bargaining for Motherhood, 41 Hofstra L. Rev. 309 (2012). This paper concerns not the acquisition of a child, but the promise not to have one by agreeing contractually to abort a pregnancy in exchange for consideration.   The topic arose as part of my inquiry into what men take into account when decisions about the disposition of an embryo or fetus is up to them, in such matters as contested embryo cases.  Another source of these decisions is found in surrogacy contracts when the commissioning man (or couple) bargains for the surrogates promise to terminate the pregnancy upon prenatal testing that reveals an anomaly specified in the contract as triggering the abortion provision.  While such contracts have not been specifically enforced, they remain a common feature of surrogacy contracts, perhaps serving an in terrorem function. 

Yet in an interesting 1987 case, L.G. v. H.A.G., the Missouri Court of Appeals upheld a contract between a father and his adult unmarried daughter where he promised to reinstate her in his will if she terminated her pregnancy.  She did, but he didn’t.  The Court found there was nothing against public policy or illegal per se in the daughter’s promise. Indeed, “family harmony and reconciliation were also involved and both … naturally encouraged as a matter of public policy.”  The case puts women’s abortion decisions in an economic framework, and suggests that fathers too have interests in reproductive decisions for which they too are willing to bargain.  

This paper draws from the chapter “Fathers and Fetuses: What Would Men Do” in my new book About Abortion: Terminating Pregnancy in 21st Century America (Harvard U.P.,  March, 2017).

March 2, 2017 in Conferences, Contract Profs, Recent Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)

Wednesday, March 1, 2017

Gastón de los Reyes (George Washington University: Business) - KCON Scholarship Spotlight

The conference is over but the scholarship lives on. This is one of a series of posts highlighting several KCON XII presenters who graciously provided me with abstracts or summaries of their presentations.

KCON12-Logo

Not from guile, but from entitlement: Lawful opportunism haunts the cracks in contracts

Gastón de los Reyes and Kirsten Martin (George Washington University School of Business)

Abstract (KCON Presentation by Gastón de los Reyes)

Gaston-De-los-Reyes (GWU School of Business)Opportunistic acts are not all cut from the same cloth. While the blatant opportunism that results from “self-interest seeking with guile” is widely acknowledged, the lawful opportunism that Williamson paints as the bane of hybrid governance remains obscure and little understood. We examine the construct of lawful opportunism and empirically explore its connection to the known and studied contracting behaviors of blatant opportunism and cooperation. Using a series of contracting vignette surveys, we demonstrate that lawful opportunism is a theoretically distinct intended behavior across a variety of contracting scenarios. A contractor’s sense of entitlement, we find, is the primary driver of intended lawful opportunism. In contrast, and perhaps surprisingly, the more a contractor views the exchange in economic terms, the less likely they are to act with blatant opportunism. The study has implications for the study of contracting and hybrid governance across disciplines and for prescription to contracting parties.

March 1, 2017 in Conferences, Contract Profs, Recent Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)

Chris Odinet (Southern University) - KCON Scholarship Spotlight

The conference is over but the scholarship lives on. This is one of a series of posts highlighting several KCON XII presenters who graciously provided me with abstracts or summaries of their presentations.

KCON12-Logo

BITCREDIT: MARKETPLACE LENDING AND CONSUMER PROTECTION 

Christopher K. Odinet

 Abstract

Chris Odinet_photoThe digital economy is changing everything, including how we borrow money. In the wake of the 2008 crisis, banks pulled back in their lending and, as a result, many consumers and small businesses found themselves unable to access credit. In the space left vacant by these traditional financial institutions have come a wave of online firms called marketplace lenders. These platforms are fast making antiques out of many mainstream lending practices, such as face-to-face interviews with loan officers and long paper applications. Instead, through underwriting by automation—utilizing big data (including social media data)—loan processing that once took weeks can now be done overnight. The result of these technological advances has been quicker access to capital, more economic efficiencies, and even greater prospects for access to credit for theunbanked and underbanked. “Click here” is the new “sign on the dotted line.”

 But there is a lot still to learn about the online lending marketplace. How do these marketplace lenders work and what kinds of products do they offer? Moreover, what role will they play in the future of American debt and credit markets? This Article explores these questions and assesses current government responses to the nascent industry. It also surveys the currentregulatory landscape for marketplacelenders and analyzes a multi-year dataset of complaints submitted to the CFPB relative to consumer loans offered by these firms.The Article concludes by offering some broad policy considerations for how investors, small businesses, and consumers could be protected in this new world of BitCredit.

March 1, 2017 in Conferences, Contract Profs, Recent Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (1)

Tuesday, February 28, 2017

Colin Marks (St. Mary's) - KCON Scholarship Spotlight

The conference is over but the scholarship lives on. This is one of a series of posts highlighting several KCON XII presenters who graciously provided me with abstracts or summaries of their presentations.

KCON12-Logo

Online and As Is

Colin P. Marks (St. Mary's University School of Law)

Abstract

Colin Marks (St. Mary's)Online retail is a multi-billion-dollar industry in the United States. Consumers enjoy the ease with which they can browse, click, and order goods from the comfort of their own homes. Though it may come as no surprise to most lawyers, retailers are taking advantage of online transactions by attaching additional terms and conditions that one would not normally find in-store. Some of these conditions are logical limitations on the use of the retailers’ websites, but others go much further, limiting consumers’ rights in a way that would surprise many shoppers. In particular, many online retailers are using these terms to limit implied warranties, selling the goods “as is,” and limiting remedies, as well as adding a host of other limitations. This article does not discuss the effects of online terms and conditions, but rather starts with exploring a very basic question: How prevalent are certain terms and conditions? While these terms and conditions may seem to be ever-present in online transactions, there have been few attempts thus far to empirically record the frequency of their use in retail transactions involving goods. This article remedies the situation by exploring the mode by which consumers assent, the prevalence of warranty and liability limitation clauses, and the prevalence of other common clauses used by the largest retailers in the United States.

SSRN Download Available Here

February 28, 2017 in Conferences, Contract Profs, Recent Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)

Charles Calleros (Arizona State) - KCON Scholarship Spotlight

The conference is over but the scholarship lives on. This is one of a series of posts highlighting several KCON XII presenters who graciously provided me with abstracts or summaries of their presentations.

KCON12-Logo

U.S. Unconscionability and Article 1171 of the New French Civil Code: Achieving Balance in Statutory Regulation and Judicial Intervention

(forthcoming in Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law)

Professor Charles R. Calleros,

Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law, Arizona State University

  Charles Calleros (Arizona State)Abstract

            Perhaps the most notable development in commercial law in 2016 is the revision of contract law in the French Civil Code, the first comprehensive revision since the adoption of the 1804 Napoleonic Code. Perhaps the most notable innovation in that revision is article 1171, which empowers a judge to strike down an ancillary provision of an adhesion contract if it would otherwise create a significant imbalance between the parties.  

            Compared to the U.S. unconscionability doctrine, article 1171 adds to existing French legislation in a cautious manner and should not spark serious concerns about interference with freedom of contract. Instead, the more interesting questions are (1) whether the French judiciary will sufficiently embrace and exercise the authority afforded it under article 1171 to achieve its limited goals, and (2) whether lawmakers in the United States can overcome the American resistance to legislative and executive intervention sufficiently to emulate French and European control of abusive terms through a combination of legislative, administrative, and judicial regulation.

February 28, 2017 in Conferences, Contract Profs, Recent Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)

Thursday, February 23, 2017

Weekly Top Ten SSRN Contracts Downloads (February 23, 2017)

Top-10-thumbsup

SSRN Top Downloads For SSRN Logo2
Contracts & Commercial Law eJournal

RECENT TOP PAPERS for all papers first announced in the last 60 days
25 Dec 2016 through 23 Feb 2017

Rank Downloads Paper Title
1 771 Risk and Anxiety: A Theory of Data Breach Harms
Daniel J. Solove and Danielle Keats Citron
George Washington University Law School and University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law
2 309 Empirical Findings on International Arbitration: An Overview
Christopher R. Drahozal
University of Kansas School of Law
3 212 Rise of the Digital Regulator
Rory Van Loo
Boston University School of Law
4 143 Interpreting Contracts via Surveys and Experiments
Omri Ben-Shahar and Lior Strahilevitz
University of Chicago Law School and University of Chicago Law School
5 127 Interpretation and Construction in Contract Law
Gregory Klass
Georgetown University Law Center
6 126 Comparative Contract Law and Development: The Missing Link?
Mariana Pargendler
Fundação Getulio Vargas Law School at São Paulo
7 123 What Brexit Means for the Interpretation and Drafting of Financial Contracts
Matthias Lehmann and Nihal Dsouza
University of Bonn and University of Bonn
8 118 Contracting Over Privacy: Introduction
Omri Ben-Shahar and Lior Strahilevitz
University of Chicago Law School and University of Chicago Law School
9 104 The Deformation of Contract in the Information Society
Margaret Jane Radin
University of Michigan Law School
10 88 The Limits of Interpretation in the Law of Contract
Andrew Robertson
Melbourne Law School

 

SSRN Top Downloads For SSRN Logo2
Law & Society: Private Law - Contracts eJournal

RECENT TOP PAPERS for all papers first announced in the last 60 days
25 Dec 2016 through 23 Feb 2017

Rank Downloads Paper Title
1 212 Rise of the Digital Regulator
Rory Van Loo
Boston University School of Law
2 143 Interpreting Contracts via Surveys and Experiments
Omri Ben-Shahar and Lior Strahilevitz
University of Chicago Law School and University of Chicago Law School
3 127 Interpretation and Construction in Contract Law
Gregory Klass
Georgetown University Law Center 
4 126 Comparative Contract Law and Development: The Missing Link?
Mariana Pargendler
Fundação Getulio Vargas Law School at São Paulo
5 118 Contracting Over Privacy: Introduction
Omri Ben-Shahar and Lior Strahilevitz
University of Chicago Law School and University of Chicago Law School
6 107 History and Theory of Good Faith Performance in the United States
Steven J. Burton
University of Iowa - College of Law
7 104 The Deformation of Contract in the Information Society
Margaret Jane Radin
University of Michigan Law School
8 101 Failures in Law Making: The Case of Arbitration Law in India
Badrinath Srinivasan
Independent
9 88 The Limits of Interpretation in the Law of Contract
Andrew Robertson
Melbourne Law School
10 68 Contract Exposition and Formalism
Gregory Klass
Georgetown University Law Center

 

February 23, 2017 in Recent Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)

Thursday, February 16, 2017

Weekly Top Ten SSRN Contracts Downloads (February 16, 2017)

Top-10 Scrolling

SSRN Top Downloads For SSRN Logo2
Contracts & Commercial Law eJournal

Rank Downloads Paper Title
1 751 Risk and Anxiety: A Theory of Data Breach Harms
Daniel J. Solove and Danielle Keats Citron
George Washington University Law School and University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law
2 304 Empirical Findings on International Arbitration: An Overview
Christopher R. Drahozal
University of Kansas School of Law
3 193 Rise of the Digital Regulator
Rory Van Loo
Boston University School of Law
4 163 Introduction to Contract, Status, and Fiduciary Law
Paul B. Miller and Andrew S. Gold
McGill University Faculty of Law and DePaul University College of Law
5 131 Interpreting Contracts via Surveys and Experiments
Omri Ben-Shahar and Lior Strahilevitz
University of Chicago Law School and University of Chicago Law School
6 120 The New Sharing Economy: The Role of Property, Tort and Contract Law for Managing the Airbnb Model
Chad G. Marzen, Darren A. Prum and Robert J. Aalberts
Florida State University, Florida State University and University of Nevada, Las Vegas
7 117 Comparative Contract Law and Development: The Missing Link?
Mariana Pargendler
Fundação Getulio Vargas Law School at São Paulo
8 113 Contracting Over Privacy: Introduction
Omri Ben-Shahar and Lior Strahilevitz
University of Chicago Law School and University of Chicago Law School
9 105 Calling on the CFPB for Help: Telling Stories and Consumer Protection
Pamela Foohey
Indiana University Maurer School of Law
10 102 What Brexit Means for the Interpretation and Drafting of Financial Contracts
Matthias Lehmann and Nihal Dsouza
University of Bonn and University of Bonn

 

SSRN Top Downloads For SSRN Logo2
Law & Society: Private Law - Contracts eJournal

Rank Downloads Paper Title
1 193 Rise of the Digital Regulator
Rory Van Loo
Boston University School of Law
2 163 Introduction to Contract, Status, and Fiduciary Law
Paul B. Miller and Andrew S. Gold
McGill University Faculty of Law and DePaul University College of Law
3 131 Interpreting Contracts via Surveys and Experiments
Omri Ben-Shahar and Lior Strahilevitz
University of Chicago Law School and University of Chicago Law School
4 117 Comparative Contract Law and Development: The Missing Link?
Mariana Pargendler
Fundação Getulio Vargas Law School at São Paulo
5 113 Contracting Over Privacy: Introduction
Omri Ben-Shahar and Lior Strahilevitz
University of Chicago Law School and University of Chicago Law School
6 103 History and Theory of Good Faith Performance in the United States
Steven J. Burton
University of Iowa - College of Law
7 100 Failures in Law Making: The Case of Arbitration Law in India
Badrinath Srinivasan
Independent
8 84 The Limits of Interpretation in the Law of Contract
Andrew Robertson
Melbourne Law School
9 82 The Hague Choice of Law Principles, CISG and PICC: A Hard Look at a Choice of Soft Law
Brooke Adele Marshall
Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private Law
10 71 The Deformation of Contract in the Information Society
Margaret Jane Radin
University of Michigan Law School

February 16, 2017 in Recent Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)

Thursday, February 9, 2017

Weekly Top Ten SSRN Contracts Downloads (February 9, 2017)

Top10-Electric


SSRN Top Downloads For SSRN Logo2
Contracts & Commercial Law eJournal

Rank Downloads Paper Title
1 739 Risk and Anxiety: A Theory of Data Breach Harms
Daniel J. Solove and Danielle Keats Citron
George Washington University Law School and University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law
2 296 Empirical Findings on International Arbitration: An Overview
Christopher R. Drahozal
University of Kansas School of Law
3 169 Rise of the Digital Regulator
Rory Van Loo
Boston University School of Law
4 157 Introduction to Contract, Status, and Fiduciary Law
Paul B. Miller and Andrew S. Gold
McGill University Faculty of Law and DePaul University College of Law
5 110 The New Sharing Economy: The Role of Property, Tort and Contract Law for Managing the Airbnb Model
Chad G. Marzen, Darren A. Prum and Robert J. Aalberts
Florida State University, Florida State University and University of Nevada, Las Vegas
6 108 Comparative Contract Law and Development: The Missing Link?
Mariana Pargendler
Fundação Getulio Vargas Law School at São Paulo
7 97 Calling on the CFPB for Help: Telling Stories and Consumer Protection
Pamela Foohey
Indiana University Maurer School of Law
8 92 Interpreting Contracts via Surveys and Experiments
Omri Ben-Shahar and Lior Strahilevitz
University of Chicago Law School and University of Chicago Law School
9 91 Contracting Over Privacy: Introduction
Omri Ben-Shahar and Lior Strahilevitz
University of Chicago Law School and University of Chicago Law School
10 87 Behavioral Law & Economics Goes to Court: The Fundamental Flaws in the Behavioral Law & Economics Arguments Against No-Surcharge Laws
Todd J. Zywicki, Geoffrey A. Manne and Kristian Stout
George Mason University - Antonin Scalia Law School, Faculty, International Center for Law & Economics (ICLE) and International Center for Law and Economics

 

SSRN Top Downloads For SSRN Logo2
Law & Society: Private Law - Contracts eJournal

Rank Downloads Paper Title
1 169 Rise of the Digital Regulator
Rory Van Loo
Boston University School of Law
2 157 Introduction to Contract, Status, and Fiduciary Law
Paul B. Miller and Andrew S. Gold
McGill University Faculty of Law and DePaul University College of Law
3 108 Comparative Contract Law and Development: The Missing Link?
Mariana Pargendler
Fundação Getulio Vargas Law School at São Paulo
4 99 History and Theory of Good Faith Performance in the United States
Steven J. Burton
University of Iowa - College of Law
5 99 Failures in Law Making: The Case of Arbitration Law in India
Badrinath Srinivasan
Independent
6 92 Interpreting Contracts via Surveys and Experiments
Omri Ben-Shahar and Lior Strahilevitz
University of Chicago Law School and University of Chicago Law School
7 91 Contracting Over Privacy: Introduction
Omri Ben-Shahar and Lior Strahilevitz
University of Chicago Law School and University of Chicago Law School
8 79 The Limits of Interpretation in the Law of Contract
Andrew Robertson
Melbourne Law School
9 77 The Hague Choice of Law Principles, CISG and PICC: A Hard Look at a Choice of Soft Law
Brooke Adele Marshall
Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private Law
10 66 Unbundling Efficient Breach: An Experiment
Maria Bigoni, Stefania Bortolotti, Francesco Parisi and Ariel Porat
University of Bologna - Department of Economics, University of Cologne - Faculty of Management, Economics and Social Sciences, University of Minnesota - Law School and Tel Aviv University

 

February 9, 2017 in Recent Scholarship | Permalink

Thursday, February 2, 2017

Weekly Top Ten SSRN Contracts Downloads (February 2, 2017)

Top 10 Groundhog Day

SSRN Top Downloads For SSRN Logo2
Contracts & Commercial Law eJournal

Rank Downloads Paper Title
1 700 Risk and Anxiety: A Theory of Data Breach Harms
Daniel J. Solove and Danielle Keats Citron
George Washington University Law School and University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law
2 291 Empirical Findings on International Arbitration: An Overview
Christopher R. Drahozal
University of Kansas School of Law
3 160 Contractual Estoppel and the Misrepresentation Act 1967
Richard Hooley
University of Cambridge - Faculty of Law
4 152 Introduction to Contract, Status, and Fiduciary Law
Paul B. Miller and Andrew S. Gold
McGill University Faculty of Law and DePaul University College of Law
5 151 Remedies
Ariel Porat
Tel Aviv University
6 112 Rise of the Digital Regulator
Rory Van Loo
Boston University School of Law
7 107 Excessive Contractual Penalties in Football
Despina Mavromati
Court of Arbitration for Sport
8 103 The New Sharing Economy: The Role of Property, Tort and Contract Law for Managing the Airbnb Model
Chad G. Marzen, Darren A. Prum and Robert J. Aalberts
Florida State University, Florida State University and University of Nevada, Las Vegas
9 88 Calling on the CFPB for Help: Telling Stories and Consumer Protection
Pamela Foohey
Indiana University Maurer School of Law
10 87 Comparative Contract Law and Development: The Missing Link?
Mariana Pargendler
Fundação Getulio Vargas Law School at São Paulo

 

SSRN Top Downloads For SSRN Logo2
Law & Society: Private Law - Contracts eJournal

Rank Downloads Paper Title
1 160 Contractual Estoppel and the Misrepresentation Act 1967
Richard Hooley
University of Cambridge - Faculty of Law
2 152 Introduction to Contract, Status, and Fiduciary Law
Paul B. Miller and Andrew S. Gold
McGill University Faculty of Law and DePaul University College of Law
3 151 Remedies
Ariel Porat
Tel Aviv University
4 112 Rise of the Digital Regulator
Rory Van Loo
Boston University School of Law
5 107 Excessive Contractual Penalties in Football
Despina Mavromati
Court of Arbitration for Sport
6 97 Failures in Law Making: The Case of Arbitration Law in India
Badrinath Srinivasan
Independent
7 96 History and Theory of Good Faith Performance in the United States
Steven J. Burton
University of Iowa - College of Law
8 87 Comparative Contract Law and Development: The Missing Link?
Mariana Pargendler
Fundação Getulio Vargas Law School at São Paulo
9 82 Contracting Over Privacy: Introduction
Omri Ben-Shahar and Lior Strahilevitz
University of Chicago Law School and University of Chicago Law School
10 75 The Limits of Interpretation in the Law of Contract
Andrew Robertson
Melbourne Law School

 

February 2, 2017 in Recent Scholarship | Permalink

Thursday, January 26, 2017

Weekly Top Ten SSRN Contracts Downloads (January 26, 2017)

Top-10 Glass

SSRN Top Downloads For SSRN Logo2
Contracts & Commercial Law eJournal

1 655 Risk and Anxiety: A Theory of Data Breach Harms
Daniel J. Solove and Danielle Keats Citron
George Washington University Law School and University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law
2 272 Empirical Findings on International Arbitration: An Overview
Christopher R. Drahozal
University of Kansas School of Law
3 185 Drafting for Dispute Resolution
John M. Newman
University of Memphis - Cecil C. Humphreys School of Law
4 157 The Corporation as Courthouse
Rory Van Loo
Boston University School of Law
5 155 The Commercial Law of Bitcoin and Blocktrain Transactions
Stephen M. McJohn and Ian McJohn
Suffolk University Law School and Independent
6 143 Remedies
Ariel Porat
Tel Aviv University
7 143 Introduction to Contract, Status, and Fiduciary Law
Paul B. Miller and Andrew S. Gold
McGill University Faculty of Law and DePaul University College of Law
8 139 Contractual Estoppel and the Misrepresentation Act 1967
Richard Hooley
University of Cambridge - Faculty of Law
9 108 The New Lex Mercatoria: An Emerging Challenge to Legal Systems in Cross-Border Transactions
Jan H. Hendrik Dalhuisen
King's College London
10 106 Excessive Contractual Penalties in Football
Despina Mavromati
Court of Arbitration for Sport

 

SSRN Top Downloads For SSRN Logo2
Law & Society: Private Law - Contracts eJournal

Rank Downloads Paper Title
1 185 Drafting for Dispute Resolution
John M. Newman
University of Memphis - Cecil C. Humphreys School of Law
2 157 The Corporation as Courthouse
Rory Van Loo
Boston University School of Law
3 143 Remedies
Ariel Porat
Tel Aviv University
4 143 Introduction to Contract, Status, and Fiduciary Law
Paul B. Miller and Andrew S. Gold
McGill University Faculty of Law and DePaul University College of Law
5 139 Contractual Estoppel and the Misrepresentation Act 1967
Richard Hooley
University of Cambridge - Faculty of Law
6 108 The New Lex Mercatoria: An Emerging Challenge to Legal Systems in Cross-Border Transactions
Jan H. Hendrik Dalhuisen
King's College London
7 106 Excessive Contractual Penalties in Football
Despina Mavromati
Court of Arbitration for Sport
8 91 Failures in Law Making: The Case of Arbitration Law in India
Badrinath Srinivasan
Independent
9 68 The Hague Choice of Law Principles, CISG and PICC: A Hard Look at a Choice of Soft Law
Brooke Adele Marshall
Max Planck Institute for Comparative and International Private Law
10 66 The Limits of Interpretation in the Law of Contract
Andrew Robertson
Melbourne Law School

 

January 26, 2017 in Recent Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (0)