Saturday, May 21, 2011

Waldeck: "Rethinking the Intersection of Inheritance and the Law of Tenancy in Common"

Sarah Waldeck (Seton Hall Univ. School of Law) has posted "Rethinking the Intersection of Inheritance and the Law of Tenancy in Common" (forthcoming Notre Dame L. Rev.) on SSRN.  Here is the abstract:

The Article is about "identity property," which it defines as property that is strongly linked to one’s sense of self and family and is valued by its holder primarily for what it represents. Identity property is often jointly inherited by siblings or other relatives, who take as tenants in common. Standard doctrine relies on familial bonds and the unilateral right of partition to mitigate the problem of bilateral monopoly and to foster cooperation in the management of the tenants’ common resource. The Article argues that, in the context of identity property, this standard account is wrong. Rather, because the law favors partition by sale, the exit of one tenant often means that the remaining co-tenants will be forced to sell the identity property. Because the remaining tenants perceive the property as non-fungible, the threat of exit is powerful enough to exacerbate the bilateral monopoly and decrease the likelihood of cooperation. The Article relies on the example of the family cottage to elucidate the meaning of "identity property" and examines the formal agreements that relatives who jointly own cottages make when they decide to opt out of the tenancy in common default rules. These formal agreements reveal a willingness to sacrifice the right of exit in order to increase the odds that co-tenants will continue to own the identity property. The Article argues that the law should heed the message of these formal agreements and adopt a more flexible approach to the inheritance of identity property, including the possibilities of temporal partition and facilitated agreement.

AC

May 21, 2011 in Scholarship, Family Law | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Proof Weddings Are Too Expensive

Read here about a couple who robbed a bank to pay for the honeymoon.

MR

May 21, 2011 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

Friday, May 20, 2011

Fighting Cancer and a Custody Battle

From Mail Online:

A woman with terminal breast cancer says she has lost custody of her children because doctors do not know how long she will live.

Read more here.

MR

May 20, 2011 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, May 19, 2011

Chicken Soup for the Soul and Chicken for the Marriage

Novel marital advice and chicken recipe here from Slate.

MR

May 19, 2011 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

World Population...

...will reach 10.1 billion in 2100.  Read more here.

MR

May 19, 2011 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, May 18, 2011

Teen Pregnancy

MTV's "16 and Pregnant" and "Teen Mom" have been criticized as encouraging teen pregnancy.  Their creator has spoken out--read it here.

MR

May 18, 2011 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, May 17, 2011

Portraits

Florida has a novel plan to increase adoptions of foster children.  Read about it here.

MR

May 17, 2011 in Adoption | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Monday, May 16, 2011

UK Fees in Family Law Cases

The Legal Services Commission in the UK is introducing two new family fee schemes.  Read about it here.

MR

May 16, 2011 in Current Affairs | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Sunday, May 15, 2011

Appleton & Pollak: "Exploring the Connections between Adoption and IVF: Twibling Analyses"

Susan Appleton (Wash. Univ. School of Law St. Louis) & Robert Pollak (Wash. Univ. Saint Louis Buss. School) have posted "Exploring the Connections between Adoption and IVF: Twibling Analyses" (95 Minn. L. Rev. Headnotes 60 (2011)) on SSRN.  Here is the abstract:

This essay responds to Trading-Off Reproductive Technology and Adoption: Does Subsidizing IVF Decrease Adoption Rates and Should It Matter?, in which I. Glenn Cohen and Daniel L. Chen analyze what they describe as an arm-chair principle called “the substitution theory”–the claim that facilitating treatment for infertility, including subsidizing in vitro fertilization (IVF), decreases adoptions. Cohen and Chen venture well beyond the arm chair, closely interrogating the substitution theory both normatively and empirically and concluding, contrary to the substitution theory, that IVF subsidies do not decrease and might actually increase adoptions.

Returning to the arm chair, this Response offers two different perspectives. First, we use a family law lens to focus on important elements of Cohen and Chen’s analysis, both explicit and implicit, including adoption, IVF, genetic connections, reproductive autonomy, and gender. We show how these elements are shaped by the authors’ assumptions, prevailing legal principles, and our culture more generally. Next, we use an economic lens to reveal how mandated subsidies for IVF produce varied conduct, depending on the preferences and resources of those who would consider adoption and IVF. Approaching Cohen and Chen’s analysis from these two different vantage points demonstrates that arm-chair theorizing, properly done, can illuminate the relationship between IVF and adoption.

AC

May 15, 2011 in Adoption, Alternative Reproduction, Scholarship, Family Law | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)