The Minnesota Law Review is excited to have published our first three pieces of volume 109 in Headnotes. Today, we are featuring "Substance over Symbolism: Do We Need Benefit Corporation Laws?" from Cheng-chi Chang at Emory University School of Law. Check out his essay here: https://lnkd.in/gtcJg_yu
Minnesota Law Review
图书期刊出版业
Minneapolis，Minnesota 940 位关注者
Founded in 1917, the Minnesota Law Review is committed to furthering excellence in legal research and scholarship.
关于我们
In January 1917, Professor Henry J. Fletcher launched the Minnesota Law Review with lofty aspirations: “A well-conducted law review . . . ought to do something to develop the spirit of statesmanship as distinguished from a dry professionalism. It ought at the same time contribute a little something to the systematic growth of the whole law.” For the next forty years, in conjunction with the Minnesota State Bar Association, the faculty of the University of Minnesota Law School directed the work of student editors of the Law Review. Despite their initial oversight and vision, however, the faculty gradually handed the editorial mantle over to law students. During 1954 and 1955, the “faculty” editors left the masthead of the journal, affiliation with the State Bar was severed, and the faculty Editor-in-Chief quietly assumed the role of “advisor.” From April 1955 through June 1989, a student President oversaw the publication. Then, in October of 1989, the student staff revived the role of Editor-in-Chief, a title now worn by a student. Today, the Board of Editors, consisting of up to thirty-nine editors, governs the Law Review and determines its policies and procedures. Along with thirty-eight student staff members, each Board of Editors strives to rise to the challenge of Professor Fletcher to “contribute a little something to the systematic growth of the whole law.”
- 网站
-
https://minnesotalawreview.org
Minnesota Law Review的外部链接
- 所属行业
- 图书期刊出版业
- 规模
- 51-200 人
- 总部
- Minneapolis，Minnesota
- 类型
- 教育机构
- 创立
- 1917
地点
-
主要
获取路线
US，Minnesota，Minneapolis
Minnesota Law Review员工
动态
-
Aaron Van Oort and John Rockenbach authored an article for the Minnesota Law Review discussing the distinction between common and individual issues, which is the single most important concept in modern class action and the one that most bedevils courts in practice.
-
The Minnesota Law Review is excited to have published our first three pieces of volume 109 in Headnotes. Today, we are featuring "Defining Common and Individual Issues in Class Actions: What a Reasonable Jury Could Do" from Aaron Van Oort and John Rockenbach of Faegre Drinker. Check out their essay here: https://lnkd.in/gQjafdV5
-
-
The Minnesota Law Review is excited to have published our first three pieces of volume 109 in Headnotes. Today, we are featuring "The Supreme Court’s Opinion in SEC v. Jarkesy Has the Potential To Be Extremely Destructive" by Professor Richard J. Pierce of The George Washington University Law School. You can find Professor Pierce's essay here: https://lnkd.in/gmm9Gd4d
-
-
We’re so excited to have published our first round of Headnotes articles for volume 109.
The just-released volume 109 of the Minnesota Law Review contains an essay I co-authored with my colleague John Rockenbach titled “Defining Common and Individual Issues in Class Actions: What a Reasonable Jury Could Do.” The essay establishes a doctrinal foundation explaining why an issue can be aggregated for common decision in a class action only when a reasonable jury would have to resolve that issue the same for everyone in the class. Otherwise, requiring a common decision will violate substantive and procedural rights and be unfair.?To judges and lawyers and students and parties in litigation who encounter class actions, I hope the essay will be helpful. And to all of you who have helped me consider this topic over the years (you know who you are), thank you!
-
Check out Volume 109 staffer Sophia Antonio's new de novo blog post about the challenges third party candidates face in presidential elections! https://lnkd.in/gves4xez
HOW RFK’S RECENT COURT BATTLES TO GET ON (AND OFF) THE BALLOT EXEMPLIFY WHY A THIRD-PARTY CANDIDATE WILL NEVER WIN THE PRESIDENCY
https://minnesotalawreview.org
-
Last week, we were lucky enough to gather a team of academics, leaders, and activists to Mondale Hall for our Fall 2024 symposium. Our panelists presented a balanced scholarly discussion of who is in charge of environmental and energy regulation in the United States, and who should be involved going forward. Thank you to everyone who made this incredible event possible, particularly Shannon Schooley, our Lead Symposium Editor. Be on the lookout for Issue 6 of Minnesota Law Review this Spring, which will feature pieces from the symposium's panelists.
-
-
Professor Matthew Bodie and co-author Grant Hayden have published a new paper now on @SSRN about a new model of corporate governance. Corporatelaw faces a dilemma: whether to prioritize shareholders or consider all stakeholders interests. To resolve this, a new model of corporate governance is suggested, based on democratic participation. Read: spkl.io/6013fMYgX Subscribe: spkl.io/6014fMYgk
-
-
The Minnesota Law Review is excited to announce our upcoming Fall 2024 Symposium, which will take place on October 18th at the law school. Be sure to check out our website to learn more and RSVP. See you there! https://lnkd.in/e49X6q_W
-
-
Thank you to Minnesota Law professors Alan Rozenshtein, Kristin Hickman, Amy Monahan, and Charlotte Garden for speaking to Vol. 109 about the impact of student-run legal scholarship. We’re so excited to share another excellent volume of the Minnesota Law Review this coming year.
-