DOCSLIB.ORG

University of Michigan Law School Faculty, 2009-2010 University of Michigan Law School

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
University of Michigan Law School Faculty, 2009-2010 University of Michigan Law School University of Michigan Law School University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository Miscellaneous Law School Publications Law School History and Publications 2009 University of Michigan Law School Faculty, 2009-2010 University of Michigan Law School Follow this and additional works at: http://repository.law.umich.edu/miscellaneous Part of the Legal Biography Commons, and the Legal Education Commons Citation University of Michigan Law School, "University of Michigan Law School Faculty, 2009-2010" (2009). Miscellaneous Law School Publications. http://repository.law.umich.edu/miscellaneous/9 This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School History and Publications at University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Miscellaneous Law School Publications by an authorized administrator of University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. o turn the pages of this slim booklet is to begin to know some of the most distinguished legal scholars in the world. Among these members of the TMichigan Law faculty are leaders in constitutional, international, tax, envi­ ronmental. and business law, and in many other areas of scholarship, as well. For students hoping to build a world-class legal education, there is no better foundation. But these printed pages exist in only two dimensions. while legal education, like the real world, exists in three. Stepping inside the magnificent buildings of the University of Michigan Law Quad brings these photographs and stories to life. Two-dimensional biographies become three-dimensional professors. Here, beneath the vaulted ceilings of Hutchins Hall, an internationally renowned intellectual property expert who testified before Congress yesterday will exchange views on Internet file sharing with a passing student. Here. profes­ sors with experience hard-won as advisers to presidents or advocates before the Supreme Court now turn their remarkable minds to preparing members of our extraordinary and diverse student body for a life in the law. It's the heart of a Michigan Law education. Welcome. Evan H. Caminker Dean and Branch Rickey Collegiate Professor of Law University of Michigan Law School AI icia Alva rez Reuven S. Avi-Yonah licia Alvarez is a clinical professor of law and Director of the Urban euven S. Avi-Yonah. the Irwin I. Cohn Professor of Law and director Communities Clinic. where she represents community-based organi­ of the International Tax LL.M. Program. specializes in corporate and zations.A Her areas of interest are issues facing low-income communities. inRternational taxation and international law. He has served as consultant She has also taught in the Michigan Clinical Law Program. focusing on to the U.S. Treasury and the Organization for Economic Co-operation and employment law. Prior to coming to Michigan, Professor Alvarez taught the Development on tax competition, and is a member of the Steering Group of Community Development Clinic at DePaul University College of Law. She the DECO's International Network for Ta x Research. He is also chair of the also taught in the Asylum Clinic and the civil litigation clinic. She has been ABA's Tax Section Committee on Tax Policy. His teaching interests focus a visiting professor at the Boston College Law School and the University of on various aspects of taxation and international law. Professor Avi-Yonah El Salvador. Professor Alvarez was a Fulbright Scholar in El Salvador and is currently a fellow of the American Bar Foundation and a member of the has consulted with clinics throughout Latin America. She serves on the board of trustees of Diritto e Practica Tributario lnternazionale. He is also an ABA Clinical Skills Committee and the planning committee for the 2010 honorary research fellow at the Taxation Law and Policy Research Institute Association of American Law Schools' Clinical Conference. Professor Alvarez at Monash University and an international research fellow at Oxford has served on the board of directors of University's Centre for Business Taxation. In addi­ the Society of American Law Teachers. tion to prior teaching appointments at Harvard (law) Before teaching she was a staff attor­ and Boston College (history), he has practiced law ney at Business and Professional with Milbank. Tweed. Hadley & McCloy, New York; People for the Public Interest and with Wachtel!, Lipton, Rosen & Katz, New York; and the Legal Assistance Foundation of with Ropes & Gray, Boston. Chicago. Professor Alvarez received her After receiving his B.A.. B.A.. magna cum laude, from Loyola summa cum laude, from University of Chicago and her JD .. Hebrew University, he cum laude, from Boston College earned three additional Law School. degrees from Harvard: an A.M. in history, a Ph.D. in history, and a J.D., magna cum laude, from Harvard Law School. "As a person interested in representing start-up com Samuel R. Bagenstos pan1es and venture capital Michael S. Barr firms. pursuing a JDJM B A amuel Bagenstos specializes in civil rights law, particularly as it pertains ichael S. Barr teaches financial institutions, international finance, at M1ch1gan 1s the best edu­ to the Americans with Disabilities Act. as well as constitutional law. His M transnational law, and jurisdiction and choice of law, and co-founded S cational dec1s1on I've ever research and teaching focus on the substance and enforcement of civil rights the International Transactions Clinic. He was also a senior fellow at the Center made. The formal tra1mng law, both constitutional and statutory. He is also an active appellate and for American Progress and at the Brookings Institution, and is now serving as I've received m accounting Supreme Court litigator in civil rights and federalism cases. In United States the U.S Department of Treasury's Assistant Secretary for Financial Institutions. and finance at the bus1ness v Ge orgia, (2006). the U. S. Supreme Court upheld, as applied to his client's Professor Barr conducts large-scale empirical research regarding financial school ennched my course- case. the constitutionality of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act services and low-and moderate-income households and writes about a wide work at the Law range of issues in financial regulation. He recently co-edited Building Inclusive Prior to joining Michigan Law, Professor Bagenstos was a professor of School tremendously, and law, and, from 2007 to 2008, also Associate Dean for Research and Faculty Financial Systems (Brookings Press 2007, co-edited with Kumar & Litan) and was h1ghly regarded by law Development at Washington University School of Law. He clerked for Judge Insufficient Funds (Russell Sage 2008, with Blank). Professor Barr previously firms and clients durmg my Stephen Reinhardt on the Ninth Circuit, served as Treasury Secretary Robert E. Rubin's Special Assistant. as Deputy summer clerkships. Exposure then joined the Civil Rights Division Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, as Special to a vanety of learnmg of the U.S. Department of Justice. Advisor to President William J. Clinton, as a enwonments He also served as Law Clerk for special advisor and counselor on the policy has also been Invaluable Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg of planning staff at the State Department. and as Beyond sharpening my skills the U.S Supreme Court. In 1993, a law clerk to U S Supreme Court Justice David in doctrinal analysiS, legal Professor Bagenstos earned his H. Souter and then-District Judge Pierre N. wntmg, and negot1at1on. I magna cum laude, Leva I, of the Southern District of J.D., had opportunities to mteract New York. He received his J.D. from Harvard, where he w1th venture capitalists, and from Yale Law School, an M. received the Fay Diploma even drafted and pitched Phil in International Relations and was Articles Office a business plan for a life Harvard from Magdalen College, Oxford Co-chair for the sciences company seekmg Law Re vie w University, as a Rhodes Scholar, Series A financmg." and his B.A., summa cum laude, Benjamin Potter, '06 with Honors in History, from Associate Yale University. He is presently Latham & Watkins on leave from his Law School Silicon Va lley duties. 3 Laura Beny Eve Brensike Primus ince joining the University of Michigan Law School in 2003, Professor ve Brensike Primus teaches criminal law. criminal procedure. and Beny has taught Corporate Finance, Enterprise Organization. habeas corpus. and she writes about structural reform in the criminal InSternational Finance, the Public Corporation. and an advanced seminar justiceE system. Before joining the Michigan Law faculty, she was an attor­ in law and finance. Her research interests include law and economics. ney in the Maryland Office of the Public Defender. In that office, Professor finance. political economy, development. and the Sudan. Her work has been Brensike Primus worked both as a trial attorney and as an appellate litigator. published in the American Economic Re vie w. American Law and Economics appearing several times before the state's highest court. She has also Re vie w, Journ al of Corporation Law. among others. and will be forthcoming participated in the lawmaking process. giving legislative testimony and in the Annual Re vie w of Law and Social Scie nce in 2010. In 2007 and 2008, helping to draft proposed legislation on criminal justice issues. Professor she advised the Government of Southern Sudan on corporate governance Brensike Primus holds a B.A., magna cum laude, from Brown University and and transparency in the private sector. In September 2006, she presented a J.D . summa cum laude, from the University of Michigan Law School. In testimony based on her research on insider trading before the U.S. Senate law school, she was an articles editor on the Michigan Law Re vie w. a board Judiciary Committee. Before coming to Michigan, she practiced private and member tor the Henry M.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The University of Michigan Law School Faculty, 2003-2004
    University of Michigan Law School University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository Miscellaneous Law School Publications Law School History and Publications 2003 The niU versity of Michigan Law School Faculty, 2003-2004 University of Michigan Law School Follow this and additional works at: http://repository.law.umich.edu/miscellaneous Part of the Legal Biography Commons, and the Legal Education Commons Citation University of Michigan Law School, "The nivU ersity of Michigan Law School Faculty, 2003-2004" (2003). Miscellaneous Law School Publications. http://repository.law.umich.edu/miscellaneous/2 This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School History and Publications at University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Miscellaneous Law School Publications by an authorized administrator of University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The University of Michigan Law School FACULTY 2003-2004 " l arrived at the U of M Law School itmnediately after finishing a Ph.D. in history with the hope and expectation that law school would constitute another major step in my intellectual growth, not just professional or vocational training in law as a trade. My expectations were more than met by the crew of humanistic intellectuals- not just historians but accomplished scholars in philosophy, literature, political theory, anthropology, psychology, and other fields - that made up a large part ofthe Michiganfaculty. In this atmosphere, the study of law 1 was the best sort of professional training, the kind that equipped me both to enter the profession at a high level-for me, a Supreme Court clerkship - and to get the critical perspective and intellectual training that prepared me for the academic position that 1 had aimed at front the start.
    [Show full text]
  • Keeping Faith with the Constitution in Changing Times
    Vanderbilt Law School Program in Constitutional Law & Theory and The American Constitution Society Present KEEPING FAITH WITH THE CONSTITUTION IN CHANGING TIMES October 6-7, 2006 Flynn Auditorium Vanderbilt Law School What does it mean to be faithful to the meaning of the Constitution? Can progressive approaches to constitutional interpretation persuasively lay claim to principle, fidelity, adherence to the rule of law and democratic legitimacy? How can these approaches be effectively communicated and made part of the public debate about the Constitution? A diverse group of scholars, lawyers, journalists and judges will address different aspects of this inquiry over two days of panel discussions and roundtable conversations during “Keeping Faith with the Constitution in Changing Times,” a conference sponsored jointly by Vanderbilt Law School’s Program in Constitutional Law & Theory and the American Constitution Society for Law and Policy. CONFERENCE SCHEDULE Friday, October 6 8:45-9:15 Continental Breakfast in North Lobby 9:15-9:45 Opening Remarks Dean Ed Rubin, Vanderbilt Law School Lisa Brown, Executive Director, ACS 9:45-10:30 Origins of the Debate over Originalism and the Living Constitution (Christopher Yoo, Moderator) Barry Friedman Howard Gillman 10:30-10:45 Break 10:45-12:15 Constitutional Fidelity Over Time (Ed Rubin, Moderator) Erwin Chemerinsky Marty Lederman John McGinnis 12:15-1:30 Lunch North Lobby 1:30-3:00 The Varieties of Historical Argument (Deborah Hellman, Moderator) Peggy Cooper Davis Robert Gordon Richard Primus
    [Show full text]
  • A Case for the Twenty-First Century Constitutional Canon: Schneiderman V
    C:\program files\qualcomm\eudora\attach\394840.doc Saved on: 1/22/2003 6:15 PM A Case for the Twenty-First Century Constitutional Canon: Schneiderman v. United States DAVID FONTANA∗ I. INTRODUCTION Hidden in the basements of American law libraries and in the Westlaw and Lexis databases is a generally ignored 1943 case, Schneiderman v. United States.1 Schneiderman is a case of substantial importance and in- terest that has belonged in the constitutional canon for some time. In Schneiderman, the Supreme Court of the United States blocked the gov- ernment’s attempt to denaturalize an American citizen, a leader of the Communist Party, because the Court found that Communists could be “at- tached to the principles of the Constitution.”2 The Court also announced a new, relatively high evidentiary burden that the government has to meet in order to strip naturalized citizens of their citizenship.3 Schneiderman is of even greater importance after September 11, 2001, because it sheds light on several key issues facing both this country and its law students and lawyers. September 11, 2001 was a monumental day in American history, politics, culture, and law. The after-effects of that day have just begun to trickle into university classrooms across the country. There are many reports of course offerings that address topics related to September 11. For instance, immediately after September 11, the Univer- ∗ D.Phil. expected, Oxford University, 2004; J.D. expected, Yale University, 2004; B.A., Univer- sity of Virginia, 1999. Many thanks to the following individuals for their assistance with this project and for their comments on all or part of the ideas in this Article: Bruce A.
    [Show full text]
  • Letter from Legal and Constitutional Scholars Supporting Puerto Rico
    April 12, 2021 The Honorable Nancy Pelosi The Honorable Charles Schumer Speaker of the House Senate Majority Leader U.S. House of Representatives U.S. Senate Washington, DC 20515 Washington, DC 20510 The Honorable Kevin McCarthy The Honorable Mitch McConnell House Republican Leader Senate Republican Leader U.S. House of Representatives U.S. Senate Washington, DC 20515 Washington, DC 20510 Dear Speaker Pelosi, Majority Leader Schumer, and Leaders McCarthy and McConnell: We, the undersigned legal and constitutional scholars, write to express our strong opposition to the Puerto Rico Self-Determination Act, H.R. 2070, and its Senate companion bill, S. 865, and to register our equally strong support for the Puerto Rico Statehood Admission Act, H.R. 1522, and its Senate companion bill, S. 780. Like all Americans, we support self-determination. But unlike the supporters of the Puerto Rico Self-Determination Act, we believe that genuine self-determination requires the United States to offer Puerto Ricans a real choice. By “real,” we mean constitutional and non-territorial. Puerto Rico’s self- determination options must be constitutional, for the obvious reason that neither Congress nor Puerto Rico has the power to implement an unconstitutional option. And they must be non-territorial, because a territorial option is not self-determination. There are two, and only two, real self-determination options for Puerto Rico: statehood and independence. Yet the Puerto Rico Self-Determination Act defies constitutional reality by calling upon Puerto Ricans to define other non-territorial options. There are no other non-territorial options. For many decades, advocates of “commonwealth” status argued that it was non-territorial.
    [Show full text]
  • Originalism at Home and Abroad
    Georgetown University Law Center Scholarship @ GEORGETOWN LAW 2014 Originalism at Home and Abroad Yvonne Tew Georgetown University Law Center, [email protected] This paper can be downloaded free of charge from: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub/1923 52 Colum. J. Transnat'l L. 780 (2013-2014) This open-access article is brought to you by the Georgetown Law Library. Posted with permission of the author. Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub Part of the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, and the Transnational Law Commons Originalism at Home and Abroad YVONNE TEW* Originalism is typically thought to be a uniquely American preoccupation. This Article challenges the conventional view that originalism enjoys little sup- port outside the United States by showing that the sto- ry of originalism-bothat home and abroad-is more nuanced than has been appreciated. This Article ex- amines how originalism has developed in two unex- plored contexts-Malaysia and Singapore-to show that originalism not only thrives outside the United States but that it takes on distinct variations reflecting the cultural, historical,and political conditions of in- dividual nations. The Article argues that whether originalism thrives, and the form that it takes, is con- text driven and culturally contingent. The account that this Article provides of how original- ism is practiced in the world beyond the United States tests familiar assumptions in the mainstream debates over originalism. First, it shows that existing ac- counts of the origins of originalism are incomplete * Associate-in-Law, Postdoctoral Research Scholar, and Lecturer-in-Law, Columbia Law School; Ph.D., University of Cambridge; Master of Laws (LL.M.), Harvard Law School; B.A.
    [Show full text]
  • Articles the Anticanon
    VOLUME 125 DECEMBER 2011 NUMBER 2 © 2011 by The Harvard Law Review Association ARTICLES THE ANTICANON Jamal Greene CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 380 I. DEFINING THE ANTICANON ............................................................................................ 385 II. DEFENDING THE ANTICANON ........................................................................................ 404 A. The Anticanon’s Errors..................................................................................................... 405 1. Dred Scott v. Sandford ............................................................................................... 406 2. Plessy v. Ferguson ...................................................................................................... 412 3. Lochner v. New York ................................................................................................... 417 4. Korematsu v. United States ....................................................................................... 422 B. A Shadow Anticanon ........................................................................................................ 427 III. RECONSTRUCTING THE ANTICANON ............................................................................ 434 A. Historicism ........................................................................................................................ 435 1. Dred Scott ...................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • January 31, 2020 to the United States Senate the Signatories of This Letter Are Professors of Law and Scholars of the American C
    January 31, 2020 To the United States Senate The signatories of this letter are professors of law and scholars of the American constitution who write to clarify that impeachment does not require proof of crime, that abuse of power is an impeachable offense, and that a president may not abuse the powers of his office to secure re- election, whatever he may believe about how beneficial his continuance in power is to the country. Impeachable conduct does not require proof of any crime. Impeachment for “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” under Article IIof the U.S. Constitution does not require proof that a president violated any criminal law. The phrase “high Crimes and Misdemeanors” is a term of art consciously adopted by the drafters of the American constitution from Great Britain. Beginning in 1386, the term was frequently used by Parliament to describe the wide variety of conduct, much of it non-criminal abuses of official power, for which British officials were impeached. The phrase “high crimes and misdemeanors” was introduced into the American constitution by George Mason, who explained the necessity for expanding impeachment beyond “treason and bribery” by drawing his colleagues’ attention to the ongoing parliamentary impeachment trial of Warren Hastings. Hastings was charged with a long list of abuses of power that his articles of impeachment labeled “high crimes and misdemeanors,” but which even his chief prosecutor, Edmund Burke, admitted were not prosecutable crimes. On George Mason’s motion, the Philadelphia convention wrote into our constitution the same phrase Parliament used to describe Hastings’ non-criminal misconduct. No convention delegate ever suggested that impeachment be limited to violations of criminal law.
    [Show full text]
  • Re-Examining Nuremberg As a New Deal Institution: Politics, Culture and the Limits of Law in Generating Human Rights Norms
    Re-examining Nuremberg as a New Deal Institution: Politics, Culture and the Limits of Law in Generating Human Rights Norms By Elizabeth Borgwardt* Major Airey Neave, famous at age twenty-nine for his multiple escapes from Nazi prisons, noticed the unusually brilliant shine on Colonel Burton Andrus' helmet, as the two officers stood waiting outside the prison wing of the Palace of Justice at Nuremberg on the afternoon of October 19, 1945. Neave was a German-speaking London barrister whose wartime heroics with the clandestine British intelligence service, MI-9, had involved disguising himself variously as a Dutch electrical worker, a German corporal, and a German artillery lieutenant.1 The afternoon before, Francis Biddle, former U.S. Attorney General and the American judge at Nuremberg, had cavalierly informed Neave that the young major was to serve copies of the Nuremberg Charter, along with a detailed criminal indictment, on the Nazi leaders incarcerated in the Palace of 2 Justice. * Assistant Professor of History, University of Utah. J.D. (Harvard); Ph.D. (Stanford); M.Phil, International Relations (Cambridge). 1. Major Neave had escaped from the supposedly escape-proof Nazi prison in Colditz Castle, Saxony, a feat which so impressed the senior members of London's Middle Temple that they waived his final Bar examinations. He learned German as an exchange student in Berlin in 1933, where he unwittingly participated in a Nazi youth march. His memoir, although not published until the late 1970s, was based on his contemporaneous notes and on a memo he filed with the Nuremberg Tribunal in 1945. See Airey Neave, Memorandum for the General Secretary of the International Military Tribunal (Oct.
    [Show full text]
  • The Age of Consent
    Columbia Law School Scholarship Archive Faculty Scholarship Faculty Publications 2014 The Age of Consent Philip Chase Bobbitt Columbia Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship Part of the Legal History Commons Recommended Citation Philip C. Bobbitt, The Age of Consent, 123 YALE L. J. 2334 (2014). Available at: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/229 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Publications at Scholarship Archive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of Scholarship Archive. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE YALE LAW JOURNAL PHILIP C. BOBBITT The Age of Consent On three October afternoons in the fall of 1974, Grant Gilmore, a Sterling Professorof Law at Yale, delivered his Storrs Lectures, the lecture series at Yale Law School whose speakers had included Roscoe Pound, Lon Fuller,and Benjamin Cardozo. Gilmore was a magisterialscholar: the author of a prize-winning treatise, Security Interests in Personal Property, and what remains the leading treatise on admiralty law; he was the Chief Reporter and draftsman for Article 9 of the Unform Commercial Code; and his PhD on French poet and critic Stiphane Mallarmi had led to an appointmentat Yale College before he moved on to study law. Professor Gilmore's Storrs Lectures were titled "The Ages of American Law." Following Karl Llewellyn, Gilmore divided American legal history into three distinct eras. The Age of Discovery roughly spanned the yearsfrom the mid-eighteenth century through the Civil War, during which the United States grandly constructed a new legal edifice upon the foundations of the English common law.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Michigan Law School Faculty, 08/09 University of Michigan Law School
    University of Michigan Law School University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository Miscellaneous Law School Publications Law School History and Publications 2008 University of Michigan Law School Faculty, 08/09 University of Michigan Law School Follow this and additional works at: http://repository.law.umich.edu/miscellaneous Part of the Legal Biography Commons, and the Legal Education Commons Citation University of Michigan Law School, "University of Michigan Law School Faculty, 08/09" (2008). Miscellaneous Law School Publications. http://repository.law.umich.edu/miscellaneous/16 This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School History and Publications at University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Miscellaneous Law School Publications by an authorized administrator of University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. o turn the pages of this slim booklet is to begin to know some of the most distinguished legal scholars in the world. Among these members of the TMichigan Law faculty are leaders in constitutional. international. tax. envi­ ronmental, and business law. and in many other areas of scholarship, as well. For students hoping to build a world-class legal education. there is no better foundation. But these printed pages exist in only two dimensions. while legal education, like the real world. exists in three. Stepping inside the magnificent buildings of the University of Michigan Law Quad brings these photographs and stories to life. Tw o-dimensional biographies become three-dimensional professors Here. beneath the vaulted ceilings of Hutchins Hall, an internationally renowned intellectual property expert who testified before Congress yesterday will exchange views on Internet file sharing with a passing student.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Michigan Law School Faculty, 2005-2006 University of Michigan Law School
    University of Michigan Law School University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository Miscellaneous Law School Publications Law School History and Publications 2005 University of Michigan Law School Faculty, 2005-2006 University of Michigan Law School Follow this and additional works at: http://repository.law.umich.edu/miscellaneous Part of the Legal Biography Commons, and the Legal Education Commons Citation University of Michigan Law School, "University of Michigan Law School Faculty, 2005-2006" (2005). Miscellaneous Law School Publications. http://repository.law.umich.edu/miscellaneous/19 This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School History and Publications at University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Miscellaneous Law School Publications by an authorized administrator of University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. University of Michigan Law School 2005-2006 Fa c u I ty ayman E. Allen has been a pioneer in the use of mathematical logic University of Michigan Law School as a tool of analysis in law as well as in the use of computers in the fieldL of legal research. He has developed a formal system of the logic of LEGAL RELATIONS, which includes underlying systems of propo­ Faculty sitional, predicate, class, deontic, action, time, and capacitive logic. The primary application of the logic of LEGAL RELATIONS and its "I arrived at the U of M Law School immediately after fi nishing a Ph.D. accompanying LEGAL RELATIONS language is in the drafting and interpretation of legal documents ranging from constitutions and stat­ in history with the hope and expectation that law school wou ld consti­ utes to contracts and bylaws.
    [Show full text]
  • KEVIN M. STACK Vanderbilt University Law School 131 21St Avenue South Nashville, TN 37203 (615) 343-9220 [email protected]
    KEVIN M. STACK Vanderbilt University Law School 131 21st Avenue South Nashville, TN 37203 (615) 343-9220 [email protected] EMPLOYMENT VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL Lee S. and Charles A. Speir Professor of Law, August 2017-present Director of Graduate Studies, Ph.D. Program in Law & Economics, July 2016-present Associate Dean for Research, July 2008-July 2010, July 2012-July 2015 Professor of Law, September 2007-August 2017 Visiting Scholar, University of Sydney, Faculty of Law, Spring 2018 BENJAMIN N. CARDOZO SCHOOL OF LAW, Yeshiva University Associate Professor, September 2005-September 2007 Assistant Professor, July 2002-September 2005 JENNER & BLOCK, Washington, DC Associate, 2000-02 THE HONORABLE A. WALLACE TASHIMA, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Law Clerk, 1998-99 THE HONORABLE KIMBA M. WOOD, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York Law Clerk, 1997-98 DAVIS POLK & WARDWELL, New York, NY Summer Associate, 1997 WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY, Washington, DC Summer Associate, 1996 EDUCATION YALE LAW SCHOOL, J.D., 1997 Felix S. Cohen Prize (awarded by faculty for best student essay relating to legal philosophy), 1997 YALE LAW JOURNAL, Staff Editor and Senior Editor, 1995-97 YALE JOURNAL OF LAW & THE HUMANITIES, Articles Editor, 1995-96 Coker Fellow, 1995 DeVane Lecture Series (Hon. Guido Calabresi) Teaching Assistant, 1997 UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD (NEW COLLEGE), M.Litt. in Philosophy, 1996 (completed 1995) Fulbright Scholarship, 1992-94 Overseas Research Students Award, 1992-94 BROWN UNIVERSITY, B.A. (Philosophy), magna cum laude and with honors, 1991 Philosophy Department Commencement Speaker, 1991 Phi Beta Kappa Society, 1990 Honors Thesis in Philosophy Kevin M.
    [Show full text]