DOCSLIB.ORG

The Charlotte Regional Fund for Entrepreneurship

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Charlotte Regional Fund for Entrepreneurship Sponsored By THE CHARLOTTE REGIONAL FUND FOR ENTREPRENEURSHIP Sponsored By Prepared By Julie Nance Principal Consultant 7/10/2013 Mapping the Ecosystem An in-depth look at the Charlotte region’s entrepreneurial ecosystem and the programs that impact high growth entrepreneurs. The Charlotte Regional Fund for Entrepreneurship Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................... III A Focus on High Growth Entrepreneurs ...................................................................................... iii A Complex Environment ................................................................................................................ iii The Charlotte Entrepreneur Ecosystem ....................................................................................... iv Community Interviews..................................................................................................................... iv Recommendations for the Charlotte Regional Fund for Entrepreneurship (CRFE) ............. vii Summary of Findings ..................................................................................................................... vii INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 1 STUDY FOCUS ........................................................................................................................................ 1 APPROACH ............................................................................................................................................. 2 Study Methodology........................................................................................................................ 2 Regional Approach ........................................................................................................................ 3 Community Interviews..................................................................................................................... 3 BEST PRACTICES IN ENTREPRENEURSHIP DEVELOPMENT AND GROWTH ............................. 4 What is an Entrepreneurial Ecosystem? ............................................................................................. 4 Definitions and Concepts in Entrepreneurship .................................................................................. 6 Key Factors for Ecosystem Success ..................................................................................................... 7 Innovation Initiatives of Note ............................................................................................................... 8 CHARLOTTE-REGION’S ENTREPRENEURIAL ECOSYSTEM ..................................................... 17 Current State of the Market .............................................................................................................. 17 Charlotte’s Ecosystem Map ................................................................................................................ 19 A. Entrepreneur Support Organizations .................................................................................. 21 Strategy & Coordination of Networks .............................................................................. 21 Local Entrepreneurship Networks........................................................................................ 21 Incubators, Accelerators, Co-working ................................................................................ 27 B. Business...................................................................................................................................... 28 Corporations ........................................................................................................................... 28 Industry Cluster Support Organizations ............................................................................ 29 C. Capital Resources .................................................................................................................... 33 Investors ................................................................................................................................... 33 Financing .................................................................................................................................. 34 Foundations ............................................................................................................................. 35 D. Educational Institutions .......................................................................................................... 37 Primary and Secondary Schools ......................................................................................... 37 Higher Educational Institutions ............................................................................................. 37 E. Government and Quasi-Governmental Agencies .......................................................... 42 Federal Departments ............................................................................................................ 42 State Departments ................................................................................................................. 43 Page i The Charlotte Regional Fund for Entrepreneurship Regional-Local Departments ................................................................................................ 43 Research Institutions ............................................................................................................... 43 Workforce Boards ................................................................................................................. 44 Economic Development Organizations............................................................................... 44 ECOSYSTEM GAPS - FINDINGS ............................................................................................. 46 Culture ............................................................................................................................................. 46 Talent Availability and Development ....................................................................................... 46 Networking and Mentoring ........................................................................................................ 46 Media.............................................................................................................................................. 46 Open Participation ....................................................................................................................... 47 Venture Capital and Funding ..................................................................................................... 47 Higher Education Partnerships ................................................................................................... 47 Large Company Partnerships and Clusters ............................................................................. 47 The Chamber and Economic Development .............................................................................. 47 The Need for CRFE and Unified Coordination ....................................................................... 47 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CRFE FUND DEVELOPMENT ...................................................... 48 CRFE Fund Mission ................................................................................................................................ 48 Recommended Program Priorities..................................................................................................... 48 Fundable Opportunity Areas ..................................................................................................... 48 Eligibility ................................................................................................................................................ 49 The CRFE Process for Grant Making ................................................................................................ 49 CRFE Advisory Committee and Board Structure ............................................................................ 50 Evaluation Criteria ............................................................................................................................... 50 Selection ................................................................................................................................................. 51 CRFE Effectiveness Review ................................................................................................................. 51 SUMMARY............................................................................................................................. 52 APPENDIX ............................................................................................................................... 1 Community interviews ............................................................................................................................ 2 Page ii The Charlotte Regional Fund for Entrepreneurship EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of Charlotte and Foundation For The Carolinas (FFTC) have come together to sponsor a review and recommendations on the Charlotte USA region entrepreneurial ecosystem. After a year of coordination and educational meetings with stakeholders in the ecosystem, the City agreed to participate financially with a
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Benjamin M. Weadon Senior Associate
    Benjamin M. Weadon Senior Associate 704.444.1082 [email protected] Charlotte | Bank of America Plaza, 101 South Tryon Street, Suite 4000 | Charlotte, NC 28280-4000 Ben Weadon is a senior associate with Alston & Bird’s Corporate & Business Transactions Group. He advises private equity firms and their portfolio companies from coast to coast on leveraged buyouts, growth equity investments, merger and acquisition transactions, and general corporate matters. Ben has advised on deals in various industries, including software, semiconductor, telecommunications, and fleet management. Ben received his J.D., with high honors, from the University of North Carolina School of Law, where he was elected to the Order of the Coif. In law school, Ben was the executive editor of the North Carolina Banking Institute Journal. Ben received a B.A. in history, cum laude, from Duke University. Representative Experience Represented CommScope Holding Company Inc. in its $7.4 billion acquisition of ARRIS International plc. Represented The Carlyle Group in its $7.4 billion acquisition of Veritas, an information management system provider, from Symantec Corporation. Represented CommScope Holding Company Inc. in its $3 billion acquisition of TE Connectivity’s telecom, enterprise, and wireless businesses. Represented an entity controlled by The Carlyle Group in the acquisition of the Compute business of MACOM Technology Solutions and related joint venture with Oracle Corporation. Represented The Carlyle Group in its investment in ProKarma, a high-growth IT services firm. Represented Ridgemont Equity Partners in its acquisition of Munch’s Supply, a leading wholesale distributor of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment. Represented Ridgemont Equity Partners in its acquisition of Dickinson Fleet Services, a technology-enabled service provider in the vehicle fleet maintenance industry.
    [Show full text]
  • RESI Boston Program Guide 09-26-2017 Digital
    SEPTEMBER 26 , 2017 BOSTON, MA Early stage investors, fundraising CEOs, scientist-entrepreneurs, strategic partners, and service providers now have an opportunity to Make a Compelling Connection ONSITE GUIDE LIFE SCIENCE NATION Connecting Products, Services & Capital #RESIBOS17 | RESIConference.com | Boston Marriott Copley Place FLOOR PLAN Therapeutics Track 2 Investor Track 3 & track4 Track 1 Device, Panels Workshops & Diagnostic & HCIT Asia Investor Panels Panels Ad-Hoc Meeting Area Breakfast & Lunch DINING 29 25 30 26 31 27 32 28 33 29 34 30 35 Breakfast / LunchBreakfast BUFFETS 37 28 24 27 23 26 22 25 21 24 20 23 19 22 exhibit hall 40 15 13 16 14 17 15 18 16 19 17 20 18 21 39 INNOVATION 14 12 13 11 12 10 11 9 10 8 9 7 8 EXHIBITORS CHALLENGE 36 38 FINALISTS 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 Partnering Check-in PARTNERING Forum Lunch BUFFETS Breakfast / Breakfast RESTROOM cocktail reception REGISTRATION content Welcome to RESI - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 RESI Agenda - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3 BOSTON RESI Innovation Challenge - - - - - - - 5 Exhibiting Companies - - - - - - - - - - 12 Track 1: Therapeutics Investor Panels - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 19 Track 2: Device, Diagnostic, & HCIT Investor Panels - - - - 29 Track 3: Entrepreneur Workshops - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 38 Track 4: Asia-North America Workshop & Panels - - - - - - 41 Track 5: Partnering Forum - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 45 Sponsors & Media Partners - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 46 1 welcome to resi On behalf of Life Science Nation (LSN) and our title sponsors WuXi AppTec and Johnson & Johnson Innovation JLABS, I would like to thank you for joining us at RESI Boston. LSN is very happy to welcome you all to Boston, the city where it all began, for our 14th RESI event.
    [Show full text]
  • TRS Contracted Investment Managers
    TRS INVESTMENT RELATIONSHIPS AS OF DECEMBER 2020 Global Public Equity (Global Income continued) Acadian Asset Management NXT Capital Management AQR Capital Management Oaktree Capital Management Arrowstreet Capital Pacific Investment Management Company Axiom International Investors Pemberton Capital Advisors Dimensional Fund Advisors PGIM Emerald Advisers Proterra Investment Partners Grandeur Peak Global Advisors Riverstone Credit Partners JP Morgan Asset Management Solar Capital Partners LSV Asset Management Taplin, Canida & Habacht/BMO Northern Trust Investments Taurus Funds Management RhumbLine Advisers TCW Asset Management Company Strategic Global Advisors TerraCotta T. Rowe Price Associates Varde Partners Wasatch Advisors Real Assets Transition Managers Barings Real Estate Advisers The Blackstone Group Citigroup Global Markets Brookfield Asset Management Loop Capital The Carlyle Group Macquarie Capital CB Richard Ellis Northern Trust Investments Dyal Capital Penserra Exeter Property Group Fortress Investment Group Global Income Gaw Capital Partners AllianceBernstein Heitman Real Estate Investment Management Apollo Global Management INVESCO Real Estate Beach Point Capital Management LaSalle Investment Management Blantyre Capital Ltd. Lion Industrial Trust Cerberus Capital Management Lone Star Dignari Capital Partners LPC Realty Advisors Dolan McEniry Capital Management Macquarie Group Limited DoubleLine Capital Madison International Realty Edelweiss Niam Franklin Advisers Oak Street Real Estate Capital Garcia Hamilton & Associates
    [Show full text]
  • Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C
    Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter ofthe Application of SinglePipe Communications, Inc., Transferor, ALEC, Inc., Licensee ... ., --, and Integrated Broadband Services, LLC, Transferee For grant of authority pursuant to Section 214 ofthe Communications Act of 1934, as amended, and Section 63.04 ofthe Commission's Rules to Transfer Control of ALEC, Inc. I. INTRODUCTION A. Summary ofTransaction SinglePipe Communications, Inc. ("SinglePipe" or "Transferor"), ALEC, Inc. ("ALEC" or "Licensee") and Integrated Broadband Services, LLC ("IBBS" or "Transferee") (collectively, "Applicants"), through their undersigned l:ounsel and pursuant to Section 214 of the Communications Act, as amended l and Section 63.04 of the Commission's rules,2 respectfully request Commission approval to transfer control of Li>:ensee to Transferee. Licensee is a non- dominant carrier holding blanket domestic 214 authorization from the Commission to provide interstate telecommunications services under Section 63.01 ofthe Commission's ruIes.3 1 47 U.S.C. § 214. 2 47 C.F.R. § 63.04. 3 47 C.F.R. § 63.01. 1 DWT 14804192v2 0102461.QODOOl B. Request for Streamlined Processing Applicants respectfully submit that this application is eligible for presumptive streamlined processing under Section 63.03(b)(l)(ii) of the Commission's rules because the Transferee is not a telecommunications provider. 4 II. DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICANTS A. Transferor and Licensee SinglePipe is a Kentucky corporation with its principal place of business at 11492 Bluegrass Parkway, Louisville, KY 40299, and is the direct, 100% parent of ALEC. SinglePipe is not a regulated telecommunications entity in any state, and has no subsidiaries, other than ALEC, that are regulated telecommunications entities.
    [Show full text]
  • Small Business Incubator Certification Program Annual Report 2020
    Small Business Incubator Certification Program 2020 Annual Report Incubator Certification Program Overview Business incubators nurture the development of Oklahoma Business Incubator entrepreneurial companies, helping them survive Association and grow during the startup period, when they The Oklahoma Business Incubator Association are most vulnerable. These programs provide their (OkBIA) was formed more than 20 years ago. The client companies with business support services purpose of the OkBIA is to provide information, and resources tailored to young firms. The most networking, guidance and assistance to incubator common goals of incubation programs are creating operators, as well as to work with the Legislature jobs in a community, enhancing a community’s to promote and benefit business incubators and entrepreneurial climate, retaining businesses in a tenants. community, building or accelerating growth in a local industry, and diversifying local economies. Oklahoma Business Incubators Incubators vary in the way they deliver their In 1988, the Oklahoma Legislature passed the services, in their organizational structure and in Oklahoma Small Business Incubators Incentives the types of clients they serve. As they are highly Act. The Act enables the tenants of a certified adaptable, incubators have differing goals, including incubator facility to be exempt from state tax liability diversifying rural economies, providing employment on income earned as a result of occupancy for up for and increasing wealth of depressed inner cities, to five years. In 2001, the legislature amended the and transferring technology from universities and act to extend the tenant’s tax exemption from five major corporations. Incubator clients are often at to 10 years. The exemption remains in effect after the forefront of developing new and innovative the tenant has graduated from an incubator.
    [Show full text]
  • The Gender Gap in Startup Catalyst Organizations
    University of California, Hastings College of the Law UC Hastings Scholarship Repository Faculty Scholarship 2017 The Gender Gap in Startup Catalyst Organizations: Bridging the Divide between Narrative and Reality Alice Armitage UC Hastings College of the Law, [email protected] Robin Feldman UC Hastings College of the Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/faculty_scholarship Recommended Citation Alice Armitage and Robin Feldman, The Gender Gap in Startup Catalyst Organizations: Bridging the Divide between Narrative and Reality, 95 Or. L. Rev. 313 (2017). Available at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/faculty_scholarship/1591 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. OREGON 2017 VOLUME 95 LAW NUMBER 2 REVIEW Articles ROBIN FELDMAN,* ALICE ARMITAGEt & CONNIE WANGT The Gender Gap in Startup Catalyst Organizations: Bridging the Divide Between Narrative and Reality I. The Catalyst Phenomenon: Function and Typology..............314 A. Co-Working Spaces.........................315 B. Incubators................................ 317 C. Accelerators ........................ ...... 318 II. The Gender Gap in Entrepreneurship and Technology..........320 III. Research Design and Methodology ................. 323 IV. Results ........................... ............... 326 *Harry & Lillian Hastings Professor and Director of the Institute for Innovation Law, University of California, Hastings College of the Law. t Associate Professor of Law and Director of the Startup Legal Garage, University of California, Hastings College of the Law. I Research Fellow at the Institute for Innovation Law, University of California, Hastings College of the Law.
    [Show full text]
  • PEI Investor Relations, Marketing & Communications Forum 2019
    June 19-20 | Convene, 730 Third Ave | New York Attendee list A.P. Moller Capital Bain Capital C-Bridge Capital Partners FTV Capital ACME Capital Banner Real Estate Group CCMP Capital Advisors Further Capital Partners Actis Barings Centerbridge Partners GCM Grosvenor Advent International Basis Investment Group Cerberus Capital Management General Atlantic AE Industrial Partners Battery Ventures Charlesbank Capital Partners General Catalyst Partners AEA Investors BBH Capital Partners The Chauncey F. Lufkin III Gennx360 AEW Capital Management BC Partners Foundation Genstar Capital AIMA The Beach Company The City of New York, Finance Global Infrastructure Partners Alcentra Berkshire Partners Civitas Capital Grain Management Alcion Ventures Bernhard Capital Partners Coller Capital Gryphon Investors Allianz Capital Partners Bicknell Family Holding Cornell Capital GTCR Altor Equity Partners Company Court Square Capital Partners Halstatt American Securities Bison Crescent Capital Group Hamilton Lane AMP Capital BKM Capital Partners CRV Hammes Angelo Gordon Blackstone Cypress Real Estate Advisors Hammond, Kennedy, Whitney Antares Capital Blue Heron Asset Managment Denham Capital & Co Apollo Global Management Blue Water Energy Duff & Phelps Hancock Capital Management ARC Financial Corp Bridge Investment Group Dyal Capital Partners Harvard Management Company ArcLight Capital Partners BroadVail Capital Edelman HCI Equity Partners Argosy Capital Brook Venture Partners EnCap Investments HGGC Arroyo Energy Investment Brookfield Asset Management EQT Partners
    [Show full text]
  • Real Estate Crowdfunding – Modern Trend Or Restructured Investment Model?: Have the SEC’S Proposed Rules on Crowdfunding Created a Closed-Market System?
    The Journal of Business, Entrepreneurship & the Law Volume 9 Issue 1 Article 2 4-1-2016 Real Estate Crowdfunding – Modern Trend or Restructured Investment Model?: Have the SEC’s Proposed Rules on Crowdfunding Created a Closed-market System? Cory Baker Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/jbel Part of the Property Law and Real Estate Commons, and the Securities Law Commons Recommended Citation Cory Baker, Real Estate Crowdfunding – Modern Trend or Restructured Investment Model?: Have the SEC’s Proposed Rules on Crowdfunding Created a Closed-market System?, 9 J. Bus. Entrepreneurship & L. 21 (2016) Available at: https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/jbel/vol9/iss1/2 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by the Caruso School of Law at Pepperdine Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Journal of Business, Entrepreneurship & the Law by an authorized editor of Pepperdine Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]. REAL ESTATE CROWDFUNDING – MODERN TREND OR RESTRUCTURED INVESTMENT MODEL?: HAVE THE SEC’S PROPOSED RULES ON CROWDFUNDING CREATED A CLOSED- MARKET SYSTEM? 1 CORY BAKER Abstract ............................................................................................................. 22 I. Introduction ................................................................................................... 22 A. What is Crowdfunding? ......................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Crowdfunding Schemes in Europe
    Crowdfunding Schemes in Europe by David Röthler and Karsten Wenzlaff EENC Report, September 2011 Crowdfunding Schemes in Europe by David Röthler and Karsten Wenzlaff EENC Report, September 2011 This document has been prepared by David Röthler and Karsten Wenzlaff on behalf of the European Expert Network on Culture (EENC). A draft was peer-reviewed by EENC member Aleksandra Uzelac. This paper reflects the views only of the EENC authors and the European Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein. The EENC was set up in 2010 at the initiative of Directorate-General for Education and Culture of the European Commission (DG EAC), with the aim of contributing to the improvement of policy development in Europe. It provides advice and support to DG EAC in the analysis of cultural policies and their implications at national, regional and European levels. The EENC involves 17 independent experts and is coordinated by Interarts and Culture Action Europe. About the authors David Röthler, Master´s degree in Law, trainer, consultant and journalist in the fields of political communication, media and European funding. He teaches at journalism schools in Austria and Germany. His focus is on participatory journalism, social media and new funding schemes e.g. crowdfunding and social payment. Furthermore he has extensive experience with the management of international projects. He is founder of the consultancy PROJEKTkompetenz.eu GmbH. Personal Weblog: politik.netzkompetenz.at Karsten Wenzlaff is the founder of the Institute of Communications for Social Communication (ikosom), a Berlin-based research facility for new forms of electronic technology.
    [Show full text]
  • A Framework for a Public-Private Partnership to Increase The
    A national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy National Renewable Energy Laboratory Innovation for Our Energy Future Enhancing Commercial Technical Report NREL/TP-110-40463 Outcomes from R&D May 2007 A Framework for a Public–Private Partnership to Increase the Yield of Federally Funded R&D Investments and Promote Economic Development L.M. Murphy Manager, Enterprise Development Programs National Renewable Energy Laboratory P. Jerde Executive Director Robert H. and Beverly A. Deming Center for Entrepreneurship, Leeds School of Business University of Colorado, Boulder L. Rutherford Venture Partner Vista Ventures R. Barone 2008 MS/MBA Candidate Department of Environmental Studies and Leeds School of Business University of Colorado, Boulder NREL is operated by Midwest Research Institute ● Battelle Contract No. DE-AC36-99-GO10337 Enhancing Commercial Technical Report NREL/TP-110-40463 Outcomes from R&D May 2007 A Framework for a Public–Private Partnership to Increase the Yield of Federally Funded R&D Investments and Promote Economic Development L.M. Murphy Manager, Enterprise Development Programs National Renewable Energy Laboratory P. Jerde Executive Director Robert H. and Beverly A. Deming Center for Entrepreneurship, Leeds School of Business University of Colorado, Boulder L. Rutherford Venture Partner Vista Ventures R. Barone 2008 MS/MBA Candidate Department of Environmental Studies and Leeds School of Business University of Colorado, Boulder Prepared under Task No. 1100.1000 National Renewable Energy Laboratory 1617 Cole Boulevard, Golden, Colorado 80401-3393 303-275-3000 • www.nrel.gov Operated for the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy by Midwest Research Institute • Battelle Contract No.
    [Show full text]
  • PEI June2020 PEI300.Pdf
    Cover story 20 Private Equity International • June 2020 Cover story Better capitalised than ever Page 22 The Top 10 over the decade Page 24 A decade that changed PE Page 27 LPs share dealmaking burden Page 28 Testing the value creation story Page 30 Investing responsibly Page 32 The state of private credit Page 34 Industry sweet spots Page 36 A liquid asset class Page 38 The PEI 300 by the numbers Page 40 June 2020 • Private Equity International 21 Cover story An industry better capitalised than ever With almost $2trn raised between them in the last five years, this year’s PEI 300 are armed and ready for the post-coronavirus rebuild, writes Isobel Markham nnual fundraising mega-funds ahead of the competition. crisis it’s better to be backed by a pri- figures go some way And Blackstone isn’t the only firm to vate equity firm, particularly and to towards painting a up the ante. The top 10 is around $30 the extent that it is able and prepared picture of just how billion larger than last year’s, the top to support these companies, which of much capital is in the 50 has broken the $1 trillion mark for course we are,” he says. hands of private equi- the first time, and the entire PEI 300 “The businesses that we own at Aty managers, but the ebbs and flows of has amassed $1.988 trillion. That’s the Blackstone that are directly affected the fundraising cycle often leave that same as Italy’s GDP. Firms now need by the pandemic, [such as] Merlin, picture incomplete.
    [Show full text]
  • Equity Crowdfunding: a Market for Lemons? Darian M
    College of William & Mary Law School William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository Faculty Publications Faculty and Deans 2015 Equity Crowdfunding: A Market for Lemons? Darian M. Ibrahim William & Mary Law School, [email protected] Repository Citation Ibrahim, Darian M., "Equity Crowdfunding: A Market for Lemons?" (2015). Faculty Publications. 1792. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/facpubs/1792 Copyright c 2015 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/facpubs IBRAHIM_4fmt 1/3/2016 1:00 PM Article Equity Crowdfunding: A Market for Lemons? Darian M. Ibrahim† INTRODUCTION Everything is online now—the way we connect with others, the way we shop, even some forms of education. We keep up with friends on Facebook we cannot see in person, buy light bulbs from Amazon rather than making a trip to the hardware store,1 and obtain an MBA at night on our computers from the comfort of our own home after the kids have gone to bed.2 One area that has initially resisted the move to cyberspace, howev- er—eschewing the virtual world for the real one—is entrepre- neurial finance. Venture capitalists (VCs) and angel investors have long valued close networks and personal relationships when select- ing which entrepreneurs to fund, and they closely monitor their investments in person after they fund.3 These practices lead to intense locality in funding—i.e., investors funding entrepre- † Professor of Law, William & Mary Law School. My thanks to Brian Broughman, Joan Heminway, Don Langevoort, Alan Meese, Nate Oman, Ja- son Parsont, Gordon Smith, participants in a faculty workshop at Washington & Lee for helpful feedback on this Article.
    [Show full text]