-
Stay Connected:
Sign up for the Florida Law Review Mailing List
eReader Ready:
Current Issue
Jan. 2013, Vol. 65, No. 1
Articles
David Haddock, Tonja Jacobi, & Matthew Sag, League Structure &Stadium Rent Seeking— the Role of Antitrust Revisited
Steven J. Cleveland, Resurrecting Deference to the Securities and Exchange Commission: Mark Cuban Trading on Inside information
Janai S. Nelson, The First Amendment, Equal Protection and Felon Disenfranchisement: A New Viewpoint
Sergio J. Campos, Erie as a Choice of Enforcement Defaults
Hanah Metchis Volokh, Constitutional Authority Statements in Congress
Sapna Kumar, The Accidental Agency?
Christian Turner, State Action Problems
Category Archives: Business & Corporate Law
Simon A. Rodell, Plumbing in the Boardroom: Plugging Boardroom Leaks through a Good Faith Duty of Confidentiality
59 Fla. L. Rev. 631 (2007) | | | | INTRODUCTION :: On January 24, 2005, the Wall Street Journal published a front-page article detailing confidential boardroom discussions at Hewlett-Packard’s (H-P) annual board meeting. The article described, in explicit detail, … Continue reading
Posted in Business & Corporate Law, Governments and Legislation, Uncategorized
Tagged boardroom leaks, director leaks, directors, duty of confidentiality, good faith, Hewlett-Packard, HP, investors, Keyworth, Rodell, shareholders, Wall Street Journal
Comments Off
Lisa M. Fairfax, Easier Said than Done? A Corporate Law Theory for Actualizing Social Responsibility Rhetoric
59 Fla. L. Rev. 771 (2007) | | | | ABSTRACT :: Post Enron has witnessed renewed concern regarding corporations’ failure to behave responsibly, both in terms of their ethical responsibility and in terms of their responsibilities to advance issues … Continue reading
Posted in Business & Corporate Law, Employment Law, Labor & Employment Law, Uncategorized
Tagged Business Community, corporate irresponsibility, Corporate Law, Corporate Rhetoric, Empirical Evidence, Fairfax, Social Responsibility
Comments Off
Brandon Faulkner, Hacking into Data Breach Notification Laws
59 Fla. L. Rev. 1097 (2007) | | | | INTRODUCTION :: On March 23, 2007, a news agency announced that the police department in Gainesville, Florida, arrested six individuals on charges that they had stolen credit card data from … Continue reading
Posted in Business & Corporate Law, Computer & Internet Law, Contract Law, Evidence, Governments and Legislation, Internet Law, Tort Law, Uncategorized
Tagged circumstantial evidence, civil litigation, company practices, Credit card data, cyber-crime, Data Breach, Faulkner, Florida, Gainesville, identity theft, Notification Laws, security policies, stolen identities
Comments Off
James Fanto, Paternalistic Regulation of Public Company Management: Lessons from Bank Regulation
58 Fla. L. Rev. 859 (2006) | | | INTRODUCTION :: By all accounts, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Sarbanes-Oxley) represented a significant intrusion by the federal government into the substantive regulation of corporate governance of U.S. public companies, an … Continue reading
Posted in Business & Corporate Law, Securities Law, Uncategorized
Tagged Bank Regulation, bank regulators, corporate advisors, enforcement, Fanto, federal banking agencies, government regulator, New Yorks Stock Exchange, NYSE, paternal, prescreen public company, prescreening, Sarbanes Oxley Act, Securities and Exchange Commission, SRO
Comments Off
John D. Colombo, In Search of Private Benefit
58 Fla. L. Rev. 1063 (2006) | | | | INTRODUCTION :: For at least the past two decades, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has relied heavily on the private benefit doctrine to police economic transactions between tax- exempt charities … Continue reading
Posted in Business & Corporate Law, Tax Law, Uncategorized
Tagged 501(c)(3), ancillary joint ventures, balancing test, charities, Colombo, exempt charity, exempt educational organization, exempt entities, internal revenue service, IRS General Counsel Memorandum, joint ventures, major political party, Policing tool, Private Benefit, private benefit doctrine, Revenue Ruling 2004-51, secondary private benefit, tax-exempt, Treasury Regulation § 1.501(c)(3)-1(d)(1)(ii)
Comments Off