Freedom from Claims and Defenses: A Study in Judicial Activism under the Uniform Commerical Code

The suggestion that we might today learn something about the judicial process in such a staid area of private law may seem surprising. After all, has not the Federal Trade Commission repealed the holder in due course rule thus tossing negotiable instruments into the dust bin? Have not the remaining technical questions been answered by the detail and rigid precision of the Uniform Commercial Code so lamented by Professor Gilmore? Surely, the attentive observer of the role of the courts might conclude that there is nothing left for the judicial policy maker in the field of bills and notes. The thesis of this Article is that any such suppositions of passivity are wrong. The opinions written today show that, as in Judge Abbott\u27s or Justice Story\u27s time, the courts contend with significant commercial paper problems. Some of the issues they face might well give Chief Judge Abbott or Justice Story profound feelings of deja vu were they available to preside. The FTC preemption is easily disposed of--it is limited to certain consumer time obligations; not even consumer checks are affected. Nor have the courts been shackled by the UCC. The answers appellate courts give in commercial paper cases are frequently a product of judicial preferences rather than statutory directives. For better or worse, the contemporary opinions dealing with freedom from claims and defenses on negotiable instruments are remarkable for the judicial legislation they embody

A Note on the Georgia Contracts Code

Among all of these codes, the present Code of Georgia enjoys a distinguished pedigree. It traces its origins and many of its provisions to the original Georgia Code of 1860. The story of that original Georgia Code has been largely lost to history, undoubtedly because it arrived simultaneously with the Civil War. For its time, the Georgia Code of 1860 was a remarkable legal document. Previous codifications in Anglo-American jurisdictions had been limited to reducing statutory materials to systematic written form or establishing new procedural systems. The Georgia Code of 1860 was the first codification of the substantive areas of the common law

The Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012: Temporarily Curtailed by the Homeowner Flood Insurance Act of 2014—A Respite to Forge an Enduring Correction to the National Flood Insurance Program Built on Virtuous Economic and Environmental Incentives

In the wake of Hurricane Sandy in 2012, this note challenges the economic and environmental efficiency of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) as it stands, and as it relates to the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012 (Biggert-Waters). The NFIP, which was enacted to provide flood insurance at low costs to coastal dwellers, was modified by Biggert-Waters, an act to help NFIP manage its debt by increasing insurance premiums to property owners, among other things. This note argues that as Biggert-Waters has been overshadowed by the Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act of 2014, Congress is in a unique position to legislate in a manner that can more effectively balance the interests of coastal property owners, the environment, and the NFIP

Working Toward a Healthy Vietnam: Key Policy Messages From the VASS-SSRC Project

This brief provides key policy messages based on a large-scale longitudinal study from 2008 to 2016 in twelve communes in three Vietnamese provinces by the Vietnam Academy of Social Sciences (VASS) and the Social Science Research Council (SSRC).The project's objective was to understand household health practices and health-seeking behavior in Viet Nam, especially among economically and socially disadvantaged groups.Key findings highlight the main areas where donors and the government will need to focus in the coming years in order to improve and reduce disparities in health outcomes.These recommendations include:Increasing the use and effectiveness of commune health centers (CHCs)Improving antenatal care and utilizationHelping CHCs implement preventive health care and essential disease control program

Secured Credit and Insolvency Law in Argentina and the U.S.: Gaining Insight from a Comparative Perspective

It is not the purpose of this study to argue for or against changes in the secured credit or insolvency law of Argentina or the U.S. The perpetual clash of interested noted by James Madison and the contemporary pressures of the global economy are likely to assure that these areas of law will be subject to continuing scrutiny in both countries. Instead, we first urge that the law governing the creation and enforcement of security devices and the way in which insolvency laws impact these devices be considered together as part of one system of financing. The power which secured credit devices give to the creditor may be either checked or enhanced once the debtor files an insolvency proceeding. Second, by comparing how secured credit and insolvency law interact in Argentina and the U.S., we believe that it is possible to gain insight as to the core values and attitudes embodied in the present legal systems and a helpful viewpoint for evaluating proposed legal changes in either country. Comparison may even tend to free us from the ideological commitments which still seem to dominate discussion of the rights of debtors and creditors