Involuntary Psychiatric Treatment and Other Coercive Behavioral Interventions as Criminal Sanctions: Reflections on Vitek v. Jones

This Article inquires into the substantive limits on the power of government to impose coercive behavioral interventions on criminal offenders solely because of a criminal conviction and sentence

An Everyday Lawyer’s Shakespeare

This summer, I enjoyed a unique opportunity to explore Shakespeare’s critique of law with a small group of students and a dear colleague in a study abroad program at the University of Arkansas Rome Center. I want to share my reflections on this singularly rewarding experience

Does Sustainability Require a New Theory of Property Rights?

This is the published version

Construction Law Apologetics

This Article challenges the legal academy’s perceptions and offers an alternative assessment of the relationship between the construction industry and law. Part I reviews practical reasons for teaching construction law to law students. In brief, Part I first demonstrates how a construction law course pairs advanced instruction in several topics introduced in the core curriculum, such as contracts, torts, civil procedure, evidence, remedies, and dispute resolution, with lessons on adapting legal knowledge to the specialized construction industry practice. Next, it explains how studying construction law can prepare students to represent clients in a wide range of complex commercial matters that require expertise in transactional practice, advocacy, and dispute resolution. Then, Part II makes the case for greater scholarly engagement with the legal aspects of the built environment, exploring some especially promising contract and tort topics in detail before briefly suggesting other potential research projects. Part III concludes by proposing an ongoing dialogue between construction lawyers and the legal academy

When Specialty Designs Cause Building Disasters: Responsibility for Shared Architectural and Engineering Services

This article examines the development, current legal status, and long-range legal implications of shared design. Of special interest is the practice of assigning significant responsibility for specialty design to those who have no direct contractual relationship with the owner of the project or the owner\u27s primary design professional. Part II examines how specialty design-build fits into the context of established design and construction contract structures. Part III explores the contract and tort theories that govern the liability of project participants for design errors and defects and that will guide courts, arbitrators, and construction lawyers who face the shared design conundrum. Part IV reviews why and how the construction industry relies increasingly on shared design practices, particularly specialty design-build, and it challenges the current industry, legislative, and regulatory perspectives on specialty design-build. Part V identifies and offers proposals concerning the fundamental policy considerations that should inform legislatures, regulatory agencies, courts, mediators, arbitrators, and construction lawyers as they face the unique responsibility and risk allocation issues of this new design-build world