A Rejoinder by Professor Waggoner

Since the patience of the reader and the space in this issue of the Law Review are nearing their limits, I wish to publish only two points in response to what Professor Dukeminier has written.. These points further support my position that Dukeminier\u27s proposed statute would lead almost anyone to conclude that A, not X, is the causal relationship measuring life in Example 1 of my article.1 By implication, these points, along with the others made in my article, corroborate my overall thesis: Professor Dukeminier\u27s proposed one-sentence statute2 cannot be counted a responsible way of identifying the measuring lives for waitand- see, if indeed measuring lives are to be used at all;3 the exact meaning of persons who can affect the vesting of the interest is disputable and the various subsidiary rules Dukeminier announces need rethinking, clarifying, and codifying

The Lexington-Fayette Urban County Board of Adjustment: Fifty Years Later

Fifty years ago, Jesse Dukeminier, Jr. and Clyde Stapleton published a case study of the practice of law before the Lexington-Fayette Urban County (LFUC) Board of Adjustment. This Article presents a new empirical study of the LFUC Board of Adjustment. Specifically, the study covers the eighteen month period from the Board’s July 2007 meeting through its December 2008 meeting. This Article discusses how the practice has changed and improved in the years since the Dukeminier-Stapleton study and the problems and difficulties that still remain. The Article begins by describing the current procedure before the LFUC Board of Adjustment and how it has changed since the Dukeminier-Stapleton study. It then addresses the three basic types of appeals the Board considers: (1) variances, (2) conditional use permits, and (3) administrative appeals from the zoning administrator. With respect to each type of appeal, the Article first describes the governing law and how it has changed since the Dukeminier-Stapleton study. It then provides an empirical study of the Board’s voting behavior. The Article concludes with an overview of the ways in which the law and practice have changed since the Dukeminier-Stapleton study and the problems that remain

A Casebook for Teaching Teachers: Jesse Dukeminier and James E. Krier, \u3cem\u3eProperty\u3c/em\u3e

This essay will evaluate the Dukeminier and Krier Property casebook from this perspective: just how good a text is it for teaching new law teachers? The answer, it seems to me, is that their book is very well suited to this goal. Given that I have used the Dukeminier and Krier casebook (D&K casebook) for nine years now, my answer should not surprise the reader. Indeed, I think it is this aspect of the book (and perhaps a general inclination of teachers not to fix what ain\u27t broke) that accounts for the extraordinary loyalty that many professors give to this book

Review of Jesse Dukeminier and James E. Krier, Property (4th Edition 1998)

Professors Dukeminier and Krier\u27s property casebook is reputed to be the market leader in Property casebooks; I have heard estimates that it has as much as a fifty percent market share. This position is well-deserved-the casebook is thorough, comprehensive, well-written, error free, and, a significant feature for new teachers, has the best teacher\u27s manual I have encountered for any casebook in any subject. IBM once sold computers because No one ever got fired for choosing IBM. An analogous claim can be made for this casebook-no one ever provoked significant faculty or student unrest by choosing Dukeminier and Krier. In this review, I will concentrate on two perspectives on the book. I first taught Property in the spring 1998 semester (using the third edition of Dukeminier and Krier) and am (as I write this) about to begin my second year of teaching the course. I can thus give the perspective of a new teacher of the subject. In addition, I am an economist as well as a lawyer and am deeply fascinated by legal history. I try to bring both law and economics and historical perspectives to my teaching. I therefore offer an evaluation of the book with respect to its ambitions in those areas

The Perfect Blend of Methodology, Doctrine & Theory

In light of the market\u27s overall approval of the casebook, what follows can only be described as but one professor\u27s views on why the Dukeminier and Krier property book works so well for so many and on where it does not work as well as it could