Boston Hospitality Review: Summer 2013

Hospitality Management: Perspectives from Industry Advisors by Rachel Roginsky and Matthew Arrants -- Te Four ‘Ps’ of Hospitality Recruiting by John D. Murtha -- Te Morris Nathanson Design Collection by Christopher Muller -- Still Searching for Excellence by Bradford Hudso

The History and Future of Capital Punishment in the United States

It is a great pleasure to be with you today to deliver the 2016 Nathaniel Nathanson Lecture. I am delighted to join the many distinguished jurists and scholars that have delivered this Lecture in prior years. Early in his career, Professor Nathanson clerked for Justice Louis Brandeis and served the Securities and Exchange Commission in its formative days. Professor Nathanson is deservedly viewed as one of the architects of modern administrative law. His work, Administrative Discretion in the Interpretation of Statutes,was monumental in the field of administrative law. Professor Nathanson was the first scholar to identify a “principle of limited judicial review” when reviewing agency interpretations of statutes...

A remark on relatively prime sets

Four functions counting the number of subsets of $\{1, 2, ..., n\}$ having particular properties are defined by Nathanson and generalized by many authors. They derive explicit formulas for all four functions. In this paper, we point out that we need to compute only one of them as the others will follow as a consequence. Moreover, our method is simpler and leads to more general results than those in the literature

Politics and Plurality in a Lawyer\u27s Choice of Clients: The Case of Stropnicky v. Nathanson

In attempting to ensure equal access to public goods, the law of public accommodation treats private, commercial, and political associations under different standards. Using Stropnicky v. Nathanson, this article analyzes a claimant\u27s interest of equal access to an attorney against an attorney\u27s freedom of association. Attorney Nathanson was sanctioned for refusing to provide representation to Mr. Stropnicky. The policy of Nathanson\u27s law practice, however, was to not represent male clients in divorce proceedings. The author argues that her policy should be considered as political, rather than commercial, activity and accorded greater deference than applied by the U.S. Supreme Court. The article recommends the Supreme Court approach such cases with a particularized analysis of the circumstances

Upper bounds for the order of an additive basis obtained by removing a finite subset of a given basis

Let $A$ be an additive basis of order $h$ and $X$ be a finite nonempty subset of $A$ such that the set $A \setminus X$ is still a basis. In this article, we give several upper bounds for the order of $A \setminus X$ in function of the order $h$ of $A$ and some parameters related to $X$ and $A$. If the parameter in question is the cardinality of $X$, Nathanson and Nash already obtained some of such upper bounds, which can be seen as polynomials in $h$ with degree $(|X| + 1)$. Here, by taking instead of the cardinality of $X$ the parameter defined by d := \frac{\diam(X)}{\gcd\{x - y | x, y \in X\}}, we show that the order of $A \setminus X$ is bounded above by $(\frac{h (h + 3)}{2} + d \frac{h (h - 1) (h + 4)}{6})$. As a consequence, we deduce that if $X$ is an arithmetic progression of length $\geq 3$, then the upper bounds of Nathanson and Nash are considerably improved. Further, by considering more complex parameters related to both $X$ and $A$, we get upper bounds which are polynomials in $h$ with degree only 2.Comment: 17 page