Attitude and Divergence in Business Students: An Examination of Personality Differences in

Many studies have reported that economics and business students have been more apt to act in self-interested ways when compared to their counterparts in other academic fields. It is our contention that past studies have not shed light on the underlying psychological differences which might be leading to this difference in behavior. We put forth evidence that certain business majors are correlated with a marked increase in levels of narcissism and decreased levels of empathy, as measured by psychological personality tests

Bankruptcy Trusts, Transparency and the Future of Asbestos Compensation

As we enter the fifth decade of asbestos personal injury litigation, much of the debate over its immediate future centers on the operations of bankruptcy trusts and their relationship to the tort system. Roughly 100 companies have entered bankruptcy as a result of their unsustainable asbestos liabilities, and, from these bankruptcies, approximately 60 trusts have been established or are in the process of being established. Some critics contend that the trust system is plagued by fraud and abuse; allowing plaintiffs\u27 lawyers to obtain compensation from the trusts for fraudulent claims and to evade relevant discovery obligations under applicable state law. Trust officials and plaintiffs\u27 lawyers counter that the trust system has ample quality control measures in place, plaintiffs routinely comply with their discovery obligations in state tort litigation, and the evidence supporting the critics\u27 allegations is merely anecdotal. Thus, while defendants have advanced various transparency initiatives at the state and federal level as necessary to combat widespread fraud and abuse, trust advocates insist that such proposals are, at best, solutions in search of a problem or, at worst, transparent ploys by which defendants hope to evade responsibility for their own malfeasance. This article has two primary objectives. First, it provides a detailed assessment of the arguments that are most frequently advanced by the opposing sides. This includes an examination of the linkages between defendant bankruptcies and the liability shares carried by solvent co-defendants, the emerging trend toward authorizing discovery into trust claim forms and materials, and the avenues by which plaintiffs may circumvent these obligations. This discussion also includes a similarly detailed assessment of the most common arguments advanced in support of the trust system and against legislative and other efforts to make the trust claiming process more transparent. Second, it situates the current debates over the performance of the bankruptcy trust system and its relationship with the tort system in the broader context of ensuring adequate compensation for current and future victims. Drawing upon the tragedy of the commons, this discussion focuses on the question of scarcity; whether the combined resources of the bankruptcy trust system and the tort system are adequate to provide reasonable compensation over time. It explains how the current framework may perversely accelerate scarcity, at least for some plaintiffs. It likewise explains how some proposals may unduly deny plaintiffs access to reasonable means of obtaining compensation going forward and examines recent federal and state legislation to ascertain their potential for doing so

The Story of Prudential Standing

Prudential standing, it seems, is the latest target in the Roberts Court’s effort to “bring some discipline” to jurisdictional and pseudo-jurisdictional concepts. During the Court’s last two terms, it issued a unanimous opinion that excised the zone of interests test from prudential standing doctrine (Lexmark), two unanimous opinions that questioned federal courts’ prudential discretion to decline jurisdiction (Lexmark and Driehaus), and a bitterly divided opinion in which the classification of a standing principle as prudential or constitutional was decisive (Windsor). Moreover, in Lexmark, the Court suggested that the third party standing principle may not be properly classified as prudential standing either, but it recognized that the question is complex and left its resolution for another day. This article examines the evolution of the prudential branch of standing doctrine, its impact on standing doctrine and judicial review, and its future in light of these recent opinions

A History of Weinbau in the Lower Missouri Valley: From Dutzow to Hermann, Missouri

The thesis presented is a history focusing on the rise of German immigration, wine growing and production or Weinbau, in the lower Missouri valley from Dutzow, Missouri to Hermann, Missouri, and the connection between the nineteenth century Missouri Germans and the rise of the Missouri wine industry

Constitutional Gaps in Bankruptcy

Federal bankruptcy law incorporates a broad range of commercial and related matters that are otherwise left to the States under the Constitution, follows an efficiency-centered process model that may implicate due process, and relies upon a judicial structure that appears to be inconsistent with Article III. In spite of the crushing volume of bankruptcy cases and proceedings each year in which the resolution of one or more of these questions may be relevant, the Supreme Court has had few opportunities to tackle them directly. Indeed, after more than two centuries, the Court has provided precious few insights into the limits of the bankruptcy power and the degree to which the various mechanisms for administering and adjudicating bankruptcy cases and proceedings may be assigned to Article I courts. And, for more than a quarter century, the modern bankruptcy adjudication structure has been premised upon untested assumptions about the bankruptcy power and Article III that were rejected in, or may be subject to challenge following, the Court’s conclusions in Stern v. Marshall. Using Marshall as a focal point of the discussion, this article explores both the structural gap between the design of the bankruptcy system and its constitutional limits and the causes of the temporal gap between the adoption of the current structure and the Court’s consideration of its constitutionality. Although these constitutional gaps have allowed the bankruptcy system to flourish during the last three decades, they have also increased its cost and complexity unnecessarily and, after Marshall, we should expect these effects to be far more pronounced. This article also outlines the need to correct these gaps as a precondition to developing an informed and constitutionally sound bankruptcy system that can realize the promise of the Bankruptcy Code

Non-Pecuniary Interests and the Injudicious Limits of Appellate Standing in Bankruptcy

Standing to appeal bankruptcy court orders today is limited to those with a pecuniary interest. This prudential limitation is based on the person aggrieved requirement of Section 39(c) of the Bankruptcy Act of 1898 - a requirement that was not included in the Bankruptcy Code. This article examines the extensive differences between the Act and the Code, the potential justifications for extending the pecuniary interest test in spite of the omission of the person aggrieved requirement, and the potential ramifications for parties and the integrity of the bankruptcy process. This analysis suggests that standing to appeal bankruptcy orders should be governed by the party in interest standard used to evaluate standing to appear in bankruptcy court