Priorities for the Next President: Corporate Law

One of the principal things a new administration is going to have to address in the area of corporate law is how to encourage business managers to properly assess the long-term risks facing their businesses, and to manage those risks so that their businesses are sustainable in the long-term.  The need for U.S. businesses, on which Americans rely for jobs as well as many basic goods and services (such as banking and insurance), to appreciate and guard against the long-term risks associated with their business activities should be evident from the current financial crisis, which stemmed in large part from financial institutions’ failure to appreciate and guard against the risks associated with the complex mortgage-backed securities and derivative instruments they held and the inevitable bursting of the housing bubble.  As a consequence, Americans not only worry that their investments (including retirement and life savings accounts) held by these financial institutions might be at risk, but they also question the long-term stability of the U.S. economy.

So what should a new administration do to make businesses better appreciate, and protect themselves from, the long-term risks associated with their businesses?

Continue ReadingPriorities for the Next President: Corporate Law

Seventh Circuit Week in Review

Beginning with this post, I will provide a regular weekend review of new Seventh Circuit opinions in criminal cases.  The past week was actually very quiet on the criminal front, with only one new opinion (and that one not especially significant in terms of discussing or modifying the law).  In United States v. Jackson, the three defendants were convicted of mail fraud in connection with a scheme to bilk their car insurance carriers by submitting false theft claims.  The Seventh Circuit had little apparent difficulty in affirming the convictions over the defendants’ arguments that the evidence was insufficient, that material evidence had been withheld by the government, and that evidence of a prior conviction had been improperly admitted.

Continue ReadingSeventh Circuit Week in Review

Doing Doors in Kewaskum

Last Tuesday, a consent judgment was entered in the Eastern District of Wisconsin resolving a free speech claim brought by a self-described “traveling evangelist.” The plaintiff Michael Foht was told by the Kewaskum Police that he could distribute religious literature only to people who said that they wanted it. This meant that he could not leave literature at private residences (he must first knock on the door and ask permission) or leaflet automobiles.

This instruction was based on an extraordinarily broad village ordinance which prohibited the distribution of “any printed matter on literature on public or private property” or the placement of such literature on motor vehicles. The ordinance had an exception for the distribution of literature to persons “willing to accept” it.

Foht apparently attempted to clarify the matter with the village attorney, who failed to return his calls. That turned out to be expensive.

Foht filed suit and the village, finally obtaining the proper legal advice, repealed the ordinance. The consent decree declares that the ordinance was facially unconstitutional and should not have been applied to Foht and awards him $11,000 in attorneys fees and costs.

The result is unexceptional, but the fact of the case may be instructive. What the law requires and whether it is complied with are two different matters. I doubt that this type of ordinance was only to be found in Kewaskum, Wisconsin.

Continue ReadingDoing Doors in Kewaskum