A Bibliography of Corporate Law Teaching Scholarship

CLTA members are encouraged to contribute their knowledge to this bibliography. To make a submission please e-mail Associate Professor Chris Symes (christopher.f.symes@adelaide.edu.au).

Bibliographical Entries

  • Bainbridge, S M, ‘Contractarianism in the Business Association Classroom: Kovacik v Reed and the Allocation of Capital Losses in Service Partnerships’ (2000) 34 Georgia Law Review 631.
  • Booth, R A ‘Minimalist Approach to Corporation Law’ (2000) 34 Georgia Law Review 431.
  • Branson, D M, ‘Teaching Comparative Corporate Governance: The Significance of Soft Law and International Institutions’ (2000) 34 Georgia Law Review 669.
  • Bratton, W W, ‘Delaware Law as Applied Public Choice Theory: Bill Cary and the Basic Course after Twenty-Five Years’ (2000) 34 Georgia Law Review 447.
  • Carney, W J, ‘Teaching Problems in Corporate Law: Making it Real’ (2000) 34 Georgia Law Review 823.
  • Chiappinelli, E A, ‘Stories from Camp Automotive: Communicating the Importance of Family Dynamics to Corporation Law’ (2000) 34 Georgia Law Review 699.
  • Cunningham, L A, ‘Comparative Corporate Governance and Pedagogy’ (2000) 34 Georgia Law Review 721.
  • Darvas P, ‘How to see the forest for the trees: Whats the point of so much corporate law? (2002) 9 Murdoch University Electronic Journal of Law E Law 1.
  • Deutsch J G, ‘The Teaching of corporate law: a Socratic investigation of law and bureaucracy’ (1987) 97 Yale Law Journal 96.
  • Dyer, B, ‘Making Company Law More Practical and More Theoretical’ (1995) 5 Australian Journal of Corporate Law 281.
  • Dyer B, Hughson M, Duns J & Ricketson S, ‘Teaching note: creating a corporations law case study’ (1997) 8 Legal Education Review 161.
  • Evans, A & Howe, J, ‘Enhancing Corporate Accountability through Contextual Ethical Exercises‘, An earlier version of this paper was presented at the Corporate Law Teachers Association Annual Conference, 5-7 February 2006, Brisbane.
  • Fanto, J A, ‘When Those Who Do Teach: The Consequences of Law Firm Education for Business Law Education’ (2000) 34 Georgia Law Review 839.
  • Fisch, J E, ‘Teaching Corporate Governance through Shareholder Litigation’ (2000) 34 Georgia Law Review 745.
  • Fleischer V, ‘Deals: Bringing Corporate Transactions into the Law School Classroom’ (2002) Columbia Business Law Review 475.
  • Goforth, C R, ‘Use of Simulations and Client-Based Exercises in the Basic Course’ (2000) 34 Georgia Law Review 851.
  • Greenfield, K, ‘There’s a Forest in Those Trees: Teaching about the Role of Corporations in Society’ (2000) 34 Georgia Law Review 1011.
  • Hamermesh, L A, ‘Why I Do Not Teach Van Gorkom'(2000) 34 Georgia Law Review 477.
  • Hicks, A, ‘Getting Started in Company Law: The Role of Post Examinations Lectures’ 27 Modern Law Teacher 270.
  • Hicks, A, ‘Teaching Modern Company Law – the Pint Pot’ (1992) 26 Law Teacher 4.
  • Horrigan B, ‘Teaching and integrating recent developments in corporate law, theory and practice’ (2001) 13 Australian Journal of Corporate Law 182.
  • Huang, P H, ‘Teaching Corporate Law from an Option Perspective’ (2000) 34 Georgia Law Review 571.
  • Hurst, T R, ‘Teaching Limited Liability Companies in the Basic Business Associations Course’ (2000) 34 Georgia Law Review 773.
  • Kahn, F S, ‘Transparency and Accountability: Rethinking Corporate Fiduciary Law’s Relevance to Corporate Disclosure’ (2000) 34 Georgia Law Review 505.
  • Kingsford Smith, D, ‘Teaching Corporations Law in the Age of Statutes’  Paper presented to CLTA 1997 National Conference University of Melbourne.
  • Kingsford Smith D, ‘Studying modern corporations law in context’ (1999) 33 Law Teacher 196.
  • Krawiec, K D, ‘Building the Basic Course around Intra-Firms Relations’ (2000) 34 Georgia Law Review 785.
  • Mahoney, P G, ‘Contract or Concession – An Essay on the History of Corporate Law’ (2000) 34 Georgia Law Review 873.
  • Maynard, T, ‘Teaching Professionalism: The Lawyer as a Professional’ (2000) 34 Georgia Law Review 895.
  • McGregor-Lowndes, M, ‘Computer Based Corporate Law Learning’ Paper presented to CLTA 1997 National Conference University of Melbourne.
  • Okamoto K S, ‘Learning and learning-to –learn by doing: simulating corporate practice in law school’ (1995) 45 Journal of Legal Education 498.
  • O’Kelley, C R T, ‘Delaware Corporation Law and Transaction Cost Engineering’ (2000) 34 Georgia Law Review 929.
  • Painter, R W, ‘Professional Responsibility Rules as Implied Contract Terms’ (2000) 34 Georgia Law Review 953.
  • Park, H & M McGregor-Lowndes, ‘A Computer Aided Strategy for Teaching Corporate Law’ Paper presented to Centre for Legal Education Innovative Ways to Teach Law workshop, September 1992, (1992) 2 Australian Journal of Corporate Law 128.
  • Partnoy, F, ‘Adding Derivatives to the Corporate Law Mix’ (2000) 34 Georgia Law Review 599.
  • Ribstein, L E, ‘Corporations or Business Associations – The Wisdom and Folly of an Integrated Course’ (2000) 34 Georgia Law Review 973.
  • Rock, E & M Wachter, ‘Corporate Law as a Facilitator of Self Governance’ (2000) 34 Georgia Law Review 529.
  • Romano, R, ‘After the revolution in corporate law’ (2005) 55 Journal of Legal Education 342.
  • Sale, H A, ‘Of Corporate Suffrage, Social Responsibility, and Layered Law: Teaching Basic Business Law through Federal Securities Law’ (2000) 34 Georgia Law Review 809.
  • Testy, K Y, ‘Adding Value(s) to Corporate Law: An Agenda for Reform’ (2000) 34 Georgia Law Review 1025.
  • Thomson, R B, ‘Teaching Business Associations: Norms, Economics and Cognitive Learning’ (2000) 34 Georgia Law Review 997.
  • Tung, F, ‘Limited Liability and Creditors’ Rights: The Limits of Risk Shifting to Creditors’ (2000) 34 Georgia Law Review 547.
  • Tzannes M & King P, ‘Meeting procedures: a vehicle to better teach corporations law and a professional legal skill’ (1997) 15 Journal of Professional Legal Education 123.
  • Von Doussa, J W, ‘Corporate Law Teaching and professional standards’ (1999) 3(1) Flinders Journal of Law Reform 119.