The Uniform Partnership Act and Legal Persons

Crane, Judson A.

doi:10.2307/1326126

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The drafters of the Uniform Partnership Act of 1914 attempted to agree, as its chief drafter William Draper Lewis (1911: 100) explained, on ‘such fundamental matters as the legal nature of a partnership, the rights of the members in partnership property, or even their relation to third persons’, but failed to do so in a logically coherent manner, as Scott Rowley (1916), Judson Adams Crane (1916) and other commentators pointed out. The Act did not formally define the partnership as a legal person, and its language was ambiguous: it recognized that partnerships as such could hold property but at the same time that partners were co-owners of this property 34 .…”

Section: Freund's Relevance Then and Nowmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ernst Freund as precursor of the rational study of corporate law

Gindis

2017

Journal of Institutional Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The rise of large business corporations in the late 19th century compelled many American observers to admit that the nature of the corporation had yet to be understood. Published in this context, Ernst Freund's little-known The Legal Nature of Corporations (1897) was an original attempt to come to terms with a new legal and economic reality. But it can also be described, to paraphrase Oliver Wendell Holmes, as the earliest example of the rational study of corporate law. The paper shows that Freund had the intuitions of an institutional economist, and engaged in what today would be called comparative institutional analysis. Remarkably, his argument that the corporate form secures property against insider defection and against outsiders anticipated recent work on entity shielding and capital lock-in, and can be read as an early contribution to what today would be called the theory of the firm.

show abstract

Section: Freund's Relevance Then and Nowmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ernst Freund as precursor of the rational study of corporate law

Gindis

2017

Journal of Institutional Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The Nexus Paradox: Legal Personality and the Theory of the Firm

Gindis¹

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ernst Freund as Precursor of the Rational Study of Corporate Law

Gindis

2017

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The rise of large business corporations in the late 19th century compelled many American observers to admit that the nature of the corporation had yet to be understood. Published in this context, Ernst Freund's little-known The Legal Nature of Corporations (1897) was an original attempt to come to terms with a new legal and economic reality. But it can also be described, to paraphrase Oliver Wendell Holmes, as the earliest example of the rational study of corporate law. The paper shows that Freund had the intuitions of an institutional economist, and engaged in what today would be called comparative institutional analysis. Remarkably, his argument that the corporate form secures property against insider defection and against outsiders anticipated recent work on entity shielding and capital lock-in, and can be read as an early contribution to what today would be called the theory of the firm.

show abstract

The Uniform Partnership Act and Legal Persons

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Ernst Freund as precursor of the rational study of corporate law

Ernst Freund as precursor of the rational study of corporate law

The Nexus Paradox: Legal Personality and the Theory of the Firm

Ernst Freund as Precursor of the Rational Study of Corporate Law

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About