----------

~LL POLITICIANS, SENATOR STANFORD

OFTEN TOOK A BEATING IN THE PRESS.

BUT WHEN HE SAID HE WOULD BEOUEATH

$20 MILLION TO FOUND A UNIVERSITY IN LOVING

MEMORY OF HIS SON, THINGS GOT REALLY NASTY.

I·A~·~"rc~:nts~a:;;~~~·~~t;ealth oan ~niybe used to erect an empty ehell aiid to com­

t memorato a 'rich man'. Collv_ -. _. ·,t VI'''' exoect r..,.

Senator Stanford will burn the. i

77Je Office ofPlanned Givingcan help guideyou and ellSure

your 'luis/us are honored.

The Office of Planned Giving can help

We're here to make sure that it isn't.

The New York Commercial Advertiser,

on Senator Stanford'sfoundinggiji of$20 million.

Call us at (800) 227-8977 ext. 54358, or write us

prepare draft language for

Our staff of attorneys can

any questions you or your advisors might have.

implications of various gift options, and answer

seem like a daunting process.

you with everything from simple bequests to

support the school you love can sometimes

charitable remainder trusts.

a will or trust, analyze tax

institution for the relief of

destitute ship-captains in

would be the building of an

the mountains of Switzerland."

like out of money is as useless as

Of course, history has proven the writer

But still, the reaction to Senator Stanford's

And the reporter wasn't

planned gifts from thousands who followed

finished. ({ ... we hope that

will....To create a great university Aladdin-

original bequest raises a point. That, no matter

dreadfully wrong. The university flourished,

in large part because of bequests and other

Jane and Leland Stanford's example.

how noble the intention, giving money to at 301 Encina Hall, Stanford, CA 94305.

STA:-":FOHI>

()FFI(;E ()F

PL;'.:'lNEI>

(; I v I N (;

6,Nf()IID LAWYER

The name's the same-Stanford Lawyef-and so arethe ever-popular class notes. What's new is the reader-friendly format and focus.

Let us know what you think.

197 0

otice anything new? We hope so. Stanford Lawyer, now 30 years and 50

issues old, has been renovated from the ground up, with the needs and

wants of today's alumni firmly in mind.

1 9 8 1

1 9 9 6

Recognizing that you're a busy person, we are focusing on news that you can use and

are unlikely to get elsewhere. And we've put the news up front where you can readily find it.

To save you time, we've also shortened and condensed our articles. Those who want to

delve more deeply will find telephone, Internet, and other "links" flagged by CD (for infor-

mation). Think-resource guide.

Our recent alumni survey confirmed the conventional wisdom: Class notes are by far

the most popular feature. You'll be glad to know that we continue to publish the most

comprehensive alumni notes in the law school world.

Survey respondents also said they would like to receive the magazine more often. We

hereby pledge to pick up the pace, with a goal of three (rather than two) issues a year.

Finally, recognizing that the magazine had begun to look a bit stale, we have freshened

our design and layout.

We welcome your reactions and comments. Please address them to editor Constance

Hellyer: e-mail chellyer@stanford.edu; telephone 650/723-3019; fax 650/725-0253; or write the

Communications Office, Crown Quadrangle, Stanford Law School, Stanford, CA

94305-8610. ~

STANFORD lAWYlR 0

#51 (Vol. 32, No.1)Fall 1997

Stanford Law SchoolGenerallnfonnation(650) 723-2465Law. Information@forsythe.stanford.edu

Administration(650) 723-2742Law.Administration@forsythe.stanford. edu

Admissions(650) 723-4985Law.Admissions@forsythe.stanford.edu

Alumni Publications(650) 723-9301Law. Alum. Pubs@forsythe.stanford.edu

Alumni Relations(650) 723-2730Law. Alumni.Relations@forsythe.stanford.edu

Career Services(650) 723-3924Law.Career. Services@forsythe.stanford.edu

Continuing Legal Education(650) 723-5905Law CLE@forsythe.stanford.edu

Dean's Office(650) 723-4455Law.SchooIDean@forsythe.stanford.edu

Development(650) 723-9504Law. Development@forsythe.stanford.edu

Faculty Affairs(650) 723-3960Law. Faculty .Affairs@forsythe.stanford.edu

Family Advocacy and Support Program(650) 725-9418martham@leland.stanford.edu

Financial Aid(650) 723-9247Law. Financial.Aid@forsythe.stanford.edu

Law and Business Program(650) 725-0802perino@leland.stanford.edu

8 FAI L 1997

Law and Technology Policy Center(650) 725-7788ceh@leland.stanford.edu

Law Fund(650) 725-8115Law. Fund@forsythe.stanford.edu

Robert Crown Law Library(650) 723-2477Law.Library@forsythe.stanford.edu

Natural and Environmental ResourcesLaw Program(650) 723-4057megC©leland.stanford.edu

John M. Olin Programin Law and Economics(650) 723-2575olin-kramer@leland.stanford.edu

Public Interest Law Programs(650) 725-4192tneLson@leland.stanford.edu

Registrar(650) 723-3430Law. Registrar@forsythe .stanford. edu

Room scheduling(650) 723-2692lohn.Mendoza@forsythe.stanford.edu

Stanford Center on Conflict andNegotiation(650) 723-9480jxs@leland.stanford.edu

Stanford Program in InternationalLegal Studies(650) 723-2978Kate. DeBoer@forsythe.stanford.edu

Student Affairs(650) 723-4522Law.Student.Affairs@forsythe.stanford.edu

Law School Web Sitehttp://www-leland.stanford.edu/group/law/

DEANPaul Brest

Richard E. Lang Professor of Lawand Dean

ASSOCIATE DEANEXTERNAL RELATIONS

Susan S. Bell

COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTORAnn Dethl fsen

EDITORConstance Hellyer

ART DIRECTORAndrew Danish

CONTRIBUTING EDITORSDeborah Fife, John Boykin

EDITORIAL INTERNSJamal Morris (JD '98)

Michael Finney (AB '00)

PRODUCTION ARTISTSDianna Henderson, Joanna McClean

STANFORD LAWYER (I SN 0585-0576)is published for alumni and friends of

Stanford Law School. Correspondence andinformation should be sent to:

Editor, Stanford Lawyer, tanford LawSchool, Stanford, A 94305-8610.E-mail: Law.Alum.Pllbs@forsythe.

sranford.edu

Copyright 1997 by the Board of Trusteesof Leland Stanford Junior University.

Reproduction in whole or in part,without permi sion of the publisher,

is prohibited.

STANFORD LAWYER is listed in:Dialog's Legal Resource Index;

and Current Law Index and LegalTrac(1980-94). Issues of the magazine since 1966

are available on microfiche throughWilliam S. Hein & Co., Inc., 1285 Main treet,

Buffalo, NY 14209-1987.

Printed by Alonzo Printing in Hayward,California. Alonzo Printing is a Ilnion shop that

pnnts exclusively on recycled and tree- free papersusing soy-based inks.

ISS U E 5 I, F ALL I 9 9 7

14Tax Reform

Five sensible ways to lighten the taxpayer's burden.You mighr never have to file again.

by Professor Joseph L. Bankman

18Professors in Print

Some excerpts and a comprehensive bibliography.Compiled by Erika Wayne

_____ILLP ART ~,-,-T~S",-----__

5News Briefs

Introducing your quickest source on securities fraudlitigation. This and other news of the School, and how you can

enjoy its resources and activities.

23Classmates & Sidebars

Fifty-plus class columns, with sidebars on:a travel maven ... 31

big-city police commissioner 33stereotype-defying Republican 39

defender of privacy 47storefront educator 51

twenty-something dean 53

59In Memoriam

60Law Gatherings

64Coming Events

__C 0 V -.E _"- _

Professor Joseph Bankmanponders our imposing tax system and

suggests some reforms.Phowgraph by Richard Morgenstein

j.Mul"~

~- ,~• I

~.. h

"My personal andprofessional worldwas broadened moreby this fellowshipyear than by anyother educational

. .expenencelnmy life."

TOM JOHNSON,President, CNNWhite House Fellow 1965-66

"What I learned aboutgovernment as a WhiteHouse Fellow was the keyto the opportunities thatcame my way. "

GEN. COLIN POWELL,former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of StaffWhite House Fellow 1972-73

Become a White House Fellow

"The opportunity tolearn about varyingleadership styles as wellas understand how ourgovernment and ourmilitary function hasgreatly enhanced mycapability to be acorporate leader."

PAULA H. CHOLMONDELEY,Vice President, General Manager,Division of Owens·ComingWhite House Fellow 1982-83

Since 1965, the White House Fellowships have offered a select group ofoutstanding men and women a year-long opportunity to participate ingovernment at the highest levels. Between 11 to 19 Fellows are chosen eachyear to serve as full-time, paid assistants to Cabinet secretaries, executivebranch agency heads and senior White House staff. The nearly 500 alumniof the program have gone on to become leaders in all fields of endeavor,fulfilling the fellowship's mission to encourage active citizen hip andservice to the nation.

SELECTION CRITERIA• Applicants must be U.S. citizens.

• Employees of the federal government are not eligible unless they arecareer military personnel.

• Applicants should be out of school and working in their chosen professions.

• Applicants are expected to have a record of remarkable achievementearly in their careers; the skills required to serve at the highest levels ofgovernment; the potential to be leaders in their professions; and a provencommitment to public service.

• Fellowships are awarded on a strict non-partisan basis.

FOR MORE INFORMATIONContact the President's Commission on White House Fellowships:

712Jackson Place, NW,Washington, DC 20503.Telephone: (202) 395-4522Facsimile: (202) 395-6179Web: http://www.whitehouse.gov/wh_fellows

FA ULTV

Professors in the news&on the air

Mann assistsSupreme CourtSome $1.4 billion inescrow d oil leaserevenues hung in thebalance as the U.S.Supr me ourt con-idered the report of

J. Keith Mann, Spe­cial Ma ter in a long­running territorialdisput between theUnited States andthe State of Alaska.Also at stake was theseaward reach of theArctic NationalWildlife Refuge. Prof.Mann's 565-pagereport provided acompr hensive studyof the legal ownershipof the submergedland.

n June 19 theCourt, with JusticeSandra Day O'Connor'52 writing theopinion, acceptedMann' award of theterritory off theNational PetroleumReserv to the .., aswell a his boundaryoff Prudhoe Bay. Amajority of the Courtwent further by also

denying Ala ka thelagoon off the Wild­life Refuge.CD See Report of theSpecial Master. U.s. v.Alaska, U.S. SupremeCourt. October Term,1995. No. 84 (Original).Also: Linda Greenhouse,"Justices Back U.S. inDispute with Alaska over

Coastal Areas." New

York Times. June 20. 1997.

Sullivan writesnew "FederalistPapers"

KathIe n M. ullivanis one of three notedscholar tapped by theTwentieth enturyFund to write ewFederalist Papers:Essays in Defense of theConstitution. Theother auth rs arehistorian Alan Brink-

ley of Columbia andpoliti al scientistNelson W. Potsby ofUC-Berkeley. Thesemodern essay , likethe originals, explorethe underlying princi­ples of our foundingdocument. They alsoappeared individuallyin the press before

being published inbook form.

Prof. Sullivanexpand d the dis­course to televi ion bymoderating a FredFriendly Seminar,Liberty and Limits:The Federalist Idea200 Years Later. Herpr gram, released byPBS on April II, wascall d "The Price fPolitics: Electing OurLeaders."

A seasoned mel 1b rof the Supreme Courtbar, Sullivan is Widely

known for h r lucidcommentary on Night­line and the NewsHourwith Jim Lehrer. AtStanford, she is theinaugural StanleyMorrison Profe sorand winner of the1996 Hurlbut Awardfor Exc lIence inTeaching.<D Book: Norton, 1997,$23. Video: 1-800/828­4727.

Barton helpsfind way toshare withThird World

Is there a good way forindustrialized nationsto share profits fromgenetic material theyfind in developingcountries? U -Davisr earcher PamelaRonald wanted to

know. She had se­quenced a potentiallyvaluable gene provid­ing resistan e to awidespread plantblight. Recognizingthat her achievementgre~ out of work atthe InternationalRice ResearchIn titute in the Philip­pine , and that thgene itself had comefrom a ric strainfound in West Afri a,she wanted to returnsome of the benefits ofits commer ialdevelopment.

Stanford Prof.John Barton, an ex-

p rt on intellectualproperty and develop­ing countries, helpeddesign a solution: aGenetic ResourcesRecognition Fund tofinance graduate fel­lowships for promisingAfricans. UC-Davis,which is patenting thegene, agreed to createthe fund, to which itand its lic nsees arpledging a portion offuture royalties.

Ronald and Barton,who i Stanford's

eorge E. OsborneProfessor, h pe thatthe UC fund will be amodel for oth r re­search universitiesutilizing genetic re.­sources from poornations.CD Press release: (916)752-1930. e-mail pjbailey@ucdavis.edu. Also:David Perlman. "Rice­Gene Scientist SharingSuccess with PoorNations:' San FranciscoChronicle. A-13. May 26.

1997.

Baxter honoredin WashingtonWilliam E Baxter,former chief of thU.. D partment fJustice's Antitrust

increasingly diverse PBS documentary Jeff Strnad Klausner's work iscommunications entitled "Crime and Finance and tax grounded in joint MAindustry. Punishment in (economics) and JDCD See R.Lowenstein, America." Released in Strnad is one of the degrees from Yale"Antitrust Enforcers Drop January, the special nation's leading (1981); a Supremethe Ideology, Focus on included on-camera scholars in the Court clerk hip withEconomics," Wall Street commentary by the growing field of Justice William Bren-JournaL February 27, 1997. School's Marion Rice law and economics. nan; practice with

Kirkwood Professor. He earned his AB in Paul, Weiss, Rifkind,

GuntherCD Videotape (#CPIA901): physics from Harvard Wharton & Garrison

speech shown 1-800/344-3337. (1975) and both a JD and later Gibson,(1979) and a PhD in Dunn & Crutcher;

Division, returned to nationwide economics (1982) and a year (1989-90)the OOJ in October to Gerald Gunther New from Yale. as a White Housereceive its prestigious garnered another Strnad comes to Fellow and DeputyJohn Sherman Award honor as Morrison faces of Stanford with 17 Associate Director ofand commemorate the Lecturer for the 1996 years' experience the Office of Policyprosecution and settle- convention of the 1997 chiefly and conjointly Development.ment of U.S. v. California State at the University of Also acquaintedAmerican Telephone Bar. The emeritus Arriving professors Southern alifornia with Chinese law and&Telegraph Company. William Nelson expand business law Law Center and the business, KlausnerBaxter's predecessor, Cromwell Professor program California Institute of spent a year in Gib-Thomas Kauper of the must have given quite Emboldened by the Technology. He was son Dunn's HongUniversity of Michi- a speech, because C-gan, was similarly Span broadcast ithonored. Attorney January 25 on itsGeneral Janet Reno America and the Courtsjoined then-Antitrust program.chief Anne K. Binga- CD Videotape (#75878):man '68 in celebrating 1-800/2n-2698.

KLAUSNER CO LE

progress of the named in 1989 to Kong office andcurrent fundraising USC's Milliken pro- another year as acampaign, the fessorship in taxation; visiting scholar andSchool has begun at Caltech he was pro- lecturer at Pekingto rebuild the fessor of law and University.faculty. economics. Klausner's main

This fall brings Strnad's contri- teaching areas will bethree new profes ors: butions to the Stan- business associationstwo recruited from ford curriculum and regulation ofother faculties and will be in finance financial institutions.one from law firm and tax law-the focuspractice. All three also of his consider- G. Marcus Colewill teach in the able research and Contracts andareas of business and scholarship. bankruptcyeconomics.

"Added to our Michael Klausner Cole is entering aca-the two history- Friedman book existing faculty, these orporations and banks demia with law firmmaking academics. sparks TV newcomers will give experience in bank-

Baxter, who is now speciaL Stanford a business Klausner is a highly ruptcy, commercial,William Benjamin curriculum second to regarded young scholar and ecclesiastical law.Scott and Luna M. Lawrence Friedman's none in the country," in corporate law. He His practice has beenScott Professor, Emeri- Crime and Punishment says a pleased Dean began teaching in 1991 with Mayer, Brown &tus, continues to work in American History Brest. at New York Univer- Platt of Chicago.on behalf of compe- (Basic Books, 1993) Here are the sity, which awarded Cole i a graduatetition in the inspired a two-hour new professors: him tenure in 1995. of {"'ornell, where he

earned a BS in applied Two of the five those of the professor Council of Economic served as president ofecon mics (1989), and appointments involve destined to be the in- Advisers in the Office the Association ofof Northwestern Law new chairs created by augural chairholder. of the President American LawSchool 00,1993), gifts to the ongoing Babcock has, in (1984-85) and then Schools' Tax Sectionwhere he was editor- Campaign for Stan- addition to leading the as a commissioner on and coauthored twoin-chief of the North- ford Law School. The U.S. Justice Depart- the Securities and Ex- books entitled Federalwestem]oumalof other three represent ment's Civil Division change Commission Income Taxation: theInternational Law the succession of a (1977-79), headed the (1985-90). 11 th edition of aand Business. In law new generation of Washington, D.C., The new pro- classic casebook and aschool he also served scholars into public defender ser- fessorship was estab- volume of examplesas teaching assistant established chairs. vice and authored a lished this spring by and explanationsfor a torts course and "Endowed profes- text on civil proce- gifts from W. A. (both Little, Brown,as a member of the sorships," says Dean dure. She continues to (Bill) Franke '61, 1997).school's national Brest, "undergird our speak out eloquently chairman and CEO of Bankman came toFrederick Douglass teaching and research in defense of the jury America West, and Stanford in 1989 fromMoot Court Team. efforts and strengthen system and on other George Roberts, the University ofA clerkship with Judge the bonds between litigation issues. founding partner of Southern CaliforniaMorris Sheppard prized professors and <D Campaign Brief#4 Kohlberg Kravi Law Center, where heArnold of the U.S. the School." (J uly 1997). Babcock: Roberts & Co. and a had been chosen 1985Eighth Circuit Court http://www-leJand. major benefactor of "Teacher of the Year."of Appeals followed. Barbara Allen Babcock stanford.edu/group/law/ the School's Roberts Before entering

Nowa Stanford Judge John Crown faculty/babcock.htm Program. teaching, he practicedas istant professor, Professor of Law eD Campaign Brief#4 tax law with Tuttle &Cole will teach Joseph A. Grundfest (July 1997). Grundfest: Taylor of Los Angeles.contracts and bank- To her string of firsts W. A. Franke Professor http://www-leland. (Bankman suggestsruptcy law. -including first of Law and Business stanford.edu/group/law/ some pragmatic re-eD FacuLty information: tenured woman at faculty/grundfes.htm forms to the taxhttp://www-leland. Stanford Law School Former SEC com- system in the articlestanford.edu/group/ -Barbara Babcock missioner Joseph Joseph Bankman beginning on pagelaw/faculty can now add "first Grundfest has been Ralph M. Parsons 14.)

Judge John Crown appointed to the new Profess01- of Law and Bankman's prede-

FacultyProfessor of Law." W. A. Franke Profes- Business cessor in the Parsons

The chair was sorship in Law and chair, Kenneth E.created this spring by Business. Grundfest One of the nation's Scott, has taken

assets the Crown family of directs the Roberts foremost tax scholars, emeritus status butChicago to honor Program for Law, Joseph Bankman has continues to teach

Five noted profe sors Judge Crown, a Business, and Cor-secure endowed chairs seasoned jurist and porate Governance-

Stanford graduate the program the new STUDENT~ A former U.S. (AB '51) who with his Franke chair wasAssistant Attorney family had provided created to support. Building Community DayGeneral lead gifts for the An expert in~ A recent SEC construction of the corporate law, securi- Some 100 law studentscommissioner School's Crown Quad- ties regulation, and turned out April 26 to help~ The coauthor of a rangle and Robert mergers and acquisi- East Palo Alto residents beautify

leading tax law text Crown Law Library. tions, Grundfest their neighborhoods.

~ A Widely consulted Judge Crown recently launched theOrganizers included (below)Suzanne McKechnie (ILl.

expert in international passed away as the nation's first official Manuel Herrera (EPA).business and environ- professorship was be- on-line Securities and Noah Sachs (lL).

mental law ing establi hed but had Class Action Clearing-~ The president-elect been plea ed with the house (see page 5).of the Association of plan and with the har- Grundfest joinedAmerican Law mony between his own the faculty in 1990Schools interests--evidence, after serving in

All have been new- procedure, advocacy, Washington, D.C., asly named to endowed and profes ional counsel and seniorprofessorships. responsibility-and economist with the

courses related to

bank and thrift insti­tution regulation.

The Parsonsprofessorship wasestablished in 1980to strengthen theSchool's law andbusiness program andto honor Ralph M.Parsons, founder ofthe internationalengineering andconstructioncompany that bearshis name.CD Bankman:http://www-leland.stanford.edu/group/law/faculty/bankman.htm

Thomas C. HellerLewis Talbot and

Nadine Hea11l SheltonProfessor of Inter­national Legal "tttdies

Thomas Heller is atthe forefront of effortsto break the inter­national impasse overglobal warming. Alsoan expert on inter­national law andeconomics, he hasbeen consulting onclimate change issueswith the WorldBusiness Council forSustainable Devel­opment.

The widelytraveled professorhelped found andcurrently codirectsthe postgraduateStanford Program inInternational LegalStudies (SPILS). He isalso a senior fellow ofthe Stanford Institutefor InternationalStudies and a formerdirector of Stanford'sOverseas StudiesProgram.

The Sheltonprofe sorship wacreated in 1972 withgifts from TalbotShelton (AB '37) andfunds from the FordFoundation to supportinternational studies.The previous holder,Mauro Cappelletti, isnow emeritus.CD Press release:http://www-leland/dept/news/relaged/970106heller.html.Heller: http://www­leland.stanford.edu/group/law/faculty/heller.htm.SPllS: 650/723-2978;or e-mail spils@forsythe.stanford.edu

Deborah L RhodeEmest W. McFallandPlOfessor of Law

Deborah Rhode hasbeen appointed to aprofessorship createdby andllamed for adevoted publicservant and alumnus.Ernest McFarland '22was a U.S. senator(1941-52) andmajority leader(1951-52), governorof Arizona (1955-59),and a state supremecourt ju tice (1965­71) and state chiefjustice (1968-71).

The mantle ofMcFarland Professorfits Rhode's own deepcommitment topublic service. Notonly is she about toassume the presidencyof the Association ofAmerican LawSchools (see page 5),but she is preparing tomake public serviceand pro bono work afocus of her term.

Rhode succeedsBarbara Babcock inthe McFarland chairfollowing Babcock'sappointment to thenew Crown professor­ship (se page 9).CD Rhode: http//www­leland.stanford.edu/group/law/faculty/rhode.htm

EAC U LT Y 3-C I:{ QLAB..

John J. Donohue IIIJohn A. WilsonDistinguished FacultyScholar

John Donohue joinedthe faculty in 1995 asone of the mostsought-after legalscholars of his genera­tion. Combining aHarvard JD with aYale PhD in econo­mics, he applieseconomic analysis tolegal issues in corpor­ate finance, employ­ment discrimination,and criminal law.

The fund sup­porting the Wilsonpost was establishedin 1996 by AlanAustin '74, his col­leagues at Palo Alto'sWilson SonsiniGoodrich & Rosati,and other friends ofWilson Sonsinifounding partnerJohn A. Wilson.Faculty scholar fundslike the new Wilsonfund provide researchsupport to a successionof up-and-comingfaculty members.CD Campaign Brief#3(March 1997). Donohue:http://www-leland.stanford.edu/group/law/faculty/donohue.htm

CAMrAIC

Progress onall fronts

Alumni rally for expanded fundraising effort

C& More than 3,000 alumni and friendsof the School have so far donated to

the Campaign for Stanford Lawchoo\. The circle of supporters

continues to grow as the Campaignevolves and new leaders join thedrive. Some recent highlights:

Ct The initial $50-million goal for theCampaign was passed by the end of1996. Efforts are now focused on agoal of at least $75 million, which iscloser to the School's true level ofneed.

C& Warren Christopher '49, formersecretary of state and presidentialMedal of Freedom holder, joined theCampaign in March as co-chair.

'* John Freidenrich '63, recentpresident of the Stanford UniversityBoard of Trustees, joined theCampaign Steering Committee.

tit The participation rate of StanfordLaw School alumni rose to 34 percentin 1995-96, the highest level in recentyears. Hats off to Chuck Koob '69,outgoing Law Fund chair.

G The School's newest alumni, theClass of 1997, set a student-donorparticipation record of 69 percent and$8,593 in actual gifts. Thanks go to sixfarSighted alums whose matches madeeach student dollar worth $7 to theSchool.CD http://www-leland.stanford.edu/group/law/campaign/

fmrn1be eanStanford has initiated adialogue

between law school deans and law firm leaders from around thecountry. Here is a report on the first exchange.

by Paul BrestRichard E. Lang Professor and Dean

G) FALL 1997

n un-prece­dentedevent

took place in Washington,D.C., this past January-a day-long conversationbetween the deans of leadinglaw schools and partners ofsome of the nation's mostprominent law firms.

The idea for the Januarydiscussion grew out of myown experience as dean-10 years during which I havespent as much time withpracticing lawyers as withlaw professors, discussingcommon concerns of the le­gal academy and practicingbar. The deans of Chicago,Harvard, and Yale readilyjoined Stanford in organizinga broader forum for an ex­change of views on theseissues.

To encourage candid,face-to-face conversations,we limited the invitation listto 10 law schools and to the

managing or senior partnerof 25 firms. Law school at­tendees ultimately includedthe dean and a faculty mem­ber from olumbia, George­town, Harvard, Michigan,New York University, Penn­sylvania, Stanford, Texas,Virginia, and Yale.

The law firms repre­sented major employers ofthe schools' graduates. Stan­ford alumni who participatedincluded Jim Gaither '64(Cooley Godward), JohnLarson '62 (Brobeck), DuaneQuaini '70 (Sonnenschein),and Marsha Simms '77(Weil, Gotshal), as well asBryant Garth '75 of theAmerican Bar Foundation.

The Ethos of the ProfessionThe working meeting beganwith a wide-ranging sessionentitled "The Ethos of theLegal Profession Today."Dean Anthony Kronman(Yale), Professor DavidLuban (Maryland), BarbaraPaul Robinson (Debevoise& Plimpton), and WesleyWilliams (Covington &Burling) each offered theirperspectives and then

opened the floor fordiscussion.

Participants cautionedagainst a romanticized viewof the profession's past or aPanglossian view of its pre­sent status, and against thepolar tendencies to be fatal­istic about economic forcesor to underestimate theirreal power.

They asked how lawyersand law schools could im­prove the collegiality, civil­ity, public responsibility, andpersonal fulfillment of lawpractice.

They questionedwhether pro bono servicehas declined and if so, why.

They also wonderedwhether professional stan­dards or regulations shoulddo more to protect thirdparties and society againstthe abuse of power by clientsand their lawyers.

Some enthusiasm wasexpressed for the proposalthat law firms adopt missionstatements reflecting theirparticular firm culturesand values.

LISTENINGTO

LAW FIRMS

Personal andProfessional LifeThe second session con­cerned "Issues of Personaland Profes ional Life." Soci­ology professor CynthiaFuchs Epstein (City Univer­sity of New York) began bysummarizing her study, com­missioned by the Associationof the Bar of the City of NewYork, on the status of womenin large law firms. Pr fessorEpstein noted that relativelyfew women are partners insuch firms. She then out­lined some of the barriers towomen's success, includingthe lack of strong mentorsand of opportunities fornetworking and rainmaking,as well as the problem ofbalancing professional andfamily responsibilities.

Professor David Wilkins(Harvard) followed with adiscussion of why there areso few black lawyers, andespecially black partners, inlarge law firms. Minorityattorneys confront many ofthe same problems awomen, such as the ab enceof mentors and networkingopportunities, he observed.These associates may befurther handicapped by fearthat their mistakes will beparticularly visible to theirsupervising partners. Thiscan lead them to avoidchallenging assignments, tobe overly cautious in theirwork, and to choose litiga­tion rather than corporatework-all choices with

potentially career-limitingor damaging results.

Following one partici­pant's observation thatwomen and minority lawyersare, in effect, canaries in thecoal mine of the legal profes­sion, the discussion broad­ened to consider various"quality of life" issues facedby all lawyers in largefirms. There wasgeneral agree-ment that thedisjunctionbetween as­sociates' ex-pectationsand the real­ity of practicecontributes todissatisfaction,and participantsthought that both the expec­tations and the reality werein need of adjustment.

Professional EducationThe meeting's third session,"Preparation for Practice,"featured Dean Robert Clark,Professors Todd Rakoff andDavid Wilkins (all of Har­vard), Michael Cooper (Sul­livan & Cromwell), andDonald Kempf (Kirkland &Ellis). The ensuing discus­sion reflected a consensusthat law schools do quitewell in teaching students tothink like lawyers, as well asintrodUcing them to substan­tive areas of law and to theinfrastructure of the legal

system. Some law firm par­ticipants were pleasantly sur­prised to learn of efforts bylaw schools to integrateethics into the mainstreamcurriculum.

While enthusiasm wasexpressed for teaching somepractical skills in law school,the consensus was that most

such skills are best ac­quired during the

early years ofpractice,

throughmentorshipand in-firmtraining.Much of the

discussion fo­cused on legal

writing. Practi-tioners informed the

deans and faculty that younglawyers corne to firms withinadequate communicationskills: They are unable toexpress themselves clearlyand succinctly and do notknow how to communicateto the variety of audiencesthat lawyers must address.Practitioners and facultyagreed that law schoolsshould offer more advancedlegal writing. (This has beenan ongoing project at Stan­ford, which I shall report onduring the corning year.)

Continuing the DialogueIn a wrap-up session moder­ated by Chicago dean Dou­glas Baird '79, practitionersand academics agreed thatthe meeting should be

repeat d, with focuseddiscussions of the chief issuesraised.

Responses to a follow-upquestionnaire indicated thatparticipants found the con­versation valuable. "A veryconstructive first step towardestablishing ongoing com­munication" was a represen­tative assessment. Law firmparticipants emphasized thevalue of not only "bridgingthe gulf between the con­cerns of practicing lawyersand the legal academy," butalso "discussing issues in big­firm practice with the leaderof other national law firms."Academic participants cited"very useful insights intohow the top of the professionthinks about changing pro­fessional norms and eco­nomic demands."

The other deans and 1are committed to continuingand deepening this valuabledialogue. ~

Dean Brest welcomes inputfrom practicing lawyers andothers with comments on legaleducation. Call the Dean'sOffice at 650h23-4455 ore-mail pbrest@stanford.edu

STANfORD LAWYER

__~_,,--- ..:o-~'--__'---"'"'-_--'__--' _

Five sensible ways to lighten the taxpayer's burden. (You might never have to file again.)

by Joseph Bankman

Ralph M. Parsons Professor of Law and Business

f)Go after

unreported income

A lot of potential taxrevenue is lost due to poorcompliance with tax laws byindividuals. Many successful

tax. If we did that and thencollected an equivalentamount of money throughslightly more progressive taxrates overall, we could increase the size of the econo­mic pie, with absolutelyno serious change in therelative tax burdens of high­and low-income groups.

There have been manyother responsible plans-putforth by Democratic andRepublican administrationsalike-to integrate thecorporate and the individualincome tax. Any of themwould be better than thesystem we have now.

More generally, ourtax system is incoherent inthe way it treats capital.Some forms of capital aretaxed very heavily, whileothers are taxed lightly. Forexample, capital invested instock and publicly tradedcompanies is heavily taxed;investments in real estateand passive investments incertain financial instru­ments are taxed relativelylightly.

We need a more rationalsystem of taxing capital. Weshould start by doing awaywith the corporate income

There's a lot of fuzzythinking on this issue. Whenpoliticians reduce individualtax rates, they commonlycompensate for it byincreasing corporate rates atthe same time. So, many taxreform proposals that mightseem to be in an affluentperson's self-interest-suchas reductions in the tax rateon capital gains or on highwages-actually turn out to

be neutral or worse, becauseof offsetting increases inthe effective tax rate oncorporations in which theyare shareholders.

mericans have objected to taxes for longer than there has been a

United States. In fact, tax resistance in colonial days was

cloaked with patriotism. Times have changed, but opposition to

taxation is alive not only in odd cults, but also in mainstream

efforts to reform and reduce taxes in this country. Taxes remain, as the saying goes, a

"hot-button issue."

Nonetheless, Americans can't seem to agree on a remedy. Proposals range from a

fiat tax or a consumption (VAT) tax to a further accretion of deductions, exemptions,

and credits in the current system. Some of the ideas are economically--or at least

politically-unworkable. But others are sensible and overdue.

We asked Professor Bankman, coauthor of the book Federal Income Taxation,

what ref07ms he would recommend. Here are his top five suggestions. -ED.

oEliminate

the corporateincome tax

Capital arising fromcorporate profits is subject to

an enormous hidden double­level tax that by any stand­ard-liberal or conservative--does not make sense.First, the corporation paystaxes on its income; thenthe individual shareholderspay tax on it again whenthey receive dividends orsell their hares.

SlANFORD ll\WYER Q

small-business owners justpocket cash. One study ofgeneral contractors indicatesthat on average they reportjust half of their income. Noaggressive tax planning byany large publicly tradedenterprise is as effective assimply putting cash in yourpocket and not reporting it.

There are many ways toget at unreported income.We could, for example,identify property purchasedby people who habituallypay little or no income tax.There are political reasonswhy--except for suspectedcriminals-this isn't done;checking on propertyownership smacks of BigBrother. But if the government got a share of thatunreported income, it wouldbe an enormous boon: Wecould have lower rates foreveryone. I think peoplewho pay honest taxes wouldregard the Big Brother trade­off differently if it were tiedto, say, a 5 percent tax cut­which it could be,overnight.

We also would have amore productive society.Many people select jobs-asservice providers or retailers,for example-in partbecause those jobs providetax-free cash income. If allincome from all occupationswere subject to the same taxrate, workers would move tojobs that are the mostproductive to the economy.

f)Weed out

pointless provisions

Suppose you have avacation home that you alsorent out. Is it, from a taxperspective, a vacation homeor a rental! Which expenses

(!!) fALL 1997

can you deduct! And whatdo you do about costs likemortgage interest, propertytax, or roof repairs that arenot divided very neatly?

The answer depends in acomplicated wayan howoften you use the vacationhome and how often yourent it out. The aim of thelaw here is laudable-toprevent taxpayers fromdeducting costs attributableto personal use. Unfortun­ately, the rule is overlycomplex and nearlyimpossible to understandand apply.

This is an example ofhow our law, in an effortto fine-tune things, hasbecome unbelievablycomplicated. No one cansort through these kinds ofrules without an accountantor tax lawyer. You need onlybe affected by one suchsection to become a foe ofthe IRS for life.

That sort of tax fine­tuning is a senseless strategy.It makes everyone suffer fromcomplexity without signifi­cantly improving fairness.

oReward

pension supersavers

The acronym ERISAstands for EmploymentRetirement Income SecurityAct, but it is sometimesderisively referred to asEvery Ridiculous Idea SinceAdam. There are certainlymany good parts of ERISA­like ensuring that youremployer does not investyour pension money on theroulette wheels in MonteCarlo. But ERISA isextremely complex, and itstax aspects have a very weaktheoretical foundation.

The tax advantages for acompany in having a pen­sion plan depend on the planbeing "antidiscriminatory."In this context, that termmeans that the plan does notdiscriminate on the basis ofincome: The janitor and theCEO both get the samepercentage of benefit forsaving toward retirement.

I believe this is anirrational way either tostimulate savings or to assurelower-paid workers of anadequate retirement.

Take the janitor: He orshe pays for a pensiondirectly, in the form ofpayroll deductions, and/orindirectly, through a reducedoverall salary. This mayanthe face of it be equaltreatment, but there's nodoubt that a janitor suffersmore from having a reducedsalary than does the CEO.

At the same time theCEO, who would most likelybe saving anyway, gets a taxbenefit for the first andevery dollar saved throughan IRA or an employer­provided pension plan. Inhis or her case, the taxbenefits are not stimulatingsavings so much aspresenting a windfall.

We should eliminate theanti-discriminationrequirement completely, sothat there is no requirementthat employers cover allemployees equally.

What about the janitor'sretirement years! That is tiedto what we do about otherthings, such as SocialSecurity. If we can keep ourcurrent Social Security safetynet, we may not need torequire company pensionprograms for the averageworker. If, however, wecannot afford to keep SocialSecurity up and must

paternalistically require ourjanitor to save, then weought to require that alljanitors and other employeessave, whether or not theircompanies happen to havepension plans.

Second, we should stoprewarding high-paidexecutives and otherwealthy individuals for theirfirst dollar of savings. Whygive tax benefits to peoplefor doing what they woulddo anyway? We would bemuch better off focusing ontheir last dollar of savings.

We should follow theadvice of my formercolleague, Deborah Weiss,and give tax benefits only tosupersavers -people who setaside more than the usualat his or her salary level.That's a more efficient wayto stimulate savings.

oInstitute

automatic filing

The odium attached totaxes isn't just about themoney; it's about the obli­gatory nuisance of filing.

In fact, about two-thirdsof retums presently requireonly a few personal detailsand the information fromtwo pieces of paper. Even so,filing can seem frighteningand burdensome to someoneunfamiliar with paperwork.You have to save records.You have to sit down and fillout the form. You worryabout whether all thedocuments have come in,whether you'll finish in time,when the refund will comein,and oon.

We should accelerateand expand what is now agradual move toward

electronic filing, by havingemployers file theiremployees' tax retums forthem. With filing at thesource, we could completelyeliminate the burden offilling out tax retums formillions of people. It couldbe the default filing methodfor the average person.

Depending on the spec­ific plan implemented, any­where from 50 to 90 percentof taxpayers could be spared.These are people with noextraordinary personal cir­cumstances, who havestraight wage income andrun-of-the-mill retums. Thisarrangement may also workfor people with certain othersources of income who con­sent in advance to allowtheir income tax to be basedon infonnation that isalready filed electronicallywith the IRS.

Most people haveemployers who are electro­nically reporting to the IRStheir wage statements any­way. And banks electronic­ally report to the IRS mostmortgage expense andinterest income. The sameIR computer that gets allthis information could cal­culate a typical person's taxliability. You would not haveany filing responsibility atall. ince you would still besubject to wage withholding,you would not even haveany re ponsibility to send ina check.

You would of course geta copy of all these reports,and you could always over­ride this default method ifyou chose to.

Automatic filing wouldnot work for everyone. Itwould not be best for you ifyou need to take advantageof certain major deductions.

Nor would it work if youremployer doesn't know, forexample, whether you havea disabled child or highinterest on a car loan.

But I believe millions oftaxpayers would make thetrade-off of giving up taxbreaks for such situations inretum for being freed of theburden of filing a tax retum.

If we could completelyeliminate the aggravation offiling for the average person,a lot of the dissatisfactionwith the tax system wouldgo away. That would be thesmartest tax reform we couldmake. ~

Joseph Bankman is theSchool's new Ralph M. ParsonsProfessor of Law and Business(see page 9). This article isbased on a February 21, 1997.interview with editor ConstanceHellyer and freelance writerJohn Boykin.

Whalahou1allattax1

For years tax critics

have tried tobalance thesimplicity of a flat

tax with the fairness of a

graduated tax. No proposal

has made much headway.

The reason is thatthere is a fundamental

conflict between a taxthat's the same for

everyone and a tax that

takes into accountcharacteristics like

whether someone is

wealthy or poor. healthy ordisabled, using their

money for schooling or to

make a fashion statement.investing in a socially

desirable way or pillaging

the environment. and soon. Whenever you take

factors like those into

account. you getcom plexity.

To be sure, our current

law gives us the worst of

both worlds: unbelievablecomplexity without much

perception of fairness.Various flat tax proposals

are often trotted out asappealing solutions.

The loudest cheers

in the 1996 presidentialcampaign came whenSteve Forbes proclaimed

that, with the flat tax plan

he proposed. we could"drive a stake in the heart

of the IRS and kill it dead."

At first. people loved his

proposal to eliminateloopholes and make thetax system fairer by

making it the same for

everyone. Some supporters

assumed that the wealthyin this country had been

successfully avoiding

income taxes. and that a

flat tax would eventhings up.

In fact. Forbes'sproposal would have

benefited the wealthy by

reducing the top marginalrates and by replacing the

income tax with a

consumption tax.The proposal would

have had the same effectas the type of consumption

tax with which most

people are familiar-a

sales tax. It would alsohave the same effect as avalue-added tax (VAT),

which can be thought of asa European-style sales tax.

Asales tax or VAT would

increase the size of the

economic pie. but it wouldalso divide the pie less

equally. The magnitude ofeach change is hotly

debated.When voters realized

that the flat tax proposals

involved real trade-offs

and were not miracle

cures. they lostinterest. @)

,TANfORIJ IAWVfl1. Ei)

Aconcise guide to recent faculty writings ona range of current issues. Here are three excerpts, plus a comprehensive bibliography

of publications appearing between January 1996 and June 1997.

Genetics Research

"Almost all the detailed work ... inhuman genetics has been done withsamples taken from people of Europeandescent, not because of any consciousor subconscious racism but becausemost of the research has been done inEurope and North America. The result,however, has been research on 'the'human genome that has largelyexcluded genetic variation in generaland almost entirely ignored thevariation found in about 85 percent ofhumanity.

"The propo ed Human GenomeDiversity Project (HGOP) is oneresolutely noncommercial effort tocollect and make available, in aSCientifically and ethically coordinatedmanner, genetic information about arepresentative sample of the world'sentire human population: Europeanand non-European, indigenous andnon-indigenous."

-Henry T. Greely

"Genes, Patents, and Indigenous Peoples"

(See Articles)

e f A ILl 'J ~ 7

Jury 'Reform'

"[Even] before the Simpson verdictwas in, partly in response to othernotorious case involving unpopularjury results (the acquittal in the fir tRodney King beating case, the hungjury in the Menendez parricide),legislaLive moves were afoot to aholishthe unanimity requirement, to reducethe number of jurors, and to eliminatethe peremptory challenge. The basicproblem with these proposals is two­fold: they wrongly assume that the jurysystem is broken; they couldprofoundly change its operation inunpredictable ways."

-Barbara Allen Babcock

"In Defense of the Criminal JUry" (See Chapters)

Water Markets

"For over twenty years, national andstate commissions have touted thepotential economic and environmentalbenefits of water markets. Rather thanlocking marginal water uses into placeand requiring water-short regions tobuild expensive and environmentallydamaging new water projects, marketswould permit high-value, water-shortuses to purchase water from lower­value uses. The opportunity to sellwater for often onsiderable sums wouldencourage valuable conservation.

"Water markets would also reducethe cost of sudden reduction in watersupply resulting from droughts orenvironmental regulation bypermitting reallocation of theremaining water to its highest uses.

"Th se and other marketadvantages seem c nvincingly strong.Yet active water markets remain arelatively local and often sporadicphenomenon."

-Barton H. (Buzz) Thompson, Jr. '76

"Water Markets and the Problem of Shifting

Paradigms" (See Chapters)

________~ications,199-619'-1-7--------B -.0 0 JLS

Barbara Allen Babcock, Sex Discrimination and the Law: History,Practice, and Theory, 2nd ed. Boston: Little, Brown, 1996.

John J. Donohue, Foundations of Employment Discrimination Law,Cary, N.C.: Oxford University Press, 1997.

Joseph Bankman, K. Pratt, and T. Griffith, Federal Income Taxation:

Examples and Explanations. Boston: Little, Brown, 1996.

Marc A. Franklin and Robert 1. Rabin, Tort Law and Alternatives,6th ed. Westbury, N.Y.: Foundation Press, 1996.

Marc A. Franklin, T. Barton Carter, and Jay B. Wright, The FirstAmendment and the Fifth Estate: Regulation of Electronic Mass Media,4th ed. Westbury, N.Y.: Foundation Press, 1997.

Lawrence M. Friedman and Harry N. cheiber, eds., Legal Cultureand the Legal Profession. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press, 1996.

Paul Goldstein, Copyright, 2nd ed. Boston: Little, Brown, 1996. AlsoCopyright on CD-Rom, New York: Aspen Law & Business, 1997.

Paul Goldstein, Copyright, Patent, Trademark, and Related StateDoctrines: Cases and Materials on the Law of Intellectual Property, 4thed. Westbury, N.Y.: Foundation Press, 1997.

J. Myron Jacobstein, A Bibliography of Published Histories of AmericanLaw Firms Through 1995. Austin: University of Texas at Austin, 1996.

Mark Kelman and Gillian Lester, Jumping the Queue: An Ethical andEmpirical Analysis into the Legal Treatment of tudenrs with LearningDisabilities, Cambridge, Ma .: Harvard University Press, 1997.

J. Keith Mann, Report of the Special Master, United States v. Alaska,No. 84 Original (Supreme Court filed March 1996).

John Henry Merryman, Problems in the Art World, American Law

Institute-American Bar Association Continuing Legal EducationCourse of Study, Chicago, 1997.

John Henry Merryman, The Proposed Generalisation of the Droit de

Suite in the European Communities. London: Intellectual PropertyInstitute, 1996.

Robert 1. Rabin and Marc A. Franklin, Tort Law and Alternatives,6th ed. Westbury, N.Y.: Foundation Press, 1996.

Margaret Jane Radin, Contested Commodities. Cambridge, Mass.:Harvard University Press, 1996.

Deborah 1. Rhode, Speaking of Sex: The Denial of Gender Inequality,Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1997.

David 1. Rosenhan and Martin E. P. Seligman, Abnormal Person­alities. New York: Norton, 1996.

Kathleen Sullivan, Alan Brinkley, and Nelson W. Polsby, The NewFederalist Papers: Essays in Defense of the Constitution, New York:

Twentieth Century Fund, W. W. orton & Co., 1997.

Robert Weisberg and Guyora Binder, Kaplan and Weisberg's CriminalLaw: Cases and Materials, 3rd ed. Boston: Little, Brown, 1996.

~ H-AJI LE Il S

Barbara Allen Babcock, "Feminism and Affirmative Action," in WeWon't Go Back: Making the ase for Affirmative Action, Charles R. Law­

rence III and Mari J. Matsuda, eds. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1997.

Barbara Allen Babcock, "In Defense of the Criminal Jury," in

Postmortem: The O. J. Simpson Case, Jeffrey Abramson, ed. New

York: Basic Books, 1996.

John H. Barton, "The Biodiversity Convention and the Flow ofScientific Information," in Global Genetic Resources: Access,Ownership and Intellectual Property Rights, K. E. Hoagland and

A. Y. Rossman, eds. Washington, D.C.: Association of System­

atics Collections, 1997.

John H. Barton, "The Law and Economics of Contemporary Techno­

logy Transfer," in The Law and Economics of Development, E. Buscaglia,W. Ratliffe and R. Cooter, eds. Greenwich, Conn: J. A. 1. Press, 1997.

John J. Donohue, "Does Law Matter in the Area of Discrimination?"

in Justice and Power in Socio-Legal Studies, Bryant Garth and AustinSarat, eds. Evanston, Ill.: Northwestern Univer ity Press, 1997.

Lawrence M. Friedman, "Brown in Context," in Race, Law andCulture: Reflections on Brown v. Board of Education, Austin Sarat, ed.

New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.

Lawrence M. Friedman, "Dreams and Nightmares: Litigation in

America," in Legal Culture and the Legal Profession, Lawrence M.Friedman and Harry N. Scheiber, eds. Boulder, Colo.: Westview

Press, 1996.

Lawrence M. Friedman and Harry N. Scheiber, "Introduction: Legal

Cultures and the Legal Profession," in Legal Culture and the LegalProfession, Lawrence M. Friedman and Harry N. Scheiber, eds.

Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press, 1996.

Henry T. Greely, "The Human Genome Diversity Project: Ethical,

Legal and Social Issues," in Genes, Religion and Society, T. Peters, ed.New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1996.

Thomas C. Grey, "Freestanding Legal Pragmatism," in The Pragma­tist Revival, Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 1997.

Janet E. Halley, "The Sexual Economist and Legal Regulation of the

Sexual Orientations," in Sex, Preference and Family, D. M. Estlund

and M. C. Nussbaum, eds. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.

Thomas C. Heller, "European Common Foreign and Security

Policy," in Reforming the Treaty on European Union: The Legal Debate,J. A. Winter et aI., eds. The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 1996.

Thomas C. Heller, "Regionalism in Europe, North America and

East Asia," in ymposium: Germany, Japan and the United States.Berlin: Japanisch-Deutsches Zentrum Berlin, 1996.

John Henry Merryman, "A Licit International Trade in CulturalProperty," in Legal·Aspects of International Art Trade (InternationalSales of Works of Art series, vol. v). Paris: ICC Pub; The Hague,London: Kluwer Law International, 1996.

STANFORD lAWYER a>

John Henry Merryman, "Draft Principles to Govern a Licit [nterna­tiona[ Trade in Art," in Legal Aspects of International Art Trade, op. cit.

John Henry Merryman, "Legal Education There and Here: AComparison," in Civil Law, Ra[f Rogowski, ed. New York: New York

University Press, ]996.

Margaret Jane Radin, "Market-[nalienability," in AppUcations of FeministLegal The01) to Women's Lives: Sex, Violence, Work, and Reproduction,D. Kelly Weisberg, ed. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1996.

Deborah L. Rhode, "Adolescent Pregnancy and Public Policy," inReproduction, Sexuality, and the Family, Karen J. Maschke, ed. ew

York: Garland Publishing, 1997.

Deborah L. Rhode, "Feminist Critical Theories," in Feminist LegalTheories, edited with introductions by Karen J. Maschke, New York:

Garland Publishing, 1997.

Deborah L. Rhode, "Simpson ound Bites: What [s and Isn't News

About Domestic Violence," in Postmortem: The O. ]. Simpson Case,Jeffrey Abramson, ed. New York: Basic Books, 1996.

Kenneth E. Scott, "The Use of Statistic in Judicial Decisions," in

Education in a Research University, K. Arrow, C. Eaves, and I. Olkin,

eds. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1996.

Barton H. Thompson, Jr., "Legal Disconnections Between Groundand Surface Water," in Making the Connections: Proceedings of theTwentieth Biennial Conference on Ground Water, September 11-12,

1995. Davis, Calif.: Centers for Water and Wi[dland Resources, 1996

(Water Resources Center Report, no. 88).

Barton H. Thompson, Jr., "Water Markets and the Problem of

Shifting Paradigms," in Water Marketing-The Next Generation: ThePolitical Economy Forum, Terry L. Anderson and Peter J. Hill, eds.Lanham, Md.: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, 1997.

WOJlK.IJj6- fAPERS

Ronald J. Gilson, "Corporate Governance and Economic Efficiency:When Do Institutions Matter?" Columbia University School of Law,

Center for Law and Economics Studies Working Paper No. 121 (1996).

Ronald J. Gilson and Bernard S. Black, "Venture Capital and the

Structure of Capital Markets: Banks Versus Stock Market ," Stanford

Law School, John M. Olin Program in Law and Economics WorkingPaper No. 135 (1996).

Joseph A. Grundfest and Peter H. Huang, "Real Options and the

Economic Analysis of Litigation: A Preliminary Inquiry," Stanford

Law School, John M. Olin Program in Law and Economics WorkingPaperNo. 13] (1996).

Joseph A. Grundfest and Michael A. Perino, "Securities LitigationReform: The First Year's Experience. A Statistical and Lega[ Analysis

of Class Action Securities Fraud Litigation Under the Privare

Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995," Stanford Law School, JohnM. Olin Program in Law and Economics Working Paper No. 140

(1997).

A. Mitchell Polinsky and Daniel L. Rubinfeld, "Does the English

Rule Discourage Low-Probability-of-Prevailing Plaintiffs?" Stanford

Law School, John M. Olin Program in Law and Economics WorkingPaper No. 137 (1996).

~ fAll 1997

A. Mitchell Polinsky, "Are Punitive Damages Really Insignificant,

Predictable, and Rational? A Comment on Eisenberg et al.," Stanford

Law School, John M. Olin Program in Law and Economics WorkingPaper No. 141 (1997).

A. Mitchell Polinsky and Steven Shavell, "Repeat Offenders and the

Theory of Deterrence," Stanford Law School, John M. Olin Program

in Law and Economics Working Paper No. 134 (1996).

Barton H. Thompson, Jr., "The Endangered Species Act: A Case

tudy in Takings and Incentives," Stanford Law School, John M. OlinProgram in Law and Economics Working Paper No. 126 (1996).

Janet Cooper Alexander, "Rethinking Damages in Securities ClassActions," 48 Stanford Law Review 1487 (1996).

Barbara Allen Babcock, "A Unanimous Jury is Fundamental to Our

Democracy," 20 Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 469 (Winter1997).

Joseph Bankman and Barbara Fried, "Why Not a Flat Tax?" 21 BostonReview 1 (Summer 1996).

John H. Barton, "Biotechnology, the Environment, and [nternationalAgricultural Trade," 9 Georgetown International Environmental LawReview 95 (Fall 1996).

John H. Barton, "Patents and Antitrust: A Rethinking in Light ofPatent Breadth and Sequential Innovation," 65 Antitrust Law Journal449 (1997).

John H. Barton and Simone Shaheen, "Sharing the Wealth: TheRole of Venture Capitalists in Russia's Economic Development," 27Law and Policy in International Business 33 (1996).

Paul Brest, "Affirmative Action: The Reason Why," 50 StanfordLawyer 2 (Fall 1996).

Paul Brest, "The Responsibility of Law Schools: Educating Lawyers asCounselors and Problem Solvers," 58 Law and Contemporary Problems5 (1996).

Tom Campbell, "Affirmative Acti n: An Impermissible So[ution," 50

Stanford Lawyer 4 (Fall 1996).

Gerhard Casper, "[n Memoriam: Philip B. Kurland," 64 University ofChicago Law Review 9 (1997).

Lance Dickson, "Forewords and Afterwords," 5 Scribes Journal of LegalWriting 141 (1996).

George Fisher, "The O. J. Simpson Corpus," 49 Stanford Law Review971 (1997).

Richard T. Ford, "Beyond Borders: A Partial Response to RichardBriffault," 48 Stanford Law Review 1173 (1996).

Richard T. Ford, "Facts and Values in Pragmatism and Personhood: AReview of Margaret Jane Radin's Reinterpreting Property," 48 StanfordLaw Review 217 (1996).

Richard T. Ford, "Imagined Cities-Review of Richard Sennett'sFlesh and Stone and Mackenzie Wark's Virtual Geography," 68 Transi­tion: An International Review 28 (1996).

Richard T. Ford, "Notes From the Outfield," 3 Appendx 148 (1996).

Barbara Fried and Joseph Bankman, "Why Not a Flat Tax?" 21

Boston Review I (Summer 1996).

Lawrence M. Friedman, "Borders: On the Emerging Sociology of

Transnational Law," 32 Stanford Journal of International Law 69(1996).

Lawrence M. Friedman, Joanna Grossman, and Chris Guthrie,"Guardians," 40 American Journal of Legal History 146 (1996).

Lawrence M. Friedman and June O. Starr, "Losing It in California:Conservatorships and the Social Organization of Aging," 73

Washingron University Law Quarterly 150 I (1996).

Ronald J. Gilson, "Corporate Governance and Economic Efficiency:

When Do Institutions Matter?" 74 Washington University LawQuarterly 327 (1996).

William B. Gould IV, "Employee Participation and Labor Policy:Why the Team Act Should Be Defeated and the National Labor

Relations Act Amended," 30 Creighton Law Review 3 (1996).

William B. Gould IV, "Recent Developments at the National Labor

Relations Board: Symposium: Current Critical Issues in Labor andEmployment Law," 40 St. Louis University Law Journal 37 (1996).

Henry T. Greely, "Conflicts in the Biotechnology Industry," 23

Journal of Law, Medicine, and Ethics 354 (Winter 1996).

Henry T. Greely, "Conflicts of Interest in Clinical Practice and

Research," 336 New England Journal of Medicine 518 (1997).

Henry T. Greely, "Direct Financial Incentives in Managed Care:

Unanswered Questions," 5 Health Matrix: Journal of Law-Medicine(March 1996).

Henry T. Greely, "Genes, Patents, and Indigenous Peoples:Biomedical Research and Indigenous Peoples' Rights," 20 CulturalSurvival Quarterly 54 (No.2, Summer 1996).

Henry T. Greely, "Model Ethical Protocol for Collecting DNASamples," 33 Houston Law Review 1431 (1997).

Henry T. Greely, "Quantitative Analysis of a Judicial Career: A Case

Study of Judge John Minor Wisdom," 53 Washington & Lee Law Review99 (Winter 1996).

Henry T. Greely, "The Control of Genetic Research: Involving the'Groups Between'," 33 Houston Law Review 1397 (1997).

Henry T. Greely, "The Human Genome Diversity Project and 'Bio­

Colonization'-Not," 74 Utne Reader 87 (March/April 1996).

Thomas c. Grey, "Bowers v. Hardwick Diminished," 68 University ofColorado Law Review 373 (1997).

Thomas C. Grey, "How to Write a Speech Code Without ReallyTrying: Reflections on the Stanford Experience," 29 University ofCalifornia at Davis Law Review 891 (1996).

Thomas C. Grey, "Holmes's Language of Judging-Some PhilistineRemarks," 70 St. John's Law Review 5 (1996).

Thomas C. Grey, "Modern American Legal Thought," 106 Yale LawJournal 493 (1996).

Joseph A. Grundfest and Michael A. Perino, "The Pentium Papers:

A Case Study of Collective Institutional Investor Activism in Litiga­tion," 38 Arizona Law Review 559 (Summer 1996).

Gerald Gunther, "Commentary: Symposium on Trends in LegalCitations and Scholarship," 71 Chicago-Kent Law Review 813 (1996).

Gerald Gunther, "Judge Learned Hand: The Choices and Satis­

factions of a Biographer," Proceedings of the American PhilosophicalSociety (1996) (Invited lecture at the 1995 meeting of the Society).

Gerald Gunther, "Judge Learned Hand: The Man, the Myth, the

Biography," Journal of Supreme Court History-1996 Yearbook of theSupreme Court Historical Society (1996) (Annual lecture of the Society,

delivered June 1995).

Gerald Gunther, "Learned Hand-The Myth and the Man," 31International Society of Barristers Quarterly 301 (1996).

Janet E. Halley, "Intersections: Sexuality, Cultural Tradition, and the

Law: Introduction," 8 Yale Journal of Law and the Humanities 93(1996).

Janet E. Halley, "Romer v. Hardwick," 68 University of Colorado LawReview 429 (1997).

Janet E. Halley, "The Status/Conduct Distinction in the 1993Revisions to Military Anti-Gay Policy," 3 GLQ: A Journal of Lesbianand Gay Studies 159 (1996).

Thomas C. Heller, "Environmental Realpolitik: Joint Implementa­tion and Climate Change," 3 Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies295 (1996).

Mark Kelman, Yuval Rotterstreich, and Amos Tversky, "Context

Dependence in Legal Decisionmaking," 25 Journal of Legal Studies 287(June 1996).

Mark Kelman, "Educated Choices," 49 Stanford Lawyer 8 (Spring 1996).

Mark Kelman, "Progressive Vacuums," 48 Stanford Law Review 975(June 1996).

Miguel A. Mendez, "The Law of Evidence and the Search for a Stable

Personality," 39 Emory Law Journal 1 (1996).

John Henry Merryman, "Note on The Marquis de Somerueles," 5InternationaIJournal of Cultural Property 321 (1996).

John Henry Merryman, "The UNIDROIT Convention: Three

Variations from the 'Urtext'," 5 International Journal of CulturalProperty 11 (1996).

A. Mitchell Polinsky, "Are Punitive Damages Really Insignificant,

Predictable, and Rational? A Comment on Eisenberg et al.," 26 Journalof Legal Studies 663 (1997).

A. Mitchell Polinsky and Daniel L. Rubinfeld, "Optimal Awards andPenalties When the Probability of Prevailing Varies Among Plain­

tiffs," 27 Rand Journal of Economics 269 (1996).

Robert L. Rabin, "Law for Law's Sake," 105 Yale Law Journal 2261(1996).

Robert L. Rabin, "Restating the Law: The Dilemmas of Products Liabi­lity," 30 University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform 197 (Spring 1997).

Robert L. Rabin, "Some Thoughts on the Ideology of Enterprise

Liability," 55 Maryland Law Review 1190 (1996).

,TANfORD LAWYER ~

Margaret Jane Radin, "Property Evolving in Cyberspace," 15 Journalof Law & Commerce 509 (1996).

Margaret Jane Radin and R. Polk Wagner, "Reflections on Exclusion

and Co-ordination in yberspace: The Case of Domain Names,"

Jurist: Law Professors on the Web (1997). [URL: http://www-leland.stanford.edu/-mrtuiin/research. heml]

Deborah L. Rhode, "Myths of Meritocracy," 65 Fordham Law Review

585 (1996).

Deborah L. Rhode, "Professionalism in Perspective: Alternative

Approaches to onlawyer Practice," 22 New York University Review ofLaw and Social Change 701 (1996).

Kenneth E. Scott, "The Evolving Roles of Contract Law," 152 Journalof Institutional & Theoretical Economics 55 (1996).

Kenneth E. Scott, "Social Treatment of Catastrophic Risk," 12 Journalof Risk and Uncertainty 99 (1996).

William H. Simon, "Should Lawyers Obey the Law?" 38 William andMary Law Review 217 (1996).

William H. Simon, "The Legal Structure of the hinese 'SocialistMarket' Enterprise," 21 Journal of Corporation Law 267 (1996).

Kathleen M. Sullivan, "Constitutional Constancy: Why Congress

hould Cure Itself of Amendment Fever," 17 Cardozo Law Review 691(1996).

Kathleen M. Sullivan, "Parades, Public Squares and VoucherPayments: Problems of Government Neutrality," 28 Connecticut LawReview 243 (1996).

Kathleen M. Sullivan, "The States Are Not Strong Enough," New

York TImes Magazine, August 18, 1996, p. 36.

Barton H. Thompson, Jr., "Environmental Policy and Stateonstitutions: The Potential Role of Substantive Guidance, 27

Rutgers Law Journal 863 (1996).

Barton H. Thompson, Jr., "Foreword: The earch for Regulatory

Alternatives," 15 Stanford Environmental Law Journal viii (1996).

Barton H. Thompson, Jr., "Resource Use and the Emerging Law of'Takings': A Realistic Appraisal," 42 Rocky Mountain Mineral LawInstitute 2-1 (1996).

Barton H. Thompson, Jr., "The Endangered Species Act: A Case

Study in Takings & Incentives," 49 Stanford Law Review 305 (1997).

Robert Weisberg, "The New York Statute as Cultural Document:

Seeking the Morally Optimal Death Penalty," 44 Buffalo Law Review283 (1996).

NEWSPAPER ARLlCL.LS

Linda A. Mabry, "Why Ron Brown Was the Best U.S. Commerce

Secretary," San Jose Mercury News, April 18, 1996, p. 6B.

John Henry Merryman, "Commentary: Archaeologists Are Not

Helping," The Art Newspaper, no. 55, January 1996, p. 26.

Margaret Jane Radin, "Patrolling the Information Superhighway,"

Washington Post, June 30, 1996, p. X03.

FALL 1997

Deborah L. Rhode, "Anti-Gay Prejudice Persists in Legal Work­

place," National Law Joumal, December 16,1996, p. A15.

Deborah L. Rhode, "Decisions Expand Equal Protection Rights,"

National Law Journal, July 29, 1996, p. C7.

Deborah L. Rhode, "ls There Sexual Parity for Prisoners?" NationalLaw Journal, July 8, 1996, p. A19.

Deborah L. Rhode, "Pc. or Discrimination?" National Law Journal,January 22,1996, p. A20.

Deborah L. Rhode, "Progress For Women in Law-But No Parity

Yet," National Law Journal, February 24, 1997, p. A23.

Deborah L. Rhode, "To Fault or Not to Fault," National Law Journal,May 13, 1996, p. A19.

Deborah L. Rhode, "What Does Woman Want? Recognition at Last,"National Law Journal, April 21, 1997, p. A17.

Deborah L. Rhode, "Women Haven't Arrived," National Law Journal,March 18, 1996, p. A19.

Deborah L. Rhode, "Women Lawyers Face 'Face Time,' OtherBiases," National Law Journal, September 2, 1996, p. A 16.

Deborah L. Rhode, "You Mu t Remember This ... ," National LawJournal, October 28, 1996, p. A21.

Kathleen M. Sullivan, "The Constitution: Above the Fray," TheChristian Science Monitor, October 25, 1996, p. 18.

Kathleen M. Sullivan, "Decisions Expand Equal Protection Rights,"

National Law Journal, July 29, 1996, p. C7.

Kathleen M. Sullivan, "Muzzle Joe Camel? It May Be Illegal,"Newsday, May 30, 1996, p. AS!.

Kathleen M. Sullivan, "Tobacco Ad Rules Would Limit Free Speech,"St. Louis Post-Dispatch, June 6, 1996, p. 3B.

Kathleen M. Sullivan, "Why the Brady Law Is Constitutional," TheNew York TImes, December 6, 1996, p. A23.

IlALE E5

Janet Cooper Alexander, Barbara A. Babcock, Richard T. Ford,Thomas Grey, Linda A. Mabry, Miguel A. Mendez, Deborah L.Rhode, and William L. Taylor, Brief Amicus Curiae, Coalition for Eco­

nomic Equity v. Wilson (U.S. District Court for the Northern Districtof California, filed December 20,1996) (No. C 96 4024 TEH).

William Cohen, Ronald D. Rotunda, Richard Parker, William Van

Alstyne '58, et aI., Brief Amicus Curiae of Law Professors in Support ofRespondent, Clinton v. Jones (Supreme Court, filed September 9,1996) (No. 95-1853).

Kathleen M. Sullivan, Akhil Reed Amar, Susan Low Bloch, Pamela S.

Karlan, Laurence H. Tribe, et al. Brief Amicus Curiae of Law Professorsin Support of Petitioner, Clinton v. Jones (Supreme ourt, filed August 8,1996) (No. 95-1853). 0

CD This list was compiled by reference librarian Erika Wayne of theRobert Crown Law Library. Continuously updated, it is available online athttp://www·leland.stanford.edu/group/law/library/what/lawbib.htm

law_•

_e[ln~

~ FALL 1997

Grads and friends from around the country continue to meet,network. and otherwise enjoy the benefits of membership in the greater Stanford Law School

community. Here's an overview of1996-97 events.

eastCoasL

o

'"zo

"o:~..%

o

>..o

theWestThe School's Southern

California Celebration '97 onApril 17 featured (I-r) legal

correspondent David Margolick'77. Profs. Robert Weisberg '79

and Barbara Allen Babcock,television scriptwriter Marshall

Goldberg '71, and lawyer/novelist Scott Turow (AM '74).

Their topic-"Heroes andVillains: Images of lawyers

in Popular Culture."

The School's NortheastCelebration on June 5 drew an

illustrious crowd including (oppo­site, lor) Campaign chair James

Gaither '64, Dean Paul Brest,and dinner chairs Victor Palmieri

'54 and Miles Rubin '52.

Anne Bingaman '68(opposite, center) spoke at

law society receptions inboth New York City and

Washington. D.C.

David Hayes '78 (opposite,left), William Kroener '70, and RobEdwards '90 (opposite, right) weresnapped at the Stanford breakfast

during the 1997 Association ofAmerican Law Schools

meeting in D.C.'1.d

Alumni in New York (left),Washington. D.C. (below), andBoston joined Prof. Buzz Thompson '76and a 2l student at April receptions toencourage potential students who hadbeen offered admission but not yetmade a commitment to accept.

\TANI-ORD IAWVfR <I

(!) fAil 1997

theMidwest

Chicago-area alumnicongregated to sa lute one of

their own-Hon. Joan B.Gottschall '73 (lower left), who

was elevated in September 1996to the U.S. District Court for the

Northern District of Illinois. Cel­ebrants at the February 13,1997,

luncheon included (clockwisefrom upper left}: featured

speaker Barbara Allen Babcock,since named to the Judge John

Crown Professorship; John Sabl'76, Bryant Garth '75, and HarleMontgomery (Garth's aunt and a

longtime benefactor, with herlate husband Kenneth Mont­

gomery, of the School's keypublic interest initiatives);

and Bill Kirsch '81 withSusan Bell, the School's

Associate Dean forExternal Relations.

zz:>~

>oz..~

>o

California Chief Justice RonaLd M. George '64 (top) was feted October 29 by thesan Francisco Law Society. Some 100 Stanford jurists joined the honorary com­mittee. San Francisco 4gers president and Stanford Law parent Carmen Policy(left) enLivened a May 29 event in that city.

Alandmark conference initiated by Women of Stanford Law. "Women in the LegalProfession," was held at the SchooL ApriL 5 (below). BroadLy attended, the pro­gram featured NYU socioLogist Cynthia Fuchs Epstein, Stanford's women Law pro­fessors (now 8 in number), and severaL savvy aLumnae.

Members of the Silicon Valley Law Society breakfasted with Dean Brest at theALza Corporation on March 19 and experienced virtuaL reaLity ApriL 16 in a tour ofStanford's new Gates BuiLding (both unpictured).

\IA tlJRl1 IAW\,[R GD

For your calendar--a preview of Stanford Law School gatheringson campus and around the country.

~ fAll1997

September 14-16

September 16

September 16

Sept. 25-28

January

January 15-16

March 23-24

Class of '52 ReunionAt Asilomar, Pacific Grove, Calif.

"Lizzie Borden on Trial: A Dramatization"On the bench: Hon. William H. Rehnquist '52,Chief Justice of the United States; and AssociateJustice Sandra Day O'Connor '52. Presented incelebration of the establishment of the Judge JohnCrown Professorship in Law.At Stanford

Seattle Law SocietyIn Seattle

Alumni Weekend 1997 and Class ReunionsAt Stanford

Association of American Law SchoolsIn San Francisco

General Counsel CollegeAt Stanford

Directors' CollegeAt Stanford

CD For information and reservations. contact the School'sAlumni Office. Telephone: 650/723-2730. E-mail: Law.ALumni.ReLations@Forsythe.stanford.edu

AN INVITATION TO ENJOY

Friends, Forums, and Football

September 25 - 28, 1997Aselection of events for all alumni-plus reunions forthe Half-Century Club (Classes of 1920 to '47) and for '57, '62, '67, '72, '77, '02, '07, and '92(The Class of '52 is meeting September 14-16 at Asilomar.)

PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 25Dean's Circle Dinner

(by invitation)

FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 26Delegates' Summit

(by invitation)

Celebration Lunch

with Dean and Faculty, 4gerspresident Carmen Policy,Reebok CEO Paul Firen'lan,and Stanford Women's Basket­ball coach Tara VanDerveer.

Panel Discussions

• The Money Game: II/llestingin an Uncertain World. Professorjoseph Bankman and fivefinancial experts.

• Does the Constitution StillWork? Perspectilles on the Framers'Visiol/ and American Politics TodayStanford president GerhardCasper, New Federalist Paperscoauthors Kathleen Sullivan andNelson Polsby, and 1997 PulitzerPrize winner jack Rakove.

• Issues of InternationalDiplomacy. Former U.S. secre­taries Warren Christopher andWilliam Perry, Stanford provostand former White House adviserCondoleezza Rice, and CarnegieCorporation president emeritusDavid Hamburg, MD.Moderated by ProfessorThomas Heller.

Alumni Reception

Reunion Dinners

SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 27

Continental Breakfast

Panel Discussions

• Fooling Mother Nature:Opportunities and Challenges hithe Biotechnology Age. An inter­disciplinary panel from medicalresearch, industry, and the law.Moderated by Carey Heckmanof the Stanford Law andTechnology Policy Center.

• Women at Law: H~/rdles an.dProspects. Lisa P. Lindelef '88,

and a panel of women alumsand faculty, with insights onobstacles and routes to successfor female attorneys, and on theprospects for change.

Recreational Choices

• Tour of jasper Ridge• Stanford Linear Accelerator

Center (SLAC)

Tailgate Celebration

Football Game

Stanford vs. University ofOregon.

SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 28Reunion Brunches

(for some classes)

AND MORE ...For further information, contact theAlumni Office, 650/723-2730.

E-mail: Law.Alun.ll1i. Relatiol1s@forsythe. stanford. edu

Website: http://www-Ieland.stariford.edu Igroup Ilaw Ialunmil

A two-day program exploring the

special skills and attributes that set the most

effective corporate counsel apart from the

rest. Designed for in-house lawyers, this

program offers theoretical

insights and practical tools

that will enhance your ability to expertly

counsel your organization regarding

business and policy decisions.

FOR INFORMATION ON EITHER PROGRAM, CONTACTAna Hays, Associate Director, Executive Education Programs

Phone 650/723-5905 • Fax: 650/725-1861 • E-mail: ahays@stanford.edu

executive

STANFORD UNIVERSITYStanford Law SchoolStanford, CA 94305-8610

An intensive, two-day program that brings

together leading directors, executives, jurists,

and regulators to explore today:'\ most challeng­

ing boardroom issues. Designed specifically

for directors, executives with

board responsibility, and general

counsel, the program focuses on strategies that

link governance and compliance to bottom line

corporate peiformance.

www-Ieland.stanford.edu/group/cle-exec/

Nonprofit OrganizationU.S. Postage

PAIDPalo Alto, CAPermit No. 28