Professor Andrew Verstein presents ‘Privatizing Personalized Law’ on April 27 at University of Chicago Law School symposium
Research | Comments Off
Office of Communications and Public Relations
March 14, 2018
ymposium about personalized law
on Friday, April 27, 2018. The event, which continues through Saturday, April 28, 2018, is co-sponsored by the University of Chicago Law Review and the Coase-Sandor Institute. It is free and open to the public.
Along with many notable presenters, Professor Verstein will bring his expertise of contract law, corporate law as well as securities and commodities regulation and legislation to the event Friday evening when presenting on the topic of “Privatizing Personal Law.”Professor Vertein is a well-published scholar. His works can be found in the Yale Law Journal, the University of Chicago Law Review, the Virginia Law Review, the Michigan Law Review, the Northwestern University Law Review, along with other journals. He has worked on a number of representative projects, including person-to-person lending and crowdfunding, financial indices and benchmarks such as Libor, and market abuse in securities and commodities markets, investor time horizons, the intersection between national security and corporate governance, the functional role of business entities, and the treatment of mixed motives in the law, which can be found in his bio.
According to the website, the symposium will feature diverse expert viewpoints on the value, feasibility, and implementation of personalization in various legal areas, including standards of care in tort law; default and mandatory rules in contract law; disclosure mandates; sentencing rules; tax laws; and legal procedures.
Panelists will discuss whether a personalized system is moral or democratic, how such a system could be implemented, and the benefits and drawbacks of shifting from uniform to personalized law. Others will explore how the increased granularity of legal norms would affect the legal system as a whole, whether personalization will make the legal system more efficient, fair, or equal, or instead serve to undermine the legitimacy of the legal system and infringe on individual privacy.