Brooklyn Law School’s Center for the Study of Business Law and Regulation and the Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial and Commercial Law are sponsoring a symposium on Friday, February 8 on The Growth and Importance of Compliance in Financial Firms: Meaning and Implications.  Attendees must RSVP by Wedesday, February 6. The agenda, available here, includes Opening Remarks by BLS Professor James Fanto who will also be a Panelist along with BLS Professors James Park, Roberta Karmel and Miriam Baer serving as Moderators. They will participate with other academics, practitioners and regulators in securities law. The description of the symposium, which will take place 9:00 am to 3:30 pm at the Subotnick Center, Brooklyn Law School, 250 Joralemon Street, Brooklyn, NY, reads:

Over the past decade, the compliance function in financial firms, in particular broker-dealers and investment advisers, has grown in size and importance. While this phenomenon is an integral part of life for compliance officers and legal practitioners who advise these firms, compliance has received relatively little attention from legal scholars. This symposium will provide the opportunity for financial and securities law scholars to evaluate and criticize, from their respective theoretical perspectives, the growing importance of compliance in financial firms, as well as comment upon particular compliance duties and issues. The conference includes noted legal practitioners, compliance specialists and regulators, who can assist the scholars in their reflection and offer their own perspectives and insights on the compliance phenomenon.

The BLS Library recently added to its collection For Whom the Whistle Blows: Advancing Corporate Compliance and Integrity Efforts in the Era of Dodd-Frank (Call # KF1422.A75 F67 2011) by Michael D. Greenberg. The 62 page item is a conference report on a May 2011 RAND a symposium on he implications of the proposed rules, the role of internal compliance and reporting processes, and steps to strengthen these processes in the era of Dodd-Frank.

The national debate about gun control comes to the US Senate in today’s scheduled hearing What Should America Do About Gun Violence. Gun control advocates argue that Second Amendment is a collective or societal right while gun rights advocates argue that the right to bear arms is an individual right. The Brooklyn Law School Library has in it collection Living with Guns: A Liberal’s Case for the Second Amendment (Call # KF3941 .W4425 2012) by former New York Times correspondent and editor Craig Whitney.

See also the Chronicle of Higher Education article All Guns Are Not Created Equal by Kevin M. Sweeney and Saul Cornell. The article returns to early America to shed light on the meaning of the Second Amendment. The comments section includes some interesting observations about the connection between the Second Amendment and the institution of slavery, particularly its role in allowing state militias to suppress slave insurrections protecting a slave system on which the economics of the South depended.

Brooklyn law School Professor James Park has posted his latest scholarly article Securities Class Actions and Bankrupt Companies on SSRN. The article is scheduled for publication in the February 2013 edition of the Michigan Law Review. The abstract reads:

This is the first extensive empirical study of securities class actions involving bankrupt companies. It examines 1466 securities class actions filed from 1996 to 2004, of which 234 (16%) involved companies that were in bankruptcy proceedings while the securities class action was pending. The study tests the hypothesis that securities class actions involving bankrupt companies (“bankruptcy cases”) are more likely to have merit than securities class actions involving companies that are not in bankruptcy (“non-bankruptcy cases”). It finds that bankruptcy cases were more likely to involve restatements than non-bankruptcy cases, but not more likely to have other indicia of merit. Bankruptcy cases were more likely to be successful in terms of dismissal rates, significant settlements, and third party settlements than non-bankruptcy cases. This bankruptcy effect fades with respect to settlements of $20 million or more, likely reflecting the influence of D&O insurance policy limits. The bankruptcy effect is evidence that courts and parties assess the merits of securities class actions differently based on the context of the suit.

The Brooklyn Law School Library’s subscription to Trade Law Guide enables researchers at BLS to research material on World Trade Organization jurisprudence. The database was created by a team of trade lawyers, researchers and engineers so that WTO law could be researched in a methodical, comprehensive and efficient manner. The database allows users to search through thousands of documents and zero in on the exact references that answer your research queries. It establishes the standard for legal research in the area of WTO law.

Trade Law Guide is an index that serves as a gateway to specific provisions of WTO agreements, instruments and other subject matter. It has four major tabs: Research Tools; Jurisprudence; Dispute Documents; and Negotiating History. The first of those tabs has a subtab called Article Citator  which provides Pinpoint access to WTO jurisprudence relevant to a provision without having to filter through annotations); its Jurisprudence Citators helps researchers ascertain the status of passages in WTO jurisprudence; the Interpretation tab helps in finding provisions and jurisprudence encompassing the rules of treaty interpretation applicable to the WTO agreements and instruments. There is also a Terms & Phrases tab to help researchers see at a glance where a particular term or phrase has been explicitly defined or where it has been considered or commented upon in WTO jurisprudence.

Other features include DSB Minutes which contain discussions of policy and other issues that arise in respect of WTO jurisprudence. The Jurisprudence Pending tab provides information on ongoing disputes for which reports, awards or decisions are pending. The Annotated Agreements & Texts tab provides fully annotated texts of six principal WTO agreements that have been the subject of extensive dispute settlement activity. The Negotiating History tab allows researchers to download and sort Uruguay Round negotiating documents. Access to the database is by IP address recognition. Off-campus access requires implementation of the BLS proxy instructions. Go to the SARA catalog to search for it.

On Friday, January 25, 2013, the American Law Institute (ALI), the Brooklyn Law Review, and Brooklyn Law School are co-sponsoring a Symposium entitled “Restatement Of…” to begin a discussion about how to continue the “venerable brand” of ALI’s Restatements of the Law titles. The event will be held from 9:00 am.to 5:00 pm at Brooklyn Law School’s Subotnick Center, 250 Joralemon Street, Brooklyn, NY and will be free of charge. Online Registration is required by Wednesday, January 23, 2013 at this link. Restatements of the Law have been clarifying, summarizing, describing, and improving the law and exerting influence on United States courts for nearly a century. Since 2001, the American Law Institute (ALI) has broadened its work and has rewritten many of its original Restatements, added new ones, and moved beyond restatements of the common law in its “Principles of the Law” series.

Continuing this modernization of a venerable brand, the “Restatement Of …” symposium asks: What other areas of the law might be restated? Leading scholars from diverse fields will come together at this symposium to delve deeper into the restatement frontier in their respective areas of expertise. Discussion topics will include new projects that the ALI could undertake, concerns about restating specific areas of the law, restatements currently in progress, doctrines that will resist restatement, and old restatements that have disappeared.

The day will be divided into four discussion groups, each led by a professor who has served as a Reporter on an ALI project. Presenters will address a wide range of issues, including “Should There Be a Restatement of Statutory Interpretation?” and “Religion and the Restatements.” It is expected that the 20 panelists will discuss gay rights, administrative law, safety, child sex abuse, federal tax law, and health-care law to name just a few topics. The full agenda, which includes welcoming remarks by BLS Dean Nick Allard, Introductory Remarks by the event’s organizer BLS Professor Anita Bernstein, Discussants BLS Professors Aaron Twerski and Neil B. Cohen, and Panelist BLS Professor Lawrence Solan, can be viewed here. Professors from 17 law schools will discuss articles they are writing for Volume 79 of the Brooklyn Law Review which will be devoted to the Restatements. It is scheduled for publication in early 2014.

On Wednesday January 23rd, Brooklyn Law School students can join NYCs Diversity Committee at Legal Services NYC’s Annual Open House. The event offers students an opportunity to learn about the important work done at Legal Services NYC and to meet the attorneys in that office. The program consists of brief staff presentations about our vital work and innovative projects. Each Legal Services NYC program will have a table staffed by an attorney who is available to meet with law students. Leadership from the various offices will attend the event. A reception with light refreshments will follow the program and allow for students to meet and network with staff attorneys and senior leaders.

The program starts with a session from 4:30pm to 5:30pm on Networking and Tabling, followed by a session from 5:30pm to 6:15 pm with a welcome by Raun Rasmussen, Executive Director of Legal Services NYC. To attend, RSVP by January 17th to diversitycommittee@ls-nyc.org. The event takes place at Brooklyn Law School’s Forchelli Conference Center, 205 State Street, 22nd floor, Brooklyn, NY.

Brooklyn Law School Professor of Law I. Bennett Capers has posted his latest article Crime, Surveillance, and Communities on SSRN. It is scheduled for publication in the Fordham Urban Law Journal later this year. The abstract reads:

Quite simply, we have become a surveillance state. Cameras — both those controlled by the state, and those installed by private entities — watch our every move, at least in public. For the most part, this public surveillance is unregulated, beyond the purview of the Fourth Amendment, and to many civil libertarians, should signal alarm. This Article challenges these assumptions, and suggests that in thinking about surveillance cameras and other technologies, we must listen to communities. For many communities, public surveillance not only has the benefit for deterring crime and aiding in the apprehension of criminals. In these communities, public surveillance can also function to monitor the police, reduce racial profiling, curb police brutality, and ultimately increase perceptions of legitimacy. The question thus becomes, not how we can use the Fourth Amendment to limit public surveillance, but rather how can we use the Fourth Amendment to harness public surveillance’s full potential.