As a full time academic administrator my claims to subject matter expertise are much diminished. Nevertheless, Professor Norman Poser graciously asked for my comments on Professor Langevoort's wonderful Article on the epistemology of corporate and securities lawyering. Professor Langevoort's Article, which I have renamed "When Bad Things Happen to Relatively Good Companies," is a model of the best in contemporary legal scholarship. It begins with a sophisticated review of research from literature that is not often cited in legal scholarship, in particular focusing on the literature of management science (business psychology). Professor Langevoort utilizes this non-legal perspective to generate important insights about substantive law, legal education, and practical issues for corporate lawyers.

 

The Article reminds us of the range of tasks that our graduates who will practice business law will face. It implies that our obligation is to provide a broad range of exposure to different kinds of learning experiences when training corporate practitioners. A principal lesson of the Article is that we are training our graduates to exercise judgment in the context of uncertainty, uncertainty as both law and facts. Moreover, we are training our graduates to practice in a profession that is experiencing ongoing dramatic restructuring. These changes raise questions about whether historic professional values such as lawyerly independence can be sustained. Because the Article is an archetype of the best in contemporary academic legal discourse, I will comment on its implications for legal scholarship, legal education, and the structure of the legal profession.