Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorLeff, Arthur
dc.date2021-11-25T13:34:29.000
dc.date.accessioned2021-11-26T11:40:08Z
dc.date.available2021-11-26T11:40:08Z
dc.date.issued1972-01-01T00:00:00-08:00
dc.identifierfss_papers/2822
dc.identifier.contextkey2003560
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.13051/2175
dc.description.abstractThe major problem (there are others) with Leff's paper arises, I think, out of the particular thinness of its empirical backing. Leff's writing theory is clear enough, at least to the careful reader. He was obviously struck by the fact that with respect to all forms of collection (which he defined roughly as "bringing about the completion of partially executed transactions") the applicable substantive law and the available procedures, both legal and economic, were formally constant and bilaterally symmetrical. But in fact the collection process seemed to work very differently in different distinguishable contexts.
dc.titleA Commentary on Leff, Injury, Ignorance and Spite-The Dynamics of Coercive Collection
dc.source.journaltitleFaculty Scholarship Series
refterms.dateFOA2021-11-26T11:40:08Z
dc.identifier.legacycoverpagehttps://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/fss_papers/2822
dc.identifier.legacyfulltexthttps://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3814&context=fss_papers&unstamped=1


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Leff_on_Leff_2_.pdf
Size:
423.8Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record