Codifications, studies and other ALI projects in the United States

See Restatements of Laws and American Legal Institute Bibliography

Bibliography

Together with the restatements of laws projects, the American Legal Institute also engages in intensive examination and analysis of legal areas thought to need reform. This type of study generally culminates in extensive recommendations for change in the law and usually is published as Principles of the Law. These projects have dealt with topics such as Aggregate Litigation, Corporate Governance, Family Dissolution, Software Contracts, Transnational Civil Procedure, Transnational Insolvency, and Transnational Intellectual Property, as well as a proposed revision of selected portions of the Federal Judicial Code.

For more than half a century ALI has collaborated with the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws in developing and monitoring the Uniform Commercial Code, a comprehensive code addressing most aspects of commercial law. Other Institute projects have resulted in the development of model statutory formulations, including the Model Code of Evidence and the Model Penal Code.

Projects and codifications

This section contains our codifications (including the Model Penal Code and the Uniform Commercial Code), studies, and other projects that are not Restatements or Principles of the Law.

Civil Procedure
•Complex Litigation
•Federal Judicial Code Revision Project
•Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments: Analysis and Proposed Federal Statute
•Study of the Division of Jurisdiction between State and Federal Courts

Commercial Law
•Legal and Economic Principles of World Trade Law
•Uniform Commercial Code

Corporate Law

Criminal Law
•A Model Code of Pre-Arraignment Procedure
•Model Penal Code
•Model Penal Code: Sentencing

Evidence
•Model Code of Evidence

Family Law

Federal Income, Estate and Gift Tax Project
•Federal Income, Estate and Gift Tax Project

Land Use Planning
•A Model Land Development Code

Securities
•Federal Securities Code

Taxation – Federal Estate and Gift Tax Project
•Federal Estate and Gift Taxation
•Study on Generation-Skipping Transfers Under the Federal Estate Tax

Taxation – Federal Income Tax Project
•Integration of the Individual and Corporate Income Taxes
•International Aspects of the United States Income Taxation
•Subchapter C
•Subchapter J
•Subchapter K
•Taxation of Private Business Enterprises

Torts
•Enterprise Responsibility for Personal Injury

Bibliography

Abyad, Commercial Reasonableness in Karl Llewellyn’s Uniform Commercial Code Jurisprudence,
83 Va. L. Rev. 429 (1997).
Adams, The 1972 Official Text of the Uniform Commercial Code: Analysis of Conflict of Laws
Provisions, 45 Miss. L.J. 281 (1974).
Agusti, The Effect of Prior Judicial and Administrative Constructions on Codification of
PreExisting
Federal Statutes: The Case of the Federal Securities Code, 15 Harv. J. Legis. 367
(1978).
Alces, Roll Over, Llewellyn?, 26 Loy. L.A. L. Rev. 543 (1993).
Alces and Frisch, Commenting on “Purpose” in the Uniform Commercial Code, 58 Ohio St. L.J.
419 (1997).
Alces and Frisch, On the UCC Revision Process: A Reply to Dean Scott, 37 Wm. & Mary L. Rev.
1217 (1996).
Alexander, Federal Estate and Gift Taxation: The Major Issues Presented in The American Law
Institute Project, 22 Tax L. Rev. 635 (1967).
ALI Proposed Federal Securities Code: A Program, 34 Bus. Law. 345 (1978).
American Bar Association, Section of Litigation’s Consolidated Comments to The American Law
Institute Project on “Principles of Corporate Governance: Analysis and Recommendations”
(1984).
The American Law Institute’s Model Land Development Code: Comments and Criticism, ASPO
LandUse
Controls Annual 1971.
American Law Institute Study on Paths to a “Better Way”: Litigation, Alternatives, and
Accommodation, 1989 Duke L.J. 808 (1989).
An Analysis of the ALI’s Approach to the StateFederal
Jurisdictional Dilemma, 21 Am. U.L. Rev.
287 (1972).
Andrews, The Accessions Tax Proposal, 22 Tax L. Rev. 589 (1967).
Baird and Jackson, Possession and Ownership: An Examination of the Scope of Article 9, 35 Stan.
L. Rev. 175 (1983).
Baker, Bulk Transfer ActPatch,
Bury, or Renovate?, 38 Bus. Law. 1771, 88 Com. L.J. 609
(1983).
Bamberger, Article 6 of the UCC: Uniformity Gone Awry, 26 Bus. Law. 329 (1970).
Bane, From Holt and Mansfield to Story to Llewellyn and Mentschikoff: The Progressive
Development of Commercial Law, 37 U. Miami L. Rev. 351 (1983).
Barnes, Toward a Normative Framework for the Uniform Commercial Code, 62 Temp. L. Rev. 117
(1989).
Barnett, A Burial Should Be Prepared for the ALI’s Subchapter J, 124 Tr. & Est. 14 (1985).
Baysinger and Butler, Race for the Bottom vs. Climb to the Top: The ALI Project and Uniformity
in Corporate Law, 10 J. Corp. L. 431 (1985).
Beghe, The American Law Institute Subchapter C Study: Acquisitions and Distributions, 33 Tax
Law. 743 (1980).
Bernstein and Fleisher, The Revision of Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial CodeAn
Overview,
54 Chi. B. Record 318 (1973).
Boner and Stayton, The Plastic Code in Operation IV, 39 Texas L. Rev. 20 (1960).
Book Review (George), American Law Institute Model Penal Code and Commentaries (Official
Draft and Revised Comments), Part II, Crim. Def., Sept.Oct.
1981, at 11.
Book Review (Marcus), American Law Institute, The Model Penal Code and Commentaries, 73 J.
Crim. L. & Criminology 811 (1982).
Book Review (Sommer), American Law Institute Federal Securities Code (Annotated), 36 Bus.
Law. 541 (1981).
Bosselman, Raymond and Persico, Some Observations on The American Law Institute’s Model
Land Development Code, 8 Urban Law. 474 (1976).
Bossetti and Kurth, Professor Elizabeth Warren’s Article 9 CarveOut
Proposal: A Strategic
Analysis, 30 UCC L.J. 3 (1997).
Branson, Countertrends in Corporation Law: Model Business Corporation Act Revision, British
Company Law Reform, and Principles of Corporate Governance and Structure, 68 Minn. L. Rev.
53 (1983).
Braucher, Politics and Principle in the Drafting of UCC Consumer Protection Provisions, 29 UCC
L.J. 68 (1996).
Braucher, Report on the Work of the Article 9 Review Committee, 23 Bus. Law. 890 (1968).
Braucher, The UCC Gets Another Rewrite: Just When You Thought You Really Knew the Uniform
Commercial Code, Almost Every Article Is Undergoing Changes in a Major Revision, 82 A.B.A. J.
66 (1996).
Brines, Article Six Bulk Transfers: Thirty Years of Confusion, 86 W. Va. L. Rev. 29 (1983).
Burdick, Diversity Jurisdiction Under The American Law Institute Proposals: Its Purpose and Its
Effect on State and Federal Courts, 48 N.D.L. Rev. 1 (1971).
The Business Roundtable, Statement of the Business Roundtable on The American Law Institute’s
Proposed “Principles of Corporate Governance and Structure: Restatement and
Recommendations” (1983).
Casner, American Law Institute Federal Estate and Gift Tax Project, 22 Tax L. Rev. 515 (1967).
Cavers, The Changing ChoiceofLaw
Process and the Federal Courts, 28 Law & Contemp. Prob.
732 (1963).
Chaffin, Restructuring Federal Estate and Gift Taxes: Impact of Proposed Reforms on Estate
Planning, 69 Mich. L. Rev. 211 (1970).
Chen, Code, Custom, and Contract: The Uniform Commercial Code as Law Merchant, 27 Tex. Int’l
L.J. 91 (1992).
Classen, Judicial Intervention in Contractual Relationships Under the Uniform Commercial Code
and Common Law, 42 S.C. L. Rev. 379 (1991).
Coe, The ALI Substantiality Test: A Flexible Approach to the Exclusionary Sanction, 10 Ga. L.
Rev. 1 (1975).
Conference Papers: A Conference Celebrating the 25th Anniversary of the Model Penal Code
(November 57,
1987, sponsored by Rutgers–Camden Law School and The American Law
Institute).
Coogan, Article 9An
Agenda for the Next Decade, 87 Yale L.J. 1012 (1978).
Culhane, The UCC Revision Process: Legislation You Should See in the Making, 26 Creighton L.
Rev. 29 (1992).
Danzig, A Comment on the Jurisprudence of the Uniform Commercial Code, 27 Stan. L. Rev. 621
(1975).
Del Duca, et al., Applying Plain English Techniques in Revising the UCC, 29 UCC L.J. 428 (1997).
Del Guadio, Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code and the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978,
12 U. Tol. L. Rev. 305 (1981).
Dunham, The ALI Land Development Code, 8 Real Property, Probate & Trust J. 510 (1973).
Edited Transcript of Proceedings of the Business Roundtable/Emory University Law and
Economics Center Conference on Remedies Under the ALI Proposals: Law and Economics, 71
Cornell L. Rev. 357 (1986).
Edwards, SelfHelp
Repossession of Software: Should Repossession Be Available in Article 2B of
the UCC? 58 U. Pitt. L. Rev. 763 (1997).
Eisenberg, Corporate Legitimacy, Conduct, and Governance–Two Models of the Corporation, 17
Creighton L. Rev. 1 (19831984).
Ellman, The Misguided Movement to Revive Fault Divorce, and Why Reformers Should Look
Instead to The American Law Institute, 11 Int’l J.L. Pol’y & Fam. 216 (1997).
Elson and Shakman, The ALI Principles of Corporate Governance: A Tainted Process and a Flawed
Product, 49 Bus. Law. 1761 (1994).
Epstein, The Consolidation of Complex Litigation: A Critical Evaluation of the ALI Proposal, 10 J.L.
& Com. 1 (1990).
Faville, Criminal Procedure Code Nears Completion, 16 A.B.A. J. 301 (1930).
Field, Jurisdiction of Federal Courts–A Summary of American Law Institute Proposals, 46 F.R.D.
141 (1969).
Fine, The Corporate Governance Debate and the ALI Proposals: Reform or Restatement?, 40
Vand. L. Rev. 693 (1987).
Flores, Risk of Loss in Sales: A Missing Chapter in the History of the UCC: Through Llewellyn to
Williston and a Bit Beyond, 27 Pac. L.J. 161 (1996).
Foss, Interpreting the Uniform Commercial Code: Methodologies Used, Misused and Unused, 20
Golden Gate U. L. Rev. 29 (1990).
Fox, A Tentative Guide to The American Law Institute’s Proposed Model Land Development Code,
6 Urban Law. 928 (1974).
Gabriel, A Primer on the United Nations Convention on the International Sale of Goods: From the
Perspective of the Uniform Commercial Code, 7 Ind. Int’l & Comp. L. Rev. 279 (1997).
Garland, A New Law of Deposits and Collections: Revised Article 4 of the UCC, 110 Banking L.J.
51 (1993).
Gedid, UCC Methodology: Taking a Realistic Look at the Code, 29 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 341
(1988).
Gibson, Promissory Estoppel, Article 2 of the U.C.C., and the Restatement (Third) of Contracts,
73 Iowa L. Rev. 659 (1988).
Gillette and Maher, Revised Article 8: Issuers Beware! 13 UCC L.J. 146 (1982).
Gilmore, The Good Faith Purchase Idea and the Uniform Commercial Code: Confessions of a
Repentant Draftsman, 15 Ga. L. Rev. 605 (1981).
Gilmore, On the Difficulties of Codifying Commercial Law, 57 Yale L.J. 1341 (1948).
Gilmore, On Statutory Obsolescence, 39 U. Colo. L. Rev. 462 (1967).
Gilmore, The Uniform Commercial Code: A Reply to Professor Beutel, 61 Yale L.J. 364 (1952).
Goodrich, American Uniform Commercial Code, 2 Int’l & Comp. L.Q. 287 (1953).
Goodrich, A Modern Commercial Code, 17 Pa. B. Ass’n Q. 182 (1946).
Goodrich, A Uniform Commercial Code, 34 Ill. B.J. 239 (1946).
Goodrich, et al., Spotlight on Evidence: A Discussion of The American Law Institute Model Code
of Evidence, and the Duty of the Bar Regarding It, 27 J. Am. Jud. Soc’y 113 (1943).
Griffith, Integration of the Corporate and Personal Income Taxes and the ALI Proposals, 23 Santa
Clara L. Rev. 715 (1983).
Gutman, The American Law Institute Trust Taxation Projects, 36 U.S. Cal. Sch. L. Tax Inst. 28
(1984).
Handlos, Drafting and Negotiating Commercial Software Licenses: A Review of Selected Issues
Raised by Proposed Uniform Commercial Code Article 2B, 30 Creighton L. Rev. 1189 (1997).
Hannaway, The Jurisprudence and Judicial Treatment of the Comments to the Uniform
Commercial Code, 75 Cornell L. Rev. 962 (1990).
Hansen, The ALI Corporate Governance Project: Of the Duty of Care and the Business Judgment
Rule, a Commentary, 41 Bus. Law. 1237 (1986).
Hansen, The Duty of Care, the Business Judgment Rule, and the American Law Institute
Corporate Governance Project, 48 Bus. Law. 1355 (1993).
Charles Hansen, A Guide to The American Law Institute Corporate Governance Project (1995).
Hansford, The New Article Financing Statement and Other Forms: Some Thoughts by the Drafter,
34 Ala. L. Rev. 263 (1983).
Harno, et al., Seminar on the Model Penal Code, 45 J. Crim. L.C. & P.S. 520 (1955).
Hawkland, The Trouble with Article 6 of the UCC: Some Thoughts About Section 6104,
82 Com.
L.J. 361 (1977).
Hawkland, The Uniform Commercial Code and the Civil Codes, 56 La. L. Rev. 231 (1995).
Hawkland, Rapson and Baker, Proposed Revisions to UCC Article 6, 38 Bus. Law. 1729, 88 Com.
L.J. 13 (1983).
Headrick, The New Article Nine of the Uniform Commercial Code: An Introduction and Critique,
34 Mont. L. Rev. 28 (Part I) & 34 Mont. L. Rev. 218 (Part II) (1973).
Herman, Llewellyn the Civilian: Speculations on the Contribution of Continental Experience to the
Uniform Commercial Code, 56 Tul. L. Rev. 1125 (1982).
Hillinger, The Article 2 Merchant Rules: Karl Llewellyn’s Attempt to Achieve the Good, the True,
the Beautiful in Commercial Law, 73 Geo. L.J. 1141 (1985).
Hillman, Construction of the Uniform Commercial Code: UCC Section 1103
and “Code”
Methodology, 18 B.C. Indus. & Com. L. Rev. 655 (1977).
Hillman, New Cases and Questions Under Article 9, 84 Com. L.J. 99 (1979).
Hillman, A Study of Uniform Commercial Code Methodology: Contract Modification Under Article
Two, 59 N.C.L. Rev. 335 (1981).
Hudak and King, Reforming and Rewriting Article Six of the UCC, 82 Case & Com., JulyAug.
1977, at 46.
Hudak and Miller, Bad Checks: Effect of the Uniform Commercial Code, 10 UCC L.J. 3 (1977).
James, Capability Predicates for Federal Securities Law Sanctions: The Present Law and the
Proposed Federal Securities Code, 12 Har. J. Legis. 1 (1974).
Kadish, Codifiers of the Criminal Law: Wechsler’s Predecessors, 78 Colum. L. Rev. 1098 (1978).
Kamp, BetweentheWars
Social Thought: Karl Llewellyn, Legal Realism, and the Uniform
Commercial Code in Context, 59 Alb. L. Rev. 325 (1995).
Kavass, Uniform Commercial Code Research: A Brief Guide to the Sources, 88 Com. L.J. 547
(1983).
Keedy, The Drafting of a Code of Criminal Procedure, 15 A.B.A. J. 7 (1929).
Kirst, Usage of Trade and Course of Dealing: Subversion of the UCC Theory, 1977 U. Ill. L.F. 811
(1977).
Knippenberg and Woodward, Uniformity and Efficiency in the Uniform Commercial Code: A Partial
Research Agenda, 45 Bus. Law. 2519 (1990).
Kripke, A Draftsman’s Wishes That He Could Do Things Over Again–U.C.C. Article 9, 26 San
Diego L. Rev. 1 (1989).