Stuart R. CohnAssociate Dean, International Studies
Gerald A. Sohn Research Scholar
Professor of Law
- Nov. 5, 2009.
Cohn led a full day workshop on Current Issues in Capital Market Development for foreign securities officials at the International Law Institute in Washington, D.C. Participants included officials from Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, Ghana, Malawi and Sierra Leone.
Elizabeth RoweAssociate Professor
- Published the book chapter "The Challenge of Protecting Trade Secret Information in a Digital World in Intellectual Property Protection of Fact-Based Works: Copyright and its Alternatives" (R. Brauneis, ed., Edward Elgar Press, 2009).
Michael R. SiebeckerAssociate Professor
- Presented “Trust & Transparency in the Wake of Berle and Means” at the Seattle University School of Law.
- Nov. 11, 2009, The Huffington Post
Siebecker drew from his experience as a former arbitrator for the National Association of Securities Dealers and law professor to address credit raters who are claiming protections under the First Amendment. “To the extent that they are successful in claiming protections under the First Amendment, this could have rather dangerous consequences and seriously undermine the sense of transparency in the U.S. capital markets,” said Michael Siebecker, a University of Florida law professor and former arbitrator for the National Association of Securities Dealers.
D. Daniel SokolAssistant Professor
- Presented a paper on corporate governance and predatory pricing at the Swedish Competition Authority's "The Pros and Cons of Competition in/by the Public Sector" in which economics and law academics are invited to present cutting edge work on a topic and practitioners respond.
John StinnefordAssistant Professor
- Nov. 10, 2009, Times Union,
Stinneford provided insight into the possible outcome of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on the cruel and unusual punishment as it relates to juveniles imprisoned to life without parole for a non-homicide crime. John Stinneford, an associate law professor at the University of Florida who studies 8th Amendment issues, said it’s difficult to speculate on the outcome of Monday’s arguments. No timetable has been set for a decision, though the court will rule before its term ends in June. Stinneford said the court could reject the inmates’ arguments or choose not to decide and refer them back to the trial courts on some narrow issue. The justices also could draw a distinction between their ages, possibly a reason they decided to hear both cases instead of just one. They also could invalidate life without parole sentences for juveniles in non-homicides, which would mean new sentences for all juveniles affected. “They are potentially very important cases,” Stinneford said.
