The laws and legal processes of many Latin American countries are old and formalistic. The norms and principles at play in the continental-law system of Latin America can be traced directly back to the laws of the Roman republic, predating by many centuries the foundations upon which the Anglo-American or common-law system is based. This is particularly true in matters of commercial contracts and agency, in the complex relationships delineated in family law, the legitimacy of state authority, and the primacy of natural law. Add to this tradition the weight of ecclesiastical law and the bureaucratic and complex societal legacies of Iberian colonialism, and what emerges is a complex tapestry of code law, entrenched norms, and traditions of practice that resist change and defy easy explanation or understanding.
Page 12 of 16
A local estate-planning/probate attorney referred a new client to you after learning about your reputation as a problem solver in international cases. The client’s father (“Dad”) died in Orlando, leaving a substantial tract of beach-front real estate in St. Martin to his wife (“Mom”), who owned a share already as a tenant-incommon with the decedent and also, incidentally, the client. The client, the decedent’s daughter, negotiated a sale of the realestate to a Brazilian national who intends to erect a resort on the picturesque parcel. Time is of the essence, yet the transaction hits a snag when it is discovered that the land records in St. Martin do not reflect Dad’s intestate death and the resulting vested interest in Mom.
When parties decide to develop certain business enterprises, they often form a corporation or other type of legal entity. The parties conduct business and create their relationships in the name of the new entity and within the framework of the bylaws to which they have agreed. Some form of incorporation is, in principle, necessary or advisable when engaging in business enterprises that have long-term objectives that are formed to develop an activity of a permanent nature, or that may require the participation of a number of shareholders who have contributed significant financial resources.
For other types of business enterprises, however, the parties may prefer to establish and define the relationships that arise from working together without creating a new legal entity. The parties maintain their individual legal status and each one continues to perform independently the activities that constitute the enterprise’s main purpose. In addition, the parties agree to jointly start a specific venture that, in most cases, lasts a specific period of time or that requires the performance of an endeavor with a limited goal. This is the area of economic activity in which the various forms of joint ventures are used most widely. For example, construction projects and mining explorations are widely conducted in Peru through what generally are called joint ventures. A joint venture allows two or more companies or persons to join to accomplish their objectives within the specific targeted activity, while maintaining their own legal individualities.
Increasing economic globalization, as well as the phenomenon of the formation of integrated regional areas, constitutes a legal and commercial field composed of a multitude of elements that affect business development. In this process of economic globalization, commercial companies can influence, with particular intensity, the industrial and commercial aspects of many different countries and the concentration of capital. The concentration of capital facilitates the appearance of business groups that play an important role at both regional and world levels.
Small businesses are an integral part of the American economy. They play a crucial role in “technological change and productivity growth.” The United States government, recognizing the vital role of small businesses, often creates and disseminates publications stressing their importance. Despite these efforts, some federal courts interpret the Lanham Act in false-advertising suits in ways that fail to consider the importance of protecting small enterprises. Specifically, these decisions lower the burden of proof necessary to recover corrective-advertising damages. In doing so, these decisions threaten the economy and ultimately risk negative long-term consequences to American consumers. To clarify the quandary that could result from the current trend in the law governing false-advertising damages, consider the following hypothetical.
The field of organ donation and transplantation has evolved since Albert Einstein’s initial proclamation. The first successful, solid-organ transplant took place in 1954, only months before Einstein’s death. Organ donation and transplantation, as a technical endeavor, can improve drastically the fate of mankind by preventing the needless suffering and death that result from organ failure. However, the rapidly evolving field of organ donation and transplantation is capable of effecting pain and injustice as well. The current organ-donation system fails in its inability to procure enough organs because it operates under the assumption that individuals are not organ donors. This is best illustrated by the following hypothetical.
The New Jersey Supreme Court has a long history of liberally interpreting election laws to “effectuate their purpose” in a manner consistent with the public interest and the statutory scheme. The Court’s recent decision in New Jersey Democratic Party, Inc. v. Samson, however, is a veiled departure from that history. In New Jersey Democratic Party, all seven justices concurred in an opinion that undermined the New Jersey Legislature’s intent to establish mandatory deadlines for creating and filling election vacancies. The Legislature’s purpose for these deadlines was to provide election officials sufficient time to prepare for an election, to protect absentee and military voters, to prevent last-minute political maneuvering that deprives voters of sufficient time to evaluate the candidates, and otherwise to provide for orderly elections.
Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved by the Board of Trustees of Stetson University and the Board of Overseers of Stetson University
College of Law that this resolution be adopted to honor W. Gary Vause for his selfless devotion to the affairs of Stetson University
and the College of Law, his attainment of the highest standards of excellence in the legal profession and within the field of higher education, and to express our appreciation for having been privileged to work with this outstanding individual and his wife.
There was something very special about Judge Jerry R. Parker’s laugh. At his memorial service, every person who spoke mentioned Jerry’s kindness and the gentle laugh that would emerge from this stern figure of a man. The memorial service concluded with Jerry’s own personal message, and in the opening sentences above, you could hear his gentle laugh and see his little smile and tilt of his head. His message, by the way, needed no rewriting or reorganization.
Judge Parker was my friend and colleague for more than a dozen years. I read with interest and respect each of the 723 appellate opinions that he authored during his career. I admired his work ethic and his determination to give all the people his full measure as a public servant. I watched him fight an evil disease with the same dogged determination with which he faced every challenge in life. I marveled at his inner strength, and I miss him very much.