LARC Cardoso Law (Yeshida Univ)
Not a member yet
9951 research outputs found
Sort by
Brief for Amicus Curiae Professor Edward A. Zelinsky in Support of Appellants and Reversal
Get PDFDOL’s tie-breaking rule violates ERISA’s duty of loyalty under ERISA § 404(a)(1)(A). ERISA’s duty of loyalty requires ERISA-regulated trustees to invest plan resources for the “exclusive purpose of . . . providing” economic benefits to plan participants and their beneficiaries, “solely in the interest of the participants and beneficiaries.” The tie-breaking rule violates this stringent statutory duty of loyalty because it permits plan trustees investing plan resources to consider “collateral benefits,” i.e., the welfare of third parties or social goals. But ERISA‟s plain text does not permit this result. The words ““solely” and “exclusive purpose” in § 404(a)(1)(A) do not mean “collateral benefits.”If an ERISA-regulated trustee genuinely confronts equally appropriate investment choices, ERISA § 404(a)(1)(C) tells the trustee what to do: The trustee must diversify, buying or offering some of each investment option. But instead of mandating such diversification, 29 CFR § 2550.404a-1(c)(2) authorizes the pursuit of collateral benefits, benefits which are extraneous to the retirement interests of plans and their participants.The notion of tie-breaking is an anachronism, originally deployed to defend ERISA‟s duty of loyalty. Today, however, the very notion of tie-breaking (whatever its prior jurisprudential justifications) conflicts with the statutory duty of loyalty to plans and their participants by introducing into the trustee’s deliberations concern for nonparticipants or for social goals. The tie-breaking rule jeopardizes the security of workers retirement assets. Using the euphemism of collateral benefits, the tie-breaking rule allows ideological (often highly political) considerations and the interests of nonparticipants to influence the investment decisions of ERISA-regulated fiduciaries.The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals should enforce ERISA’s plain language and reverse the District Court’s judgment below, approving DOL’s tie-breaking rule
Kim Reviews Delmotte\u27s \u3ci\u3ePredistribution Against Rent-Seeking — The Benefit Principle’s Alternative To Redistributive Taxation\u3c/i\u3e
No full textProfessor Young Ran (Christine) Kim reviewed Michigan State Professor Charles Delmotte\u27s paper “Predistribution Against Rent-Seeking: The Benefit Principle\u27s Alternative to Redistributive Taxation” for TaxProf Blog
Michael Oher and The Blind Side of Conservatorships
Get PDFhttps://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/flyers-2023-2024/1089/thumbnail.jp
AELJ Symposium: Barking Up the Wrong Tree
Get PDFhttps://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/flyers-2023-2024/1091/thumbnail.jp
Why Greco-Turkish Conflict Needs American Intervention: A Meaningful Mediator
Get PDFTensions between the Greek and Turkish governments have soared over territorial claims in the Aegean, chiefly concerning the delimitation of territorial waters. The conflict arose on January 20th, 2021, when the Greek parliament nearly unanimously passed a law extending the breadth of Greece’s territorial waters in the Aegean Sea towards Turkey. While bilateral treaties exist between Turkey and Libya and between Greece and Egypt, each regulating the maritime zones of the contracting states, no such agreement exists between Greece and Turkey. “These agreements, however, have no legal effect on Greece and Turkey because international agreements must not harm nor benefit third-party states without their consent (pasta-tertiles-rule).” Greece justifies this expansion under Article 3 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which states that every state has the right to establish the breadth of its territorial sea up to a limit not exceeding 12 nautical miles measured from the coastal baselines. They interpret this to mean that this extension would begin from the Greek islands furthest east. On the other hand, Turkey argues that if a country is composed entirely of islands, these would give rise to areas of maritime jurisdiction, but that a continental country’s maritime jurisdiction should be based on the mainland, and not islands. The impact of such a Greek extension would deprive Turkey of one of the two coastal islands of the Aegean Sea, its rights to access the high seas from territorial waters, and the economic benefits derived from the Aegean. Ultimately, fueling Turkish concerns over a possible disproportionate increase in Greek-controlled space. Resolving this dispute is imperative for regional stability. Only the presence of an influential mediator can make strides for ultimate peace.
This post was originally published on the Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution website on March 26, 2024. The original post can be accessed via the Archived Link button above
Stop the Boats: Prime Minister Sunak and the UK’s Assertion of National Sovereignty
Get PDFThe British Parliament is in the process of voting on the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill, that would send asylum seekers who arrive in Britain to Rwanda, a country in East Africa. This change would indicate a further distancing of the United Kingdom (UK) from the European Union (EU) and international law. That said, when viewed in the context of the UK’s support for Ukraine, one can instead see an evolving view of individual national sovereignty.
This post was originally published on the Cardozo International & Comparative Law Review on March 4, 2024. The original post can be accessed via the Archived Link button above
Windfall Taxes: The New Trend the United States Refuses to Take Part In
Get PDFRussia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 resulted in a significant burden on Europe in regard to their energy sector. As a result of this conflict and the European Union’s (“EU”) subsequent restriction of oil and coal from Russia to the EU, the prices of the energy supply as a whole increased. However, companies in the EU were responsible for replacing much of the materials and energy that were once imported from Russia.
This post was originally published on the Cardozo International & Comparative Law Review on June 20, 2024. The original post can be accessed via the Archived Link button above
The Seminar Paper Topics Graveyard
Get PDFI often teach one-off academic research instruction sessions for law students, for either those working on a journal or those in a writing seminar.
My approach to these sessions is relatively standard—demonstrate the sources and strategies for academic legal research—but tailored to the individual needs and overall topic of each course. One of my favorite ways to personalize a session is to demonstrate the research process using a topic that matches the class itself. A “fake paper,” if you will