If you're thinking about getting it, get it. You'll be very glad you did.

Posner, who is arguably today's most influential legal thinker, has put together an invaluable collection of Justice Holmes' most memorable writings. The combo of Posner selecting Holmes is powerful: the selections invariably present the brilliant Holmes on timeless legal topics. So much brain power is frightening, and we are lucky to be able to get it all in one fairly short book. All the more remarkable is how Holmes' ideas have not aged a bit; the similarities between Holmes and Posner are obvious.

This book is a must for academically-inclined lawyers, judges and professors.

"The Leadership Challenge Planner is a one-hop-at-a-time workbook for leaders. It's designed to help you reflect and act on your need (or organization's) for change...When we began our research, we decided to find out what practices characterize exemplary leaders: people who get extraordinary things done in organizations. Our research began with analyzing what behaviors people demonstrated when they were leading a project that they considered a 'personal best': one that set an individual standard of excellence for them. We collected thousands of stories of leaders performing at their peak, and we looked at what actions seemed to be consistent in all the stories. Several years-and several thousand quantitative and qualitative analyses-later, we found that five practices define exemplary leadership: 1.Challenging the process 2.Inspiring a shared vision 3.Enabling others to act 4.Modeling the way 5.Encouraging the heart...The purpose of this planner is to assist people, managers and nonmanagers alike, in furthering their ability to lead others and get extraordinary things done...We hope that his planner convinces you that leadership is everyone's business...By accepting the challenge to lead, you come to realize that the only limits are those you place on yourself" (from the Introduction).

In this context, throughout the five chapters (3 through 7), James M. Kouzes and Barry Z. Posner list and explain guidelines for these five practices.

1. Guidelines for Challenging the Process- Try these strategies to change, grow, innovate, and improve: *treat every job as an adventure *send people shopping for ideas *put 'idea gathering' on your own agenda *go out and find something that needs fixing *take a class; learn a new skill *experiment, experiment, experiment *make it safe for others to experiment *work with ideas that may sound strange initially *debrief every failure as well as every success *model risk taking.

2. Guidelines for Inspiring a Shared Vision- Try hese strategies to envision an uplifting future and enlist others in the vision: *determine what you want *act on your intuition *test your assumptions *become a futurist *develop your interpersonal competence *breathe life into your vision *speak positively *speak from the heart *make the intangible tangible *listen, listen, listen.

3. Guidelines for Enabling Others to Act- Try these strategies to build trust and strengthen others: *always say we *increase interactions *focus on gains, not losses *from planning and problem-solving partnership *go first *enlarge people's sphere of influence *make sure delegated tasks are relevant *make connections *make heroes of other people *educate, educate, educate.

4. Guidelines for Modeling the Way- Try these strategies to set the example and achieve small wins: *open a dialoque about personal and shared values *audit your actions *be dramatic *tell stories about teacheble moments *take personal interest in everything *make a plan *create a model *break it up, and break it down *ask for volunteers *sell the benefits, benefits, benefits.

5. Guidelines for Encouraging the Heart- Try these strategies to recognize individual contributions and celebrate team accomplishments: *seek out people who are doing things right *personalize and publicize each recognition *link the recognition to a clear set of standards *celebrate individual recognition in a group *be creative about rewards and recognition *give recognition and rewards *tell the story of someone who exemplifies the standards you set *design the reward-and-recognition system participatively *provide feedback en route *schedule celebrations *be a cheer leader, in your own preferred way *stay in love with what you do *have fun, laugh, enjoy.

Highly recommended.

A must read for anybody in a leadership position. "The Leadership Challenge" gives a full idea of what it takes to be an effective leader in today's world. It may be in the corporate world, hospitals, military, schools etc, this book tells it like it is.

Richard A. Posner is Chief Judge of the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals and a professor and the University of Chicago Law School. In addition to being one of the most cited judges in U.S. legal history and one of the founders of the Law and Economics school of legal theory, Judge Posner is also one of the fathers of modern antitrust theory.

This book is somewhat dated, but this is primarily due to the fact that it has been so widely read (and its policies so widely adopted) by other American judges. Up until the late 1970s, U.S. antitrust law was characterized by the pursuit of two (sometimes conflicting) goals: protecting consumers from monopolies and price fixing, and protecting "small dealers and worthy men" from larger competitors. Posner's book and a similar volume by Judge Robert Bork (The Antitrust Paradox) laid the theoretical groundwork for a seminal shift in antitrust thinking--one focusing primarily on consumer welfare.

In Antitrust Economics, Posner describes in easy-to-understand terms why monopolies are bad from an economic point of view, and the shape of current antitrust law. He then lays out why some types of economic behavior that up until then had been considered anticompetitive (mergers between competitors, some types of exclusive supplier arrangements) can actually be pro-competitive or, at the least, pro-consumer. For example, while retail behemoths such as WalMart or mergers like that between Daimler-Benz and Chrysler may be devastating to smaller competitors, they may benefit consumers by generating economies of scale and lower prices.

Regardless of whether one agrees with Posner's theories or the economic concentration in many industries that followed the adoption of his ideas, "Antitrust Economics" is essential reading if one wants to understand how we got to where we are and the theory behind modern antitrust law.

I was not so sure whether I'd even understand this book, let alone enjoy it, but found it really added to my knowledge about not only tort law, but also about law and economics in general. I'd particularly recommend it for other law students. Also, don't be intimidated by the authors' credentials--I have virtually no background in economics and still was able to follow it.

Too often it seems that law is limited to the "good old boys" network that largely is content to go to law school, graduate, speak only to lawyers and clients and die. Outside fields are rarely considered. "Who cares if a policy is economically inefficient?" "Why should that frustrate 'democracy'".

Posner is the first I know of among solid legal scholars to explore the connections between law and related disciplines. His works are not introductory, most seem overly technical. While this is good in highlighting the seriousness of his efforts and pushing the "Frontiers of Legal Theory", it has not led to stellar general interest. I can only hope that some will take his ideas and make them more digestible for a public audience.

This book is about the 'pragmatic' concept of democracy and the law in it; aobut 3/4 of the book is spent on the former, 1/4, the latter subject. Posner believes that 'democracy' has been misconstrued by many academics (my, how he scorns academics) and many left liberals, to whom 'democracy' means that everyone shall take an interest in politics, everyone shall vigorously deliberate with friends and neighbors and everyone will vote with an informed and semi-altruistic ("common good") mind. To Posner, this is an impossible utopia.

Posner, and I agree with him, would rather "democracy" stand for a system where we vote for leaders so that they, not we, can take the interest in politics. Part of Posners point lies in highlighting that deliberative democracy (the kind outlined in the preceeding paragraph as opposed to his concept of pragmatic democracy)is prevelant amongst activists and academics precisely because they, being interested in political issues, find it easy to convince themselves that everyone else must be too. They are also more likely to associate with others that have similar intersts, helping to reinforce the belief. Posner's pragmatic democracy is defended against deliberative democracy from a variety of angles (winner take all or proportional representation, how far should free speech be taken, FEC regulations, majoritarianism or countermajoritarianism, state v. federal, etc.) Keep in mind that Posner is not arguing that we should not strive to increase peoples participation in politics, but that assuming everyone to be capable, intersted and responsible enough to live up to deliberative ideals is a goal just short of giving society a 100% makeover.

The second bit of the book is on law and the pragmatic concept: that is, law as an extension of practical reasoning, not legal reasoning, of which Posner argues there is no such concrete thing. Judges, while reccomended to stick to law if it it's instruction is undeniably clear, should look at difficult cases (where a clause may not have direct application or is simply ambiguous) as, in a sense, creating law where it did not exist before. All of this, he couches in the over-broad argument of reasoning from likely consequences. Why does this not, per se, lead him to out-and-out judicial activism? Becuase a few of the consequnces of such activism are loss of continuity if a clauses application is excessively changed, loss of judicial credibility, and decrease in peoples ability to follow law as they read it to apply. The average person, Posner suggests, should be able to predict how the judge will rule. All of this he applies to two cases in particular: Bush v. Gore and Clinton's impeachment (which due to Posner's tendency to wander into unrelated topics, he never quite gets around to). Unfortunately, this section can be skipped if you've read both Posner's "The Problems of Jurisprudence" (see my review) and his two books on Bush v. Gore and the Clinton impeachment.

Still there are some problems. The book being on the two subjects of pragmatic philosophy and pragmatic law, he never ties the two together. Maybe he assumed the connection was self evident but the one does not follow from the other. Also, Posner's polymathic tendency to wander from tangent to tangent sometimes in the space of a few pages, was more noticeable in this book then others. Especially the chapter on Kelsen v. Hayek on law stuck out as irrelevant. Another strange example is that Posner's first broaching of Bush v. Gore led to a lengthy digression on third parties and proportional representation that, while stimulating, was never tied back to Bush v. Gore as the chapter simply ends. Third fault: we've read many of these ideas before in Posners other books (which I strongly reccomend in addition to this one). This one is just a bit more in depth about what is meant by pragmatic law and democracy.

In conclusion, this book is still spectacular, engaging and exemplary of Posner's intense and sparkling wit. I did not deduct any stars from the three above faults because had those faults not been present, this book may have had 7 stars (if that were only possible!) Like many others, I disagree with much of Posner (preferring a textualism closer to Scalia) but have to admit that without this guy, law might be a bit more dull!!

This book is wonderful! It tells about Manhattan architeture not only with words, but mainly with pictures! There are tons of full-page, vivid color photos that visualize the words printed on the page. A definite book for anyone enthralled with the architecture of the Greatest City in the World!

I greatly recommend this book for teenagers! It's basicly about a girl named Cara Nelson who has planned a sweet sixteen birthday party. She has alot of things happen all at once to her changing her life!This was very hard book to put down, it's a very suspensful story and keeps you on your toes. In the last three chapters everything comes together without confusion.Greatly recommended for teens!

Judge Posner examines the reasons for Cardozo's reputation and, more important, analyzes the rhetorical methods the judge used in creating some of the most renowned and cited decisions in American law. How and why he crafted the statement of the facts a certain way for one decision, a different way for another; how Cardozo used a lawyer's persuasive skills in reaching results he believed were warranted. Posner also examines the inconsistencies in Cardozo's thinking and opinion-writing. The book presents a portrait of a brilliant, prudent jurist and illuminates his professional shortcomings as well. May have little appeal for the non-lawyer, but for anyone interested in legal writing, the judicial process, and opinion-making, this is a terrific book.

This may be the classic book by Posner. Shorter than most his books--and less encyclopaedic--but also less maiandering. Cardozo: A Study in Reputation stays on track, while revealing a complex sensibility of jurisprudence by Posner and an astounding intuition by Cardozo. In this book we see two great legal minds at work: Cardozo's providing the interpretations that further social welfare and Posner's explaining why these interpretations are so desirable.

I 'd rate this book the one MUST READ book if you are thinking about law school. This is what law school is about: Struggling with how to promote social welfare by interpretation and rulemaking.

Judge Posner builds and presents a strong case in defense of Justice Cardozo's reputation as a leading American jurist. Apparently, sometime during the 1950s a revisionary movement emerged in American legal thought that eventually injured Benjamin N. Cardozo. His Hemmingwayesque opinions were criticized as pedestrian, and the logic behind his reasoning was attacked as paternalistic. Judge Posner's thesis (a top-notch dissertation) deflects the subjective defamation and focuses upon objective standards of judicial measurement. Employing the resources of an electronic legal database, he proves that the Cardozo opinions, particularly those written as a judge in NY's Ct. of Appeals, have been consistently cited with regularity. This original test demonstrates that Cardozo's influence on the common law is unrivaled by any jurist other than O W Holmes.

Attempting to create a new genre of social science, Judge Posner smoothly integrates the drives that formed Cardozo as a man with the strictures of the law that define a judge. Analysis of the opinions, along with the briefs of the arguments, show that he was a good judge because he was able to reach correct results even when the specific facts of cases seemed to predict a legal anamoly. That quality produced case law that remains hard to reconcile, and the result has been attacks on the decisions as inconsistent. Judge Posner recognizes those weaknesses, but rather than contorting his logic in reconciling them explains that a man's reputation is typically based on either his high points or his low ones. In Cardozo's case, his death after only six years on the US Supreme Court limited the high points to controversial cases, such as MacPherson and Hynes. Judge Posner speculates that had Cardozo, like Holmes, had a full career as a Supreme Court justice the subjective standard for measurement of his reputation would have shifted away from the decisions as a state judge.

Although those state court opinions continue to dominate Torts textbooks, Cardozo's critics have injured his reputation by suggesting that he was merely a flamboyant local judge. Judge Posner shows that their slurs have not reached the ears of leading jurists. However, the ordinary person is apt to adopt those reputationary revisions without actually reading Cardozo's opinions and relating them to the specific cases and the development of American common law. Thus, Judge Posner creates a bridge, somewhat like Justice Cardozo, between arcane legal studies and the conduct of the people that law governs.

Anyone interested in Economic Analysis of Law should have this book of "legendary" Posner

Prior to 1960, legal scholars invoked economics only in a handful of specialized contexts -- mostly antitrust and taxation. But it was not generally thought that economic science had much of anything useful to say about the law generally.

Then, in the early 1960s, Guido Calabresi and Ronald Coase published a couple of papers that a lot of people found pretty darned interesting.

Richard Posner was one of those people. Within about a decade thereafter, he had written a massive treatise-textbook that attempted to apply (Chicago-school) economic insights to almost the entirety of the law, in part relying on Calabresi's insights on risk allocation and Coase's famous theorem about what happens in a world with no transaction costs.

That treatise-textbook is now in its fifth edition, and you're looking at the Amazon page for it. It would be hard to name a more influential work in the field of law and economics -- and even today, as Posner himself will gladly tell you, although there are a few other _textbooks_ on the topic, there are still no other _treatises_.

Posner's scope is breathtaking. Not content to limit himself to the usual array of legal topics (property, torts, contracts, criminal law, legal procedure, and so forth), he also manages to devote portions of his text to, e.g., sex and marriage, surrogate motherhood, prostitution, homosexuality, and a host of other controversial and/or marginal topics you don't typically encounter in an economics text.

The typical reader will probably not find him altogether persuasive on these topics. In fact, if you're anything like me, you'll probably wind up shaking your head in sheer wonderment: how is it possible for someone to be so brilliantly incisive on one page and so infuriatingly obtuse on the next?

But don't assume Posner is the one who's wrong. Don't misunderstand me; I think he _is_ sometimes the one who's wrong. But even then, his arguments are something to be reckoned with, not to be easily dismissed. (Nor is he _ever_ simply "obtuse.")

For the most part I think the book is a success in its more modest aim. In the fifth edition, Posner ends his opening chapter with a short reply to critics of the law and economics movement; with much of what he has to say here I can wholeheartedly agree. His work should, as he notes, be of _some_ interest to anyone who thinks Kaldor-Hicks efficiency/potential Pareto improvement plays any role whatsoever in setting policies. (I don't personally think it plays or should play much role at all, but I can agree with the point as Posner has stated it.) And Posner notes, quite unobjectionably, that the entire field should not be rejected merely because one does not accept the views of its most aggressive exponents.

But make no mistake, Posner _is_ one of its most aggressive exponents, and the apparent modesty of his aims is somewhat disingenuous: he is not merely trying to find out what economics can say about the law but to tell us that it can say quite a lot indeed. And it is here that I find him ultimately unconvincing on a number of points.

(To take one well-known example, I don't think Posner's discussion of the famous "Hand formula" captures what Judge Billings Learned Hand meant by it, and at any rate the formula is not as useful as Posner seems to think it is. There is some good discussion of the Hand formula by Richard Wright in _Philosophical Foundations of Tort Law_, and in general Posner has been roundly and in some respects successfully criticized by a wide range of scholars from Ronald Dworkin to Gary Schwartz.)

But there is no getting around this massive work, and it absolutely cannot be lightly dismissed. On the contrary, the thing bristles with fine insights and obviously massive legal and economic erudition; most of it will repay close reading even for the reader who ends up disagreeing. If you have any interest in the field of law and economics, you really ought to read this book _sometime_.

this is one of the most original and groundbreaking pieces of legal literature in history...Posner, one of the founders of the "chicago school" of law & economics applies the principles of ecomonics to analyze the entrire legal system from basic rules to underlying principles