This book is divided into commonly used sections: property law, family law, etc. Each topic is then presented in specific question and answer form. It is nice that it specifically relates to Texas law, most books cover general US law and that is useless. Easy to understand and informative.

This is a tour de force on one of the most important yet most neglected areas of the law. I took a course from this book, and it was one of the best experiences I had in law school.

Hagedorn's book is droll and boring. His examples are typical and his approach lends nothing new to the study. Buy if you want a weak text from a small man.

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 is a great casebook! Anyone who has sat through a law school class knows that most casebooks are pretty bad. They are filled with pointless cases and most lack a solid narrative to help "connect the dots," so to speak, between the various concepts in the course. Not this book, though! Prof. McDermott (a partner at a prestigious NYC firm) has written perhaps the best casebook I've used so far in my legal studies. The cases are well chosen and clear; the narrative is very instructive, and there are plenty of examples of model corporate finance documents and materials (e.g. indentures, arts. of incorp., statutes, etc). The course practically teaches itself with this book! I, like many law students, normally rely heavily on secondary source outlines (e.g. Gilberts) for exam prep in each class. However, this casebook is so good that I honestly feel no need whatsoever to seek out commercial outlines to prepare me for the exam! This is a top notch book-- all professors and students of the legal aspects of corporate finance should give it a look.

This book captures both the joys and pitfalls of wanting a career in law. I recently received an email message from someone discussing what they would do if they had their life to live over again. As someone who succumbed to the lure of the law, I certainly agree with those attorneys in this book who would NEVER even consider going to law school if they could go back in time! For me, like some people in Moll's book, law school was more than a means to a living - it was a way to finally fit in. Tired of being outsiders, some of us felt that law school would offer a way to be with people like ourselves: smart; witty; analytical; quick at times with the sharp tongue. Moll captures how this dream was more than deferred for some attorneys in his book. Instead of encountering people like themselves - legal people who worked hard when they had to but were essentially good at heart - they met mean, sometimes over-controlling attorneys, who were so jaded by their pasts that they imposed their anger on everyone around them (and even those far away) who didn't fit their mold of being a 'good little lawyer.' Some attorneys in Moll's book love their jobs. Those, in my view, are either the exceptions or those who had the family backgrounds, connections and money to make the law work for them, even before they entered law school. The others, like myself, have been disillusioned by attempting to work for and learning first hand about some of the most powerful attorneys who they at one time admired and sought out as mentors. It was especially revealing to consider the views of the minority attorneys who Moll presented in his book. Many undertook law careers as a way to make the world less of an uneven place for men and women of ethnicity. What makes me really sad about some of the self-proclaimed great attorneys (some in this book; some that I've encountered personally) is the fact that they profess a love for the law and its notions about equality. However, it is the same powerful attorneys who, at times, don't hesitate to use their control to deny opportunities to and even eliminate the career opportunities for those less powerful in the profession. It would be helpful for those lawyers to read - actually read - this book. Maybe Moll's book would lead some of them to the fact that becoming a mentor and ally to other legal professionals instead of attacking and seizing on other attorneys' shortcomings would go far in making their lives less empty and in making the law more of what it purports to be -- a place of equality.

The focus on the "human side" of the business of practicing law is often overlooked by law office management experts. Mr. Reed's judgment and experience is demonstrated by the insight and valuable suggestions he offers in this easy to read volume.

I used a previous edition of this book for a college level class I taught a few years ago. It is an exceptional study in commercial leasing. I have taken classes from the instructors in the IREM CPM courses and they really do know their stuff!

I tell my commercial leasing associates that this book is "THE BIBLE" for their leasing activity!

Highly recommend this book or anything by these authors.

This book has several chapters which are fairly easy to read for those persons who do not enjoy "math"; the concepts in this book will be stimulating to those who wish to undertand why Human behavior is oftentimes so "unreasonable" and beyond belief. For example, how can one explain human behavior when the same person buys a pack of cigarretes and a cure for smoking at the same time? Why is it that a bright physician will go down the primrose path and become an alcoholic? The answer to both of these puzzles lies in the concepts of "meliorazion" and the "matching law", which in a nutschell can be defined as the proportionate allocation of behaviors to different reinforcement rates. Example:In a given space of time(ie,one afternoon)Mary will spend about 30% of her time with Ann, 50% of her time with Tom and 20% of her time with Robin. All this is done "automatically" and without conscious effort from Mary's part. The matching law has "matched" her behavior proportionately to the amount of reinforcement that Mary gets from all these people. Melioration is the concept that guides one's behavior to what is reinforcing. Behaviors distributed across time(ie,learning of tennis, becoming a drunk, a loafer,ect)tend to stabilize around the matching law which is guided by "melioration" and not "rationality". The book and its concept may revolutionize Economic consumer behavior and psychology's understanding of behavior. The matching law has been substantiated by several hundred experiments with animals and human subjects. Dr.Herrnstein's untimely death was very unfortunate.

THE MEDICAL MALPRACTICE HANDBOOK by Bruce Livingston, Physician, J.D., & Stephen Morewitz, Ph.D., is an excellent handbook, particularly for those who are unfamiliar with the field. It provides a detailed road map for the investigation, preparation, and disposition of a medical malpractice case.