Hardback
Property Law
This important two-volume collection assembles the seminal legal articles in property law and its subtopics published during the 20th and 21st centuries. The coverage is broad, as comprehensive as possible, ranging from theoretical to practical and doctrinal. The authors are primarily American and all stand as leading figures in their respective fields. Both volumes place their focus on topics of current interest, including economic and non-economic theories of property, the takings problem, and the reform of the law of land-use servitudes. Prefaced by an original introduction by the editor, this collection will be an invaluable tool for researchers and students of property law alike.
More Information
Critical Acclaim
Contributors
Contents
More Information
This important two-volume collection assembles the seminal legal articles in property law and its subtopics published during the 20th and 21st centuries. The coverage is broad, as comprehensive as possible, ranging from theoretical to practical and doctrinal. The authors are primarily American and all stand as leading figures in their respective fields. Both volumes place their focus on topics of current interest, including economic and non-economic theories of property, the takings problem, and the reform of the law of land-use servitudes. Prefaced by an original introduction by the editor, this collection will be an invaluable tool for researchers and students of property law alike.
Critical Acclaim
‘Property is one of the most essential – and most misunderstood –concepts. The law of property is complex because the institution of private property fills a wide variety of functions, from providing security and autonomy to generating social welfare to supporting democratic political institutions. Understanding property is immeasurably enhanced by looking at it from a variety of normative perspectives and understanding how it has changed over time. These volumes address key issues by explaining debates among important theorists, all of whom have insights worth studying. The authors collected here have each put their mark on the field, and the editors have skillfully framed the fruitful debates they generated. A must-have compendium.’
– Joseph William Singer, Harvard Law School, US
– Joseph William Singer, Harvard Law School, US
Contributors
Contributors include: G. Calabresi, H. Dagan, R. Ellickson, A.M. Honoré, D. Melamed, T. Merrill, F. Michelman, M.J. Radin, C. Rose, H. Smith
Contents
Contents:
Volume I
Acknowledgements vii
Introduction Gregory S. Alexander ix
PART I CONCEPTUAL MATTERS: STRUCTURING OWNERSHIP
1. William Blackstone (1979 [1765–1769]), ‘The Rights’ in
Commentaries on the Laws of England, Volume II, Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press, 2 2
2. Wesley N. Hohfeld (1917), ‘Fundamental Legal Conceptions as
Applied in Judicial Reasoning’, Yale Law Journal, 26 (8), June,
710–70 3
3. A.M. Honoré (1961), ‘Ownership’, in A.G. Guest (ed.), Oxford
Essays in Jurisprudence: A Collaborative Work, Chapter V, Oxford,
UK and New York, NY, USA: Oxford University Press, 107–47 64
4. Thomas C. Grey (1980), ‘The Disintegration of Property’, in
J. Roland Pennock and John W. Chapman (eds), Nomos XXII:
Property, New York, NY, USA: New York University Press, 69–85 105
5. Henry E. Smith (2012), ‘Property as the Law of Things’, Harvard
Law Review, 125 (7), May, 1691–726 122
PART II THE OBJECTS OF PROPERTY
6. Charles A. Reich (1964), ‘The New Property’, Yale Law Journal, 73
(5), April, 733–87 159
7. Margaret Jane Radin (1987), ‘Market-Inalienability’, Harvard Law
Review, 100 (8), June, 1849–937 214
8. Cheryl I. Harris (1993), ‘Whiteness as Property’, Harvard Law
Review, 106 (8), June, 1707–91 303
9. Joseph William Singer (1988), ‘The Reliance Interest in Property’,
Stanford Law Review, 40 (3), February, 611–751 388
10. Sarah Harding (1999), ‘Value, Obligation and Cultural Heritage’,
Arizona State Law Journal, 31 (2), February, 291–354 529
PART III RULES VERSUS STANDARDS IN PROPERTY LAW
11. Carol M. Rose (1988), ‘Crystals and Mud in Property Law’,
Stanford Law Review, 40 (3), February, 577–610 594
12. Henry E. Smith (2009), ‘Mind the Gap: The Indirect Relation
Between Ends and Means in American Property Law’, Cornell Law
Review , 94 (4), May, 959–89 628
13. Gregory S. Alexander and Eduardo M. Peñalver (2012), ‘The Right
to Exclude and its Limits’, in (eds) An Introduction to Property
Theory , Chapter 7, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press,
130–55 659
PART IV THE ECONOMIC APPROACH TO PROPERTY
14. Harold Demsetz (1967), ‘Toward a Theory of Property Rights’,
American Economic Review , 57 (2), May, 347–59 686
15. Guido Calabresi and A. Douglas Melamed (1972), ‘Property Rules,
Liability Rules, and Inalienability: One View of the Cathedral’,
Harvard Law Review , 85 (6), April, 1089–128 699
16. Robert C. Ellickson (1986), ‘Of Coase and Cattle: Dispute
Resolution Among Neighbors in Shasta County’, Stanford Law
Review , 38 (3), February, 623–87 739
PART V NON-ECONOMIC THEORIES OF PROPERTY
17. Margaret Jane Radin (1982), ‘Property and Personhood’, Stanford
Law Review , 34 (5), May, 957–1015 805
18. Gregory S. Alexander (2009), ‘The Social-Obligation Norm in
American Property Law’, Cornell Law Review , 94 (4), May,
745–819 864
Volume II
Acknowledgements vii
Introduction: An Introduction by the editor appears in Volume I
PART I THE NUMERUS CLAUSUS QUESTION
1. Thomas W. Merrill and Henry E. Smith (2000), ‘Optimal
Standardization in the Law of Property: The Numerus Clausus
Principle’, Yale Law Journal, 110 (1), October, 1–70 2
2. Henry Hansmann and Reinier Kraakman (2002), ‘Property,
Contract, and Verification: The Numerus Clausus Problem and the
Divisibility of Rights’, Journal of Legal Studies, 31 (S2), June,
S373–S420 72
PART II COMMONS AND PROPERTY RIGHTS
3. Michael A. Heller (1998), ‘The Tragedy of the Anticommons:
Property in the Transition from Marx to Markets’, Harvard Law
Review, 111 (3), January, 621–88 121
4. James E. Krier (1992), ‘The Tragedy of the Commons, Part Two’,
Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, 15 (2), Spring, 325–47 189
PART III ESTATES IN LAND AND FUTURE INTERESTS
5. T.P. Gallanis (2003), ‘The Future of Future Interests’, Washington
and Lee Law Review, 60 (2), Spring, 513–75 213
6. W. Barton Leach (1938), ‘Perpetuities in a Nutshell’, Harvard Law
Review, 51 (4), February, 638–71 276
7. Lawrence W. Waggoner (1985), ‘Perpetuities: A Perspective on
Wait-and-See’, Columbia Law Review, 85 (8), December, 1714–29 310
PART IV LANDLORD/TENANT RELATIONS
8. Mary Ann Glendon (1982), ‘The Transformation of American
Landlord–Tenant Law’, Boston College Law Review, 23 (3), May,
503–76 327
9. Duncan Kennedy (1987), ‘The Effect of the Warranty of
Habitability on Low Income Housing: “Milking” and Class
Violence’, Florida State University Law Review, 15 (3), Fall,
485–519 401
PART V SERVITUDES
10. Gerald Korngold (1988), ‘For Unifying Servitudes and Defeasible
Fees: Property Law’s Functional Equivalents’, Texas Law Review,
66 (3), February, 533–76 437
11. Susan F. French (1982), ‘Toward a Modern Law of Servitudes:
Reweaving the Ancient Strands’, Southern California Law Review,
55 (6), September, 1261–319 481
PART VI ZONING AND LAND USE CONTROLS
12. Robert C. Ellickson (1973), ‘Alternatives to Zoning: Covenants,
Nuisance Rules, and Fines as Land Use Controls’, University of
Chicago Law Review, 40 (4), Summer, 681–781 541
13. Carol M. Rose (1983), ‘Planning and Dealing: Piecemeal Land
Controls as a Problem of Local Legitimacy’, California Law
Review, 71 (3), May, 837–912 642
PART VII CONSTITUTION PROTECTION OF PROPERTY: THE TAKINGS
ISSUE
14. Frank I. Michelman (1967), ‘Property, Utility, and Fairness:
Comments on the Ethical Foundations of “Just Compensation”
Law’, Harvard Law Review, 80 (6), April, 1165–258 719
15. Thomas W. Merrill (1986), ‘The Economics of Public Use’, Cornell
Law Review, 72 (1), November, 61–116 813
16. Hanoch Dagan (1999), ‘Takings and Distributive Justice’, Virginia
Law Review, 85 (5), August, 741–804 869
Volume I
Acknowledgements vii
Introduction Gregory S. Alexander ix
PART I CONCEPTUAL MATTERS: STRUCTURING OWNERSHIP
1. William Blackstone (1979 [1765–1769]), ‘The Rights’ in
Commentaries on the Laws of England, Volume II, Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press, 2 2
2. Wesley N. Hohfeld (1917), ‘Fundamental Legal Conceptions as
Applied in Judicial Reasoning’, Yale Law Journal, 26 (8), June,
710–70 3
3. A.M. Honoré (1961), ‘Ownership’, in A.G. Guest (ed.), Oxford
Essays in Jurisprudence: A Collaborative Work, Chapter V, Oxford,
UK and New York, NY, USA: Oxford University Press, 107–47 64
4. Thomas C. Grey (1980), ‘The Disintegration of Property’, in
J. Roland Pennock and John W. Chapman (eds), Nomos XXII:
Property, New York, NY, USA: New York University Press, 69–85 105
5. Henry E. Smith (2012), ‘Property as the Law of Things’, Harvard
Law Review, 125 (7), May, 1691–726 122
PART II THE OBJECTS OF PROPERTY
6. Charles A. Reich (1964), ‘The New Property’, Yale Law Journal, 73
(5), April, 733–87 159
7. Margaret Jane Radin (1987), ‘Market-Inalienability’, Harvard Law
Review, 100 (8), June, 1849–937 214
8. Cheryl I. Harris (1993), ‘Whiteness as Property’, Harvard Law
Review, 106 (8), June, 1707–91 303
9. Joseph William Singer (1988), ‘The Reliance Interest in Property’,
Stanford Law Review, 40 (3), February, 611–751 388
10. Sarah Harding (1999), ‘Value, Obligation and Cultural Heritage’,
Arizona State Law Journal, 31 (2), February, 291–354 529
PART III RULES VERSUS STANDARDS IN PROPERTY LAW
11. Carol M. Rose (1988), ‘Crystals and Mud in Property Law’,
Stanford Law Review, 40 (3), February, 577–610 594
12. Henry E. Smith (2009), ‘Mind the Gap: The Indirect Relation
Between Ends and Means in American Property Law’, Cornell Law
Review , 94 (4), May, 959–89 628
13. Gregory S. Alexander and Eduardo M. Peñalver (2012), ‘The Right
to Exclude and its Limits’, in (eds) An Introduction to Property
Theory , Chapter 7, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press,
130–55 659
PART IV THE ECONOMIC APPROACH TO PROPERTY
14. Harold Demsetz (1967), ‘Toward a Theory of Property Rights’,
American Economic Review , 57 (2), May, 347–59 686
15. Guido Calabresi and A. Douglas Melamed (1972), ‘Property Rules,
Liability Rules, and Inalienability: One View of the Cathedral’,
Harvard Law Review , 85 (6), April, 1089–128 699
16. Robert C. Ellickson (1986), ‘Of Coase and Cattle: Dispute
Resolution Among Neighbors in Shasta County’, Stanford Law
Review , 38 (3), February, 623–87 739
PART V NON-ECONOMIC THEORIES OF PROPERTY
17. Margaret Jane Radin (1982), ‘Property and Personhood’, Stanford
Law Review , 34 (5), May, 957–1015 805
18. Gregory S. Alexander (2009), ‘The Social-Obligation Norm in
American Property Law’, Cornell Law Review , 94 (4), May,
745–819 864
Volume II
Acknowledgements vii
Introduction: An Introduction by the editor appears in Volume I
PART I THE NUMERUS CLAUSUS QUESTION
1. Thomas W. Merrill and Henry E. Smith (2000), ‘Optimal
Standardization in the Law of Property: The Numerus Clausus
Principle’, Yale Law Journal, 110 (1), October, 1–70 2
2. Henry Hansmann and Reinier Kraakman (2002), ‘Property,
Contract, and Verification: The Numerus Clausus Problem and the
Divisibility of Rights’, Journal of Legal Studies, 31 (S2), June,
S373–S420 72
PART II COMMONS AND PROPERTY RIGHTS
3. Michael A. Heller (1998), ‘The Tragedy of the Anticommons:
Property in the Transition from Marx to Markets’, Harvard Law
Review, 111 (3), January, 621–88 121
4. James E. Krier (1992), ‘The Tragedy of the Commons, Part Two’,
Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, 15 (2), Spring, 325–47 189
PART III ESTATES IN LAND AND FUTURE INTERESTS
5. T.P. Gallanis (2003), ‘The Future of Future Interests’, Washington
and Lee Law Review, 60 (2), Spring, 513–75 213
6. W. Barton Leach (1938), ‘Perpetuities in a Nutshell’, Harvard Law
Review, 51 (4), February, 638–71 276
7. Lawrence W. Waggoner (1985), ‘Perpetuities: A Perspective on
Wait-and-See’, Columbia Law Review, 85 (8), December, 1714–29 310
PART IV LANDLORD/TENANT RELATIONS
8. Mary Ann Glendon (1982), ‘The Transformation of American
Landlord–Tenant Law’, Boston College Law Review, 23 (3), May,
503–76 327
9. Duncan Kennedy (1987), ‘The Effect of the Warranty of
Habitability on Low Income Housing: “Milking” and Class
Violence’, Florida State University Law Review, 15 (3), Fall,
485–519 401
PART V SERVITUDES
10. Gerald Korngold (1988), ‘For Unifying Servitudes and Defeasible
Fees: Property Law’s Functional Equivalents’, Texas Law Review,
66 (3), February, 533–76 437
11. Susan F. French (1982), ‘Toward a Modern Law of Servitudes:
Reweaving the Ancient Strands’, Southern California Law Review,
55 (6), September, 1261–319 481
PART VI ZONING AND LAND USE CONTROLS
12. Robert C. Ellickson (1973), ‘Alternatives to Zoning: Covenants,
Nuisance Rules, and Fines as Land Use Controls’, University of
Chicago Law Review, 40 (4), Summer, 681–781 541
13. Carol M. Rose (1983), ‘Planning and Dealing: Piecemeal Land
Controls as a Problem of Local Legitimacy’, California Law
Review, 71 (3), May, 837–912 642
PART VII CONSTITUTION PROTECTION OF PROPERTY: THE TAKINGS
ISSUE
14. Frank I. Michelman (1967), ‘Property, Utility, and Fairness:
Comments on the Ethical Foundations of “Just Compensation”
Law’, Harvard Law Review, 80 (6), April, 1165–258 719
15. Thomas W. Merrill (1986), ‘The Economics of Public Use’, Cornell
Law Review, 72 (1), November, 61–116 813
16. Hanoch Dagan (1999), ‘Takings and Distributive Justice’, Virginia
Law Review, 85 (5), August, 741–804 869
