The Working Group on Property, Citizenship, and Social Entrepreneurism (PCSE) ( is sponsored by the Syracuse University College of Law and its Program in Law and Market Economy. The Program in Law and Market Economy is an interdisciplinary program focusing on the relationship among law, markets, and culture. Within this context the Working Group on PCSE brings together experts from a variety of institutions to discuss and explore issues related to property law, governance, and globalization. The Group will provide an ongoing forum for the publication of important new works.

Table of Contents

'I'm Not Quite Dead Yet!': Rethinking the Anti-Lapse Redistribution of a Dead Beneficiary's Gift

Eloisa C. Rodriguez-Dod, Florida International University (FIU) - College of Law

An Overview of the Fannie and Freddie Conservatorship Litigation

David J. Reiss, Brooklyn Law School

Brief of Amici Curiae 49 Professors in Support of Petitioners

Michael A. Carrier, Rutgers University School of Law - Camden
Judith Zahid, Zelle Hofmann Voelbel & Mason LLP

Changing Your Name in New York: A Guide for Attorneys and the Self-Represented — Part III.

Gerald Lebovits, Columbia University - Law School, Fordham University School of Law, New York University School of Law
Taneem Kabir, DeToffol & Associates

Sponsored by Syracuse University, College of Law

"'I'm Not Quite Dead Yet!': Rethinking the Anti-Lapse Redistribution of a Dead Beneficiary's Gift" Free Download
Cleveland State Law Review, Vol. 61, No. 4, 2013
Florida International University Legal Studies Research Paper No. 14-10

ELOISA C. RODRIGUEZ-DOD, Florida International University (FIU) - College of Law

This Article critically examines the tension between an individual’s autonomy and societal goals in the context of anti-lapse statutes applicable to wills and trusts. It scrutinizes the current rules of construction regarding anti-lapse statutes and identifies their deficiencies in their application to wills and trusts. Anti-lapse statutes create a category of substitute takers when a beneficiary prematurely dies. They are based on the legislature’s presumption of how a testator or settlor would want his property distributed in these circumstances. However, a testator’s or settlor’s intent may effectively be frustrated by this presumed intent. This Article analyzes and identifies the deficiencies encountered in the common law, state statutes, Uniform Probate Code, and Uniform Trust Code, and proposes possible solutions. Finally, it questions the need for anti-lapse statutes and considers application of the doctrine of reformation in their stead.

"An Overview of the Fannie and Freddie Conservatorship Litigation" Free Download
Journal of Law & Business (2014 Forthcoming)
Brooklyn Law School, Legal Studies Paper No. 300

DAVID J. REISS, Brooklyn Law School

The fate of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are subject to the vagaries of politics, regulation, public opinion, the economy, and not least of all the numerous cases that have been filed in 2013 against various government entities arising from the placement of the two companies into conservatorship. This short article will provide an overview of the last of these. The litigation surrounding Fannie and Freddie’s conservatorship raises all sorts of issues about the federal government’s involvement in housing finance. These issues are worth setting forth as the proper role of these two companies in the housing finance system is still very much up in the air. The plaintiffs, in the main, argue that the federal government has breached its duties to preferred shareholders, common shareholders, and potential beneficiaries of a housing trust fund authorized by the same statute that authorized their conservatorships. At this early stage, it appears that the plaintiffs have a tough row to hoe.

"Brief of Amici Curiae 49 Professors in Support of Petitioners" Free Download
California Supreme Court brief in In re Cipro Cases I & II, 2014

MICHAEL A. CARRIER, Rutgers University School of Law - Camden
JUDITH ZAHID, Zelle Hofmann Voelbel & Mason LLP

In FTC v. Actavis, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a brand-name drug company’s payment to a generic firm to delay entering the market could violate the antitrust laws. What does that mean for the earlier opinion of the California Court of Appeal in the “Cipro? case that had upheld Bayer’s payment of $398 million to generics? This amicus brief, filed in the California Supreme Court on behalf of 49 Professors, answers that question in three steps.

The first explains how the Actavis ruling knocked out each of the six pillars that had supported the California Court of Appeal’s decision. These pillars were based on (1) exclusion payments’ supposed lack of anticompetitive effects, (2) the toothless “scope of the patent? test, (3) a dispositive public policy favoring settlement, (4) the public policy (or at least one strand) underlying patent law, (5) the alleged need for exclusion payments to attain settlements, and (6) the “natural? status of exclusion payments.

The second step concludes, based on the Cartwright Act, section 16600 of the Business and Professions Code, and the Unfair Competition Act, that California law reaches beyond federal law in its emphasis on consumer welfare and condemnation of trusts.

And the third explains that preemption doctrine does not prevent California courts from rigorously analyzing settlements like the one in this case.

"Changing Your Name in New York: A Guide for Attorneys and the Self-Represented — Part III." Free Download
Gerald Lebovits & Taneem Kabir, Changing Your Name in New York: A Guide for Attorneys and the Self-Represented — Part III, 77 Queens Bar Bull. 10 (Feb./Mar. 2014).

GERALD LEBOVITS, Columbia University - Law School, Fordham University School of Law, New York University School of Law
TANEEM KABIR, DeToffol & Associates

This article, the third and final in a series, explains to attorneys and pro se applicants the process of changing one's name in new York State.


About this eJournal

Sponsored by: Syracuse University, College of Law.

The eJournal of Property, Citizenship, and Social Entrepreneurism (PCSE) is an interdisciplinary journal dedicated to exploring the core principle that a just and accessible property law system is the basis for both good citizenship and successful socio-legal development. This eJournal distributes working and accepted paper abstracts primarily concerned with matters of property as they relate to the human process of exchange, the fostering of democratic institutions, the building of sustainable communities, the stewardship of the global environment and its natural resources, the promotion of citizenship, and the development of market institutions that respond to and promote a worthy social mission.

Our goal is to explore the legal infrastructure of property in broad terms: encompassing concerns for real, personal, intangible, and intellectual property, as well as looking at property related financial markets (including real estate mortgages, personal property security interests, licensing, and securitization).

Making reference to specific examples of property (in its various forms) we will address the following types of issues.

1) To what extent do property rights reduce or eliminate the need for government regulation (particularly command and control-regulation) while enhancing the environment for open market approaches to economic development and globalization? This includes consideration of the way in which property rights actually reduce transaction costs, correct for problems raised by the tragedy of the commons, and organize society in a way that fosters efficient economic development.

2) What is the role of privatization of State controlled property in the transformation process? How should privatization be approached and what distinctions need to be made between public, private, and state property? This includes discussion of necessary support infrastructure for successful privatization, and consideration of the need for government control over private companies dealing with public utilities, natural resources, and transportation systems.

3) To what extent do property rights enhance citizenship and advance democratic institutions? What role does private property play in creating political elites and the structures needed for controlled development and social transformation? How can property rights be used to make the rule of law more tangible, and to promote civic participation and inclusion? How are property rights related to citizenship issues respecting matters of race, gender, ethnicity, urban or rural location, and other factors?

4) To what extent do property rights promote entrepreneurism, including social entrepreneurism focusing on values other than mere maximization of economic wealth and efficiency? How can property rights fuel economic development while helping to reduce poverty?

5) In a world of global financial institutions such as the European Development Bank, The World Bank, and the IMF, with the power to influence indirect or quasi-law making, how are global property law systems to develop and become institutionalized? How do these institutions facilitate problems related to globalization and harmonization, and what are the socio-legal implications from such activity?


To submit your research to SSRN, sign in to the SSRN User HeadQuarters, click the My Papers link on left menu and then the Start New Submission button at top of page.

Distribution Services

If your organization is interested in increasing readership for its research by starting a Research Paper Series, or sponsoring a Subject Matter eJournal, please email:

Distributed by

Legal Scholarship Network (LSN), a division of Social Science Electronic Publishing (SSEP) and Social Science Research Network (SSRN)



Northwestern University - School of Law, Northwestern University - Kellogg School of Management, European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI)

Stanford Law School, Columbia Law School, European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI)

Please contact us at the above addresses with your comments, questions or suggestions for LSN-Sub.