The Enforceability of the GM–Fisher Body Contract: Comment on Goldberg
12 Pages Posted: 2 Oct 2008 Last revised: 9 Jul 2011
Date Written: October 1, 2008
Abstract
Goldberg unconvincingly claims that the General Motors (GM)–Fisher Body contract was in fact legally unenforceable. But even if Goldberg's contract law conclusion were correct, it is economically irrelevant. It is clear from the actions of Fisher and GM and from the testimonial and other contemporaneous evidence that both transactors considered the contract legally binding and behaved accordingly. Therefore, proper economic analysis of the Fisher–GM case should continue to assume contract enforceability, and the economic determinants of organizational structure illustrated by the case remain fully valid.
JEL Classification: L14, K12
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?
Recommended Papers
-
Contracts as Reference Points - Experimental Evidence
By Ernst Fehr, Oliver Hart, ...
-
Contracts as Reference Points: Experimental Evidence
By Ernst Fehr, Oliver Hart, ...
-
Contracts as Reference Points - Experimental Evidence
By Ernst Fehr, Oliver Hart, ...
-
By Oliver Hart and John Moore
-
By Oliver Hart and John Moore
-
By Oliver Hart and John Moore
-
Shifting the Blame: On Delegation and Responsibility
By Björn Bartling and Urs Fischbacher
-
Agreeing Now to Agree Later: Contracts that Rule Out But Do Not Rule in
By Oliver Hart and John Moore
-
Agreeing Now to Agree Later: Contracts that Rule Out But Do Not Rule in
By Oliver Hart and John Moore