About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


15 J. Legal Stud. Educ. 1 (1997)

handle is hein.journals/jlse15 and id is 1 raw text is: JURISPRUDENTIAL THEORIES IN COUNTERPOINT: COMMERCIAL IMPRACTICABILITY THROUGH A LEGAL KALEIDOSCOPE by Deborah Ballam, Caryn Beck-Dudley, Frank Cross, Daniel T. Ostas, Ramona Paetzold, and Kenneth Schneyer INTRODUCTION by Deborah Ballam One of the most useful techniques for helping our students understand that the study of law is far more than memorizing Black letter law is to develop their understanding of the various schools of jurisprudence. However, discussions of the relative merits of various contemporary legal theories frequently take place on the plane of the abstract: either they are entirely removed from any practical legal decisions, or they respond to hypothetical lawsuits specifically tailored to bring out the contrasts between the theories. The student of such debates may wonder whether, and how, these different legal theories would actually differ from each other in grappling with a specific legal doctrine and an actual lawsuit. As a thought experiment, we decided to turn the lenses of different jurisprudential theories on a single doctrine and an actual case: the well-known contract reformation decision of Aluminum Co. ofAmerica v. Essex Group, Inc. (hereinafter Alcoa).' * Professor, Fisher College of Business, The Ohio State University. 1 499 F. Supp. 53 (W.D. Pa. 1980).