Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T15:56:31.041Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

From Pluralism to Individualism: Berle and Means and 20th-Century American Legal Thought

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 December 2018

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Review Essay
Copyright
Copyright © American Bar Foundation, 2005 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Akard, Patrick J. 1992. Corporate Mobilization and Political Power: The Transformation of U.S. Economic Policy in the 1970s. American Sociological Review 57:597615.Google Scholar
Alexander, Gregory S. 1997. Commodity and Propriety: Competing Visions of Property in American Legal Thought, 1776–1970. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Balkin, J. M. 1990. Some Realism about Pluralism: Legal Realist Approaches to the First Amendment. Duke Law Journal (1990): 375430.Google Scholar
Barenberg, Mark. 1993. The Political Economy of the Wagner Act: Power, Symbol, and Workplace Cooperation. Harvard Law Review 106:13791496.Google Scholar
Bell, Daniel. 1960. The End of Ideology: On the Exhaustion of Political Ideas in the Fifties. Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press.Google Scholar
Bentley, Arthur F. 1908. The Process of Government: A Study of Social Pressures. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Berle, Adolf A. 1928. Studies in the Law of Corporation Finance. Chicago: Callaghan and Company.Google Scholar
Berle, Adolf A. 1931. Corporate Powers as Powers in Trust. Harvard Law Review 44:1049–74.Google Scholar
Berle, Adolf A. 1932. For Whom Corporate Managers Are Trustees: A Note. Harvard Law Review 45:1365–72.Google Scholar
Berle, Adolf A. 1952. The Developing Law of Corporate Concentration. University of Chicago Law Review 19:639–61.Google Scholar
Berle, Adolf A. 1954. The 20th Century Capitalist Revolution. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company.Google Scholar
Berle, Adolf A. 1960. Foreword. In Mason 1960, ixxv.Google Scholar
Berle, Adolf A. 1962. Modem Functions of the Corporate System. Columbia Law Review 62:433–49.Google Scholar
Berle, Adolf A. 1965. Property, Production, and Revolution. Columbia Law Review 65:120.Google Scholar
Berle, Adolf A. 1967a. Power. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.Google Scholar
Berle, Adolf A. 1967b. Property, Production and Revolution: A Preface to the Revised Edition. In Berle and Means 1968, viixxvii.Google Scholar
Berle, Adolf A., and Gardiner, C. Means. 1930. Corporations and the Public Investor. American Economic Review 20:5471.Google Scholar
Berle, Adolf A., and Gardiner, C. Means. 1932. The Modern Corporation and Private Property. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Berle, Adolf A., and Gardiner, C. Means. 1968. The Modern Corporation and Private Property Rev. edition. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.Google Scholar
Berle, Beatrice Bishop, and Travis, Beal Jacobs, eds. 1973. Navigating the Rapids, 1918. 1971: From the Papers of Adolf A. Berle. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
Blumberg, Phillip I. 1972. Corporate Responsibility in a Changing Society: Essays on Corporate Social Responsibility. Boston: Boston University School of Law.Google Scholar
Bowman, Scott R. 1996. The Modern Corporation and American Political Thought: Law, Power, and Ideology. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Bratton, William W. 1989a. The New Economic Theory of the Firm: Critical Perspectives from History. Stanford Law Review 41:14711527.Google Scholar
Bratton, William W. 1989b. The “Nexus of Contracts” Corporation: A Critical Appraisal. Cornell Law Review 74:407–65.Google Scholar
Bratton, William W. Jr. 2001. Berle and Means Reconsidered at the Century's Turn, Journal of Corporation Law 26:737–70.Google Scholar
Brinkley, Alan. 1989. The New Deal and the Idea of the State. In Fraser and Gerstle 1989, 85–121.Google Scholar
Brinkley, Alan. 1995. The End of Reform: New Deal Liberalism in Recession and War. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
Brudney, Victor. 1997. Contract and Fiduciary Duty in Corporate Law. Boston College Law Review 38:595665.Google Scholar
Butler, Henry N. 1989. The Contractual Theory of the Corporation. George Mason University Law Review 11:99123.Google Scholar
Butler, Henry N., and Harry, E. Ribstein. 1990. Opting Out of Fiduciary Duties: Response to the Anti-contractarians. Washington Law Review 65:172.Google Scholar
Carver, Thomas N. 1925. The Present Economic Revolution in the United States. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.Google Scholar
Chayes, Abram. 1960. The Modern Corporation and the Rule of Law. In Mason 1960, 2545.Google Scholar
Coase, Ronald H. 1937. The Nature of the Firm. Economica 4:386405.Google Scholar
Coffee, John C 1989. The Mandatory/Enabling Balance in Corporate Law: An Essay on the Judicial Role. Columbia Law Review 89:1618–92.Google Scholar
Cohen, Morris R. 1927. Property and Sovereignty. Cornell Law Quarterly 13:830.Google Scholar
Columbia, Law Review. 1989. Symposium: Contractual Freedom in Corporate Law. Columbia Law Review 89:13951775.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert A. 1956. A Preface to Democratic Theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Dahl, Robert A. 1959. Business and Politics: A Critical Appraisal of Political Science. In Robert, A. Dahl Mason Haire, and Paul, F. Lazarsfeld eds. Social Science Research on Business: Product and Potential. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Dahl, A., Mason, Haire, and Paul, F. Lazarsfeld. 1967. Pluralist Democracy in the United States: Conflict and Consent. Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
Demsetz, Harold. 1983. The Structure of Ownership and the Theory of the Firm. Journal of Law and Economics 26:375–90.Google Scholar
Dewey, John. 1927. The Public and Its Problems. New York: Henry Holt and Company.Google Scholar
Dodd, Merrick E. 1932. For Whom Are Corporate Managers Trustees Harvard Law Review 45:1145–63.Google Scholar
Dodd, Merrick E. 1942. Book Review: Bureaucracy and Trusteeship in Large Corporations by Marshall E. Dimock. University of Chicago Law Review 9:538–49.Google Scholar
Dudziak, Mary L. 2001. Cold War Civil Rights: Race and the Image of American Democracy. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Easterbrook, Frank H., and Daniel, R. Fischel. 1983. Voting in Corporate Law. Journal of Law and Economics 26:395427.Google Scholar
Easterbrook, Frank H., and Daniel, R. Fischel. 1991. The Economic Structure of Corporate Law. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Eisenberg, Avigail I. 1995. Reconstructing Political Pluralism. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Ernst, Daniel R. 1993. Common Laborers? Industrial Pluralists, Legal Realists, and the Law of Industrial Disputes, 1915–1943. Law and History Review 11:59100.Google Scholar
Fama, Eugene F., and Michael, C. Jensen. 1983a. Agency Problems and Residual Claims. Journal of Law and Economics 26:327–49.Google Scholar
Fama, Eugene F., and Michael, C. Jensen. 1983b. Separation of Ownership and Control. Journal of Law and Economics 26:301–25.Google Scholar
Follett, Mary Parker. 1918. The New State: Group Organization the Solution of Popular Government. New York: Longmans, Green.Google Scholar
Follett, Mary Parker. 1924. Creative Experience. New York: Longmans, Green and co.Google Scholar
Follett, Mary Parker. 1925. Power. In Metcalf and Urwick 1942.Google Scholar
Forbath, William E. 2000. Civil Rights and Economic Citizenship: Notes on the Past and Future of the Civil Rights and Labor Movements. University of Pennsylvania Journal of Labor and Employment Law 2:697718.Google Scholar
Forbath, William E. 2001. The New Deal Constitution in Exile. Duke Law Journal 51:165222.Google Scholar
Frank, Jerome. 1933. Book Review: The Modem Corporation and Private Property Yale Law Journal 42:9891000.Google Scholar
Fraser, Steve, and Gary, Gerstle, eds. 1989. The Rise and Fall of the New Deal Order, 1930–1980. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Friedlander, Joel Edan. 1996. Corporation and Kulturkampf: Time Culture as Illegal Fiction. Connecticut Law Review 29:31115.Google Scholar
Friedman, Milton. 1962. Capitalism and Freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Friedman, Milton. 1970. The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits. New York Times, Sept. 13.Google Scholar
Galbraith, John Kenneth. 1952. American Capitalism: The Concept of Countervailing Power. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Genovese, Eugene D. 1997. Secularism in the General Crisis of Capitalism. American Journal of Jurisprudence 42:195210.Google Scholar
Glasberg, Davita Silfen, and Michael, Schwartz. 1983. Ownership and Control of Corporations. Annual Review of Sociology 9:311–32.Google Scholar
Goluboff, Risa L. 2001. The Thirteenth Amendment and the Lost Origins of Civil Rights. Duke Law Journal 50:1609–85.Google Scholar
Gordon, Jeffrey N. 1989. The Mandatory Structure of Corporate Law. Columbia Law Review 89:1549–99.Google Scholar
Gordon, Robert W. 1995. Legal Realism. In Richard, Wightman Fox and James, T. Kloppenberg, eds., A Companion to American Thought. Cambridge, Mass.: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
Graham, Pauline, ed. 1995. Mary Parker Follett: Prophet of Management. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
Hager, Mark M. 1989. Bodies Politic: The Progressive History of Organizational “Real Entity” Theory. University of Pittsburgh Law Review 50:575654.Google Scholar
Hale, Robert L. 1923. Coercion and Distribution in a Supposedly Non-coercive State. Political Science Quarterly 38:470–94.Google Scholar
Hawley, Ellis W. 1979. The Great War and the Search for Modem Order: A History of the American People and their institutions, 1917–1933. New York: St. Martin's Press.Google Scholar
Hessen, Robert. 1983. The Modern Corporation and Private Property: A Reappraisal. Journal of Law and Economics 26:273289.Google Scholar
Hirst, Paul Q. ed. 1989. The Pluralist Theory of the State: Selected Writings of G. D. H. Cole, J. N. Figgis, and H. J. Laski. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Horwitz, Morton J. 1992. The Transformation of American Law, 1870–1960: The Crisis of Legal Orthodoxy. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hovenkamp, Herbert. 1988. The Classical Corporation in American Legal Thought. Georgetown Law Journal 76:15931689.Google Scholar
Hovenkamp, Herbert. 2000. Knowledge about Welfare: Legal Realism and the Separation of Law and Economics. Minnesota Law Review 84:805–62.Google Scholar
Isaacs, Nathan. 1933. Book Review: The Modem Corporation and Private Property Yale Law Journal 42:463–65.Google Scholar
Israels, Carlos L. 1964. Are Corporate Powers Still Held in Trust Columbia Law Review 64:1446–57.Google Scholar
Jaffe, Louis L. 1937. Law Making by Private Groups. Harvard Law Review 51:201–53.Google Scholar
Journal of Law and Economics. 1983. Conference: Corporations and Private Property (sponsored by the Hoover Institution). Journal of Law and Economics 26:235496.Google Scholar
Kariel, Henry S. 1961. The Decline of American Pluralism. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Katz, Wilber G. 1958. The Philosophy of Midcentury Corporation Statutes. Law and Contemporary Problems 23:171–92.Google Scholar
Kitch, Edmund W., ed. 1983. The Fire of Truth: A Remembrance of Law and Economics at Chicago 1932–1970 (a transcript of a discussion held March 21–23, 1981, in Los Angeles). Journal of Law and Economics 26:163234.Google Scholar
Kline, Joseph V. 1933. Book Review: The Modern Corporation and Private Property Columbia Law Review 33:557–60.Google Scholar
Kolko, Gabriel. 1963. The Triumph of Conservatism: A Reinterpretation of American History, 1900–1916. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Laski, Harold J. 1916. The Personality of Associations. Harvard Law Review 29:404–26.Google Scholar
Laski, Harold J. 1917. Studies in the Problem of Sovereignty. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Laski, Harold J. 1918. The Problem of Administrative Areas. Smith College Studies in History. Northampton, Mass.: Department of History at Smith College.Google Scholar
Laski, Harold J. 1925. A Grammar of Politics. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Latham, Earl. 1952. The Group Basis of Politics: A Study in Basing-Point Legislation. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Lustig, Jeffrey R. 1982. Corporate Liberalism: The Origins of Modem American Political Theory, 1890–1920. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Manne, Henry G. 1962. The “Higher Criticism” of the Modern Corporation. Columbia Law Review 62:399432.Google Scholar
Manning, Bayless. 1958. Book Review: The American Stockholder, by J. A. Livingston. Yak Law]oumal 67:1477–96.Google Scholar
Mark, Gregory A. 1987. The Personification of the Business Corporation in American Law. University of Chicago Law Review 54:1441–83.Google Scholar
Mason, Edward S., ed. 1960. The Corporation in Modem Society. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
McCraw, Thomas K. 1990. In Retrospect: Berle and Means. Reviews in American History. 18:578–96.Google Scholar
Means, Gardiner C. 1935. The Distribution of Control and Responsibility in a Modern Economy. Political Science Quarterly 50:5969.Google Scholar
Means, Gardiner C. 1967. Implications of the Corporate Revolution in Economic Theory. In Berle and Means 1968, xxixxxxviii.Google Scholar
Means, Gardiner C. 1983a. Corporate Power in the Marketplace. Journal of Law and Economics 26:467–85.Google Scholar
Means, Gardiner C. 1983b. Hessen's “Reappraisal.” Journal of Law and Economics 26:297300.Google Scholar
Metcalf, Henry C, and Urwick, L., eds. 1942. Dynamic Administration: The Collected Papers of Mary Parker Follett. New York: Harper and Brothers.Google Scholar
Miller, Arthur Selwyn. 1976. The Modern Corporate State: Private Governments and the American Constitution. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
Millon, David. 1990. Theories of the Corporation. Duke Law Journal 1990:201–62.Google Scholar
Mills, Wright C. 1956. The Power Elite. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Lawrence E. 2001. Corporate Irresponsibility: America's Newest Export. New Haven, Conn: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Moore, Thomas Gale. 1983. Introduction. Journal of Law and Economics 26:235–36.Google Scholar
Novak, William. 1996. The People's Welfare: Law and Regulation in Nineteenth-Century America. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
O'Melinn, Liam S. 2000. The Sanctity of Association: The Corporation and Individualism in American Law. San Diego Law Review 37:101–65.Google Scholar
Pells, Richard H. 1989. The Liberal Mind in a Conservative Age: American Intellectuals in the 1940s and 1950s. 2nd ed. Middletown, Conn.: Wesleyan University Press.Google Scholar
Phillips, Michael 1989. Freedom in Miller's Corporate State. George Washington Law Review 57:1533–55.Google Scholar
Pope, James Gray. 2002. The Thirteenth Amendment versus the Commerce Clause: Labor and the Shaping of American Constitutional Law, 1921–1957. Columbia Law Review 102:1122.Google Scholar
Purcell, Edward A. 1973. The Crisis of Democratic Theory: Scientific Naturalism and the Problem of Value. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky.Google Scholar
Reich, Charles A. 1964- The New Property. Yale Law Journal 73:733–87. Ricardo-Campbell, Rita. 1983. Comments on the Structure of Ownership and the Theory of the Firm. Journal of Law and Economics 26:391–93.Google Scholar
Ripley, William Z. 1927. Main Street and Wall Street. Boston: Little, Brown, and Company.Google Scholar
Roe, Mark. 1994. Strong Managers, Weak Owners: The Political Roots of American Corporate Finance. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Rostow, Eugene V. 1960. To Whom and for What Ends Is Corporate Management Responsible? In Mason 1960, 4671.Google Scholar
Sandel, Michael J. 1998. Democracy's Discontent: America in Search of Public Philosophy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Schiller, Reuel E. 1999. From Group Rights to Individual Liberties: Post-War Labor Law, Liberalism, and the Waning of Union Strength. Berkeley Journal of Employment and Labor Law 20:173.Google Scholar
Schneiderman, David. 1998. Harold Laski, Viscount Haldane, and the Law of the Canadian Constitution in the Early-Twentieth Century. University of Toronto Law Journal 48:521–60.Google Scholar
Schwarz, Jordan A. 1987. Liberal: Adolf A. Berle and the Vision of an American Era. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Singer, Joseph W. 1988. Legal Realism Now. California Law Review 76:465544.Google Scholar
Skowronek, Stephen. 1982. Building a New American State: The Emergence of National Administrative Capacities, 1877–1920. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sommer, A. A. Jr. 1991. Whom Should the Corporation Serve? The Berle-Dodd Debate Revisited Sixty Years Later. Delaware Journal of Corporate Law 16:3356.Google Scholar
Stewart, Richard B. 1987. Organizational Jurisprudence. Harvard Law Review 101:371–90.Google Scholar
Stigler, George J., and Claire, Friedland. 1983. The Literature of Economics: The Case of Berle and Means. Journal of Law and Economics 26:237–68.Google Scholar
Tocqueville, Alexis de. 1835. Democracy in America. Trans. Reeve, Henry. London: Saunders and Otley.Google Scholar
Tsuk, Dalia. 2001a. Pluralisms: The Indian New Deal as a Model. Margins: Maryland's Interdisciplinary Journal of Race, Class and Gender 1:393449.Google Scholar
Tsuk, Dalia. 2001b. The New Deal Origins of American Legal Pluralism. Florida State University Law Review 29:189268.Google Scholar
Tsuk, Dalia. 2002a. ”A Double Runner”: Felix S. Cohen and the Indian New Deal. Political and Legal Anthropolgy Review 25:4868.Google Scholar
Tsuk, Dalia. 2002b. Legal Realism. In Herbert, M. Kritzer, ed., Legal Systems of the World: A Political, Social, and Cultural Encyclopedia. Santa Barbara, Calif.: ABC-CLIO.Google Scholar
Tsuk, Dalia. 2003. Corporations without Labor: The Politics of Progressive Corporate Law. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 151:18611912.Google Scholar
Veblen, Thorstein. 1923. Absentee Ownership and Business Enterprise in Recent Times. New York: B. W. Huebsch.Google Scholar
Warren, William C. 1964. Adolf A. Berle. Columbia Law Review 64:1377–85.Google Scholar
Weiner, Joseph L. 1952. The New Deal and the Corporation. University of Chicago Law Review 19:724–38.Google Scholar
Weiner, Joseph L. 1969. The Berle-Dodd Dialogue on the Concept of the Corporation. Columbia Law Review 64:1458–67.Google Scholar
Weiss, Elliott J. 1984. Economic Analysis, Corporate Law, and the ALI Corporate Governance Project. Cornell Law Review 70:172.Google Scholar
Weiss, Leonard W. 1983. The Extent and Effects of Aggregate Concentration. Journal of Law and Economics 26:429–55.Google Scholar
Williamson, Oliver E. 1983. Organization Form, Residual Claimants, and Corporate Control. Journal of Law and Economics 26:351–66.Google Scholar
Wilson, Woodrow. 1910. The Lawyer and the Community. A.B.A. Reporter 35:419–39.Google Scholar
Wormser, Maurice. 1931. Frankenstein, Incorporated. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Whittlesey House.Google Scholar
Wren, Daniel A. 1987. The Evolution of Management Thought 3rd ed. New York: Wiley Series in Management.Google Scholar
Zeitlin, Maurice. 1974. Corporate Ownership and Control: The Large Corporation and the Capitalist Class. American Journal of Sociology 79:10731119.Google Scholar