S. Breyer, E. Kagan, A. Kaufman, Todd D. Rakoff, P. Strauss, Richard K. Willard
{"title":"In Memoriam: Clark Byse","authors":"S. Breyer, E. Kagan, A. Kaufman, Todd D. Rakoff, P. Strauss, Richard K. Willard","doi":"10.7916/D8R78F7T","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Clark Byse was a member of that great generation of scholars that created administrative law. He worked with Walter Gellhorn, Louis Jaffe, Kenneth Culp Davis, Nat Nathanson, and a handful of others. They began with a few traditional common law rules, a new federal statute, a group of New Deal agencies, and a growing number of judicial decisions. They formed these materials into more coherent legal principles, approaches, and systems of interpretation. They helped to define the proper relationship between citizen and government in a world that must rely upon administrative expertise to translate the electorate’s desires into effective policy and action. In a word, Clark and those few others were the intellectual architects of the modern democratic administrative state. Clark Byse as scholar participated fully in that great enterprise. His casebook with Walter Gellhorn, now in its tenth edition, is a legal classic.1 He did not limit his writing to administrative law, however, for he also wrote much of value about, for example, contracts, civil procedure, and academic freedom. Clark Byse as teacher taught administrative law and contract law to generations of law students. His object was to transmit what we call “legal thinking” — the disciplined, critical, purpose-oriented approach that underlies American law. Indeed, Clark made a point of telling his students, “[N]ever forget that the emphasis in this class is on what and how you think, not on what some judge or treatise writer or","PeriodicalId":48320,"journal":{"name":"Harvard Law Review","volume":"121 1","pages":"453-468"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2007-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Harvard Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7916/D8R78F7T","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Clark Byse was a member of that great generation of scholars that created administrative law. He worked with Walter Gellhorn, Louis Jaffe, Kenneth Culp Davis, Nat Nathanson, and a handful of others. They began with a few traditional common law rules, a new federal statute, a group of New Deal agencies, and a growing number of judicial decisions. They formed these materials into more coherent legal principles, approaches, and systems of interpretation. They helped to define the proper relationship between citizen and government in a world that must rely upon administrative expertise to translate the electorate’s desires into effective policy and action. In a word, Clark and those few others were the intellectual architects of the modern democratic administrative state. Clark Byse as scholar participated fully in that great enterprise. His casebook with Walter Gellhorn, now in its tenth edition, is a legal classic.1 He did not limit his writing to administrative law, however, for he also wrote much of value about, for example, contracts, civil procedure, and academic freedom. Clark Byse as teacher taught administrative law and contract law to generations of law students. His object was to transmit what we call “legal thinking” — the disciplined, critical, purpose-oriented approach that underlies American law. Indeed, Clark made a point of telling his students, “[N]ever forget that the emphasis in this class is on what and how you think, not on what some judge or treatise writer or
期刊介绍:
The Harvard Law Review is a student-run organization whose primary purpose is to publish a journal of legal scholarship. The Review comes out monthly from November through June and has roughly 2,500 pages per volume. The organization is formally independent of the Harvard Law School. Student editors make all editorial and organizational decisions and, together with a professional business staff of three, carry out day-to-day operations. Aside from serving as an important academic forum for legal scholarship, the Review has two other goals. First, the journal is designed to be an effective research tool for practicing lawyers and students of the law. Second, it provides opportunities for Review members to develop their own editing and writing skills. Accordingly, each issue contains pieces by student editors as well as outside authors. The Review publishes articles by professors, judges, and practitioners and solicits reviews of important recent books from recognized experts. All articles — even those by the most respected authorities — are subjected to a rigorous editorial process designed to sharpen and strengthen substance and tone.