The Lanec (short for Law and Economics) movement of the 1970s hit the legal landscape like a nuclear device and permanently irradiated it. A couple of decades later, as we sift through the fallout, we are entitled to ask whether anything fundamental has changed. Every contributorto this Symposium seems to answer yes. Maybe they're like the book reviewer who believes deep in her heart that the book is worthless, but if she reveals it the editor will conclude that there is no point in printing her review. Let me put my own biases on the table. In general I applaud the greater precision that has come to legal studies through economics. But has Lanec changed the nature of the law? I'm not sure that it has lived up to the hopes or hypes of its original enthusiasts.
"Post-Revolutionary Law and Economics: A Foreword to the Symposium,"
Hofstra Law Review: Vol. 20
, Article 1.
Available at: http://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/hlr/vol20/iss4/1