Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisor O'Neil, Robert M. 2013-03-15T20:39:56Z 2013-03-15T20:39:56Z 2013-03
dc.identifier.citation 88 Wash. L. Rev. 125 (2013) en_US
dc.identifier.issn 0043-0617
dc.description Volume 88, Number 1, March 2013 en_US
dc.description.abstract Clerk for Justice William J. Brennan, Jr., 1962 Term; Emeritus Professor of Law and Former President, University of Virginia; Former President, University of Wisconsin System and Professor of Law, University of Wisconsin-Madison; and Senior Fellow, Association of Governing Boards of Colleges and Universities. If ever a pending Supreme Court case deserved the merciful disposition of “improvidently granted,” it would seem to be Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. v. Greenmoss Builders, Inc.1 Many factors seem to warrant such interment for an elusive and wholly unsatisfying controversy. Arguably, by any objective standard, this case should never have gone beyond a routine and little noted denial of certioriari. Against this unhappy background, let me offer several countervailing and compelling factors that seem to warrant an alternative disposition. en_US
dc.language.iso en_US en_US
dc.publisher Seattle: Washington Law Review, University of Washington School of Law en_US
dc.subject Case Study and Commentaries en_US
dc.title [88WashLRev125]A Tale of Two Greenmoss Builders en_US
dc.type Article en_US
dc.rights.holder Copyright 2013 by Washington Law Review Association. en_US

Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


Advanced Search


My Account