Abstract
I. Introduction . . . . . 671
II. Assessing the Argument for Maintaining Divergent Standards for the Corporate Fiduciary Duty of Care . . . . . 673
A. The Limited Body of Scholarship Justifying Divergent Standards in the Corporate Law Context . . . . . 673
B. The Dan-Cohen Arguments and the Singer Response . . . . . 676
1. Bentham’s Recognition of the Distinction Between Conduct Rules and Decision Rules . . . . . 676
2. The Prerequisite of Acoustic Separation . . . . . 678
3. The Argument for Legitimacy . . . . . 681
C. The Phillips and Eisenberg Arguments Regarding Whether Divergent Standards Are Justified in the Corporate Fiduciary Duty of Care Context . . . . . 686
III. Conclusion . . . . . 691
Recommended Citation
Gregory Scott Crespi,
Standards of Conduct and Standards of Review in Corporate Law: The Need for Closer Alignment,
82 Neb. L. Rev.
(2003)
Available at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr/vol82/iss3/3