The Illinois Business Law Journal

Imposing Fiduciary Duties on Political Partnerships

In a change from the ordinary politics of promoting the supremacy of one party platform over another, this past campaign season aspiring candidates promised bi-partisan cooperation on several key issues.  It is interesting to think, though, of what these candidates meant by “cooperation.”  Analogizing the promised cooperation to a legal partnership framework, candidates could be interpreted to have campaigned to form bi-partisan political partnerships under which they would owe fiduciary duties of loyalty and care to their political foes.  While cooperating under a duty of loyalty and care may sound appalling to the newly elected candidates, imposing legal-inspired fiduciary duties on political partnerships could benefit the American economic and political landscape. 

Could the Rule Against Pro Se Representation be a Problem for Single-Member LLCs?

Limited liability companies (LLCs) enjoy unique hybrid status as a “relatively new form of doing business that is created and defined by state law.”[1]  Though the LLC is “not formally characterized”[2] as either a partnership or a corporation, but as a hybrid entity, problems occur when precedent addresses partnerships or corporations, but not LLCs directly.  When the law fails to address LLCs specifically, judges and commentators analyze the law and determine whether an LLC should be grouped as a corporation or a partnership for a specific purpose.  For example, bankruptcy laws do not refer specifically to LLCs, yet LLCs can still be debtors or creditors.[3]  Generally speaking, “LLCs have been treated as corporations almost by default for bankruptcy purposes.”[4]  However, placing LLCs into default corporate categories may not always effectively serve the goals of an LLC.   In particular, this article addresses a current interpretive problem existing in the characterization of single-member LLCs for the purpose of determining whether the LLC may appear before a court without counsel.

Ford-GM Merger/Alliance Talks: Bigger is not necessarily Better

Automotive News recently reported that General Motors Corp. and Ford Motor Co. have discussed a possible merger or alliance.[1]  Neither company will comment on the talks [2], leading some followers to believe the reports are mere "speculation" and reflect "[n]ostalgia for the glory days of the American automobile industry."[3]  Nostalgia and speculation aside, the merger/alliance rumors are enough to incite the interests of industry followers and American car buyers as to the possible benefits of such a relationship.

Social Security: Is Reform Lighting the Fire or Extinguishing the Flames and will Entrepreneurs get Burned?

In his recent State of the Union address, President Bush laid the foundation for what is sure to become a long and vicious debate on Capital Hill. The debate isn’t confined to the hallowed halls and dark corners of the nation’s capital. It is buzzing through retirement communities and dorm rooms, from water coolers to water slides.

Social Security is the great debate. Is the system burning already? Do we need to douse the flames? Is it good enough and will only ignite if Republicans play with it?