Professor Crespi is a 1985 graduate of the Yale Law School. Before entering law school he was a Professor of Economics at the University of Iowa and at the University of Tulsa. Immediately prior to joining the faculty at SMU in 1990 Professor Crespi served in the White House as the Senior Counsel for the Council of Economic Advisers. Dr Crespi also practiced law with the firms of Debevoise & Plimpton and Davis, Hockenberg for several years before joining the SMU faculty, working on a range of corporate and commercial law matters. He is the author of two books on securities regulation and over 60 articles on a wide range of legal topics, including disability rights, contract law, corporate law, law and economics, jurisprudence, and legal education. Professor Crespi now teaches contract law, business enterprise, and law and economics. He is a four-time winner of the Law School’s Teacher of the Year award.

Primary Articles

“Cost-Benefit Analysis: Not a Suitable Approach for Evaluating Climate Regulation Policies,” (forthcoming spring, 2011 in the Wash. & Lee J. Energy, Climate and the Env.)

“The Trillion Dollar Problem of Underwater Homeowners: Avoiding a New Surge of Foreclosures by Encouraging Principal-Reducing Modifications,” 51 Santa Clara L. Rev. 153 (2011).

“Green Cards for Foreign House Buyers: A Way to Help Stabilize Housing Prices,” 45 Tul. L. Rev. 471 (2010).

“The Endogeniety Problem in Cost-Benefit Analysis: Valuing Policies That Alter Preferences or Genetic Identities,” 8 George. J. L. & Pub. Pol. 91 (2010).

“How Recognizing the Endogeniety of Identity Renders the Discounting Debate Largely Irrelevant,” 30 J.  Land, Res. & Env. L. 75 (2010).

“Further Reflections on Post-Realist Legal Scholarship and Teaching: A Brief Response to Professor Scordato,” 50 S. Clara L. Rev. 281 (2010).

“A Brief Reflection on the Problem of Person-Altering Consequences,”  2 J. App. Economy 13 (2009). 

“Incorporating Endogenous Preferences in Cost-Benefit Analysis,” 17 Penn. St. Env. L. Rev. 157 (2009).

“The Fatal Flaw of Cost-Benefit Analysis: The Problem of Person-Altering Consequences, 38 Env. L. Rep. 10703 (2008).

“Choice of Law in Veil Piercing Litigation: Courts Should Discard the Internal Affairs Rule and Embrace General Choice of Law Principles,” 64 NYU Ann. Surv. 85 (2008).

“Would It be Unethical to Dump Radioactive Wastes in the Ocean?  The Surprising Ethical Implications of the Person-Altering Consequences of Policies,” 1 Ecology Law Currents 1 (2008) (reprinted as Chapter 2 of Waste Management: Environmental Impact (L. Lakshmi, ed., 2008).

“Clarifying the Boundary Between the Parol Evidence Rule and the Rules Governing Subsequent Oral Modifications,” 34 Ohio No. L. R. 71 (2008).   

“What’s Wrong With Dumping Radioactive Wastes in the Ocean?  The Surprising Ethical Implications of the Problem of Person-Altering Consequences,” 37 Env.  L.  Rep. 10873 (2007).

MAXIMIZING THE WEALTH OF FICTIONAL SHAREHOLDERS: WHICH FICTION SHOULD DIRECTORS EMBRACE?, 32 Journal of Corporation Law 381-427 (2007).

VALUATION IN COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS: CHOOSING BETWEEN OFFER PRICES AND ASKING PRICES AS THE APPROPRIATE MEASURE OF WILLINGNESS TO PAY, 39 John Marshall Law Review 429-473 (2006).

STANDARDS OF CONDUCT AND STANDARDS OF REVIEW IN CORPORATE LAW: THE NEED FOR CLOSER ALIGNMENT, 82 Nebraska Law Review 671-692 (2004).

THE INFLUENCE OF TWO DECADES OF CONTRACT LAW SCHOLARSHIP ON JUDICIAL RULINGS: AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS, 57 SMU Law Review 105-136 (2004).

REDEFINING THE FIDUCIARY DUTIES OF CORPORATE DIRECTORS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TEAM PRODUCTION MODEL OF CORPORATE GOVERNANCE, 36 Creighton Law Review 623-642 (2003).

RETHINKING CORPORATE FIDUCIARY DUTIES: THE INEFFICIENCY OF THE SHAREHOLDER PRIMACY NORM, 55 SMU Law Review 141-156 (2002).

SELLING STRUCTURED SETTLEMENTS: THE UNCERTAIN EFFECT OF ANTI-ASSIGNMENT CLAUSES, 28 Pepperdine Law Review 787-817 (2001).

THE ENFORCIBILITY OF FIXED-TERM EMPLOYMENT CONTRACTS THAT CONFLICT WITH CORPORATE BYLAWS, 36 Tulane Law Journal 583-590 (2001).

THE INFLUENCE OF A DECADE OF STATUTORY INTERPRETATION SCHOLARSHIP ON JUDICIAL RULINGS: AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS, 53 SMU Law Review 9-30 (2000).

EXPLORING THE COMPLICATIONIST GAMBIT: AN AUSTRIAN APPROACH TO THE ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF LAW, 73 Notre Dame Law Review 316-384 (1998).

Other

IS A SIGNED OFFER SUFFICIENT TO SATISFY THE STATUTE OF FRAUDS?, 80 North Dakota Law Review 1-9 (2004).

JUDICIAL AND LAW REVIEW CITATION FREQUENCIES FOR ARTICLES PUBLISHED IN DIFFERENT ‘TIERS’ OF LAW JOURNALS: AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS, 44 Santa Clara Law Review 897-960 (2004).

RANKING SPECIALIZED LAW REVIEWS: A METHODOLOGICAL CRITIQUE, 26 Florida State University Law Review 837-849 (1999).

RANKING THE ENVIRONMENTAL LAW, NATURAL RESOURCES LAW, AND LAND USE PLANNING JOURNALS: A SURVEY OF EXPERT OPINION, 23 William & Mary Environmental Law & Policy Review 273-297 (1998).

RANKING INTERNATIONAL AND COMPARATIVE LAW JOURNALS: A SURVEY OF EXPERT OPINION, 31 International Lawyer 869-886 (1997).

DOES THE CHICAGO SCHOOL NEED TO EXPAND ITS CURRICULUM? (review of Law and Economics: New and Critical Perspectives (Robin Paul Malloy & Christopher Braun, editors)), 22 Law & Social Inquirer 149-169 (1997).

PUTTING THE CHICAGO SCHOOL DEBATE IN PROPER PERSPECTIVE, 22 Law & Social Inquirer 201-207 (1997).

COMPARING AMERICAN AND NEW ZEALAND LEGAL EDUCATION: ARE AMERICAN LAW SCHOOLS TOO GOOD?, 30 Vanderbilt Transactional Law Journal 31-57 (1997).