Should Judges Intervene?

, Special to


Should judges be able to reject settlements between parties when the government is one of the litigants? columnist Joel Cohen weighs in.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at

What's being said

  • the widow Foley

    Agreed. Judges should also consider discontinuing Court reinforcement of shareholder oppression, speaking to their current role of perpetuating the "remedy" to shareholder oppression, namely a Court-ordered forced buyout at terms dictated by the majority, If my husband wanted to leave his shares to his partners, he would have. They are the only ones who have gained any benefit from them.

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202644169623

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.