Ill-Gotten Gains: Evasion, Blackmail, Fraud, and Kindred Puzzles of the Law (Paperback)

by Leo Katz (Author) "I HAVE READ somewhere, and I do not remember where, a shrewd bit of marriage advice credited to F. Scott Fitzgerald: "Don't marry for money,..." (more)
Key Phrases: punishment puzzle, utilitarian surgeon, deontological point, Deep Throat, New York, United States (more...)

Editorial Reviews

Amazon.com Review
One of the things that attracts some people to lawyers and repels the rest of us is their ability to see and create loopholes. If the law is an ass, it is a very clever one. This book, by a University of Pennsylvania law professor, investigates the loophole phenomenon to a fare-thee-well. Want to use damaging information about a competitor to keep her away from an interview for a job you're both vying for, but don't want to violate the extortion statutes? Then see p. 2. Mad enough at your son to want to burn his house down with him in it but don't want to get convicted of first-degree murder? The recipe for that is on p. 38. Katz serves up a rich variety of examples and their variations to arrive at a general theory of what lawyers are doing when they -- legally -- walk their clients around a law. Truth be told though, the examples are a lot more compelling than the theory. --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

From Library Journal
Criminal law performs two useful functions: it defines certain conduct as so harmful to the individual or the community as to justify society's forbidding that conduct, and it provides a method of punishment for those whose conduct violates society's norms. Katz (law, Univ. of Pennsylvania) examines three forms of conduct-tax evasion, blackmail, and fraud-that he terms related mysteries and that all involve legality and morally puzzling forms of theft. All three involve some form of ill-gotten economic gain. Wanting us to consider why this conduct should be deemed criminal at all, Katz argues that these three forms of theft are the most prominent examples of the nonutilitarian character of much of our legal and moral thinking. He even shows that this conduct might be justified on purely economic grounds, particularly where there is no harm to other individuals or the community at large. While this is a good, well-written book full of interesting examples, it will probably appeal to a limited group of better-educated readers.
Jerry E. Stephens, U.S. Court of Appeals Lib., Oklahoma City
Copyright 1996 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 308 pages
• Publisher: University Of Chicago Press (May 8, 1998)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0226425940
• ISBN-13: 978-0226425948
• Product Dimensions: 9 x 6 x 0.9 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 5.0 out of 5 stars See all reviews (1 customer review)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #998,340 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

10 of 10 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars I like the way he thinks, July 22, 2001

By	John S. Ryan "Scott Ryan" (Silver Lake, OH) - See all my reviews (TOP 500 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)

I'm turning into quite a fan of Leo Katz. I was so impressed by his _Bad Acts and Guilty Minds_ that I picked this one up almost at once. And it's just as good.

This time around, Katz's plan is to deal with what he calls "three related mysteries": the moral problem of "avoision" (i.e., what counts as morally bad evasion and what merely as legitimate avoidance); the moral nature of e.g. blackmail and insider trading (i.e., what, if anything, justifies our all but universal moral intuitions that these and other similar acts are genuinely wrong); and the problem of "undeserved glory" (and what's wrong with appropriating someone else's fame).

I won't try to spell out Katz's examples and arguments under each of these headings, for I could not do so if I tried: his discussions are very well organized, but they pass from one subtopic to another with such rapidity and ease that I would have a hard time deciding just what to select. In general I shall say only that even where I disagree with him (as I sometimes do), his lively and provocative analysis is a sheer joy to read.

His most prominent theme is also one of which I heartily approve. There are some lawyers, philosophers, and especially economists who think it is possible to be both a libertarian and a utilitarian. Katz forcefully disagrees (as do I). And one purpose of this volume is to hammer that point home.

Himself apparently a libertarian, Katz argues repeatedly and at length that libertarianism requires a deontological foundation; utilitarianism is simply inadequate in every respect. Along the way he also mounts a striking _deontological_ defense of the role of the attorney (in helping clients to avoid malignant moral outrages by "capitalizing on the deontological properties of legal rules," p. 131; you'll have to read the book to find out just what this means). And in one brief passage that one could wish were longer, he follows Amartya Sen to a striking conclusion: libertarianism is _also_ incompatible with complete freedom of contract. As in his earlier book, Katz's own outlook seems to be a sort of self-critical intuitionism along the lines of Judith Jarvis Thomson (whose "trolley problem" also gets a further workout here).

I wrote in my review of Katz's previous book that it was all but unique. I am happy to say that isn't entirely so; this book is a lot like it. Highly recommended.