Congrats, Al!

Well, see, I've already provided your first slide for your workshop

Ha! Happy to have been useful . . .

I'm in the same boat, Tamara. They have so far been very good, it seems, about accommodating people on other flights, including flights on another airline. But it's still a risk.

Hi Alex -- yes, the reference is to the AA-Reno Air merger, when the court awarded AA more than $45 million dollars in damages due to the pilot union "sick out." Naturally, there could not be a court ruling yet on this week's actions. But the prior case must be very much on the minds of those who were around to experience it.

The Fortune Teller! I had forgotten that one . . .

Interesting post, Peter. Welcome, and glad to have you with us.

Definitely haunted.

Thanks Patrick.

Good to be back, Al. Thanks! Sent from my iPad

Great to hear from you, Bill -- and can't wait to hear more about your summer travel as well.

The collegehumor link is brilliant!

Ill have to leave that one to Taibi -- just because Im an academic doesnt mean I have *endless* amounts of free time. :-)

"I do not believe that calling Dimon down to a congressional hearing and reading him the riot act is useful at all. " On this we are in complete agreement (as any sane person should be). But the pols must have their few moments on tape giving Dimon a tongue-lashing to prove that they're not all soft on the banks. Yada yada.

There's some speculation in the press today, James, that there may be more losses -- they don't know, of course, but it is a reasonable story. I may blog more about that later today if I have time. You may have seen, Adam, that a few folks are calling for more stringent measures, such as breaking up large banks or returning to Glass-Steagall, in the wake of this news. That's probably not the same as what you have in mind with "punishment" (which I take to be a call for individual accountability) but it is more harsh than Dodd Frank. I doubt that any of these proposals will have traction, absent another 2008-like episode.

"when I head for Sicily and the Veneto" Oh, I'm so jealous! Bring photos back, please . . .

Hi Bill -- the IG9 is actually a corporate credit index, not a mortgage index.

Thanks for this, Joan. Sent from my iPad

My experience on United last week pretty much mirrored this -- no ability to use the computer, old frequent flyer numbers didn't work, no ability to look up new numbers, etc. etc. So it looks as if they've managed to adopt new processes and systems that neither set of employees understand. I was particularly understanding and good natured about this, having just traveled 20 hours with the flu. And, naturally, my rant was completely effective in getting the desired results.

I agree - quite clever. Sent from my iPad

Thanks, Matt -- theyll be published next year in the Duke Law Journal. Patrick, you might want to take a look at the Katzenstein and Bradley-Gulati articles, in addition to Postemas when they are posted. All address to some extent emergent customs, or the ways in which custom forms and changes, and thus talk a bit about the type of newer traditions that you mention, whether they can properly be called custom, what are the consequences of that, etc. Sent from my iPad

Excellent question, Patrick. As you might expect, a fair amount of time yesterday was devoted to definitional issues. I won’t be able to properly rephrase Gerry Postema’s excellent comment on this, but something about the term custom being an amorphous cloud that we have to corral just long enough to all talk about the same thing, even if some wisps get out and then it all goes away. He said it much more eloquently, of course. I’d say, first, that I think our group would all agree that tradition is different from custom, in that custom is obligatory, whereas tradition is not – it’s just what normally happens. A few folks discuss this in the draft papers for the symposium, so you might want to look at it when it comes out. Social norms, however, is different and I think that most of us used that term interchangeably with custom, though I don’t know if that is really correct (maybe it depends on the circumstance?). The international law folks, I suspect, may have to define custom a little more narrowly than others to make it useful for them since, as you know better than I do, their main concern is when custom becomes binding as law, so there are more conditions to meet. I’ll let you know if anything else interesting emerges from today’s discussion. And, if you haven’t yet, you might want to check the website in the link I posted yesterday. Our summer reading papers and speaker series are there, and some of those papers (including the Postema paper, if I recall correctly) tackle definitional issues.

Thanks for this, Patrick.

Good questions, Bill

Great post, David. And a fascinating question. I'd love to know more about your course and possibly see a reading list if you're willing to pass it on at some point. Best, Kim