37 Suffolk University Law Review 981 (2004)
The word "rejoinder" connotes a reply to criticism, and that connotation sets the scope of this short essay. This Rejoinder will leave aside (albeit with thanks) the articles that explain the background to, the context for, or particular aspects of the Uniform Limited Partnership Act (2001). Instead, this Rejoinder will focus on the three articles that purport to find a blemish (Professor Bishop), a general theoretical deficiency (Mr. Callison and Dean Vestal), or a fundamental misconception (Professor Ribstein) in the new Act.
Kleinberger, Daniel S., "The Reporter's Rejoinder" (2004). Faculty Scholarship. 509.