Page 165 - The First Fifty Years

Do Not Delete 1/8/2015 10:16 AM

ENDURINGLY GREAT 159

books and other themed issues that, while hugely valuable to
HLR’s growing prestige, nonetheless took a considerable toll on
efficiency and resources.14 The Evidence Handbook came to the
rescue once again, this time thoroughly revised by HLR’s own
Cathy Cochran.15

The Review achieved lofty heights during its fourth decade.16
Not even a flood of almost biblical proportions, in June 2001,
brought on by a ferocious tropical storm, could submerge the
journal’s now well-established excellence. Allison did its worst,
but HLR still published Issue 38:3 on time that fall. Decade 4’s
other notable challenge involved concluding the mutually
beneficial relationship HLR had developed with the Health Law
Institute’s nearly annual symposia. But the organization rose to
the challenge, finding more-than-suitable replacements in the
Frankel Lectures and the new symposia series from the Institute
for Intellectual Property & Information Law (IPIL).

At the beginning of Decade 5, having overcome all prior
adversities, the Review was well-positioned to build on the
numerous achievements of its first 40 years.

A Place Beyond

By the beginning of Houston Law Review’s fifth decade, the
exceptional had become the norm in terms of HLR’s “business as
usual” scholarship. The journal’s notable non-themed issue
scholarship had grown entirely too abundant to be recited in full
in this essay, although a sample reveals the depth of success that
HLR had achieved. Professors from Penn, Vanderbilt, Fordham,
North Carolina, UC Davis, Ohio State, Minnesota, Washington,
Alabama, Florida, and Indiana all published in Houston Law
Review’s non-themed issues of Decade 5.

The success was evident immediately in the pages of Volume
41. D. Don Welch of Vanderbilt authored “What’s Going On?” in
the Law School Curriculum, Melissa B. Jacoby of North Carolina
wrote Negotiating Bankruptcy Legislation Through the News
Media, and Sheila R. Foster of Fordham published Causation in
Antidiscrimination Law: Beyond Intent Versus Impact.17 Joining
them were authors from Seton Hall, Connecticut, SMU,
Arkansas, and LSU. In a single volume, the scholarship of
Houston Law Review included non-Texas based contributions
that would have compared favorably with all of Decade 1’s
content combined.

As always, the Review continued to publish legal scholarship
relevant to the times, diverse in category, and unrelenting in
quality of author. Given the Law Center’s own rise in national