Partnership

This book is an invaluable guideline for first-time clinical supervisors of student teachers. Sample observation forms and letters of reference are given for various scenarios, as well as advice on troubleshooting and dealing with problems in the field.

Forty authors contribute to this anthology of essays discussing issues such as the gender wage gap, work and family benefits, temporary and part-time work, and female leadership in unions.

You've really got to wonder why it is that publishers keep turning to Geoffrey Giuliano for Beatles books?

Is it the publishers' assumptions that we only want to read about the seedy underbelly of popstars? Is it because dirty stories sell better than honest ones? Does he come cheap?

The shame of it is that people keep buying them - and to those of you who are lead to believe that he's an expert and writing the truth - it's not so. Geoffrey Giuliano clearly does little real research, he goes on basic stories available anywhere (or dredged up from scandal sheets) and turns them into "history."

Geoffrey Giuliano books offer NOTHING to readers wanting to learn about the Beatles (or any of his other targets). He goes straight for the scummy side of his subjects and where finding not enough, elaborates. Look, I have NOTHING against truth, and there is no value to books that ignore the bad side of a celebrity's life. But to simply focus on dirt, rumor and scandal just to sell books...awful.

Geoffrey Giuliano books are to literature as Jerry Springer is to television. Avoid, please...

Lennon's a genius, McCartney is boring and pretenious, Starr is a no talent hack and Harrison merely a brat... riiiiiiiiiiiiight.

The writing is amatuerish in nature, with an overabundance of exclamation points where none are necessary; a clear bias towards one of his subject matters over the other; and inaccurate information even the most casual Beatle fan would be quick to point out.

Author doesn't stay on the topic implied from the title of the book, that being the relationship between the two men. The subject quickly mushrooms to a boring, shallow book on the Beatles.

Avoid.

So far I had only read Lennon In America by Geoffrey Giuliano - a book that I absolutely hated. It was therefore that I wasn't expecting a lot from this book, but I must say that at least this one is better in style. An entertaining read.
The focus of the book is the relationship between Lennon & McCartney and how they collaborated on songs in (mainly) the early stages. Later on they didn't write together anymore (well hardly), but because of the rivalry that existed between them, each motivated the other to come up with some of the best songs ever written in this world.
George and Ringo hardly feature in the book, which seems a bit strange as the book deals with the career of Lennon / McCartney and The Beatles in a strictly chronological order and of course George and Ringo played a major role in that. To be fair though, in the author's notes Giuliano already announces that the book mentions the works of George and Ringo only in passing, without the amount of detail that is given to Lennon & McCartney.
The book describes how John and Paul met, started playing music in Julia's bathroom, wrote their first songs together, became The Beatles, how they worked in the studio, how their relationship grew from bad to worse and briefly describes their song writing after the Beatles broke up. All of this interspersed with quotes and bits of (mostly well known) interviews.
Right from the start, it is very clear that the author likes Lennon a lot better than McCartney. Lennon is always the genius, McCartney always has other motives in anything he does and is just waiting for a chance to take control of The Beatles.
Lennon's music is innovative and (often) provocative, while McCartney writes songs that are sugar coated and suitable for old age pensioners....
In summary, an entertainingly written book, but not a must have.

For someone looking for very light reading on Ike and Churchill, this may be an appropriate choice. I could envision a high school history teacher assigning this to 16-18 year old students. It is generally enjoyable but it certainly isn't thorough or definitive. It can't be compared to masterpiece works of history,... This, indeed, is "history lite."

But what is supremely disappointing about this book is its factual errors. For instance, at one point in the book Mr. Humes writes of Ike and Churchill meeting in '59, apparently AFTER their respective political tenures were completed, with Ike lamenting JFK's handling of the Bay of Pigs and Berlin Wall crises, and Churchill disparaging Anthny Eden's tenure as PM of Great Britain. But they certainly DID NOT have this discussion in '59. Ike's Presidency lasted until January '61 and our setbacks in Cuba and Berlin didn't happen until later in 1961-62. How could Humes, or more importantly the editor, get this wrong? At another point in the book, he dates the Suez Crisis to 1959 - it happened in October 1956! Earlier he writes of the tragic death of Ike's son at age 3. Hume identifies the baby as Dwight David. His actual name was Doud Dwight, his first name being Mamie's maiden name. He dates Wilson's entry into WWI in 1916. It was 1917, after the 1916 election wherein Wilson campaigned on the "He Kept Us Out Of War" slogan.

If it weren't for these inexcusable factual errors, I could endorse this as light summertime reading for the casual historian... I'm also surprised that David Eisenhower wrote a forward to the book (well done) and that Bill Buckley provided a jacket-cover recommendation. These guys obviously didn't read it - they surely would have noticed the aggravating factual errors I found.

Finally, while I'm an Ike fan and believe he's one of America's finest leaders of the 20th century - both as General and President - I think Humes gives too much credit with the suggestion that he "saved the world" along with Churchill... Professor Humes would be advised to remember,... that other heroes ... deserve lots of credit...

The book only gives general information about LLC's in all 50 states, and no specific information about LLC's in Illinois. Question in point: Does Illionis allow single-owner LLC's? You wont find the answer in this book! I was also disappointed when I read about choosing a business structure. By improperly describing the tax ramifications of an LLC, partnership, and sole-propriotorship, the book tries to steer most (not all) readers towards starting a corporation. Why? Maybe because the book conatains the 1-800 phone number of a business that can provide you with the necessary documents?? The book is not a total loss, however it does not live up to its title and contains tax information that is very biased, if not blatantly wrong.

very good pointfor this book...

Has some good basic information, but not worth the asking price. Half of the book is sample parnership documents.

At first, I was afraid of agency & partnership, then later I realized that these subjects are covered already in torts and corporations courses. This lecture series is long even though the material is quite simple. I have two problems with this product. There are four tapes on agency and partnership, respectively. First, for each subject the professor spend three tapes telling the rules and then the last tape saying, "Okay, now here are the rules from the new Restatement." They should have said the most updated rules from the start. Second, (and please forgive the age-ism here), the back cover shows the Munch is an older gentleman. When you listen to the tapes, you will learn that he has an old man's voice. Whereas other tapes have younger people cracking jokes because they know many of these law subjects are tedious, here you have the kind of old professor that will make you go to sleep. Again, please forgive the unintended courseness of that observation. But honestly, his voice will be an impediment to listening to this series.

Mr. Sabrin's book is nothing more than a fabrication of "historical" events. His sources for the book come entirely from the Soviet Ministry of Information and the KGB. Sadly, the book's purpose is indeed to exaggerate and inflame any differences between Jews and Ukrainians. Mr. Sabrin and the authors like him have few adherents in the post-Soviet era.

Here is a most distinct sloppy and truly un reserched work on the issue of collaboration in Central and Eastern Europe. The author's reliance on KGB provided docuentation make one wonder what the purposes realy was in writting this "work". Purpose of the work seems to have been the inflamation of unfounded animosity of Ukrainians and Jews. A comparative study on the collaboration of other nations with the Nazi's vis-a-vis Jews would reveal that French and Polish and Czech collaboration lead to a much more significant toll on the Jewish population in those occupied territories than in Nazi occupied Ukraine.

I know my history and this book is pure nonsense, fabrication and a revision of history to support a hidden agenda. Ukrainians also were in large numbers, inhabitants of the very same concentration camps as others. Put simply this book is pure racist and not worth the paper it is written on.

this book is maddening. it zigzags through material in an incomprehensible fashion. you have to work so hard to see which cases go together and how they go together. it certainly doesn't make it easy.

Hamilton has a Nutshell outline, which is okay. The Casenote Outline is quite good in my opinion.

If this book shows up on the syllabus for your Corporations class, run. There has never been a worse textbook published in the history of academia. The typos are beyond unacceptable. The flow of material makes no sense, and there is no commentary from the authors in between sections to explain why the authors seem to think the topics should be discussed in that order. The cases are incredibly badly edited. One example, out of too many to even count, is in the first case on the law of corporate directors' duty of care. The court's holding about which defendants should be liable is left in, but none of the facts about any of those defendants are in the book at all. Definitions are non-existent, and in the rare places where the authors do try to actually explain concepts, the text is full of errors and the explanations are badly written. Robert Hamilton and Jonathan Macey (the authors) should be ashamed of themselves. You'd be better off typing "business" into Westlaw or Lexis and learning it yourself.