Andrew Schwartz

Countless contracts have been undermined by the COVID-19 pandemic of 2020 as well as government orders to contain it. Flights have been canceled, concerts have been called off, and dorms have been closed, just to name a few. Do these all count as breaches of contract—or are the parties excused due to the extraordinary circumstances? And how should the losses be allocated between the parties? The law provides one set of answers to these questions; ethics offers another. With a focus on American law and Jewish ethics, this paper shows that the two systems are in accord with some respects and differ in others: Both law and Jewish ethics would excuse a party who cannot complete his contract due to a force beyond his control, like the COVID-19 pandemic. Yet Jewish ethics would require that the excused party still be paid, while American law would not.

This article situates Nathaniel Branden's unique contributions to clinical psychology in the cognitive and behavioral therapy traditions, and describes ways in which Brandenian concepts were prefigured in the work of Alfred Adler and have been echoed in the work of modern behavior therapists, most notably Steven Hayes and Marsha Linehan. A dialectical sensibility common to all these contributors is noted. The article concludes with a reflection on Branden's sociological fate, offering an analogy between Freud's rejection of Adler and Milton Erickson's rejection of Branden, reported here in print for the first time.