Two of my principal antipathies, doubtless idiosyncratic (though not unshared), are Festschriften and student-run law reviews . . . . [1. Tony Weir, All Or Nothing?, 78 Tul. L. Rev. 511, 512 (2004).]

—Tony Weir

Although his name appeared often in the bylines, text, and margins of the Tulane Law Review, these words opened the last of many pieces Tony Weir contributed.  In writing of Judge Martin L.C. Feldman, he noted that despite these antipathies “my esteem for [him] helped me overcome them in this instance.”

In deference to Weir’s aversion to Festschriften, this Issue does not intend to assume that form nor its name.  The Editors have instructed each of the authors to omit any allusion to Weir the individual, and instead to use these pages to expand upon his body of work in the comparative law, especially with regard to the law of torts.[2. Id.]

Because we are unable to give deference to Weir’s other antipathy, the Editors hope that the authors’ esteem for him would have helped him overcome his distaste for student-run law reviews in this instance as well.  We dedicate the Issue to him in his words:  “[We] proffer the following . . . as a friendly token of [our] regard.”[3. Id.]