Law Commons^™

The Right Mix, Richard C. Reuben

Faculty Publications

This edition of Dispute Resolution Magazine explores several aspects of the problem. It begins with a debate between Jean Sternlight and Theodore 0. Rogers over the propriety of mandatory predispute arbitration processes in the consumer and employment contexts, followed by a proposal by Terry Trantina for a "constructive compromise" regarding the general validity of arbitration agreements in contracts of adhesion.

This trio of essays is followed by articles on two major arbitration reform efforts. The first, by Thomas J. Stipanowich and J. Clark Kelso, discusses the rise of protocols and other industry standards intended to bring fairness to the arbitratica …

Recent Developments: The Uniform Arbitration Act, Benjamin K. Byrd, Mondonna L. Ghasedi, Robert J. Steintjes, Michelle Trant

Journal of Dispute Resolution

This Article is an overview of recent court decisions that interpret state versions of the Uniform Arbitration Act ("U.A.A.").' Arbitration statutes patterned after the U.A.A. have been adopted by thirty-four states and the District of Columbia.' The goal of this project is to promote uniformity in the interpretation of the U.A.A. by articulating the underlying policies and rationales of recent court decisions interpreting the U.A.A.

Failing Faith In Litigation? A Survey Of Business Lawyers' And Executives' Opinions, John M. Lande

Faculty Publications

To provide a more systematic assessment of contemporary faith in litigation, this article looks at a particular context-- business litigation--and analyzes the opinions of three groups of respondents: lawyers in private law firms who do commercial litigation (“outside counsel”), lawyers employed in business firms who do some litigation (“inside counsel”), and nonlawyer executives in business firms (“executives”). These groups have the greatest exposure to litigation in the corporate setting; furthermore, because they play powerful roles in our political, economic, and social life as well as the legal system, their opinions influence public opinion more generally.

I'Ll Take It For What It Is Worth -- The Use Of Hearsay Evidence By Labor Arbitrators: A Primer And Modest Proposal, Marvin F. Hill, Jr., Tammy M. Westhoff,

Journal of Dispute Resolution

This article considers these and other selected problems dealing with hearsay evidence that are likely to be encountered in the arbitral forum. It is our thesis that arbitrators do and should credit some (but not all) forms of hearsay evidence, but that the arbitral process is not served by admitting all evidence and "taking it for what it is worth." Further, we believe when an advocate's case against a grievant consists entirely of hearsay evidence, and there is no reliable substitute for cross examination or "equivalent circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness," the grievant should prevail. Only in the rarest of cases …

Preliminary Injunction Of Arbitration Proceedings - Six Clinics Holding Corporation, Ii V. Cafcomp Systems, Inc., Heidi Albers

Journal of Dispute Resolution

The issue presented in Six Clinics Holding Corporation, I v. Cafcomp Systems, Inc., is whether a court is prohibited from issuing a preliminary injunction in a case subject to arbitration.' The parties had a private agreement to arbitrate any disputes, but the court enjoined the arbitration in order to determine a federal issue outside the arbitrator's jurisdiction The defendant argued that the Anti-Injunction Act, which prohibits federal courts from enjoining state court proceedings, was violated.4 However, the court found a loophole by stating that a private arbitration is not a state proceeding and thus is not governed by the Act.5 …