Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Series

UF Law Faculty Publications

Dispute resolution

2002

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

Dr Ethics Book Brings It All Together, Jonathan R. Cohen Jul 2002

Dr Ethics Book Brings It All Together, Jonathan R. Cohen

UF Law Faculty Publications

Dispute resolution practice has changed dramatically over the past several decades. The traditional litigation model has increasingly given way to a “multi-door” vision of varied dispute resolution practices. With that functional change in how we process disputes has come a pressing need to address the varied ethical challenges of these varied practices. Dispute Resolution Ethics is a marvelous contribution toward that effort.


The Contemplative Lawyer: On The Potential Contributions Of Mindfulness Meditation To Law Students, Lawyers, And Their Clients, Leonard L. Riskin Apr 2002

The Contemplative Lawyer: On The Potential Contributions Of Mindfulness Meditation To Law Students, Lawyers, And Their Clients, Leonard L. Riskin

UF Law Faculty Publications

This Article proposes that introducing mindfulness meditation into the legal profession may improve practitioners' well-being and performance and weaken the dominance of adversarial mind-sets. By enabling some lawyers to make more room for - and act from - broader and deeper perspectives, mindfulness can help lawyers provide more appropriate service (especially through better listening and negotiation) and gain more personal satisfaction from their work.

Part I of this article describes a number of problems associated with law school and law practice. Part II sets forth a variety of ways in which lawyers, law schools, and professional organizations have tried to address these ...


Legislating Apology: The Pros And Cons, Jonathan R. Cohen Apr 2002

Legislating Apology: The Pros And Cons, Jonathan R. Cohen

UF Law Faculty Publications

Should apologies be admissible into evidence as proof of fault in civil cases? While this question is a simple one, its potential ramifications are great, and legislative and scholarly interest in the admissibility of apologies has exploded. Shortly after the idea of excluding apologies from admissibility into evidence was raised in academic circles three years ago, it rapidly spread to the policy arena. For example, California and Florida enacted laws in 2000 and 2001 respectively excluding from admissibility apologetic expressions of sympathy ("I'm sorry that you are hurt") but not fault-admitting apologies ("I'm sorrythat I injured you") after ...