Law Commons^™

Expanding The Nafta Chapter 19 Dispute Settlement System: A Way To Declaw Trade Remedy Laws In A Free Trade Area Of The Americas?, Stephen Powell

Stephen Joseph Powell

Chapter 19 of the NAFTA transfers judicial review of U.S., Canadian, and Mexican government investigations under the controversial anti-dumping and countervailing duty (AD/CVD) laws from national courts to binational panels of private international law experts. The system stands as a unique surrender of judicial sovereignty to an international body, a hybrid of national courts and international dispute settlement with as yet no parallel in the world of international trade or other international law regimes. Binational panel decisions have been controversial because agencies chafe at their intimate examination of agency findings and supporting evidence. Panels also are viewed as substantially more …

Bargaining Without Law, Robert J. Condlin

Robert J. Condlin

Like a professional athlete on growth hormones, legal bargaining scholarship has transformed itself over the years. Once an amateurish assortment of war stories and folk tales, now it is a hulking behemoth of social science surveys and studies. There is a lot to like in this transformation. Much of the new writing is insightful, sophisticated, and spirited, with things to tell even the most experienced bargainer. But it also is missing something important: law. Bargaining scholars now routinely write about dispute settlement as if the strength of the parties’ competing legal claims is of no consequence. Rarely do they discuss …

The Potential Contribution Of Adr To An Integrated Curriculum: Preparing Law Students For Real World Lawyering, John Lande, Jean R. Sternlight

John Lande

This Article briefly reviews the long history of critiques of legal education that highlight the failure to adequately prepare students for what they will and should do as attorneys. It takes a sober look at the hurdles reformers face when trying to make significant curricular changes. Recognizing these substantial barriers, it proposes a modest and feasible menu of reforms that interested faculty and law schools can achieve without investing substantial additional resources. The proposals are not intended as a comprehensive package to be implemented on an all-or-nothing basis but as a set of options to be selected by individual faculty …

Collaborative Lawyers’ Duties To Screen The Appropriateness Of Collaborative Law And Obtain Clients’ Informed Consent To Use Collaborative Law, John Lande, Forrest S. Mosten

John Lande

Collaborative Law (CL) is an innovative dispute resolution process that offers significant benefits but also poses significant non-obvious risks. In CL, the lawyers and clients sign a “participation agreement” promising to use an interest-based approach to negotiation and fully disclose all relevant information. A key element of CL is the “disqualification agreement,” which provides that both CL lawyers would be disqualified from representing the clients if the case is litigated. CL is designed to encourage parties to stay in the process which can be good, though sometimes parties feel stuck there, having invested thousands of dollars and at risk of …

The Persistence Of Low Expectations In Special Education Law Viewed Through The Lens Of Therapeutic Jurisprduence, Richard Peterson

Richard Peterson

For more than thirty-five years a paradigm of low expectations has infected efforts to educate children with disabilities and has been a persistent and stubborn obstacle to the successful implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), and its predecessor, the Education of All Handicapped Children Act (EAHCA). This dilemma raises questions addressed in this paper: What is meant by low expectations in the context of Special Education Law? What are the root causes of this phenomenon, and what makes it so resistant to change? How does it impede implementation of the IDEA? And lastly, in what ways does …

Lessons From The Field: First Impressions From Second Generation Negotiation Teaching, Kenneth Fox, Manon Schonewille, Esra Çuhadar-Gürkaynak

Kenneth H Fox

In May, 2008, an international group of 50 negotiation scholars and teachers met in Rome, Italy, to launch a four year project to rethink negotiation theory and pedagogy. From its inception, the Rethinking Negotiation Teaching project (NT 2.0 project) has had two primary goals: to significantly advance our understanding of the negotiation process in all its complexity; and to improve how we teach others about negotiation. The first year of this four-year project focused on generating new ideas and approaches to negotiation scholarship and teaching. Some of this scholarship was published in the book Rethinking Negotiation Teaching and some in …

Reweaving The Fabric Of Society: Restorative Justice In The United States, Kenneth Fox

Kenneth H Fox

This article provides an overview of restorative justice practices in the United States. It offers a brief history of the field, articulates its underlying values, and describes its primary forms of practice. The purpose of this article is to introduce readers to an emerging and important way to re-think how citizens relate to one another and to the “state” when crime occurs.

Anatomy Of The First Public International Sports Arbitration And The Future Of Public Arbitration After Usada V. Floyd Landis, Maureen A. Weston Prof.

Maureen A Weston

Mere weeks after American professional cyclist Floyd Landis seemingly won the 2006 Tour de France, the United States Anti-Doping Association (USADA), under the authority granted to it by the U.S. Congress, and through its enforcement of the World Anti-Doping Code (WADC), accused him of having committed doping violations during the race. Landis vehemently denied these allegations, and accused the French laboratory that had performed the testing of his post-race samples, the Laboratoire National du Depistage du Dopage (LNDD), of bias and misconduct in his case.

Under USADA rules, an American athlete accused of doping may request an arbitration hearing before …

The Other Avenues Of Hall Street And Prospects For Judicial Review Of Arbitral Awards, Maureen A. Weston Prof.

Maureen A Weston

In Hall Street Associates, L.L.C. v. Mattel, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) provided the exclusive grounds for judicial vacatur and modification of arbitral awards covered under the Act. In so ruling, the Court rejected the contention that the FAA’s requirement to enforce arbitration contracts as written includes private contracts that seek to expand the scope of judicial review beyond the grounds enumerated in the FAA. Despite holding that parties cannot expand a court’s power to review an arbitration award under the FAA, the Court alluded to the possibility of “other possible avenues” for …