Law Commons^™

Class Action's Last Hope: The Argument For Federal Statutory Rights Preemption Of The Federal Arbitration Act: In Re American Express Merchants' Litigation, Matthew Reddish

Journal of Dispute Resolution

This note will examine the history behind several recent federal decisions on class arbitration as well as federal antitrust laws and how antitrust laws should be enforced in the shadow of the FAA.

Privately Employed Hearing Officers: Hearing Board Procedures Of The New York Stock Exchange, David J. Agatstein

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

California Code Of Civil Procedure Sections 877, 877.5 And 877.6: The Settlement Game In The Ballpark That Tech-Bilt, Emery J. Mishky, Robert Tessier, Patrick G. Vastano

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Recent Developments In Alternative Dispute Resolution , Lee R. Petillon

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Mandatory Summary Jury Trial In Federal Court: Foundationally Flawed, Nina Jill Spiegel

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Rule 408: Maintaining The Sheild For Negotiation In Federal And Bankruptcy Courts, Leslie T. Gladstone

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Implications Of Alternative Dispute Resolution Processes For Decisionmaking In Administrative Disputes, Wallace Warfield

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Using Court-Annexed Arbitration To Reduce Litigant Costs And To Increase The Pace Of Litigation, John L. Barkai, Gene Kassebaum

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Mediation - A Preferred Method Of Dispute Resolution, Kenneth R. Feinberg

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Lost Options For Mutual Gain? The Layperson, The Lawyer, And Dispute Resolution In Early America, Carli N. Conklin

Faculty Publications

In 1786, legal reform activist Benjamin Austin undertook a campaign to promote the use of arbitration over litigation as the primary method of dispute resolution in Massachusetts. Although supported by a groundswell of anti-lawyer sentiment, Austin ultimately failed in securing the triumph of arbitration. Exploring Austin's pamphlet campaign in its historical context not only provides us with a snapshot of the arguments for and against dispute resolution in early America, but also serves as a corrective to the prevailing accounts of arbitration in American legal history. This article explores the context and content of Austin's pamphlet campaign and its implications …

Arbitral Autonomy, Liaquat Ali Khan

Ali Khan

This Article presents concrete proposals to amend the current arbitration law for minimizing court intervention into arbitration proceedings and enforcement of arbitral awards. As a method of dispute resolution, arbitration offers an alternative to litigation. Yet arbitration is frequently interspersed with litigation. As a true alternative, arbitration should be, and can be, autonomous, that is, litigation-free. Arbitral autonomy fails when parties go to court to challenge validity of the arbitration agreement, to obtain emergency relief, or to contest enforceability of the award, among other reasons. To accomplish litigation-free arbitration, first, the need to go to court must be minimized; second, …

What Sally Soprano Teaches Lawyers About Hitting The Right Ethical Note In Adr Advocacy, Elayne E. Greenberg

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

Paradoxically, when lawyers opt to mediate or arbitrate, lawyers may still wind up selecting, shaping and advocating in these dispute resolution processes to resemble the very litigation process they have sought to avoid. After all, litigation likely comports with the lawyer’s own conflict style, comfort level and concepts of justice. As a consequence of this litigation bias, we see that the metaphorical doors of a multi-door courthouse that once offered a menu of dispute resolution choices are increasingly leading us back to one choice: a variation of the litigation door. Even though the Model Rules of Professional Conduct confirm …

In Quest Of The Arbitration Trifecta, Or Closed Door Litigation?: The Delaware Arbitration Program, Thomas Stipanowich

Thomas J. Stipanowich

The Delaware Arbitration Program established a procedure by which businesses can agree to have their disputes heard in an arbitration proceeding before a sitting judge of the state’s highly regarded Chancery Court. The Program arguably offers a veritable trifecta of procedural advantages for commercial parties, including expert adjudication, efficient case management and short cycle time and, above all, a proceeding cloaked in secrecy. It also may enhance the reputation of Delaware as the forum of choice for businesses. But the Program’s ambitious intermingling of public and private forums brings into play the longstanding tug-of-war between the traditional view of court …

Litigating Religion, Michael A. Helfand

Michael A Helfand

This article considers how parties should resolve disputes that turn on religious doctrine and practice – that is, how people should litigate religion. Under current constitutional doctrine, litigating religion is generally the task of two types of religious institutions: first, religious arbitration tribunals, whose decisions are protected by arbitration doctrine, and religious courts, whose decision are protected by the religion clauses. Such institutions have been thrust into playing this role largely because the religion clauses are currently understood to prohibit courts from resolving religious questions – that is, the “religious question” doctrine is currently understood to prohibit courts from litigating …