Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
State Court Invalidation Of A Federal Regulation: Thomas V. North Carolina Department Of Human Resources, Gary L. Cole
State Court Invalidation Of A Federal Regulation: Thomas V. North Carolina Department Of Human Resources, Gary L. Cole
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
No abstract provided.
Self-Represented Litigants And The Access To Justice Revolution In The State Courts: Cross-Pollinating Perspectives Toward A Dialogue For Innovation In The Courts And The Administrative System, Richard Zorza
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
In the last ten to fifteen years, state courts have responded to a tidal wave of self-represented litigants with a wide range of innovations that are fundamentally transforming the courts. These innovations impact the whole system and range from new ways of accepting cases into the system to innovative courtroom procedures and management practices, and from a more proactive process of managing the flow of cases to innovations that help make sure that the parties comply with the court's orders. Indeed, the Self-Represented Litigation Network, a national network of groups working for access to justice for the self-represented, has identified …
Mediation Confidentiality: For California Litigants, Why Should Mediation Confidentiality Be A Function Of The Court In Which The Litigation Is Pending?, Rebecca Callahan
Mediation Confidentiality: For California Litigants, Why Should Mediation Confidentiality Be A Function Of The Court In Which The Litigation Is Pending?, Rebecca Callahan
Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal
The article presents information on mediation confidentiality. Confidentiality protections are available to California litigants depending on whether the litigants are in state or federal court. It depicts that California courts provide protection only when disputants utilize mediation for resolving their differences and also focuses on the evidence exclusion provision in which the privilege held by participant acts as bar to compel discovery without everyone's consent.