Law Commons^™

Real Practice Systems Annotated Bibliography, John Lande

Faculty Publications

Real Practice Systems (RPS) theory holds that practitioners’ practice systems are based on their personal histories, values, goals, motivations, knowledge, and skills as well as the parties and the cases in their work. RPS analysis can be used in many dispute resolution roles such as mediator, advocate in mediation, negotiator, and litigator generally. In mediation, practitioners develop categories of cases, parties, and behavior patterns that lead them to design routine procedures and strategies for dealing with recurring challenges before, during, and after mediation sessions.

RPS theory is the culmination of much of the work in my scholarly career. The bibliography …

Existential Copyright And Professional Photography, Jessica Silbey, Eva E. Subotnik, Peter Dicola

Faculty Publications

Intellectual property law has intended benefits, but it also carries certain costs—deliberately so. Skeptics have asked: Why should intellectual property law exist at all? To get traction on that overly broad but still important inquiry, we decided to ask a new, preliminary question: What do creators in a particular industry actually use intellectual property for? In this first-of-its-kind study, we conducted thirty-two in-depth qualitative interviews of photographers about how copyright law functions within their creative and business practices. By learning the actual functions of copyright law on the ground, we can evaluate and contextualize existing theories of intellectual property. More …

The Changed Batna, Elayne E. Greenberg

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

This column invites readers to consider whether the adjudicated outcome should be relied on as a realistic benchmark for advocates and mediators. In everyday dispute resolution practice, advocates and mediators regularly consider an adjudicated decision to be a realistic point of comparison to a negotiated or mediated outcome. For example, when assessing the merits of settlement, lawyers preparing for a legal negotiation and mediation frequently consider the likely adjudicated outcome as their best alternative to a negotiated agreement (hereinafter BATNA). In mediation, mediators often focus parties and their lawyers on the cost, time and likelihood of a favorable adjudicated …

Overcoming Roadblocks To Reaching Settlement In Family Law Cases, John M. Lande

Faculty Publications

In “litigation as usual,” settlement often comes only after adversarial posturing, the original conflict escalates, the relationships deteriorate, the process takes too long and costs too much, and nobody is really happy with the resolution. This article describes roadblocks to negotiation and ways to overcome them to reach good settlements in family law cases.

Measuring The Creative Plea Bargain, Thea B. Johnson

Faculty Publications

A great deal of criminal law scholarship and practice turns on whether a defendant gets a good deal through plea bargaining. But what is a good deal? And how do defense attorneys secure such deals? Much scholarship measures plea bargains by one metric: how many years the defendant receives at sentencing. In the era of collateral consequences, however, this is no longer an adequate metric as it misses a world of bargaining that happens outside of the sentence. Through empirical research, this Article examines the measure of a good plea and the work that goes into negotiating such a plea. …

Taking Advantage Of Opportunities In Litigotiation, John M. Lande

Faculty Publications

This article is partially based on a study in which I interviewed respected lawyers about their negotiation processes in pretrial litigation. I asked these lawyers about their negotiation procedures generally, and I asked them to describe the last case they settled, starting with the first interaction with their clients in the matter. Although this article focuses on negotiation in the litigation context, some lawyers presumably use analogous procedures in transactional matters.

Family Lawyering With Planned Early Negotiation, John M. Lande

Faculty Publications

Whether you know it or not, you may already be using planned early negotiation (PEN). As the term suggests, this process involves planning to negotiate your cases at the earliest appropriate time. Normally you can be ready to negotiate long before you are ready for trial.

This article summarizes PEN procedures based on interviews with excellent lawyers about how they handle their cases. For example, one lawyer said that he “prepares for settlement from day one of the lawsuit” and that he engages in a “constant process of evaluating the claim” throughout the litigation. Planning to negotiate from the outset …

Good Pretrial Lawyering: Planning To Get To Yes Sooner, Cheaper, And Better, John M. Lande

Faculty Publications

Although the ostensible purpose for pretrial litigation is to prepare for trial, such preparation is inextricably intertwined with negotiation because the expected trial outcome is a major factor affecting negotiation. Indeed, since most litigated cases are settled, good litigators prepare for negotiation at least as much as trial. The lawyers interviewed for this article, who were selected because of their good reputations, described how they prepare for both possibilities. They recommend taking charge of their cases from the outset, which includes getting a clear understanding of clients and their interests, developing good relationships with counterpart lawyers, carefully investigating the cases, …

A Framework For Advancing Negotiation Theory: Implications From A Study Of How Lawyers Reach Agreement In Pretrial Litigation, John M. Lande

Faculty Publications

The prevailing negotiation theory tries to fit lots of square pegs into just two round holes–adversarial or cooperative bargaining. In the real world, negotiation comes in many different shapes, not just circles and squares. Analyzing law school textbook definitions of the traditional models, this article demonstrates that the two “round holes” in current negotiation theory are poorly defined. It also presents empirical accounts of actual pretrial negotiations to demonstrate that the theoretical models do not fit some real-life negotiations. It argues that it is time to replace the traditional models with a flexible framework that can accommodate virtually all legal …

Escaping From Lawyers' Prison Of Fear, John Lande

Faculty Publications

Lawyers regularly experience numerous fears endemic to their work. This is not surprising considering that lawyers generally operate in environments that frequently stimulate many fears. Lawyers’ fears can lead them to enhance their performance due to increased preparation and effective “thinking on their feet.” Fear is problematic when it is out of proportion to actual threats, is expressed inappropriately, or is chronically unaddressed effectively. It can lead to sub-optimal and counterproductive performance through paralysis, ritualized behavior, or inappropriate aggression. Some lawyers’ fears unnecessarily prevent them from performing well, producing good results for clients, earning more income, and experiencing greater satisfaction …

The Cheater’S “High”— Harmonize Ethics, Research And Negation Behavior, Elayne E. Greenberg

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

In the context of negotiations, how does “cheater’s high” influence our ethical behavior, decision-making and negotiation strategy? “Cheater’s high” is the term coined by behavioral ethics researchers to describe the positive feeling we experience when we cheat. Rather than feel guilty for these ethical transgressions as was previously believed, those who cheat actually experience a positive effect that further incentivizes the unethical behavior to continue. Even though some who are perched on their ivory tower may feel immune from “cheater’s high,” social scientists remind us that at times we all cheat to varying degrees. This cheating reality is problematic …

Lessons From Teaching Students To Negotiate Like A Lawyer, John M. Lande

Faculty Publications

This article reports my observations from teaching those courses and offers suggestions for future efforts to improve legal education. My experience supports the (1) focus on negotiation in a wide range of situations in addition to the final resolution of disputes and transactions, (2) addition of "ordinary legal negotiation" to the two traditional theories of negotiation, and (3) use of multi-stage simulations in addition to traditional single-stage simulations. These approaches were critical in providing students with a more realistic understanding of negotiation. This article also describes experiments with other teaching techniques in my courses.

Principles For Designing Negotiation Instruction, John M. Lande, Ximena Bustamante, Jay Folberg, Joel Lee

Faculty Publications

This article analyzes recommendations in the Rethinking Negotiation Teaching (RNT) series. Instructors teaching negotiation and other dispute resolution subjects have long had a hard time trying to cover everything they would like in their courses. The RNT project has documented (and, to some extent, stimulated) a growing profusion of ideas and techniques for teaching negotiation, which has multiplied instructors’ dilemmas in designing their courses. Since instructors cannot teach everything they would like, this article suggests some general principles for making decisions about what to include and how to conduct these courses. Clearly, there is no single right or best way …

Teaching Students To Negotiate Like A Lawyer, John M. Lande

Faculty Publications

Some important stages might include: (1) initial client interview, (2) negotiation of a retainer agreement, (3) developing good working relationships with counterpart lawyers, (4) conducting factual investigation and/or legal research, (5) working with counterparts to plan the negotiation process, (6) resolving discovery disputes, (7) preparing client for negotiations, (8) conducting an ultimate negotiation, (9) engaging a mediator and mediating the matter, and (10) drafting a settlement agreement. This essay suggests that by using both single-stage and multi-stage simulations, instructors can better prepare students for negotiations that they will actually conduct in practice. These suggestions grow out my book, Lawyering with …

It’S A Small World After All: Cultural Competence For Advocates In Dispute Resolution Processes, Elayne E. Greenberg

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

Cultural competence has become an ethical mandate for all neutrals and advocates who use dispute resolution. Even though conflict is a universal phenomenon, our expression and choice of how to resolve conflict is culture specific. As our world becomes increasingly smaller, and flatter, and our law practices become globalized, ethically responsible attorneys are recalibrating their ethical compass and replacing their ethnocentric lens with a culturally relative lens. Yes, even if you are a New York attorney who disavows any international practice and remains steadfastly tethered to the N.Y. Rules of Professional Conduct, you still need to be culturally competent. …

Before You Take A Collaborative Law Case, John M. Lande

Faculty Publications

Under the Model Rules of Professional Conduct, lawyers have a duty to screen potential Collaborative Law (CL) cases for appropriateness and obtain clients' informed consent to use CL. The duty to screen cases is based on the "reasonableness" requirement of Rule 1.2(c) and the requirement to avoid conflicts of interest that might interfere with competent and diligent representation under Rule 1.7. Both rules require lawyers to obtain clients' informed consent to participate in a CL process. Although the Uniform Collaborative Law Act is not an ethical rule, sections 14 and 15 create relevant duties, including detailed provisions requiring lawyers to …

Learning From Cooperative Negotiators In Wisconsin, John M. Lande

Faculty Publications

To negotiate constructively from the outset of a matter, some lawyers use a "Cooperative" process, giving parties an additional process option, especially if parties believe that mediation or Collaborative practice is not suitable. Cooperative practice offers parties the opportunity to have lawyers represent them in an interest-based process governed by a negotiation agreement-while retaining ready access to litigation if needed, without losing their lawyers as in Collaborative practice. Cooperative practice can increase interest-based negotiation in direct negotiation between lawyers, increase efficiency and satisfaction with negotiation, and influence the general legal culture to incorporate problem-solving in everyday practice more often.

How Much Justice Can We Afford?: Defining The Courts' Roles And Deciding The Appropriate Number Of Trials, Settlement Signals, And Other Elements Needed To Administer Justice, John M. Lande

Faculty Publications

This article discusses how the U.S. court system can function optimally given declining trial rates and the limited resources available. The question of how much justice we can afford is a challenge that becomes more difficult as budgets fall behind the increasing demand for and cost of court services. Presumably most analysts would agree that courts should try cases when appropriate - and help litigants find just resolutions without trial when it is not needed. The courts' ability to provide trials in some cases is possible only if the vast majority of other cases are not tried.This article provides background …

The Promise And Perils Of Collaborative Law, John M. Lande

Faculty Publications

Getting people to use an interest-based approach in negotiation has been a difficult problem. Experts provide helpful suggestions for changing the game, though these are usually limited to case-by-case efforts within a culture of adversarial negotiation. Collaborative law (CL) is an important innovation that establishes a general norm of interest-based negotiation and intentionally develops a new legal culture. This article describes CL's promise and potential perils, focusing particularly on the perils to complement the literature touting the promise.

The Discourse Beneath: Emotional Epistemology In Legal Deliberation And Negotiation, Erin Ryan

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Possibilities For Collaborative Law: Ethics And Practice Of Lawyer Disqualification And Process Control In A New Model Of Lawyering, John M. Lande

Faculty Publications

This article assesses the possibilities for collaborative law (CL) to promote problem-solving negotiation and analyzes the operation and effect of the CL disqualification agreement (DA), which CL leaders hold as essential to the process. In CL, the lawyers and clients agree to negotiate from the outset of the case using a problem-solving approach. Under CL theory, the process creates a metaphorical "container" by using a DA disqualifying both lawyers from representing their clients if either party chooses to proceed in litigation. This article argues that much CL theory and practice is valuable, including protocols of early commitment to negotiation, interest-based …

Zoning, Taking, And Dealing: The Problems And Promise Of Bargaining In Land Use Planning, Erin Ryan

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Ending A Mud Bowl: Defining Arbitration’S Finality Through Functional Analysis, Amy J. Schmitz

Faculty Publications

The Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) and Uniform Arbitration Act (UAA), on the state level, prescribe a nearly identical procedural and remedial scheme for promoting independent, self-contained arbitration. To that end, both acts curtail courts' review of arbitration awards, by limiting the grounds for vacating awards to those aimed at ensuring only basic procedural fairness. Nonetheless, seemingly "pro-arbitration" impulses have driven some courts' eager application, or misapplication, of the FAA/UAA statutory scheme to enforce dispute resolution agreements that reject the acts' limited review prescriptions. This Article tackles this arguable abuse of the FAA/UAA scheme, by proposing a functional analysis for defining …

The Criminal Defense Lawyer As Effective Negotiator: A Systemic Approach, Rodney J. Uphoff

Faculty Publications

In the first issue of the Clinical Law Review, Peter Hoffman challenged clinical legal educators to produce clinical scholarship that is “practical in its orientation and design” and written so as to enhance the ability of lawyers to represent their clients and to help law students prepare for law practice. This article takes up Hoffman's challenge in the context of examining the skill of negotiating or plea bargaining from the perspective of the criminal defense lawyer. Before discussing the methods, approach or techniques that lawyers can use to enhance their ability to bargain effectively, it is critical to understand what …

Striker Replacements: A Law, Economics, And Negotiations Approach, Rafael Gely, Leonard Bierman

Faculty Publications

In this article, we directly attack Professors Wachter and Cohen's assertion regarding the economic efficiency of the Mackay doctrine. Applying internal and external labor market analysis, we argue that the Mackay doctrine is economically inefficient because it allows employers to behave “opportunistically” with respect to employees that have made “firm-specific” investments in their employing firms. To remedy this problem we propose a new “negotiations approach,” the components of which are: (1) the statutory overruling of Mackay, and (2) the concomitant amendment of the NLRA to make the striker replacement issue a “mandatory” subject of collective bargaining.

Mediation Paradigms And Professional Identities: Can Mediators Activate A New Movement For Justice?, John M. Lande

Faculty Publications

This article, written early in the modern ADR era, provided a framework for developing the mediation field. It begins by elaborating William Simon’s critique of the “ideology of advocacy.” Simon argues that the adversary system is supposed to foster values of individuality, autonomy, responsibility, and dignity, but it often undermines those values in practice. This article catalogs a “parade of horribles” experienced by disputants, attorneys, judges, and the public. These include unequal access to justice, procedural rules that frustrate substantive justice, a narrow set of available remedies, a game psychology undermines respect for law and justice, parties’ alienating experience in …