Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Foreward: Competing And Complementary Rule Systems: Civil Procedure And Adr, Jean R. Sternlight
Foreward: Competing And Complementary Rule Systems: Civil Procedure And Adr, Jean R. Sternlight
Scholarly Works
This is a foreword to articles submitted as part of the Association of American Law School’s Symposium during at the January 2004 AALS’s Annual Meeting in Atlanta, Georgia entitled "Competing or Complementary Rule Systems? Adjudication, Arbitration and the Procedural World of the Future." The session brought together panelists whose expertises ranged across the academy. The legal academics were joined by the federal district judge now chairing the committee charged by the Judicial Conference of the United States to draft federal civil procedural rules. The stimulating session reflected on the relationship between litigation and non-litigation approaches to dispute resolution. Participants explored …
Adr: The New Equity, Thomas O. Main
Separate And Not Equal: Integrating Civil Procedure And Adr In Legal Academia, Jean R. Sternlight
Separate And Not Equal: Integrating Civil Procedure And Adr In Legal Academia, Jean R. Sternlight
Scholarly Works
Traditionally, academics specializing in ADR and civil procedure have not tended to deal with each other's issues. The typical civil procedure course focuses on litigation, and at best throws in a few classes on mediation and negotiation. Similarly, the typical ADR course devotes little or no attention to litigation, law, courts, or administrative institutions. Thus, the two disciplines are taught quite separately. Further, this separation is not equal. While students are required to learn about litigation, and are also offered many additional litigation electives, the ADR curriculum is almost always purely elective, and the classes are much smaller. Yet, the …
Creeping Mandatory Arbitration: Is It Just?, Jean R. Sternlight
Creeping Mandatory Arbitration: Is It Just?, Jean R. Sternlight
Scholarly Works
This Article examines the phenomenon of mandatory binding arbitration, imposed on consumers and employees, and considers whether this type of dispute resolution serves or instead undermines justice. It is fairly easy to attack binding arbitration as unfair, for example pointing to the fact that it undermines rights to jury trial and to proceed in class actions. However, this Article seeks to examine the phenomenon of mandatory binding arbitration from a broader perspective, recognizing that it is inappropriate to assume that justice requires our existing system of litigation, with its class actions and jury trial. The Article concludes that while informal …