Lawyer Views on Mandatory Arbitration
Arizona State University (ASU) - Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law
Arizona State University (ASU)
Arizona Attorney, Vol. 41, p. 32, 2005
This article summarizes some of the key findings from a survey of Arizona lawyers regarding Arizona's court-connected arbitration system. Most lawyers who had represented clients in arbitration thought the process and award were fair. Their ratings of the arbitrators’ level of preparation and knowledge of the law and arbitration procedures, however, were less favorable. A majority of lawyers thought either that arbitration should remain mandatory for cases below the current jurisdictional limit or that a different ADR process should be made mandatory. A majority of lawyers favored retaining most of the basic components of the current arbitration system. But a majority favored changes in arbitrator service, assignment, and compensation. The lawyers appeared to be skeptical about court-connected arbitration's ability to provide a more efficient and effective dispute resolution process for smaller cases.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 7
Keywords: arbitration, alternative dispute resolution, empirical researchAccepted Paper Series
Date posted: December 10, 2010
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo6 in 0.734 seconds