Maintaining ADR Integrity

Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 7-9, January 2009

6 Pages Posted: 12 Feb 2009 Last revised: 23 Aug 2010

See all articles by Carrie Menkel-Meadow

Carrie Menkel-Meadow

University of California, Irvine School of Law; Georgetown University Law Center

Date Written: August 19, 2010

Abstract

On the occasion of the 30th Anniversary of the Center for Public Resources-International Institute for Conflict Prevention & Resolution, Professor Menkel-Meadow considers the issues in maintaining high quality and integrity in the use of ADR methods, including mediation, negotiation and arbitration. The initial goals of the ADR movement are contrasted to some recent developments and challenges to these goals, with a focus on some key issues to watch in the future -- "sham" processes, misuse of processes for adversarial gain, unethical uses, incompetent parties, lawyers and neutrals and dilution of the original goals of quality and "tailored" dispute resolution.

Suggested Citation

Menkel-Meadow, Carrie J., Maintaining ADR Integrity (August 19, 2010). Alternatives to the High Cost of Litigation, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 7-9, January 2009, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1340185

Carrie J. Menkel-Meadow (Contact Author)

University of California, Irvine School of Law ( email )

401 E. Peltason Drive
Irvine, CA 92697-1000
United States
949-824-1987 (Phone)

Georgetown University Law Center ( email )

600 New Jersey Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001
United States
202-662-9379 (Phone)
202-662-9412 (Fax)

Here is the Coronavirus
related research on SSRN

Paper statistics

Downloads
241
Abstract Views
1,572
rank
138,056
PlumX Metrics