Court Related Arbitration: Access, If Not Efficiency

Dispute Resolution Magazine, Vol. 13, p. 35, 2007

2 Pages Posted: 11 Dec 2010

See all articles by Roselle Wissler

Roselle Wissler

Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law, Arizona State University

Bob Dauber

Arizona State University (ASU) - Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law

Date Written: 2007

Abstract

This article summarizes the findings of an empirical study of arbitration in Arizona's general jurisdiction civil trial courts. The study found that the arbitration program's primary goals of providing faster and less expensive resolution of cases, reducing the court's workload, and maintaining or enhancing the satisfaction of users, were not entirely being met. Arbitration cases often did not meet court case processing time standards. Cases that had an arbitration hearing appeared more likely to have been diverted from settlement than from trial. The findings, which were consistent with studies in other jurisdictions, suggest that court-connected arbitration does not have negative consequences, but also does not consistently or substantially improve the effectiveness and efficiency of dispute resolution.

Keywords: arbitration, alternative dispute resolution, empirical research

Suggested Citation

Wissler, Roselle and Dauber, Bob, Court Related Arbitration: Access, If Not Efficiency (2007). Dispute Resolution Magazine, Vol. 13, p. 35, 2007, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1722665

Roselle Wissler (Contact Author)

Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law, Arizona State University ( email )

111 E. Taylor St.
Mail code 9520
Phoenix, AZ 85004-4467
United States

Bob Dauber

Arizona State University (ASU) - Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law ( email )

Box 877906
Tempe, AZ 85287-7906
United States

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
40
Abstract Views
1,456
PlumX Metrics