Download this Paper Open PDF in Browser

Mandatory Arbitration in Arizona: Structure and Performance

Arizona Attorney, Vol. 42, p. 18, 2005

5 Pages Posted: 11 Dec 2010  

Roselle Wissler

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

Bob Dauber

Arizona State University (ASU)

Date Written: 2005

Abstract

This article summarizes some of the key findings regarding the structure and performance of Arizona's court-connected arbitration system. Most cases eligible for arbitration concluded before a hearing was held, and those cases that had a hearing seemed more likely to have been diverted from settlement than from trial. Consequently, the arbitration program was likely to affect the court's workload in a relatively small proportion of cases, was more likely to reduce the use of court pretrial rather than trial resources, and was unlikely to substantially reduce litigants' costs. Many cases did not meet arbitration deadlines and court case processing time standards. These 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, Mandatory Arbitration in Arizona: Structure and Performance (2005). Arizona Attorney, Vol. 42, p. 18, 2005. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1723261

Roselle Wissler (Contact Author)

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

Box 877906
Tempe, AZ 85287-7906
United States

Bob Dauber

Arizona State University (ASU) ( email )

Farmer Building 440G PO Box 872011
Tempe, AZ 85287
United States

Paper statistics

Downloads
21
Abstract Views
566