E.O. Wilson is a Harvard biologist, two-time Pulitzer Prize winning author, and the world’s leading authority on ants. As this article explains, he believes that human civilizations and ant civilizations have much in common. In some respects, that’s encouraging. Ant civilizations are communitarian in some very positive ways. For example, ants who have had enough … Continue reading On Ants, Humans, and the Challenge of Conflict Resolution →

Below is a listing of the presenters at the Works-In-Progress Conference later this week, here at Oregon.  Stay tuned for more! MM — Cynthia Alkon, Texas Wesleyan: Rearranging Deck Chairs on the Titanic: Rule of law development assistance to countries in conflict Hiro Aragaki, Fordham Business School: Arbitration’s Suspect Status Rich Birke, Willamette: A Neuroscientific … Continue reading ADR Works-In-Progress Lineup →

I am delighted to post this blog courtesy of Professor Richard Reuben of the University of Missouri School of Law: I finally had occasion to take a close look at AT&T v. Concepcion, which will be argued on Nov. 9, and think it could be a real sleeper.  There is a lot of spin in … Continue reading AT&T v. Concepcion Musings →

This past weekend, the Hugh L. Carey Center for Dispute Resolution at St. John’s and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) hosted the second annual Securities Dispute Resolution Triathlon at St. John’s Manhattan campus. The Triathlon combines negotiation, mediation, and arbitration in one competition, as students play the roles of parties and attorneys in a … Continue reading Winners of 2010 Dispute Resolution Triathlon →

On October 15, 2010, The University of Missouri School of Law is organizing a Symposium:  ADR and the Rule of law .  It looks like a great group of speakers–and the Dispute Resolution Journal will follow it up with what promises to be a very interesting symposium issue.  Video of the conference will be available later for those … Continue reading ADR and the Rule of Law →

Many (aside: why isn’t it all?) of us who teach Negotiation spend at least some time on Rule 8.4 (dishonesty, fraud, deceit, misrepresentation) and its relationship to Rule 4.1 (fraud).  The New York City Bar’s committee on ethics just issued an opinion in which it declared that an attorney may attempt to “friend” an unrepresented … Continue reading What? Rule 8.4 means it?! →

I am grateful to Paul for restarting this discussion on foreclosure mediation—it is useful to keep revisiting what is working and what is not.  The New York Times article is interesting in a number of ways.  First, as Paul notes, it confuses the process of mediation with the underlying applicable law.  Mediation—voluntary as in our … Continue reading Foreclosure Mediation Take 2? →

In a surprising but welcome development, FINRA announced today that it will file a rule proposal next month with the Securities and Exchange Commission to make permanent its Public Arbitrator Pilot Program, in which investors are given the choice of selecting an all-public arbitrator panel in disputes with brokers, rather than a panel made up … Continue reading FINRA Proposes to Make Permanent its Public Arbitrator Pilot Program →

With the first Monday in October nearly upon us, it will be interesting to see how Justice Sotomayor votes in the Supreme Court’s upcoming arbitration cases, especially the controversial AT & T v. Concepcion. Sotomayor did not participate in Stolt-Nielsen, which produced a 5-3 majority with Ginsburg, Breyer, and the now-retired Justice Stevens in the … Continue reading Sotomayor on Arbitration →

Last month, a New York Times published an article on the breakup of a well known matrimonial law firm in New York City.  http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/29/nyregion/29divorce.html?emc=eta1  The article compares this breakup to several of the high profile and messy divorces that the firm has handled.  The information in the article certainly echoes the stories we hear in divorce … Continue reading Breaking up is hard, even with practice →