Against Integrative Bargaining

5 Comments

Professor Russell Korobkin from UCLA gave an interesting talk at the AALS DR Section Works-in-Progress Conference a couple of weeks ago.  His talk, Against Integrative Bargaining, was interesting and certainly caught the attention of everyone at the conference.  His basic thesis was simple: Integrative Bargaining (or problem-solving negotiation or interest based negotiation) is oversold.  Looking … Continue reading Against Integrative Bargaining →

Dispute Resolution and the Normalization of International Adjudication

3 Comments

I attended a conference at NYU two weeks ago as part of NYU’s Journal of International Law & Politics symposium on the “Normalization of Adjudication in Complex International Governance Regimes.”  Invited to bring a little dispute resolution to this otherwise complete adjudicatory focus, it was very interesting to think about what the “normalization” of international courts and … Continue reading Dispute Resolution and the Normalization of International Adjudication →

Certiorari Grant in Third Arbitration Case for 2008-09 Term

I was just informed that certiorari was granted in Arthur Andersen LLP, et al., v. Carlisle, et al. (08-146), on Friday. The question at issue is whether, under the Federal Arbitration Act, federal circuits courts have jurisdiction to hear appeals of denials of motions to compel arbitration raised by parties that did not sign the … Continue reading Certiorari Grant in Third Arbitration Case for 2008-09 Term →

One’s Bottom Line – A Material Fact under Rule 4.1?

1 Comment

Is one’s bottom line (or reservation price or walk away point) in negotiation a material fact under Rule 4.1?  If so, why is that?  I’ve been wrestling with these two questions in a piece I’m writing on attorney negotiation ethics (thanks to those who gave me feedback on the article at the AALS Works-in-Progress conference … Continue reading One’s Bottom Line – A Material Fact under Rule 4.1? →

Go Vote–It’s a Wonderful Dispute Resolution Process

4 Comments

Perhaps the most amazing development in US history occurred when George Washington refused to become king, and peacefully handed over power to John Adams.  The concept that power will be voluntarily (or at least peacefully) handed over to someone who believes in completely different values and ideals than the current political leader is still so … Continue reading Go Vote–It’s a Wonderful Dispute Resolution Process →

iArbitration, iUnconscionability, and the iPhone

2 Comments

A federal district court in the Northern District of Illinois recently refused to compel arbitration of a consumer’s complaint brought in relation to the purchase of an iPhone. The case is shocking for at least two reasons.  It is shocking because the lead attorney for AT&T engaged in shameful, clearly sanctionable behavior during the course … Continue reading iArbitration, iUnconscionability, and the iPhone →

Mirror Neurons & Mediation Advice

5 Comments

At the Works-in-Progress conference this past week at Arizona State University (great job Art!), I had the pleasure of hearing from Professor Scott Hughes on his latest work on mirror neurons.  I have blogged about mirror neurons before and the impact on people.  It explains things from why Harley rides are pleasurable to why Starbucks runs smoothly.  Scott … Continue reading Mirror Neurons & Mediation Advice →

Call for Papers: International Mediation

  For anyone who’s interested in writing about international or comparative mediation, you should be aware of the following opportunity:  Call for Papers International Mediation Leadership Summit The Dispute Resolution Section of the American Bar Association, in collaboration with AAA International Centre for Dispute Resolution, ACB Group-Netherlands, ADR Center-Rome, CEDR, CMAP, International Academy of Mediators, … Continue reading Call for Papers: International Mediation →