My colleague, Ned Foley, contemplates an Amicus Court designed to assist in resolution of election-related disputes. Ned and another colleague, Steve Huefner, are contemplating whether ADR might be useful more broadly to provide mechanisms that would assist parties in avoiding election-related disputes and/or help resolve them more peacefully and with greater buy-in. Let’s Not Repeat … Continue reading EL-ADR (Election ADR): ADR of the future?
Divided We Fall is the title of Nick Kristof’s op-ed piece in the New York Times this past Thursday using the political debates as a lovely example of how we all like to view the world from our own little belltower. For those of us who have taught ladder of inference, partisan perceptions, and the … Continue reading Divided We Fall
If “conflict resolution” happened in a forest, and nobody was around to facilitate it, would it still be “conflict resolution”? In an article in the most recent Conflict Resolution Quarterly, Patricia Orr, Kirk Emerson, and Dale Keyes report on the development of an evaluation framework for conflict resolution practice in environmental and natural resource disputes. … Continue reading Defining Environmental “Conflict Resolution”
This past weekend, the Graduate Program in Dispute Resolution here at Marquette hosted noted scholar Bernie Mayer. Bernie was mostly speaking about his book, Beyond Neutrality and, on Saturday, was invited in a point-counterpoint format to discuss his arguments with equally well-noted practitioner Howard Bellman. One point of the discussion was about Bernie’s argument, outlined … Continue reading Crisis in Dispute Resolution?
Interesting and informative post on Pyett v. 14 Penn Plaza from Rick Bales at Workplace Prof Blog. Rick and I participated on a panel on recently decided and to be decided Supreme Court cases at the ABA Section on Dispute Resolution Conference during the first week of April. His post can be found at http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/laborprof_blog/2008/04/pyett-and-arbit.html … Continue reading Rick Bales on Pyett; Commentary by Cole
Many of us were privileged last week at the ABA Section on Dispute Resolution conference in Seattle to hear from Linda Babcock about her new book, Ask for It. This new book is her answer to her previous work, Women Don’t Ask in which she reviews studies (conducted by herself and others) demonstrating that women … Continue reading Ask for It
In one of her blog entries following the Supreme Court’s Hall Street v Mattel decision, Sarah Cole wondered whether the restrictive reading of FAA s10 and s11 left any space for “manifest disregard” and any other judicially-created grounds for arbitral review. Sarah concluded, I think correctly, that manifest disregard appears safe. And as she points … Continue reading Hall Street v. Mattel and “Public Policy”
As the Chair-Elect of the Alternative Dispute Resolution Section of the Association of American Law Schools (AALS), I’m responsible for organizing the Section’s workshop for its annual meeting in January, 2009. I’ve had the good fortune to work with a wonderful group of colleagues (including my fellow bloggers) on this project. We’ve decided on a … Continue reading Dispute Resolution in the Year 2050 (Or Maybe Just 2025)
Shameless self-promotion alert! Earlier today, I posted my first draft of an article entitled The Four Ways to Assure Mediator Quality (and why none of them work) I gave a presentation by the same title at Harvard Law School’s Dispute Resolution Forum about six weeks ago, and this draft reflects much of the feedback I … Continue reading The Four Ways to Assure Mediator Quality (and why none of them work)
Last week, I returned from a trip to Europe with 21 law students–an exercise in dispute resolution itself! Seriously, we had a wonderful time and I will, no doubt, be blogging about some of the lessons/speakers/institutions we visited for some time. Today, I wanted to write about our meeting with Professor Alain Verbeke of the … Continue reading Bye, Bye Belgium?
