By John Lande, February 8, 2012
This post has been viewed 1,809 times.
This article critiques Professor Chris Guthrie’s lead symposium article entitled, Misjudging. Guthrie’s article makes two major arguments. The first is a descriptive, empirical argument that judges are prone to error because of three types of blinders and that people underestimate the amount of such judicial error. The second argument is prescriptive, recommending that, because of these judicial blinders, disputants should consider using non-judicial dispute resolution processes generally, and particularly facilitative mediation and arbitration.
