This article addresses the development of the mediation privilege. The author contends that the boundaries of this protection are unclear and attempts to bring together perspectives of various jurisdictions which interpret the reach of the privilege, the U.M.A.'s proposed approach, and general privilege law. The author demonstrates the hidden dangers of practicing in the mediation field and how the courts may interpret the limits of this privilege.
The Supreme People's Court of China interpreted a 1994 Labor Law to allow workers to pursue greater ADR methods to settle their disputes. The author discusses how future courts and decisions should extend this proliferation of ADR.
The author uses an analogy of cooking the fugu fish, which is poisonous if not cooked properly, to mediators' struggle with open communication versus what may be admissible in criminal proceedings. Laflin discusses whether mediation can be run effectively with such a struggle, and if not, what should be done.
The article discusses the issue of arbitration clauses in employment contracts in the context of Cooperv. MRM,Inv. Co. In Cooper,the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld an arbitration clause by considering five issues: whether it was a contract of adhesion, whether it was unconscionable, whether it lacked sufficient bilateralism, whether there was a threat of invalidity due to lack of express waiver of the right to jury, and whether arbitration would be prohibitively expensive. Cooper stands for the acceptance...
Part V of this article discusses the enforcement of the scope of arbitration provisions within construction contracts. This section focuses on Texas case law and discusses mandamus proceedings on arbitration clauses, deletion or omission of arbitration clauses, waiver of arbitration clauses, and review of enforcement of arbitration clauses.
Lee and Sensei Tabuchi apply the wisdom and the skills of martial arts to the realm of negotiating. Using this martial arts perspective, the authors provide a step-by-step guide on how to become a better negotiator.
In response to the athlete doping epidemic, the United States Olympic Committee established the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) to monitor doping in Olympic athletes. The USADA's adjudication process via arbitrated hearings is based on regulations from the American Arbitration Association/Court of Arbitration for Sport. Athletes do not have a choice for adjudication as they must arbitrate doping allegations and sanctions. Courts are reluctant to intervene with USADA adjudication policies.
Dispute resolution practitioners and scholars widely assume that the basket of techniques and processes known as ADR should be adopted as a complement to, or as additional options within, a government-sponsored judicial monopoly.
A recent decision by the Arizona Supreme Court, holding that statutory arbitration award exclusions apply to all employees, seems to be in conflict with recent U.S. Supreme Court holdings that favor the enforcement of employment arbitration agreements. Further, the Arizona Supreme Court left some unanswered questions with regards to the Federal Arbitration Act, which will need to be resolved soon to ensure employment arbitration agreements in the state.