NCJ Number
98300
Date Published
1984
Length
57 pages
Annotation
This paper analyzes data from a survey conducted by the Civil Litigation Research Project (CLRP) to gather empirical data on the attitudes of attorneys towards dispute processing alternatives.
Abstract
The CLRP interviewed lawyers who had brought cases in Federal and State courts and alternative institutions including private arbitration and State administrative agencies. Lawyers who considered more than one institutional option for the dispute were asked why they initially preferred one institution and how they evaluated the institution selected. It was found that lawyers prefer institutions that give favorable results at low cost and with relative speed. Overall, lawyers ranked alternative institutions higher on many process and quality variables (especially cost effectiveness) than they did the courts. At the same time, they cited outcome advantages most frequently as a reason for preferring courts over any institutional alternatives they considered. The study suggests that efforts to introduce alternative dispute processing institutions will meet with attorney resistance if they are perceived as lowering the chances for favorable outcomes, or as increasing cost and adding to delay. Eight references and an appendix providing the study design and tabular data are provided. (Author abstract modified.)