NCJ Number
131286
Date Published
1990
Length
161 pages
Annotation
Ten Federal district courts have mandatory programs of court-annexed, nonbinding arbitration that are funded by Congress.
Abstract
An evaluation of these programs was initiated in 1985 to determine whether litigants view arbitration as a form of second-class justice, an issue of concern to legislatures and courts contemplating the adoption of such programs. Data were obtained from 3,501 attorneys, 723 litigants, and 62 judges. It was found that the 10 arbitration programs have a number of features in common. Particular case types are mandatorily referred to the program to be heard either by a single arbitrator or by a panel of three arbitrators. Following a hearing at which each side presents its case, arbitrators issue a decision based on the merits of the case and, where appropriate, determine an award. Dollar ceilings of awards range from $50,000 to $150,000; 6 programs have a $100,000 ceiling. Parties who are dissatisfied with the decision have a specified time period to file a demand for trial de novo. If a demand is filed, the case goes back to the regular docket for pretrial and trial before the judge assigned to the case. If a trial de novo is not demanded, the arbitration award becomes a nonappealable court judgment. The most common arbitration program cases are diversity contract and tort cases. Most litigants and attorneys do not think that arbitration is a form of second-class justice. Arbitration programs can reduce the cost of litigation and disposition time. Goals and effects of and recommendations regarding arbitration program characteristics are discussed. Appendixes contain a table of local rules and case types selected as initially eligible for arbitration. 38 tables and 9 graphs