NCJ Number
95765
Date Published
1984
Length
79 pages
Annotation
This publication examines the shortcomings of the traditional court-based method of resolving disputes, alternatives that are growing in popularity, and common concerns about the potential dangers of such methods.
Abstract
Prominent criticisms of the court-based, lawyer-dominated dispute processing system include its high costs, delays, unfairness because outcomes favor experienced and wealthy litigants, and failure to deal with the causes of disputes. Strains on the judicial system are exacerbated by diminishing social acceptance of individual risk, high crime rates, growth of government regulation, and the diminishing authority of informal dispute resolving processes in families and neighborhoods. The partial failure of other reforms such as small claims courts and no-fault laws, as well as resistance to change by the organized bar, also strain the system. Finally, the lack of empirical data on the justice system, particularly the civil sector, make evaluating reforms difficult. Dispute resolution innovations fall into several families: court reforms such as limitations on discovery or diversion; forums and procedures independent of the courts -commercial arbitration, private resolution services, community-based dispute resolution centers, and mediation; and systematic change, including delegalization, regulatory innovations, and providing low-cost access to legal services. A useful way to distinguish the various techniques at the heart of most proposals is in terms of their degree of coerciveness. One concern about these alternatives is that they may provide second class justice, be more vulnerable than the courts to special interest pressures, or produce an even more contentious society. A table classifying dispute resolution activities, a list of organization resources, and a 25-item bibliography are supplied.