Toward a Theory of the Third Party (From Empirical Theories About Courts, P 84-114, 1983, Keith O Boyum and Lynn Mather, ed. - See NCJ-90490)

• NCJ Number: 90493
• Author(s): D Black; M P Baumgartner
• Date Published: 1983
• Length: 31 pages
• Sponsoring Agency: National Science Foundation; National Institute of Justice (NIJ); US Dept of Justice NIJ Pub
• Sale Source: Longman Inc
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: Earlier version presented, to the Disputes Processing Research Program, University of Wisconsin and to the Center for Criminal Justice, Harvard Law School

Annotation

Third parties who intervene in the disputes of others vary according to whether their intervention is partisan or not and according to the degree of their intervention.

Abstract

A typology for classifying third parties identifies 12 roles. These include five support roles: informer, adviser, advocate, ally, and surrogate. It also includes five settlement roles: friendly peacemaker, mediator, arbitrator, judge, and repressive peacemaker. An 11th role, that of negotiator, combines partisan and nonpartisan elements. The 12th role is that of healer, which does not fit into any of these categories. All five of the support rules, when seen from the perspective of the principal on the other side, are also opposition roles. None of the roles in the typology is performed by legal officials all the time, although all are performed by legal officials some of the time. This typology serves as a preliminary vocabulary and guide. The higher the settlement agent's status relative to that of the conflicting parties, the more often authoritative intervention will occur. The degree of intimacy between the third party and the principals also appears to relate to settlement behavior. Individuals and particular segments of society may find a theory of the third party useful in deciding how to deal with a conflict. One figure is provided.