Evaluation of Court-Annexed Arbitration in Three Federal District Courts

• NCJ Number: 79277
• Author(s): E A Lind; J E Shapard
• Date Published: 1981
• Length: 142 pages
• Corporate Author: Federal Judicial Ctr
• Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

This is an evaluation report of experimental local rules providing for mandatory, nonbinding arbitration of certain classes of civil actions in effect since early 1978 in the Federal District Courts of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the District of Connecticut, and the Northern District of California.

Abstract

Although the three local rules differ in various respects, they typically provide for mandatory arbitration before a panel of three arbitrators for cases seeking money damages not exceeding $100,000 and generally involving personal injury or contract subject matter. Evaluation information was collected over 2 years through questionnaires from counsel, docket information, questionnaires from arbitrators, and interviews with arbitrators, counsel, and court personnel. The results of the evaluation suggest that more expeditious settlement has been achieved because of court-annexed arbitration, but frequent termination by acceptance of an award has not. The arbitration rules have caused a decrease in time from filing to disposition of cases in two of the three districts. It appears that court-annexed arbitration can serve as an effective deadline for case preparation, substituting for trial, not as a forum for case resolution, but as a stimulus to settlement. It is much less clear that the arbitration rules had tangible consequences for cases that reached an arbitration hearing. About 40 percent of arbitrated cases were disposed of by the arbitration process; in the other 60 percent, the arbitration was voided by a demand for trial de novo. The report offers suggestions on how the effectiveness of arbitration for promoting posthearing settlement might be enhanced. Because substantial numbers of cases proceed beyond the arbitration hearing, the concept of arbitration as a mechanism to promote posthearing settlements may warrant special attention. Overall, court-annexed arbitration promises to expedite litigation for many cases, but it remains uncertain whether the rules will result in decreased incidence of trials. Tabular data are given. Appendixes contain texts of the rules and study instruments.