NCJ Number
116030
Journal
Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution Volume: 4 Issue: 1 Dated: (1988) Pages: 81-95
Date Published
1988
Length
15 pages
Annotation
Much of the conflict that currently exists between judicial behavior and dispute settlement and the Code of Judicial Conduct could be eliminated by Congressional amendment of Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to reflect the requirement that a judge who actively participates in pretrial settlement activity be ineligible to hear the case if settlement efforts fail and traditional adjudication is undertaken.
Abstract
Judicial involvement in litigation in the form of pretrial conferences received explicit Federal approval and promotion with the adoption of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in 1938. A recent study has shown that 75 percent of Federal judges and more than half of State judges have initiated discussions which ultimately led to settlement. However, the degree of involvement and the frequency with which judicial participation in dispute resolution occurs is not uniform. Thus, judges and lawyers have used a wide range of settlement methods. Judicial participation and promotion of settlement negotiations results in fast, inexpensive, and usually just resolution of civil disputes, but it often involves judicial behavior that is considered contrary to the ethical considerations underlying the Code of Judicial Conduct. However, the Code does not clearly define the proper role of the judge in dispute settlement. Amending Rule 16 would not add to the burden on court resources, but it would provide greater assurance that justice will be accomplished and would be preferable to changing the Code. 91 footnotes.