NCJ Number
46704
Date Published
1978
Length
17 pages
Annotation
IN A STATEMENT BEFORE THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SUPPORTED A BILL PROVIDING FOR AN EXPERIMENT IN CERTAIN FEDERAL DISTRICT COURTS WITH MANDATORY BUT NONBINDING ARBITRATION OF SELECTED CASES.
Abstract
THIS PROPOSAL, U.S. SENATE BILL 2253 (S. 2253) FOR COURT-ANNEXED ARBITRATION, IS A KEY ELEMENT IN THE PROGRAM OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE TO IMPROVE THE FUNCTIONING OF THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM, AND TO BROADEN ACCESS TO THE JUSTICE SYSTEM FOR ALL CITIZENS. THE PROPOSAL IS DESIGNED BOTH TO SPEED UP THE RESOLUTION OF CASES THAT ARE NOW SETTLED OUT OF COURT, AND TO RESOLVE MORE EXPEDITIOUSLY AND LESS EXPENSIVELY MANY OF THE CASES THAT NOW GO TO TRIAL. A NUMBER OF STATES HAVE USED COMPULSORY NONBINDING ARBITRATION OF CIVIL COURT CASES WITH GOOD RESULTS FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS. THE STATE SYSTEMS GENERALLY INVOLVE REFERRAL OF MONEY DAMAGE CASES TO VOLUNTEER LAWYER ARBITRATORS, WITH MAXIMUM CLAIMS SET FROM $3,000 TO $10,000. BETWEEN 85 TO 95 PERCENT OF ALL CASES REFERRED TO ARBITRATION END THERE, WITH THE REST BEING APPEALED TO TRIALS. THE SUCCESS OF THE STATE SYSTEMS CLEARLY INDICATES THAT THE EXPERIMENT IS WORTH TRYING IN FEDERAL COURTS. SPECIFICALLY, S. 2253 WOULD AUTHORIZE AN EXPERIMENT WITH COURT-ANNEXED ARBITRATION FOR SPECIFIED CATEGORIES OF CASES IN FIVE TO EIGHT DISTRICT COURTS FOR A 3 YEAR-PERIOD. THREE CRITERIA WOULD DETERMINE WHICH CASES WERE TO BE ARBITRATED; THE CASE MUST INVOLVE MONEY DAMAGES ONLY, BE LIMITED TO A DOLLAR VALUE OF $50,000, AND PRESENT PREDOMINANTLY FACTUAL RATHER THAN COMPLEX LEGAL ISSUES. MONEY DAMAGE TORT AND CONTRACT CASES ARE THE GROUPS MOST SUITABLE UNDER THESE CRITERIA. CASES ARISING UNDER THE TRUTH-IN-LENDING STATUTE WOULD NOT BE INCLUDED. CASES IN WHICH THE UNITED STATES IS A PARTY ARE PREFERABLY RESERVED TO REGULATION IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN ADMINISTRATIVE FLEXIBILITY. IT IS ESTIMATED THAT IF EIGHT DISTRICTS PARTICIPATE IN THE EXPERIMENT, 925 TORT AND 1,228 CONTRACT CASES UNDER $50,000 WOULD BE ARBITRATED EACH YEAR IN THOSE DISTRICTS. EXPERIENCED ATTORNEYS WHO ARE MEMBERS OF THE BAR OF THE PARTICULAR DISTRICT COURT WOULD BE THE ARBITRATORS, AT A FEE NOT EXCEEDING $50 PLUS EXPENSES PER CASE. PROCEDURES RELATING TO TIME CONSTRAINTS, THE CHOICE OF A SINGLE ARBITRATOR OR PANEL OF THREE, AND PROMPTNESS OF AWARDS, ARE SPELLED OUT IN THE LEGISLATION. DISINCENTIVES TO DEMANDING A TRIAL ARE INCLUDED. THREE FEDERAL DISTRICT COURTS ARE NOW TESTING THE ARBITRATION PROCESS WITH LOCAL COURT RULES MODELED AFTER THE PROPOSED LEGISLATION, BUT WITH VARIATIONS IN PROCEDURES AND TYPES OF CASES ARBITRATED, WHICH SHOULD YIELD VALUABLE EXPERIENCE IN REFINING DETAILS OF THE BILL.