Nonconsensual Nonbinding = Nonsensical? Reconsidering Court-Connected Arbitration Programs

Authors

Amy J. Schmitz, University of Missouri School of LawFollow

Document Type

Article

Publication Date

Winter 2009

Abstract

Policymakers have adopted programs mandating parties to submit their disputes to court connected arbitration hoping to garner efficiency benefits commonly associated with contractual Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) arbitration. Mandatory nonbinding arbitration, however, is ill-equipped for this task because it lacks the consensual core and finality of FAA arbitration. Instead, it often adds an inefficient layer to the litigation process and may harm those least able to protect themselves from coerced settlements or burdens of protracted litigation.

Recommended Citation

Amy J. Schmitz, Nonconsensual + Nonbinding = Nonsensical? Reconsidering Court-Connected Arbitration Programs, 10 Cardozo J. Conflict Resol. 587 (2009)