Abstract
In 1997 the Missouri Supreme Court revised its civil (non-family) ADR rule, Rule 17, to give individual judges the power to order cases to ADR. One of the primary reasons for the revision was to increase the use of what was seen as a worthwhile but underutilized rule. In an effort to evaluate the revised rule and its effects, the Missouri Supreme Court commissioned the Authors to conduct an extensive attorney survey to assess when and why lawyers choose to use ADR, especially mediation; what ADR has on the litigation process; and how and when judges get involved in choosing ADR. The following Report, published in May 2002 by the Missouri Supreme Court and reprinted here, details the answers Missouri lawyers gave to these important questions and provides important evaluative information for the emerging national picture of court-connected ADR.
Recommended Citation
Bobbi McAdoo and Art Hinshaw,
Challenge of Institutionalizing Alternative Dispute Resolution: Attorney Perspectives on the Effect of Rule 17 on Civil Litigation in Missouri, The,
67 Mo. L. Rev.
(2002)
Available at: https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/mlr/vol67/iss3/2