With the rising number of divorces in today's society 2 and with the national emphasis to resolve child custody disputes through alternative forms of dispute resolution,3 the ability to hold arbitrators accountable for their actions within settlement conferences is becoming a prevalent issue. Arbitrators and mediators, commonly outside of the court's supervision, are now determining the best interests of the child, a role traditionally reserved to the courts.4 This increase of out-of-court settlements creates a need for certain standards which hold these quasi-judicial officers responsible for their decisions and liable for their actions. The court in Howard v. Drapkin addressed the latter concern and extended absolute quasi-judicial immunity to an arbitrator involved in a child custody dispute. 5
Robert M. Carroll,
Quasi-Judicial Immunity: The Arbitrator's Shield or Sword,
1991 J. Disp. Resol.
Available at: https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/jdr/vol1991/iss1/10