Traditional and Nontraditional Forms of Adr

Traditional and Nontraditional Forms of Alternative Dispute Resolutions

Dea Woodward

Law 531

October 10, 2011

Laurie Wicker

Traditional and Nontraditional Forms of Alternative Dispute Resolutions

The movement toward Alternative Dispute Resolution in the United States began after the World War I, and reached its first milestone with the passage of the first modern arbitration statute in New York in the mid-1920s (Lectric Law Library, 2011). Alternative Dispute Resolution techniques were not created to undercut the traditional United States court system. However, ADR gives the parties involved the option or freedom to return to the traditional court process at any time. ADR is also defined as a process used to refer to informal dispute resolution processes in which the parties meet with a professional third party who helps resolve their disputes in a less formal and more consensual way (Spangler, 2003).

Litigation is a time-consuming process that requires much money and complex issues. According to Cheeseman (2010), litigation is the process of bringing, maintaining, and defending a lawsuit. The most common forms of ADR are mediation and arbitration. Other forms include judicial settlement conferences, fact-finding, ombudsmen, special masters, etc. (Spangler, 2003).

Laws such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964 gave people the right to seek justice for unfair treatment. Mediation and arbitration became very popular during these times. The main purpose of using ADR is to relieve the court of backlogged cases, reduce costs, increase community involvement, facilitate access to justice, and provide more effective dispute resolutions.

Advantages and Disadvantages of ADR

ADR is the most widely used and accepted process among both the public and the legal profession in recent years. The ADR process is generally faster and less expensive. In many cases, the disputants layout the process and define what to include in the agreement. This involvement helps to...