Resources / Study / Innovation for Court ADR

Just Court ADR

The blog of Resolution Systems Institute

Archive for the ‘Policy-making’ Category

Maryland and Illinois: A Tale of Two States

Jennifer Shack, May 15th, 2014

As someone working to develop and improve court ADR in Illinois, I have long been envious of the comparatively vast resources available to do this in Maryland. And I’ve also been very interested in what Maryland’s multi-year statewide evaluation of ADR will find.  Recently, the research team involved in the evaluation published its report on Maryland’s ADR landscape. To some extent, the report was eye opening. Despite a Supreme Court that is highly supportive and a statewide organization with ample funding, in some ways the landscape looks very much like Illinois’, where the Supreme Court has not taken a leadership role and funding has been limited and unreliable.  (more…)

Illinois Expands Law Student and Graduate Representation in ADR

Just Court ADR, June 19th, 2013

Yesterday, the Illinois Supreme Court announced changes to Rule 711 that explicitly permit qualified law students and graduates who have not yet been admitted to practice to provide ADR representation starting July 1, 2013. Consistent with previous requirements, law students and graduates will offer legal services with client consent, under attorney supervision. However, the revised rule allows law students and graduates to appear on behalf of clients in court-annexed arbitrations and mediations in Illinois courts and administrative tribunals, and to represent clients in nonlitigation matters. It also reduces the coursework required before applying for permission to provide services. (more…)

Illinois Rule Changes Increase Opportunities for Legal Representation in ADR

Just Court ADR, June 17th, 2013

Illinois rule changes that may increase the availability of counsel for alternative dispute resolution processes take effect in two weeks. After July 1, 2013, it will be easier for lawyers to work with clients on one clearly defined portion of a civil legal matter without taking on other issues or proceedings within the case. Updated forms and procedures streamline representation for clients who wish to retain a lawyer for settlement negotiations only, understanding that the lawyer will not be responsible for taking the case to trial. (more…)

What Does the Transformation of Justice Look Like? British Columbia Has an Answer

Jennifer Shack, June 7th, 2013

With the financial crunch that has hit courts, jurisdiction after jurisdiction has asked what ADR’s role should be. Should ADR be the method through which courts can both serve litigants and save money, or is it a financial burden on courts that should be eliminated or privatized? In many courts in the US, the answer has been the latter. This was seen most recently with the closure of Los Angeles County’s ADR program – the largest in the country. As mediators there work to develop a private system to replace services the court once provided, the government of British Columbia is moving in a different direction. There, the eye is on developing integrated administrative systems, including ADR, that would limit use of the courts to those disputes most appropriate for litigation.  (more…)

Montana Overwhelmed by Record Number of Cases; Looks to Innovate

Jennifer Shack, May 7th, 2013

Montana’s civil caseload topped 50,000 last year. That may not seem to be a lot to those in more populated states, but it’s enough to drive the state’s legislature to act. Citing an overwhelmed bench and litigants deprived of “prompt, careful consideration,” the legislature issued a joint resolution that the state evaluate the cost and effectiveness of current court processes and “identify measures that will help improve the administration of justice and promote the nonadversarial resolution of family law disputes.” It’s yet to be seen if the study will be undertaken, as studies requested by the legislature are prioritized at the end of the legislative session.

It’s great to see a state legislature looking to get data on court performance and trying to find evidence-based solutions to what appears to be a problem for the courts. They say necessity is the mother of invention. Here, it appears to be the mother of evaluation as well.

Verified by ExactMetrics