Resources / Study / Innovation for Court ADR

Just Court ADR

The blog of Resolution Systems Institute

Author Archive

My Favorite Resource Featuring Heather Scheiwe Kulp

Nicole Wilmet, March 2nd, 2018

In February, we launched a new section in our Court ADR Connection newsletter entitled My Favorite Resource. My Favorite Resource will feature brief interviews with individuals engaged in the world of alternative dispute resolution to learn what their favorite ADR resource is.

For our inaugural post, our Resource Center Director Nicole Wilmet had the pleasure of reaching out to Heather Scheiwe Kulp, the Alternative Dispute Resolution Coordinator for the Office of Mediation and Arbitration in New Hampshire. Heather is also a former Skadden Fellow and RSI employee. During her time at RSI, Heather authored several resources that you can find here.

NW: What is one of your favorite ADR resources? 

HSK: I frequently turn to Designing Systems and Processes for Managing Disputes, a “textbook” by Nancy H. Rogers, Robert C. Bordone, Frank E. A. Sander, and Craig A. McEwen. It’s much more than a textbook, really, as it has a comprehensive method for planning, designing, implementing, and evaluating dispute systems. So, I’ve found the resource translates easily between my multiple “hats,” whether I’m wearing my trainer hat, academic/professor hat, designer hat, or evaluator hat.

NW: Why do you value this particular resource? 

HSK: It is written in a conversational, rather than high-brow, style, yet it is packed with data and additional citations. So, practitioners and academics alike can get what they need from it. I particularly appreciate that the authors start with theory and move to practical recommendations for how to implement best practices. It also includes really helpful case studies, showing you how actual people can do—and successfully have done—what they recommend.

NW: How did you first learn about this resource?

HSK: I was on faculty with one of the authors, Robert Bordone, at the Harvard Negotiation and Mediation Clinical Program. There, we implemented the design steps from this text in our clinic projects. We lived this material, and it was helpful to see how it played out in practice.

NW: For those unfamiliar with this resource, what is one part of this resource that you wouldn’t want someone to miss? 

HSK: The case studies are great examples of how DSD (Dispute System Design) principles can be tailored to address a variety of challenges, from international peacemaking efforts to online consumer disputes. It also makes DSD seem accessible; with this text, you feel like you could actually begin helping an organization, country, or societal system you care about manage conflict better.

Do you have a favorite ADR resource you would like to share? If so, please reach out to our Resource Center Director Nicole Wilmet at nwilmet@aboutrsi.org!

 

A Look Back on 2017

Nicole Wilmet, December 27th, 2017

What a wonderful year 2017 has been! From court program evaluations and trainings to staff gatherings, we have had an exciting year and continued to make great strides in serving communities with court alternative dispute resolution!

One of the greatest highlights from this year was the launch of our new website, AboutRSI.org! The launch of our new site brought together our two previous sites CourtADR.org and AboutRSI.org to become a one-stop shop for all things ADR. Our updated Resource Center allows for quick and easy searches for court ADR resources in our Research Library, and provides summaries of Court ADR Across Illinois and Court ADR Across the US. Additionally, the launch of our new website also brought the release of our Guide to Program Success, a how-to guide on court ADR program design, management, and evaluation. We look forward to continuing to share and add new resources to our Resource Center in 2018!

This year, our staff continued to bring RSI’s expertise to communities across the U.S. Here in Illinois, our program coordinators ran successful Foreclosure Mediation programs in Lake, Winnebago, Boone, and Kane Counties. We also launched our Child Protection Mediation program in Kane County, addressing cases involving abuse and neglect. Outside of Illinois, our Executive Director Susan Yates and Kane County Mediation Programs Manager Kevin Malone traveled to San Francisco for the American Bar Association Section of Dispute Resolution Conference! Additionally, this year, Susan traveled to Georgia and New Hampshire to lead a training for court ADR program administrators and provide training for state and federal court mediators and lawyers.

2017 was also a busy and exciting year for our Director of Research, Jennifer Shack, who spent the year engaged in several research and evaluation projects. This year, Jen lead an evaluation of Washington, D.C. Court’s child protection mediation program, an evaluation of a pilot program in Ohio that will use mediation for civil stalking cases, and an evaluation of the Supreme Court of Ohio Dispute Resolution Section’s The Right Track Project, a pilot program to address truancy problems. Want to have Jen help evaluate your court’s program in 2018? Click here to learn more!

Last but certainly not least, our Board members were also recognized for their work in ADR this year! In April, long-serving RSI Board member James J. Alfini was awarded the American Bar Association Chair’s Award for Outstanding Service to the ABA Section of Dispute Resolution!

As we finish this month we are thankful for a wonderful 2017 and are looking forward to 2018!

Happy New Year From All of Us Here at RSI!

Get to Know You Interview Series: Susan Yates

Nicole Wilmet, November 27th, 2017

Welcome to the second installment in our Get to Know You Interview series! My name is Nicole Wilmet and I am RSI’s Resource Center Director. Each month, I will be sitting down with members of the RSI staff to learn more about them and what they do in their role at RSI.

This month, I sat down with RSI’s Executive Director Susan M. Yates.

NW: What is your role at RSI?

SMY: Executive Director

NW: How did you first get involved in ADR?

SMY: Back in college, I studied labor relations at Cornell University’s School of Industrial and Labor Relations. I was especially interested in the courses about mediation, arbitration and negotiation. The school was very divided between people coming from the labor perspective and those coming from the management perspective. That seemed pointless and wasteful to me.

When the school brought in someone from one of the very first community mediation organizations in the country to talk to the students about community mediation, it clicked for me. Why waste all that time and energy in divisiveness and angst when you can sit down and work out a plan that satisfies everyone?

NW: What is your favorite part about being a mediator?

SMY: The people. I love getting to know people and learning from them. People in conflict are often very open with mediators, and I am no exception. With that openness, I can generate rapport and help people construct a way out of a conflict that has been weighing them down. It is a pretty special service to be able to provide.

NW: How did RSI come to be?

SMY: That is a long story. As with many successful ventures, RSI started with a few smart, committed people who shared a vision. A judge, an academic and a funder saw the need for collecting and disseminating reliable data and guidance that courts could use to improve their management and delivery of ADR services. They formed the base for RSI and over the years we developed a remarkable Board of Directors, a fabulous staff and a wide array of services.

NW: With all the various types of ADR, how did RSI come to focus on court ADR specifically?

SMY: If we want to make systemic change in how people resolve their disputes, what better way than by working with courts? I have adapted the quote from the bank robber Willie Sutton who, when asked why he robbed banks, said, “Because that’s where the money is.” I say, “Why work with court ADR? That’s where the cases are.”

NW: What is a typical day like as Executive Director?

SMY: Ha! Typical day? There is no such thing!

NW: What is your favorite part of your job? Why?

SMY: Dispute system design. I love figuring out how ADR can meet the needs of people in dispute, as well as all the stakeholders. These days I am focused on online dispute resolution for families. A process like this will help smooth the way for parents as they go through separation or divorce, and we know less parental conflict is good for the children. It will help judges who are overwhelmed with parents who are trying to represent themselves. Plus, from the perspective of the ADR field, it will help keep the “A” in alternative dispute resolution.

NW: What role does RSI play in the ADR community and how do you see this role expanding in the future?

SMY: We are seen as the “go-to” source for everything related to court ADR. We accomplish a lot of this through our totally renovated website (AboutRSI.org) that we launched recently. The other critical piece is the expertise of our amazing staff. Over the years we have worked with all kinds of court, bar and other committees; trained mediators, judges and court staff; presented at conferences and via webinars; and written, written, written. With all these great resources – online and in person – I expect RSI will be able to meet the needs of people working in court ADR for years to come.

NW: During your time working in court ADR, what, if any, would you say has been one of the biggest challenges you have faced and how were you able to overcome this challenge?

SMY: Funding. I can’t say we have overcome this challenge, but I don’t know that any non-profit ever overcomes the challenge of bringing in the funds needed to provide services. I must say that RSI would not exist were it not for the generous support of the M.R. Bauer Foundation. They have supported us since the very beginning. Over the years, they have been joined by individuals, law firms, ADR providers, corporations and other foundations. We are also supported by government entities. For example, the Office of Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan has supported our work in foreclosure mediation for more than four years. Also, courts around the country have contracted with RSI to provide services ranging from training to program evaluations.

There is still a lot of work to do. If anyone wants to donate, they can visit our page on Razoo, which processes our contributions!

NW: What aspect of ADR are you most interested in?

SMY: I am dedicated to mediation as a method of improving access to justice. There are a lot of challenges, but I think there is enormous potential.

NW: What are some of your favorite projects that you have worked on while at RSI?

SMY: Foreclosure mediation is definitely a big favorite. This is the area where I say RSI got to “practice what we preach.” Thanks to the support of the Illinois Attorney General, we got to do it all: dispute system design with stakeholders, training mediators, administering programs, collecting monitoring data and conducting a statewide evaluation. We helped all the programs in the state improve by giving them actionable data. With foreclosure mediation, I think we showed we know what we are doing.

NW: What is your favorite activity to do outside of work?

SMY: Anything related to my son! He is a Marine so I don’t get to see him often, but he is always my favorite person. (Pictured below.)

NW: If you could have dinner with any three people (living or dead) who would they be and why?

SMY:

Jesus.

My great-great-great grandmother. She was pregnant when she got on a ship to emigrate to the US and she gave birth on that ship. I would want to ask her what she was thinking.

Someone who wants to fully fund RSI in perpetuity!

 

U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Mandatory Arbitration Clause in Nursing Home Dispute

Nicole Wilmet, July 5th, 2017

In May, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a binding arbitration clause when it heard the case of Kindred Nursing Centers Limited Partnership v. Clark. In Kindred, Beverly Wellner and Janis Clark, the wife and daughter of Joe Wellner and Olive Clark, each held power of attorney for their respective family members. When Joe and Olive moved into Kindred Nursing Centers L.P., Beverley and Janis completed all the necessary power of attorney paperwork on behalf of their family members. Included in this paperwork was a binding arbitration agreement whereby Beverly and Janis agreed, on their family member’s behalf, that any disputes arising out of their family member’s stay at the facility would be resolved through binding arbitration.

After Joe and Olive passed away, Beverley and Janis brought negligence suits against Kindred Nursing Centers L.P. alleging that Kindred’s substandard care caused their family member’s deaths. Kindred then moved to dismiss these cases and claimed that the binding arbitration agreements signed by Beverly and Janis prohibited these cases from being heard in court. Both the Kentucky trial court and appellate courts dismissed Kindred’s claims and found that Beverly and Janis could try their case in court. Following the appellate court’s decision, Kindred then appealed to the Kentucky Supreme Court who affirmed the lower courts’ decisions and once again found that the families’ claims could be tried in court. As the Kentucky Supreme Court explained, the Kentucky Constitution protects an individual’s right to a jury trial. 478 S.W. 3d 306, 328-329 (2015). As such, the court found that the nursing home’s power of attorney agreement could not permit an individual with power of attorney to waive a jury trial and enter into a binding arbitration agreement without specifically saying so. Id. at 329. Following the court’s decision, Kindred then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

On May 15th, in a 7-1 decision, the Supreme Court determined that the lower courts in Kentucky violated the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) when they failed to give effect to the nursing home’s binding arbitration clause. As the court explained, under the FAA, courts are required to give arbitration agreements the same weight as all other contracts. (pg. 7) By failing to uphold the Kentucky nursing home’s arbitration clause, the Court found that the Kentucky courts failed to give the arbitration clause the same weight as other contracts. (pg. 8) As a result, the Court held that the nursing home’s clause was valid and enforceable.

Verified by ExactMetrics