The Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution is pleased to bring you Volume 8, Issue 1 of the Mayhew-Hite Report on Dispute Resolution and the Courts.
In Q & A with Professor Sarah Rudolph Cole: What You Should Know Regarding Possible Changes to Consumer Arbitration, Professor Sarah Rudolph Cole, an expert in arbitration, discusses the developments and what is on the horizon of consumer arbitration. The lead article can be accessed here.
In June of 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review the Second Circuit’s decision in Stolt-Nielsen SA v. AnimalFeeds Int’l Corp., 548 F.3d 85 (2nd Cir. 2008), which held that interpreting a silent arbitration clause to permit class arbitration does not manifestly disregard the law. The Second Circuit reasoned that the parties’ contract provided that the scope of the arbitration clause was an issue for the arbitrators themselves to decide.
The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in this case on December 9, 2009. The decision in this case is expected to address not only the issue of class arbitration, but will likely clarify the viability of the manifest disregard doctrine after the Court’s decision in Hall Street Associates, L.L.C. v. Mattel, Inc., 552 U.S. 576 (2008). The Court’s decision in Stolt-Nielsen will have significant impact on the future of arbitration, particularly with regard to class arbitration and the permissible reasons to vacate an arbitration decision. A detailed summary of the Second Circuit’s decision can be accessed here.
The Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution will hold its symposium, titled “Codifying Mediation 2.0” on February 5, 2010. The symposium will be a day-long roundtable examining the rules of civil procedure and mediation. The Uniform Mediation Act (UMA), now enacted in 11 jurisdictions, covers mediation privilege, reports to the trier of fact, mediator conflict of interest, and right to be accompanied by counsel or other persons. The UMA left for another time issues of law that include limits on the authority to require parties to act in ways that stimulate settlement, which includes the extent to which courts should compel mediation participation, the appropriateness of the judge participating in mediation, the authority of the court to compel payment of mediators, and the regulation of private mediators who receive court referrals.
Using the Uniform Mediation Act as the starting point for discussions, the roundtable will examine the following issues: Should the rules of civil procedure be amended to provide a uniform approach? Would it be more appropriate for some or all of the issues to amend existing statutes, such as the Federal Dispute Resolution Act or the Uniform Mediation Act? Roundtable participants include: Judge Sandra Beckwith, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Ohio; Professor Sarah Rudolph Cole, Squire, Sanders and Dempsey Designated Professor of Law at the Moritz College of Law and Director of the Moritz Program on Dispute Resolution; Steven S. Gensler, Welcome D. and W. DeVier Pierson Professor of Law at the University of Oklahoma School of Law and author of a highly renowned treatise on the federal rules of civil procedure; John B. Pinney, Senior Trial Lawyer in the Commercial Litigation and Dispute Resolution Client Services Department, and Chair of the International Practice Group at Graydon, Head, & Ritchey, LLP; Robert Rack, Mediator with the Sixth Circuit; Nancy Hardin Rogers, Michael E. Moritz Chair in Alternative Dispute Resolution, former Dean of the Moritz College of Law, and former Attorney General of the State of Ohio; Edward F. Sherman, W.R. Irby Chair in Law at Tulane University Law School, former Dean of the Tulane Law School, and author in dispute resolution and civil procedure; Roselle Wissler, Research Director, Lodestar Dispute Resolution Program and Faculty Fellow, Center for the Study of Law, Science, & Technology at the Arizona State University Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law.
The roundtable will be followed by a paper symposium issue of the Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution. For more information on the Symposium please click here.
In Incorporating Alternative Dispute Resolution into State Administrative Agencies: In a Race to the Top, Which State Will Get There First?, Amanda McNeil discusses the use of ADR in the State Administrative Agency process. She argues that States that have adopted the Uniform Mediation Act (UMA) and have central panel systems for their administrative agencies are in the ideal position to follow the example set by the federal government by instituting state-wide ADR protocols for administrative agencies. The full-text of this paper can be accessed here.
Editor: Amanda McNeil, in collaboration with members of the Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution.
Advisor: Professor Sarah R. Cole
Send Comments To:
Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution
The Ohio State University, Moritz College of Law
55 West 12th Avenue, Columbus, Ohio 43210-1391
Phone Number: (614) 292-7170