Kristen Blankley, Assistant Professor at the University of Nebraska College of Law recently authored and interesting and useful article entitled Keeping a Secret from Yourself? Confidentiality When the Same Neutral Serves Both as Mediator and as Arbitrator in the Same Case, Baylor Law Review, Forthcoming. In her article, Professor Blankley examines the process of med-arb from a confidentiality and privilege standpoint.
Here is the abstract:
As the alternative dispute resolution field has grown, parties have designed their own processes from established processes in an attempt to best serve their process needs. One such hybrid process is mediation-arbitration, called “med-arb” for short. Med-arb involves a single neutral who first serves as a mediator, and, if the parties reach impasse in mediation, the neutral then serves as an arbitrator to resolve the dispute. Although the literature has given some attention to the benefits and drawbacks of med-arb, this Article examines the process in light of broad mediation confidentiality and privilege statutes. Because these laws have no exceptions for med-arb, parties who seek to utilize this process must execute careful waivers to avoid the possibility that any resulting arbitration award later be vacated by the courts.
The article may be downloaded here (without charge) from Social Science Research Network.
We welcome your comments.
Technorati Tags: arbitration, ADR, law, Mediation
Related Posts
The Role of Arbitrators as Ethics Enforcers
Taming the Wild West of Arbitration Ethics
Law Review Article | Regulating Mandatory Arbitration
Law Review Article | Does Class Arbitration ‘Change the Nature’ of Arbitration? Stolt-Nielsen and First Principles
Law Review Article | Integrating ‘Alternative’ Dispute Resolution into Bankruptcy: As Simple (and Pure) as Motherhood and Apple Pie?
Law Review Article | Religious Arbitration and the New Multiculturalism: Negotiating Conflicting Legal Orders
