Issuu on Google+

AlternAtive Dispute resolution Resol } rise of the new paradigm: ! Alternative Dispute Resolution {uTion Anyone who has spent time sitting in a jury room waiting to be assigned to a case knows the cold, hard truth: For better or for worse, the glory days of the American jury trial are over. At a time when the American Bar Association (ABA) boasts more than 400,000 members, fewer and fewer cases are making their way to the courtroom. According to the 2004 ABA report “The Vanishing Trial,” the federal district courts conducted fewer civil trials in 2002 than in 1962, plunging from 11 percent to 1.8 percent, despite a five-fold increase in civil filings. During that same 40-year period, the number of federal criminal trials fell from 15 percent to 4.7 percent. The eARly DAys of ADR A number of prominent Willamette University College of Law graduates have distinguished themselves within the ADR arena. Most embarked on traditional career paths but went on to specialize in mediation and/or arbitration, the two most common forms of ADR. And state courts fared no better. Data from the National Center for State Courts indicate that state civil trial dispositions dropped from 27,567 to 19,264 between 1993 and 2002. For some states, like California, dispositions dropped more than 50 percent during this time. Jeffrey M. Batchelor JD’72, shareholder in Markowitz, Herbold, Glade & Mehlhaf PC in Portland, Ore., made the move to ADR in the late 1980s when the chief judge of the Oregon Court of Appeals recruited him to train and work as a mediator for the court. “I really didn’t know that much about mediation,” Batchelor said, “but I figured if the chief judge was asking, I had better do it. While some litigators bemoan the drop in jury trials as evidence of our failing court system, most advocates welcome the opportunity to replace an archaic system of justice with more advantageous methods of resolving conflicts. Consequently, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) has become the new bedrock of the American legal system. “Even then, I could see fewer cases were being tried, so I could see down the road that even fewer would be appealed,” said Batchelor, who began practice as an appellate specialist. “I could see a change in my own law practice and in the field as a whole. More and more cases were being settled and arbitrated.” } “The key is to find a pathway to resolution but not engage in psychotherapy, which I’m not qualified to do, nor do I think it is my role as mediator.” — Eric B. Lindauer 14 | Willamette lawyer When Batchelor first began mediating cases for the court, he spent 70 percent of his time on appellate work and 30 percent on ADR. “Those numbers are now flipped,” he said. “At least 70 percent of my work today is focused on ADR.” Charles S. Burdell Jr. JD’70, owner and partner in Judicial Dispute Resolution LLC in Seattle, Wash., also came to ADR by way of a traditional practice. While working as a trial lawyer, he began mediating cases on a volunteer basis for the Federal Bar Association. “In the early 1980s, there was a backlog of federal district court cases in Seattle,” Burdell explained. “There were

Willamette Lawyer | Fall 2007 • Vol. VII, No. 2

Related publications