skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 98300 Find in a Library
Title: Costs, Processes and Outcomes - Lawyers' Attitudes to Courts and Other Dispute Processing Options
Author(s): D M Trubek; H Kritzer; K Holst; W Felstiner
Date Published: 1984
Page Count: 57
Sponsoring Agency: University of Wisconsin-Madison
Madison, WI 53706
Sale Source: University of Wisconsin-Madison
Law School
Disputes Processing Research Program
Madison, WI 53706
United States of America
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This paper analyzes data from a survey conducted by the Civil Litigation Research Project (CLRP) to gather empirical data on the attitudes of attorneys towards dispute processing alternatives.
Abstract: The CLRP interviewed lawyers who had brought cases in Federal and State courts and alternative institutions including private arbitration and State administrative agencies. Lawyers who considered more than one institutional option for the dispute were asked why they initially preferred one institution and how they evaluated the institution selected. It was found that lawyers prefer institutions that give favorable results at low cost and with relative speed. Overall, lawyers ranked alternative institutions higher on many process and quality variables (especially cost effectiveness) than they did the courts. At the same time, they cited outcome advantages most frequently as a reason for preferring courts over any institutional alternatives they considered. The study suggests that efforts to introduce alternative dispute processing institutions will meet with attorney resistance if they are perceived as lowering the chances for favorable outcomes, or as increasing cost and adding to delay. Eight references and an appendix providing the study design and tabular data are provided. (Author abstract modified.)
Index Term(s): Alternative dispute settlement; Attitudes; Attorneys; Court-administered arbitration; Dispute resolution
Note: Working paper 1984-9.
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=98300

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.