英语论文网

(2000).
I. INTRODUCTION
Discourage litigation. Persuade your neighbours to compromise whenever you can. Point out to them how the nominal winner is often a real loser-in fees, expenses, and waste of time. As a peacemaker the lawyer has a superior opportunity of being a good [person]. There will still be business enough.
These wise words could have been written by one of our contemporaries, a proponent of the recent increase in the use of alternative dispute resolution methods. They were in fact written a century and a half ago by Abraham Lincoln, in notes he prepared for a law lecture. Their significance has not diminished with time, however, and Lincoln's wisdom and counsel remain as pertinent to the practice of law in the twenty-first century as they were in the 1800s.
The popularity of ADR has increased dramatically in recent years. Almost all state and federal courts now employ some type of ADR, and the CPR Institute for Dispute Resolution's research shows that most federal judges favour ADR, as do an impressive ninety-seven percent of corporate executives. Another recent survey of 1,000 of the largest corporations in the United States revealed that ninety percent of the respondents viewed mediation as a cost-saving measure, eighty-one percent found mediation to be a more satisfactory process than litigation, eighty-eight percent had used mediation in the previous three years, and seventy-nine percent had used arbitration in the previous three years.
The value of ADR has been recognized by the public as well as the private sector. Congress passed the ADR Act of 1996, the President signed the Presidential Memorandum of May 1, 1998 supporting ADR, and Attorney General Janet Reno spoke in 1998 about her abiding commitment to ADR and her goal that every agency of the federal government implements at least one new ADR program in the following year.
There seems to be a common perception, however, or, in reality, a misperception, that complex cases are inappropriate for ADR. Actually, complex business cases are in many instances the best cases for some type of alternative dispute resolution mechanism, because in such cases the advantages of ADR over traditional litigation can be maximized and experienced on a grander scale. In a 1996 survey of general counsel and outside attorneys conducted by Deloitte & Touche, one respondent stated unequivocally that "mediation is the best process for cost effective complex business dispute resolution." Determining whether a particular case is best resolved through a method other than traditional litigation, and just what the best method is, are issues that every attorney should consider early in the development of each case.

II. WHY USE ADR?
Alternative dispute resolution techniques offer many potential advantages over traditional litigation practices. As former United States Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren Burger once noted, 'The notion that ordinary people want black-robed judges, well dressed lawyers and fine courtrooms as settings to resolve their disputes is incorrect. People with problems, like people with pains, want relief, and they want it as quickly and inexpensively as possible A-D-R. How do you spell relief? In many cases, lawyers and clients alike spell relief".
A. ADR Saves Time.
It is not uncommon for a straightforward case to take three years to make it to本论文由英语论文网提供整理，提供论文代写，英语论文代写，代写论文，代写英语论文，代写留学生论文，代写英文论文，留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。