CAADRS / CAADRS Resource Center

CAADRS Resource Center

Resource Center

On-Line Resource Database

Our annotated, searchable database contains a wide range of materials of interest to those involved in court-related ADR, including articles, studies, books, and programs.

Resources listed here were chosen for their interest to individuals involved in court-related ADR; however, the listing of a resource does not constitute an endorsement of it as all items have not been reviewed.

We welcome suggestions for additions to our database. If you know of any good resources not found here, please e-mail us.

Some materials listed in our database are available to Illinois courts and their officers. Judges and court staff interested in borrowing an item from our library should contact us to check availability.

The following is a sample list of resources that are currently in CAADRS’ Resource Center. While they have been chosen for this page because of the quality of their content, their placement here should not be considered to be an endorsement by CAADRS.

The resources have been placed in the following categories:

Advocacy in ADR

Arbitration Advocacy. John W. Cooley and Steven Lubet, National Institute for Trial Advocacy (1997).

This book takes the reader through the steps of arbitration and provides checklists to help practitioners choose the appropriate arbitration forum and panel. It looks at preliminary pre-arbitration considerations, pre-hearing advocacy, preparing for the arbitration hearing, and post-hearing advocacy.

Mediation Advocacy. John W. Cooley, National Institute for Trial Advocacy (1996).

This book examines the lawyer’s role in ADR from a perspective of the “lawyer as architect of dispute resolution processes.” The book is a combination of practice and theory, and has appendices with thorough mediation checklists, forms, rules, and a short list of organizations throughout the country offering ADR services. The book derived from a continuing education course and focuses on teaching points chronologically throughout the mediation process.

Representing Clients in Mediation. Eric Galton, American Lawyer Media, L.P., (1994)

The goal of this book is to assist lawyers to better understand and utilize mediation, primarily in the context of civil cases. To do so, the author presents a mediation from beginning to end. His discussion includes:

Conflict Resolution in General

Dispute Resolution: Negotiation, Mediation, and Other Processes (Third edition). Stephen B. Goldberg, Frank E.A. Sander, and Nancy H. Rogers, Aspen Publishers (1999).

Intended as a basic course on dispute resolution, this book gives an overview of all ADR processes. It does a detailed study on negotiation, mediation, and adjudication (including arbitration), med-arb, mini-trial, and then applies them to family, community, intra-institutional, consumer, environmental, intergovernmental, and international disputes. It also discusses how to overcome impediments to the use of ADR processes.

Getting Disputes Resolved: Designing Systems to Cut the Costs of Conflict. William Ury, Jeanne Brett and Stephen B. Goldberg, Jossey-Bass Inc. (1993).

The authors use their collective experience in designing dispute resolution systems in the coal industry to discuss:

Mediation: Law, Policy and Practice. Nancy H. Rogers and Craig McEwen, West Publishing (1997).

This book offers extensive, state-by-state coverage of selected mediation and confidentiality legislation. It analyzes mediation-related law and social science research and looks particularly at the institutionalization of mediation, debates about standards and model procedures, issues unique to lawyer-mediators (conflict of interest, advertising, joint practice, unauthorized practice of law), and the regulations for quality control.

The Mediation Process. Christopher W. Moore, Jossey-Bass Inc. (1996).

This book provides an overview of the entire process of mediation and identifies when mediation is appropriate as well as when it has a high probability of success. The author outlines twelve stages of the mediation process and discusses what a mediator should do prior to mediation and what skills should be used during mediation. He then lays out the steps involved in reaching a settlement and preparing final agreement packages.

Nichols Illinois Civil Practice: Alternative Dispute Resolution Handbook (with forms). Lee Hugh Goodman, West Group (1996, with supplements for 1997, 1999).

This handbook explains how to use all forms of ADR with an emphasis on mediation and arbitration. The book offers practical guidance on how to identify which cases are best for ADR, evaluate the qualifications of arbitrators and mediators, conduct effective discovery in ADR, prepare a client for an ADR hearing, modify one’s trial technique for arbitration, develop an effective negotiation strategy, and respond to obstacles that opposing parties often create. The handbook includes discussion of advantages of ADR over litigation and ADR forms, including contract clauses, letters to clients, demands, motions, notices, and discovery requests.

Processes of Dispute Resolution: The Role of Lawyers (Second edition). John S. Murray, Alan Scott Rau and Edward F. Sherman, The Foundation Press (1996).

This book pulls together the thinking and writing of a large number of top names in the field of ADR. Much of this book is based on reprints from other books and journal articles. The focus is on theory, policy discussions, academic research, the role of lawyers and the courts, and contrasts between different kinds of ADR.

ADR and Settlement in the Federal District Courts: A Sourcebook for Judges and Lawyers. Elizabeth Plapinger and Donna Stienstra, Federal Judicial Center and CPR Institute for Dispute Resolution (1996).

This book looks at ADR and settlement practices in each of the ninety-four federal district courts, gives an overview of dispute resolution approaches used in each district, and gives an in-depth description of each court-managed ADR program in the districts which have them.

Child Protection and Dependency Mediation Program Profiles. Jan Shaw and Nancy Thoennes, Association of Family and Conciliation Courts.

This book provides information regarding child protection and dependency mediation programs around the U.S. Information includes: stage at which case may mediate, whether mediation is voluntary or mandatory, who can attend, issues included in mediation, mediator qualifications, and funding sources.

Mediation & Conference Programs in the Federal Courts of Appeals. Robert J. Niemec, Federal Judicial Center (1997).

This is a reference guide on mediation and settlement conference programs in the federal courts of appeals, programs that offer a way for courts to deal with increasing filings without increased demand for circuit judgeships. The book responds to requests from the appellate courts for a detailed description of other circuits’ mediation and conference programs as well as more general information about what happens in other circuits. In addition, it provides a means for attorneys to learn more about these programs.

Court ADR: Elements of Program Design. Elizabeth Plapinger and Margaret Shaw, CPR Institute for Dispute Resolution (1997).

This book is designed to help federal and state courts that are developing or modifying ADR programs to address central issues, such as the ADR processes that will be offered and for what types of cases, whether the processes will be mandatory or voluntary, how cases will be selected, how the program will be funded, the qualifications of neutrals, whether confidentiality will be protected, and how the program will be monitored and evaluated.

Court-Annexed Mediation: Critical Perspectives on Selected State and Federal Programs. Edward J. Bergman and John G. Bickerman, Pike and Fischer (1998).

This is a collection of essays describing nine court-annexed mediation programs. They are intended to create “a sense of how a program is structured and implemented, highlighting strengths and weaknesses.” The essays are narrative and subjective rather than statistic and useful for training purposes.

Guide for Implementing the Balanced and Restorative Justice Model. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (1998).

The Guide is intended to assist juvenile justice professionals in implementing a balanced and restorative justice (BARJ) approach in their work. It presents practical information and tools to enable these professionals to implement the BARJ philosophy and mission and provides concrete examples of how they can examine their own roles (as probation officers, judges, police officers and victim advocates) in facilitating the implementation of BARJ programs. The book includes a background in the BARJ philosophy as well.

Guidelines for Establishing Court-Connected Mediation, Evaluation and Conciliation Services, 2nd Edition. Phil Bushard, Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (1993).

This is a manual designed to assist courts in the implementation of family mediation and conciliation programs. The guidelines include creating community linkages; establishing the authority for court services; estimating the size of the program and future staff needs; funding; organizational structure, procedures, and facilities; program monitoring and evaluation; and managing services and staff.

Judge’s Deskbook on Court ADR. Elizabeth Plapinger, Margaret L. Shaw, and Donna Stienstra, Federal Judicial Center (1993).

This book was originally developed for the National ADR Institute for Federal Judges-a seminar for federal district judges, magistrate judges, lawyers and ADR scholars, with the intent to teach federal judges about ADR and promote wise decision-making about ADR development and use. It includes sections on the ADR process, which examines the main court ADR processes; court ADR programs, which addresses the development and operation of such programs; ADR and case management, which looks at how judges evaluate and use ADR; and selected policy papers on court ADR, which look at policy and ethics issues.

“Mediating Family Disputes in a World with Domestic Violence: How To Devise a Safe and Effective Court-Connected Mediaiton Program.” Rene L. Rimelspach, Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution, 17(1): 95-112 (2001).

This article presents arguments for and against mediating divorce cases involving domestic violence. It then argues for the mediation of these cases and provides guidelines for courts on how to do so while ensuring the safety of and a balance of power between the parties.

Report to the Michigan Supreme Court. Dispute Resolution Task Force (1999).

This report provides recommendations for the continued development of ADR processes in Michigan trial courts. It includes recommendations for integrating DR processes in the trial courts, and for new and amended court rules, guidelines, standards, and statutes. Among its recommendations are: to give mediators acting under the appointment or qualification of a court the status of quasi-judicial immunity from suit; to make ADR processes available both pre-filing and throughout the course of litigation; to monitor ADR programs and services; and to adopt a court rule assuring the confidentiality of ADR processes.

Alternative Dispute Resolution in the District Court of Maryland. Chief Judge Martha F. Rasin, District Court of Maryland (1998).

The District Court conducted a survey of ADR presently in use. It concluded that ADR exists in the districts with the most crowded dockets, there is more mediation in criminal cases than in civil cases, most mediators are volunteers or paid on a sliding scale, the strongest supporters of mediation are the mediators and judges, and mediation has failed in some locations.

An Evaluation of Mediation and Early Neutral Evaluation Under the Civil Justice Reform Act. James S. Kakalik, et al., RAND Institute of Civil Justice (1996).

This study examined the implementation, costs, and effects of mediation and early neutral evaluation programs for civil cases in six federal district courts with CJRA pilot programs. The districts studied were: California (Southern), New York (Eastern), New York (Southern), Pennsylvania (Eastern), Oklahoma (Western), and Texas (Southern). The cases were evaluated by time to disposition; cost of litigation; cost to the court for administering the ADR program; monetary outcomes; provider, litigant, and lawyer views of satisfaction with case management and; provider, litigant, and lawyer views of the fairness of case management. The study concludes that there is no strong statistical evidence that the mediation or neutral evaluation programs, as implemented in the six district courts studied, significantly affected time to disposition, litigation costs, or attorney views of fairness or satisfaction with case management; however the vast majority of lwyers in every program were satisfied with the ADR process itself. ADR programs also appear to increase the likelihood of a monetary settlement.

An Evaluation of Michigan’s Community Dispute Resolution Program. Harry Mika, Michigan State Court Administrative Office (1997).

This is a four-volume report that includes an Executive Summary; Detailed Findings, Recommendations, and Appendices; a Methodology for Multi-Site Program Evaluation; and an Appraisal of the Evaluation and Implementation Phases. The program deals mainly with landlord/tenant, consumer, locksmith services, contract, and neighborhood disputes. Services are provided through 30 community-based centers. The evaluation process included site visits (including interviews), organizational audits, survey of clients and judiciary, and interpretation of statistical data. The study found that there is very little planning or evaluation done, that there is an increase in conciliation over mediation because of staff turnover, and that funding has become a major challenge.

The Impact of Rule 114 on Civil Litigation Practice in Minnesota. Bobbi McAdoo, Supreme Court Office of Continuing Education (1997).

Examines the impact of Minnesota Rule 114, which requires attorneys to consider ADR in every civil case, discuss ADR with their clients and opposing counsel, and advise the court regarding their conclusions about ADR, including the selection of a process, a neutral, and the timing of the ADR process. Findings include: Rule 114 has caused tremendous growth in the use of mediation; less than 1/3 of lawyers surveyed reported an increase in settlement rates for filed cases since Rule 114; the key reason lawyers choose mediation is to save litigation expenses, but also because it saves time, decreases client expense and is less adversarial; the most important qualification for a mediator is substantive experience in the field of law related to the case.

Mediation in Bankruptcy: The Federal Judicial Center Survey of Mediation Participants. Robert Niemic, The Federal Judicial Center (1998).

“Mediation participants” throughout the United States were given a questionnaire in which they could express their views on mediation in bankruptcy cases. This survey compiles and documents the results of these questionnaires. The purpose of this survey is to collect empirical information to help the Advisory Committee on Bankruptcy Rules determine whether to consider rules changes that would govern mediation of bankruptcy matters.

National Symposium on Court-Connected Dispute Resolution Research. Susan Keilitz, ed., National Center for State Courts (1994).

The symposium was designed “to enhance the value of existing ADR research and evaluation for court policy makers and practitioners and to encourage the greater utility of future studies.” It found five interrelated themes: 1) to understand the effects of ADR, courts need to know more about the dynamics of the litigation process and attorneys’ expectations about how ADR fits into that scheme; 2) courts need more reliable findings on the benefits of ADR; 3) courts need significantly greater knowledge about the most effective methods for training, qualifying, and selecting ADR providers; 4) innovative measures of participant satisfaction should be developed; 5) courts need better access to practical guides for implementing, operating, and evaluating ADR programs. Includes an annotated bibliography.

“Satisfaction with Custody Mediation: Results from the York County Custody Mediation Program” Tricia S. Jones, Andrea Bodtker, Mediation Quarterly, 16(2):185-200 (Winter 1998).

This article gives some of the results of the York County Custody Mediation program evaluation funded by the State Justice Institute. The evaluation measured disputant and mediator satisfaction with the mediation process. Satisfaction was measured by whether agreements had been achieved, whether Protection from Abuse orders had been filed, whether caucuses were used, and whether disputants were represented by attorneys. The evaluation showed that disputants had high rates of short-term satisfaction with the mediation process and its outcomes, and mediators were less satisfied with the mediation process than the disputants.

ADR Cost Savings & Benefits Studies. CPR Institute for Dispute Resolution (1994).

This study is part of the CPR Model ADR Procedures and Practices series, which focuses on a discussion of litigation problems, costs of the civil litigation system, growth in ADR, broad commercial ADR surveys, specific company ADR program reports, industry sector ADR studies, comparative findings on dispute resolution processes, ADR process analysis, and settlement rates.

Alternatives to Litigation: Do They Have a Place in the Federal District Courts? Donna Stienstra and Thomas E. Willging, Federal Judicial Center (1995).

This paper examines the following questions, “is there a proper place in the federal courts for alternative methods of dispute resolution? Is it appropriate to compel litigants to participate in such procedures as arbitration and mediation? What is the proper role of courts in resolving disputes? And what is their proper role in society?” It focuses on examining the place of court-based, mandatory, non-binding ADR. It also discusses whether ADR procedures ‘enhance or undermine that role and whether these alternatives provide any benefits to individual parties, to courts, or to society.’ And also the ‘questions about the role of the courts and ADR’s value and effects through a series of arguments in support of and in opposition to court-based ADR programs.’

“How Will Lawyering and Mediation Practices Transform Each Other?” John Lande, Florida State University Law Review 24:839-901 (1997).

This article describes the ‘liti-mediation culture,’ one in which both mediation and litigation exists, and discusses the ways in which lawyering and mediation practices shape each other within this culture.