Copyright (c) 1999 Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution
Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution
ARTICLE: Mandated Mediation of Civil Cases in State Courts: A Litigant's Perspective on Program Model Choices
14 Ohio St. J. on Disp. Resol. 813
John P. McCrory *
This Article is part of a broader research project designed to examine court-based mediation from a new vantage point. The objective of the project, which has two stages, is to promote greater understanding of the costs, benefits, and other implications of selecting particular mediation program design models. 1 The models chosen for the comparisons are:
1. In-house staff mediators; 2
2. Court contracts with a nonprofit service provider; 3
3. Private mediators paid by the court; 4
4. Private mediators paid by the parties; 5
5. Volunteer mediators supervised by the court; 6 and
6. Mixed programs. 7
Five states, Colorado, Georgia, Hawai'i, Maine, and Ohio, were selected as the focus for our inquiry in the first stage of the project. All of the states have substantial experience with court-based mediation and strong leadership from statewide court-based dispute resolution offices.
Summaries of activities within the five states, with particular reference to the program models listed above, were provided by program directors from each state. 8 Our initial inquiries will lay a foundation for a more detailed examination of selected programs within each state based upon what is learned from our preliminary inquiries and related research. Researchers 9 have considered the information collected from the perspectives of different stakeholders in court-based mediation programs, including judges, court administrators, state policy makers, and litigants who are ordered to mediate their disputes before having access to a trial.
I will examine the models from the perspective of consumers--litigants who ...
If you are interested in obtaining a lexis.com® ID and Password, please contact us at 1-(800)-227-4908 or visit us at http://www.lexisnexis.com/.