Historically, arbitration evolved out of the need for an alternative to traditional litigation within our public court systems. Clients wanted a less time-consuming and more cost-effective method to resolve conflicts. Arbitration was one such alternative dispute resolution mechanism, which allowed for resolution of claims in a private setting and for the selection of fact finders with specialized training or experience.
However, recently a counter-trend against arbitration has emerged. As a consequence of extended discovery, and the fact that arbitrators are allowing more and more information (even hearsay and nonrelevant testimony) to be admitted, the length of time and cost that it takes to arbitrate a case is drastically increasing.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
