英语论文网

F. Private Judging
By statute or court rule in most states, parties involved in a dispute may appoint a person of their choosing as the decision-maker. Sometimes the "private judge" is a retired judge from the traditional court system, and in other instances the parties may appoint a judge with specialized expertise in the subject matter of their dispute. Private judges can act as traditional judges in a quasi-trial setting, or as arbitrators or mediators if either of those ADR processes is chosen by the parties.
In the quasi-trial setting, the appointed judge has full judicial powers, except the power to hold persons appearing before him or her in contempt. The parties may agree that the private judge's decision is non-binding, but it is nearly always selected as a binding option. In the latter case, the private judge's decision is entitled to entry as a judgment and may be appealed.
In some cases, the private judge is called upon to decide only certain issues and submit his/her decision to the court, which will continue with the traditional litigation process. This procedure may be suggested or even ordered by the trial court when the issues are too time-consuming to be addressed in the ordinary course of the court's business. In most instances, the trial court adopts the private judge's recommendations.
There is no transcript of the private-judging proceedings that becomes part of the public record, and it is therefore a more confidential process than a trial. There is also a greater likelihood with private judging that the dispute will be handled when scheduled, rather than continued to a later date to accommodate the court's over-crowded calendar. Private judging may be less costly than litigation, too, since the parties often split the cost of the private judge and resolution usually occurs earlier in the case than a trial would, thereby saving both time and money.
Because private judging is confidential, allows the parties to appoint a decision-maker with expertise in the subject matter involved in the dispute, and provides for a more prompt resolution, all at a time chosen by and convenient to the parties, it can be a very effective dispute resolution option. As with the other ADR methods, the parties' lawyers should help them decide if private judging is a good option for them, help them select the judge, and advise them on their rights and an appropriate outcome.

G. "e-ADR"
One not-so-traditional form of ADR is the fairly recent innovation of Internet-based settlement services. Although a complex business dispute may not readily lend itself to on-line resolution, this new phenomenon is nonetheless worthy of mention. Following are two examples of electronic dispute resolution services.
1. NAM Corporation's clickNsettle. Com
ClickNsettle.com utilizes a direct settlement format that enables parties in a dispute to enter "blind" and confidential offers and demands via the Internet. It provides parties involved in disputes that can be settled monetarily the opportunity to negotiate their case without actually "tipping their hand" about what settlement terms they would find acceptable. The demands and offers are secure, and only the final settlement amount is revealed, which ensures that neither party will 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。