Document Type

Article

Publication Year

1997

Journal Title

Bench & Bar of Minnesota

ISSN

0276-1505

Abstract

Not so long ago, "ADR" was just one more term in a legal jargon already filled with too many acronyms. While we concede that "ADR" might not rival "CPR" as a vital necessity, its use is extremely important to the practice of law today. Since the promulgation of Rule 114 of the Minnesota General Rules of Practice, nearly 80 percent of Minnesota attorneys report that they are using ADR to help resolve their civil cases filed in state trial courts.' Their reasons? ADR processes can cut litigation costs, reduce clients' expenses, save attorneys' and clients' time, and generate earlier settlements. National research also consistently shows that ADR increases clients' satisfaction with the resolution of their cases.

But most attorneys think of ADR only in relatively standard, two-party cases. It probably would surprise many attorneys that ADR also is being used to help settle huge, complicated class actions or mass torts. One dramatic - and instructive - example of this use of ADR has occurred in the federal court in Minnesota. In this article, we will describe this use of ADR - and share a few of the lessons learned in this experience.

First Page

21

Last Page

23

Num Pages

3

Issue Number

8

Publisher

Minnesota Bar Association

FIle Type

PDF

Share

COinS
 
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.