US Supreme Court to Decide if ADA Claim Must Be Arbitrated Before
Bringing A Court Action Wright v. Universal Maritime Svc Corp
Certiorari granted 03/02/98
Decision below: Unpublished, 1997 WL 422869 (4th Cir. 07/29/97)

The United States Supreme Court will decide whether a claimant
under the Americans With Disabilities Act must submit his claim to
arbitration under a collective bargaining agreement prior to
bringing a court action. Wright filed a court action without first
filing a grievance under the collective bargaining agreement, which
covered "all matters" regarding "terms and conditions of
employment."  The Fourth Circuit affirmed dismissal of Wright's ADA
suit, citing Austin v. Owens-Brockway Glass, 78 F.3d 875 (4th Cir
03/12/96).

[Editor's Note: Only the Fourth Circuit requires an employee to
follow a collective agreement's grievance-and-arbitration
procedures before suing under Title VII or the ADA.  Gilmer v.
Interstate/Johnson Lane, 500 US 20 (1991), held that an employee
with an individual arbitration agreement cannot bring an ADEA suit,
but must arbitrate instead.  Alexander v. Gardner-Denver, 415 US 36
(1974), held that an employee who had already lost an arbitration
under a collective agreement can still bring a Title VII suit.  It
seems unlikely that the Supreme Court would hold that an
arbitration clause in a collective agreement is a total bar to
litigation (as it did hold in Gilmer as to an individual
agreement).  However, the Fourth Circuit's ruling could be upheld
merely as a rule requiring exhaustion of collective agreement
remedies, with the employee still being free to sue (as in
Gardner-Denver) if he loses the arbitration.]

Title VII Claim Not Subject To Arbitration Because Of Damages
Limitation Provision Paladino v. Avnet Computer Tech., Inc.  (11th Cir 02/04/98)

Former employee brought a Title VII claim against employer. The
court ruled that the claim was not subject to arbitration because
the arbitration clause limited the damages an arbitrator could
award to those for breach of contract. The three judges on the
panel offered different underlying rationales for the decision.
However, the agreement failed either because its confusing language
failed to inform the employee that the agreement covered statutory
claims, or because the agreement divested the employee of any
prospect of obtaining meaningful relief and was therefore
unenforceable. [Full Decision: 1998 WL 41578]

Orally Stipulating To Arbitration Waived Statutory Requirement of
Written Agreement Law Offices of Ian Herzog v. Law Offices of Joseph M. Fredrics
(Cal.App. 2 Dist. 02/18/98)

Parties to attorney fee dispute orally stipulated on record to
binding arbitration, and the court entered an order sending the
matter to arbitration.  The prevailing party at arbitration filed
petition to confirm award, which the Superior Court granted.  The
losing party appealed.  The Court of Appeals held that: (1) by
orally stipulating to arbitration, party waived his right under
statute requiring existence of written agreement for order to
compel arbitration, and (2) party was judicially estopped from
claiming that order compelling arbitration was void. [Full
Decision: 1998 WL 64024]

Commission on Healthcare Dispute Resolution - Interim Report

The Commission on Healthcare Dispute Resolution established by the
American Arbitration Association, American Bar Association, and
American Medical Association, formed in Fall 1997, issued an
Interim Progress Report 01/20/98, and expects a final report in
summer 1998.  The Commission will make recommendations on
"resolving disputes over access to health care treatment, and
coverage, in the private health plan/managed-care environment."

Objectives: (1) Identify substantive areas suitable for ADR; (2)
Establish due process criteria; (3) Develop model ADR procedures.

Areas of study: Access to specific health care providers, needed
treatment, specific health care facilities; medical necessity of
treatment; experimental treatment; reasonableness of cost;
continuity of care; disclosure of information to consumers;
development of drug formularies; out-of-area coverage; provider
communication with patients; utilization management.

ADR methods: Ombuds, fact-finding, mediation, arbitration.

Commissioners On Uniform State Laws To Collaborate On Mediation Law

The National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws and
the American Bar Association Section on Dispute Resolution
announced recently that they will appoint interlocking committees
to draft a uniform or model mediation law for states to consider.
Both groups will begin work in the next few months on uniform
provisions on confidentiality in mediation, followed by work on
other provisions over the next three to four years.

Professor Nancy Rogers from Ohio State with the assistance of
Richard C. Reuben of the Stanford Center on Conflict and
Negotiation will coordinate the academic assistance.  Faculty from
several other law schools will participate in a comprehensive
review of the more than 2,000 state and federal mediation statutes
and court rules. The project will solicit suggestions and comments
throughout the process from an advisory committee that is broadly
representative of the dispute resolution field. In about a year,
the project will begin circulating drafts and soliciting reactions
to its work from any interested persons or groups. Details:
richardr@leland.stanford.edu.

Hamline University And Mediation Center For Dispute Resolution
Affiliation

Hamline University and Mediation Center for Dispute Resolution have
announced a formal university-wide affiliation.  Under the
leadership of Nancy Welsh and Professor Bobbi McAdoo, the Center
and Institute have trained and assisted lawyers, judges,
legislators, public officials, businesses and individuals from the
Midwest and beyond. Details: (612) 523-2941

NCPCR - Executive Director Position

"Executive Director, 30 hrs/wk with benefits (potential to become
full time), for a national nonprofit located in Northern Virginia.
We are seeking a leader for the National Conference on Peacemaking
and Conflict Resolution. Duties include: support and supervise
ongoing activities, work closely with diverse board, colleagues and
constituents, and develop new collaborative programs with its host
organization. Strong fundraising background is required. Candidates
must have excellent administrative skills and knowledge of fields
related to conflict resolution and peacemaking. Job description
available by contacting NCPCR (email ncpcr@gmu.edu, phone
703-993-2440, or FAX 703-993-3070). Salary range: $28,000-$34,000.
Women and minority candidates are strongly encouraged to apply.
Send resume and cover letter by March 22 to NCPCR at 4400
University Drive, Fairfax, VA, 22030."

AFM Conference Correction

In our 02/23/98 edition we gave incorrect dates for the Academy of
Family Mediators 15th Annual Conference.  It will be July 7-11,
1998 in San Francisco.  Details: afmoffic@mediators.org

Recent Developments in Dispute Resolution
Willamette Law Online  -  Willamette University College of Law