Introduction

As Congress recognized seven years ago when it passed legislation requiring every federal district court to adopt an ADR Program, ADR has come of age.

The vast majority of lawyers and clients who have participated in an ADR program sponsored by a federal court have emerged grateful for the experience. They recognize that ADR provided them with an opportunity to work toward settlement, or toward streamlining and rationalizing their litigation, that was far more engaging and rewarding (in many different ways) than their unassisted efforts would have been. And even when their cases did not settle during the ADR event, they feel that they learned from and profited by the experience. As important, they praise the fairness of the procedures -- and know that, by providing them, the court really tried to help them find a better way. It is difficult to over-estimate the value of programs that leave litigants and lawyers with these kinds of feelings about our courts.

While it is clear that court-sponsored ADR has come of age, it is equally clear that innovation and evolution continue to be the hallmarks of ADR processes. Because of that innovation and evolution, a district court cannot meet its obligations under the ADR Act and cannot meet the ADR needs of its litigants and lawyers without periodically re-examing its ADR program to determine whether changes should be made (in light of new developments in the field or changes in the court's circumstances) in order to maximize the benefits the program could deliver.

A primary purpose of this Resource Guide is to make such re-examinations easier -- and to reduce the risk that when a court undertakes a review of some aspect of its program it will overlook significant issues that have surfaced in other jurisdictions. The heart of this Guide consists of a series of modules for planning and executing programs at annual District Court conferences. These conferences offer unique opportunities for lawyers and judges to share their views about the health and utility of current programs and procedures, to identify issues that warrant further analysis, and to begin formulating any appropriate changes in policy. The modules in this Guide are designed to help districts maximize the potential of these conferences -- to explore and debate the pertinent policy questions and practical suggestions as usefully as possible.

Toward these ends, the modules are, essentially, a series of self-contained lesson plans for sessions at annual district conferences. Each module is organized around a major subject or issue in the world of court-ADR. Each module suggests a structure for a program, identifies the critical issues that should be addressed, lists people with relevant expertise who might help amplify or tailor a program to a specific district's circumstances or who might serve as program faculty, and cites sources of written material that could be consulted in preparation for the program or shared with participants. Thus, the modules make it much easier to go from program concept to completion in any one of these subject areas.

Dana Curtis, Esq., who has been a professional mediator for many years and who teaches mediation courses at Stanford Law School's Martin Daniel Gould Center for Conflict Resolution Programs, deserves the lion's share of the work, ably assisted by Robin Donoghue of the Circuit Executive's Office. The judges, lawyers, and litigants in this Circuit are deeply in her debt. On behalf of all this Guide's future beneficiaries, the Circuit's Standing Committee on ADR takes this opportunity to express its sincere gratitude to Ms. Curtis.

The Resource Guide is intended to be a living document. The ADR Committee intends to update it periodically to add modules that respond to the districts' needs and suggestions and to update the existing modules. For the Guide to remain useful, however, we need your feedback, both on the modules themselves and on the ADR programs that you present at district and other conferences. We welcome your substantive suggestions by accessing the ADR website. In addition, the ADR Committee is eager to help any district or bar group design or implement any ADR educational or training program. Please contact us through the website with any questions, suggestions, or requests for assistance.

We wish you all the best as you engage in the rewarding and constructive work of delivering ADR services.

Dorothy W. Nelson
For the Ninth Circuit ADR Committee


Contributions to the Program Guide

The Ninth Circuit ADR Committee
The following members of the Ninth Circuit ADR Committee initiated and supervised this project:

Senior Circuit Judge Dorothy W. Nelson, Chair
Circuit Judge Raymond C. Fisher
District Judge Ann L. Aiken
District Judge Frank R. Zapata
Chief Bankruptcy Judge Randall J. Newsome
Chief Bankruptcy Judge Gregg Zive
Bankruptcy Judge Louise DeCarl Adler
Magistrate Judge Wayne D. Brazil
Magistrate Judge Valerie P. Cooke
Magistrate Judge Jeffrey W. Johnson
Magistrate Judge Kim Mueller
Chief Circuit Mediator David E. Lombardi
ADR Program Director Denise M. Asper
Philip E. Cutler, Esq.
Ruth V. Glick, Attorney at Law
Bruce Meyerson, Esq.
Chief Bankruptcy Judge Barry Russell, Consultant
Circuit Executive Gregory B. Walters
Assistant Circuit Executive Robin Donoghue

The Western Justice Center Foundation
This project was funded by a grant under the auspices of the Western Justice Center Foundation (WJCF). The WJCF became operational in 1996 under a grant from the James Irvine Foundation, supplemented by a grant of general support in 1997 from the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. The WJCF furthers its goal of the development of a peaceful society through its three priority programs: teaching children the skills of peaceful conflict resolution; helping communities resolve disputes without violence; and assisting our nation’s courts and administrative agencies to improve access to justice through innovative programs and other practices that increase consumer satisfaction.

WJCF is non-partisan and non-ideological. It nurtures collaboration among diverse groups and creates cost-effective partnerships among organizations to accomplish more than each organization could achieve alone. WJCF is both a local and national resource, providing services and testing new ideas in the greater Pasadena/Los Angeles area, then communicating results on these and other model practices to a growing national/international constituency.

About the JAMS Foundation
The JAMS Foundation funded the development of this Program Guide. JAMS is a non-profit corporation that provides financial assistance for conflict resolution initiatives with national impact. The Foundation encourages the use of alternative dispute resolution, supports education at all levels about collaborative processes for resolving differences, promotes innovation in conflict resolution and advances the settlement of conflict worldwide.

Acknowledgements

The development of this Program Guide was made possible by a grant from the JAMS Foundation. The Western Justice Center and the Ninth Circuit ADR Committee, whose members shepherded the project forward, are grateful for the JAMS Foundation’s generosity and support. This Program Guide was prepared with valuable input from many members of the Circuit ADR Committee and countless lawyers, court staff and neutrals from throughout the Circuit. Special thanks go to Senior Circuit Judge Dorothy Nelson and Magistrate Judge Wayne Brazil, who served as both editors and muses. Their thoughtful and substantial contributions to the content and form of this Program Guide enriched it greatly. Particular thanks also go to Robin Donoghue, who edited the Program Guide and cheerfully oversaw innumerable communications among the Program Guide’s many other “editors.” The able research assistance of Britnee Reamy and Brette Steele enhanced the Program Guide as well. For his generous contribution of creative ideas, writing and editing expertise and abundant patience and support, gratitude goes to Daniel Bowling.

Dana L. Curtis