(Relatively) Recent and Exciting Arbitration Decisions

In the last few years, the legitimacy and reach of arbitration and arbitration clauses have been considerably expanded by the U.S. Supreme Court.  Three in particular interest me because they related to my own practice emphasis:  14 Penn Plaza, Rent-a-Center, and Stolt-Nielsen.  This blog will discuss their basic holdings and why they are significant in the larger scheme of arbitration.

Foreclosure Mediation - Limitations and Concerns

As part of my New Mexico mediation practice, I find I am increasingly being referred residential foreclosure mediation cases.  This is no accident as today, an increasing number of states and/or individual state courts are utilizing foreclosure mediation programs to manage the current "foreclosure crisis." Some states with such programs, either state-wide or local include: Connecticut; Delaware; Florida—various judicial districts; Kentucky—Jefferson County; Maine; Maryland; Michigan; Nevada; New Jersey; New Mexico—First and Thirteenth Judicial Districts; New York; Ohio—various counties; Oregon; Pennsylvania—various counties; Rhode Island—Providence. 

A recurring and thorny dilemma for mediators today is how to conduct and what are the proper parameters for a foreclosure mediation or settlement facilitation.

NM Survey -- Lawyers' Take on State’s Civil Justice System

In the January 12, 2011 edition of the New Mexico Bar Bulletin, State Supreme Court Justice Edward L. Chavez reported the results of a recent survey conducted by the NM Defense Lawyers Ass’n (NMDLA) and the NM Trial Lawyers Ass’n (NMTLA), at the State Supreme Court’s request.  See Bar Bulletin, Jan. 12, 2001, Vol. 50, No. 1.

The NMDLA and the NMTLA are comprised and represent the interests of members of the civil defense bar and the plaintiffs civil bar, respectively.  253 attorneys responded, and the results were interesting both for what they indicate, and the questions they leave lingering. 

Neutrals “Friending” or “Connecting” with and/or “Following" or being ”Followed by" Folks

I’ve posted several blogs recently about the impact and implications of modern technology for neutrals, such as the judiciary’s use of sophisticated Information Technology (IT) and internet sources in its decisions, and the increasing use and questionable reliability of internet-based primary sources.  Now, I turn to social media.

I or my firm is a member of various social media:  the ubiquitous Facebook; the quick & dirty Twitter; profile-building (I hope!) Blogger; and the imminently useful and informative LinkedIn.  When signing up with  LinkedIn, it automatically searched my email for contacts already on LinkeIn, and offered to extend an invitation to “connect” with the email “contacts.” I am a lawyer and a labor neutral, and my contacts not surprisingly included a number of labor and management representatives, and also lawyers from a number of different walks.  Moreover, once on LinkedIn, I signed up to follow a variety of interest groups, some members of which—presumably those interested in my Twitter and/or Blogger postings—have since “connected” with or begun to "follow" me.... Have I committed ethics violations???  

The Rule of Law in the US, Compared

An interesting little article in the December 2010 issue of the ABA Journal compares the U.S.'s ratings in "rule of law" index, as compared to other countries.  Id., "Playing Catch-up," James Podgers.  The authors observes that the U.S. rates "no lower than 11th among the 35 countries covered by the index on any of nine key principles," but that it typically ranks among the lowest when compared to its "high-income and regional peers," and it "breaks the top three in only one category."

Specifically, the U.S, rated as follows on the 9 key factors:

Factor 1:  Limited governmental powers:  9th (Sweden was 1st, Netherlands 2nd, Australia 3rd)

Factor 2:  Absence of corruption:  10th  (Sweden was 1st, Netherlands 2nd, Australia 3rd)

Factor 3:  Clear, publicized and stable laws: 9th (Sweden was 1st, Netherlands 2nd, Japan 3rd)

Factor 4:  Order and security:  9th (Singapore was 1st, Japan 2nd, Australia 3rd)

Factor 5:  Fundamental rights: 10th (Australia was 1st, Sweden 2nd, Netherlands 3rd)

Factor 6:  Open government: 3rd (Sweden was 1st, Netherlands 2nd)

Factor 7:  Regulatory enforcement: 8th (Sweden was 1st, Netherlands 2nd, Australia 3rd)

Factor 8:  Access to civil justice:  11th (Singapore was 1st, Sweden 2nd, Netherlands 3rd)

Factor 9:  Effective criminal justice: 7th (Australia was 1st, Japan 2nd, Sweden 3rd)

If you are interested in arbitration, mediation, or contract ALJ services, please contact Pilar Vaile, P.C. at (505) 247-0802 or info@pilarvailepc.com.

Pilar Vaile

Pilar Vaile, P.C.

Albuquerque, NM

Risks of Obtaining Primary Legal Information from the Web

If you get the majority of your primary legal information from the free online sources, much of which is provided by governmental entities, then you are among the majority of lawyers today.  See 2009 American Bar Association Legal Technology Survey.  However, The American Association of Law Libraries (AALL), State-by-State Reports on Authentication of Online Legal Resources ("Authentication Report") (2007) demonstrates that we need to use great caution in relying on such information.

Judiciary Going Digital?

Members of the judiciary are often perceived as being a little, well, out of touch with the world.  As one example, commentators have pointed to Justice Scalia's recent questioning why a V-chip could not be used to regulate the ability of minors to watch violent video games, instead of the 2007 California law that was the subject of the oral arguments.  Apparently counsel for the State had to patiently, gently explain that V-chip technology only works in televisions... Nevertheless, jokes at the Justices' expense aside, the world has gone digital and it is inevitable that the judiciary will also be swept along in its wake, in time.