I begin by thanking the UCLA Law Review, and particularly Darrin Mollet and Bryce Johnson, for seeing the timeliness of the topic of alternative dispute resolution and organizing this Symposium-collecting some of the best thinkers, writers, and practitioners in the field to discuss, among other things, the economics of ADR, the role of lawyers, courts, and judges in ADR, and the application of ADR to a variety of substantive legal and regulatory problems. In this Introduction, I would like to introduce the topics and the authors, and put them in the larger context of the movement that is now called "ADR," and the fear it engenders that it might indeed "end adjudication" as we know it. I will develop here an extremely short and understated intellectual history of the field and describe, briefly, what the field has already taught us-What are the "propositions" of learning that come from ADR? I will try, as well, to describe some of the current difficult and controversial issues and topics that confront the field and that many of our authors will address in these pages.
44 UCLA L. Rev. 1613
Scholarly Commons Citation
Menkel-Meadow, Carrie, "Introduction: What Will We Do When Adjudication Ends? A Brief Intellectual History of ADR" (1997). Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works. Paper 1765.