Modest Proposals for Rhode Island Superior Court Reform

Wednesday, February 01, 2012 4:00 PM | Anonymous

by David A. Wollin, Esq. (appeared in the RI Bar Journal, Volume 60, Number 4, January/ February 2012)
"Under the leadership of Presiding Justice Alice Gibney, the Superior Court has done yeoman’s work in moving civil cases through the judicial system. These recent efforts are designed to reduce the backlog of cases and ensure that litigants receive their day in court in a timely manner. As former Chief Justice Warren Burger has observed, “A sense of confidence in the courts is essential to maintain the fabric of ordered liberty for a free people,” and one of the main things that could “destroy that confidence and do incalculable damage to society: that people come to believe that inefficiency and delay will drain even a just judgment of its value.”  In that spirit, I offer ten proposals for reforming current practice to augment the commendable efforts being undertaken in the Superior Court. Many of these proposals can be implemented immediately. A few require retooling of existing procedures. Each one owes its origin to the federal system, the experience of other state court systems or recent developments in our own court. 
1. Mandatory Mediation 
Courts are designed to resolve conflict. They can do so in a number of ways, most notably through full-blown litigation or alternative dispute resolution (ADR). The Superior Court’s highly successful “Settlement Week” is an excellent example of the latter approach. 
Mediation is also required in medical malpractice cases.
There is no reason why ADR cannot occur early on in every case.
Mediation should be required after a lawsuit has been pending for three months, even if a dispositive motion is pending. The mediation should be scheduled within the succeeding three months and require the presence of the parties. The parties can draw on the mediation services available in the court system or retain a private mediator if they so choose.
With the Rhode Island Bar Association’s cooperation, mediators who will need to be recruited should be given Continuing Legal Education credit for each case mediated.
The benefits of mediation are legion. In broadest terms, mediation is less expensive and more expeditious than litigation and eliminates the need for appeals.
Parties tend to be more satisfied with outcomes upon which they have mutually agreed than those imposed upon them by a judicial decision-maker such as a judge or jury.
The process also allows for the parties to have more control over the outcome and to craft their own customized agreements to cover the spectrum of disputed issues. In this way, the parties can feel they have a greater voice in the final result and this, in turn,
enhances the prospect of future compliance with the terms of the settlement".
(The article continues with other recommendations)... 

Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software