On 18-Jan-99 Martin B. Schwimmer wrote:
>>And further, ADR is available now, at the consent of both parties. Any
>>MANDATED ADR, where neither party can elect not to be a part of the ADR, is a
>>violation of their rights.
>
>>There is no need to mandate ADR, provisions for it exist on our laws already.
>
> The New York Stock Exchange's arbitration system would be an example of
> manadatory ADR held to be constitutional.
>
No one said mandatory ADR was unconstitutional. But in the case you present,
the case law has been fleshed out rather completely IN COURTS.
This provides the necessary background for ADR to be effective in a particular
area.
----------------------------------
E-Mail: William X. Walsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 18-Jan-99
Time: 11:37:42
----------------------------------
__________________________________________________
To receive the digest version instead, send a
blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To SUBSCRIBE forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNSUBSCRIBE, forward this message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems/suggestions regarding this list? Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___END____________________________________________
