SYLLABUS
LAW 556: ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION
Spring 2016
General Information:
Section 3
Meets Thurs. 4:00-6:00 pm
Elizabeth Simon
Esimon2@luc.edu
Phone: 708-205-7503
Office hours: by appointment
Course Objectives
This class is intended to give you a background in the strategies of different forms of
alternative dispute resolution with a focus on: negotiation, mediation and arbitration. It is
a skills-based class, utilizing simulation exercises, demonstrations and discussions to
enhance your proficiency in ADR-related counseling and advocacy.
Course Goals
1. Increase your understanding of dispute resolution procedures, including the
distinctions between negotiation, mediation and arbitration.
2. Become familiar with the different perspectives of advocate, mediator/arbitrator
and client
3. Assess the advantages and disadvantages of different dispute resolution
procedures in different settings
Required Texts:
Fisher, Ury and Patton, Getting to Yes (Penguin, 2011)
Assigned Readings (see TWEN and Syllabus)
Course Policies:
A. Attendance
The American Bar Association requires regular and punctual class attendance. Failure to
attend class regularly and punctually may be considered grounds for refusal to allow a
student to continue in a class or to submit a final project, which will result in a grade of
“WF (withdraw/failing).
B. Class Problems, Simulations and Role Plays
Questions from the readings and exercises will occasionally be assigned. Prepare brief
answers and email them to me before the beginning of class. Be prepared to discuss the
readings. This class involves a number of role-plays and simulation activities.
Preparation is essential, whether as a client, attorney or neutral, in order for the role-play
or simulation to be effective. Note that your consistent preparation and participation in
exercises and role-plays will factor significantly into the final grade.
2|P age
ADR Syllabus
Finally, if you must miss a class for a good reason, please inform me in advance. It is imp
so we can make necessary arrangements to make-up the work so you receive credit for
the assignment.
C. Course Assignments and Grading
Your grade will be determined as follows:
1. Preparation & participation: role-plays, in-class discussions and exercises (30 points)
2. Unit Final Assignments: (70 points)
-Negotiation Role Play and Self-Reflection:(20 points)
-Mediation Role Play and Self-Reflection: (20 points)
-Arbitration Case Summaries and Role Play (20 points)
-ADR Presentation: (10 points)
CLASS SCHEDULE
Spring 2015
January 21: Dispute Resolution: An Overview
Reading: Sander & Goldberg, “Fitting the Forum to the Fuss,” 10 Negot. J. 19 (1994)
ADR Exercise: The Lemon Car (read General Facts)(see TWEN)
PART I: NEGOTIATION
January 28: Negotiation Concepts & Models, Part 1: The Adversarial Model
Readings: Handout: Negotiation Planning and Stages
Korobkin, R., “A Positive Theory of Legal Negotiation,” 88 Geo. L.J. 1789
Be prepared to identify and apply the following: bargaining zone, BATNA
(objective and perceived), reservation value, “surplus allocation,” negotiating
styles, e.g., competitive/distributive vs. cooperative/integrative).
Negotiation Exercise: Parker v. Davidson (negligence)
Read General Facts before class. In class Pre-Negotiation Preparation: After
receiving confidential facts, clients and attorneys will jointly complete and turn in
Exercise 1: Negotiation Planning Worksheet (Distributive) (15 minutes).
February 4: Negotiation Concepts & Models, Part 2: A Problem-Solving Approach
Reading: Menkel-Meadow, C. “Toward Another View of Legal Negotiation,” 31 UCLA
L. Rev. 754 (1984)
Be prepared to discuss the following: the structure, process and assumptions in
traditional adversarial negotiations. According to the author, what are the key
aspects of a problem-solving negotiation model? What are the limitations to
utilizing a problem-solving approach?
3|P age
ADR Syllabus
Before class, read General and Confidential Facts and jointly complete and turn in
Exercise 2: Negotiation Planning Worksheet (Integrative)
Negotiation Exercise: Fun Times (intellectual property)
February 11: Negotiation Preparation: Client Counseling
Reading: Cochran, Robert and Rhode, Deborah, “Symposium on Client Counseling and
Moral Responsibility,” 30 Pepp. L. Rev., 591-614 (2002-03)
Be prepared to discuss the following: (i) the defining characteristics of the three
client counseling approaches: directive, client-centered and collaborative;(ii) key
criticisms of each approach. Be prepared to discuss: What are the key arguments
Rhode makes in terms of utilizing a more directive approach in settings where
moral or ethical issues arise?
Client Counseling Exercise: Bullard House (real estate)
February 18: Negotiation Unit Final: Beyer v. Del Rey and City of Waterbury
Negotiation: Case File Memorandum Due before Class on 2/18
PART II: MEDIATION
February 25: Introduction to Mediation: Negotiation Basics in a Third-Party
Context
Readings: Mediation Handouts
Getting to Yes, Parts I & II
Guest Speaker
Fishbowl Exercise: small claims dispute
March 3: Mediation: Skills and Practice
Reading: Getting to Yes, Parts III & IV
Mediation Video:
Exercise 3: Before class email your review of the mediation video (Library
Reserve).
Mediation Exercise: Cutting Edge (employment)
March 10: Spring Break – No Class
March 17: Multi-Party Mediation
Reading: Getting to Yes, Part V
Mediation Exercise: Carson Extension
March 24: Mediation Unit Final
Sturmanis v. The Marauders (wrongful death)
4|P age
ADR Syllabus
Mediation Final due 4/1/16
PART III: ARBITRATION
March 31: Introduction to Arbitration
Readings: New York Times Series on Arbitration and Counter Replies
April 7: Arbitration and Drafting ADR Clauses
Reading: “Drafting ADR Clauses,” American Arbitration Association
Discussion and Small Group Exercise: Drafting Dilemmas
April 14: Arbitration and the Courts
Reading: Assigned Cases on TWEN
Class Presentations on Arbitral Law from the Courts’ Perspective
As a group, summarize the facts and holdings in each of the cases assigned to you
and answer the following questions: i) what principles (or conflicting principles)
were at issue; ii) what factors account for conflicting and inconsistent holdings;
iii) which cases do you find least persuasive and why?
April 21: Mock Arbitration
Broken Benches (product liability)
FINAL PRESENTATIONS
April 28: ADR Applications in the Real World
Class Presentations on an aspect of ADR