The article is an empirical study of, among other things, what judges do when they are facilitating a settlement and they believe the outcome is substantially different from what they believe would be the usual range of outcomes at trial. The topic is important because many authors have expressed concern about the blurring of the judicial roles of settlement facilitator and decision maker. it documents that judges are largely unconcerned, which raises many policy questions.
Another piece of good news is that this is the fourth in a series of law review articles and is empirically based. A literature review about this issue was in the first article, published in the Journal of Dispute Resolution at the U of Missouri. The most recent article in the series has been accepted for publication in the Spring of 2012 by the Harvard Negotiation Law Review. This article is heavily dependent on reporting new empirical data.
- settlement conferences,
- empirical data
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/peter_robinson/3/