A is for ARBITRATION -
a Primer by Hon. William C. Miller
Hon. William C. Miller. Former Associate Judge of the District Court of Maryland from August of 1980 until May of 1982; Associate Judge of the Circuit Court for Montgomery County from May 1982 until October 1995. Chief Judge of the Sixth Judicial Circuit
(Montgomery and Frederick Counties) from October 1995 until June of 1996. Retired in 1996 and presently serves as call-back judge and in that capacity has served in the circuit courts in Montgomery, Prince George’s and Anne Arundel Counties and on the District Court in Montgomery County and the Court of Special Appeals. Adjunct Professor at the Washington College of Law of American University teaching trial practice. Since retirement, has acted as mediator, arbitrator, facilitator and as a special master in approximately 175 cases; certified as a mediator by MICPEL. From 1958 until 1980 was in private practice in Montgomery County in a small trial firm. Judge Miller is a graduate of the University of MD, B.A. and the George Washington University Law School.
Arbitration has been with us for a long, long time. As Martin Domke notes in his Brief History of Arbitration, Domke on Commercial Arbitration, we even had ar- bitration in ancient mythology when the three goddesses asked Paris to award the golden apple to the most beautiful among them. Only in the last two decades, how- ever, have lawyers and judges generally accepted the fact that arbitration and the other forms of alternative dispute resolu- tion are not only practical methods of deciding cases but are necessary to pre- vent courts from collapsing under the weight of steadily increasing caseloads. Arbitration is “the process whereby
parties voluntarily agree to substitute a private tribunal for the public tribunal otherwise available to them.” It offers par- ties an inexpensive and expedited process by which to resolve their dispute, conserve judicial resources and offers the parties an opportunity to submit the dispute to an
arbitrator who is experienced in the par- ties’ field of business and thus sensitive to the parties’ individual needs. See M.L.E., “Alternative Dispute Resolutions”, Section 2, p. 242; Snyder v. Berliner Const. Co., Inc., 79 Md. App. 29, 555 A.2d 523 (1989). In 1973, the Maryland Legislature adopted the Maryland Uniform Arbitra- tion Act (MUAA), which is found at MD. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings, §§ 3-201, et seq. This Act is the ana- logue of the Federal Arbitration Act and establishes a policy favoring the settlement of disputes through arbitration. Chief Justice Warren E. Burger made the following observation:
The notion that most people want black-robed judges, well dressed lawyers and fine paneled court- rooms as the setting to resolve their disputes is not correct. People with problems, like people with pains,
want relief, and they want it as quickly and inexpensively as pos- sible. For over a decade there have been dire
predictions that without the adoption of court sponsored ADR programs the courts will collapse under the weight of thousands of mass- tort and product li- ability claims, as well as steadily increasing filings in other civil, domestic, and crimi- nal cases. See 50 Md Bar Review 71 (1991). It is not my intention in this ar- ticle to preach to you that ADR, and arbitration in particular, is the panacea for all of the court system’s ills. Furthermore, having been a judge for the past twenty- two and one-half years, I certainly would not urge you to rule out presenting your client’s dispute to a judge or jury. Don’t waive your client’s jury and court trial rights and arbitrate simply to lighten the burden of the court. Do it only after you have considered all of the means by which your client’s case can be resolved, and you then conclude that arbitration is in his, her or their interest.
The decision to arbitrate
If there is a relatively small amount of money involved, you may want to con- sider filing your client’s case in the District Court. There you can get a speedy, cost effective determination of the case, unless, of course, there is an appeal de novo if it’s a small claim or an appeal on the record if its not. You may con- clude that your client’s case has more jury appeal than arbitrator appeal. Even though differentiated case management and early judicial intervention has done much to streamline our court systems and to speed a case through the Circuit Court, it can still be time consuming and expen- sive. Furthermore, if you get a big win, almost as certainly as there is a commer- cial after a punt in a televised NFL
(Continued on page 16) 14 Trial Reporter Summer 2003
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56