Litigants in publicly filed civil cases in Rhode Island may soon have another means of resolving their dispute, by hiring a private, retired judge to hear their cases confidentially. The proposal is based on a law that was enacted in 1984 but has not been used. According to an ABA Journal's write-up:
Under Rhode Island's Retired Justice Trial Act, litigants decide where the case would be heard and pay all costs—including the fee for the retired judge whose decisions, the law states, would "have the same force and effect as if it had been entered or made by an active judge of the court."
The plan would potentially free up court resources that could be devoted to other cases, and offer those who can afford to pay a judge to hear a case the opportunity to avoid the delay and potential embarrassment inherent in the public judicial system.
In a Providence Journal write-up, court spokesman Craig Berke said this proposal allows for additional avenues to resolving disputes. Berke also noted that decisions will be entered into the public record and could be subject to appellate review if one of the sides is not happy with the outcome.
This proposal, similar in many respects to other forms of privately-administered dispute resolution like arbitration and mediation, would help court systems and taxpayers because the parties will pay the fees associated with the process. This is a particularly valuable notion at a time when courts across the U.S. are overburdened and underfunded.
A scheduled public hearing on the Supreme Court's proposal will be held on January 15.
2 comments:
Can't parties make the same arrangements by contract? I've read other reports of parties hiring private judges to hear cases. The only question would be the ability to appeal. RI's process allows appeal according to the article.
I like the idea in general, and I've seen retired judges take on the role of arbitrator. Absent special legislation, without the legal ability to appeal, many parties would not choose this procedure.
Could parties, (outside RI) for instance, agree that a retired judge decides the facts, and then the parties submit the case for summary judgment based on the facts as found by the retired judge. Then at least the parties would have the right to appeal questions of law.
Gavin Craig
I think your plan for arbitration by a former judge would work, but that special legislation (as is in place in Rhode Island) would be required to provide the right to appeal on more searching grounds than are provided by federal or state arbitration law. The relatively recent Supreme Court opinion in Hall Street Assoc. v. Mattel (http://www.adrforum.com/adrupdate/casedetail.aspx?caseid=1544) makes it clear that parties cannot authorize a court by contract to review an arbitration award for errors of law.
-Mark Fellows
Post a Comment