Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-w7rtg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-28T19:10:54.668Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Relative Significance of Disputing Forum and Dispute Characteristics for Outcome and Compliance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 July 2024

Craig A. McEwen  and
Richard J. Maiman
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In a recent study of small claims mediation and adjudication in an Ontario court, Vidmar introduced the concept of “admitted liability” (1984). He argued that it is this case characteristic and not the forum type that accounts for the greater likelihood of accommodative settlements in mediation than in adjudication, as well as the higher rates of compliance with mediated outcomes. This article reanalyzes some of Vidmar's data in conjunction with both previously reported and new data about small claims cases in Maine. We conclude that the forum type remains a stronger predictor of case outcome and compliance than any case characteristic. However, the data do support Vidmar's alternative hypothesis that case characteristics help specify the relationships between forum type, on the one hand, and outcome and levels of compliance on the other.

Type
Research Note
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 20 , Issue 3 , 1986 , pp. 439 - 447
Copyright
Copyright © 1986 The Law and Society Association

Footnotes

Research for this paper has been supported by grants from the Law and Social Sciences Program of the National Science Foundation (SES-7908872, SES-8310393, and SES-8310451). We would like to thank Richard Lempert and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on an earlier version of this paper.

References

BABBIE, Earl (1983) The Practice of Social Research, 3rd Ed. Belmont, California: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
KENDALL, Patricia L., and Paul F., LAZARSFELD (1950) “Problems of Survey Analysis,” in Merton, R. K. and Lazarsfeld, P. F. (eds.), Continuities in Social Research: Studies in the Scope and Method of “The American Soldier. ” New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
McEWEN, Craig A., and Richard J., MAIMAN (1981) “Small Claims Mediation in Maine: An Empirical Assessment,” 33 Maine Law Review 237.Google Scholar
Richard J., MAIMAN (1984) “Mediation in Small Claims Court: Achieving Compliance through Consent,” 18 Law & Society Review 11.Google Scholar
Richard J., MAIMAN (1986) “In Search of Legitimacy: Toward An Empirical Analysis,” 8 Law & Policy 257.Google Scholar
MERTON, Robert K. (1973) The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
VIDMAR, Neil (1984) “The Small Claims Court: A Reconceptualization of Disputes and An Empirical Investigation,” 18 Law & Society Review 515.Google Scholar
VIDMAR, Neil (1985) “An Assessment of Mediation in a Small Claims Court,” 41 Journal of Social Issues 127.Google Scholar