The Appropriateness of Mediation: A Case Study and Reflection on Fuller and Fiss

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Fiss would probably argue that the case should not be mediated, for it meets two of his four proposed grounds for preferring adjudication to mediation: significant distributional inequalities existed between the parties and the case, if litigated, might have called forth an authoritative interpretation of the law. Fuller, on the other hand, would consider the case appropriate for mediation if the participants intended to create relevant norms to define their relationship and had a strong interest in continuing the relationship and the mediation. The author concludes that the participants, by choosing mediation over litigation, did not choose the more conservative process. They exposed themselves to one another's angers and irrationalities and became aware that cooperation was not possible.
Original languageEnglish
JournalOhio State Journal on Dispute Resolution
Volume4
StatePublished - 1989

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'The Appropriateness of Mediation: A Case Study and Reflection on Fuller and Fiss'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this