Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorWare, Stephen J.
dc.date.accessioned2013-11-20T19:19:13Z
dc.date.available2013-11-20T19:19:13Z
dc.date.issued2013-07-11
dc.identifier.citationStephen J. Ware, Is Adjudication a Public Good?: 'Overcrowded Courts' and the Private-Sector Alternative of Arbitration, 14 CARDOZO J. CONFLICT RESOL. 899 (2013).
dc.identifier.citation14 Cardozo J. Conflict Resol. 899 (2013)
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1808/12480
dc.descriptionFull-text available at SSRN. See link in this record.
dc.description.abstractOne way to end the public subsidy for cases that do not deserve it is for courts to charge the parties to such a case a fee high enough to reimburse the court for its costs of adjudicating the case. Several thoughtful commentators have proposed such “user fees.” This Article assesses those proposals and suggests that user fees would make litigation look more like arbitration. It concludes by considering the possibility that the public-sector court system and private arbitration organizations could compete in the market for unsubsidized adjudication and in the market for subsidized adjudication. In short, this Article places discussions of overcrowded courts and court user fees in the context of a society — our society — with a strong private sector alternative to our courts.
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherCardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution
dc.relation.isversionofhttp://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2292107
dc.subjectLitigation
dc.subjectUser fees
dc.subjectArbitration
dc.subjectAdjudication
dc.titleIs Adjudication a Public Good?: “Overcrowded Courts” and the Private-Sector Alternative of Arbitration
dc.typeArticle
kusw.kuauthorWare, Stephen
kusw.kudepartmentLaw
kusw.oastatusfullparticipation
kusw.oapolicyThis item meets KU Open Access policy criteria.
dc.rights.accessrightsopenAccess


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record