Você está na página 1de 3

Nika Krikheli

PSC 2404
Prof. J.Smonsen
Nov 12, 2015
Optional Assignment
Court system is a very important for everybody's lives there days; that's where we go to
find justice, but sometimes it is hard to find, because the system can have cracks and can be
beaten.
There are two types of forum, private and public. There are tons of differences between
these two, both sides have disadvantages and advantages, but first I will start by the differences.
On one hand The arbitration process is private, and only between the two parties and also
informal, while public is conducted in a public courtroom. The private forum process is fairly
quicker than public forum since in private forum as soon as an arbitrator is selected, the case can
be heard immediately, unlike public forum where the case must wait until the court has time to
hear it which can mean many months or even years. In the private forum both sides decide
together on the judge; in a public forum, the judge is appointed and the parties can't really make
a selection. Attorneys may represent the parties in an private judging, but there is not much that
they can do; in public forum attorney fees are high but they have lot more freedom to gather
evidence and be a lot more involved. In the private judging the arbitrator controls what evidence
is allowed, while the court requires full disclosure of evidence to both parties. I would say that
Availability of Appeal is the main and the most important difference between the two, in
arbitration, the parties usually have no appeal option and that is the worst part for a plaintiff..
Some arbitration decisions may be reviewed by a judge and can also remove the decision of the

arbitrator if the complainant can prove that the arbitrator was biased to the other party. There is
no official record of the proceedings handled by arbitrators since everything is behind closed
doors, while everything that happens in public forums hearings is recorded. While stating the
differences one can already notice disadvantages and advantages between the two. As stated in
the article " Still, there are thousands of Americans who either out of necessity or on principle
want their grievances heard and have taken their chances in arbitration." As stated in the
article a plaintiff can choose the arbitrator " The American Arbitration Association, a nonprofit,
said it allowed plaintiffs to reject arbitrators on the ground of potential bias." but even if so the
companies have their own arbitrators and their relationships matter a lot. Arbitration records
obtained by The Times showed that 41 arbitrators each handled 10 or more cases for one
company between 2010 and 2014.
I think the article brought a great example on how relationships matter in private judging:
"Some of the chumminess is subtler, as in the case of the arbitrator who went to a basketball
game with the companys lawyers the night before the proceedings began. (The company won.)
Or that of the man overseeing an insurance case brought by Stephen R. Syson in Santa Barbara,
Calif. During a break in proceedings, a dismayed Mr. Syson said he watched the arbitrator and
defense lawyer return in matching silver sports cars after going to lunch together. (He lost.)"We
have to understand that this is their business and arbitrators have an economic reason to decide in
favor of the repeat players.
Of course there is still a good side to private forums , the fact that it is fast and can
resolve an issue behind closed doors, as stated in the article " Some plaintiffs said in interviews
that arbitration had helped to resolve their disputes quickly without the bureaucratic headaches of
going to court. Some said the arbitrators had acted professionally and without bias." But

arbitrators acting without bias doesn't always happen. The Times, examined records from more
than 25,000 arbitrations between 2010 and 2014 and interviewing hundreds of lawyers,
arbitrators, plaintiffs and judges in 35 states, uncovered many troubling cases.
In the most cases either people don't pay attention at all when they sign the contract about
arbitration or they just don't know and they can easily be deceived, and corporations don't mind
lying and people end up being treated unfairly. Even when people know what they are signing
while getting a job, they don't really have many options it either getting a job and sign it or end
up with no job, as stated in the article " Graduates entering the job market can confront even
more challenging terrain. For many people, when the choice is between giving up the right to go
to court or the chance to get a job, it is not a choice at all. That is why a housekeeper in suburban
Virginia said she had to sign an employment agreement with an arbitration clause that her
employer had printed from the Internet. She said she regretted it later when he sexually harassed
her and she had no legal recourse in court." I still think that the key is still education of people
about arbitration, at least people should know what they are signing so that they know what to
expect.