archive-org.com » ORG » A » ALABAMAADR.ORG

Total: 447

Choose link from "Titles, links and description words view":

Or switch to "Titles and links view".
  • Alabama ADRC :: Media :: Mediation Video
    General ADR Restorative Justice Webinars Contact Us Resources AG Opinions Court ADR Executive Orders Executive Order 50 Executive Order 42 Executive Order 7 2015 Mediation Week Proclamation Ethics Legislation Uniform Collaborative Law Act Mediator Confidentiality Act Mandatory Mediation Act Arbitration Act Draft Private Judging Act Peer Mediation Publications CLE ADR Procedures in Alabama Handbook Judges Mediation Bench Book Seal the Deal CLE Practical Tips from Top Mediators Brochures Bookshop Resources ADR Organizations ADR News Links Find Mediator Jobs Law School ADR Programs Ethics Restorative Justice Circle Sentencing Criminal Mediation Victim Offender Conferencing More on Restorative Justice Portraits of Restorative Justice State Agency ADR Statistics Home Admin News for Alabama Neutrals News Blog Newsletters Facebook ADR Procedures Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedures in Alabama with Mediation Model Need Legal Help Resources for Legal Assistance Share Media Center Mediation Video What is Mediation Professional Mediation Associates This video explains the mediation process in brief For people wanting to settle a dispute without going through the traditional channels mediation offers an alternative Peer Mediation This video was produced by the Dispute Resolution Service at the Los Angeles County Bar Also available at YouTube Follow the link below to view this peer mediation video clip and have access to others Peer Mediation video located at youtube com watch v zsRKgJx Dvk The Three Little Pigs Go To Mediation The Three Little Pigs Go To Mediation Video created by the Department of Veteran s Affairs explains and demonstrates the principles of mediation in a way that will have everyone smiling Located at http www va gov orm Mediation VA fable html More Video Information on Mediation These links are courtesy of the American Bar Association Mediation A Better Way to Resolve Disputes video Introduction to Mediation video Introduction to Mediation 2 video Introduction to Mediation 3

    Original URL path: http://alabamaadr.org/web/media/video_Mediation.php (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive


  • Alabama ADRC :: Media :: Arbitration Video
    Agreements Private Judging Consumer Complaints Need legal help Contact Us Media Center Alabama ADR Blog ADR in News Articles Newsletters Photo Gallery Podcasts Publications CLE Resources ADR Organizations ADR News Links Mediator Jobs on the Web Law School ADR Programs Videos Mediation Arbitration General ADR Restorative Justice Webinars Contact Us Resources AG Opinions Court ADR Executive Orders Executive Order 50 Executive Order 42 Executive Order 7 2015 Mediation Week Proclamation Ethics Legislation Uniform Collaborative Law Act Mediator Confidentiality Act Mandatory Mediation Act Arbitration Act Draft Private Judging Act Peer Mediation Publications CLE ADR Procedures in Alabama Handbook Judges Mediation Bench Book Seal the Deal CLE Practical Tips from Top Mediators Brochures Bookshop Resources ADR Organizations ADR News Links Find Mediator Jobs Law School ADR Programs Ethics Restorative Justice Circle Sentencing Criminal Mediation Victim Offender Conferencing More on Restorative Justice Portraits of Restorative Justice State Agency ADR Statistics Home Admin News for Alabama Neutrals News Blog Newsletters Facebook ADR Procedures Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedures in Alabama with Mediation Model Need Legal Help Resources for Legal Assistance Share Media Center Arbitration Video On April 18 1986 Johnny Carson played a practical joke on David Letterman by stealing Dave s red pickup truck from in from of this Malibu home Shortly after the truck was returned Dave noticed a broken headlight that hadn t been broken before Carson s people denied responsibility To settle the dispute Johnny invited Dave back to his show on June 27 along with People s Court judge Joseph Wapner to arbitrate the case Carson Letterman Arbitration Part I Part II Additional Resources The Intersection of Negotiation and the Human Brain Dr Richard Birke discussed this interesting topic at the July 2014 Meeting of the Alabama State Bar This was a thought provoking discussion so we are providing it

    Original URL path: http://alabamaadr.org/web/media/video_Arbitration.php (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Alabama ADRC :: Media :: Social Media in ADR Video
    Foreclosure FAQs Arbitration What is Arbitration Arbitration Agreements Private Judging Consumer Complaints Need legal help Contact Us Media Center Alabama ADR Blog ADR in News Articles Newsletters Photo Gallery Podcasts Publications CLE Resources ADR Organizations ADR News Links Mediator Jobs on the Web Law School ADR Programs Videos Mediation Arbitration General ADR Restorative Justice Webinars Contact Us Resources AG Opinions Court ADR Executive Orders Executive Order 50 Executive Order 42 Executive Order 7 2015 Mediation Week Proclamation Ethics Legislation Uniform Collaborative Law Act Mediator Confidentiality Act Mandatory Mediation Act Arbitration Act Draft Private Judging Act Peer Mediation Publications CLE ADR Procedures in Alabama Handbook Judges Mediation Bench Book Seal the Deal CLE Practical Tips from Top Mediators Brochures Bookshop Resources ADR Organizations ADR News Links Find Mediator Jobs Law School ADR Programs Ethics Restorative Justice Circle Sentencing Criminal Mediation Victim Offender Conferencing More on Restorative Justice Portraits of Restorative Justice State Agency ADR Statistics Home Admin News for Alabama Neutrals News Blog Newsletters Facebook ADR Procedures Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedures in Alabama with Mediation Model Need Legal Help Resources for Legal Assistance Share Media Center Social Media in ADR Video Taking The Lead In Social Media View more presentations from

    Original URL path: http://alabamaadr.org/web/media/video_SocialMedia.php (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Alabama ADRC :: Restorative Justice :: Portraits of Restorative Justice
    Full Roster Mediator Roster Arbitrator Roster Private Judge Roster Public Info Alternative Dispute Resolution Mediation What is Mediation How does Mediation work Family Mediation Foreclosure Mediation Foreclosure FAQs Arbitration What is Arbitration Arbitration Agreements Private Judging Consumer Complaints Need legal help Contact Us Media Center Alabama ADR Blog ADR in News Articles Newsletters Photo Gallery Podcasts Publications CLE Resources ADR Organizations ADR News Links Mediator Jobs on the Web Law School ADR Programs Videos Mediation Arbitration General ADR Restorative Justice Webinars Contact Us Resources AG Opinions Court ADR Executive Orders Executive Order 50 Executive Order 42 Executive Order 7 2015 Mediation Week Proclamation Ethics Legislation Uniform Collaborative Law Act Mediator Confidentiality Act Mandatory Mediation Act Arbitration Act Draft Private Judging Act Peer Mediation Publications CLE ADR Procedures in Alabama Handbook Judges Mediation Bench Book Seal the Deal CLE Practical Tips from Top Mediators Brochures Bookshop Resources ADR Organizations ADR News Links Find Mediator Jobs Law School ADR Programs Ethics Restorative Justice Circle Sentencing Criminal Mediation Victim Offender Conferencing More on Restorative Justice Portraits of Restorative Justice State Agency ADR Statistics Home Admin Loading News for Alabama Neutrals News Blog Newsletters Facebook ADR Procedures Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedures in Alabama with

    Original URL path: http://alabamaadr.org/web/restorative/restore_portraits.php (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Alabama ADRC :: Media Center :: Webinars
    Law School ADR Programs Ethics Restorative Justice Circle Sentencing Criminal Mediation Victim Offender Conferencing More on Restorative Justice Portraits of Restorative Justice State Agency ADR Statistics Home Admin News for Alabama Neutrals News Blog Newsletters Facebook ADR Procedures Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedures in Alabama with Mediation Model Need Legal Help Resources for Legal Assistance Share Media Center Webinars and Webcasts Mediation Webinar Series 2016 This 6 part mediation series is a unique opportunity to learn from some of the leading mediators in the country Each webinar will focus on different phases of the mediation process as well as useful analytical techniques and strategies for mediators The program will also provide in depth discussion on common barriers and ethical issues mediators face in helping parties reach durable agreements Please see below for more details on each program Special Deal Get one webinar free 55 value when you purchase the entire series Please log in to the American Bar Website to register and receive the deal Register now Read more about the series Practical Tips from Top Mediators This webcast was held as part of our 2015 Mediation Week activities It was sponsored by the Dispute Resolution Section of the Alabama State Bar and the Alabama Center for Dispute Resolution Presenters tips are available in the CLE sections of the website Upchurch Watson White Max CLE Seminars and Webinars Upchurch Watson White Max provides their client law firms and colleagues with continuing legal education opportunities on a variety of ADR issues AT NO CHARGE Recordings of past webinars are available online at http uww adr com seminars cfm sections id 6 While these webinars are not yet accepted for CLE hours in Alabama they offer valuable training and information Topics include the following Difficult Conversations between Lawyer and Client What s Left

    Original URL path: http://alabamaadr.org/web/media/webinars_index.php (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Alabama ADRC :: Attorney General Opinions
    is not precluded by statute and 2 the parties agree to it in writing The comments pertaining to this provision state that this is consistent with Alabama s statutory requirement that the judiciary encourage informal settlement of disputes section 6 6 1 as well as the intent of Ala R Civ P Rule 16 to discourage judicial proceedings if resolution may be reached in a more informal manner ALA CODE 41 22 12 Commentary 1991 This Office has previously observed that s ettling disputes without litigation is a good public policy The importance of this policy is evidenced in the actions of the three branches of government by the Legislature s inclusion in the APA of a process by which contested cases can be settled see section 41 22 12 f of the Code of Alabama by the Governor s issuance of two executive orders encouraging state agencies to engage in dispute resolution measures where appropriate and in the words of numerous decisions of the courts Opinion to Honorable D David Parsons Acting Commissioner Alabama Department of Insurance dated May 10 1999 A G No 99 00201 at 2 We note however that the permission contained in section 41 22 12 f does not alter the requirements relating to the record which must be kept in contested cases See ALA CODE 41 22 12 g h Supp 1999 In addition section 41 22 12 f does not authorize a state agency to enter into a settlement or resolution that is confidential unless otherwise authorized by law See Alabama Open Records Act ALA CODE 36 12 40 1991 In Stone v Consolidated Publishing Co 404 So 2d 678 Ala 1981 the Supreme Court of Alabama stated that r ecorded information received by a public officer in confidence sensitive personnel records pending criminal investigations and records the disclosure of which would be detrimental to the best interests of the public are some of the areas which may not be subject to public disclosure Courts must balance the interest of the citizens in knowing what their public officers are doing in the discharge of public duties against the interest of the general public in having the business of government carried on efficiently and without undue interference Id at 68l In a later decision the Supreme Court also stated that t here is a presumption in favor of public disclosure of public writings and records expressed in the language of 36 12 40 and t he exceptions set forth in Stone must be strictly construed Chambers v Birmingham News Co 552 So 2d 854 856 Ala 1989 see also Opinion to Constance S Aune Mobile County Board of Education dated October 4 1995 A G No 96 00003 discussing section 36 12 40 and Stone exceptions CONCLUSION Section 41 22 12 f of the Code of Alabama authorizes state agencies to use voluntary nonbinding alternative dispute resolution processes such as mediation to resolve contested cases under the Alabama Administrative Procedure Act provided l use

    Original URL path: http://alabamaadr.org/web/legal/AG_opinions.php (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Alabama ADRC :: Alabama Supreme Court Commission on Dispute Resolution
    OF RULES a Mediation is an extrajudicial procedure for the resolution of disputes provided for by statute and by the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure A mediator facilitates negotiations between parties to a civil action and assists the parties in trying to reach a settlement but does not have the authority to impose a settlement upon the parties b These rules shall apply 1 In mediation ordered by the courts of this State as provided by statute or by the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure 2 In any other mediations by parties in a pending civil action in an Alabama court other than the Alabama Supreme Court or Alabama Court of Civil Appeals unless the parties expressly provide otherwise and 3 In other mediations if the parties agree that these Rules shall apply Adopted effective August 1 1992 amended effective February 3 1998 June 26 2002 Comment to Amendment Effective June 26 2002 Passage of Act No 96 515 1996 Ala Acts codified at 6 6 20 Ala Code 1975 introduced a statutory basis for courts to order mediation that necessitated changes in the first sentence of Rule 1 a This change will reduce the need to amend these Rules in the event of a new or revised mediation statute or a future change in the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure The new language in the second sentence of Rule 1 a emphasizes the facilitation role of a mediator The former language might be seen as suggesting a more decision making role for the mediator it used phrases such as submit their dispute and t he mediator may suggest ways of resolving the dispute The new language does not eliminate the possibility of a mediator s evaluating a dispute and suggesting solutions see Rule 9 The revisions to Rule 1 b are designed to clarify when the Rules are mandatory as opposed to when they are optional Clearly any mediation ordered by a court should be conducted according to these Rules Because 6 6 20 is not limited to actions in the circuit court the prohibition against mediation in district courts is abolished Rule b 2 establishes a presumption in favor of the application of these Rules in all pending trial court cases except when the parties agree otherwise This adds greater uniformity in mediation procedures statewide and eliminates confusion about the applicability of these Rules in non court ordered mediation Similarly Rule 1 b 3 was added to plainly state that these Rules may apply in any action including mediation of a case pending in an appellate court if the parties agree RULE 2 INITIATION OF MEDIATION STAY OF PROCEEDINGS Parties to a civil action may engage in mediation by mutual consent at any time The court in which an action is pending shall order mediation when one or more parties request mediation or it may order mediation upon its own motion In all instances except where the request for mediation is made by only one party the court may allocate the costs of mediation except attorney fees among the parties In cases in which only one party requests mediation the party requesting mediation shall pay the costs of mediation except attorney fees unless the parties agree otherwise Upon the entry of an order for mediation the proceedings as to the dispute in mediation may be stayed for such time as set by the court in its order of mediation Upon motion by any concerned party the court may for good cause shown extend the time of the stay for such length of time as the court may deem appropriate Adopted effective August 1 1992 amended effective June 26 2002 Committee Comment to Rule 2 Participation in the mediation process is strictly voluntary Any party wishing to terminate the process may do so at any time pursuant to Rule 13 Pursuant to Rule 13 the mediation process is also terminated by expiration of the period of stay provided for by Rule 2 Comment to Amendment Effective June 26 2002 Section 6 6 20 Ala Code 1975 allows one party to require a court to order mediation of a dispute irrespective of the position of any other party to the dispute This change in the law required the amendment of the first paragraph of Rule 2 to make the rule consistent with 6 6 20 In cases where the court can apportion the costs of mediation the court may want to balance a number of considerations when deciding whether and how to apportion mediation costs between the parties It may be helpful for the courts to consider the commitment to the mediation process that derives when each party has a financial stake in the process Courts may find mediations are more successful if each party is required to pay some portion of the mediation costs Rules 2 as originally adopted provided in the last paragraph that the underlying proceedings shall be stayed the change to may be stayed provides greater flexibility to courts and disputants in staying all or part of a dispute during the course of meditation RULE 3 APPOINTMENT OF A MEDIATOR Upon an order for mediation the court or such authority as the court may designate shall appoint a qualified mediator The mediator appointed shall be agreed upon by the parties concerned subject to the qualifications provisions of Rule 4 except that if the parties do not agree upon a mediator then the selection of the mediator shall be in the discretion of the court or its designated authority A single mediator shall be appointed unless the parties or the court determines otherwise Adopted effective August 1 1992 amended effective June 26 2002 Comment to Amendment Effective June 26 2002 The language added to the second sentence was necessitated by the language added to Rule 4 regarding qualifications of mediators in court ordered mediations RULE 4 QUALIFICATIONS OF A MEDIATOR In court ordered mediations the mediator shall have those qualifications required by statute or by the Alabama Supreme Court Mediator Registration Standards or in the absence of such statute or standards the mediator shall have those qualifications the court may deem appropriate given the subject matter of the mediation No person shall serve as a mediator in any dispute in which that person has any financial or personal interest except by the written consent of all parties Before accepting an appointment the prospective mediator shall disclose to the parties any circumstances likely to create an appearance of bias or likely to prevent the mediation from commencing within a reasonable time Upon receipt of such disclosure the parties may name a different person as mediator If the parties disagree as to whether a prospective mediator should serve the court shall appoint the mediator Adopted effective August 1 1992 amended effective June 26 2002 Comment to Amendment Effective June 26 2002 The first sentence of Rule 4 establishes a minimum standard for qualifications of mediators in court ordered mediations Presently no statutory qualifications exist so the rule was drafted to allow for the possibility of mediator qualifications by statute at a later date without the necessity of amending Rule 4 The Alabama Supreme Court has adopted Mediator Registration Standards The Rule does not require the selected mediator to actually be registered with the Alabama Center for Dispute Resolution but the mediator must possess the training and skill sufficient to be registered Rule 4 applies only in court ordered mediations in mediations in which the parties mutually agree to mediate the parties are free to select the mediator of their choice without regard to the provisions of Rule 4 Any disclosures of possible bias conflict of interest or scheduling difficulty should be made to the parties not the court The parties are best situated to determine whether any of those items rises to such a level as to disqualify the mediator from serving This should save time for judges eliminate the possibility of the court s rejection of a mediator the parties would have found acceptable and gives the parties the greatest possible control over the process If the disclosure causes a rejection of the proposed mediator by a party the parties should have the first option to select a successor The court would have the final say in the event the parties could not agree upon a successor mediator RULE 5 VACANCIES If any mediator becomes unwilling or unable to serve the court shall appoint another mediator The appointment of a successor mediator shall be by the same procedures and upon the same terms as an initial appointment Adopted effective August 1 1992 amended effective June 26 2002 RULE 6 ASSISTANCE AND SETTLEMENT AUTHORITY Any party not represented by an attorney may be assisted by persons of his or her choice in the mediation Each party or that party s representative must be prepared to discuss during mediation sessions the issues submitted to mediation and unless otherwise expressly agreed upon by the parties or ordered by the court before the first mediation session someone with authority to settle those issues must be present at the mediation session or reasonably available to authorize settlement during the mediation session Adopted effective August 1 1992 amended effective June 26 2002 Comment to Amendment Effective June 26 2002 The first obligation imposed by the second sentence is that a party make reasonable efforts to participate in mediation by appearing at the mediation prepared to discuss the issues being submitted to mediation This entails the party s possessing a sufficient knowledge of the facts of the dispute and the law governing the dispute Lawyers representing clients in mediation since the adoption of these Rules in 1992 have identified a problem of some parties appearing at mediations without full or realistic settlement authority Such a practice unnecessarily prolongs the mediation and can be used improperly as a discovery or negotiating tactic The ultimate aim of mediation is the resolution of the dispute therefore each party has an obligation to ensure before agreeing to a date and time for the mediation that a person with settlement authority for all issues being mediated will be readily available throughout the mediation to approve a settlement negotiated during the mediation The rule attempts to strike the proper balance between having a person with full settlement authority physically present at the mediation session and allowing such person to be within reasonable contact such as by telephone Mediation of disputes with small amounts in controversy or where the person with settlement authority would incur substantial cost to travel to the site of the mediation might best be accommodated by using a telephone conference or similar long distance communication On the other hand one value of mediation is having the decision makers such as a corporation s chief financial officer or chief executive officer present to hear the discussions during mediation to personally assess the pros and cons of pursuing litigation versus settling the controversy for a particular amount The default standard is that someone with full authority must be available such as by telephone fax or other means that can provide input on the settlement within a reasonable time The parties may negotiate or the court may require the parties to have a person with full settlement authority present throughout the mediation Presumable this would occur only in cases in which the cost of having such a person present would be reasonable in light of the amount in controversy in the underlying dispute There are a number of different ways a party could communicate with a person with full authority to settle the dispute This Rule presumes that a party will make every reasonable effort to ensure the person with settlement authority remains continuously available throughout the mediation to consult and provide input on a potential settlement proposal Because the length and types of mediations may vary greatly and because the decision maker may be in a different time zone from the time zone of the location of the mediation the Rule does not attempt to define what is reasonable If one party has a concern over the extent of the settlement authority the representative of a party present at the mediation has an effort to identify the person with adequate authority and the availability of that person during the mediation should be undertaken at the beginning of the mediation This can be done through private sessions with the mediator at the beginning of the mediation to protect a party s interest in not disclosing the extent of its settlement authority RULE 7 TIME AND PLACE OF MEDIATION The mediator shall fix the time of each mediation session The mediation sessions shall be held at any convenient location agreeable to the mediator and the parties or as otherwise designated by the court Adopted effective august 1 1992 amended effective June 26 2002 RULE 8 IDENTIFICATION OF MATTERS IN DISPUTE A mediator may require each party concerned within a reasonable time before the first scheduled mediation session to provide the mediator with a brief memorandum setting forth the party s position with regard to the issues that need to be resolved The mediator shall not distribute the memoranda to the parties without their consent At the first session the parties shall produce all information reasonably required for the mediator to understand the issues presented The mediator may require either party to supplement this information Adopted effective August 1 1992 amended effective June 26 2002 Comment to Amendment Effective June 26 2002 The former requirement that each party in every type of mediation provide the mediator with a brief memorandum at least 10 days before the first mediation session was unnecessarily inflexible Parties and mediators alike frequently ignored that requirement The better practice is to allow a mediator to require such a memorandum if in the mediator s judgement a memorandum would be helpful or necessary Therefore shall is changed to may and the 10 days requirement is removed In some cases sharing the memoranda with the parties might facilitate the mediation but the mediator should not allow the contents of any memorandum submitted by a party to be viewed by another party without the consent of the party who prepared the memorandum RULE 9 AUTHORITY OF MEDIATOR The mediator does not have authority to impose a settlement upon the parties but the mediator shall attempt to help the parties reach a satisfactory resolution of their dispute The mediator is authorized to conduct joint and separate meetings with the parties to communicate offers between the parties as the parties authorize and at the request of the parties to make oral and written recommendations for settlement Whenever necessary the mediator may also obtain expert advice concerning technical aspects of the dispute provided the parties agree to the mediator s obtaining such advice and assume the expenses of obtaining it Arrangements for obtaining such advice shall be made by the mediator or by the parties The mediator is authorized to end the mediation whenever in the judgment of the mediator further efforts at mediation would not contribute to a resolution of the dispute between the parties see Rule13 a 2 Adopted effective August 1 1992 amended effective June 26 2002 Comment to Amendment Effective June 26 2002 The amendment added the phrase to communicate offers between the parties as the parties authorize to the second sentence to emphasize that the parties control what offers are shared with another party and when those offers are shared A mediator may in private session suggest a possible solution however the mediator must have the consent of the party with whom the proposed solution is first shared in order to communicate this proposed solution to the other party Nothing in this section would prohibit the parties from mutually requesting a mediator to propose a solution to the dispute or an amount to settle a dispute Indeed the revision is not intended to reduce a mediator s role in helping parties in joint or private sessions to find creative solutions The fourth sentence was revised to remove the phrase as the mediator shall determine because the mediator does not have the power to compel any party to pay the costs of obtaining experts RULE 10 PRIVACY Mediation sessions are private An alleged victim of domestic or family violence may have in attendance at mediation a supportive person of his or her choice In all other cases persons other than the parties and their representative may attend mediation sessions only with the permission of the parties and with the consent of the mediator Adopted effective August 1 1992 amended effective June 26 2002 Comment to Amendment Effective June 26 2002 The second sentence has been added to comply with 6 6 20 f 3 Ala Code 1975 This permits a person who is the alleged victim of abuse to bring a person in addition to the party s attorney with him or her to the mediation irrespective of whether the accompanying person is an attorney without receiving permission from the mediator or other party The changes to the last sentence simplified the language of the original Rule in an attempt to make clear who could attend and under what circumstances RULE 11 CONFIDENTIALITY a All information disclosed in the course of a mediation including oral documentary or electronic information shall be deemed confidential and shall not be divulged by anyone in attendance at the mediation except as permitted under this Rule or by statute The term information disclosed in the course of a mediation shall include but not be limited to 1 view expressed or suggestions made by another party with respect to a possible settlement of the dispute 2 admissions made by another party in the course of the mediation proceedings 3 proposals made or views expressed by the mediator 4 the fact that another party had or had not indicated a willingness to accept a proposal for settlement made by the mediator and 5 all records reports or other

    Original URL path: http://alabamaadr.org/web/CourtADR/index.php (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Alabama ADRC :: Executive Orders
    Contact Us Media Center Alabama ADR Blog ADR in News Articles Newsletters Photo Gallery Podcasts Publications CLE Resources ADR Organizations ADR News Links Mediator Jobs on the Web Law School ADR Programs Videos Mediation Arbitration General ADR Restorative Justice Webinars Contact Us Resources AG Opinions Court ADR Executive Orders Executive Order 50 Executive Order 42 Executive Order 7 2015 Mediation Week Proclamation Ethics Legislation Uniform Collaborative Law Act Mediator Confidentiality Act Mandatory Mediation Act Arbitration Act Draft Private Judging Act Peer Mediation Publications CLE ADR Procedures in Alabama Handbook Judges Mediation Bench Book Seal the Deal CLE Practical Tips from Top Mediators Brochures Bookshop Resources ADR Organizations ADR News Links Find Mediator Jobs Law School ADR Programs Ethics Restorative Justice Circle Sentencing Criminal Mediation Victim Offender Conferencing More on Restorative Justice Portraits of Restorative Justice State Agency ADR Statistics Home Admin News for Alabama Neutrals News Blog Newsletters Facebook ADR Procedures Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedures in Alabama with Mediation Model Need Legal Help Resources for Legal Assistance Share Executive Orders Executive Order 50 State Agency ADR Task Force Appointed 1998 Executive Order 42 Alabama Government Agencies Encouraged to Use Mediation 1998 Executive Order 7 Expansion of the Workplace Mediation Pilot

    Original URL path: http://alabamaadr.org/web/legal/Exec_Orders.php (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive



  •