Answer to Question 1
Another procedure that is already in relatively widespread use is alternative dispute resolution (ADR). Realizing that the exploding backlog of both criminal and civil cases pushes business cases to the back of the queue, many private corporations are attempting to avoid courts and lawyers by using alternative means of resolving their legal conflicts. Some corporations have even opted out of litigation altogether; about 600 top corporations have signed pledges with other companies to consider negotiation and other forms of ADR before suing other corporate signers. ADR is appropriate when new law is not being created. ADR can provide the parties with a forum to reach a resolution that may benefit both sides. Litigation is adversarial; ADR can resolve disputes in a collaborative manner that allows the parties' relationship to be maintained. Furthermore, ADR proceedings are normally confidential, with only the final agreement being made public. ADR is also much more expedient and less costly than a trial. The two most common forms of ADR used today are arbitration and mediation. Arbitration is similar to a trial, though less formal. An arbitrator is selected or appointed to a case; civil court rules generally apply. Parties are usually represented by counsel. The arbitrator listens to testimony by witnesses for both sides; then, after hearing closing remarks by counsel, the arbitrator renders a verdict. Mediation is considerably less formal and more friendly than arbitration. Parties agree to negotiate with the aid of an impartial person who facilitates the settlement negotiations. A mediation session includes the mediator and both parties; each side presents his or her position and identifies the issues and areas of dispute. The mediator works with the parties until a settlement is reached or the negotiations become deadlocked.
Answer to Question 2
FALSE