I have been a trial lawyer for over 40 years. Over the last 30 years,

service as an arbitrator, special master and pro tem judge has become

an increasingly important and significant part of my practice. My

experience as a lawyer and arbitrator has taught me much, most

especially that:

 

 

• parties to a dispute choose arbitration for the advantages it has

over traditional civil litigation, particularly (1) an early opportunity

to present their evidence and get a resolution and (2) a process

that minimizes the most expensive phase of litigation—discovery,

 

• parties to a dispute, and their lawyers, need and want information

about how the decision-maker manages cases and conducts the

dispute resolution process, and

 

• the decision-maker is best able to carry out his or her role—and

the parties and their counsel are most comfortable with the

fundamental fairness and integrity of the process—if the

decision-maker manages the process fairly and efficiently.

 

 

With these principles in mind, and mindful that information about

how individual arbitrators conduct proceedings is hard to come by—

and in any event generally anecdotal—in the late 1990s I set about to

summarize my arbitration philosophy and the principles which govern

my management of cases, essentially what I expect from the lawyers

who appear before me . . . and what they may expect from me. In my
experience, most arbitrators in commercial cases manage their cases