When Arbitrator Intelligence promised to increase transparency, accountability, and diversity in arbitrator selection, it was celebrated as a welcome innovation. Now separated from its academic backing, however, it might accomplish the opposite. Arbitrator Intelligence could even facilitate the manufacture of deceptive arbitrator images – and it is already stifling diversity.
Since Arbitrator Intelligence’s Reports exist, counsel may feel obligated to consider them as part of counsel’s due diligence. Simply reading these error-laden Reports, however, sends counsel on a possibly wasteful errand to establish whether the arbitrator really is who Arbitrator Intelligence says. And that errand could ultimately be for nothing, as several of those about whom Reports are offered are not accepting appointments: they have retired or their current position renders them unable to accept arbitrator appointments.
If Arbitrator Intelligence is willing to misrepresent the appoint-ability of the arbitrators for whom it offers Reports, what other misrepresentations, errors, or omissions can buyers expect?
For more information, see Arbitrator “Intelligence” and the Mysterious Brown M&M, forthcoming University of Toledo Law Review, available for comment athttps://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3839008
In this, the first episode of the Arbitration Conversation, Amy interviews Svetlana Gitman, Vice President of the Commercial Division at American Arbitration Association (AAA). Amy and Svetlana talked about how...By Svetlana Gitman, Amy Schmitz
This article first appeared in Global Dispute Resolution Insights, here. For the second time in four years, the U.S. Supreme Court has declined to resolve an arbitration-related issue that state...By Sarah Biser
“American exceptionalism” has been used to reference the United States’ outlier policies in various contexts, including its love for litigation. Despite Americans’ reverence for their “day in court,” their zest...By Amy Schmitz