Arbitration and Award
dc.contributor.author | Sturges, Wesley | |
dc.date | 2021-11-25T13:34:33.000 | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-11-26T11:41:45Z | |
dc.date.available | 2021-11-26T11:41:45Z | |
dc.date.issued | 1954-01-01T00:00:00-08:00 | |
dc.identifier | fss_papers/3311 | |
dc.identifier.contextkey | 2346510 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.13051/2713 | |
dc.description.abstract | Turning to the subject of arbitration: I approach it as a method of liquidating controversies which may arise between parties – controversies of a civil nature – and treat the process as one that is available to lawyers for use in a given case if they shall determine its desirability in the case. It presents a choice of remedy in lieu of ordinary civil procedure of civil actions and requires the lawyer to select the method to be used in a given case. I am not here today to try to “sell” arbitration to the lawyers of Mississippi, but rather to examine the position of the process, particularly in the state, and to make some suggestions as to possible improvements of the present law of the sate, particularly of the Mississippi statute on arbitration, in order that it may be as efficient as is reasonably practicable. | |
dc.title | Arbitration and Award | |
dc.source.journaltitle | Faculty Scholarship Series | |
refterms.dateFOA | 2021-11-26T11:41:45Z | |
dc.identifier.legacycoverpage | https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/fss_papers/3311 | |
dc.identifier.legacyfulltext | https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4311&context=fss_papers&unstamped=1 |