(a) Consideration of Alternative Dispute Resolution in Appropriate Cases.— Notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary and except as provided in subsections (b) and (c), each district court shall, by local rule adopted under section
2071(a), require that litigants in all civil cases consider the use of an alternative dispute resolution process at an appropriate stage in the litigation. Each district court shall provide litigants in all civil cases with at least one alternative dispute resolution process, including, but not limited to, mediation, early neutral evaluation, minitrial, and arbitration as authorized in sections
658. Any district court that elects to require the use of alternative dispute resolution in certain cases may do so only with respect to mediation, early neutral evaluation, and, if the parties consent, arbitration.
(b) Actions Exempted From Consideration of Alternative Dispute Resolution.— Each district court may exempt from the requirements of this section specific cases or categories of cases in which use of alternative dispute resolution would not be appropriate. In defining these exemptions, each district court shall consult with members of the bar, including the United States Attorney for that district.
(c) Authority of the Attorney General.— Nothing in this section shall alter or conflict with the authority of the Attorney General to conduct litigation on behalf of the United States, with the authority of any Federal agency authorized to conduct litigation in the United States courts, or with any delegation of litigation authority by the Attorney General.
(d) Confidentiality Provisions.— Until such time as rules are adopted under chapter
131 of this title providing for the confidentiality of alternative dispute resolution processes under this chapter, each district court shall, by local rule adopted under section
2071(a), provide for the confidentiality of the alternative dispute resolution processes and to prohibit disclosure of confidential dispute resolution communications.
1998—Pub. L. 105–315amended section generally, substituting provisions relating to alternative dispute resolution jurisdiction for provisions relating to arbitration jurisdiction.
Exception to Limitation on Money Damages
Pub. L. 100–702, title IX, § 901(c),Nov. 19, 1988, 102 Stat. 4663, provided that notwithstanding establishment by former section
652 of this title of a $100,000 limitation on money damages with respect to cases referred to arbitration, a district court listed in former section
658 of this title whose local rule on Nov. 19, 1988, provided for a limitation on money damages of not more than $150,000, could continue to apply the higher limitation, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 105–315, § 12(a),Oct. 30, 1998, 112 Stat. 2998.
The table below lists the classification updates, since Jan. 3, 2012, for this section. Updates to a broader range of sections may be found at the update page for containing chapter, title, etc.
The most recent Classification Table update that we have noticed was Tuesday, August 13, 2013
An empty table indicates that we see no relevant changes listed in the classification tables. If you suspect that our system may be missing something, please double-check with the Office of the Law Revision Counsel.
Description of Change
Statutes at Large
LII has no control over and does not endorse any external Internet site that contains links to or references LII.