Doing Justice and Demonstrating Fairness in Small Claims Arbitration

Adler, J., Hensler, D., & Nelson, C. (1983). Simple justice: How litigants fare in the Pittsburgh court arbitration process. Pittsburgh, PA: Rand Corporation. Atkinson, J. M. (1992). Displaying neutrality: Formal aspects of informal court proceedings. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (Eds.), Talk at work (pp. 199–211). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Barkan, S. (1985). Protesters on trial: Criminal prosecutions in the southern civil rights and Vietnam antiwar movements. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. Burns, S. (1996). Lawyers’ work in the Menendez brothers’ murder trial. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 7, 19–32. Burns, S. (2000a). Making settlement work: An examination of the work of judicial mediators. Aldershot, UK: Dartmouth/Ashgate. Burns, S. (2000b). Impeachment work in the Menendez brothers’ murder trial. In J. Ulmer (Ed.), Sociology of crime, law and deviance (Vol. 2, pp. 233–256). Oxford, UK: JAI/Elsevier Science. Burns, S. (2001). ‘Think your blackest thoughts and darken them’: Judicial mediation of large money damage disputes. Human Studies, 24, 227–249. Burns, S. (2004). Pursuing ‘deep pockets’: Insurance-related issues in judicial settlement work. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 33, 111–153. Burns, S., & Peyrot, M. (2003). Tough love: Nurturing and coercing responsibility and recovery in California drug courts. Social Problems, 50, 416–438. Cahill, S. (1998). Helping pro pers proves a controversial matter. Los Angeles Daily Journal, 1. California civil code, section 1431.1, et seq. Conley, J., & O’Barr, W. (1990). Rules versus relationships: The ethnography of legal discourse. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Davis, A. (2000). A pro se program that is also ‘pro’ judges, lawyers and the public. Texas Bar Journal, 63, 896. de Tocqueville, A. (1969). Democracy in America. New York: Doubleday/Anchor. Emerson, R. (1969). Judging delinquents. Chicago: Aldine. Emerson, R. (1994). Constructing serious violence: Processing a domestic violence restraining order. Perspectives on Social Problems, 6, 3–28. Feeley, M. (1979). The process is the punishment: Handling cases in a lower criminal court. New York: Russell Sage. Garcia, A. (1991). Dispute resolution without disputing: How the interactional organization of mediation hearings minimizes argument. American Sociological Review, 56, 818–835. Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Garfinkel, H. (1988). Evidence for locally produced, naturally accountable phenomena of order, etc.: An announcement of studies. Sociological Theory, 6, 103–109. Garfinkel, H. (1996). Ethnomethodology’s program. Social Psychology Quarterly, 59, 5–21. Garfinkel, H. (2002). Ethnomethodology’s program: Working out Durkheim’s aphorism. Boston, MA: Rowman and Littlefield. Garfinkel, H., & Sacks, H. (1970). On formal structures of practical actions. In J. C. Mckinney & R. Tiryakian (Eds.), Theoretical sociology (pp. 338–366). New York: Appleton Century Crofts. Gibeaut, J. (1999). Turning pro se: The number of unrepresented litigants is growing, but few courts have developed policies in response. ABA Journal, 85(Jan.), 28. Goffman, E. (1962). On cooling the mark out: Some aspects of adaptation to failure. In A. Rose (Ed.), Human behavior and social processes (pp. 484–505). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin. Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of talk. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. Goldschmidt, J. (1998). How are courts handling pro se litigants? Judicature, 82, 13–19. Greacen, J. (1995). No legal advice from court personnel: What does that mean? Judges’ Journal, 34, 10. Hashimoto, E. (2007). Defending the right to self representation: An empirical look at the pro se felony defendant. North Carolina Law Review, 85, 423–487. Helfrich, C. (1997). Facing a pro se opponent. The Compleat Lawyer, 14, 1. Holstein, J. (1993). Court-ordered insanity. New York: Aldine de Gruyter. Hornsby, W. (2002). Defining the role of lawyers in pro se litigation. Judges’ Journal, 41, 5. Katz, G. (2008). First ‘Judge Judy,’ now ‘the peacemaker’ Los Angeles Daily Journal, 1. Kendon, A. (1972). Some relationships between body motion and speech. In A. Seigman & B. Pope (Eds.), Studies in dyadic communication (pp. 177–216). Elmsford, NY: Pergamon Press. Kendon, A. (1985). Some uses of gesture. In D. Tannen & M. Saville-Troike (Eds.), Perspectives on silence (pp. 215–234). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation. Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice: Critical issues in social justice. New York: Plenum Press. Lynch, M. (1997). Preliminary notes on judges’ work: The judge as a constituent of courtroom ‘hearings’. In M. Travers & J. Manzo (Eds.), Law in action (pp. 99–130). Aldershot, UK: Ashgate. Lynch, M. (2005). Making common sense of science: Problems and strategies in the courtroom. Paper presented at the meeting of How science makes sense: The transformation of local claims into facts. Amsterdam. Lynch, M. (2007). Law courts as a perspicuous site for EM investigations: Re-specifying the science/common sense distinction. In S. Hester & D. Francis (Eds.), Orders of ordinary action: Respecifying sociological knowledge (pp. 107–120). Aldershot, UK: Ashgate. Lynch, M., & Cole, S. (2005). Science and technology studies on trial: Dilemmas of expertise. Social Studies of Science, 35, 269–311. Lynch, M., & Macbeth, D. (1998). Demonstrating physics lessons. In J. Greeno & S. Goldman (Eds.), Thinking practices in mathematics and science learning (pp. 269–299). Oxford, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum. Miller, R., & Sarat, A. (1981). Grievances, claims, and disputes: Assessing the adversary culture. Law and Society Review, 15, 525–566. Morgan, M. (2004). Standby me: Self-representation and standby counsel in capital cases. Capital Defense Journal, 16, 367. O’Leary, K. (2005). Lawyerless, but not alone. California Courts Review, 141, 14–16. Peyrot, M. (1982). Caseload management: Choosing suitable clients in a community health clinic agency. Social Problems, 30, 157–167. Peyrot, M., & Burns, S. (2001). Sociologists on trial: Theoretical competition and juror reasoning. The American Sociologist, 32, 42–69. Pollner, M. (1974). Mundane reasoning. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 4, 35–54. Pollner, M. (1979). Explicative transactions: Managing and making meaning in traffic court. In G. Psathas (Ed.), Everyday language (pp. 227–253). New York: Irvington. Rifkin, J., Millin, J., & Cobb, S. (1991). Toward a new discourse for mediation: A critique of neutrality. Mediation Quarterly, 9, 151–164. Sacks, H. (1979). Hotrodder: A revolutionary category. In G. Psathas (Ed.), Everyday language (pp. 7–14). New York: Irvington Press. Schegloff, E. (1984). On some gestures’ relation to talk. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action (pp. 266–298). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Sherowski, E. (1996). Hot coffee, cold cash: Making the most of alternative dispute resolution in high stakes personal injury lawsuits. Ohio State Journal of Dispute Resolution, 11, 512–536. Simon, W. (1978). The ideology of advocacy: Procedural justice and professional ethics. Wisconsin Law Review, 29, 26–37. Thompson, M. (1995). New approaches: Firms springing up to offer services for pro pers. Los Angeles Daily Journal, 1. Travers, M., & Manzo, J. (Eds.). (1997). Law in action. Aldershot, UK: Dartmouth/Ashgate. Wetlaufer, G. (1990). The ethics of lying in negotiations. Iowa Law Review, 75, 1219–1273. Wheeler, S. (1969). On record: Files and dossiers in American life. New York: Russell Sage. Yngvesson, B., & Hennessey, P. (1975). Small claims, complex disputes: A review of the small claims literature. Law and Society Review, 9, 219. Ziegler, D., & Hermann, M. (1972). The invisible litigant: An inside view of pro se litigants in federal court. NYU Law Review, 47, 157–257.