H.R. 2127 (100th): Court-Annexed Arbitration Act of 1987

Introduced:
Apr 22, 1987 (100th Congress, 1987–1988)
Status:
Died (Referred to Committee)
Sponsor
Robert Kastenmeier
Representative for Wisconsin's 2nd congressional district
Party
Democrat
Related Bills
H.R. 4341 (99th) was a previous version of this bill.

Referred to Committee
Last Action: Mar 06, 1986

H.R. 3152 (Related)
Court Reform and Access to Justice Act of 1987

Referred to Committee
Last Action: Aug 06, 1987

 
Status

This bill was introduced on April 22, 1987, in a previous session of Congress, but was not enacted.

Progress
Introduced Apr 22, 1987
Referred to Committee Apr 22, 1987
 
Full Title

A bill to amend title 28 of the United States Code to encourage prompt, informal, and inexpensive resolution of civil cases in United States district courts by the use of arbitration, and for other purposes.

Summary

No summaries available.

Cosponsors
1 cosponsors (1R) (show)
Committees

House Judiciary

Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet

The committee chair determines whether a bill will move past the committee stage.

 
Primary Source

THOMAS.gov (The Library of Congress)

GovTrack gets most information from THOMAS, which is updated generally one day after events occur. Activity since the last update may not be reflected here. Data comes via the congress project.

Widget

Get a bill status widget for your website »

Citation

Click a format for a citation suggestion:

Notes

H.R. stands for House of Representatives bill.

A bill must be passed by both the House and Senate in identical form and then be signed by the president to become law.

The bill’s title was written by its sponsor.

GovTrack’s Bill Summary

We don’t have a summary available yet.

Library of Congress Summary

The summary below was written by the Congressional Research Service, which is a nonpartisan division of the Library of Congress.


4/22/1987--Introduced.
Court-Annexed Arbitration Act of 1987 - Amends the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to empower (on an experimental basis) specified U.S. district courts to authorize the use of arbitration.
Permits such courts to:
(1) allow arbitration where the parties consent; and
(2) require arbitration where the relief sought consists only of money damages not in excess of $100,000.
Disallows referrals to arbitration where the action is based on an alleged violation of a right secured by the Constitution. Grants arbitrators the power to:
(1) conduct arbitration hearings;
(2) administer oaths and affirmations; and
(3) make awards.
Provides that the arbitration award shall be filed with the clerk of the district court and (after 30 days) entered as the judgment of the court.
States that such judgment shall not:
(1) be subject to review in any court of appeal; or
(2) preclude any issue from being raised in any action seeking redress for a violation of any rights.
Allows any party, within 30 days after the filing of an arbitration award, to demand a trial de novo in the district court.
Requires the specified district courts to:
(1) establish standards for the certification of arbitrators;
(2) certify arbitrators; and
(3) establish the amount of compensation that each arbitrator shall receive.
Allows the Judicial Conference of the United States to develop interim model rules for arbitration procedure.
Requires the Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts to include in its annual report on Administrative Office activities statistical information regarding the implementation of this Act. Requires the Federal Judicial Center to report to the Congress on the implementation of this Act. Authorizes appropriations.

House Republican Conference Summary

The summary below was written by the House Republican Conference, which is the caucus of Republicans in the House of Representatives.


No summary available.

House Democratic Caucus Summary

The House Democratic Caucus does not provide summaries of bills.

So, yes, we display the House Republican Conference’s summaries when available even if we do not have a Democratic summary available. That’s because we feel it is better to give you as much information as possible, even if we cannot provide every viewpoint.

We’ll be looking for a source of summaries from the other side in the meanwhile.

Use the comment space below for discussion of the merits of H.R. 2127 (100th) with other GovTrack users.
Your comments are not read by Congressional staff.

comments powered by Disqus