<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for ADR Prof Blog</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.indisputably.org/?feed=comments-rss2" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.indisputably.org</link>
	<description>A Member of the Law Professor Blogs Network</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 17:02:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on George Friedman responds to Dan Solin&#8217;s indictment of FINRA arbitration by George Friedman&#039;s rebuttal to Dan Solin’s criticism of FINRA arbitration &#124; ARS Blog</title>
		<link>http://www.indisputably.org/?p=4524&#038;cpage=1#comment-17412</link>
		<dc:creator>George Friedman&#039;s rebuttal to Dan Solin’s criticism of FINRA arbitration &#124; ARS Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 17:02:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.indisputably.org/?p=4524#comment-17412</guid>
		<description>[...] Read his response here » [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Read his response here » [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on George Friedman responds to Dan Solin&#8217;s indictment of FINRA arbitration by Dan Solin</title>
		<link>http://www.indisputably.org/?p=4524&#038;cpage=1#comment-17299</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Solin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 May 2013 12:41:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.indisputably.org/?p=4524#comment-17299</guid>
		<description>There is plenty of &quot;actual data&quot; and &quot;factual support&quot; for those of us who believe FINRA arbitration is a national disgrace.  I cite to some of it in this blog post:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dan-solin/mandatory-arbitration-armor_b_3214992.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is plenty of &#8220;actual data&#8221; and &#8220;factual support&#8221; for those of us who believe FINRA arbitration is a national disgrace.  I cite to some of it in this blog post:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dan-solin/mandatory-arbitration-armor_b_3214992.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dan-solin/mandatory-arbitration-armor_b_3214992.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Added Pressure on SEC to Eliminate Mandatory Securities Arbitration by Tennessee court invalidates brokerage firm&#8217;s arbitration clause as unconscionable</title>
		<link>http://www.indisputably.org/?p=4670&#038;cpage=1#comment-17233</link>
		<dc:creator>Tennessee court invalidates brokerage firm&#8217;s arbitration clause as unconscionable</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 May 2013 13:48:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.indisputably.org/?p=4670#comment-17233</guid>
		<description>[...] WordPress.org       &#8592; Added Pressure on SEC to Eliminate Mandatory Securities Arbitration [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] WordPress.org       &larr; Added Pressure on SEC to Eliminate Mandatory Securities Arbitration [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on FINRA Hearing Panel Concludes that FAA Preempts Enforcement of FINRA Rules Barring Class Action Waiver in Broker-Dealer&#8217;s Customer Agreement by Added Pressure on SEC to Eliminate Mandatory Securities Arbitration</title>
		<link>http://www.indisputably.org/?p=4375&#038;cpage=1#comment-17224</link>
		<dc:creator>Added Pressure on SEC to Eliminate Mandatory Securities Arbitration</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Apr 2013 18:25:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.indisputably.org/?p=4375#comment-17224</guid>
		<description>[...] agreements because of the Federal Arbitration Act (see my previous blog posts about that decision here and here), investor rights advocates have stepped up their efforts to press the Securities and [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] agreements because of the Federal Arbitration Act (see my previous blog posts about that decision here and here), investor rights advocates have stepped up their efforts to press the Securities and [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on ADR on Top Five List of What Needs More Attention From Legal Academy by Nancy Welsh</title>
		<link>http://www.indisputably.org/?p=4661&#038;cpage=1#comment-17140</link>
		<dc:creator>Nancy Welsh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2013 11:28:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.indisputably.org/?p=4661#comment-17140</guid>
		<description>Let&#039;s aim for more clinical hiring as you describe, Brian--and as we staff more courses focused on developing students&#039; skills in representing their clients in ADR procedures, we should leverage that experience with more writing (and hiring) that explores the appropriate legal and public policy relationships among the various areas of procedural law (e.g., Federal Civil Procedure, State Civil Procedure, Federal Courts, Arbitration, Mediation, Negotiation, Administrative Law, Bankruptcy Law, etc.).  For example, anyone writing about (or litigating something in connection with) court-connected mandatory mediation is also exploring the appropriate legal/procedural relationship between mediation and civil procedure.  The same is true for anyone writing about (or litigating in connection with) agency-connected mediation and administrative procedure.  The increased attention to judicial review of arbitral awards and mediated settlement agreements similarly arises out of the need to bring coherence and logic to the relationship between these two &quot;ADR&quot; procedures, on one hand, and the enforcement power of the courts, on the other hand.  This is a major dispute system design project for our field.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let&#8217;s aim for more clinical hiring as you describe, Brian&#8211;and as we staff more courses focused on developing students&#8217; skills in representing their clients in ADR procedures, we should leverage that experience with more writing (and hiring) that explores the appropriate legal and public policy relationships among the various areas of procedural law (e.g., Federal Civil Procedure, State Civil Procedure, Federal Courts, Arbitration, Mediation, Negotiation, Administrative Law, Bankruptcy Law, etc.).  For example, anyone writing about (or litigating something in connection with) court-connected mandatory mediation is also exploring the appropriate legal/procedural relationship between mediation and civil procedure.  The same is true for anyone writing about (or litigating in connection with) agency-connected mediation and administrative procedure.  The increased attention to judicial review of arbitral awards and mediated settlement agreements similarly arises out of the need to bring coherence and logic to the relationship between these two &#8220;ADR&#8221; procedures, on one hand, and the enforcement power of the courts, on the other hand.  This is a major dispute system design project for our field.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
