[88] §9(b) of the Investment Company Act of 1940.
[89] §4C(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; Cf. Rule 102 (b), 102 (e) of the Rules of Practice 17 CFR 200 et seq. [Release No 34-35833; File No S7-40-94] .
[90] Boddie v. Connecticut 401 U.S. 371 (1971) (and the cases cited therein).
[91] Cf. Barry v. Barchi 443 U.S. 55 (1979), FDIC v. Mallen 486 U.S. 230 (1988).
[92] See Securities Act § 8A(a), Securities Exchange Act §21C(c), Investment Company Act §9(f)(1).
[93] See Comment (a)-(c) to Rule 510, supra.
[94] Ray, supra, at 67; Guidance for Agency Dispute Resolution Specialists, supra, at 4-7.
[95] Brazil, Kahn, Newman, & Gold, Early Neutral Evaluation: An Experimental Effort to Expedite Dispute Resolution, 69 Judicature 279 (1986).
[96] Mullins, Alternative Dispute Resolution and the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission, 5 Ad. L. J. 555, 568-69 (1991). (Эта комиссия изменила правила в 1992 году с тем, чтобы устранила правила, требующие установления конкретных обстоятельств на самой ранней стадии процесса. 57 FR 41676 (Sept. 11, 1992), однако, это справедливо относительно Федеральной комиссии по связи (FCC); См. 63 FR 690, at 1002, 1007, 10022 (January 7, 1998)
[97] Administrative Conference of the United States, Recommendation 86-3: Agencies Use of Alternative Means of Dispute Resolutions, 1 CFR § 305.86-3 (1993).
[98] Standards of Conduct for Mediators, #1, adopted in 1994 by the American Arbitration Association and the Society for Professionals in Dispute Resolution, reprinted in Sara A. Cole, Nancy H. Rogers, and Craig A. McCain, 2 Mediation: Law Policy and Practice, Appendix D, p. 2 (1994). Другой кодекс медиаторов провозглашает: “Это обязанность медиатора помочь сторонам прийти к соглашению. Ни в коем случае медиатор не должен оказывать на стороны давление для заключения соглашения”. Code of Professional Conduct developed by the Center for Dispute Resolution, Denver, Colorado, #1, reprinted in Edward A. Dauer, et al., 2 Manual of Dispute Resolution: ADR Law & Practice, Appendix G-1, Art. 1 (1996).
[99] Ad Hoc Panel on Dispute Resolution and Public Policy, National Institute for Dispute Resolution, Paths to Justice: Major Public Policy Issues of Dispute Resolution 36-37 (1983), reprinted in Administrative Conference of the U.S., Sourcebook: Federal Agency Use of Alternative Means of Dispute Resolution 44-45 (1987).
[100] 14 CFR § 17.17, 17.31 (2000) (FAA, Procedures for Protests and Contract Disputes); 45 CFR §74.91 (2000) (Department of Health & Human Services, Awards and Subawards to Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, etc.); 45 CFR § 2540.230 (2000) (Department of Health & Human Services, grievance procedures re: Corporation for National and Community Services).
[101] Правила National Credit Union Administration, 12 CFR § 709.8(c) (2) (2000).
[102] Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 706 (a), 28 U.S.C. App. (2002).
[103] Joseph & Gilbert, Breaking the Settlement Ice: The Use of Settlement Judges in Administrative Procedures, 3 Admin. L. J. 571, 573 (1989-90).
[104] 5 U.S.C. §§ 554(d), 557(d) (2002).
[105] 5 U.S.C. § 556(c) (2002).
[106] 16 CFR § 3.42(c) (7) (2000) (Federal Trade Commission, Rules of Practice for Adjudicative Procedures); 29 CFR § 417.6 (2000) (Procedures for Removal of Local Labor Organization Officers); 49 CFR § 386.54 (2000) (Motor Carrier Safety Regulations); 14 CFR § 1264.117(b)(3) (2000) (NASA, Implementation of the Program Fraud Civil Penalties Act of 1986, Authority of the presiding officer); 18 CFR § 157.205 (2000) (FERC, Interstate Pipeline Blanket Certificates, Notice Procedure); 33 CFR § 20.202(e) (2000) (Coast Guard, powers of administrative law judges).
[107] Grigson v. Creative Artists Agency, LLC, 210 F. 3d 524 (5th Cir. 2000) (applying equitable estoppel against production company and actor alleging tortious interference with a distribution agreement).
[108] 7 U.S.C. § 136a (c) (2) (B) (iii) (2002) (regarding arbitration to determine compensation for development of government-required data).
[109] Edwards, Alternative Dispute Resolution: Panacea or Anathema, 99 Harvard L. Rev. 668 (1986); Ray, Emerging Options in Dispute Resolution, 75 A.B.A.J. 66 (June, 1989); Riggs & Dorminey, Federal Agencies’ Use of Alternative Means of Dispute Resolution, 1 ADMIN L. J. 125, 126 (1987); Sander, The Variety of Dispute Resolution, 70 F.R.D. 111 (1976).
[110] 5 U.S.C. §§ 554, 556, 557 (2002).
[111] Bernard Schwartz, Administrative Law: A Casebook 62-65 (4th ed. 1994).
[112] Harter, Dispute Resolution and Administrative Law, 29 Vill. L. Rev. 1393, 1403, n. 46 (1983-84).
[113] Crowell & Pou, Appealing Government Contract Decisions: Reducing the Cost and Delay of Procurement Litigation with Alternative Dispute Resolution Techniques, 1987 Recommendations and Reports of the Administrative Conference 1139; Crowell & Pou, Appealing Government Contract Decisions: Reducing the Cost and Delay of Procurement Litigation with Alternative Dispute Resolution Techniques, 49 Md. L. Rev. 183 (1990).
[114] Edelman, Carr, & Simon, ADR at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Pou, Federal Agency Use of ADR: The Experience to Date, and Robinson, ADR in Enforcement Actions at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, in Containing Legal Costs: ADR Strategies for Corporations, Law Firms, and Government (Fein, ed. 1987); A Colloquium on Improving Dispute Resolution: Options for the Federal Government, 1 Admin. L. Rev. 399 (1987).
[115] В дополнение к названным выше изменениям федерального законодательства, которое регулирует административные процедуры напрямую можно также отметить 12 U.S.C. § 4806 (e) (2002) (требует пилотных программ ADR в агентствах, которые регулируют банковские и кредитные союзы); 20 U.S.C. §1415(e) (2002) (прямо перечисляет посредничество при разрешении споров, затрагивающих детей с заболеваниями в образовательных учреждениях, получающих федеральное финансирование) 26 U.S.C. §7123 (2002) (указывает Внутренней службе доходов установить альтернативные процедуры, добавлено в 1998 by P.L. 105-206).
[116] Pub. L. No. 101-552, § 3(a).
[117] Id. At § 3 (b) (См. также 5 U.S.C. § 581 note (2002)).
[118] Administrative Dispute Resolution Act, Pub. L. No. 101-552, 104 Stat. 2736 (1990) (с изменениями нумерации секций Титула 5, сделанными Administrative Procedure Technical Amendments Act, Pub. L. No. 102-354, 106 Stat. 944 (1992)) (кодифицирован большей частью в 5 U.S.C. §§ 571-83, с кодификаций различных положений в в различных секциях Титулов 9, 28, 29 и 41). Последующие изменения были внесены Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 1996, Act Oct. 1996, Pub. L. 104-320, 110 Stat. 3870 (внес изменения, среди прочего, в 5 U.S.C. §§ 569, 571, 571 note, 573, 574, 575, 580, 28 § 1491, 41 U.S.C. §605).
[119] Administrative Conference of the U.S., The Administrative Dispute Resolution Act
[120] L. Ray, Emerging Options in Dispute Resolutions, 75 A.B.A. JOURNAL 66 (June, 1989); ALI-ABA, Alternative Dispute Resolution: How to Use It to Your Advantage: ALI-ABA Course of Study Materials (1996); Jay Grenig, Alternative Dispute Resolution with Forms (2d ed 1997).
[121] 65 FR 38986, 39003 (June 22, 2000) (Commodities Futures Trading Commission) (Notice of Proposed Rulemaking; new regulatory framework for multilateral transaction execution facilities, etc.); 65 FR 36888 (June 12, 2000) (Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration, Notice Announcing Reopening of Public Comment Period re: ADR for online consumer transactions); 65 FR 31131 (May 16, 2000) (Department of defence Proposed Rule re: Defense Logistics Agency Solicitations); 64 FR 61236, 61237 (November 10, 1999) (Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission Notice of Proposed Rulemaking re: procedural rules); 64 FR 40138, 40158 (July 23, 1999) (Environmental Protection Agency, Final Rule, consolidated rules of practice for civil penalties, compliance orders, etc.).