Ad hoc adjudication breaks litigant participation and undermines its legitimacy

Evidence

2. If adjudication which is authoritative and compulsory is also ad hoc, then the parties are compelled to accept a determination in whlcht1ey have had no meaningful opportunity to participate. Compare Professor Fuller: … “In adjudication the litigant participates in the decision solely by appealing to the reason of the arbiter with proofs and arguments. This thread of participation is broken * * * if the nature of the adjudicative task undertaken deprives the parties’ arguments of their normal significance for the decision of the case.” — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process, 3312

Categorization

• DEFINE: Fuller’s participation-through-proofs-and-arguments conception of the litigant’s role in adjudication.
• XREF: connects to: Reliance on litigation atrophied the community group’s own organizing; A court held lack of translation defeated meaningful participation — Luke W. Cole and Sheila R. Foster, From the Ground Up: Environmental…, 82; A discretionary state power stripped a poor community of appellate remedy — Luke W. Cole and Sheila R. Foster, From the Ground Up: Environmental…, 257 (+7 more)

Broader Connections

• Deliberate opaqueness in dispute resolution discourages parties from litigating to judgment. #corroborates (0.82) — Lisa Bernestein, Opting out of the Legal System, 88
• Courts shunt interpersonal disputes to ADR because they consider them junk cases #corroborates (0.78) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 1187