Appeals Court Rules Arbitration Contracts Valid and Binding, Imposes Sanctions

Posted February 6, 2014

In RJW Williams Farms, Inc. v. Topflight Grain Co-op., Inc., No. 4-13-0220, 2014 Ill. App., 130220-U, (4th Jan. 23, 2014), the Illinois Court of Appeals affirmed a trial court’s decision that when arbitration contracts are valid and binding, any dispute arising under the contracts must be heard in arbitration.  The court also sanctioned the plaintiff-appellant for naming the arbitrator as a party to the suit.  For a copy of the decision, please contact the National Agricultural Law Center at nataglaw@uark.edu.  For more information on arbitration or crop insurance, please visit the Center’s Reading Rooms here and here. 

Background

This case involves a dispute over ten contracts for the sale of grain between the plaintiff-appellant, RJW Williams Farms (grain seller) (RJW) and defendant-appellee, Topflight Grain Cooperative, Inc. (grain purchaser) (Topflight).  Id. at 1.  Each contract included a provision for dispute resolution through arbitration by the National Grain and Feed Association (NFGA).  Id.  A dispute arose, Topflight filed for arbitration and a default judgment of $2.5 million was entered against RJW.  Id. at *2.   RJW filed a “Motion to Set Aside Default Judgment with NFGA” and NFGA granted the request, provided that RJW sign 3 arbitration services contracts, collectively covering all ten grain contracts.  Id.  RJW signed the agreements.  Id. 

While the arbitration cases were still open and pending with NFGA, RJW filed a complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief in the trial court to stop the arbitration process, naming both Topflight and NGFA as defendants.  Id. at *3.  RJW appealed, arguing that it cannot be compelled to submit to arbitration when there are questions about the validity of the underlying contracts and that NGFA does not have jurisdiction to arbitrate the dispute.  Id.

Analysis and Holding

The appeals court disagreed with RJW, affirming the trial court’s dismissal.  Id. at *6.  The court stated that “the controlling issue” was whether Topflight and RJW agreed to arbitrate their dispute.  Id. at *4.  Since it was undisputed that RJW signed the three arbitration contracts, the agreement to arbitrate was valid.  Id.  The court rejected RJW’s argument that it only signed the arbitration contracts under duress because “the defense of duress requires a wrongful act, which was not alleged here.”  Id.  The court stated that RJW’s arguments on the validity of the underlying contracts can be made in arbitration.  Id. at *5. 

Granting NGFA’s motion for sanctions against RJW for naming NGFA as a party to the lawsuit, the court stated it is “well established that an arbitrator is immune from suit for all acts which he performs in his capacity as an arbitrator.”  Id. at *6.  An arbitrator is also immune to “challenges to his authority or jurisdiction to arbitrate.”  Id.

NALC Resource: Crop Insurance Arbitration Guide

Posted November 8, 2013

Crop insurance policies normally require arbitration as the course of action required for a producer who wishes to challenge a claim denial.  While crop insurance is common and widely used, producers may not be familiar with the arbitration requirement or the arbitration process. 

An article, “Crop Insurance Arbitration:  What is Arbitration, When is it Required, and How Does it Work?” by Grant Ballard, attorney with the Banks Law Firm in Little Rock, Arkansas, is a helpful resource.

This article provides information on the arbitration process, the arbitration clause typically found in crop insurance policies, when arbitration is required, appeal of an arbitration award, and state law actions against insurance providers.  

NALC Resource: State Law Clearinghouse

Posted October 22, 2013

The State Law Clearinghouse, available here, is a free resource provided by the National Agricultural Law Center.  

The Clearinghouse is an ongoing project to compile all state statutes that exist in specific topics of agricultural law.  State laws may vary widely from one state to the next, even when the area of law is the same.  This resource allows a researcher to obtain targeted, state-specific information on the issue by providing a complete statutory text along with the date of possible expiration.

Statute compilations posted to date include: Agricultural liens, agritourism, alternative dispute resolution (ADR), animal cruelty, animal identification, biofuels, climate change, farm animal confinement, fence law, recreational use, and right-to-farm.

To use, simply click on a state and a drop down menu will appear with the names of the topics of the statutes that have been assembled for that state.  From there, click on the appropriate state, and a document will open with the applicable information.  If a topic is missing from a state’s drop down menu, laws on that topic have not yet been passed in that state.

Eighth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Producers' Lawsuit Claiming that USDA Improperly Calculated Farmers' SURE Payments

Posted:  June 6, 2013

In Bartlett v. United States Dep’t of Agric., No. 12-3087,2013 WL 2420501 (8^th Cir. June 5, 2013), the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed a federal district court decision to dismiss an action brought by more than three dozen corn and soybean farmers claiming that the defendants improperly calculated their Supplemental Assistance Payments Program (SURE) payments.  This case is noteworthy, in part, because it contains important statements of administrative law relative to USDA National Appeals Division (NAD) decision-making and the issue of “matters of general applicability.” 

The United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa dismissed the plaintiffs’ lawsuit for failure to exhaust their administrative remedies prior to filing their lawsuit in federal district court.   On appeal, the plaintiffs argued that they were not required to exhaust their administrative remedies because “further appeal within the USDA would have been futile, their claim raised a purely legal question, and the Iowa FSA’s misconduct equitably estops the Government from asserting the failure to exhaust defense.”  After individually examining each of the plaintiffs’ claims, the Eight Circuit concluded that “[b]ecause the Producers are unable to demonstrate any of the limited exceptions to the administrative exhaustion requirement apply, the district court did not err in dismissing their suit for failure to exhaust.” 

In its decision, the Eighth Circuit reemphasized its position – previously espoused in Ace Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Fed. Crop Ins. Corp., 440 F.3d 992 (8^th Cir. 2006) -- that 7 U.S.C. § 6912(e) is non-jurisdictional.  This is important for several reasons, including that it differs from Bastek v. Fed. Crop Ins. Corp., 145 F.3d 90 (2d Cir. 1998), which held that § 6912(e) is jurisdictional in nature and, therefore, a bar to judicial review.

Attorneys Sought for USDA Hispanic and Women Farmers and Ranchers Claims Process

Farmers Legal Action Group, Inc. (FLAG) and the National Agricultural Law Center (NALC) are assisting in the development of a legal assistance network of attorneys to assist claimants in the completion of the official Claims Form for the USDA Hispanic and Women Farmers and Ranchers Claims Process. The Legal Assistance Network listing will be widely available, including being listed on the National Agricultural Law Center website here so that claimants and others can easily access the information and make contact.

For background information on the USDA HWFRCP, please see the information below and/or visit the official Claims Process website at www.farmerclaims.gov.  For an attorney to be listed in the Legal Assistance Network, he or she must provide via email to nataglaw@uark.edu three items of information:

 

(1) a statement from the attorney that he or she has viewed the attorney training video, which is available upon request made to nataglaw@uark.edu;

(2) a statement indicating the state(s) in which the attorney is licensed to practice along with the corresponding bar number(s) for those states; and

(3) appropriate contact information. Once this information is received, the attorney's name, contact information, and state(s) in which he or she is licensed to practice will be included on the legal assistance network list published on the National Agricultural Law Center website.

Once listed in the network an attorney can be removed at any time upon request.

If you are an attorney interested in being listed in the Legal Assistance Network, please send an email to nataglaw@uark.edu that indicates the state(s) in which you are licensed to practice along with the corresponding bar number(s) for those states, along with a request for a copy of the training video.

 

 

 

Attorneys Sought Nationwide To Assist Claimants in USDA Hispanic and Women Farmers and Ranchers Claims Process

Farmers Legal Action Group, Inc. (FLAG) and the National Agricultural Law Center (NALC) are assisting in the development of a legal assistance network of attorneys to assist claimants in the completion of the official Claims Form for the USDA Hispanic and Women Farmers and Ranchers Claims Process. The Legal Assistance Network listing will be widely available, including being listed on the National Agricultural Law Center website here so that claimants and others can easily access the information and make contact. For background information on the USDA HWFRCP, please see the information below and/or visit the official Claims Process website at www.farmerclaims.gov.

Please note, however, that a claimant is not required to be assisted by an attorney in order to complete and submit the official USDA HWFRCP Claim Form. In addition, the attorney need not be listed in the legal assistance network in order to assist a claimant.

 

For an attorney to be listed in the Legal Assistance Network, he or she must provide via email to nataglaw@uark.edut three items of information:

 

(1) a statement from the attorney that he or she has viewed the attorney training video, which is available upon request made to nataglaw@uark.edu;

 

(2) a statement indicating the state(s) in which the attorney is licensed to practice along with the corresponding bar number(s) for those states; and

 

(3) appropriate contact information. Once this information is received, the attorney's name, contact information, and state(s) in which he or she is licensed to practice will be included on the legal assistance network list published on the National Agricultural Law Center website.

 

Once listed in the network an attorney can be removed at any time upon request.

If you are an attorney interested in being listed in the Legal Assistance Network, please send an email to nataglaw@uark.edu that indicates the state(s) in which you are licensed to practice along with the corresponding bar number(s) for those states, along with a request for a copy of the training video.

 

The Farmers Legal Action Group, Inc. and the National Agricultural Law Center will also be available to respond to your questions regarding the Claims Form and the USDA Loan and Loan Servicing Programs that may arise while you are providing assistance to potential claimants. You may contact contact either with your questions by email at HWFRCP@flaginc.org or nataglaw@uark.edu, or by phone to Lynn Hayes at (651) 223-5400 or Harrison Pittman at (479) 575-7640.

 

USDA HWFRCP Background Information:

 

 

The United States Government has established a Claims Process to make available up to $1.33 billion or more to farmers who alleged discrimination by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) based on being female, or based on being Hispanic, in making or servicing farm loans during certain periods between 1981 and 2000. Claimants who qualify and who submit a timely claim could receive an award of up to $50,000 or up to $250,000 in cash, depending on the evidence submitted. USDA will also provide a total of up to $160 million in debt relief to successful Claimants who currently owe USDA money for eligible farm loans. In addition, successful Claimants may also receive an additional amount, equal to 25% of the combined cash award plus the principal amount of debt relief, to help pay federal taxes that may be owed.

Attorneys Sought To Assist Claimants in USDA Hispanic and Women Farmers and Ranchers Claims Process

 

Farmers Legal Action Group, Inc. (FLAG) and the National Agricultural Law Center (NALC) are assisting in the development of a legal assistance network of attorneys to assist claimants in the completion of the official Claims Form for the USDA Hispanic and Women Farmers and Ranchers Claims Process. The Legal Assistance Network will be publicly available on the National Agricultural Law Center website here so that claimants and others can easily access the information and make contact. For background information on the USDA HWFRCP, please see the information below and/or visit the official Claims Process website at www.farmerclaims.gov.

 

Please note, however, that a claimant is not required to be assisted by an attorney in order to complete and submit the official USDA HWFRCP Claim Form. In addition, the attorney need not be listed in the legal assistance network in order to assist a claimant.

 

For an attorney to be listed in the Legal Assistance Network, he or she must provide via email to nataglaw@uark.edu three items of information:

 

(1) a statement from the attorney that he or she has viewed the attorney training video, which is available upon request made to nataglaw@uark.edu;

 

(2) a statement indicating the state(s) in which the attorney is licensed to practice along with the corresponding bar number(s) for those states; and

 

(3) appropriate contact information. Once this information is received, the attorney's name, contact information, and state(s) in which he or she is licensed to practice will be included on the legal assistance network list published on the National Agricultural Law Center website.

 

Once listed in the network an attorney can be removed at any time upon request.

 

If you are an attorney interested in being listed in the Legal Assistance Network, please send an email to nataglaw@uark.edu that indicates the state(s) in which you are licensed to practice along with the corresponding bar number(s) for those states, along with a request for a copy of the training video.

 

The Farmers Legal Action Group, Inc. and the National Agricultural Law Center will also be available to respond to your questions regarding the Claims Form and the USDA Loan and Loan Servicing Programs that may arise while you are providing assistance to potential claimants. You may contact contact either with your questions by email at HWFRCP@flaginc.org or nataglaw@uark.edu, or by phone to Lynn Hayes at (651) 223-5400 or Harrison Pittman at (479) 575-7640.

 

USDA HWFRCP Background Information:

The United States Government has established a Claims Process to make available up to $1.33 billion or more to farmers who alleged discrimination by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) based on being female, or based on being Hispanic, in making or servicing farm loans during certain periods between 1981 and 2000. Claimants who qualify and who submit a timely claim could receive an award of up to $50,000 or up to $250,000 in cash, depending on the evidence submitted. USDA will also provide a total of up to $160 million in debt relief to successful Claimants who currently owe USDA money for eligible farm loans. In addition, successful Claimants may also receive an additional amount, equal to 25% of the combined cash award plus the principal amount of debt relief, to help pay federal taxes that may be owed.



October 16: Attorney Training for USDA Hispanic and Women Farmers & Ranchers Claims Process

On October 16, 2012, from 1 p.m. - 3:45 (EST) a free training session by live webcast will be held for attorneys interested in assisting claimants in the USDA Hispanic and Women Farmers and Ranchers Claims Process (HWFRCP). The training is intended for attorneys nationwide who want to assist potential claimants in completing the official HWFRCP claims form.

The October 16, 2012 training session will conducted by live webcast from Washington, D.C. To register for the live webcast, please visit http://hwfrcp.eventbrite.com.

For more information about the HWFRCP, visit the official claims process website at www.farmerclaims.gov.  In addition, the National Agricultural Law Center has HWFRCP research and information available to the public linked from its home page, www.nationalaglawcenter.org.

The HWFRCP is a non-judicial, non-adversarial process designed to resolve past claims of discrimination in the USDA Farm Loan Programs.  The claims are based on actions that occurred between 1981 and and 1996 or mid-October 1998 and mid-October 2000.  The claims period opened September 24, 2012 and runs through March 25, 2013.

For questions involving the October 16 attorney training or about the claims process, contact HWFRCP@flaginc.org or call (651)-223-5400. 

New Article Published Covering Arbitration in Federal Crop Insurance

While farmers and others are likely familiar with federal crop insurance, many are not as familiar with the arbitration requirement that appears under the Common Crop Insurance Policy or the arbitration process.   Crop insurance has long been an important component of risk management in agriculture, but has taken on new significance due to the 2012 drought and emphasis in the ongoing 2012 Farm Bill debate.  Consequently, crop insurance is playing a significant role in the lives of producers and others in the nation's agricultural community and it is important that those affected have an understanding of key aspects of federal crop insurance. 

A recently published article, What is Arbitration, When is it Required, and How Does it Work? explains arbitration and its operation within the federal crop insurance program. Areas discussed in the article include arbitration as a form of dispute resolution, when arbitration is required in the context of a crop insurance dispute, whether an arbitration award can be appealed, and state law actions against an insurance provider.

The article is written by Grant Ballard, Center Research Consultant and associate with the Banks Law Firm, PLLC.  Mr. Ballard earned a J.D. and an LL.M. in Agricultural Law at the University of Arkansas School of Law and works in the areas of federal crop insurance litigation, farm programs, and other agricultural-related legal areas.  He has authored several articles regarding federal crop insurance, including Prevented Planting Crop Insurance: Overview, Drought, and Excessive Moisture, The Federal Crop Insurance Program: Administration, Structure, and Operation, and Filing a Crop Insurance Claim: An Overview for Producers.  His law review article Practitioner's Guide to the Litigation of Federally Reinsured Crop Insurance Claims will be published in the Drake Journal of Agricultural Law in the Fall of 2012. 

Attorneys Sought to Assist in USDA Hispanic and Women Farmers and Ranchers Claims Process

The United States government has established a voluntary admininstrative claims process, the USDA Hispanic and Women Farmers and Ranchers Claims Process (HWFRCP), that seeks to resolve allegations of past discrimination involving USDA farm loan programs.  The period in which to file a claim opened on September 24, 2012 and runs through March 25, 2013.  Claims are based on actions that occurred between 1981 and 1996 or mid-October 1998 and mid-October 2000.

Lawyers and law school clinics nationwide are being sought to assist Hispanic and women farmers to complete and submit the official HWFRCP claims forms.  If you are an attorney or associated with a law school clinic and are interested in being involved in the HWFRCP, please send an email inquiry to HWFRCP@flaginc.org or call (651) 223-5400.  In addition, interested attorneys or persons associated with legal clinics may also contact nataglaw@uark.edu or call (479) 575-7640.

Background on the HWFRCP

As part of USDA's efforts to make civil rights matters a top priority, USDA is committed to resolving past claims of discrimination in its farm loan programs.  In recent years, USDA entered into settlement agreements in certified class action lawsuits filed on behalf of African American and Native American farmers.  Class counsel assisted thousands of farmers to file their individual claims under those settlement agreements. For background information regarding these particular lawsuits, please visit the National Agricultural Law Center website here. 

Lawsuits alleging past discrimination in USDA Farm Loan Programs were also filed on behalf of Hispanic and women farmers and ranchers.  However, those cases were not certified as class actions.  Subsequently, the United States government established the USDA HWFRCP to provide at least $1.33 billion to claimants who alleged discrimination by the USDA based on being female or being Hispanic in making or servicing farm loans during certain periods between 1981 and 2000. 

The official website for the HWFRCP is www.farmerclaims.gov.  As part of its national research and information mission, the National Agricultural Law Center is also providing information regarding the process, which can be accessed from the Center's home page, www.nationalaglawcenter.org. 

 

Upcoming: 33rd Annual Meeting of the American Agricultural Law Association

The 33rd Annual Meeting of the American Agricultural Law Association will be held October 18-20, 2012 at the downtown Sheraton Hotel 2012 in Nashville, Tennessee. If you are interested in networking with attorneys and other professionals who work in agriculture and food throughout the U.S. and the world, AALA is the organization for you.

As described on the AALA website:

"The American Agricultural Law Association (AALA) is the only national professional organization focusing on the legal needs of the agricultural community. Crossing traditional barriers, it offers an independent forum for investigation of innovative and workable solutions to complex agricultural law problems. This role has taken on greater importance in the midst of the current international and environmental issues, reshaping agriculture and the impending technological advances which promise equally dramatic changes."

Becoming a member of AALA is very easy, and new members are welcomed and greatly appreciated. For information about joining AALA, visit the AALA site here. If you have any questions about AALA, joining, and/or membership benefits, please contact AALA Executive Director Robert Achenbach at RobertA@aglaw-assn.org. Also, you can contact AALA Membership Committee Chair Harrison Pittman at hmpittm@uark.edu. 

House Ag Committee reauthorizes agricultural mediation grant program

The House Agriculture Committee was relatively busy last week. The committee passed two bills and approved its budget recommendation letter for federal agencies and programs under its jurisdiction.

The piece of legislation that was passed that has national implications is H.R. 3509, which reauthorizes funding for the State agricultural mediation grant program, which was authorized under title V of the Agricultural Credit Act of 1987. According to the news release from the committee, the program provides grants to state programs that "help agricultural producers, their creditors and various agencies address disputes, including loan problems and USDA adverse decisions."

As Jerry Hagstrom writes for Agweek online, the vote on H.R. 3509 was unanimous. Hagstrom reports that the program was first created during the "farm crisis of the 1980s." Though the bill allows for $7.5 million to be appropriated to the program each year, last year the program was funded at $4.369 million.

The USDA Farm Service Agency reports that 32 states participate in the program, "which provides matching grants to the states." Since it was created, the mediation program has dealt with disputes involving loans, federal support program payments, conservation programs, and rural issues.

To read the House Agriculture Committee news release, click here.
To read the Hagstrom article in Agweek click here.

Posted: 03/08/10

Justice and Agriculture Department workshops on competition start this week

This week the Des Moines, Iowa suburb of Ankeny will play host to the first workshop jointly held by the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) that will take a look at consolidation and competition in agricultural industries.

As Christopher Leonard of the Associated Press reports, many in the industry believe that this workshop will provide insight into the seriousness of the Obama administration in taking on consolidation and competition issues in agriculture. Administration officials believe the meeting on Friday will provide those interested in these issues, from attorneys to regulators, "their first chance to work side-by-side and examine the concentration of power in rural America."

Farmers are certainly interested in what will come out of the workshops to see if their "long-standing complaints" about big business drowning out smaller operations is actually addressed, or if the meetings are mere "political theater." Leonard quotes Tara Smith, the director of congressional relations for the American Farm Bureau Federation, as stating, '"This is certainly a much brighter spotlight than we've seen in the last 10 years [.]"'

Christine Varney, the head of the DOJ's antitrust division has complained that the previous administration was too hesitant to act when concerns over concentration were raised. Varney hopes to change this perception and believes vertical concentration in the market is worth taking a closer look at.

USDA Secretary Vilsack will be joining Varney at the workshops. Vilsack hopes what they hear and learn will yield "policies to foster competition in agriculture, rather than scattered enforcement actions." Additionally, Vilsack stated that if the competition practices are fair, then the government will take no action. It is their hope not to stifle large agricultural business operations, but to create a level playing field.

For their part, as Leonard reports, industry groups do not believe consolidation in the industry leads to price fixing or a lack of competition." The American Meat Institute has filed testimony in which they argue that companies have become consolidated because government regulations require large monetary investments that lead to the merger of companies in order to afford the costs of regulations.

Regardless, both sides, in theory, now have an audience to air their views on the issues. There will also be four other meetings following the meeting in Iowa.

To read the AP article by Leonard, click here.
To read previous US Agricultural & Food Law and Policy Blog Post on the announcement of the workshops, click here.

Posted: 03/08/10

Western Water Struggles in Montana

With continued development of farmland into residential subdivisions, the demand on a precious resource-water-in the arid West has farmers and developers “vying for control of water supplies that have emerged as one of the region’s most coveted natural resources [.]” according Matthew Brown’s reporting for the Associated Press.

On Tuesday another struggle emerged between the two groups as “five Montana ranch owners filed a petition Tuesday with the Department of Natural Resources and Conservation (DNRC), charging the state’s water rules were stacked against them.”

Under current state law in Montana water rights are given by precedence to “the ‘senior’ right of farms and ranches.” Yet, current rules give exemptions from the state water laws when it comes to small wells “used by each house within larger subdivisions [.]” This exemption essentially means hundreds of homes can be developed within one larger subdivision without water permits. The fear is what this extra demand will do to the water source, an underground aquifer.

“Rancher Polly Rex characterized the exemption as a loophole that could ultimately rob her of the means to grow hay and water her livestock. Rex said a subdivision of more than 60 homes going up next to her Absarokee ranch could eventually draw down the natural springs she uses on an adjacent 1,250-acre field."I just really don't think I should change how I do our business because of somebody else," said Rex, whose water rights date to the late 1800s. "We simply cannot hand out water rights in thin air. It's a dumb way to do
business."’

John Grassy, the DNRC spokesman, said attorneys for the agency are reviewing the ranchers’ legal petition as ‘“[t]he petition raises issues of statewide significance.”’ A previous 2006 Gallatin County Commission petition that is similar to this petition was rejected. That petition was rejected because “the county would have ‘completely halted development’ across large areas of the state where all water rights already have been allocated.”

The subdivision versus farmland issue has been present in Montana since at least 2000 as 30,000 exempt wells were drilled over an eight year period to serve the growing suburbs of Montana’s biggest cities. The exemption was put in place in 1993. The ranchers want this changed “so that two or more wells drawing from the same source would need a permit.”

Developers view the other option for water allocation as “a process that’s too burdensome to be viable [.]” This is why Dustin Stewart and the Montana Building Industry Association views “[p]rotecting Montana’s ability to use individual water wells and build homes in a rural area is something we are willing to fight for.”

We shall have to wait and see how this water rights struggle plays out.

To read the Associated Press article click here.

Posted: 12/04/09

Soybean News

Agri-pulse is reporting on a couple of soybean stories that readers might be interested in knowing about. First, U.S. Department of Agriculture Undersecretary Jim Miller informed soybean industry leaders that he is willing to request the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service “to arbitrate longstanding differences between the United Soybean Board, which oversees the checkoff [program] and the American Soybean Association, the industry’s primary lobbying organization.” The American Soybean Association’s board of directors voted on Monday to accept the offer. In the second story, the review of the audit and investigation of the national soybean checkoff will not be completed by the Office of Inspector General by the end of the year as previously expected.

To read the Agri-pulse story on these two issues click here.

Posted: 09/04/09

Agricultural Mediation Bill Introduced into Senate

Iowa’s Senator Tom Harkin, the chairman of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, and Kansas’s Senator Pat Roberts introduced legislation on Monday to reauthorize the USDA’s Certified State Agriculture Mediation Program for five additional years. For press release from Senator Harkin’s office on Iowapolitics.com, click here. For press release from Senator Robert’s office, click here

Currently 35 states are certified under the program, to view a map of the states certified New Mexico State University, click here. For more on the program administered by the Farm Service Agency, click here. For more information, click here to view the Center’s reading room on alternative dispute resolution.

Posted: 06/30/09

Alternative Dispute Resolution

Subject Description: As the number of cases filed each year has increased and court resources are stretched further and further, parties are turning to solutions outside the traditional judicial system as a faster, simpler solution to resolving a dispute. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is a series of processes that seek to solve disputes among individuals without resorting to complex, time consuming and expensive litigation. This subject heading focuses on the federal and state legal issues pertinent to alternative dispute resolution in the agricultural context.