PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 35 · Passed Senate amended · Oct 7, 1998
Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 1998 - Replaces Federal judicial code arbitration provisions with alternative dispute resolution (ADR) provisions. Directs each U.S. district court to: (1) authorize the use of ADR processes in all civil actions; (2) devise and implement its own ADR program to encourage and promote the use of ADR in its district; (3) examine the effectiveness of existing ADR programs and adopt appropriate improvements; and (4) retain or designate an employee or judicial officer who is knowledgeable in ADR practices and processes to implement, administer, oversee, and evaluate the court's ADR program. Authorizes the Federal Judicial Center and the Administrative Office of the United States Courts to assist the district courts in the establishment and improvement of ADR programs. (Sec. 4) Directs each district court to: (1) require that litigants in all civil cases consider the use of an ADR process at an appropriate stage in the litigation; and (2) provide litigants in all civil cases with at least one ADR process. Allows any district court that elects to require the use of ADR in certain cases to do so only with respect to mediation, early neutral evaluation, and, if the parties consent, arbitration. Authorizes each court to exempt from requirements of this section cases in which arbitration would not be appropriate. Requires each court to provide for the confidentiality of ADR processes and to prohibit disclosure of confidential dispute resolution communications. (Sec. 5) Requires each district court that authorizes the use of ADR processes to adopt appropriate processes for making neutrals available for use by the parties for each category of process offered. Sets forth provisions regarding neutral selection, qualifications, and training. (Sec. 6) Authorizes a district court to allow the referral to arbitration of any civil action pending before it, when the parties consent, except where: (1) the action is based on an alleged violation of a right secured by the Constitution; (2) jurisdiction is based on Federal civil rights and elective franchise provisions; or (3) the relief sought consists of money damages exceeding $150,000. Directs the district court to establish interim procedures to ensure that consent to arbitration is freely and knowingly obtained and that no party or attorney is prejudiced for refusing to participate in arbitration. (Sec. 7) Empowers ADR arbitrators to: (1) conduct arbitration hearings; (2) administer oaths and affirmations; and (3) make awards. Requires district courts to establish standards for arbitrator certification. Entitles arbitrators in an ADR program to the immunities and protections that the law accords to persons serving in a quasi-judicial capacity. (Sec. 8) Makes Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 (relating to subpoenas) applicable to subpoenas for the attendance of witnesses and the production of documentary evidence at an arbitration hearing. (Sec. 9) Sets forth provisions regarding: (1) filing procedures and the effect of an arbitration award and judgment; (2) the sealing of such award until the court enters its final judgment or the action has otherwise terminated; and (3) filing deadlines, restoration to the court docket, and the exclusion of evidence of arbitration with respect to a trial de novo of arbitration awards. (Sec. 10) Directs the district court to establish the amount of compensation that each neutral shall receive for services rendered. (Sec. 11) Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Rep. Coble, Howard [R-NC-6] · R–NC
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 105-315.
Became Public Law No: 105-315.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendments Agreed to by voice vote. (consideration: CR H10457-10459)
Resolving differences -- House actions: On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendments Agreed to by voice vote.(consideration: CR H10457-10459)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Mr. Coble moved that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendments.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Amendment SP 3784 agreed to in Senate by Unanimous Consent.
Amendment SP 3784 proposed by Senator McCain for Senator Grassley.
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S11808-11810)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 514.
Committee on Judiciary. Reported to Senate by Senator Hatch with amendments. Without written report.
Committee on Judiciary. Reported to Senate by Senator Hatch with amendments. Without written report.
Committee on Judiciary. Ordered to be reported with amendments favorably.
Referred to Subcommittee on Oversight and Courts.
Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 405 - 2 (Roll No. 101).
House roll call 101 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 405 - 2 (Roll No. 101).
House roll call 101 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business.
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 5, rule I, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2066-2069, H2076)
Mr. Coble moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 281.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 105-487.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 105-487.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3528 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3528 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3528 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3528 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.