Michael Moffitt

Visiting Professor of Law

Spring 2018

Areeda 126

Assistant: John Rzasa / (617) 495-1618

Biography

Michael Moffitt is a Professor of Law and holds the Philip H. Knight Chair in Law at the University of Oregon.

Professor Moffitt previously served for six years as the Dean of the University of Oregon School of Law. During his time as Dean, the law school quadrupled its student scholarships, enrolled the most diverse student body in the school’s history, developed an innovative undergraduate legal studies program, more than doubled its philanthropic support, and launched a satellite campus in Portland, Oregon.

Prior to serving as Dean, Professor Moffitt was the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, and served as the Associate Director of Oregon’s nationally-ranked Appropriate Dispute Resolution Center. He taught Negotiation, Dispute Resolution, Arbitration, Advanced Negotiation, the Law of Settlement, and Civil Procedure. Prior to joining the Oregon faculty, he was a Lecturer on Law at Harvard Law School, a visiting professor at the Ohio State University College of Law, and served as the Clinical Supervisor of the Harvard Mediation Program. Immediately after law school, he served as a law clerk to United States District Judge Ann Aldrich. Professor Moffitt spent several years as a consultant with Conflict Management Group, designing and delivering mediation services, negotiation coaching, and training workshops around the world. His clients have ranged from senior judges to tribal leaders, from unionized prison guards to accountants, from railroad officials to major law firms, from multinational corporations to diplomatic academy trainees.

Professor Moffitt has published more than two dozen scholarly articles on mediation, negotiation, dispute resolution, and civil procedure. He co-edited The Handbook of Dispute Resolution, (Jossey-Bass, 2005), an award-winning compilation of 31 original chapters by leading scholars and practitioners in the field. He also co-authored the innovative, student-focused book, Dispute Resolution: Examples & Explanations (Aspen 2008) (2d ed. Aspen 2011) (3d ed. Aspen 2014).

The Provost of the University of Oregon named Professor Moffitt as one of the first University recipients of the Oregon Fund for Faculty Excellence Awards. The Oregon law school faculty awarded him with the law school’s Orlando J. Hollis Faculty Teaching Award. He is also the recipient of the University’s Ersted Award for Distinguished Teaching.

A graduate of Marietta College and Harvard Law School, he is a devoted but mediocre snowboarder, an aggressive tennis player, and the happily exhausted parent of two teenage daughters.

Areas of Interest

Michael Moffitt, Islands, Vitamins, Salt, Germs: Four Visions of the Future of ADR in Law Schools (and a Data-Driven Snapshot of the Field Today), 25 Ohio St. J. on Disp. Resol. 25 (2010).
Categories:
Civil Practice & Procedure
,
Legal Profession
Sub-Categories:
Dispute Resolution
,
Negotiation & Alternative Dispute Resolution
,
Mediation
,
Legal Education
Type: Article
Abstract
Many have written about the growth and evolution of ADR, both within law schools and in broader contexts. With this article, I hope to add two things to those descriptions of the field. First, I provide a more detailed and data-driven snapshot of the field’s recent history within the legal academy. How large is the field? Is it growing? What do we know about those who are joining the ranks of ADR faculty and those who are leaving it? How many courses do ADR faculty teach, and what do they wind up teaching? What roles do gender and teaching experience play in who teaches or in what they teach? What do we know about the schools at which law faculty are teaching ADR? Second, I suggest four different models for describing how law schools approach their ADR offerings. Some law schools may become Islands of ADR - ones in which ADR is part of the school’s distinctiveness. Some law schools may ADR as Vitamins - requiring every student to take at least the recommended dosage. Some law schools may treat ADR as Salt - vital seasoning for many different offerings, but never consumed on its own. Finally, individual faculty members at some law schools may intentionally, but quietly, incorporate ADR as Germs into their courses. These four images of ADR’s future in law schools provide an opportunity to return to the data, to test the extent to which law schools are already pursuing one or more of these visions.
Michael Moffitt, Customized Litigation: The Case for Making Civil Procedure Negotiable, 75 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 461 (2007).
Categories:
Civil Practice & Procedure
Sub-Categories:
Litigation & Settlement
,
Practice & Procedure
Type: Article
Abstract
This article calls for a complete re-conceptualization of the procedural rules governing modern litigation. Specifically, it suggests that litigants ought to be given the opportunity to customize their litigation experience - that procedural rules should be treated as default rules from which parties can mutually negotiate deviations. Although they are not typically labeled as such, modest examples of customization already occur both within the rules of civil procedure and extra-judicially. This article argues that much greater tailoring is possible, and it suggests three criteria for assessing how much deviation from the current baseline is tolerable. This article argues that a judicial system that presents an opportunity for customized litigation would be more procedurally just, more efficient, and more accessible than one with only a set of non-negotiable procedural rules.
Michael Moffitt, Suing Mediators, 83 B.U. L. Rev. 147 (2003).
Categories:
Civil Practice & Procedure
Sub-Categories:
Mediation
,
Remedies
,
Torts
,
Litigation & Settlement
Type: Article

Current Courses

Course Catalog View

Areeda 126

Assistant: John Rzasa / (617) 495-1618