Arbitration is a relatively fast way to arrive upon a decision when two parties are in a dispute. Arbitration has definite benefits such as being flexible and not as formal as a traditional courthouse. Usually, arbitration can be scheduled quicker and with less working parts than a trial. In rare instances, if all parties involved come to an agreement, arbitrators can sometimes create rulings that judges are not allowed to decide. In arbitration, both sides present all evidence to an arbitrator in efforts to prove each side’s case. The arbitrator reaches a final verdict and decides whom the winners and losers are. An arbitrator does the job that a traditional judge or jury would normally do in court if the matter escalated to that point (Hill …show more content…
Anti-trust laws were created top prevent larger companies and organizations from pushing smaller entities out of the ability to fairy compete for business. Mr. Oltz received a settlement from the hospital initially but was later unable to recoup legal fees and damages from the hospital once the trial judge ruled the damages were excessive. This case is a great example of what anti-trust laws were designed to do and who the laws are intended to protect. Mr. Oltz unfortunate encountered difficulty with getting his legal fees paid based upon a technicality, however this case did shed light on the conspiracy at elimination of competition among anesthesiologists in St. Peter’s Community