becomes an instrument for the personal advan-
tage of its parent corporation, stockholders,
directors, or officers. When a court applies it,
the court is said to pierce the corporate veil.
Courts have not traditionally applied the
alter ego doctrine to other business forms, such
as partnerships and limited partnerships, be-
cause partners generally do not enjoy the same
form of limited liability as corporate stock-
holders, officers, and directors. By comparison,
however, owners of limited liability companies
may structure their business in a manner similar
to a corporation so that members and managers
are shielded from personal liability for the debts
of the
LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY (LLC). Several
courts have determined that the alter ego
doctrine may also apply to LLCs. For instance,
in Kaycee Land & Livestock v. Flahive, 46 P.3d
323 (Wyo. 2002), the Wyoming Supreme Court
held that the equitable doctrine of piercing the
veil was an available remedy under the Wyom-
ing Limited Liability Company Act.
CROSS REFERENCES
Corporations ; Immunity; Liability.
ALTERATION
Modification; changing a thing without obliterat-
ing it.
An alteration is a variation made in the
language or terms of a legal document that
affects the rights and obligations of the parties

alteration.
Material Changes
The alteration of an instrument materially
changes it. The document no longer reflects the
terms that the parties originally intended to serve
as the basis of their legal obligation to each other.
To be material, the change must affect an
important part of the instrument and the rights
of the parties to it. Any material alteration relieves
the nonconsenting party of any obligation to
perform according to the terms of the instrument.
If the altered instrument is a contract, then the
original contract is void. The nonconsenting party
cannot be legally obligated by the new contract
since he or she never agreed to it. A document that
has been materially altered does not regain its
original validity if it is restored to its original form
by erasing or deleting unauthorized words.
The date of an instrument is often consid-
ered a material provision when it establishes the
time within which the parties to a document
must perform their obligations under it. An
unauthorized change of date that shortens the
time of payment or extends the time of
performance so that more interest will become
due is a material alteration.
An alteration of a signature that changes the
legal effect of an instrument is material. Erasing
words that show that the signer is acting as an
agent, for example, changes the signer’s

The Person Making the Change
The change to the instrument must be made by
a party or someone authorized by him or her to
do so. No change made by a third person
without the consent of either party to the
document will invalidate it if its original terms
can be learned. When a material alteration is
made by a party to
COMMERCIAL PAPER, such as a
check or
PROMISSORY NOTE, the paper will be
enforced as originally written against the party
who made the changes.
Consensual Alteration
A change in an instrument made with the
consent of the parties is binding upon them.
Such
CONSENSUAL ALTERATION is usually evidenced
by the signing by each party of his or her initials
and the date that the agreement to the changes
to the instrument was reached.
ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION
Procedures for settling disputes by means other than
litigation; e.g., by arbitration, mediation,or
minitrials. Such procedures, which are usually less
costly and more expeditious than litigation, are
increasingly being used in commercial and labor
disputes, in divorce actions, in resolving motor
vehicle and medical malpractice tort claims, and in
other disputes that would likely otherwise involve

dispute resolution has become such a well-
accepted shorthand for the vast array of non-
litigation processes that its continued use seems
assured.
Although certain ADR techniques are well
established and frequently used—for example,
mediation and arbitration—alternative dispute
resolution has no fixed definition. It includes a
wide range of processes, many with little in
common except that each is an alternative to full-
blown litigation. Litigants, lawyers, and judges
are constantly adapting existing ADR processes
or devising new ones to meet the unique needs of
their legal disputes. The definition of alternative
dispute resolution is constantly expanding to
include new techniques.
ADR t ec hniques have not been created to
undercut the traditional U.S. court system. Cer-
tainly, ADR options can be used in cases where
litigation is not the most appropriate route. How-
ever, they can also be used in conjunction w ith
litigation when the parties want to explore other
options but also wa nt to remain free to return to
the traditional court process at any point.
Of the many litigation alternatives to re-
solve a legal dispute, mediation, arbitration,
mediation-arbitration, minitrial, early neutral
evaluation, summary jury trial, and collabora-
tive law are the most common.
GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION

7.
ٗ Plaintiff's Attorney ٗ Cross Complainant's Attorney 8. ٗ Defendant's Attorney ٗ Cross Defendant's Attorney
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________
NAME NAME
_________________________________________________ __________________________________________________
ADDRESS ADDRESS
(_____)_____________________________________________ (_____)____________________________________________
TELEPHONE NUMBER TELEPHONE NUMBER
9. Please indicate your relationship to the case:

ٗ Plaintiff ٗ Plaintiff's attorney ٗ Defendant ٗ Defendant's attorney

ٗ 3rd party defendant ٗ 3rd party defendant's attorney ٗ Other (specify): __________________________________
10. Dispute resolution process:

ٗ Mediation ٗ Arbitration ٗ Neutral case evaluation ٗ Other (specify): _________________________________
11. How was case resolved?
a.
ٗ As a direct result of the ADR process.
b.
ٗ As an indirect result of the ADR process. c. ٗ Resolution was unrelated to ADR process.
12. Check the closest dollar amount that you estimate you saved (attorneys fees, expert witness fees, and other costs) by using this
dispute resolution process compared to resolving this case through litigation, whether by settlement or trial.

ٗ $0 ٗ $250 ٗ $500 ٗ $750 ٗ $1,000 ٗ more than $1,000 (specify): $ _____________________________
13. If the dispute resolution process caused a net increase in your costs in this case, check the closest dollar amount of the additional
cost:

ٗ $0 ٗ $250 ٗ $500 ٗ $750 ٗ $1,000 ٗ more than $1,000 (specify): $ _____________________________
14. Check the closest number of court days that you estimate the court saved (motions, hearings, conferences, trial, etc.) as a result of

agree on anything, begin a pattern of saying yes.
Second, the parties exchange initial posi-
tions, not by way of lecturing the mediator but
in a face-to-face exchange with each other.
Often, this is the first time each party hears the
other’s complete and uninterrupted version.
The parties may begin to see that the story has
two sides and that it may not be so unreason-
able to compromise their initial positions.
Third, if the parties have agreed to what is
called a “caucusing procedure,” the mediator
meets with each side separately in a series of
confidential, private meetings and begins explor-
ing
SETTLEMENT alternatives, perhaps by engaging
the parties in some “reality testing” of their initial
proposals. This process, sometimes called shuttle
diplomacy, often uncovers areas of flexibility that
the parties could not see or would have been
uncomfortable putting forward officially.
Fourth, when the gap between the parties
begins to close, the mediator may carry offers
and counteroffers back and forth between them,
or the parties may elect to return to a joint
session to exchange their offers.
Finally, when the parties agree upon the
broad terms of a settlement, they formally
reaffirm their understanding of that settlement,
complete the final details, and sign a settlement
agreement.

effective appeal process. Thus, when an arbitra-
tion decision is issued, the case is ended.
Final and binding arbitration has long been
used in labor-management disputes. For dec-
ades, unions and employers have found it
mutually advantageous to have a knowledge-
able arbitrator—whom they themselves have
chosen—resolve their disputes in this cheaper
and faster fashion. One primary advantage for
both sides has been that taking disputes to
arbitration has kept everyone working by
providing an alternative to strikes and lockouts
and has kept everyone out of the courts. Given
this very successful track record, the commer-
cial world has become enthusiastic about
arbitration for other types of disputes as well.
A new form of arbitration, known as “court-
annexed arbitration,” has emerged. Many
variations of court-annexed arbitration have
developed throughout the United States. One
can be found in Minnesota, where, in the mid-
1990s, the Hennepin County district court
adopted a program making civil cases involving
less than $50,000 subject to mandatory non-
binding arbitration. The results of that experi-
mental program were so encouraging that
legislation was later enacted expanding the
arbitration program statewide. Most cases were
channeled through an ADR proces s before they
could be heard in the courts. A growing number

representatives—by now more aware of the
strengths and weaknesses of each side—try to
NEGOTIATE a resolution of the problem. If they are
unable to do so, they often ask for the neutra l
adviser’s best guess as to the probable outcome of
the case. They then resume negotiations.
The keys to the success of this approach are
the presence of both sides’ top officials and the
exchange of information that takes place during
the minitrial. Too often, prelitigation work has
insulated top management from the true
strengths and weaknesses of their cases. Mini-
trial presentations allow them to see the dispute
as it would appear to an outsider and set the
stage for a cooperative settlement.
Early Neutral Evaluation
An early neutral evaluation (ENE) is used when
one or both parties to a dispute seek the advice
of an experienced individual, usually an attor-
ney, concerning the strength of their cases. An
objective evaluation by a knowledgeable outsid-
er can sometimes move parties away from
unrealistic positions, or at least provide them
with more insight into their cases’ strengths and
weaknesses. Of course, the success of this
technique depends upon the parties’ faith in
the fairness and objectivity of the neutral third-
party, and their willingness to compromise.
Summary Jury Trial
Summary jury trials have been used primarily in

dispute by identifying the priorities, goals, needs,
and interests of the parties and helping them
work together toward a settlement that is
consistent with such goals and needs. Unlike
mediation, in the collaborative law process the
parties agree at the beginning of the dispute to
settle the case outside of court. In addition,
while going through the process, the attorneys
facilitate the negotiations, and the parties are
fully informed of the law and any legal con-
sequences regarding their various decisions
and options. As of September 2009, California,
North Carolina, and Texas had implemented
statutes regarding collaborative divorce. O ther
courts have implemented local court rules
regarding the collaborative law process for their
jurisdiction. In addition, the National Confer-
ence of Commissioners on Uniform State laws,
on July 15, 2009, adopted the Uniform Collabo-
rative Law Act, which will be presented to state
legislatures for enactment.
GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION
252 ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION
ADR by Statute and Regulation
Since the late 1980s, Congress has recognized
that ADR provides a cost-efficient alternative to
traditional methods for dispute resolution. In
1988, Congress enacted the Judicial Improve-
ments and Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C.A.
§ 652 (1993 & Supp. 2003), which permitted

State legislatures have similarly provided for
ADR in many of their statutes. Judges in Florid a,
for example, possess authority to submit most
types of cases to mediation or arbitration in lieu
of litigation. Fla. Stat. § 44.1011 (1997). The
COMMISSIONERS ON UNIFORM LAWS have approved
several uniform laws, which may be adopted by
the various states, related to ADR proceedings.
Versions of the Uniform Arbitration Act, first
approved in 1956, have been adopted by 49 states.
Likewise, the Uniform Mediation Act, drafted in
conjunction with the American Bar Association’s
Section on Dispute Resolution in 2001, provides
rules on the issu es of confidentiality and
privileges in mediation.
ADR has had an impact on administrative
agencies as well. Congress amended the
Administrative Procedure Act in 1990 to autho-
rize and encourage administrative agencies
to submit administrative disputes to ADR (5
U.S.C.A. § 572 [1996]). ADR often takes the
form of mediation in disputes involving labor
and employment relations and equal employ-
ment opportunity. Several federal agencies
provide guides about ADR proceedings to pro-
spective complainants and other constituents.
Courts frequently uphold decisions made
during ADR proceedings. In Major League
Baseball Players Association v. Garvey, 532 U.S.
504, 121 S. Ct. 1724, 149 L. Ed. 2d 740 (2001),

in Preston v. Ferrer, the Court held
that the question of whether a contract is
unenforceable under California’s Talent Agen-
cies Act is a question that must be decided by an
arbitrator rather than the court. Specifically
Justice Ginsburg wrote in the decision that when
the parties have a contract that includes an
arbitration clause, the Federal Arbitration Act
supersedes state laws that provide for a specific
forum to resolv e the dispute. In that case, the
Court held that the decision to determine
whether the contract was enforceable was for
the arbitrator rather than the state’s labor
commissioner.
GALE ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN LAW, 3RD E DITION
ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION 253
FURTHER READINGS
International Academy of Collaborative Professionals.
Home page:
(accessed on September 21, 2009).
Meek, Susan B. 1996. Alternative Dispute Resolution. Tucson,
Az.: Lawyers and Judges.
National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State
Laws. Home page: (accessed on
September 21, 2009).
Nolan-Haley, Jacqueline M. 2008. Alternative Dispute
Resolution in a Nutshell St. Paul, Minn.: West Group.
Ware, Stephen J. 2001. Alternative Dispute Resolution. St.
Paul, Minn.: West Group.
ALTERNATIVE RELIEF

AMBASSADORS AND CONSULS
An ambas sador is the foreign diplomatic repre-
sentative of a nation who is authorized to handle
political negotiations between his or her country
and the country where the ambassador has been
assigned. A consul is the commercial agent of a
nation, who is empowered only to engage in
business transactions, and not political matters in
the country where he or she is stationed.
The president with the
CONSENT of the Senate
appoints ambassadors and consuls whereas the
SECRETARY OF STATE appoints staff officers and
other subordinate employees.
Powers and Duties
The powers of an ambassador are specified in his
or her credentials, or documents of introduc-
tion, which the ambassador submits to the
foreign government. In addition to responsibility
for political negotiations, an American
ambassador may initiate
LEGAL PROCEEDINGS on
behalf of the United States and defend suits
instituted against it. A foreign ambassador in the
United States has similar duties regarding his or
her government.
In general, a consul is authorized to safeguard
the legal rights and property interests of the
citizens of his or her country and to appear in
court to ascertain that the laws of the nation where

became effective as part of the federal law in
1972, governs diplomatic
IMMUNITY by granting
various degrees of immunity from civil and
criminal
LIABILITY to the members of diplomatic
missions.
Diplomatic Agents The supervisor of a mis-
sion, such as an ambassador, and members of
the mission staff who possess diplomatic rank
are
DIPLOMATIC AGENTS. Such an agent is immune
from criminal liability in the nation in which he
or she serves, but the commission of a crime
may result in a recall request to the ambassa-
dor’s country. His or her expulsion may ensue
upon the refusal of any such request.
In addition, a diplomatic agent is immune
from civil lawsuits, except for actions involving
estates, when he or she is the executor,
administrator, or
BENEFICIARY; actions concern-
ing real property held by the diplomatic agent
for personal, not official functions; and actions
relating to professional or business activities
that are beyond the scope of diplomatic duties.
A diplomatic agent is not required to
TESTIFY as a
witness; and the family members living in the
agent’s household enjoy the same immunities.

United States and the members of their house-
holds are generally exempt from federal, state,
and
MUNICIPAL taxes. They are responsible,
however, for indirect taxes that are part of the
price of goods, taxes on property inherited from
a citizen, taxes on any real property they own
privately, or capital gains taxes on profits from
personal investments. Diplomatic agents have
no obligation to serve in the U.S. armed forces.
These exemptions also apply to the administra-
tive and technical staffs of the mission and their
families. The service staff and private servants
are exempt from taxes on wages received from
their employment with the mission or its
members.
FURTHER READINGS
Keeley, Robert V., ed. 2000. First Line of Defense:
Ambassadors, Embassies, and American Interests Abroad.
Washington, D.C.: American Academy of Diplomacy.
Lehman, Daniel J. 2002. “The Federal Republic of Germany
v. The United States of America: The Individual Right
to Consular Access.” Law & Inequality: A Journal of
Theory and Practice 20, vol. 2 (summer).
Pittman, Andrew B. 2001. “Ambassadorial Waiver of
Foreign State Sovereign Immunity to Domestic Adju-
dication in United States Courts.” Washington and Lee
Law Review 58 (spring).
CROSS REFERENCES
Diplomatic Agents; Diplomatic Immunity; International

acronym for America’sMissing:BroadcastEmer-
gency Respons e. Th e first AMB ER p lan called o n
broadcasters to provide information ov e r radio
and television as soon as possible. This information
included descriptions and pictures of th e missing
child, the suspected abductor, a suspec ted vehicle,
and a ny other information t hat could prove helpful
in locating the child.
The AMBER Alert concept spread quickly
around the United States. By 2002, 18 states had
enacted such plans and local communities in
other states set up their own AMBER Alert plans.
Proponents claimed that the al erts had proved
effective and urged Congress to enact a law that
would make AMBER Alerts a national program.
Congress responded by including an AMBER
Alert provision in the Prosecutorial Remedies
and Other Tools to end the Exploitation of
Children Today (PROTECT) Act of 2003 (Pub.
L. No. 108-21, 117 Stat. 650). Under the statute,
the
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, in cooperation with the
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION and the FEDERAL
COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
(FCC), appoints a
National AMBER Alert coordinator to oversee
the communication network. The coordinator
works with states, broadcasters, and law enforce-
ment agencies to set up and coordinate AMBER
plans. Grants are provided to help set up AMBER

that state to issue an alert. Even if there is no
formal agreement between states, many have
informal arrangements to issue AMBER Alerts
upon request.
The federal AMBER coordinator issues an
annual report that analyzes the number of alerts
issued, the various classifications of abductions,
and their
RESOLUTION. There are four classifica-
tions: family abduction; nonfamily abduction;
lost, injured, or otherwise missing; and endan-
gered runaway. A family abduction occurs when
an individual between birth and 17 years of age
is abducted from his or her custodial parent or
legal
GUARDIAN by a noncustodial family member
who is related to the child by blood or
MARRIAGE.
A nonfamily abduction occurs when a child, age
17 or younger, is abducted by someone who is
unknown to the child or his or her family, an
acquaintance, or someone who is unidentifiable
as either. The classification of lost, injured, or
otherwise missing refers to any missing child
where there are insufficient facts to determine
the cause of a child’s disappearance as well as
any child age 10 or younger who is missing on
his or her own accord. An endangered runaway
is any missing child between 11 and 17 years of
age, who is missing on his or her own accord

unfounded. Another study challenged the claim
that the alerts saved as many lives as claimed.
Successful recovery is most likely when the
victim is abducted by a parent, who rarely
harms the child.
FURTHER READINGS
AMBER Alert, Office of Justice Programs, DOJ, www.
amberalert.gov (accessed December 21, 2009).
Fass, Paula. 2006. Kidnapped: Child Abduction in America.
New York: Oxford Univ. Press.
CROSS REFERENCES
Child Molestation; Kidnapping.
AMBIGUITY
Uncertainty or doubtfulness of the meaning of
language.
When language is capable of being under-
stood in more than one way by a
REASONABLE
PERSON
, ambiguity exists. It is not the use of
peculiar words or of common words used in a
peculiar sense. Words are ambiguous when their
significance is unclear to persons with competent
knowledge and skill to understand them.
There are two categories of ambiguity:
LATENT and PATENT. Latent ambiguity exists when
the language used is clear and intelligible so that
it suggests one meaning but some extrinsic fact
or evidence creates a need for interpretation or
a choice among two or more possible meanings.

contemporaneous agreements to determine the
meaning of the ambiguous language. Parol
evidence may be used to explain the meaning
of a writing as long as its use does not vary the
terms of the writing. If there is no such
evidence, the court may hear evidence of the
subjective intention or
UNDERSTANDING of the
parties to clarify the ambiguity.
Sometimes, courts decide the meaning of
ambiguous language on the basis of who was
responsible or at fault for the ambiguity. When
only one party knew or should have known of the
ambiguity, the unsuspecting party’s subjective
knowledge of the meaning will control. If both
parties knew or should have known of the
uncertainty, the court will look to the subjective
understanding of both. The ambiguity no longer
exists if the parties agree upon its meaning. If the
parties disagree and the ambiguous provisions
are material, no contract is formed because of
lack of mutual assent.
Courts frequently interpret an ambiguous
contract term against the interests of the party
who pre pared the contract and created the
ambiguity. This is common in cases of adhesion
contracts and insurance contracts. A drafter of a
document should not benefit at the expense of an
innocent party because the drafter w as careless in
drafting the agreement.