Court-annexed Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) programs have become increasingly prevalent in the past fifty years, but there is a lack of comprehensive data on their efficacy and impact. Davis analyzes a student note by Jordan Hicks, which provides a detailed examination of court-annexed ADR programs in DE Superior Court. Hicks's analysis focuses on judicial efficiency, speed, failure rates, and prejudicial concerns, and offers a template for studying similar programs in other jurisdictions. He highlights the challenges of gathering data on court-annexed ADR programs across different states and the inconsistencies in statistical reporting. However, Hicks's approach of turning available data into meaningful information and his suggestions for improving the efficiency of court-annexed ADR programs are commendable. He emphasizes the importance of considering the public interest and the quality of the ADR process, and suggests that a comprehensive study of court-annexed ADR programs would require significant resources and ongoing iteration. He concludes by acknowledging Hicks's valuable contribution and his potential to inspire new approaches to studying and improving court-annexed ADR programs.