In our last blog post, the first in this two-part post about the case for early mediation, we discussed traditional, post-discovery mediation and its role as essentially an alternative to trial. In this post, we look at the kind of mediation we are proponents of – early mediation (we call ours “3-D Mediation”) – used either as an alternative to …
Before We Talk About Mediation and the Value of Early Mediation, Let’s Start with Two Key Questions to Ask Yourself About Your Dispute: How quickly do you want to get your dispute resolved? Is most of the relevant information needed to resolve your dispute the kind that is (a) freely available or ascertainable and (b) are the parties willing and …
Resolving a Dispute is Like Traveling, Writing a Business Plan, or Choosing a Course of Medical Treatment: If you take the wrong road, you won’t get the result you want. My friend Liz Ferris, a marketing consultant who works with lawyers around the world, has often given us this simple but often overlooked advice: “If you want to achieve your …
Choosing the wrong dispute resolution process may very well prevent the parties from achieving their goals and satisfying their interests.
Are the parties willing to focus on resolution by intention and design and not go to court?
What is the most efficient process (the best fit) for your particular dispute situation?
Collaborative Law (“CL”) in civil disputes other than divorce cases have been brainstorming about the expanded use of CL in employment, business, probate, construction and other areas of law. In the spirit of transparency that is an important element of CL
We use different approaches like mediation, collaborative law, conciliation, case evaluation and our own Integrated Dispute Resolution (“IDR”) to help people solve their problem and we tailor that approach to the specific situation and circumstances of the people in that particular dispute.
Have you ever thought negatively about a person or a situation based on information you thought was accurate but which turned out to be wrong?
We believe the parties in the dispute should ultimately decide how it gets resolved. They should select the right process, with our guidance and recommendations, and should make the final decisions about what the resolution will look like. Dispute resolution needs to be efficient in time and cost, needs to preserve important relationships and not drain the resources and emotions of the parties. The process should and can be agile and creative enough to come up with solutions that really fit the needs and meet the interests of the parties.
I’m often asked how case evaluation is used to resolve a dispute. One important prerequisite is that the parties to the dispute – and their lawyers — have to want to resolve the matter quickly and approach it like a problem to solve, not a fight over who is right.