Baseball arbitration belongs here – let the games begin, and the disputes end!

Michael Zeytoonian Case Evaluation, Collaborative Law, Collaborative Processes, Financial Considerations of Dispute Resolution, Mediation

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.

Who’s going to pay for my primary care lawyer?

Michael Zeytoonian Business, Collaborative Law, Dispute Resolution Resources, Financial Considerations of Dispute Resolution, Preventive Law

There are many advantages to having trusted legal counsel on board, someone who knows your business and family circumstances well, knows your priorities and goals, your disposition and who can give you good preventive and proactive advice, before you decide which legal path to travel.

Applying the goal of sustainability to dispute resolution

Michael Zeytoonian Social Enterprise and Sustainability

What does the issue of sustainability have to do with lawyers and dispute resolution? Good question. We typically think of sustainability as it relates to protecting our environment, going green. But one obvious intersection would be the conflicts that are inherent when you think about the different interests and stakeholders interacting on sustainability issues, which would be better resolved by non-adversarial approaches

Collaborative processes are sustainable, part IV – alternatives to motion practice

Michael Zeytoonian Business, Collaborative Processes, Dispute Resolution Resources, Social Enterprise and Sustainability

Part IV on the Series of articles on Sustainability of Collaborative Processes – Alternatives to Motion Practice. Motion Practice is not a sustainable practice. It is useful to streamline litigation but can be time consuming and costly. The same purposes can be accomplished with the practice of transparency inherent in Collaborative Processes.

Collaborative processes are sustainable, part III; looking at information exchange differently

Michael Zeytoonian Business, Collaborative Processes, Dispute Resolution Resources, Social Enterprise and Sustainability

A key difference between Collaborative Practice and litigation is the way information is viewed and used. Collaborative Practice is not adversarial or positional. The model in Collaborative Practice is not winner vs. loser – it is interest-based or pricipled negotiation.