Q: When would it be advisable for an attorney to consider ADR as opposed to litigation?
A: Each case is different. The goals of the client and the motivation and ability of the client to deal with compromise are important assessments which any lawyer must make before engaging in mediation. Timing is a major factor in making the decision to choose ADR instead of litigation. Generally, the attorneys after conferring with their client may consider this alternative as they strategize about process at the commencement of litigation to provide sufficient time to mediate/arbitrate before trial. Depending on the strategy and process employed, the scope of discovery prior to mediation can be limited as an additional cost savings. The goal of resolving a client’s claims should always include a discussion of what process most serves the needs of the client, and that discussion should occur at the commencement of the representation.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]