Published decision from trials and appeals can give you a glimpse into the huge volume of cases resolved by a trial. Some disputes simply will not be resulted without a decision by a jury or a man or woman in a black robe. Other cases will be resolved by settlement after a trial is commenced and discovery has helped the parties understand the strengths and weaknesses of their respective position.
Litigation can be a slow and expensive process (even without appeals).
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), such as mediation and arbitration can be substantially quicker and less expensive than traditional litigation. For some clients substitution of their dispute or grievance to ADR is the most logical choice. However, ADR is not the best venue for resolving all disputes and grievances.
Binding Arbitration: In binding arbitration a neutral person, or panel of people, consider the evidence and then issue a final decision inthe form of an award. Arbitration is a process that parties agree to engage in via a contract. Most parties use standard rules, such as those provided by the American Arbitration Association. However there is room for customized rules for issues such as discovery. Compared to litigation is state of federal court, arbitration tends to be substantially quicker and less expensive. One reason that the process is quicker and less expensive, is that the right to appeal is extremely limited. The Connecticut courts, and the federal court rarely set aside an arbitration award.
Mediation: In mediation a neutral person considers the positions of the adversaries and tries to help steer them toward a compromise. A mediator cannot compel any party to accept a settlement that they do not want to accept. However, a skilled mediator will help each party understand why a compromise may be that party’s best interest. For parties that are open to a possible settlement, but disinclined to make a first settlement offer, mediation can be a great tool for dispute resolution. The use of mediation does not preclude use of arbitration or traditional litigation if the mediation fails to result in a resolution.
In our experience some disputes are best resolved by traditional litigation in state or federal courts, while others are best resolved with binding arbitration. There are some grievances for which the parties know mediation will be of no benefit, there are others for which litigation strategy precludes mediation, but many cases do benefit from the assistance of a skilled mediator.
Most Connecticut lawyers with experience with arbitration and mediation will recommend ADR for certain types of disputes while strongly recommending against arbitration in some cases. Consult with an attorney who understands the risks and benefits of all your options before deciding whether ADR is appropriate for your dispute.