Transparency in Mediation

An important factor in alternative dispute resolution is the manner in which each party handles the exchange of relevant information. The litigation process is known for concealing relevant information from opposing parties; however, new legal transparencies and software make it difficult to “hide” information.

Mediation is a very straight-forward and transparent process at its core, which means sharing information among parties helps facilitate the resolution.

Each party, attorney, mediator and neutral brings something important to the mediation process, and understands the value of a smooth dispute resolution.  Sharing relevant information is helpful and will not hinder the ADR process, because it acts to bring each party closer the fundamental details of the case.



MDRS ADR and Mediation Video

Please enjoy a short video, also featured on YouTube here, in which I talk about the advantages of mediation and alternative dispute resolution.

– Brian Jerome

Court Battle or Alternative Dispute Resolution?

In almost all areas of dispute, mediation and arbitration are excellent means to resolve it. There is one instance when ADR isn’t necessarily the best direction to take:  when the dispute involves creation of new law. Save this rare exception, ADR has four distinct advantages over litigation and should be seriously considered prior to any court battle.

One of the most beneficial aspects of mediation is the savings on court and legal costs.  Many people who engage in litigation feel that the payment of legal costs are just a deferment until they win, but in many cases, both parties are on the hook for costs.  With ADR, like mediation and arbitration, the costs are less than litigation, and there is little risk of incurring unexpected costs.

Another reason ADR should be considered before litigation? It’s a win-win situation.  The traditional plaintiff-versus-defendant format is replaced by parties who are trying to work toward a single agreement.  Another two reasons Massachusetts ADR is a good choice:  sessions are more convenient than strictly designated court schedules; and emotional disputes are handled in a compassionate, skilled manor, in which the mediator, arbitrator, or panel member recognizes the issues pertaining to all parties.

The full article can be seen here.