Accordingto the rules of professional conduct, a lawyer should advise his/her client about the advantages, disadvantages, and availabilty of dispute resolution processes that might be appropriate in pursuing the client's objectives. While most lawyers are firmly entrenched in the adversarial culture, there are in fact many reasons why slugging it out in court may not be the best approach in your situation.

In traditional litigation, there may be winners and losers. However, the only sure winners are the attorneys, as their fees pile up rapidly with each legal volley. The most important fact to be aware of when litigating a claim (“filing suit”), is that you lose control over the situation and put your future in the hands of the court. The judge will make a decision based on legal precedent and what may be a quick read of the facts of the case. It’s rare that both parties to a lawsuit walk away satisfied. More likely, neither does.

At Gabeler, Battocchi, Griggs & Powell, we are pleased to offer our clients several options to litigation, all of which are cited repeatedly in the Virginia statute. These mechanisms vary in the way the process is structured and in the degree of openness and communication required by the participants. All will lead to a binding legal agreement.

While alternative dispute resolution is most frequently used in domestic disputes, it is in fact applicable in most types of claims. The attorneys at Gabeler, Battocchi, Griggs & Powell are experienced and certified in the various alternative modalities of dispute resolution. “This is the way the practice of law is supposed to be,” says Senior Partner, Lane Gabeler. “The way it used to be,” she adds.

The simplest dispute resolution mechanism is the “Direct” route. Here, the two parties in dispute seek the counsel of their own attorneys, but negotiate directly with each other, unmediated by a third party. This clearly keeps the parties in charge of the process and keeps costs to a minimum. However if there are strong emotions in play, as there often are, direct negotiation may not be a realistic option.

Mediation is a familiar process, similar to that used in labor disputes. Plaintiff and defendant, each advised by their own counsel, do not communicate directly with each other. Rather, a mediator carries messages back and forth, often literally walking from room to room. The mediator, a trained professional, seeks to work through the miscommunications and hard feelings that the parties bring to the proceedings and move them toward a reasonable conclusion. A lot depends on the ability of this person to discern the factors underlying the disagreement and persuade the parties to compromise.

Collaboration, while simple in its essence, is a newer and less familiar legal mechanism. In a collaborative process, the parties and their attorneys sit around a table and parse through the facts and feelings of the case. Attorneys certified in collaborative practice are trained to recognize the underlying values of the participants and to seek opportunities for a win-win outcome. These attorneys can call upon a network of other certified professionals, such as accountants or counselors, whose services may be helpful.

Collaboration is rapidly gaining popularity in the domestic field. In a recent case, a wronged wife came in to the offices of Gabeler, Battocchi, Griggs & Powell determined to win the house and everything else. While such feelings are typical and understandable, in fact, neither party was going to be able to afford the house on a single income. Our attorneys steered the pair toward a collaborative process, and the wife ended up in a townhouse in the same school district—which turned out to have been an important value for here.

Collaboration has tremendous applicability in probate cases. Rather than putting all the responsibility on an executor, the parties can sit around a table and efficiently divide the property. Similar benefits are to be found in contract cases, employment disputes, real estate cases, and medical malpractice.

Of all the alternatives, collaboration has the greatest upside potential for a mutually satisfying outcome; however it requires a total commitment to the process. All parties vow to disclose all pertinent information at the outset. If it comes to light that anyone has withheld information, the entire process fails and the parties must seek other counsel.

Call 703-790-5244 to make an appointment today.