Alternative Dispute Resolution – or ADR – is an option to people in a divorce or other domestic matter other than going to a trail. Hence the “alternative” in its name. ADR comes in three types. These are

1) mediation,

2) late case evaluation and

3) arbitration.

Mediation is addressed in more detail on another page on this site. Suffice it to say that this is an opportunity for parties – with the help of an unbiased person – to negotiate a settlement to their dispute; the guiding principle of mediation is that all discussions and all settlement offers are ‘off the record’ and not admissible as evidence if the dispute later goes to court.

Late-Case Evaluation is a formal way to get the insight of an uninvolved yet highly experienced attorney who practices in family law. The Late Case Evaluator hears a brief summary of what the evidence would show if the parties went to trial. Then the evaluator renders her thoughts and opinions as to how she thinks the case would be or should be resolved. Often, after the Late-Case Evaluation, the parties proceed to mediation and seek to settle the case.

Arbitration is much like going to court, but the “judge” is an Arbitrator (or a panel of Arbitrators); this person(s) has been hand picked by the parties and has been empowered to hear the evidence and to enter an ‘Award’ resolving the dispute. Arbitration is an adversarial process – pretty much like an actual trial – at which the parties, represented by counsel (or unrepresented if no attorney has been hired), present evidence to the Arbitrator in the form of documents and testimony. The Arbitrator then enters an ‘Arbitration Award’ in the matter. That Arbitration Award must be submitted to and ‘confirmed’ by the trial court in order for the Award to be the final judgment in the case.

People often ask: “If arbitration is pretty much like a trial – except that the parties must pay the arbitrator for her time – why would we even consider it?”

The most common reasons why people opt for arbitration over a trial are: (1) privacy of the arbitration hearing in that this is not conducted in “open court”; (2) flexibility in scheduling the hearing rather than being scheduled by the Court; (3) ability to get an award more quickly than waiting to have the dispute heard by the Court; and, (4) the ability to choose the arbitrator who will “judge” your case.

The drawbacks to arbitration, of course, are:

(1) the cost (Again, the parties must pay the arbitrator for her time.);

(2) arbitration is not mandatory and cannot be forced on the other side; both sides must agree to arbitration and the choice of the arbitrator. Otherwise, you have the judge assigned by the Court; and

(3) waiving of the right to trial by jury.