In my experience, some
domestic relations attorneys put on a
litigious and combative front when
dealing with opposing parties and
opposing counsel, instead of
approaching their client’s case from
an efficacious and cost-effective
framework. Often times, the initial
combativeness of many family law
attorneys comes across as
showboating or grandstanding.
In reality, all the attorney could
ever hope to accomplish by such
behavior is to illustrate to the client
that the attorney is an aggressive
advocate willing to go so far as to
alienate fellow colleagues just to
make the client feel better about their
case. Ironically, such actions simply
mirror the underlying dispute
between the two parties involved in
the first place and are a dead end to
reaching an out of court agreement.
Unfortunately, subscribing to
this type of lawyering is neither
fiscally responsible nor healthy to the
attorney-attorney or the attorneyclient
relationship. As opposed to a
pugilistic litigation strategy, perhaps
all involved would be better served
by undertaking an amicable
alternative dispute resolution
approach from the outset.
One of the available ADR
methods to accomplish an expedient
and thorough negotiation is the use
of collaborative law. Collaborative
law is a dispute resolution process
that does not involve the courts. It is
based on facilitative principles,
similar to those underlying
mediation, but is distinct from
mediation in that the parties are
represented by their own attorneys
who facilitate the discussion in
accordance with an agreement.
Appropriately, collaborative law
has gained popularity particularly in
the divorce context, where the
process is known as collaborative
divorce. I have implemented this
technique in myriad domestic
disputes.
The use of collaborative law
usually occurs one of two ways. The
first way occurs after a
comprehensive review of all
documents, when I place an
introductory call to opposing counsel,
exchange pleasantries, and then
invite him/her along with his/her
client to my office for a four-way
negotiation session. This is a great
way to set your tone for the case as
amicable, approachable, and
ameliorative.
The second way occurs at the
courthouse during a scheduled
hearing date in one of the
9
conference rooms connected to your
assigned courtroom (this is why I
prefer not to continue court dates, as
the time is better spent moving
toward settlement). Either one of
these types of collaborative law
tends to create good will between
the attorneys, which in turn leads to
better results for the clients and
more efficient negotiation among all
involved.
At first, the suggestion of
approaching domestic relations
disputes from an ADR collaborative
law perspective may seem
antithetical to divorce proceedings;
however, the results often achieved
at the conclusion of the case are
preferable and more economical
than the outcome of a trial.
Furthermore, a party-driven
agreement is usually preferable to an
independent third party decision
maker’s decree.
In the end, mastering the art of
ADR will not only benefit the parties
involved, but also increase the
attorney’s mental and physical well
being by introducing a sense of
togetherness otherwise not present
in the dispute.
domestic relations attorneys put on a
litigious and combative front when
dealing with opposing parties and
opposing counsel, instead of
approaching their client’s case from
an efficacious and cost-effective
framework. Often times, the initial
combativeness of many family law
attorneys comes across as
showboating or grandstanding.
In reality, all the attorney could
ever hope to accomplish by such
behavior is to illustrate to the client
that the attorney is an aggressive
advocate willing to go so far as to
alienate fellow colleagues just to
make the client feel better about their
case. Ironically, such actions simply
mirror the underlying dispute
between the two parties involved in
the first place and are a dead end to
reaching an out of court agreement.
Unfortunately, subscribing to
this type of lawyering is neither
fiscally responsible nor healthy to the
attorney-attorney or the attorneyclient
relationship. As opposed to a
pugilistic litigation strategy, perhaps
all involved would be better served
by undertaking an amicable
alternative dispute resolution
approach from the outset.
One of the available ADR
methods to accomplish an expedient
and thorough negotiation is the use
of collaborative law. Collaborative
law is a dispute resolution process
that does not involve the courts. It is
based on facilitative principles,
similar to those underlying
mediation, but is distinct from
mediation in that the parties are
represented by their own attorneys
who facilitate the discussion in
accordance with an agreement.
Appropriately, collaborative law
has gained popularity particularly in
the divorce context, where the
process is known as collaborative
divorce. I have implemented this
technique in myriad domestic
disputes.
The use of collaborative law
usually occurs one of two ways. The
first way occurs after a
comprehensive review of all
documents, when I place an
introductory call to opposing counsel,
exchange pleasantries, and then
invite him/her along with his/her
client to my office for a four-way
negotiation session. This is a great
way to set your tone for the case as
amicable, approachable, and
ameliorative.
The second way occurs at the
courthouse during a scheduled
hearing date in one of the
9
conference rooms connected to your
assigned courtroom (this is why I
prefer not to continue court dates, as
the time is better spent moving
toward settlement). Either one of
these types of collaborative law
tends to create good will between
the attorneys, which in turn leads to
better results for the clients and
more efficient negotiation among all
involved.
At first, the suggestion of
approaching domestic relations
disputes from an ADR collaborative
law perspective may seem
antithetical to divorce proceedings;
however, the results often achieved
at the conclusion of the case are
preferable and more economical
than the outcome of a trial.
Furthermore, a party-driven
agreement is usually preferable to an
independent third party decision
maker’s decree.
In the end, mastering the art of
ADR will not only benefit the parties
involved, but also increase the
attorney’s mental and physical well
being by introducing a sense of
togetherness otherwise not present
in the dispute.
