Bus Law Traditional and Non-Traditional Litigation

There are two forms of dispute resolution available for the resolution of legal disputes in the United States. Traditional litigation involves the use of the court system and can involve a judge or jury trial. Alternative dispute resolution uses not-traditional forms such as mediation, negation, conciliation, mini-trial, and fact finding. Both forms have advantages and disadvantages.

Traditional litigation is highly formalized and may involve a lengthy time frame as there are various motions and pleadings that can be made be either party. One of the advantages of traditional litigation is that during the discovery phase of the trial, witnesses can be subpoenaed even if they are unwilling. Also, the rules of discovery are very formal and allow all parties to prepare for the litigation. Another advantage is that judgments are not only enforceable but can also be appealed. One of the disadvantages of traditional litigation is that it is time consuming and costly. Traditional litigation can also be a matter of public record which can have an adverse impact if the judgment is negative for the business being sued.

Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is less formalized than traditional litigation. ADR usually involves a neutral third party who mediates, arbitrates, or fulfills some type of neutral role. One of the advantages of ADR is that it can tend to be less costly and shorten the settlement time of the dispute. Depending on the type of ADR, the details of the resolution can be confidential. One of the disadvantages of ADR is that it may be non-binding, meaning that any resolution is unenforceable depending on the type of alternative dispute resolution chosen. Another disadvantage is that the law and legal precedence may not be taken into account in reaching a resolution. While most mediators and arbitrators are knowledgeable in the area of dispute, they may not follow the law or case precedence in making a decision regarding a settlement as in...