back . . .


Comparison of Litigation and Collaborative Law

Litigation Process
Descriptors  
Collaborative Process
Descriptors
Parties in disputes often feel intimidated, fearful, anxious, powerless, out gunned, and not in control.  Litigation does nothing to calm this uneasiness and, in fact, a common successful litigation tactic is to make the other side so uncomfortable they are coerced into settling. Collaborative process affirmatively seeks to make both parties feel safe, respected, in control of their lives and as comfortable as possible while working towards resolution - coercion is not part of the process. The goal of the process is to allow the safe expression and resolution of conflict.
Process often focused on determining blame or fault for problems. Process focused on reaching solutions to problems.

Unpredictable Results.

Predictable results.

May get results that you do not want or agree with.

There will be no result without your express agreement.
Unsafe atmosphere - subject to cross examination, subpoenas and depositions Safe atmosphere - civil, dignified, respectful.
Public Private and confidential.
Inconvenient scheduling - court and other side may determine the parties’ schedules Schedules for meetings are by agreement.
Filtered process - information often exchanged subject to discovery rules and lawyer/party discretion. Often negotiate indirectly through lawyers. Transparent process - same information available all parties/attorneys at same time. Parties develop options and negotiate for resolution in “four way” meetings.
Much time, money and energy spent getting ready for a trial that most likely will never occur.   90% of cases settle but 90% of legal fees are not spent on settlement efforts. 100% of all time, money and creative energy is spent on settlement efforts - fewer wasted financial, emotional and mental resources.
Legal expenses are not all within your control. Other side can force you to spend  money on depositions, discovery and hearings that you do not want. All legal expenses are discussed and agreed upon.  Legal resources and expenses are more efficiently used.    
Cannot just “try” litigation. Can try collaboration - if it does not work, you can always litigate.

back . . .