Many lawyers claim that they settle most of their cases. How is Collaborative Law different from what they do when they settle in a conventional law practice?
There is a big difference between a settlement that is negotiated during the conventional litigation process and one that takes place in the context of an agreement that there will be no court proceedings or even the threat of court. Most conventional family law matters settle figuratively, if not literally, “on the courthouse steps” (fewer than five percent of litigated cases actually ever get adjudicated in a court of law). By that time, a great deal of money has been spent and emotional damage caused. The process is for the most part driven by mutual coercion and fear which is why so many settlements occur just prior to trial. The settlements are often reached under conditions of considerable tension and anxiety. In contrast, the Collaborative Law process is geared from the very beginning to make it possible for creative, respectful collective problem solving to occur. It is quicker, less costly, more individualized, less stressful, and almost invariably more satisfying. At its best
Related Questions
- My lawyer says she settles most of her cases. How is Collaborative Law different from what she does when she settles cases in a conventional law practice?
- My lawyer says he settles most of his cases anyways. How is collaborative law different from settling a traditional case?
- Are there special types of lawyers for different types of cases?
