Summit Solutions offers both ‘traditional’
arbitration, mediation and mini-trials, described below, and also
works with the parties to adapt these and other techniques to suit
the needs of the particular case.
Whether
Arbitration, Mediation (or some combination) or a mini-trial is
appropriate depends on the situation. Arbitration guarantees a result;
mediation does not. Mediation works well when the parties expect
their business or other relationship to continue after the dispute.
Arbitration is a more suitable alternative where the parties have
unsuccessfully failed to come to a mutually agreeable resolution.
Mediation will not necessarily be rule-based. Arbitration may be
guided by rules and legal principles. Mediation
is unlikely to be effective in the presence of great hostility between
the parties or the absence of incentive to compromise. In such circumstances,
arbitration may be the only hope of avoiding litigation or resolving
a suit without trial.
Where
parties wish to present their case more fully and to have it adjudicated
based on legal precedent on a full record, a mini-trial is appropriate.
It virtually eliminates the months or years trial delay in the regular
judicial process, avoids appeals, and gives each side the “day in
court” which it desires.
MEDIATION
The mediation process is typically an informal procedure in which
the parties meet with the neutral mediator, sometimes together and
sometimes separately.
Mediation permits the parties to discuss the issues in a safe environment,
to clear up misunderstandings, seek to identify areas of agreement,
and come to a joint solution. The mediator does not impose a solution.
In mediation, cheats speak for themselves and make their own decisions.
The mediator will explore
the strengths and weaknesses of each side's case and share opinions
with the parties. There are no rules of evidence, no testimony or
cross examination, and no expert witnesses. A free but guided exchange
is encouraged.
Mediation permits quick determination of the likelihood of settlement
success. Each side may in confidence reveal to the mediator the
range of an acceptable result (whether in dollars or other sought-for
relief). A skilled mediator can work with that information, and
the parties' nuanced communications, to come to a conclusion on
whether the case can be settled. The resulting informed recommendation
from the mediator is often key to the parties' reaching agreement
quickly.
No recording or transcript is made. Privacy is preserved. Where
the case involves personal injury, the plaintiff/claimant may be
spared the need to be present and relive the trauma.
If the parties have counsel or representatives, the mediator may
also assist in presenting the evaluation of the case to the parties
directly. Parties often give weight to the opinions of a neutral
party who has heard both sides.
Participants in mediation may sign a written agreement which is
enforceable as a contract. They may also choose to pursue the voluntary
solutions they have reached, preserving their right to go to court
later if unexpected problems develop.
Mediation can bring parties together through a voluntary ‘summit
meeting’ with a neutral facilitator who assist them in achieving
their goal of an amicable settlement.
ARBITRATION
Arbitration is a private court in which the parties agree to be
bound by the decision of a neutral person who hears the parties’
presentations. Arbitration requires the parties’ agreement.
One may submit a matter to arbitration either through a contractual
agreement to arbitrate signed before any dispute arose, or by an
agreement to arbitrate reached after a dispute arises.
Arbitration, which may be binding or non-binding, is more formal
than mediation. Each side literally has its 'day in court' and may
present testimony and cross-examine parties and, sometimes, witnesses.
Expert testimony is not required, with resulting substantial cost
saving. Depending on the parties' agreement to arbitrator, the arbitrator
may announce the result at the conclusion of the hearing or later,
and this may be with or without an explanation of the decision.
Under federal and state law, the results of binding arbitration
typically are enforceable by courts should a party fail to fulfill
its promise to comply with the arbitrator's ruling. Non-binding
arbitration often persuades parties to settle, since they have had
the opportunity to make their best case in a neutral forum.
Parties can define the issues they wish to be determined. Liability
and damages (or other relief) may be heard, as may apportionment
or other questions.
There are many possible variations which may be applied in arbitration.
Summit Solutions will help define an individualize approach which
the parties believe will best serve their needs.
An example of a traditional and often successful arbitration technique,
used if the parties want definite closure and maximum risk protection
is 'high/low' arbitration. This method simultaneously assures the
plaintiff/claimant at least a pre-determined amount and protects
the respondent/defendant from exposure above a pre-determined amount.
The high and low figures are never disclosed to the arbitrator.
If the award is between the high and low figures, the award stands.
If it is below the 'low' or above the 'high,' the pre-determined
protective figures govern.
Arbitration is private and without a record, so that the parties
are assured against public disclosure of the results.
Cases already in court can be removed from the trial calendar to
permit arbitration to take place.
MINI-TRIAL
Parties may be most comfortable with an expanded opportunity to
present their case through a 'mini-trial' in which all needed witnesses
either testify in person or submit affidavits or narrative statements.
Cross-examination is available. The presiding judge works with the
parties to ensure a complete but expedited presentation, with relaxed
evidentiary rules and other special time-saving techniques. Even
the most complex cases may take only one to three days to present.
A decision can be made either with or without an explanation.
A mini-trial may be used to 'test out' how a neutral would rule,
thus supporting the parties' separate negotiation efforts, or it
may be used as a form of binding arbitration, with the parties'
agreement to accept the results.

|