Litigation, Collaborative Practice, and Mediation Defined and Compared

Litigation:

This is the classic courtroom drama.  Each party has his or her own attorney and, with much fanfare, every bit of evidence is poured over, every witness is called to the stand, and every effort is made to gain every advantage possible.  Certainly, some of these matters are more contentious than others, and most family law disputes and conflicts settle short of going to trial, but that does not mean that a series of hearings have not occurred, and much money has been spent.

Maloof Law Group, APC acknowledges this manner of resolving disputes, and though neither we nor our clients can entirely control a given situation, we strive to make the best out of the classic adversarial system.  This means we utilize discretion, charge reasonable fees, pick battles, and seek to find reasonable compromise (consented to by our clients in advance) so as to ensure an outcome that is as favorable as possible at the lowest cost of time and money as possible.

This is not an easy task, but Maloof Law Group, APC has proven in many instances that it can be done, and done successfully.  We can and will fight for your rights and safety, but we can and will also do so in a way that keeps the “big picture” clearly in view.

Collaborative Practice:

Collaborative practice is different than family law litigation, the main distinction being that, unlike mediation, each party has their own attorney, but neither attorney is permitted to go to court.  Rather, a series of experts are hired to consult with the family and, together with their input and the input of the attorneys, the family makes decisions rooted in compromise but based upon complete and thorough information.   Collaborative practice is less expensive than contentious litigation, but is also more productive, and more solutions-oriented.  It is an ideal dispute resolution mechanism for any family law petitioner or respondent who wants a thorough opportunity to be heard, but would rather engage in open and candid discussion versus engage in the uncertain battle of litigation.

Mediation:

Mediation has both family law parties sit at a common table with a common facilitator who provides each with valuable information, controls the cadence of the conversation, and ensures that each party gets an opportunity to be heard.  As a result, the mediator brings about agreements that were otherwise unreachable, and then distills those agreements into the documents necessary to convert them into orders of the court.  The mediator him or herself has no authority to make decisions, as a court does, but simply acts as a means to educate the parties and search for workable solutions to problems previously thought unsolvable.  Some cases should not proceed by mediation (domestic violence cases, for instance), but some cases that should be mediations spend altogether too much in the litigation arena and wind up costing themselves not only additional money, but also time.