Understanding Mediation as an Alternative to Litigation

The most common form of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is mediation. During a mediation, a neutral third party (often a retired judge or experienced attorney) works with the parties to try to reach a settlement of their dispute. The mediator does so by focusing on the disputed issues and exploring possible options for settlement. Mediation generally is considered “informal,” unlike litigation or arbitration. It is a non-binding, private process, in which the mediator acts as a neutral intermediary or “deal broker.”

Unlike arbitration or trial, the mediator has no power to require the parties to settle their dispute, insist on a particular result or issue a decision. The parties must come to any agreement themselves. If a settlement cannot be reached, the parties are free to try another form of ADR or go to trial.

Mediation offers a number of advantages. Most mediations take no more than a day or two to complete. Since the mediation process moves quickly and requires significantly less preparation than does litigation or arbitration, mediation generally is cost-effective.

A settlement reached at mediation is final and binding. Unlike a court judgment, the details of a mediated settlement can be kept private, allowing the parties to resolve their dispute while keeping the details of that resolution out of the public eye.

The advantages of mediation, however, do conceal certain weaknesses. Since mediation is non-binding, a mediation that ends with no agreement can feel like “wasted time.” And unless both parties are motivated to settle the dispute and demonstrate a willingness to work together to reach a compromise, mediation is unlikely to succeed.

If you have any question, please contact Grant Killoran at grant.killoran@wilaw.com or 414-276-5000.