People have options of choosing between litigation, arbitration mediation, and a mini-trial. If people have the knowledge of the alternative dispute resolutions, they may resolve his or her case timely and inexpensive. Advantages of arbitration include no publicity, and it is usually quick, simpler, and cheaper than litigation (Newland & Associates, 2004). A disadvantage of arbitration is that either party cannot appeal. The plaintiff in the case will need to choose an arbitrator and pay the fees for the services.
Team C Week Three Reflection Sharon Douglas, Crystal Faison, Deone Francois, and Wanzie Fugler LAW/531 July 2, 2012 Haley Major Green Team C Week Three Reflection In civil cases, a settlement is the alternative to pursuing litigation. Litigation is the process for solving civil or commercial disputes through the courts. A settlement typically occurs when the defendant agrees to the claims of the plaintiff and decides not to fight the matter in court, which is also known as settling outside of court. Settlements are more popular because defendants do not want to pay the cost of litigation; therefore a settlement ends litigation. It occurs during the early stages of the trial.
International Arbitration is a less expensive, neutral way to settle a dispute. Both parties present their case and the arbitrator works toward a resolution. Another forum is the U.S courts and local government courts of that country. Many businesses may push for the “home court advantage” of the forum and this may pose a problem. It is best to agree on International Arbitration on neutral ground to solve conflict.
Concepts and Terms Quiz BSHS/441 C.W 10-15-2012 1. Describe 2 of the various types of conflict resolution. Advocates and Mediators are the two main types of conflict resolution used in many professions today. To prevent situations from spiraling out of control, mediators are used to keep an equal balance between two conflicting parties. Advocates can often do the same, but are more for one side then both.
The court held that in the instant case the court had either found that these conditions were met or they were undisputed. Therefore, the communication was privileged and protected from disclosure. I believe the criteria set forth in RFF Family Partnership, LP v. Burns & Levinson is a very practical and rational one. It allows the lawyer to protect and serve his fiduciary duty to his client, and at the same time if a conflict should come up, it allows the lawyer to seek advice of a lawyer without the fear intimidation by way of disclosure. Such privileged communications lead to resolutions in resolving existing conflicts, and avoiding potential conflicts.
It is not considered jury tampering because the prosecution and defense attorneys have the right to know the credibility of the person that would be deciding the fate of the defendant. Why or why not? The only way that I would see it being jury tampering is if after the jurors are chosen, someone starts threatening or trying to coerce the witness to not testify at the trial. Lawyers can also exercise a challenge for cause claiming the juror could not be
The defense attorney has the role to prove the defendant as being not guilty. The defense attorney role is to protect the defendant’s rights, show that the prosecutor did not provide sufficient evidence to find the defendant guilty, show if necessary where evidence provided by the prosecutor did not violate the defendant’s rights, and advocate for his or her clients best interest. The prosecutor and the defense attorney’s ethical obligation differ in many ways. According to Kittmer (1995-2015), the differences of the attorneys’ ethical obligations are as follow: “Client's Welfare * Defense attorneys are ethically bound to their clients. They must defend them to the best of their ability and look out for what is best for them… Prosecuting attorneys' clients are usually the people of a specific city or country.
If a situation should occur then the company could be covered by t the Conflict of laws which has three branches , Jurisdiction whether the forum court has the power to resolve the dispute at hand, Choice of law the law which is being applied to resolve the dispute, and Foreign judgments the ability to recognize and enforce a judgment from an external forum within the jurisdiction of the adjudicating forum. When a company enters into a contract with another company overseas the contract should be clear of which area their conflicts will be solved. Most often it is more cost effective to leave these conflicts to arbitration, more so if the company is not a part of any international trade groups. Foreign judgments can also be a great tool if they are on a neutral ground. Either foreign judgments or arbitration must have a binding clause in the contract to
Many companies are creating ADR teams with the sole duty is to settle differences. One of the main goal of ADR is to keep the parties involved ending up in litigation. ADR saves valuable time and saves the company from the expenses of long court battles. Government agencies, and organizations, such as the United States Air Force are looking to institute a formal ADR process or even create an ADR division to handle conflict resolution and contract disputes (Tolan, 1996). Accord might want to implement changes at a slower pace.
The traditional negotiation theory distinguishes between two negotiation styles. Positional bargaining which can be pursued in a hard or a soft manner has been complemented by the approach of principle based negotiation. In their publication "Getting to yes" Roger Fisher and William Ury proclaim being hard on the problem but soft on people to be "a method of negotiation explicitly designed to produce wise outcomes efficiently and amicably" The journal at hand deals with the question if principle based negotiation is an appropriate strategy to reach an agreement that yields promising returns for the single negotiator. My assumption is, that the approach may be too soft to maximize the negotiators outcome. Fisher and Ury recognize that "behind opposed positions lie shared and compatible interests, as well as conflicting ones".