|
|||
Dispute Resolution
![]() In 1850, Abraham Lincoln told attorneys: “Discourage
litigation. Persuade your neighbors to compromise whenever you can. Point
out to them how the nominal winner is the real loser - in fees, and expertise,
and waste of time. As a peacemaker the lawyer has a superior opportunity
of being a good man. There will still be business enough.”
Abe had it right 150 years ago. More and more business decision makers are discovering what lawyers have always known - that the use of "litigation" to resolve disputes is typically a bad idea. Litigation creates a divisive atmosphere, tends to increase the cost of doing business and diverts you and your employees from their usual responsibilities. The expense is significant. The delays are maddening. Results are uncertain. Remedies are often inappropriate. The decisions you will face when a dispute arises may be the most difficult but important decisions you will make for your business. Although the options at every decision point should be analyzed in a rational manner, it is almost impossible to remain completely rational. And it is difficult to quantify the frustration factor. Having said this, in addition to our constant dispute avoidance counseling with our clients, our goal is to assist you in making the best possible decisions at the outset and throughout the dispute resolution process. Our dispute resolution legal services and strategies include the following:
How important is dispute avoidance?
You might have heard the saying “the only argument you win is the one you don’t have.” This is true in life and a lesson hard-learned in today’s business environment. When a dispute begins to escalate, it is often difficult to back down, even when the cost of fighting the dispute outweighs the potential recoverable damages. And when faced with the strategic decision of whether to sue, seek alternative dispute resolution forums, or settle informally, our emotions and pride often start calling the shots. In addition, since most litigation attorneys pride themselves on their aggressive advocacy skills and stand to reap a tremendous financial benefit when a client heads down the litigation warpath, you are not likely to get unbiased advice on how to proceed. A couple more observations. First, the skills a litigation attorney develops and perfects to attain success in the litigation world can be a hindrance rather than a help if your goal is to resolve a dispute quickly, reasonably and efficiently. Put another way, many litigation lawyers are quite skillful “hired guns” at trial advocacy, but in diplomacy, they can be quite atrocious! Second, with the tremendous resources that you will expend in a formal dispute, you may want to join the growing number of business decision makers who are finally coming to realize that dispute prevention is paramount. Does that mean that you should hire an attorney prior to signing every contract or that you should never entertain a lawsuit? Not at all. We don’t believe it is necessary to consult with a doctor with every body ache either. But wouldn't it be wise to consult with an unbiased attorney when the downside exposure exceeds a certain financial threshold? And wouldn't wisdom dictate consultation prior to dedicating your resources to all out litigation war? We offer the litigation between the City of Anaheim and the Angels
baseball organization over the contractually required use of “Anaheim”
as an example of a biased system. The City retained a large law firm to
handle the dispute (which we hope was not the same firm that drafted the
contract in the first place). The City then assembled three distinguished
litigators from three separate law firms to independently evaluate the
facts of the contract dispute and recommend how the City should proceed.
Based on their billable rates (likely around $600 per hour) and the billable
hours it would generate for their firms, it came as no surprise that they
all recommended that the City proceed with the lawsuit. One of these individuals
was rewarded by being placed on the litigation team with the initial large
firm. When the verdict came in for the Angels organization (i.e., the
City lost), it was estimated that the City spent almost $3 million in
legal fees and costs and the Angels spent $7 million. That's $10 million
to lawyers and "expert" witnesses! And this is on
a basic contract dispute over ambiguous language in a single sentence.
How much will be spent on the appeal? Was there another way? Not if you
ask the people who stand to benefit from a long, expensive and drawn-out
battle.
“In today’s business world it is more important than ever to make well informed decisions, and when the inevitable dispute arises, these decisions become critical. On this front, retaining an ethical attorney with solid legal and business experience is paramount. Steve possesses each of these necessary attributes, and has been a valuable member of my legal team in both the pre-litigation and litigation phases of my case. He has consistently assisted me in developing case strategy and evaluating my many legal alternatives, while paying particular attention to disclosing my cost of action and the risk vs. reward of full litigation. Steve has proven to be an attorney I can truly trust.”
- M. Seymour, President
Taylor-Blake, Inc. |
|||
| Neither the content on this website nor transmissions between you and Hagemeister,Inc. through this website are intended to provide legal or other advice or to create a client relationship. |