Our Civil and Community-Impact Litigation has been HOA and misconduct, Interference, Builder defects, Agency negligence, Civil rights-adjacent claims, Disability and service-animal, and a number of other civil matters.
Our firm is a strong proponent of alternative dispute resolution (“ADR”) and, where appropriate, strategically employs pre-litigation methods and forums to explore early resolution provided that time is not of the essence and the parties are willing to engage in good-faith dialogue, be heard, and meaningfully evaluate settlement.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, recent authority has clarified the Court’s powers with respect to ADR. The Court of Appeal has confirmed that trial courts possess the authority to order parties to engage in ADR and to stay proceedings for that purpose, reaffirming ADR’s role as an important and integral component of the dispute-resolution process.
Should ADR not result in resolution, the matter generally remains set to proceed through litigation, including jury trial, or to be calendared accordingly. At the parties’ election, ADR remains an open and available forum at any stage of the proceedings. The parties may select the forum and method whether mediation, structured negotiations, or multiple ADR sessions while the matter is pending toward trial, in an effort to reach a mutually agreeable resolution.
In the event ADR, e.g., the attended mediation session doesn’t result with a mutual agreement of the parties, it doesn’t equal to ADR is or a chosen method proves unsuccessful, rather the parties will simply continue along the established litigation path. From here on the parties continue to navigating the attendant legal landscape, challenges, and complexities, while engaging in independent negotiations in parallel with litigation without prejudice to any party’s rights, claims, or defenses.