ASSIGNMENT #5 ADR Heather Libionati Stacy and Elizbeth's landlord /tenant disagreement have the potential to be settled by way of either, mediation, arbitration, or litigation. When deciding as to which one of the three options would be best to use can be done by, discussing the pros and cons of each and then applying those to Stacy and Elisabeth's situation. #1.) First Option-Meditation: When a dispute or disagreement between two people arises, many have sought the assistance through the ADR process called meditation, this involves a neutral third party called a Mediator, who meets with the disputing parties in an attempt to help them reach an agreement that ends their conflict. Mediation is less formal than litigation or arbitration. Mediators are typically a trained professional who provide a neutral place where both parties can meet and discuss their problem with the intention of reaching an agreement that resolves the dispute that both sides can be happy with. Pros: *Mediators provide a structured way to negotiate a settlement or give advice and guidance – but they do not impose solutions or forcibly resolve the conflict. * Mediation, the parties are responsible for reaching an agreement. Unlike arbitration, the party's role in mediation is not to try to persuade the mediator, but to try to reach an outcome to the disagreement that is acceptable to both. Cons: * mediation, unlike arbitration, is always nonbinding. This means that the disputing parties, even though they agree to attend mediation, do not have to agree to any proposed solution, nor do they have to agree to continue mediation if they do not want to if a resolution is not reached. * Costs: Institutions typically charge between $30 and several hundred dollars to file a small claims case. The parties also typically must split the cost of the mediator's time which can vary anywhere between $70 and $400 per hour depending on the complexity of the dispute and whom the parties choose to be the mediator. (In some cases, if court appointed can be free of cost) #2.) Second Option- Arbitration: Arbitration is the most formal type of alternative dispute resolution. In arbitration, the disputing sides bring their disagreement before a neural third-party arbitrator. State rules determine who can be an arbitrator, and typically require that an arbitrator have either legal or professional experience. The Arbitrators 'job operates much like that of a judge, in the way of overseeing a dispute and imposing decisions, as to the way a judge would impose a ruling or a judgment. In arbitration, each side is there to try to persuade or convince the arbitrator, who is responsible for evaluating each side’s position and making a ruling or decision. Pros: *. Arbitration can be binding or nonbinding. * In nonbinding arbitration, the arbitrator typically issues a ruling or recommendation that both sides are free to either adopt or reject. (offering Flexibility) * the arbitration process involves rules and procedures, which are usually less restrictive than the rules that govern the litigation process. Further, arbitration allows the sides to come to an agreement about what kinds of rules will be used during the process, and as to the degree of the process's formality. Cons: Since the courts will almost always uphold the decision of the arbitrator if one side does not agree to the arbitrator's decision, although they may appeal the decision, the courts will normally be in favor of arbitrations decision. Arbitration in many cases can be costly and may not end with the results the either party intended, or feel are fair. Due to the fact that an arbitrator is expected to have knowledge of the applicable law they are not bound use it in a strict form as well as the fact that it is within the scope off authority for the arbitrator to interpret the dispute and may base decisions through their interpretation When parties have agreed to go to arbitration, it can mean taking a chance on the outcome. Cost: Arbitrator fees normally range from about $1000 per day (per diem) to $2000 per day, usually depending upon the arbitrator's experience and the geographic area in which he or she practices #3.) Third Option- Litigation: Litigation means using the state or federal court system to resolve a dispute. Where one party has filed suit against another party. Depending on where the lawsuit is brought, a judge or a jury is the ultimate fact finder. The judge or jury determines which side prevails and what damages, if any, should be awarded. *Pros: The force of law behind all decisions Finality Access to a wide range of tools to gather information about the dispute Deadlines than increase chances of settling a lawsuit* * Cons: * Expensive Slow Unpredictable results Often destroys relationship between two sides Public results May cause reputational harm Lengthy appeals process Favors side with deeper pockets Legal resolution may lack any business rationale *Conclusion: Based on the pros and cons of the three options, the option of ADR mediation would seem to be the best solution, as it meets Stacy’s requests as to a low cost remedy for a third party who can help guide and make suggestions to the two friends where they can reach a resolution and hopefully remain good friends. Whereas the other two options of arbitration and litigation would be more formal and create undue stress on thier friendship, as well as being very costly and timeframes that may take much longer and outcomes jeopardizing their friend ship.
