October 17, 2011
Litigation Versus ADR
The current assignment is to compare and contrast traditional litigation and non-traditional ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution). Within in the comparison and contrast two questions will be answered. The first is, what are the risks that businesses and other organizations encounter when dealing with traditional litigation? The second is, when might ADR be a more appropriate measure in order for business managers to reduce those risks? Litigation by definition is an action brought in court to enforce a particular right. Litigation involves a plaintiff, a defendant, a judge, and possibly a jury depending on the severity of the lawsuit. Before litigation is started first the plaintiff has an allegation of wrong doing or injury against a defendant. If all means to settle the allegation have been exhausted and no resolution has been met then the allegation goes to trial. The first step of the trial process is the discovery phase. During this phase the courts send out a series of questionnaires to the defendant seeking information on the plaintiff's allegation. This phase could take weeks to years to accomplish. Once this phase is complete then the next phase is for both parties to enter into a settlement conference. It is during this phase that both parties are given the opportunity to settle the allegation or go on to the trial phase. If neither party is willing to settle then the lawsuit proceeds to the trial phase. During the trial phase a judge and possibly a jury hears relevant evidence from both parties on the allegation. Once all evidence has been presented then the court or jury decides on the final outcome. Once the final outcome has been decided the losing side has an opportunity appeal the decision of the court within a specified time. Non-traditional ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) has recently become more popular in solving disputes than...