May 20, 2013
Lillian Hill Watson
Traditional and Nontraditional Litigation Paper
According to Cheeseman, (2010) the process of bringing, maintaining, and defending a lawsuit is called litigation. Nowadays, this process has been enhanced by annexing non-judicial dispute resolution in the form of arbitration, negotiation, mediation, and quite a few others. These forms are commonly known as alternative dispute resolutions (ADR) and have helped reduce the extensive backlog courts and tribunals are currently experiencing in today's legal environment (Steinecke, 1998). Although lengthy, expensive and disruptive; litigation is still the avenue of approach when a definitive and authoritative decision is needed as a precedent. All in all, traditional litigation and ADR are both effective means of solving disputes. When comparing and contrasting these two forms, it is valuable to understand their benefits and drawbacks. The factors involved will determine which one best fits the case in question as well as get the legal process underway (Air Force ADR Criteria, 2007). Traditional litigation is usually lengthier, more expensive and at times disruptive to business. It is public but preferable if the dispute is a matter of principle and no continuing relationship between the two parties will exist after the trial (Spafford, 1997). There is uncertainty added since the jury could deliberate in an unfavorable manner. Average time for a trial to take place is one to two years (Ziebell, 2011). The disruption to business could prove detrimental to every day operations. It could effectively bankrupt any company no matter the size or seriously hinder its work output. At the same time, if the company has been negligent, traditional litigation is the best quick approach to safeguard citizens from further harm. Rozdieczer and Alvarez de la Campa (2006) define ADR as any process or procedure other...