ADR Times

If you have recently bought or sold a house, you may be worried about the possibility of a failure to disclose. One of the scariest parts about buying a house is paying for all repairs and issues on your own. Not knowing about the necessary repairs before buying the house can cause animosity and questions about who should pay for it. If a seller fails to disclose a defect they knew about, they can be responsible for footing the bill.

Many people will feel an overwhelming loss at the end of a relationship, responding not only to the loss of the relationship, but also to the loss of all of the time, energy, and memories that are a part of that relationship. When this happens in a relationship, it can be the place where sunk cost fallacy invades the relationship. If this is the case, the couple may end up staying together because of the time and the memories that they have together, even if it is not the healthiest option for them. Learning when a relationship may be in the phase and how to remove yourself from that relationship in a healthy way can be difficult, but it will often be the healthiest option. Investing in the future can help make the past fade away, but it is often easier said than done. This article will examine the fallacy and the impact that it has on relationships, as well as provide some tips to help remove yourself from that situation.

While many people have been exposed to hostage negotiators in movies and television shows, most people would not know immediately how hostage negotiators are trained. Hostage negotiators, also called crisis negotiators, are the first people called in hostage situations or other situations where there needs to be a trained person working with those involved to lessen the crisis and stabilize the situation.

When a union laborer feels that their employer violates their contract, they often face the process of filing a grievance. Unfortunately, this process can often feel overwhelming and discouraging in workplaces, so many instances go unreported. For this reason, this article attempts to explain the grievance process to better aid laborers in the steps to a resolution and ensure a successful grievance process.

When creating a contract, few people imagine that they will need to use the frustration of purpose to stop performing under the contract. However, no one can foresee how things will happen as the contract moves on, and events can render the contract useless to its purpose. Contracts are agreements between two or more parties to exchange goods or services.

When trying to bring a relative to the United States, they may face inadmissibility and need to consider a hardship waiver to rectify the issue. A hardship waiver allows a relative that would typically be inadmissible to enter the United States because of the extreme hardship that the relative will face if they remain abroad.

The first step in arbitration is generally served on the parties (and filing with the arbitration provider) a Notice of Arbitration. However, at times (depending on the provisions of the contractual arbitration clause, the applicable arbitration rules, or legal authority), another document, such as a Notice of Appointment of Arbitrator(s), may begin the arbitral proceedings.

When parties have difficulty discussing the issues with the other party in the room, the mediator may decide to move to caucus mediation. Caucuses can be a powerful tool in mediation, but some downsides need to be considered when considering a caucus. The mediator’s style will also impact when caucuses are used.

When parties have elected to participate in an arbitration, they may choose to take advantage of a guarantee for recovery based on high-low arbitration. The practice has grown in popularity in personal injury and medical malpractice arbitration but is still relatively new to the alternative dispute resolution world. Some critics...

What is the job of a judge, and how should he or she go about it? Is it only to interpret and apply the law, or is their role to “do justice”? The answers to these questions are important because the law affects many parts of our daily lives. Therefore, how it is applied is critical.

Requiring parties to participate in mediation before a lawsuit is becoming more common, but it has many parties questioning if mediation is mandatory and what the implication of making it mandatory is doing to the mediation process. Mediation was created as an alternative process to litigation to help the parties attempt to resolve their disputes in a voluntary and conciliatory way. However, as it has become mandatory, parties are often resistant to the idea and do not participate in ways that would help resolve the dispute before it becomes a full lawsuit and moves through litigation. Understanding what mediation is and when it can be mandatory will help illustrate how the process of making mediation mandatory in some instances may be affecting the process, both positively and negatively. This article will examine mandatory mediation and the unique challenges it presents to the alternative dispute resolution world.

When negotiating, the parties must find the zone of possible agreement or the ZOPA. Finding this zone will not only help the parties identify a way to agree with one another, but it will also help frame the negotiation to ensure that it can be completed. When the parties can identify the ZOPA, they can work within that zone to create an agreement that both parties can get behind. However, it is also possible that a ZOPA is not a possibility given the outcomes that the parties are identifying, and it is important to learn early on that this is not a possibility. Ensuring that the parties can find a ZOPA will help the negotiation wrap up while realizing that there is not a ZOPA will help the parties end a negotiation quickly. This article will focus on defining and identifying a ZOPA to aid negotiators in this essential activity.

You have been fighting with your former business partner for more than five years now. It has taken a great deal of time, money, and energy. You were shocked when the trial court ruled against you. It was a difficult decision to commit further resources to an appeal. Fortunately, the...

The words solve and resolve have similar meanings, and many people struggle to determine the difference between them. Within the alternative dispute resolution world, these terms can be used interchangeably when talking about how a dispute ends; however, it brings up an interesting concept when evaluating how the difference between the words can influence how we talk about disputes. The similarity does not make the qualification necessary, but it can influence the way that we view dispute resolution.

In the modern world, many people choose to communicate through text messages, which can be an easy way to keep in touch with friends in family. However, this form of communication may raise questions about whether it is legal to screenshot text messages and when these screenshots can be shared. There are differing laws between countries and states regarding the legality of keeping, sharing, and using communication from another person, which can cause many people to wonder if their actions could be illegal. Understanding when there is a protected right in the information contained in a text message and when and how screenshots can be used is important to exist in the digital age. This article will outline the importance of a right to privacy, examine some common scenarios that may cause issues for people with the screenshots, and discuss the legality of these scenarios as well as the morality. The goal of this article is to help readers understand how and when they can use screenshots and text messages, and when they may need to hold onto or delete the messages.

Deciding to divorce can be difficult, and there are often signs that one spouse may be changing their mind about the divorce. This can confuse the parties as they attempt to navigate separation, custody, and dividing their lives because it can cause the couple to question whether the divorce is actually the best thing for their relationship and lives. It can also be a welcomed idea, especially if the spouse that changed their mind was the one who initiated the divorce in the first place. However, it can be a difficult idea to navigate because it often involves assumptions about the behavior of one spouse, which can be read wrong. Knowing what the signs are of a spouse changing their mind and the reasons that a spouse may change their mind can be helpful to determine if a conversation regarding the change may be the right idea. It is important to understand a true shift in thinking or a second thought that will not change their mind.

Communication is the key to achieving a lot in the world, so when communication does not come as easy, it can be not easy to move forward in a career or effectively negotiate for something that you want. This is where the skills and work of a communication coach may come in. Communication coaches are becoming a common option for both individuals and groups looking to develop a way to effectively convey their wants, needs, and dreams to those around them. By practicing and building up skills that will help their clients feel confident in their abilities, communication coaches provide their clients with the confidence to accomplish their goals with communication and avoid confusion, misunderstandings, and microaggressions. They understand that communication and the ability to communicate come different to each person, but they are also skilled at finding ways to help each client succeed. This article will explore the role of the communication coach, the skills they teach, and how they teach them, and then explore some of the benefits provided by receiving coaching.

Within the alternative dispute resolution sphere, the word partiality, or more commonly impartiality, is used often, but for some new to the field, it can be difficult to define. It often feels like a type of action that would normally be easily identifiable, but in the world of alternative dispute resolution, the prohibition against partiality requires that the term be adequately defined and not based on the feelings of the parties. Yet there is little consensus on when partiality and bias become dangerous to the resolution process, and when a very small bit of partiality is not harmful. Some practitioners would argue that any partiality should be considered by the parties when deciding on a neutral, while others evaluate the decision based on how much effect it could have. Still, others argue that there should be absolutely no evidence of bias anywhere within the resolution process. These differing opinions on what partiality is and how much truly affects the outcome of a case demonstrate how difficult it is to define the term and how hard it can be to correctly identify when it interferes with the neutrality of the process. This article will create a working definition of partiality and discuss the intersection between neutrality and alternative dispute resolution.

When learning about conflict and dispute resolution, it can be difficult to understand the definition of “confrontational.” Everyone will have their ideas of what confrontation is and its uses, particularly dependent on their own conflict style and how it responds to confrontation. Some people will argue that a confrontation is a valuable tool in a conflict resolution specialist’s kit, but others will feel that all confrontation is harmful. Much of this has to do with their definition of confrontational. Defining the term can be difficult because one person’s confrontation will be another’s honesty, but thinking about the basic characteristics that are present in a confrontational interaction or personality, a working definition can be established. Understanding these key characteristics can help negotiators avoid confrontation when needed and use it when necessary. It also helps those who are conflict adverse realize when an interaction is confrontational and when it is only the perception of confrontation. Learning about confrontation allows the parties to be better negotiators and problem solvers, resolving more disputes overall.

The recent rise in consent decrees in the news, especially concerning the topic of policing, may have some people wonder what a consent decree is. Consent decrees may feel very similar to other forms of settlement agreements, and in some ways, they function similarly, but there are key aspects to a consent decree that may not be present in other settlement agreements. Consent decrees have risen in popularity lately as more police forces have decided to use them in use of force cases, but they have been around for some time in a variety of kinds of law, such as antitrust, civil rights violations, discrimination, business law, and many others. Understanding what consent decrees are and the goals that they seek to accomplish can help the parties in a lawsuit determine if it is the right method of resolution for them. This article will explain what consent decrees are, outline how they are achieved and how they work, compare them to other resolution types, and finally end with a discussion of common forms of consent decrees. By reading this article, one will be prepared to approach a settlement conference or other resolution service prepared to know if a consent decree will give them the best option.