Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is a dispute resolution process that acts as a means of using an external party to settle disagreements between two parties Colbran, 2012.
ADR has now become widespread and accepted by many states and counties in the United States. In the recent past, some courts have demanded that some parties use ADR to settle their cases. If the mediation process of ADR does not reach an agreement then the parties' case can be tried in court. Due to the increasing caseload of traditional courts, ADR has gained popularity. This is because ADR involves fewer costs, provides confidentiality, and it also offers greater control for the parties to select the individuals deciding their dispute. ADR is classified into four categories namely mediation, negotiation, arbitration, and collaborative law. Divorce mediation is the preferred method for resolving any divorce case before the case can proceed to court for a full hearing in New York. Divorce disputes can be resolved outside the court in a cooperative and comprehensive manner using ADR. ADR also offers the divorce parties an opportunity to settle their dispute quickly, cheaply, and in a less stressful manner.
Supplementing the judicial process using ADR
Courts have realized that having full formal divorce litigation can have huge expenses for the parties involved. Resolution of the divorce case can also take longer. This is why many jurisdictions have turned to ADR in order to supplement the judicial process. ADR improves the quality of justice as it provides clarity of understanding for the parties, the parties also have access to evidence, and they are satisfied with the result of the process Ver Steegh, 2008.
ADR has allowed the courts to reduce the number of court cases, which eases the caseflow management. Supplementing the judicial process using ADR allows the courts to concentrate on cases that cannot be tried by any other means. ADR has also allowed courts to reduce the number of days it takes to hear and conclude a case. Reducing the time it takes to conclude a case enables courts to have more hearings and also to reduce their overall costs.
In divorce cases, this is vital as the parties are fully involved and they understand each other better. Resolving their own disputes also provides the parties with creative solutions, greater satisfaction, lasting outcomes, and improved relationships. This is all because the two parties have been provided with an opportunity to resolve their own dispute normally without interference from third parties. In case they are unable to resolve their dispute alone a third party would be appointed who would be neutral. The third party would be charged with assisting the two parties to reach an amicable resolution. Majority of divorce cases have no legal or financial arguments. The arguments are normally emotional and social, which makes it easy to resolve the disputes using ADR instead of a full court hearing. This is because even with a court judgment the parties might still feel unsatisfied. ADR allows the parties to be heard fully and supported to resolve their emotional and social issues.
ADR effects on caseflow management
Postjudgment motions are reduced thus reducing the number of court resources used in divorce cases. Divorce cases normally have postjudgment matters that demand for a trial judge. Therefore, it is vital that enough time be allocated for the hearing of any postjudgment matters of divorce. The amount of time that a judge needs for postjudgment matters is estimated to be 35% of the judge's time. This is a considerable amount of time and has an overall effect on caseflow management. This shows that by requiring that a majority of divorce cases be resolved through ADR, the trial judges will have ample time to deal with other cases and this would result in more cases been heard by the judge. Caseflow management would be much easier, and more cases would be heard to conclusion without having undue delays.
Implementing ADR for divorce case processing has an effect on caseflow management as it reduces the number of hearings and case preparation costs. This is because ADR narrows the cases that require adjudication in…
