“[N]o one wants to litigate.”
We understand that at the Dayton business law firm of Gottschlich & Portune. In fact, the above quote is from our website, which dutifully notes our experience as legal advocates for our diverse clients in both arbitration and court. Our attorneys believe that arbitration can be an optimal first-choice forum selection to resolve contractual disputes in many instances, but it is often the proven willingness to litigate a matter aggressively before a judge that makes it so.
Of course, there are distinct advantages to arbitration over litigation that are commonly cited by enthusiastic advocates of so-called “alternative dispute resolution” processes (mediation is often lumped in with arbitration in that category).
Those come with a caveat, though, namely this: One of more of those advantages might simply turn out to be perceived and not actual in a given case.
For example, arbitration is often lauded for being a faster and cheaper process than litigation. That is often true, but not always, especially when unforeseen glitches emerge and time wears on.
And then there is this: The right to appeal — and especially to a court — is not guaranteed with all arbitrations. And even when it is, notes a recent law journal piece, courts often “give tremendous deference to arbitrators and the awards they issue.” That can make for a notably adverse result for a losing party in arbitration who wants to appeal a decision.
The central point to perhaps make about arbitration is that, like litigation, it might be the best legal route to take in a given case. Whether that is true will depend on a number of case-specific factors and issues, which can be candidly discussed with proven legal counsel in a timely manner.