For those new to the legal process, it can be hard to articulate or understand what their preferred road for resolving a case may be. Thanks to a new study by a UC Davis law professor, litigant's preferences are becoming clearer to attorneys. The study reveals, somewhat unsurprisingly, litigants prefer swift and conclusive methods for dispute resolution to other options that may take longer, or leave the conclusiveness of the proceedings up in the air.
If you anticipate being involved in a legal dispute, you should contact a legal team that understands the best ways to resolve that dispute as quickly as possible.
The UC Davis study collected data from over 400 litigants in 19 different states, including Oregon, with cases involving employment, civil rights, medical malpractice, personal injury, and property disputes. The data shows that people involved in civil lawsuits prefer mediation, a form of alternative dispute resolution that ends with an agreement between the parties, to nonbinding arbitration, which produces a decision by the arbitrator that is only advisory and not enforceable.
Similarly, the study indicates litigants prefer trials where a judge determines the verdict, rather than those with a jury determining the verdict.
This information illustrates a clear desire by those involved in civil lawsuits to resolve their disputes as quickly as possible. While the study's findings are meant to help design future court-related alternative dispute resolution systems, they are also helpful to attorneys who take on clients that are unfamiliar with the legal process.
Most cases are well suited for arbitration or mediation. You should choose a team of attorneys that can guide you toward alternative dispute resolution methods you might not otherwise know you would prefer.