Conn. 'Collaborative' Seeks Shift in Dispute Resolution

A satisfying expression for litigants may be "see you in court," but seasoned attorneys and judges will acknowledge some matters are better resolved before they end up on the docket.

This premium content is reserved for Connecticut subscribers.

Continue reading by getting started with a subscription.

Already a subscriber? Log in now

What's being said

  • Hector Morera

    I disagree with the implication that working in a small bar is always a good thing. Yes, it may breed collegiality but it also breeds fear of antagonizing the wrong person and fear of exposing repeated misconduct by one or more individuals. In 2010, I spent about $3000 trying to get an attorney to take my case. One Family Court attorney I interviewed spent 1/2 hour complaining to me about her colleagues and "how she was never invited to go on this influential gal‘s infamous shoe shopping spree". You do the math. I just paid $150 for this attorney to get therapy by venting to me. Can‘t tell you how many times an attorney told me they don‘t want to antagonize a certain influential other attorney. I‘m all for collaborative dispute resolution, but sadly it has been my experience that it can mask many of the dysfunctional issues of the system and further enable them to continue. Sometimes transparency is a good thing. Thank you

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202784213161

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.

Recommended for You