Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Before You Take A Collaborative Law Case, John M. Lande
Before You Take A Collaborative Law Case, John M. Lande
Faculty Publications
Under the Model Rules of Professional Conduct, lawyers have a duty to screen potential Collaborative Law (CL) cases for appropriateness and obtain clients' informed consent to use CL. The duty to screen cases is based on the "reasonableness" requirement of Rule 1.2(c) and the requirement to avoid conflicts of interest that might interfere with competent and diligent representation under Rule 1.7. Both rules require lawyers to obtain clients' informed consent to participate in a CL process. Although the Uniform Collaborative Law Act is not an ethical rule, sections 14 and 15 create relevant duties, including detailed provisions requiring lawyers to …
The Uniform Collaborative Law Act's Contribution To Informed Client Decision Making In Choosing A Dispute Resolution Process, John M. Lande, Forrest Steven Mosten
The Uniform Collaborative Law Act's Contribution To Informed Client Decision Making In Choosing A Dispute Resolution Process, John M. Lande, Forrest Steven Mosten
Faculty Publications
This Article describes how lawyers can implement the requirements of the Uniform Collaborative Law Act to obtain clients’ informed consent. The Act requires lawyers to obtain clients’ informed consent before undertaking a Collaborative representation but does not specify the information that lawyers must discuss with prospective Collaborative parties. To flesh out the Act’s requirements, this Article describes how lawyers should analyze the facts and parties’ interests, screen the appropriateness of dispute resolution processes, analyze the reasonably available dispute resolution options, and discuss the Collaborative process with clients. It specifically addresses privacy issues including privilege, confidentiality, and full disclosure requirements. This …
Principles For Policymaking About Collaborative Law And Other Adr Processes, John M. Lande
Principles For Policymaking About Collaborative Law And Other Adr Processes, John M. Lande
Faculty Publications
This Article articulates a set of principles for policymaking about alternative dispute resolution (ADR) to promote values of process pluralism, choice in dispute resolution processes, and sound decision making. It argues that policymakers should use a dispute system design (DSD) framework in analyzing policy options. DSD involves systematically managing a series of disputes rather than handling individual disputes on an ad hoc basis. It generally includes assessing the needs of disputants and other stakeholders, planning to address those needs, providing necessary training and education for disputants and dispute resolution professionals, implementing the system, evaluating it, and making periodic modifications as …
The Promise And Perils Of Collaborative Law, John M. Lande
The Promise And Perils Of Collaborative Law, John M. Lande
Faculty Publications
Getting people to use an interest-based approach in negotiation has been a difficult problem. Experts provide helpful suggestions for changing the game, though these are usually limited to case-by-case efforts within a culture of adversarial negotiation. Collaborative law (CL) is an important innovation that establishes a general norm of interest-based negotiation and intentionally develops a new legal culture. This article describes CL's promise and potential perils, focusing particularly on the perils to complement the literature touting the promise.
Possibilities For Collaborative Law: Ethics And Practice Of Lawyer Disqualification And Process Control In A New Model Of Lawyering, John M. Lande
Possibilities For Collaborative Law: Ethics And Practice Of Lawyer Disqualification And Process Control In A New Model Of Lawyering, John M. Lande
Faculty Publications
This article assesses the possibilities for collaborative law (CL) to promote problem-solving negotiation and analyzes the operation and effect of the CL disqualification agreement (DA), which CL leaders hold as essential to the process. In CL, the lawyers and clients agree to negotiate from the outset of the case using a problem-solving approach. Under CL theory, the process creates a metaphorical "container" by using a DA disqualifying both lawyers from representing their clients if either party chooses to proceed in litigation. This article argues that much CL theory and practice is valuable, including protocols of early commitment to negotiation, interest-based …