I have been a family law litigator for over 31 years. The entire time I have been practicing law, I’ve been a certified mediator since 1999 and a collaboratively trained attorney since 2010. One of the most frustrating aspects of litigation is the lack of communication and wasted time in trying to accomplish any of the court’s directives which are necessary in any divorce. By way of example I recently had a collaborative case and at our third meeting we had progressed to resolving parenting, and the sale of a home. We needed to discuss the retirement accounts. At that meeting we only discussed the retirement accounts and came to a conclusion that the pensions were to be evaluated. We prepared all of the paperwork that was necessary to order an evaluation from a pension appraisal company we all chose. We filled out the necessary forms, including the authorizations that were properly completed and signed by both the husband and the wife. The information was accurate. The signatures were notarized and a credit card payment was made.
Shortly after the meeting I sent all of the documentation by Federal Express to the pension company with a cover letter explaining what plans the husband and wife had, what was being evaluated, instructions to include our clients and attorneys in all of our correspondence, and to set up an account.
If this had been done in litigation, the court would have ordered the appraisals on one date, all the documentation would have to have been completed by each attorney separately, sent to the pension appraiser, payment would have to have been made, and hopefully everything would be done in an efficient manner, and the paperwork would have begun promptly. Many times, cases need to be adjourned because the paperwork was not submitted correctly, someone did not make payment, a certain authorization was needed or a document wasn’t signed properly.
In collaborative law so much of what is time consuming and expensive in litigation can be completed and streamlined in an easy and effective way. Being able to have everyone at a table at the same time also cuts down on so much difficulty, red tape costs to the clients, and lack of response between the parties.
I compare it to the game telephone that we used to play when we were children.
Someone whispers a phrase or sentence and it is repeated and after everyone has a turn the phrase is repeated out loud. It is almost never what was first said. I believe something similar happens in litigation because everything has to be communicated to an opposing attorney. The opposing attorney has an ethical obligation to advise their client (and hopefully they do) of what was requested, what settlement offer was made, or whatever problem there is, and then after input from their client, they communicate back to the attorney for the other spouse. Then that attorney must speak to their client about what was said and then give a response back. All of this back and forth can distort the original message and also causes delay, time, and counsel fees. Collaborative Law does away with this.
In New York we have no fault divorce. The divorce is going to happen no matter whether or not a person wants it. Trying to streamline the procedure and process to have the information that is needed quickly and promptly is invaluable. It is less frustrating for the attorneys, as well as the parties. This is a very difficult time for a family. The best way to handle it is with the least amount of confusion, with information freely exchanged, and the least amount of delay as possible. Collaborative law does that. That’s why I am such an advocate for this process.
