Thoughts on construction law from Christopher G. Hill, Virginia construction lawyer, LEED AP, mediator, and member of the Virginia Legal Elite in Construction Law
As Hurricane Ian is bearing down on Florida the economy is sputtering, it is easy to lose track of things that construction professionals (among others) can control. One of those things is how to resolve your construction dispute. When initial, and hopefully business-oriented, discussions break down and the construction lawyers get involved, often more formal means are required. One “formal” possibility that should always be considered and almost always attempted is the mediation of your dispute.
I know, I pound this particular gavel often. Why? Because not only are litigation and arbitration expensive and time-draining, you are putting your fate in the hands of a judge or arbitrator to decide. Let’s face it, most contractors (and solo construction lawyers for that matter) want as much control over their businesses and projects as possible. Mediation is the only third-party dispute resolution process that allows the parties to decide their own mutual fate. This is one of the primary reasons I almost always recommend that my clients try mediation before or after filing their lawsuit or arbitration demand. Continue reading Mediation is (Almost) Always Worth a Shot
Map of Virginia highlighting Goochland County (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
As I sit here thinking about an impending trial in the Goochland County General District Court, it hit me that I also serve as a mediator in that court from time to time. Coincidentally, I will be “wearing both hats” (litigator and mediator) this week on back to back days. It will be interesting to have to switch roles so quickly on back to back days.
While I don’t have the results of this thought experiment as I sit here typing this post, the timeline does bring into focus the two possible avenues to resolve a dispute. Neither is perfect and either works in the proper situation. Both lend a final “result” and closure to the dispute, they just each do so in a different manner and with a different role for me, the construction attorney/construction mediator.
As I left a mediation last week at 8:30 at night, I realized something that I knew all along. Mediation works.
Why does mediation work? For several reasons that I can think of.
The first, and likely most important is that lawyers are expensive. In most construction cases, we charge by the hour and those hours build up, especially close to a trial date. A mediated settlement can avoid this sharp uptick in attorney fees that always occurs in the last month before trial. Therefore the earlier the better.
The second is the flexibility to make a business decision. Commercial contractors and subcontractors are in a business, and they should be making business decisions. While one such decision can be to go to litigation; litigation is not always the best solution from a financial, or stress perspective. Construction professionals, with the assistance of construction attorneys, can come up with a creative way to deal with a problem and solve it.
While sometimes trial is inevitable (yes, even with a mediation), mediation allows for more options. At trial, someone wins and someone loses. A judge must pick sides and leave someone (and possibly both sides) unhappy. Then there are appeals, collections, and other expensive issues to deal with. Mediation allows compromise and allows the parties to agree to terms that the Court (or arbitration for that matter) could not give them. Add to this the opportunity costs of protracted litigation and the idea seems to be a no brainer.
The third is that a contractor can leave a mediation satisfied that they took part in the process and in controlling their own fate. Let’s face it, litigation is a foreign world for most construction professionals. Once that call is made to their lawyer, the process can seem to be out of their hands, and in many ways it is. A good mediator can change that. While the compromise may not result in complete satisfaction, trial can, and often does result in dissatisfaction. At least with mediation, one can feel as if he was in some control and not on a headlong charge to oblivion without a way to put on the breaks.
Don’t get me wrong, mediation must be approached with a spirit of compromise and sometimes starting litigation is the only way to get there. If the parties aren’t committed to the process, no settlement can occur. Mediation does not work all the time, particularly if the parties present hurdles to the process.
In short, while litigation has its place and I am a construction attorney with the experience to pursue a case from start to finish, I would much rather help the contractors and subcontractors I represent continue to make money and avoid the stress, expense and monetary cost of litigation through contract review and mediation where possible. This is for one simple reason, mediation works.
Please join the conversation with a comment below. Also, I encourage you to subscribe to keep up with the latest Construction Law Musings.
PS- for more thoughts on this, please check out this great post by Adam Baker.
A simple statistical mediation model. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
I often get calls from clients, potential construction clients, and other construction and business professionals with questions about arbitration or mediation clauses in the contracts that they are reviewing or drafting. When I get these calls, it often becomes clear that, understandably, there is some confusion as to what each of these alternate dispute resolution processes entails. I thought I’d put together a quick primer on what each is and their differences. Continue reading Mediation v. Arbitration, Both Private Dispute Resolution but Very Different Sorts
