In my experience as a collaborative lawyer, it has been much easier to work
out collaborative solutions with other collaborative counsel who have also had
significant prior experience litigating family law cases. When a
collaborative attorney has a litigation background, they approach the goal of
collaborative resolution in a reasoned and pragmatic way, impacted by the
harsh
reality of what can happen if the parties end up in court. It is somewhat
akin to
the best/worst alternative to a negotiated agreement. To be adequately able
to share the WATNA with collaborative clients, you must have spent some time
in the litigation trenches.
In the situations where I have had collaborative cases with attorneys with
very little family law litigation experience, their approach has been very
theoretical, without necessarily being practical--reminding me of one of my
favorite quotes:
The difference between theory and practice is that in theory there is no
difference, but in practice there is....
Nikki Clark
In a message dated 5/31/2006 5:55:01 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
sbrunst1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
John,
In Rochester, New York, when we began we borrowed the wisdom of previous
groups (we latched onto the Cincinnati group's rules as a place to start)
and adopted a five year rule. We, too, attracted new members with "clout".
After three years and requests from committed practitioners with less than
our required number of years in the trenches to work collaboratively, our
organization dropped the requirement to two years so long as the less
experienced attorney had a more experienced mentor from the group.
I strongly believe that we didn't go far enough. This conflict resolution
process should be taught in law schools, in college and in high school
(right beside Moot Court, thank you). The "newbie" could be assigned a more
experienced collaborative lawyer mentor and they could learn together - one
to understand the nuances of procedural protocol and the legal standards in
the community and the other to see the dispute with perhaps fresher eyes and
practiced conflict resolution skills.
I've had the privilege to meet a law school graduate at the IACP Forum in
Atlanta and again at CP-Cal in Sonoma who is trying to be accepted to work
as a collaborative practitioner in California. She has no interest in
litigating, ever. What should we do with her, with her enthusiasm, skill,
dedication? As this message spreads, there will be many like her who
follow. Perhaps we should question our assumptions and see if there is a way
to include, rather than exclude.
Sue
Suzanne L. Brunsting, Esq.
202 Clovercrest Drive
Rochester, NY 14618
(585) 244-4239
sbrunst1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
www.suebrunsting.com
-----Original Message-----
From: CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of John Crouch
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 5:26 PM
To: CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [CollabLaw] Five-year practice requirement?
What is the current wisdom on whether groups should require five years of
family practice before practitioners can join?
Our group was unanimously in favor of such a requirement when we started out
-- we wanted competent, well-regarded members, and we wanted them to have
the experience to advise clients on what would happen in court. But when we
finally "become Medicine Hat" and collaborative is the norm, it'll be
counterproductive to say lawyers can't collaborate for their first 5 years.
The more difficult question is, we're somewhere between those two points,
but where? And at what point should the rule change?
And does any group have different years-in-practice requirements for
different professions? It seems to me that if there is already a reliable
system for certifying members of a certain profession to work with divorcing
families, that might be an effective substitute for a years-in-practice
requirement.
-- John Crouch
Arlington, Virginia
703-528-6700
crouch@xxxxxxxxxxx
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Home
is just a click away. Make Yahoo! your home page now.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/DHchtC/3FxNAA/yQLSAA/aQSolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Yahoo! Groups Links
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.0/352 - Release Date: 5/30/2006
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.0/352 - Release Date: 5/30/2006
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Protect your PC from spy ware with award winning anti spy technology. It's
free.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/97bhrC/LGxNAA/yQLSAA/aQSolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Yahoo! Groups Links
nikki clark, esq.
mediation/collaborative law/litigation
law offices of shirley d. jacobs
39650 liberty street, suite 490
fremont ca 94538
510 624 9099
fax 498 4435
This e-mail and any accompanying documents may be confidential and legally
privileged. The information is intended only for the sole use of the recipient
named in this email. If you are not the intended recipient please contact
the sender and delete all copies of it from your system. Any review, use,
dissemination, distribution or copying of this email is strictly prohibited.
Please note that the sender accepts no responsibility for viruses and it is
your
responsibility to scan this e-mail and attachments (if any).
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
