Kevin, your comments are right on point. Pre-meetings and agreed agendas,
with nothing added except by agreement of all participants,help ensure a
structured and guided conversation rather than polarized "us/them"
experiences.
The choreographed presentation of points of view is a very useful and
adaptable concept. The lawyers need to have a high degree of harmony and
trust to do this well (your practice group is where this kind of trust
relationship develops)--when high trust levels are present, the lawyers can
agree to switch sides for the choreographed discussion, which is sometimes
useful--or my favorite, a collegial (and well prepared) mutual presentation
of applicable legal concepts in a way that illuminates the broad discretion
(i.e. unpredictability) of judicial decisionmaking, and that shows the
congruent understanding of both lawyers as to the extremes of possible
judicial outcomes that couples with similar facts and points of view might
experience if they presented their issue to the local judge for decision.
This is a constructive way to fulfill the legal duty to explain the relevant
law prior to reaching agreement, while also supporting collaborative
interest-based rather than positional legal-matrix decisionmaking. It works
best if done pretty far down the road. I usually like to do it at the point
that information-gathering and sharing are complete and needs and
priorities have been discussed, but before settlement frameworks are floated
and discussed.
Best,
Pauline
On 12/29/06, Dr. Kevin Karlson <kevinkarlsonjdphd@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
A few lessons learned and best practices from my foray into Fortune 500
business meetings:
1. Never introduce a new topic for the first time in a group meeting--one
to
one offline first to let the initial emotional reactions get processed
2. Few people react the same way to discussions of a topic and to the
written summary of the same topic in a meeting note or document; don't
expect a verbal agreement in a meeting to be the final word- most people
need to see it in "black and white" to really "get it" (lawyers included).
3. Having the two lawyers on the same page before the meeting starts is
critical to avoiding a retreat to the "litigation mindset". This could
mean
agreeing ahead of time to having a staged debate about the opposing views
on
a critical issue, when the parties are not equally capable of debating
without arguing or just giving in.
4. Follow up meeting notes prepared by one of the lawyers (who is assigned
the task for each meeting), outlining the current agreements, unsettled
issues, agenda for the next meeting, and discussion highlights as well as
homework and deadlines are an important aid to keeping the momentum
rolling
and limiting the "Xerox" conversations (having the same discussions over
and
over and over). People will still forget, but you will have a document to
refer to as the final word on "what we agreed to".
Happy New Year to all
Kevin Karlson JD PhD
Vision Purpose Values
Consulting/Coaching
Phone: 972.839.2394
Email: Kevinkarlsonjdphd@xxxxxxxxxx <Kevinkarlsonjdphd%40swbell.net>
1406 Flintwood Drive Suite 100
Richardson, TX 75081
Where there is no vision, the people perish. Prov. 29:18
THIS COMMUNICATION AND ANY ATTACHMENTS ARE PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL.
ANY
UNAUTHORIZED RECEIPT, USE, OR DISSEMINATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU
HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY THE SENDER
IMMEDIATELY BY RETURN E-MAIL, AND DELETE THIS COMMUNICATION FROM ALL
AFFECTED DATABASES. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.
-----Original Message-----
From: CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <CollabLaw%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto:
CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <CollabLaw%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf
Of jmotsay@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <jmotsay%40motsayandlay.com>
Sent: Friday, December 29, 2006 8:30 AM
To: CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <CollabLaw%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [CollabLaw] Friday Tips & Problems
I thought cl was not about what the judge would do but what the clients
both
agree upon!
Your first suggestions of prior conact with client and another with ol
work
well for me.
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
-----Original Message-----
From: "Honey Hastings"
<honeyhastings@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<honeyhastings%40earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 13:18:27
To:CollabLaw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <CollabLaw%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [CollabLaw] Friday Tips & Problems
My experience this week led to these insights:
a.When homework is agreed-on, discuss and include "due date." Put in
meeting notes.
b.When scheduling next 4-way, also schedule time for counsel to confer
in advance.
Situation that lead to insights:
This case is almost done. Other lawyer (OL)& client were to meet before
4-way to discuss several settlement points. They didn't. (She & I
didn't talk either!)I send proposed alimony schedule the day before the
meeting. At 4-way, OL said unable to respond to alimony as just got it.
OL & client had 2 long caucuses during 4-way, apparently to discuss OL
objection to amount & duration of alimony that her client appeared to
be ok with. Much of the rest of session was argument between counsel
about purpose & justification of alimony in our state, a topic that had
been addressed in prior meetings.
Questions for the group:
1.Any other thoughts on how to prevent the problems described?
2.What are you doing about the tension between the solution that fits
the family & what the law is (AKA what the judge would do)?
Honey Hastings
Wilton NH
honeyhastings@: <mailto:honeyhastings%40earthlink.net> earthlink.net
Yahoo! Groups Links
