Friends
Collaborative Practice is clearly "ADR" as it is generally understood,
decision-making method that is an alternative to court. (Our goal is to reverse
the comparison, so that CP & mediation are the norm and court is seen as the
"other," as it is statistically.)
I am impressed with this comprehensive proposal. My first quick review raised
the same question I've had when reading CP statutes - what is the purpose of
the rule/statute? They all appear to be based on an assumption of court
involvement before the case is settled.
What is the goal of the MN proposal? Why did you spend all the hours doing
this? Is it to address specific problems you have encountered? Is it to
increase visibility/credibility?
Will the Texas & other folks who have gone either of these routes please answer
for their jurisdictions?
Honey Hastings
honeyhastings@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
office/Wilton NH 603.654.5000
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
