A recent decision, Steine v. Steine, decided by Superior Court Justice Gregory Mulligan, stresses some of the pitfalls of "settling a case on the courtroom steps". In this particular case, the litigants and their lawyers attended a case conference (a meeting with a judge before a formal court appearance) to discuss the merits of their respective positions. The lawyers and clients negotiated for 6.5 hours and managed to settle all issues in the case. Minutes were drafted up but because a photocopier was not available in the courthouse at that time, one lawyer promised to provide a copy of the minutes to the other lawyer. Unfortunately, this never happened and slowly, the deal reached began to unravel. One of the problems in this case was that the lawyers had not fully teased out all of the specific terms of the negotiation when the minutes were drafted -- probably because it was late in the day and everyone had been negotiating for 6.5 hours. As a result, when it came time to formalize these minutes at a later date, the lawyers could not agree on some very specific terms (that they thought had already been agreed to).
The reason I highlight this case is because it is very typical in court cases for the parties to settle their case on the courtroom steps. However, these agreements are often rushed through, not comprehensive, and not forward thinking. The parties don't have an opportunity to "try on a pair of shoes and walk around in them". They need to make a final decision immediately. And, then, they are sometimes not happy with the results because they didn't think through all of the repercussions. So...I must stress that this is a peril of seeking resolution through the court system.
Read the Law Times article here: http://www.lawtimesnews.com/201010047654/Commentary/Family-Law-Steine-case-shows-pitfalls-of-incomplete-agreements
No comments:
Post a Comment