About

As I was cleaning out my office after over 38 years at the same law firm, where I went from the very bottom of the letterhead to the very top, I came across a course catalogue from my law school alma mater, University of Washington, circa 1982. I looked through it for nostalgia, and I noticed that there was not one single course or seminar offering for anything having to do with what we now know as “Alternative Dispute Resolution” a/k/a ADR.

Out of curiosity, I checked the courses currently being offered by our state’s law school, Boyd School of Law. Alternative Dispute Resolution is now a part of the required first year civil procedure course. There are also electives in mediation, mediation clinics and courses addressing other ADR topics. University of Washington has the same basic course offerings in ADR, as do virtually all other ABA accredited law schools across the country. Simply stated, the legal profession has embraced ADR during the course of my legal career. There has literally been an Alternative Dispute Resolution revolution.

My ADR journey began in 1993 under the tutelage of A. William “Bill” Maupin, who was a founding partner of my law firm before starting his judicial career. Justice Maupin was one of the architects of Nevada’s Court Annexed Arbitration program (“NAR”). I was in the inaugural class of trained and approved arbitrators, and over the years I have handled several hundred NAR assignments in Washoe County, Carson City and Douglas County. I remain active in the NAR program, and am now one of the presenters of the Nevada State Bar arbitrator training program in Northern Nevada.

I became involved in private ADR work in 2008 as a compliment to my civil litigation trial practice. This took me to Pepperdine University’s Straus Institute for Dispute Resolution on two occasions, focusing on general mediation concepts and complex construction defect disputes. Since that time, I have acted as mediator or arbitrator in well over 150 contested civil matters for lawyers and law firms from all corners of our state. I have also been appointed Special Master in numerous construction related cases, which is always a unique experience.

Looking forward, I am devoting my legal energy to ADR matters. It is true that ADR does indeed matter, as it provides a flexible and cost effective alternative to the relative inflexible and now highly complicated, expensive and time consuming “traditional” litigation model that used to be the gold standard in resolving civil disputes. Make no mistake, some disputes need a trial, and civil jury trails are not going away. Trial lawyers still need to be trial lawyers, and comfortable in that forum. Yet there are few cases that would not benefit from one form of ADR or the other. Indeed, marching into a courtroom for a trial without first engaging in a serious mediation session is unwise and in recent years, has fortunately become the exception and not the rule.

I would love the opportunity to help you and your clients to avoid the pitfalls, uncertainties and overwhelming expense that are inherent in traditional litigation and trials. The wise use of ADR allows the parties to control their own destinies, which is most certainly not the case when the jury foreperson hands the verdict to the court clerk, who then hands it to the judge, who then reads it out for all to hear.