Case Evaluation and other ADR processes

“Honest and straightforward in assessing case merits.”

Neutral case evaluation: When a case is complex or has gotten out of control, then the expertise and opinion of an expert can be helpful. Case evaluation is a tool that can be used independently or in conjunction with mediation or any of the collaborative processes. It takes a close look at a dispute, the issues, the positions of the parties, as well as applicable law and trial precedents, and objectively assesses the strengths and weaknesses of the case.

Mini-Trial/Mock Trial/Moot Court: The neutral hears summary case presentation, critiques the presentation and offers suggestions as to case strategy. Barr’s experiences as a trial judge* make her uniquely suited to give the parties an informed opinion as to how a trial judge might react to the unique personalities and legal issues of a particular case.

Med Arb: A mediator assists parties in negotiation, but if no settlement is reached, she issues a decision. This is a process that could benefit parties who would like to avoid costs of arbitration. Arb-med is another possibility. In arb-med, the arbitrator reaches a decision, but doesn’t tell the parties what it is until she determines that a mediated solution cannot be reached.

Barr offers an objective perspective, informed by years of experience.

As independent player in the process, Barr is able to offer unbiased, legally sound feedback. This can prove invaluable in assessing positions and can serve as a “reality check” for one or all parties, who for many reasons, might not have an objective view of the strengths, weaknesses or value of the case.

* Barr has also had experience sitting in an appellate capacity, although she was not commissioned as an appellate judge. See biographical information in About Robbie M. Barr.