This Law Firm is recognized as a professional provider of Alternative Dispute Resolution services.
Mediation is the process whereby a neutral third-party intervenes between contesting parties with a view to persuade them to adjust or settle their disputes. Some of the same personality and intellectual traits that distinguish a good lawyer should be present in a good mediator. Mediators should be chosen for their trial experience and other attributes such as credibility, neutrality, logic, demeanor, communication skills, analytical ability, intellectual dexterity, control under pressure and general ability to effectively create an atmosphere to assist the participants in the settlement of their case.
David B. Israel is a Supreme Court Certified Circuit Civil Mediator. Mr. Israel has concentrated his legal experience in the areas of construction, commercial, real estate and business disputes and litigation. This background, in addition to Mr. Israel’s knowledge, experience, focus, credibility and neutrality give him the ability to bring together litigating parties with the goal of developing cooperation and trust in order to ensure the best resolution to the participants.
There are many benefits involved with the utilization of mediation services. Mediation allows the possibility for disputing parties to seek an alternative to costly and time-consuming litigation. Mr. Israel realizes these benefits and devotes himself to allow all parties the opportunity to take advantage of these benefits.
Arbitration is a form of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) which is a legal technique for the resolution of disputes outside the courts, wherein the parties to a dispute refer it to one or more persons by whose decision they agree to be bound. It is a settlement technique in which a third party reviews the case and imposes a decision that is legally binding for both sides.
Arbitration can be either voluntary or mandatory and can be either binding or non-binding. Non-binding arbitration is, on the surface, similar to mediation. However, the principal distinction is that whereas a mediator will try to help the parties find a middle ground on which to compromise, the non-binding arbitrator remains totally removed from the settlement process and will only give a determination of liability and, if appropriate, an indication of the quantum of damages payable.