The trial lawyers at Cameron Ingersoll Roche PLLC focus on business litigation in the federal and state courts of Virginia, Maryland and the District of Columbia, but we go anywhere our clients take us. We also regularly serve as co-counsel to national and international law firms seeking representation and guidance with respect to litigation matters in the DC metro area.
Litigation is a serious business. Every case, no matter its size, is going to be tried to a judge, jury or arbitrator by one or two primary attorneys if it does not settle. But no case can settle to your best advantage if your opponent believes you are afraid to go to trial. To go the distance, and to do it without wasting money, you need experienced trial attorneys on your side.
The trial attorneys at Cameron Ingersoll Roche have tried hundreds of cases, if not over one thousand, and have handled thousands more through settlement. We are in the courtroom constantly, and we handle many cases that are as complex as any that are handled in large, multi-national firms.
In today’s commercial world there is no question that various forms of alternative dispute resolution – also known as “ADR” – are becoming increasingly common. Some industry sectors, like the financial markets and brokerage houses, now require that most disputes be submitted to binding ADR. ADR is likely to continue to expand as parties seek alternatives to traditional dispute resolution forums.
The most common forms of ADR are arbitration and mediation. As a general matter, arbitration is typically binding whereas mediation is often non-binding. Most jurisdictions have laws that make binding arbitration or mediation awards enforceable as judgments in a court of law. Of course, many arbitrations and mediations lead to negotiated settlements, just as with court.
It is commonly believed that ADR is less expensive and more efficient than litigation, but whether or not this is true in a given case often depends on the nature of the dispute and what may be riding on the outcome. Other differences between ADR and courts of law also exist. Discovery is often more limited in ADR than in court, juries are not available, punitive damages may or may not be available and there are normally extremely limited rights of appeal. In ADR, the rules of evidence are normally much looser than in court. In any given case, these various differences may – or may not – be to your advantage.